Science > Outer Space and "Inner Space" Sciences

Ark - where are you headed?

<< < (26/33) > >>

eoste:

--- Quote from: ark on March 18, 2012, 09:05:08 AM ---What is "real"? Something that kicks back when we kick it? Well, I think monads may be able to kick back. Only these kicks are rather weak.... In this sense a group of monads, or a whole army of them, may have more reality than just one.

--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: ark on March 18, 2012, 09:08:15 AM ---
--- Quote from: Guardian on March 17, 2012, 06:34:38 PM ---Just 'cause ya can't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there.

--- End quote ---

On the other hand not all we "see" IS there. Sometimes our senses and our mind deceive us, and we make a little cat into a huge lion.
--- End quote ---

May be we can understand something like there is a virtual information, for instance 1+1=0 or 3x2 is not 2x3 (as somehow stated in the previous posts) "crystallizing" in regard to the level of the observer's perception, like 1+1=2 or 3x2=2x3...

Megan:

--- Quote from: ark on March 18, 2012, 08:48:32 AM ---...If we think, for example, that there are only two integer numbers, one called “even” and denoted by 0, the other one called “odd” and denoted by 1, then even+even=even, even+odd=odd, and even+odd=odd...

--- End quote ---

It looks like an "exclusive OR" transformation. A difference detector: a "1" output means "different" and a "0" output means "same." Half of a "half adder."

--- Quote ---...A groupoid consists of points and of arrows. Points represent the static aspect, arrows represent the dynamic aspect. Arrows connect points. It will be enough for us to concentrate on transformation groupoids...

--- End quote ---

"Static" meaning something like "values belonging to a domain" and "dynamic" meaning "operations?" So this diagram represents a particular transformation (sometimes called "exclusive OR")?

Buddy:

--- Quote from: Megan on March 18, 2012, 05:40:18 PM ---
--- Quote from: ark on March 18, 2012, 08:48:32 AM ---...If we think, for example, that there are only two integer numbers, one called “even” and denoted by 0, the other one called “odd” and denoted by 1, then even+even=even, even+odd=odd, and even+odd=odd...

--- End quote ---

It looks like an "exclusive OR" transformation. A difference detector: a "1" output means "different" and a "0" output means "same." Half of a "half adder."

--- Quote ---...A groupoid consists of points and of arrows. Points represent the static aspect, arrows represent the dynamic aspect. Arrows connect points. It will be enough for us to concentrate on transformation groupoids...

--- End quote ---

"Static" meaning something like "values belonging to a domain" and "dynamic" meaning "operations?" So this diagram represents a particular transformation (sometimes called "exclusive OR")?

--- End quote ---

That's a question that occurs to me also. Does "digital" physics start here? If so, the English way of precisely describing this relationship is very inefficient:

(0 OR 1) AND (NOT(0 AND 1))

...because the level below this requires inclusion. So, assuming the answer to Megan's question is "yes", is this 'unit of symmetry' the fundamental monad of which you originally asked?

ark:
The possible esoteric meaning of the fundamental groupoid.

Sometimes a scientist is inspired by a philosophy, and a philosopher is inspired by mysticism. I think that there is nothing wrong with such a state of affairs as long as different modes of thinking are clearly separated in the mind of a thinking person. With this in mind let me take an excursion leading us beyond the rigorous way of a scientist, and also beyond the inquisitive way of a philosopher. Let us visit the distant past, let us go back to the Orphic cosmogonies.

According to Damascius (West, 1983) among the first-born gods (Protogenoi) there were two serpent deities: Khronos and Ananke. They were not corporal. Khronos was of a male character, Ananke (or Adrastea) of a female one, “her arms extended throughout the universe and touching its extremities.” Khronos stands for the static principle of “unaging time”, while Ananke represents the dynamic principle of “Inevitability” (or Compulsion, or Necessity).
The following quotation is from Damascios, a Neoplatonist who lived c. AD 500. […] (West, 1983)

"United with it was Ananke, being of the same nature, or Adrastea, incorporeal, her arms extended throughout the universe and touching its extremities. I think this stands for the third principle, occupying the place of essence, only he made it bisexual to symbolize the universal generative cause. And I assume that the theology in the Rhapsodies discarded the two first principles (together with the one before the two, that was left unspoken), and began from this third principle after the two, because this was the first that was expressible and acceptable to human ears. For this is the great Unaging Time that we found in it [sc. in the Rhapsodic Theogony], the father of Aither and Chaos. Indeed, in this theology too [sc. the Hieronyman], this Time, the serpent, has offspring, three in number: moist Aither (I quote), unbounded Chaos, and as a third, misty Darkness (Erebos) . . . Among these, he says, Time generated an egg this tradition too making it generated by Time, and born `among' these because it is from these that the third Intelligible triad is produced. What is this triad, then? The egg; the dyad of the two natures inside it (male and female), and the plurality of the various seeds between; and thirdly an incorporeal god with golden wings on his shoulders, bulls' heads growing upon his flanks, and on his head a monstrous serpent, presenting the appearance of all kinds of animal forms . "

Our fundamental groupoid has two points and two transformations.) 1 may well represent Khronos, the male principle, 0 can represent Ananke – the female one.. Then we have the central circle – the egg, or the Light. They form the triad, an Intelligible triad, as it is called by Damascios.

ark:

--- Quote from: Buddy on March 18, 2012, 07:06:17 PM ---That's a question that occurs to me also. Does "digital" physics start here? If so, the English way of precisely describing this relationship is very inefficient:

(0 OR 1) AND (NOT(0 AND 1))

...because the level below this requires inclusion. So, assuming the answer to Megan's question is "yes", is this 'unit of symmetry' the fundamental monad of which you originally asked?

--- End quote ---

I would prefer to stay with my original picture. Two static points and four arrows. Or: two static points, and two transformations: one "do nothing" and one "change the point to the other one". One passive, and one active. But still you have three loops - see the picture.