monday 26th january 2015
yesterday, as part of bbc tv ‘ski sunday’ programme, the skier graham bell made a video whilst skiing the hahnenkamm downhill course at kitzbühel in austria.
today inspired by his run, i have started to write this critical text about how we see and understand things. my aim is to build the text here over the next few weeks.
tuesday 27th january 2015
we are going back to the beginning of bell’s hahnenkamm run, and on the way we will try to comprehend how all the things flashing past us come to exist – to extend in space and time.
we will also meditate on the means by which our own comprehending brings these things into existence – as a ‘grasping together’ of the extensive understandings that we have of our own pure singleness.
friday 30th january 2015
the notion of pure singleness is in response to the mysterious nature of things at atomic and subatomic scales, shown in the experiments and equations of quantum physics and quantum mechanics.
at very tiny scales, the characteristics of a particle are inherently uncertain; not until the particle is measured do it’s characteristics lose their uncertainty. crucially, it is the act of measurement that forces the particle to have certain characteristics, such as a particular location or spin. this is well illustrated in the famous double slit experiment as described by theoretical physicist prof. jim al-khalili. in his 2013 talk at the royal institution…
<a href=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ” rel=”noreferrer nofollow”>www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ</a>
saturday 31st january 2015
quantum entanglement is a theoretical prediction which comes from the equations of quantum mechanics. two particles can become entangled if they are brought close together and their properties become linked. (at this point their exact characteristics remain uncertain.) quantum mechanics says that even if you separate these connected particles by arbitrarily large distances – say for example 100 light years – they can remain inextricably connected, or entangled. its not until the uncertainties of the one particle are measured, that its characteristics – and crucially those of its entangled ‘self at a distance’ become certain. in other words, crucially, measuring the state of one entangled particle actually changes the state of the other.
monday 2nd february 2015
pure singleness
the paradoxical nature of quantum measurement suggests that we are fundamentally entangled with the things we seek to comprehend. and when elementary things such as atoms are comprehended, and specifically ‘measured’, this entanglement becomes apparent.
we must therefore assume that the quantum ‘paradox’ is so only to entities such as we, whose basic existence is quantized (based in difference). we cannot assume that prior to our differential comprehending as ‘things in time and space’, that difference is the actual ‘way’. in other words, just because we cannot comprehend things prior to their difference, does not mean that there is not a condition prior to difference. this is indeed what the quantum paradox suggests.
let us say that there extends a condition prior to the difference of things in time and space, which we will call the pure singleness of difference, or ‘pure singleness.’ it is our task in this text to comprehend how things come into existence as the extending of pure singleness.
tuesday 3rd february 2015
we have no means of comprehending or describing pure singleness, other than to emphasise that this is both our condition and the condition of every other thing around us. it is our basic understanding with things around us that forms the space and time in which we comprehend them. it is the grasping together of our extensive understandings with them that makes things real…
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
…although they seem somewhat distant, we are not actually separated from these things rushing past our eyes. rather, each moment of time and space is a product of our basic understanding with (our extending-with) others. each moment happens as an alternating with the other, for which i become real as you and you become real as me. this is the actual extending of pure singleness as basic understanding (understanding-with).
the crucial point is that i see a thing because i am that thing. i see a thing as different from myself, because as pure singleness, i am the extending of that different thing, as it is the extending of me.
wednesday 4th february 2015
although we cannot comprehend pure singleness, from our perspective as quantized things in time and space (beings), we can and must make some assumptions. the first is that for us, pure singleness must be an extending. the second is that for us, pure singleness must be an extending as difference. the third is that pure singleness extends symmetrically. the fourth is that pure singleness extends as the total symmetry of all differences. in other words, although the complex diversity of things around us seems anything but symmetrical, the sum total of all these differences always adds up to the absolute symmetry of pure singleness.
we have now come to the beginning of graham bell’s hahnenkamm run, with much still to consider. that being the case, we will simply set off again. but this time we will be skiing downhill and flipped – into the symmetry of pure singleness.
continued in part 2
thursday 5th february 2015
alter-universes and things
we came to the conclusion in part 1 of this text, that pure singleness is the condition prior to our being real in space and time, and if this conclusion is forced upon us by quantum entanglement, then we ourselves are always entangled with every other thing – we see things because we are those very things that we see.
in other words, i am actually not conscious of seeing you, being out there in the distance, rather i have extensive understandings-with you which are the basis of our shared reality. there is no space (or time) between us – i see you because i am you. each of these understandings-with the other we call an ‘entanglement of alter-universes’, and later we hope to show exactly how these alter-universes are entangled, and extend as the basis of everything. suffice to say, the more entangled we are, the closer you appear to be.
each real thing we see around us is actually an infinite complexity of entangled alter-universes of pure difference – each extending (-with us) as its own time and space. (later we hope to show how time and space come into being-with things.) this infinite entanglement of relative spacetimes has profound implications for our comprehending of gravity, light, and the constancy of light speed in particular.
let us assume that the speed of light is constant for all observers only because the infinite number of alter-universes which constitute the observers are entangled. in other words, light does not travel through space, rather it is a function of my symmetrical becoming-with the others with which i am entangled.
saturday 7th february 2015
pure singleness, symmetry and force
we asserted previously that the pure singleness of difference must be symmetrical. the reason we said this is simply because that for each extending of pure singleness which is ‘different from its other’, there must also be that very other from which it is different, and which is also ‘different from its other’.
this is our core comprehending of the pure singleness of difference, (on which is based the phenomenon of entanglement). in other words, we say that these two differentials are most profoundly entangled, because each is the very extending of the other. difference is the auto-entanglement of pure singleness.
if each differential that forms this simplest of all alter-universes is nothing but its difference from the other, then each must depend on the other for its very extending – its entire (pre)existence. this symmetrical extending out of the other we call their mutual understanding-with, and each differential feels this understanding-with the other as the force of its own otherness – its ‘self at a distance’ – its life force. all force is the force of otherness, the force of our own entanglement-with pure singleness.
wednesday 11th february 2015
alter-universes, strings and things
before we go any further, we need to re-emphasize this precept: that our comprehending of things not isolated from that which we comprehend; and the means by which we comprehend the universe very much depends on how we comprehend the universe. plainly, it is because we comprehend the universe in a quantized way as ‘different things in time and space,’ that we must assume that our comprehending is quantized (packeted, grainy or particulate).
however, having said that, we have been considering pure singleness as the basis of this universe of things in time and space; and we have begun to think of things, not as separate particles, but as entangled alter-universes.
in other words, anything of any scale – from something the size of the universe, to something the size of a star, to something the size of a motor car, to something the size of an atom, to something the planck scale of a string (theory), is actually the extending of pure singleness as an entanglement of alter-universes. it’s not that things don’t exist, it’s just that reality is quantized as we comprehend it.
we must also be clear that we do not mean to suggest that pure singleness is a thing which extends as subsidiary things. as yet we have few ideas actually about pure singleness, other than to assert that the basic condition of things is that we extend as pure singleness.
last saturday we touched briefly on the most primitive of all possible alter-universes – the symmetrical extending of two differentials. but we must admit that although it understands itself, there is no way for this primitive ‘twofold’ alter-universe to comprehend itself. the most primitive alter-universe – which can also comprehend itself – is a threefold alter-universe; simply because for any basic difference of two, there must also be a third entangled differential to comprehend the difference between the other two. this it does by extending as nothing but its difference from them. inasmuch as all three constitute a singular, symmetrical, threefold entanglement of alter-universes, the manner of their comprehending is identical; but each actually comprehends as its ownmost differentiated constitution – a product of the combined constitutions of the others.
to be clear, the reason that any threefold(+) entanglement of alter-universes comprehends itself as a thing, is because each of its constituent differentials comprehends this and nothing else – ‘i am nothing but my difference from you’. this is the identical manner of their comprehending, but the basic understanding of each with the others is as its ownmost difference from them. for example: a threefold entanglement of alter-universes whose understandings-with are A(BC) B(CA) C(AB) comprehends itself as the thing ABC{(BC)(CA)(AB)}.
understanding is the most primitive extending of difference. we call it ‘understanding’ because each differential extends ‘under the standing’ of the other – as the very extending of the other. this is what we mean by entanglement.
in concluding this section, let us assert that these primitive alter-universes are the purely single extending of the strings of string theory.
saturday 14th february 2015
force, energy, space and time
let us imagine that all things as we comprehend them (such as the moon) extend as nothing but their difference from every other thing; and that every different thing is an infinitely complex entanglement of alter-universes (each of which is constituted as an infinitely complex entanglement of alter-universes……∞) let us also imagine that this infinitely complex universe of things is based on the simple primitive n-fold entanglements of alter-universes that we have started discussing; primitives which are constituted as nothing but a differential extending of pure singleness.
although we have not so far been meditating on how time and space are proper to our quantized comprehending as things, later we will try to show how space and time are actually the differential extending of pure singleness.
but in the meantime, let us assume that, just as alter-universal things are infinitely entangled, so too must their proper times and spaces be infinitely entangled. in other words, we must assume that if the ‘particles of science’ are shown to be entangled, then so also are their times and spaces entangled – simply because their basic primitives propagate, and are propagated by, their own proper time and space.
in our earlier brief consideration of primitives, we said (of a twofold alter-universe) that if each of its constituent differentials is nothing but its difference from the other, then each must depend on the other for its very extending. this symmetrical extending out of the other we call their mutual understanding-with, and each differential feels this understanding-with the other as the force of its own otherness. all force is the force of otherness.
if that is the case, and taking proper time and space into account, let us say (provisionally) that energy is force – relative to time.
let us also say provisionally that space extends as the difference of pure singleness and that time extends as the reiteration of that difference
continued in part 3
monday 16th february 2015
we concluded part 2 by asserting that each entangled alter-universe which extends to constitute our understanding-with (and comprehending of) pure singleness – propagates (and is propagated by) its own proper time and space.
we also claimed that the auto-extending differentials which constitute alter-universes, must have a profound understand-with the others from which they derive their difference(s). (inasmuch as each is constituted as nothing but its difference from the others.) we furthermore claimed that each differential feels this profound understanding-with as the (effective) force of its own otherness. all force is the force of otherness – of our entangled self at a distance.
we also claimed provisionally that energy is force relative to time. (force is actually theoretical, – the condition of our understanding-with prior to time; while energy is really physical, because it is temporally extensive). we also asserted that if we comprehend space as the differential extending of pure singleness, then time extends as the reiteration of that extending.
energy, mass and entanglement.
let us then comprehend the mass of a thing, not as the property of a particulate thing, but rather as the energy of our own understandings-with that thing. in other words for example, we do not feel the force of gravity of the planet on which we stand, rather we comprehend our ownmost alter-universal understandings-with the earth and everything, as the temporal energy called ‘gravity’ – but which is in fact our ‘self in the distance’ all around. we assume that the mass of a thing is relative to our energetic comprehendings of that thing in the context of every other thing.
infinite degrees of darkness
as pure singleness, we are entangled in every possible way, and at every possible moment, with every possible alter-universal condition. in other words and so to speak, this infinity of alter-universal conditions varies from infinitely primitive, to not quite so infinitely primitive, to primitive but infinitely complex, to infinitely complex but not yet visible, to visible but infinitely primitive, to quite comprehensive but not yet visible, to visible but not a comprehensive thing, to a comprehensively sensible existing thing…. ∞
let us assert that dark matter is the pre-existence of infinitely complex entanglements of alter-universes, which are not yet visible as comprehensive things.
for the rest of this text, we will be concerned with the justification of all these various claims. in it we will try to illustrate schematically, some of the primitive alter-universal conditions which constitute our comprehending – hoping to show eventually how they can become comprehensible as things.
tuesday 17th february 2015
the elementary moment
our comprehending is this – pure singleness extends as understanding-with alterity; and it does so as an infinitely variable entanglement of alter-universes. each n-fold alter-universe has a basic pattern of mutual understanding-with (of the others of its constitution), which governs how its differentials are entangled. we call this pattern the ‘elementary moment’, and although it extends prior to the time of the alter-universe, by its auto-reiteration, it is the basis of proper time.
pure singleness extends as the sum total of all possible entangled, reiterating, elementary moments.
(graphic)
wednesday 18th february 2015
let us comprehend pure singleness as the elementary moment of a two-fold alter-universe. each differential (coloured red and violet for our benefit) is nothing but the extending of the other. this is how they are entangled.
inasmuch they are nothing but a simple extending of alterity, the constitution of each differential is (each understands itself as) nothing but a spacing from the other. we understand space as and with the the very otherness of the other. each is real as the auto-understanding of the other.
(graphic)
let us comprehend pure singleness as the moment of realisation of a two-fold alter-universe. by this, we do not mean to imply that there is anything like a brain which has a ‘moment of realisation’. rather, we mean a moment constituted by the differentials of an alter-universe, for which each becomes real as the other. it is the realising of the elementary moment.
each is real as the auto-understanding of the other
rehto eht of gnidnatsrednu-otua eht sa laer si hcae
continued in part 4.
friday 20th february 2015
on realization and time
we concluded part 3 by comprehending that any primitive alter-universe has an ‘elementary moment’ – a pattern which governs how its constituent differentials extend and understand each other.
we also comprehended that at the ‘moment of realization’, each is real as the auto-understanding of the other.
in other words, by being constitutionally nothing but a differential extending of the other, each realizes its own exteriority as a spacing from the other. in this way each understands space.
our task is now to show how the constituent differentials understand time – as progressive reiterations of the moment of realization – as moments of presence.
saturday 21st february 2015
elementary moment:
the pattern of differential extending of an alter-universe.
(graphic)
moment of realization:
the differentials realize their pattern, becoming spatially real for each other.
(graphic)
first moment of presence:
(auto-reiteration of the moment of realization)
the beginning of time for a spatial alter-universe,
for which each presents itself for the first moment of time
to the other as the other
but – so
each differential auto-understands as a spatiality-with the other (by extending constitutionally as the other) but pure singleness extends instantaneously, so the other which the one is spatially real as, is already spatially real as its ownmost other …which is the one.
in other words, for a moment of presence in a violet-red, two-fold alter-universe, violet is real as that which red is already real as – which is violet. (and the same is true for red-violet) this is what we mean by the instantaneous symmetrical entanglement of pure singleness; and although a moment of time seems to pass for red and violet as an accumulative alternation of their spatial realities, this moment is only how each understands and realizes the presence of the other
pure singleness does not extend spatio-temporally, and is not effected. hence their entanglement extends into itself instantaneously.
sunday 22nd february 2015
eight moments of a violet-red alter-universe.
elementary :
violet red
realizing :
violet is (real as red) but red is already (real as violet)
red is (real as violet) but violet is already (real as red)
first present:
so (real as red) is presently (real as (real as violet))
so (real as violet) is presently (real as (real as red))
second present:
but (real as violet) is already (real as (real as red)) so (real as (real as violet)) is presently (real as (real as (real as red)))
but (real as red) is already (real as (real as violet)) so (real as (real as red)) is presently (real as (real as (real as violet)))
third present:
but (real as (real as red)) is already (real as (real as (real as violet))) so (real as(real as (real as red)) is presently (real as(real as (real as (real as violet)))
but (real as(real as violet))
is already (real as(real as (real as red)))so (real as (real as (real as violet))) is presently (real as(real as (real as (real as red)))
to abbreviate the rest…
fourth present:
but (((violet))) is already ((((red)))) so ((((violet)))) is presently (((((red)))))
but (((red))) is already ((((violet)))) so ((((red)))) is presently (((((violet)))))
fifth present:
but ((((red)))) is already (((((violet))))) so (((((red))))) is presently ((((((violet))))))
but ((((violet)))) is already (((((red))))) so (((((violet))))) is presently ((((((red))))))
sixth, seventh, etc., red and violet continue accumulating the momentary spatial realities of each other as the time of their alter-universe.
continued in part 5
friday 27th february 2015
in part 4 we considered a twofold (violet-red) alter-universe, and we comprehended how these mutually extending differentials understand each other, and thus become real for each other in their proper space and time.
but let us emphasize that we ourselves are always the things which we consider. in other words, given that our comprehending (of our own pure singleness) is discontinuous and therefore quantized, we are these very extending differentials who comprehend their own pure singleness as a difference from the other.
it was in beginning to comprehend this difference, that we reduced our own complex condition to that of a primitive two-fold alter-universe. in this way we comprehended how, by realizing the other’s constitution as the difference of our own, we become real-with the other in our proper space.
we saw also that, through a process of instantaneous auto-reiteration (by always having the prior constitution of the other as the difference of our own) we understand the other, not only as real in space but as the meaning of spacetime.
monday 2nd march 2015
we have comprehended how a twofold alter-universe auto-understands its proper time and space; but what does it comprehend? does it have a grasp, not only on what it is, but also on what it has been, and is becoming? would it need such a thing as a brain before it could remember what it was the moment before?
memory and time
as pure singleness extends, there is no thing that grasps this extending. but we have assumed that the co-extensions (the differentials) of such extending realize the other’s constitution as the difference of our own,. it is only via the other that each comes into auto-understanding. we call this moment of realization an articulation of temporality, which is instantaneously reiterated as presence.
instantaneous pure singleness of extending
let us here emphasize that there is no time taken, no accumulative articulations of temporality for the extending of pure singleness. all time as such is merely proper to that alter-universe which understands it own extending as difference from alterity. from the elementary moment to the moment of realization as ∞ moments of re-presentation, no time actually passes. time is merely the real understanding of a spatial, alter-universal thing.
temporal articulations are accumulative. they re-present the reality of alterity as moments of spacetime. but although each is real as(the other already) as((the other already)) as(((the other already))) as ((((the other already)))) ….. ∞, this accumulative alternation of realities cannot be anything but a basic understanding-with the other of the present moment. there is no memory, no means for the differentials of a primitive alter-universe to remember their condition from the previous moment into the present moment.
tuesday 3rd march 2015
difference and gravitation
to be real at each moment with the other, is not only to realize the other’s constitution as the difference of our own, but as we said in part two, inasmuch as all force is the force of otherness – of our self at a distance – we are forcefully attracted to that other. in other words, where there is difference so is there gravitation. where there is repellence so is there attraction. where there is exteriorization of the one as the other, so is there interiorization of the other as the one.
in other words, the symmetry of pure singleness means that the forceful characteristics – the differences – of an isolated alter-universe would always cancel each other out.
and although we have tried to imagine ourselves as an isolated twofold alter-universe, no alter-universes are really isolated. each is the meaning (the entanglement) of the others – even our own universe as it expands, does so in the understanding of alterity as yet un-comprehended by us. there is no isolation for pure singleness.
so although the understanding of each with the other is as differential gravitation that accumulates with each articulation of temporality, this accumulation is merely their self-cancelling reality. and even if we wanted to, we couldn’t put ourselves in the place of either red or violet, because their existence is not theoretical, but rather, an unimaginable fiction – never having extended in the first place.
but bearing that in mind, we can imagine the two entangled realities that cancel each other out at every moment; and we can see from this diagram how the differentials, not being able to comprehend their entanglement, would nevertheless comprehend themselves as different from the other.
wednesday 4th march 2015
red-green-violet entanglement of alter-universes
yesterday we realized that there can be no such thing as a twofold alter-universe. in fact there is no such extending thing as ‘an alter-universe’. rather, there are only entanglements of alter-universes, and this is how we must comprehend them.
given that we ourselves must register the extending of our own pure singleness by differential comprehending, let us now consider a threefold entanglement of alter-universes. here we will show not only the means by which a simple symmetrical co-extending of three differentials -red-green-violet – can also be a threefold entanglement of alter-universes, but we will also try to comprehend their temporality and show why our comprehending of things is basically three dimensional.
friday 6th march 2015
(graphic)
elementary moment
let us comprehend our own pure singleness as a simple extending of three differentials that form the elementary moment of a three-fold entanglement of alter-universes.
our task here is to comprehend how the differential gravitation of red-green- violet might develop, not only as the (impossible) symmetry of our own pure singleness, but also with each constituent differential extending as an asymmetrical entanglement with the others. we call this asymmetrical symmetry the a-symmetry of entangled alter-universes; which is our self at a distance.
moment of realization
the moment of realization at which a simple 3-fold extending realizes (be-comes) three entangled alter-universes: the (most basic) entanglement r(gv)g(vr)v(rg) …
(graphic)
green is real as the auto-understanding of violet-red; as alter-universe g(vr)
violet is real as the auto-understanding of red-green; as alter-universe r(gv)
red is real as the auto-understanding of green-violet; as alter-universe v(rg)
(graphic)
but violet is already (red-green)
and red is already (green-violet)
so (violet-red) is presently ((red-green)(green-violet))
but green is already (violet-red)
and violet is already (red-green)
so (green-violet) is presently((violet-red)(red-green))
but red is already (green-violet)
and green is already (violet-red)
so (red-green) is presently ((green-violet)(violet-red))
continued in part 6
monday 9th march 2015
pure singleness of space and the arrow of time
spacetime is our accumulative auto-understanding with alterity, and in part 5 we comprehended that for any moment of time, each alter-universal differential be-comes spatially real as its others already were. and although each understands the passing of time as an arrow – a unidimensional flow of presence with others – each is also already a constituent of the others it is be-coming. this is to say that each has always already accumulated its own constitution, and is actually going back for the future as much as forward for the past as the pure singleness of difference.
tuesday 10th march 2015
wednesday 11th march 2015
(graphic)
momentary constituents of violet-green-red entanglement of alter-universes.
elementary
realization
presentation
first re-presentation*
second re-presentation
third re-presentation
* when each presents itself to the other as that which it already was, which was the other as the self.
continued in part 7
thursday 12th march 2015
in part 6 we tried to extend our existing comprehending of things in time and space, towards our condition of pure singleness.
we also glanced at the (first few) momentary constituents of a violet-red-green three-fold entanglement of alter-universes. our task now is to describe more exactly these first few moments, and to try to imagine what it is for us to extend (as we always do anyway) – into this specific and particular case of an (impossibly isolated) primitive threefold entanglement of alter-universes.
let us consider each moment in greater detail…
(graphic)
elementary moment :
differential-gravitational-comprehending of our own pure singleness as a 3fold extending, for which each is nothing but a difference from the others.
realizing moment :
each ‘is’ (is real spatially) – realizing their existence (through our own differential-gravitational-comprehending) by having the others as their own constituents…
green is real as(violet-red)
g(vr)
violet is real as (red-green)
v(rg)
red is real as (green-violet)
r(gv)
present moment :
BUT (!) all the others, which now comprise the constitutions of the three, already (☚) have each one
as part of their constitutions; and SO (∴) each is presently real as (🔘) the prior constitution of the others. this is the (instantaneous) temporal symmetry of pure singleness that realizes the present instant from each moment of its having been
what it will be…
! v ☚ (rg) + r ☚ (gv)
∴ (vr) 🔘 ((rg)(gv))
! g ☚ (vr) + v ☚ (rg)
∴ (gv) 🔘 ((vr)(rg))
! r ☚ (gv) + g ☚ (vr)
∴ (rg) 🔘 ((gv)(vr))
1st moment ofre-presentation:
!(rg) ☚ ((gv)(vr)) + (gv) ☚ ((vr)(rg))
∴ ((rg)(gv)) 🔘 (((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg))
!(gv) ☚ ((vr)(rg)) + (vr) ☚ ((rg)(gv))
∴ ((gv)(vr)) 🔘 (((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))
!(vr) ☚ ((rg)(gv)) + (rg) ☚ ((gv)(vr))
∴ ((vr)(rg)) 🔘 ( ((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))
2nd moment of re-presentation
! ((gv)(vr)) ☚ (((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))
+ ((vr)(rg)) ☚ (((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))
∴ (((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg))) 🔘
((((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))(((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr))))
! ((vr)(rg)) ☚ (((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))
+((rg)(gv)) ☚ (((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))
∴ (((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr))) 🔘
((((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))(((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv))))
! ((rg)(gv)) ☚ (((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))
+ ((gv)(vr)) ☚ (((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))
∴ (((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv))) 🔘
((((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))(((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg))))
3rd moment of re-presentation
! (((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv))) ☚
((((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))
(((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg))))
+ (((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr))) ☚
((((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))
(((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv))))
∴ ((((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))(((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))) 🔘
(((((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))(((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg))))
((((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))(((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))))
! (((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg))) ☚
((((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))
(((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr))))
+ (((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv))) ☚
((((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))
(((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg))))
∴ ((((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))(((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))) 🔘
(((((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))(((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr))))
((((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))(((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))))
! (((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr))) ☚
((((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))
(((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv))))
+ (((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg))) ☚
((((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))
(((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr))))
∴ ((((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))(((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))) 🔘
(((((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))(((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv))))
((((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))(((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))))
saturday 14th march 2015
so far, we have been trying to comprehend the first few moments of a threefold entanglement of alter-universes, by looking at slices across the lateral (spatial) axes. our task now is to comprehend more clearly how these three realities are entangled by the interweaving of their constituents.
let us open up the elementary moment along its longitudinal (temporal) axis. this will help us later when we come to take an (impossible) perspective from beyond the edge of the alter-universe.
monday 16th march 2015
(graphic)
⬇️
m o m e n t
o f
r e a l i z a t i o n
⬇️
g r v
🔘 🔘 🔘
︵ ︵ ︵
vr gv rg
︶ ︶ ︶
⬇️
i n s t a n t
t e m p o r a l
a r t i c u l a t i o n
⬇️
! ! !
v g r
☝︎ ☝︎ ☝︎
︵ ︵ ︵
rg vr gv
︶ ︶ ︶
+ + +
r v g
☝︎ ☝︎ ☝︎
︵ ︵ ︵
gv rg vr
︶ ︶ ︶
∴ ∴ ∴
⬇️
m o m e n t
o f
p r e s e n t a t i o n
⬇️
︵ ︵ ︵
vr gv rg
︶ ︶ ︶
🔘 🔘 🔘
︵ ︵ ︵
︵ ︵ ︵
rg vr gv
︶ ︶ ︶
︵ ︵ ︵
gv rg vr
︶ ︶ ︶
︶ ︶ ︶
⬇️
i n s t a n t
t e m p o r a l
a r t i c u l a t i o n
⬇️
! ! !
︵ ︵ ︵
rg vr gv
︶ ︶ ︶
☝︎ ☝︎ ☝︎
︵ ︵ ︵
gv rg vr
︶ ︶ ︶
︵ ︵ ︵
vr gv rg
︶ ︶ ︶
︶ ︶ ︶
+ + +
︵ ︵ ︵
gv rg vr
︶ ︶ ︶
☝︎ ☝︎ ☝︎
︵ ︵ ︵
︵ ︵ ︵
vr gv rg
︶ ︶ ︶
︵ ︵ ︵
rg vr gv
︶ ︶ ︶
︶ ︶ ︶
∴ ∴ ∴
⬇️
1 s t
m o m e n t
o f
r e – p r e s e n t a t i o n
⬇️
︵ ︵ ︵
︵ ︵ ︵
rg vr gv
︶ ︶ ︶
︵ ︵ ︵
gv rg vr
︶ ︶ ︶
︶ ︶ ︶
🔘 🔘 🔘
︵ ︵ ︵
︵ ︵ ︵
︵ ︵ ︵
gv rg vr
︶ ︶ ︶
︵ ︵ ︵
vr gv rg
︶ ︶ ︶
︶ ︶ ︶
︵ ︵ ︵
︵ ︵ ︵
vr gv rg
︶ ︶ ︶
︵ ︵ ︵
rg vr gv
︶ ︶ ︶
︶ ︶ ︶
︶ ︶ ︶
⬇️
i n s t a n t
t e m p o r a l
a r t i c u l a t i o n
⬇️
! ! !
💚 ❤️ 💙
💚 ❤️ 💙
💚 ❤️ 💙
continued in part 8
wednesday 18th march 2015
thursday 19th march 2015
first five moments of a threefold entanglement of alter-universes
(graphic)
friday 20th march 2015 (date of partial solar eclipse in scotland)
(graphic)
perspective view of the first five moments of extending of pure singleness of difference as a threefold entanglement of alter-universes…
(graphic)
continued in part 9
monday 23rd march 2015
on the a-symmetry of entangled alter-universes
at the beginning of part 1 we stated that we would try to comprehend how all the things flashing past us (courtesy of skier graham bell on the hahnenkamm downhill course) come to exist – how they come to extend in space and time.
we also said that we would meditate on the means by which our own comprehending brings these things into existence, as a ‘grasping together’ of the extensive understandings that we have of our own pure singleness.
in part 5 we further stated that our task was to comprehend how the differential gravitation of red-green-violet might develop, not only as the symmetry of our own pure singleness, but also with each constituent differential extending as an asymmetrical entanglement with the others; and we called this asymmetrical symmetry ‘the a-symmetry of entangled alter-universes’ – which is the means of our gravitational-differentiation of our self at a distance.
let us be clear that why we are doing this is because from moment to moment in our flows of time, our common existence is by our asymmetrical differences from each other. but as well as our being in time and space we are also the absolute symmetry of our own pure singleness. if this is the case, we must be part of an infinitely complex entanglement of a-symmetrical alter-universes; absolute symmetry which must be reduced – as and at each moment – to a gravitational difference from the other. the other which is there in space for a time.
our task now is to describe in detail the basis of our a-symmetry, by comprehending this primitive threefold entangled alter-universal thing, red-green-violet…
tuesday 24th march 2015
(graphic)
perspective view of the first five moments of extending of pure singleness as three entangled realities r(gv)g(vr)v(rg)
(graphic)
now let us open up this entanglement of alter-universes – this ‘thing’ – so that we can see its three entangled realities r(gv)g(vr)v(rg)
wednesday 25th march 2015
(graphic)
a ‘thing’ is the proper name for a comprehending of entangled alter-universes (primitive or complex); and these three primitive entangled alter-universes r(gv)g(vr)v(rg), comprise the primitive comprehending thing called rgv{(gv)(vr)(rg)}. where { } = grasping together or comprehending.
each alter-universe is the entangled spatio-temporality of pure singleness, and in this way is it constitutionally real as the others with which it extends. in other words, there are three (partial) realities r(gv) g(vr) v(rg) that comprise the real comprehending thing rgv{(gv)(vr)(rg)}.
but although the thing thus constituted – rgv{(gv)(vr)(rg)} – is nothing but the comprehending of the three entangled realities r(gv) g(vr) v(rg), it does not comprehend the (symmetrical) constitutional complexities of its own entanglement. rather does it comprehend its own alterity as such, as a simple difference of one from the other – there in space and time. (the reason that this can be the case is that space and time are functions of pure singleness extending as an alter-universal thing).
in other words, an entangled alter-universe does not have the kind of constitutional reality that could comprehend the thing of which it is part. at any moment it only understands as its own constituency. only the thing can comprehend, and it does so, not with a brain as such, but as the fact of its own alterity, moment by moment, and thus does the alter-universe comprehend its own alterity by proxy, via the thing of which it is a part. in other words, each entangled alter-universe understands its own gravitational difference as the others, but it comprehends as the thing of which it is a part – as the sheer extending otherness of the others.
the upshot is that there is no form of comprehending, no decision which i take, no action that i make, that is not also taken simultaneously by the others around me, which constitute with me, this or that thing.
we are trying to comprehend our own comprehending of things in time and space, and now we can say that our comprehending of any thing is a-symmetrical… the absolute symmetry of pure singleness as asymmetrical gravitational differentiation.
this means that we can symbolize the a-symmetrical comprehending of the rgv{(gv)(vr)(rg)} thing as one of its entangled realities r(gv), which will enable us to evaluate the constitutional gravitational difference of the thing, moment by moment.
(graphic)
continued in part 10
friday 27th march 2015
in part 9 we grasped the meaning of a thing as a comprehending of entangled alter-universes.
and we saw that it is the basic understandings of these constituent alter-universes which it grasps together.
furthermore we saw that a thing does not comprehend all the constitutional complexities of its constituents, but rather only comprehends its constituents as the very fact of its own alterity (its exteriority – its otherness as such).
and yet further we saw that the constituent alter-universes of a thing must comprehend as the sheer alterity of that thing, being un-comprehending of their own entangled understandings with the others.
we comprehend all of this to mean that of all that appears to surround us…
the thing
is always greater than
the phenomenon
axiomatic
axiomatic
axiomatic
axiomatic
axiomatic
axiomatic
axiomatic
axiomatic
axiomatic
axiomatic
phenomena and time
we can now say that a thing is an entanglement of phenomena – if by the term phenomenon, we mean an alter-universe that shows itself to the others (as the others) of its entanglement.* the three entangled alter-universes (the partial realities) r(gv) g(vr) v(rg), are actually the phenomena of the thing rgv{(gv)(vr)(rg)}.
we also saw yesterday how these phenomena share and constitute the proper spacetime of the thing, with the others of their entanglement – which they comprehend at each moment as their basic alterity, their reality of simply being different in space and time.
we saw also that we could therefore symbolise the comprehending of the whole thing rgv{(gv)(vr)(rg)} by the comprehending of any one of its phenomena, and we chose r(gv) for this.
our task now is to evaluate this proper time, to try and grasp what the phenomenal thing {r(gv)} would comprehend. if it were able to look back through time, what would it see?
* (it follows that for infinitely variable complex entanglements of alter-universal phenomena and things, ‘showing up for the neighbours’ is also infinitely variable. matter and energy are always visible or invisible (light or dark) to each other by degree, depending on the amount and complexity of their entanglements).
saturday 28th march 2015
(graphic)
sunday 29th march 2015
phenomenon r(gv) standing for the first five moments of alter-universal thing rgv{(gv)(vr)(rg)}
(graphic)
elementary moment (of extension)
{ r }
(graphic)
moment of realization (of extension)
{(gv)}
(graphic)
moment of presentation (of extension)
{((vr)(rg))}
(graphic)
first moment of re-presentation
{(((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))}
(graphic)
second moment of re-presentation
{((((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))(((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv))))}
(graphic)
third moment of re-presentation
{(((((vr)(rg))((rg)(gv)))(((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr))))
((((rg)(gv))((gv)(vr)))(((gv)(vr))((vr)(rg)))))}
(graphic)
as we realized earlier, the phenomenon {r(gv)} does not comprehend its complex constitutional understandings-with the others, but rather comprehends as the thing rgv{(gv)(vr)(rg)} – as a simple moment by moment accumulation of alterity.
the issue for phenomenon {r(gv)} (or for any thingly phenomenon for that matter) is that it has no way of registering its alterity as the accumulation of understandings-with the others of its entanglement. even if it had a brain that could remember what just happened, this brain would only be motivated to comprehend its alterity as the sheer space and time of existence.
but by looking into this primitive thingly phenomenon {r(gv)}, we are able to see and quantify its accumulating constituents at any moment. in the next part we’ll start by comparing the proportions of red, green and violet, to see what it says about the way that things comprehend the differential gravitation of alterity.
continued in part 11
monday 30th march 2015
in part 10 we consolidated our comprehending of the thinghood of a thing and of its constituent phenomena. our task now is to look more carefully at the temporality of the thing ‘through the eyes’ of its constituent phenomenon {r(gv)}.
we must re-emphasise that these articulations of temporality are instantaneous, and that proper time would only appear to flow as a remembered accumulation for {r(gv)}, and only then if it were possessed of a brain.
likewise we should also note that there are no fractional states. these are temporal articulations of sheer absolute difference – which is in every case our own quantized or discrete comprehending, as the alterity of pure singleness.
(although the discrete nature of the electron shells of an atom are vastly more complex than this primitive thing, we hope to go there eventually.)
but let us here begin by simply adding up the total instances of the constituents at every moment of the thing’s existence. note that at any moment, the phenomenon ‘is what it is at the present’, and these are the accumulating quantities of interest.
(graphic)
tuesday 31st march 2015
(graphic)
we can see from the diagram that although {r(gv)} auto-comprehends as a simple alterity (i am spatially different from the other for a time), this ‘binary’ alterity is always comprised of a proportionality of three. we can also see that for each succeeding moment of time, their proportions are different. in other words, the complex (but symmetrical) proportional understandings of {r(gv)} are reduced at every moment to a simple, but gravitationally different (asymmetrical) alterity. (vis. a-symmetry).
moment 0
pure singleness extends as the elementary moment of a threefold thing {r(gv)}
moment 1
thingly phenomenon {r(gv)} instantaneously realises its binary alterity of proportions
red 0, green 1, violet 1…
(∴ phenomenal proportionality = 0 : 2)
moment 2
…which instantly presents its binary alterity of proportions
red 2, green 1, violet 1…
(∴ phenomenal proportionality = 1 : 1)
moment 3
…which instantly re-presents its binary alterity of proportions
red 2, green 3, violet 3…
(∴ phenomenal proportionality = 1 : 3)
moment 4
…which instantly re-presents its binary alterity of proportions
red 6, green 5, violet 5…
(∴ phenomenal proportionality = 3 : 5)
moment 5
…which instantly re-presents its binary alterity of proportions
red 10, green 11, violet 11…
(∴ phenomenal proportionality = 5 : 11)
we have raised a few terms here which we should try to consolidate.
things and phenomena
a ‘thing’ is constituted by ‘phenomena’ (later we will see that it is always three phenomena that constitute any thing – things are always comprised of threefold entanglements of their constituent phenomena.)
but things are always also the entangled phenomena of other more complex things. in other words, ‘things’ and ‘phenomena’ are our comprehending of regional entanglements of alter-universes.
‘phenomenal proportionality’ refers to the differential gravitation of momentary understanding among entangled phenomena. it is the measure of force of self-at-a-distance for any phenomenon of our comprehending.
whereas ‘thingly proportionality’ is the gravitational potential of a thing at any moment of its proper time; and is the product of dividing the quantity of phenomenal alterity by phenomenal self. it is the force of self-not-at-a-distance which the thing carries over into any subsequent phenomenality. thingly proportionality is gravity.
wednesday 1st april 2015
let us look further into the proportionality of the first few moments of thing {r(gv)}. (let us re-emphasise that these arguments are theoretical – concerning an impossibly isolated phenomenal thing {r(gv)}, and its thingly phenomena – rgv.) (we should also remember that what applies to red also applies equally and simultaneously to green and violet). (and also we will try wherever possible to make the pronouns personal, to reflect the fact that it is always our own comprehending under discussion).
moment 1 – the moment when the phenomenal thing {r(gv)} comes into existence, and thingly phenomenon r becomes real as the gravitational difference of its others (gv).
there being zero instances of red with one instance each of green and violet, let us assume that at the start of any thing’s existence, our phenomenal red self (whom we are trying to comprehend and which is in every case the one who is entangled with the others) is only real as the alterity of our phenomenal others, green and violet. therefore when we divide the instances of our alterity by the instances of our self, we see that at moment 1 the thing {r(gv)} is infinitely other. (2÷0 = ∞).
given that our self is nothing but its differential gravitation from alterity, this is to say that at the first moment of any thing’s existence, our gravitation to the other from which comes our differential existence, is infinite.
at the first real moment of any isolated thing, that thing has infinite gravity. (a thing only appears isolated to the thing which comprehends itself as isolated – therefore ‘with infinite gravity at the beginning of time’.
moment 2 – at the second moment of any thing’s existence, there are two instances of our red self, with one each of our green and violet alterity. so we describe moment 2 as being of 1 : 1 phenomenal proportionality, and of gravity (1÷1 = 1).
(these numbers simply reflect the constitution of our alterity at the previous moment r(gv)- the constitution of our red self at any moment is always that of the constitution of our alterity green and violet at the previous moment of our co-existence).
(graphic)
continued in part 12
thursday 2nd april – friday 3rd april 2015
concerning the impossibly isolated
alter-universe
{r(gv)}
(graphic)
in part 11 we comprehended that inasmuch as we extend as nothing but our differential gravitation with alterity, then at the beginning of our proper time (at the moment of realization), our gravity is infinite – our red self is constituted wholly as our green-violet alterity.
moment of presentation – gravity 1
(2 alterity ÷ 2 self)
first moment of re-presentation – gravity 3
(6 alterity ÷ 2 self)
second moment of re-presentation – gravity 1.6666666666667
(10 alterity ÷ 6 self)
third moment of re-presentation – gravity 2.2
(22 alterity ÷ 10 self)
saturday 4th april 2015
let us re-emphasise that we are talking only of our understanding of things in our proper time and space, and that for our pure singleness of difference there is no time and space. (but having said that, it is only as our comprehending of our own pure singleness that things exist.)
let us also re-assert that although for a thingly, phenomenal self ‘in space’, time does seem to pass as accumulating moments of difference, the moments being accumulated are those already accumulated by the thingly, phenomenal others – always in part as the self already was.
therefore by reason of symmetry, the momentary articulation of a thing’s proper time into it’s future is thus cancelled by an equal and opposite articulation into it’s past. for the absolute symmetry of singleness, the currency is not spatio-temporality, but rather sheer difference as such.
let us now go on to describe the first fifteen moments of phenomenal proportionality of {r(gv)}. this will then lead us on to a consideration of the gravity of our thing {r(gv)}. (note that at moment zero – just before the infinite gravity of moment one – the value is zero. we take this to indicate the zero gravity of pure singleness).
(0 + 0) ÷ 1 = 0
(1 + 1) ÷ 0 = ∞
(1 + 1) ÷ 2 = 1
(3 + 3) ÷ 2 = 3
(5 + 5) ÷ 6 = 1.666666666…
(11 + 11) ÷ 10 = 2.2
(21 + 21) ÷ 22 = 1.9090909090…
(43 + 43) ÷ 42 = 2.0476190476…
(85 + 85) ÷ 86 = 1.976744186…
(171 + 171) ÷ 170 = 2.0117647058…
(341 + 341) ÷ 342 = 1.9941520467…
(683 + 683) ÷ 682 = 2.0029325513…
(1365 + 1365) ÷ 1366 = 1.9985358711…
(2731 + 2731) ÷ 2730 = 2.0007326007…
(5461 + 5461) ÷ 5462 = 1.9996338337…
(graphic)
sunday 5th april 2015
at the beginning of graham bell’s ski run on the hahnenkamm downhill course at kitzbühel in austria on 25th january, we said that we would try to comprehend how all the things flashing past us come to exist – to extend in space and time.
to guide this quest, we are concentrating on trying to comprehend the phenomenon of quantum entanglement, and to answer the implied fundamental question – how can one thing be in two places at once?
in trying to answer this, we have concluded that one thing could only appear to be in two places at once to some other thing which is right there in the entanglement. and we concluded that this other would always be our self.
as we patently cannot comprehend this ‘being in two places at once’ in the mix of everyday events, we are forced to the conclusion that prior to our existence in space and time, we are a pure singleness of difference.
our quest so far has been to comprehend how pure singleness could extend differentially, and we have looked in detail at two-fold and three-fold alter-universes in this respect – coming to the conclusion that ‘a universe’ as such could not exist in isolation, and therefore is always merely one of an infinity of entanglements of alter-universes – in which we ourselves, as our comprehending, are always properly entangled.
we tried to rationalise time and space as functions of our own pure singleness, and we concluded that our proper space is a differential realization of pure singleness extending, while our proper time persistently re-presents that extending until the entanglement is no longer comprehended.
we started to give some structure to the idea of extending as such, and concluded that structured extending is always on the basis of a three-fold entanglement of alter-universes. the relationship that these have with each other is one of profound understanding. (profound because each extends only as a differential constituent of the others. in other words they are entangled).
we say of these three entangled alter-universes that they are ‘phenomena’, because they show themselves to the others, as the others, in their proper spacetime.
we also considered the thinghood of a thing, and we concluded that a thing is the persistence of an entanglement of phenomena. we also said that whereas things are constituted by phenomena, they are themselves always entangled phenomena with other things. things are phenomena, phenomena are things, and we are phenomena that comprehend our own understanding of entanglement as a thing among things.
we also considered carefully how each moment is realized and re-presented, saying that although time seems to always be our becoming of the future, we do so only through that alterity which we already are. (this relates to the symmetry of pure singleness and the asymmetry of being – and the subsequent need for a rationale of a-symmetry).
we started to think about the meaning of force for entangled alter-universes, and we concluded that for every difference-from there is a gravitation-to. we concluded that whereas the difference-from/gravitation-to of our understanding with alterity is phenomenal, we comprehend this as the force of gravity of things. in other words, the gravity of entangled things is always our comprehending of our own gravitational understanding.
in the second album we will be trying to comprehend and describe how more complex entanglements of phenomena and things come into existence. we will be looking to describe how three-fold entanglements are part of four- and five-fold entanglements, and we will also consider how infinitely complex things like atoms are entangled. we hope also to broach the topic of the periodic table of elements, from the perspective of binary comprehending of three-fold entanglements.
my own efforts in all this will be assuming a less public face for the few months of summer, and posts will temporarily be more sporadic. nevertheless there is one question, which for me comes out of what we have been considering so far, and it is this…
does our universe at its beginning have infinite gravity and does it expand from a big bang simply because of the way we understand phenomena and comprehend things?