The Crossing of the Boundary of the Void

The Dawn of Space and Time in a Selfconscious Quantum Universe

The Crossing of the Boundary of the Void

If one accepts the existence of the divine, then the ideas of people
like Aquinas might have applicability to thinking about where logic
exists and where it doesn't.

According to such ideas, we can say that intuition is to know, without
the use of reasoning; and that reasoning is to know through what
Aquinas termed a movement (or multi-step process) of the mind - in
other words, intuition is immediate knowledge and reasoning is gradual
knowledge. Aquinas asserted that one of the attributes that makes
angels superior to humans is that they know by intuition, whereas
humans know by reasoning. Aquinas referred to angels as intellectual
beings and to humans as rational beings. In the scheme of Aquinas,
God is an even more perfect manifestation of intuitive knowledge - God
is intuitive and omniscient.

These classical/medieval ideas may not have a lot of appeal in the
modern world, but I find them interesting. I don't know if Aquinas
took the next step in thinking about where logic exists and where it
doesn't, but it doesn't seem like much of a step: If by logic we mean
the set of rules by which humans properly perform reasoning, and if we
accept the assertion that God is a purely intuitive being, then God
has no need for logic. If God is what preceded and precipitated the
big bang, there was no need for logic prior to the existence of
rational beings. Logic, then, would exist only in the human mind.

Billk/rcgolfer

I agree with Bill, that the ideas of Aquinas and the classical, say Greek thought should be relevant to discussions of 'Natural Philosophy' which was the term the classical scientists liked to use to describe themselves from Aristotle to Newton to Einstein, Heisenberg and Bohr.

Any scientist, which is not too immersed in hisher own agendas of esteem and reputation within the prevailing paradigms heshe functions under; would recognise that the origins and genesis of the 'laws of nature' deserve serious investigations beyond a statement of: "It is just so as it is!" or a similar 'copout' of: "We can never find out the mysteries!" or the more spiritually inclined: "The work of God cannot be deciphered by the human mind!".

So the magnificent correlation between abstract mathematics and the concrete physical world should become subject to investigation.

And as Eugene P. Wigner wrote on the "Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences":
Quote: "The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for the better or for worse, to our pleasure even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches of learning."-EoQ.

And the basis of mathematics is logic and so one can say, that a certain kind of logic should precede the first 'idea' of mathematics, say simple arithmetic or Kronecker's 'Ziffern' (Ciphers), when the latter said: "God created the Integers; everything else is the invention of Man!".

So the eonold debate over Mathematics being a human invention or a Platonic preexistent realm of idealised form reduces to the notion of where the binary system self-states derive from.

Physically, it can be modelled on open and closed strings {meaning 0=closed and 1=open} of finite spacetime duration, so giving a minimum quantised metric symbolisation in the Planck parameters.

Abstractly, no such physical quantisation is necessary and the concepts of Cantorian infinity nestings and the Nullstate are permissible and become even necessary for the 'physical' to emerge or 'to become created'.

So then the classical logic applied to such binary eigenstates can, under the presumption of boundary- and initial conditions for some sort of 'Energy'; result in the conservation laws for this energy and its derivatives such as momentum and entropy of those self-states.

From this the equations of quantum states and their operators evolves and emerges in some manner and as modelled in the many avenues and branches of physical theory.

This then gives as a 'history of science' and the 'natural philosophies'; but it fails to address the creation of the binary logic or the ciphers 0 and 1' as prerequisital necessity.

Here, the philosopher enters the fray and a gnosis=scientific insight might use a simple dichotomy like open/closed as a basis to postulate a bifurcation for this basis into polarities like plus and minus and subsequent dichotomies.

So then the abstract logic can model string physics to connect the abstract mathematics to allow a physical universe to emerge (or be born in a Big Bang say). This then at least indicates the answer to Wigner's question.

Mathematics is effective for a material universe, because the physicality manifests as 'energy equilibrium' from the binary eigenstate of the set [0,1], which can be made abstract by its own definitions and emergences.

Then the description of the set [0,1] becomes the key to describe any subsequent evolution of energy states from the said 'energy equilibriumisation'. This set [0,1] must also by necessity and sufficiency be demetricated and so not depend on any physical parameters such as space, time or mass.

A difficulty arises here; because even a notation like [0,1] demands the existence of spacetime for its symbolisation. So any philosophical meanderings about the universe and existence, must eschew any metric symbolisation, which includes all of mathematics in terms of its own semantics.

So mathematics itself emerges from its own logic - but in hindsight - and after the spacetime representations are made possible by an existent spacetime describing a universe and its cosmogony and its cosmology say.

But this also gives a clue as to the real nature of time. Time cannot be linear and onedirectional, but must be circular and at least bidirectional to allow 'hindsight' within a spacetime to also be a kind of 'foresight' without a spacetime.

Should one now associate the 'foresight' with the 'Gods', 'Fathers', 'Allahs', 'Krishnas' and 'Name it
Yourselves' of 'religions' and the 'Hindsight' with the 'Physical Universe' itself; then the 'Creator-Creation' duality aka the polarity-dichotomies (yang/yin aka chicken/egg aka DNA/RNA aka aka) can easily be extended into other dichotomies, such as wave-particle and matter/antimatter and positive/negative and so on.

Then the 'foresight' manifests itself through and by its own 'hindsight' and the gnostic is well justified to write about the Father of the Universe as the Word or Logos being abstract and in a sense nonexistent; but becomes 'visible' and explorable through the Mother of the Universe and all 'their' common 'children' of the sentience, which are driven by the 'inbred' urges to ask the questions and as posed by the 'hindsight' aka the Creation as the holistic universe itself.

The material universe has a wavelike quality as the encompassment of nonlocality, and finds itself quantum entangled with its particlelike qualities of the local spacetimes of the metrics.

Tony B.

PS.: The elementary challenge after all of this is to describe the binary eigenstate in a nonexistent metric spacetime through symbolic representations, semiotics, allegory and mythology and whatever story one can create in a dance of the 'foresight' with the 'hindsight' using such notions as memory, experience and the identifications of the selfhood.

To the true gnostioc, this 'proves' herhis identity and kinship with both the original 'hindsight' and the original 'foresight' whatever they may be.

The below description is from Hans Dieter Franke (HD), a renown mathematical logician from Bavaria, Germany and posting on the patternville yahoo.group forum. I find his description of 'crossing the boundaries' highly relevant to my own endeavours in cosmology and therefore have chosen to comment upon it.

""A usually useful method is to ascribe a measure at least in order to achieve that everyone debates the same.
I have already introduced generalized Elliott wave theory.
The generalization is in terms of "life" insofar that every living organism invests ( the first generally perceivable investment is to be born) in life expecting a return which is life.
If every investor gets this positive return an "infinite ressource" is to be assumed however this is thinking in the wrong direction. Rather we have an inexhaustible ressource. This is not just a play on words because infinite is a mental fiction while inexhaustible is an uncaused effect.
The different strategies and perceptions of these investors in life yield the fractal i.e similarity transformed Elliott waves.
This thesis allows to cross the boundary from inside where we are investors in our life to outside to see the total outcome ( while we are actually still inside ) but although we have participated we cannto discover a single trace of our very own, individual action although the total result is another without our individual active participance .
So the theory allows to establish a measure of culture ( which is the Elliott fractal) and to establish culture as a feature to be inside and outside concurrently.""
Hans Dieter

Commentary by TonyB.:

HD first states, that a quality of 'life', defined as some dynamical interaction with its environs and surroundings say; becomes the simultaneous perception of being located within that environment and also without as bilocal observer.

This can also be said to be a simple physical action of perceiving one's virtual image in a material and opticalised mirror.

If we now render the mirror nonphysical as a Boundary for the physical existentium and place it say as a boundary in 11 dimensions, then we can describe the inside as a 10-dimensional universe (containing all those 3D opticalized mirrors orf course).
The outside then becomes a 12 dimensional 'Vafa-Spacetime' which by necessity contains the 10D universe as a subset (like a Hubble-Bubble say).

So the outside observer is or can be much greater in extent, than the inside observer, yet being one and the same in bilocality and as HD's 'total result' in concurrency.

I am no expert on fractional dimensionality and am basically ignorant on Elliott waves.

I do support HD's general proposition for a negative fractal dimensionality for the Void of -0.62 however.

This derives from the well known Omega interval (0,1] as the unitised subset for the real and complex numbers in mathematics.
Applying a binary algorithm to this interval crystallises a number of Fibonacci patterns, which extend this Omega interval to the interval: [Y,-1,-X;-1/2;(X-1),0,X] with the encompassment [Y,X] being the quadratic roots of the Arithmetic Summation function T(n)=n(n+1).

n is a dimensionless cycletime (defined in dn/dt=Ho=Nodal Hubble Frequency-Constant say), which is related to the Feynman path integral for summation of particle histories in quantum mechanics.

So in summing the probability distributions to unity in the wavefunction for the universe results in T(n)=1 and the Fibonacci roots Y and X for X+Y=XY=-1=exp(i.pi)=i^2 (Euler's Identity).

Should we now assign a 'physical time t' to n and allow a material universe to be 'born' at n=Ho.t=0; then the above Omega interval extension would describe a fractal dimension X=0.618033... to a nodally oscillating or cyclic universe in 11 dimensions and where the nodes are simple positive integers in evenness for the mapped beginnings and the oddness for the maximal asymptotic extent as boundary for the 10th dimension.
The 'timings' of physics so are by necessity linearised with a onesided entropic arrow of time, which can however be reversed in the 12D Vafa-space of the 'outside observer'.

A Big Bang cosmology so becomes relativistical and arbitrary in the 'root-defining' n=X coordinate, representing a kind of 'unfreezing' of a particular universal spacetime scenario.

The 'thawing' of the 'Void as Nothing' so describes a Big Bang Cosmology and the 'Crossing of the Boundary' from the abstract to the material.

Also, the n=0 coordinate is required to become 'quantum-smeared' to avoid the mathematical singularity of itself to become physically manifested, say as given in Planck-Scale definitions.

Tony B.

If Ego is a false sense of oneself, then what is a not false sense of oneself?

Anna

A good deduction Anna, right at the central core of existential reasonings for a sentient beingness.
The answer must necessarily be grandiose, bordering both on the sublime and the insane.

If ego is the sense of individuation, say as the individuated consciousness of Jung relative to a group- or cosmic consciousness; then the 'superego' or super-id for the latter must be the not false sense on oneself.

The Christian and New Ager would term this Christ-consciouness, the Islamist the honour of the prophet and the Allhah Akbar and the Hindu the Krishna devotedness and similar.

The gnostic now understands, that the super-id is omnipresent and in a sense immutable, though subject to evolution via the sub-egos say.

But every individuated ego bears the potential to 'see and experience' itself as its encompassing super-ego.

Henceforth the megalomaniacal tendencies of certain political leaders and the 'inbred urge' to control and dominate in the human psyche.

Henceforth also the 'natural' instincts of parental protection of its young across species and so on.

But, as said before to you. YOU are the entire universe as a hologram of it and your sentience of self-perception, egocentricities etc. are all forms of bringing your 'little sense of self' closer to your 'bigger sense of self' - that of the 'Big SheHe' of the BodyMinded Cosmos.

This btw is the meaning behind the 'promises of the afterlife' in the religions; which carry a rootmemory as to the recycling of the 'mortal' BodyMinds being an evolutionary necessity for its image of the 'eternal' MindBodies to come into existence.

Tony B.

I agree with you HD. By the way I have googled a little on Elliott waves and they are very clear in recognising the Fibonacci patterns in the cyclicities. So your dimensionality of the void and my X seem to have a bit of support in the subject. I hadn't known this before.

Tony B.

dear Tony,
following your derivation ( in another thread )

is it so that "energy" and "information" are separated by a dimension?

Hans Dieter

I am so sorry HD of not replying sooner. I just found your message. I was busy refuting on other lists and somehow missed your posting.

Yes, I would say so, a dimensional divide exists between 'physically manifested energy' and the information encodable thereby.

But I am not sure I can explain this properly with my rather simplistic 'mirror dimension' aka the 11th of the strings.

This divide is imo related to the entropy arrow and the onedirectional time vector as commonly understood.

In a physically definable spacetime, ergo metrics; this time vector evolves from the 4-vector of Euclidean flat Minkowski spacetime.

This means that the Pythagoraen theorem is applied to the 4-space and that the dynamics engage a 3d-translation through space and a 1d-translation through time thus definable as an additional albeit complex space dimension.

One can then say, that the dynamics through space must reduce the dynamics through time and henceforth crystallising the postulates of Special relativity.

A relative 'standing still' so is necessary for a maximum movement through time at lightspeed.

In the overall cosmic evolution in the physical spacetime then, the onedirectional time arrow will obey the relativity postulates and additionally allow an asymptotic approach to the maximum conditions in a 'decelerating' cosmology in 'infinite' time.

The 'physical boundary' condition of this asymptote is the 11th dimension (or the 5th in anti deSitter Kaluza Klein models in holographic universe scenarios and the like). It can never be attained by the 'physical universe', however is approximated closer and closer in the linear arrow of time and entropy.

The dimensional divide does however 'connect' the say 10th dimension of the physical universe to its 'mirror spacetime' of the 12th. I do not understand the technicalities, but this is known as the Vafa-spacetime of toroidal topology, say a 8-Torus added to the Minkowski spacetime of 4D or such.

Significantly, Vafa introduces a doublearrowed timedimension here; thus allowing a 'reflection property' to 'connect' the physical universe to its 'shadow partner'.

This is all I can hitherto make of it. But I feel, that the 11th dimension acts like an Information-Absorber. Whatever happens in the 10th and below is projected onto the 11th from the Inside, MEMORISED in some manner, and then both reflected back into the Inside and refracted into the Outside.

But in terms of continuity, the Inside and the Outside are topologically connected, say in Moebian connectivity (Moebius Strip in 2D and Klein Bottle in 3D say).

The connectivity then should be in some manner be definable as the discontinuity - say a twist in the 10D to establish the 11D untwisted by the 12D by asymptotic approach.

I feel, I have the right idea, but also feel, I am not informed enough to derive this rigorously.

Tony B.