I have stumbled upon a remarkable pattern in everything.Is this the beginning of ToE?

[labelwench]

This post is to Pattern, who may not comprehend my logic in thanking some posts which may appear to be contradictory.

I embrace all points of view, and recognize the time and effort that most put into their replies.

Therefore, I thank many posters for their contributions, save if the content or the approach is entirely inappropriate, IMO.

The way around the time out feature is to use the 'go advanced' feature and 'preview post' a few times thereafter when making a longer post. This gives one an opportunity to spell check, reorganize their thoughts and allows the system to sense that you are still active.

Regards,

Labelwench

[SteveA]

Hi, Pattern. What I do to avoid losing posts is to copy them into the cut/paste buffer first. I highlight all the text in the post and then hit CTRL-C. If the post isn't accepted (and most of the time I take too long replying so I lose the text), then I go back and reopen the reply screen in a new tab and long in and then use CTRL-V to paste the previous text into a new reply.

You're not the only one that's had trouble with that. I'm happy that my comments might have got you thinking a bit about some of your natural reactions to my posts. That's a good way to learn about oneself, IMO.

If I had to summarize my views along lines you were describing, I'd agree that I've picked up an Eastern slant to things, though in some ways I'm diametrically opposed to those as well.

I think most everything is rather unimportant except for whatever value one finds to things and this seems true for basically everyone to me. If there's such a thing as a 'valueist' philosophy, that's would probably describe me best, though I similarly see values as largely acquired or determined by emotions and so I'd place emotions above material or mental.

Though using common conventions or stereotypes can be good to communicate about ideas between people who share those, I tend to use less stereotypical and more verbose descriptions to convey my ideas and from your posts it appears you do it similarly and put some original thought into your ideas with some self-analysis as well. That seems a good way to get a better view outside 'conventional boxes'.

I think my 'path' began from a more materialistic, mathematical and scientific perspective many years ago but various emotional pressures seemed to want to push past that and I've had quite an interesting journey over the years discovery that the feeling that there's a little more than simply what we can immediate touch and feel going on. There were many obvious conflicts I found in many things portrayed as representative of 'Science' that were unresolvable for me without going off the beaten path and it makes sense that ultimately the best judge of 'how things work' in ones life would have to be oneself (though I don't discount all the information and ideas others can provide, but no 2nd hand view can replace the importance of the 1st hand view).

My basic theory is simply that logic appears unable to dictate the long term evolutionary trends in time (so in that case it would be that there are degrees of freedom in how those patterns unfold) and it appears that conscious interactions are involved in that evolution. Given such a freedom, it would appear the most significant aspect is in realizing with that whatever ideals one has in whatever manner is best and no matter the place or circumstances, it appears that's a common drive in life and I see it as emotional, though likely something fundamentally rooted in universal expansion or an attribute of time itself.

More directly regarding patterns, I believe they are what provide us with persistent features in space and allow for a stable environment, but it's a good question to consider as to what extent we might assume that such patterns are fixed and 'externally' defined and equivalent to laws imposed upon things or to what extent the manner of interpretating/defining these determine the context in which the future unfolds.

My analogy of the hill wasn't meant to be interpreted in solely physical terms but to point out that the tools and assumptions one uses to understand things can be influencial in what becomes known and the properties of it. For example, if we defined time in terms of day and night on Earth, then such a view of time would be unwitnessable for someone else in deep space ... the references for that version of time would be unavailable. Another expression I've heard is that if one has a hammer, everything looks like a nail and it's interesting to consider how preconceptions and expectations can be influencial in determining who events over time are interpreted.

It appears I once again failed to keep my post 'short and sweet', that's a hard habit to break for me. Oh well.

Enjoy the site,
Steve

[Pattern]

SteveA

Ok, so I guess i missunderstood you. Anyhow, now you know my position at least.

From the scheme in my first post one can see that, if its correct then biology is far less responible for our actions then what is normally precieve. Emotions and thoughts would have nothing to do with biology, aside from what impact hormones have on our system. Our mind is comletly empty at birth and so on. Like society, mind is a selforganising system somehow. So that is my position on biology.

Then about habit: One very interesting thing about humans is their ability to grow accustomed to all kinds of enviroments and circumstances. This "urge" to feel at home anywhere and everwhere seems very strong. I almost doubt that it is not biologically driven. Whatever comes in our way we make it into a habit. I feel that this thought is conforting when my thoughts run too wild. I thougt of this for some reason when you wrote about night and day in space.

Well, I for my part am quite convinced that this scheme I came upp with some weeks ago is a large part of ToE. Its not a joke and I would sincerly appreciate feedback on it.

[SteveA]

Well it does appear natural that in order for us to understand experiences, we have to compress the "raw" information and work with symbols representing things and this tends to give a more patterned/structured than is necessarily present in the original form. So, for example, we might count apples on a table and say there are 5 apples, but this is a view that tends to treat all apples as if they were identical. Upon closer inspection, it's likely the apples are different in subtle ways (otherwise if they were all precisely identical, then we shouldn't be able to separate them and they would just be the same apple) and so I tend to think that most patterns we refer to are approximations and not truly laws that must be true.

On the other hand, I do agree that much of the structure of life does arise from persistent patterns and also that the areas where we have an ability to apply precise logic appear to be those areas in which some form of perfectly repeating pattern exists.

So according to that last comment, it could be that everything we can discuss in a precise way is derived from a precise pattern, as your observations allude to.

Two things to consider though could be:

1) Time and change may not be describable in terms of a precise pattern. In which case there could be difficulting in describing how a present state, denoted by various patterns evolves into future patterns.

and

2) There could be multiple ways of describing the same set of relationships using different types of patterns. In this case, it might be said that other patterns are true as well or it could be worth considering which forms of patterns appear to best describe things (and "best" tends to be something subjective and relative to whatever values/desires one has in such a judgement).

I do agree that Occam's Razor is a good rule of thumb and that the simplest and most generally applicable patterns are most likely to be persistent. Is there a pattern underlying all patterns? Your comments here seem to imply it and I have strong suspicions as well that there's at least a common framework used in the construction of any form of pattern.

[labelwench]

This is the season when I annually observe the 'emergence' of the seedlings from the seeds which I sow and the unusual correlation between seed size and the complexity of the resulting plant.

Most vegetable seed is considerably larger in size than are flower seeds.

The most intricate flowers in regard to bloom color, texture and diversity, arise from the teeniest of seeds, and I then transpose that mammals emerge from 'seed' that is microscopic in size.

This inverse relationship in regard to the simple patterns at this level of observation have kept my simple mind quite happily engaged for a considerable span.

I am not much assistance in the feedback you request, beyond this observation, but I will continue to follow this thread to see what others may have to offer.

Petunias are one of the most diverse specimens, their seed being so fine that it is often pelleted to assist the gardener.

[SteveA]

That's a beautiful image, Lorrina and I think it's a good example of how nature both has patterns and divergences from these as well. There's an additional level of detail not simply because of the similarity between the flowers, but because of them being slightly different and unique as well. I assume either extreme extreme of a robotically perfect orchard or something incoherently random would be undesirable and life is a bit of a dance between these extremes with a bit of interactive improvisation required at times

[Pattern]

Now i have made a short movie about the perspective and i hope it explains it better then i was able to do in this thread. So if you have any questions or anyting, please comment.

Keep in mind that this theory is not finished yet so there is a lot of room for improvment.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRie-49MvS8

[labelwench]

Now i have made a short movie about the perspective and i hope it explains it better then i was able to do in this thread. So if you have any questions or anyting, please comment.

Keep in mind that this theory is not finished yet so there is a lot of room for improvment.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRie-49MvS8

I took the time to watch your video, as I am one who finds the relationship between things very interesting. This is still in draft form? I did notice some spelling and grammar which I am sure you will catch as you continue your work. If you would like a bit of help with that aspect, you can call on me as I have done considerable editing and policy review in my work.

Kind regards,

Labelwench

[Rybo]

Anyhow, what do you think? "emergence"

Pattern, the 3D icosahedron has 10 Great Circle Planes and in my Rybonics theory are basis for EM-Radiation.
4-fold to 5-fold and these 10 may be seen as corresponding to your 10 levels. I dunno.

Anyway, the simplest pattern I'm aware of is a V. If extended the becomes VVV ergo Euclidean wave.

However, if we close the V with and edge/line that connects the two open, terminal endpoints of the V then we have a enclosed an area with a triangle ergo the first step towards a systemic enclosure of space/spatiality.

This triangle means that we have three V's because the triangle has three V's.

With the Euclidean wave as three lines, we only have two V's /\/ and no structural stability.

A triangle is the minimal pattern for 2D systemic enclosure and a circle is the maximal pattern for 2D enclosure.

If we add three more lines, that connect three corner points of triangle to a central point we have subdivide the triangle into three smaller triangles and also have created a flat 3D tetrahedron i.e. if a tetrahedron was to turn it self inside out, there it passes through a 2D plane of existence.

This plane is the triangle subdivided into three.
Spirit & Soul

This is enough for a beginning of my thoughts on pattern, Pattern.

Oh yeah here is link to expand upon the V idea.

http://www.toequest.com/forum/mathem...sness-2-a.html

Rybo