Measurement

It all begins with the experiential continuumm, that subjective processing experience of external and internal processing which occurs so naturally wee forget that the subjective internal process is projecting the external objective process onto an invisible reality that consists in intensities of all sorts.

This reality of intensities i call Shunya, or if i am of a Greek frame of mind Monad. And this reality i fill with Semeia, scattered according to the configurations of my sensory network meshes. And from each Semeion i draw down the details of my experiential continuum unconsciously.

When a self consciousness arises which constructs "I" and I accepts this self then i revise my understanding of the experiential continuum inductively, iteratively, fractally crystalising out of the intensities a beautifully strange fractal pattern of experiential continua in which i live and breathe and have my very being.

Some intensities i perceive as sentient, and these sentient intensities i define as entities. Welcome to my world!

The application of measures to my beautiful fractal is as subjective as the fractal itself,and flows from my own boundaries within and without myself,and from my own processing of comparisons. My initial response is to cry out rhythmically at each distinction: thus language and rhythm and song become admixed in the very measuring of my world by my own, my persona boundaries and bindings and bonds, my apprehension of relationships within my experiential continua.

The most important tool we have ever invented for measurement is the circular disc.

http://www.math.tamu.edu/~dallen/history/euclid/euclid.html

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=815zmgp8UxoC&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=Euclid+circle+to+measure&source=bl&ots=csy9cddYVR&sig=CelNvJ1Wz_x3mgxP9mb974cFzag&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iqFkT624BcKK8gPSypWPCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Euclid%20circle%20to%20measure&f=false

http://gfisher.org/euclid_and_the_egyptian_rope.htm

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ac07

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ac07
http://it.stlawu.edu/~dmelvill/mesomath/sumerian.html

http://factsanddetails.com/world.php?itemid=1511&catid=56&subcatid=363

http://www.seshat.ch/home/babylon.htm
http://www.seshat.ch/home/homepage.htm

http://courses.ncssm.edu/aphys/course/pi/pi_lab_example_ph405.htm
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:arg_rIRe0XoJ:resource.nspiringlearning.org.uk/uploads/files/231/Circumference.v5.pdf+&hl=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShop7ZW2_3H3VRABf5KRZmbhkCrDY2N2BG5xReoT576XCopYH3writNBck9L_OUs6E3UYU85Y98szIXeRbdQ_6zgvT3jWYUenEsUeLXckDX3Dq_wMzjBQkPTHTXtxF-g64yTTgA&sig=AHIEtbS2KqHwDzGcB3kPnyt_jfnoyHCR0A

So i guess you cannot measure the circumference of a circle! At least nobody seems willing to explain how. You can calculate the circumference, and you cam calculate pi. but measure? Oh no you cannot do that!

Yet you can estimate the circumference of a wheel, or even the circumference of a head, using a tape, but one can never actually measure the circumference of the circle.

The same state of affairs exists with the diagonal of he unit square. Thus the whole of our measurement schemes are based on things we cannot do, numbers that do not exist, approximations we can never finish.

The issue is obscured, because logicians are the ones who fear it most. Artisans forever measure the square and the diagonal and the circle circumference. But those who seek an ideal world cannot abide the approximations of the real world. Thus they assign their perfect values in the world they create, which is called a Formal system.

The person who bridges the gap between the real and the formal systems is Eudoxus, wih his theory of roportions. Yet, in his day he was seen as "a keeper of appearances", one who saved the faces of the Pythagoreaans. It is due to his influence that Formal systems of analogy and hypothetical systems of deduction flourished alongside the pragmatic deductive systems. By his sophistry that which is "real" is not able to falsify that which is formal, but each are analogous worlds with their own rules of consistency, but one common "observer" the "nous" of man.

In those times the terminology was not so asinine. The distinction was between the world of the gods and the world of men. And Greek men in particular were at war with the gods!

Today i would draw attention to the role of the "observer". It is no longer valid to consider such an observer as apart from what is observed. I go further and state that the reality observed is created as an external experienc by an internal process that also creates the internal experience. The line between subjective and objective has to be removed and replaced by a continuum. And each observable within that continuum has to be assigned a measure that distinguishes its place on the continuum. And further, this continuum is an anlogy, a model constructed which may or may not reflect some greater "reality" that cannot be directly perceived, but is only apprehended as what is "not the model" i experience. This situation i have denoted by the set FS and the set notFS. The set not FS contains all things dractally but i apprehend only the fractal structures within the set FS.

Thus within the set FS is the "real" world and the " "formal" world, the distinction being that the real world is subjectively objective, while the formal world is just subjective. And the formal world is constructed by subjective processes on subjective forms, and verified by the consistency of these subjective processes across the construction. This is a second verifying subjective process.

The real world is constructed less obviously, because it is constructed unconsciously, and verified by unconscious and conscious observations of consistency and persistency, coherence and congruency, summetria and sunthemata. This complex process is achieved mainly unconsciously and is the foundation of our intuitive sense of what is real and what is not. It s all held together by an unspoken of compliance, a willingness to accept what is unconsciously provided. Those who question this provision are called mad.

There are and always have been some intellects able to be mad and retain the social norm behaviours. These we have called Philosophers, adventurers,explorers and Shaman's and prophets. They all speak of a different reality beyond the one we can sense. Because it is beyond sense it is "non-sense" but many are persuaded by the firm knowledge they espouse and the wonders they can do.

The wonders we can do now technologically would astonish our forefathers. We can speak to rock or metal and it can speak back o us, we can make the very lightning bolt in the heavens speak and sing through a tesla coil. We can command light from a piece of metal and fire from a match.

And yet we have not advanced beyond the mentality of our frefathers, because we cannot. We cannot escape the zoology and the biology of the systems within which we live and establish our experiential continua. We cannot preserve one consciousness because we have believed a lie. Consciousness is not what is most remarkable about life MEMORY is. And the defining process of animate life is the creation of memory. How memory is accessed and processed and created is the fundamental drive behind survival.

WE struggle to survive and procreate in order to develop and protect memory, in whatever form and by whatever means it is recorded. The unconscious process chooses to establish it in the genetic materials of our beings, but it can do no other, for once replication starts it can only continue with variation. The complexities of that variation have in the end given every animate a quality we denote as intelligence or mind, but we see it in the complex botanical systems on a larger scale. And on the universal scale we see the founding simplicities of our mind writ large. Beyond that who can tell?

Measurement is one of the Formal knowledges, and as such a metron is assigned. It is attributed as a whole monas to some subjective object and then assigned fractally; that is some iterative process of division or combination is used to assign this standard metron to all scales in a fractal pattern

Benoit Mandelbrot established a name for a system of study that snowballed into a philosophical analysis of complexities. In my view it is the foundational set of notions for our age, and for our evolution beyond the mentality of our fathers. It is not entirely without precedent in the ancient philosophies, but today we have the power to realise its tenets and to develop a new mindset in a vast demographic. These simple otions will not solve all the worlds problems but they will engage more minds in the task, and establish a unity of mind.

I believe in a fractal universe of universes! It makes me sane and fills me with equanamity hope and joy and awe.

These are things that are measured o us all.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s