Super Refugee
Andre Willers
28 September 2007
I have looked into the state of the lowest social strata of refugees in Africa , Asia , Europe , Americas , and I am filled with disgust .
The older brothers have created sweets in abundance , but walk away when the children suffer from stomach pains , saying that they should not be so greedy .
This following is for the little ones .
The three Consents that form the basis of the Law :
The Law
1.No Rule without Consent .
2.No Tax without Consent .
3.No Punishment without Consent .
How to organize a refugee situation .
Elect a leader (Dux) . Essential . Humans are hierarchical . (Rule by Consent)
Elect a Archpriest . (In charge of moral rules ,dying , etc) (Rule by Consent)
Elect a Lawayer. (Responsible for documents , permits , passports , etc) (No Tax without Consent)
Elect a Policeman . (Responsible for the strict enforcement of the agreed rules. The emphasis is on strict , as refugees tend to be in a state of learned helplessness , and the only known way out is social environment with strict rules . This so that the neural network of the deconstructed person can learn the new rules .) (No Punishment without Consent)
Elect a Soldier . There are a large number of predators preying on these defenseless people . (No Rule without Consent)
This takes only a few minutes . The persons responsible take on the characteristics of their posts as time goes by . ( Well proven by various studies .)
Reinforcement :
Humans forget easily , one of their strong points . We need to involve humans in daily rituals that involve other persons , body-image (ie fingertips) and the Law .
The ritual :
Before any meal , all stand up , look to the person on the left , clap once and say “The Law” , then look to the person on center , clap twice and say “The Law” , then look to the person on right , clap thrice and say “The Law” .
The Law being the three Consents formulated above .
This sounds ridiculous , but so does Christian , Islamic , Buddhistic , Hindu , etc rituals . The idea is to bind the rituals of dinner and eating into the Law .
Try it and see how your behaviour changes . It is a very powerful changing agent .
Joining the Society of the Law :
Any person that says these exact words (and no other) is a member of the Society of the Law and is entitled to the full protection of the Society .
No other person need be present .
The words:
“The Law
1.No Rule without Consent .
2.No Tax without Consent .
3.No Punishment without Consent .”
The person can only withdraw from the society without prejudice if both the Dux and the Archpriest agrees .
As you can see , this makes it easy to join and difficult to leave .
The whole idea . The only persons that qualify to leave are hermits .
This makes the system quite muscular .
Toujours!
Andre
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Brain hemispheres
Hi,
By Jungian synchronicity I ran into a very good summation of the state of the art concerning brain hemispheres :
The references are:
"New Scientist" 22 Sept 2007 , "Mind Tricks:Six ways to explore your brain" . Item 3 ("A Brain of two halves") is relevant .
The issue should be available from your library , or try http://archive.newscientist.com
Book : "Mind Hacks" by Tom Stafford and Matt Webb
From the article in New Scientist :
Quote :
"The latest view is that the two hemispheres have subtly different styles of information processing : the left has a bias toward detail , the right a more holistic outlook . You can watch a video of a split-brain experiment at
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMLzP1VCANo&mode=related&search= .
Most people , of course , have a functional corpus callosum that shunts information between the hemispheres . Even so , subtle left-right differences exist . One task where the hemispheres operate differently is face-recognition . When most of us see a face , the right cerebral hemisphere does the lion's share of the work recognising its gender and decoding its expression . And because the right hemisphere is fed by the left visual field , that means we have a notable left-sided bias in our judgement of faces ."
End Quote .
Commentary:
Here you see the most powerful of evolutionary mechanisms at work :
The evolution recipe :
Make multiple copies , diversify the non-essential ones and reinforce the successful mutations .
One copy is sufficient for "business as usual" . The other copies can diverge and find more efficient ways of doing things without impairing functionality normally inherent in a single-copy mutation .
This is born out by experimental data . Analyzing DNA in terms of repeat gene-strings is now brisk business .
This is a partial explanation for the small number of genes (25 000) in the human genome .
Hormone evolution cannot be explained in any other terms , especially the sex-hormones .
If you examine the Oestregon -> Testosterone path , you will find numerous hormones spun off from this backbone .
An example will make it clearer :
A certain homonin group has one DNA sequence that enables them manufacture an enzyme to metabolize a tuberous starch (like potatoes) . Environmental pressures make the this tuber plentiful . Multiple copies of this DNA sequence are created all the time by the processes of cell-division . Cells and organisms with multiple copies can make more of the enzyme . They are more efficient and successful . Some of these sequences always mutate . Mostly , the mutation is not successful . But sometimes , it is . Now the organism can can metabolize a new starch . The food supply is increased . Those organisms with this outcompete the old ones . And so it goes .
An anti-example will make it even clearer :
MacDonalds is renowned for trying to bring the mutational rate to zero . Every branch must do everything the same way with the same ingredients . It gets increasingly difficult as slight mutations spin off and take hold ( King Burgers , Nando's, Spurs , etc)
This is called Intra-species competition : the same basic idea , but with differences that appeal to different customers , but within certain well-defined parameters . Cf franchises . Eg , you belong to the human franchise .
At some point , MacDonalds will have to modify (if it can) , or go extinct (bankrupt) . It's immense superstructure of control mechanisms can no longer be supported by the infrastructure in competition with similar , but more appealing firms .
A winning recipe becomes untenable due to competitive pressure and the inability to adapt .
Can you see the relevance to Empires and Religions ?
Boredom.
This is not handled by Maslow's hierarchy . Yet feedback organisms (including humans , bacteria , mitochondria) can die of boredom , or indulge in self-destructive behaviour for the sake of variety .
What gives ?
We sneak up in the usual way by looking at learned-helplessness . This is when the feedback into the neural-network is random . The "weights" assigned to the output is randomized , even where they have been established . The organism cannot react to anything . See http//:andreswhy.blogspot.com
This is true for anything using neuralnetworks . Cockroaches to computers .
Ok, that is understandable .
Now , let the feedback be non-random . The neural weights can then only assume values within certain boundaries . The values within these boundaries are discrete (the logic comes from from synaptic levels) . Pauli's principle comes into play . There are a finite number quantum states any system can have .
If this number is exceeded , the system becomes bored and assignes values to the new item outside of the existing set of values .
The more civilized , the smaller the number of acceptable quantum-states . The more likely revolution .
Boredom and boredom breaking is thus a mechanism that flows from subatomic and quantum arguments .
The above argument is relative . Notice that the number of quantum states acceptable to an entitity might be very small
("I can't wear these shoes to to the ball ! " )
So , electrons , protons etc can be bored . But they have a large number of possible states . Complex feedback systems limit the degrees of freedom . You , as a person , have fewer degrees of freedom than an electron .
Another proof of why a Theory of Everything is not possible . The moment there is a self-aware observer , the degrees of freedom decrease rapidly (it does not collapse to a singularity , but to sets of axioms that decrease to a singularity.)
So , the next time you get bored , think of all the electrons in the wires about you .
They are really , really bored . When all the quantum states (Pauli states) on the planet are filled , you will hop . The greater the degree of interconnectivity , the smaller the number free quantum states .
Ho-ho-ho!
But of course , you need not wait until all the Pauli states are filled . Little bubbles of filled states will pop up all over the place , in statistically meaningful ways .
The little bubbles will inflate to create Turing self-aware entities .That's you , if you have'nt noticed .
Andre
By Jungian synchronicity I ran into a very good summation of the state of the art concerning brain hemispheres :
The references are:
"New Scientist" 22 Sept 2007 , "Mind Tricks:Six ways to explore your brain" . Item 3 ("A Brain of two halves") is relevant .
The issue should be available from your library , or try http://archive.newscientist.com
Book : "Mind Hacks" by Tom Stafford and Matt Webb
From the article in New Scientist :
Quote :
"The latest view is that the two hemispheres have subtly different styles of information processing : the left has a bias toward detail , the right a more holistic outlook . You can watch a video of a split-brain experiment at
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMLzP1VCANo&mode=related&search= .
Most people , of course , have a functional corpus callosum that shunts information between the hemispheres . Even so , subtle left-right differences exist . One task where the hemispheres operate differently is face-recognition . When most of us see a face , the right cerebral hemisphere does the lion's share of the work recognising its gender and decoding its expression . And because the right hemisphere is fed by the left visual field , that means we have a notable left-sided bias in our judgement of faces ."
End Quote .
Commentary:
Here you see the most powerful of evolutionary mechanisms at work :
The evolution recipe :
Make multiple copies , diversify the non-essential ones and reinforce the successful mutations .
One copy is sufficient for "business as usual" . The other copies can diverge and find more efficient ways of doing things without impairing functionality normally inherent in a single-copy mutation .
This is born out by experimental data . Analyzing DNA in terms of repeat gene-strings is now brisk business .
This is a partial explanation for the small number of genes (25 000) in the human genome .
Hormone evolution cannot be explained in any other terms , especially the sex-hormones .
If you examine the Oestregon -> Testosterone path , you will find numerous hormones spun off from this backbone .
An example will make it clearer :
A certain homonin group has one DNA sequence that enables them manufacture an enzyme to metabolize a tuberous starch (like potatoes) . Environmental pressures make the this tuber plentiful . Multiple copies of this DNA sequence are created all the time by the processes of cell-division . Cells and organisms with multiple copies can make more of the enzyme . They are more efficient and successful . Some of these sequences always mutate . Mostly , the mutation is not successful . But sometimes , it is . Now the organism can can metabolize a new starch . The food supply is increased . Those organisms with this outcompete the old ones . And so it goes .
An anti-example will make it even clearer :
MacDonalds is renowned for trying to bring the mutational rate to zero . Every branch must do everything the same way with the same ingredients . It gets increasingly difficult as slight mutations spin off and take hold ( King Burgers , Nando's, Spurs , etc)
This is called Intra-species competition : the same basic idea , but with differences that appeal to different customers , but within certain well-defined parameters . Cf franchises . Eg , you belong to the human franchise .
At some point , MacDonalds will have to modify (if it can) , or go extinct (bankrupt) . It's immense superstructure of control mechanisms can no longer be supported by the infrastructure in competition with similar , but more appealing firms .
A winning recipe becomes untenable due to competitive pressure and the inability to adapt .
Can you see the relevance to Empires and Religions ?
Boredom.
This is not handled by Maslow's hierarchy . Yet feedback organisms (including humans , bacteria , mitochondria) can die of boredom , or indulge in self-destructive behaviour for the sake of variety .
What gives ?
We sneak up in the usual way by looking at learned-helplessness . This is when the feedback into the neural-network is random . The "weights" assigned to the output is randomized , even where they have been established . The organism cannot react to anything . See http//:andreswhy.blogspot.com
This is true for anything using neuralnetworks . Cockroaches to computers .
Ok, that is understandable .
Now , let the feedback be non-random . The neural weights can then only assume values within certain boundaries . The values within these boundaries are discrete (the logic comes from from synaptic levels) . Pauli's principle comes into play . There are a finite number quantum states any system can have .
If this number is exceeded , the system becomes bored and assignes values to the new item outside of the existing set of values .
The more civilized , the smaller the number of acceptable quantum-states . The more likely revolution .
Boredom and boredom breaking is thus a mechanism that flows from subatomic and quantum arguments .
The above argument is relative . Notice that the number of quantum states acceptable to an entitity might be very small
("I can't wear these shoes to to the ball ! " )
So , electrons , protons etc can be bored . But they have a large number of possible states . Complex feedback systems limit the degrees of freedom . You , as a person , have fewer degrees of freedom than an electron .
Another proof of why a Theory of Everything is not possible . The moment there is a self-aware observer , the degrees of freedom decrease rapidly (it does not collapse to a singularity , but to sets of axioms that decrease to a singularity.)
So , the next time you get bored , think of all the electrons in the wires about you .
They are really , really bored . When all the quantum states (Pauli states) on the planet are filled , you will hop . The greater the degree of interconnectivity , the smaller the number free quantum states .
Ho-ho-ho!
But of course , you need not wait until all the Pauli states are filled . Little bubbles of filled states will pop up all over the place , in statistically meaningful ways .
The little bubbles will inflate to create Turing self-aware entities .That's you , if you have'nt noticed .
Andre
Monday, October 22, 2007
Hi,
By Jungian synchronicity I ran into a very good summation of the state of the art concerning brain hemispheres :
The references are:
"New Scientist" 22 Sept 2007 , "Mind Tricks:Six ways to explore your brain" . Item 3 ("A Brain of two halves") is relevant .
The issue should be available from your library , or try http://archive.newscientist.com
Book : "Mind Hacks" by Tom Stafford and Matt Webb
From the article in New Scientist :
Quote :
"The latest view is that the two hemispheres have subtly different styles of information processing : the left has a bias toward detail , the right a more holistic outlook . You can watch a video of a split-brain experiment at
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMLzP1VCANo&mode=related&search= .
Most people , of course , have a functional corpus callosum that shunts information between the hemispheres . Even so , subtle left-right differences exist . One task where the hemispheres operate differently is face-recognition . When most of us see a face , the right cerebral hemisphere does the lion's share of the work recognising its gender and decoding its expression . And because the right hemisphere is fed by the left visual field , that means we have a notable left-sided bias in our judgement of faces ."
End Quote .
Commentary:
Here you see the most powerful of evolutionary mechanisms at work :
The evolution recipe :
Make multiple copies , diversify the non-essential ones and reinforce the successful mutations .
One copy is sufficient for "business as usual" . The other copies can diverge and find more efficient ways of doing things without impairing functionality normally inherent in a single-copy mutation .
This is born out by experimental data . Analyzing DNA in terms of repeat gene-strings is now brisk business .
This is a partial explanation for the small number of genes (25 000) in the human genome .
Hormone evolution cannot be explained in any other terms , especially the sex-hormones .
If you examine the Oestregon -> Testosterone path , you will find numerous hormones spun off from this backbone .
An example will make it clearer :
A certain homonin group has one DNA sequence that enables them manufacture an enzyme to metabolize a tuberous starch (like potatoes) . Environmental pressures make the this tuber plentiful . Multiple copies of this DNA sequence are created all the time by the processes of cell-division . Cells and organisms with multiple copies can make more of the enzyme . They are more efficient and successful . Some of these sequences always mutate . Mostly , the mutation is not successful . But sometimes , it is . Now the organism can can metabolize a new starch . The food supply is increased . Those organisms with this outcompete the old ones . And so it goes .
An anti-example will make it even clearer :
MacDonalds is renowned for trying to bring the mutational rate to zero . Every branch must do everything the same way with the same ingredients . It gets increasingly difficult as slight mutations spin off and take hold ( King Burgers , Nando's, Spurs , etc)
This is called Intra-species competition : the same basic idea , but with differences that appeal to different customers , but within certain well-defined parameters . Cf franchises . Eg , you belong to the human franchise .
At some point , MacDonalds will have to modify (if it can) , or go extinct (bankrupt) . It's immense superstructure of control mechanisms can no longer be supported by the infrastructure in competition with similar , but more appealing firms .
A winning recipe becomes untenable due to competitive pressure and the inability to adapt .
Can you see the relevance to Empires and Religions ?
Boredom.
This is not handled by Maslow's hierarchy . Yet feedback organisms (including humans , bacteria , mitochondria) can die of boredom , or indulge in self-destructive behaviour for the sake of variety .
What gives ?
We sneak up in the usual way by looking at learned-helplessness . This is when the feedback into the neural-network is random . The "weights" assigned to the output is randomized , even where they have been established . The organism cannot react to anything . See http//:andreswhy.blogspot.com
This is true for anything using neuralnetworks . Cockroaches to computers .
Ok, that is understandable .
Now , let the feedback be non-random . The neural weights can then only assume values within certain boundaries . The values within these boundaries are discrete (the logic comes from from synaptic levels) . Pauli's principle comes into play . There are a finite number quantum states any system can have .
If this number is exceeded , the system becomes bored and assignes values to the new item outside of the existing set of values .
The more civilized , the smaller the number of acceptable quantum-states . The more likely revolution .
Boredom and boredom breaking is thus a mechanism that flows from subatomic and quantum arguments .
The above argument is relative . Notice that the number of quantum states acceptable to an entitity might be very small
("I can't wear these shoes to to the ball ! " )
So , electrons , protons etc can be bored . But they have a large number of possible states . Complex feedback systems limit the degrees of freedom . You , as a person , have fewer degrees of freedom than an electron .
Another proof of why a Theory of Everything is not possible . The moment there is a self-aware observer , the degrees of freedom decrease rapidly (it does not collapse to a singularity , but to sets of axioms that decrease to a singularity.)
So , the next time you get bored , think of all the electrons in the wires about you .
They are really , really bored . When all the quantum states (Pauli states) on the planet are filled , you will hop . The greater the degree of interconnectivity , the smaller the number free quantum states .
Ho-ho-ho!
But of course , you need not wait until all the Pauli states are filled . Little bubbles of filled states will pop up all over the place , in statistically meaningful ways .
The little bubbles will inflate to create Turing self-aware entities .That's you , if you have'nt noticed .
Andre
-----Original Message-----From: Andre Willers [mailto:andre.w@absamail.co.za] Sent: 18 October 2007 08:04 AMTo: 'Botha, Aniki'Cc: Michael Reid (michael.reid@dpi.vic.gov.au)Subject: RE: Incase you weren't doing enough work
Hi,
Some processing tends to be done in different halves of the brain , but there is heavy interconnection . It is a tendency only , and of no use trying to suss out a persons personality .
In other words, a party trick .
A similar trick is seen as follows:
Draw the edges of a transparent 3 dim brick as if looking down at one of the corners . You can then switch the perspective (the point coming out at you , or facing away from you) by concentrating .
Greetings
Andre
-----Original Message-----From: Botha, Aniki [mailto:abotha@kpmg.com.au] Sent: 10 October 2007 07:10 AMTo: andre.w@absamail.co.zaSubject: FW: Incase you weren't doing enough work
Oom Andre,
Wat is die verduideliking hier agter?
Die persoon wat dit vir my gestuur het, sien "anti-clockwise" en ek sien "clockwise".... http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22556678-23272,00.html goes anti clock wise for me – but then after a while it was going everywhere
By Jungian synchronicity I ran into a very good summation of the state of the art concerning brain hemispheres :
The references are:
"New Scientist" 22 Sept 2007 , "Mind Tricks:Six ways to explore your brain" . Item 3 ("A Brain of two halves") is relevant .
The issue should be available from your library , or try http://archive.newscientist.com
Book : "Mind Hacks" by Tom Stafford and Matt Webb
From the article in New Scientist :
Quote :
"The latest view is that the two hemispheres have subtly different styles of information processing : the left has a bias toward detail , the right a more holistic outlook . You can watch a video of a split-brain experiment at
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMLzP1VCANo&mode=related&search= .
Most people , of course , have a functional corpus callosum that shunts information between the hemispheres . Even so , subtle left-right differences exist . One task where the hemispheres operate differently is face-recognition . When most of us see a face , the right cerebral hemisphere does the lion's share of the work recognising its gender and decoding its expression . And because the right hemisphere is fed by the left visual field , that means we have a notable left-sided bias in our judgement of faces ."
End Quote .
Commentary:
Here you see the most powerful of evolutionary mechanisms at work :
The evolution recipe :
Make multiple copies , diversify the non-essential ones and reinforce the successful mutations .
One copy is sufficient for "business as usual" . The other copies can diverge and find more efficient ways of doing things without impairing functionality normally inherent in a single-copy mutation .
This is born out by experimental data . Analyzing DNA in terms of repeat gene-strings is now brisk business .
This is a partial explanation for the small number of genes (25 000) in the human genome .
Hormone evolution cannot be explained in any other terms , especially the sex-hormones .
If you examine the Oestregon -> Testosterone path , you will find numerous hormones spun off from this backbone .
An example will make it clearer :
A certain homonin group has one DNA sequence that enables them manufacture an enzyme to metabolize a tuberous starch (like potatoes) . Environmental pressures make the this tuber plentiful . Multiple copies of this DNA sequence are created all the time by the processes of cell-division . Cells and organisms with multiple copies can make more of the enzyme . They are more efficient and successful . Some of these sequences always mutate . Mostly , the mutation is not successful . But sometimes , it is . Now the organism can can metabolize a new starch . The food supply is increased . Those organisms with this outcompete the old ones . And so it goes .
An anti-example will make it even clearer :
MacDonalds is renowned for trying to bring the mutational rate to zero . Every branch must do everything the same way with the same ingredients . It gets increasingly difficult as slight mutations spin off and take hold ( King Burgers , Nando's, Spurs , etc)
This is called Intra-species competition : the same basic idea , but with differences that appeal to different customers , but within certain well-defined parameters . Cf franchises . Eg , you belong to the human franchise .
At some point , MacDonalds will have to modify (if it can) , or go extinct (bankrupt) . It's immense superstructure of control mechanisms can no longer be supported by the infrastructure in competition with similar , but more appealing firms .
A winning recipe becomes untenable due to competitive pressure and the inability to adapt .
Can you see the relevance to Empires and Religions ?
Boredom.
This is not handled by Maslow's hierarchy . Yet feedback organisms (including humans , bacteria , mitochondria) can die of boredom , or indulge in self-destructive behaviour for the sake of variety .
What gives ?
We sneak up in the usual way by looking at learned-helplessness . This is when the feedback into the neural-network is random . The "weights" assigned to the output is randomized , even where they have been established . The organism cannot react to anything . See http//:andreswhy.blogspot.com
This is true for anything using neuralnetworks . Cockroaches to computers .
Ok, that is understandable .
Now , let the feedback be non-random . The neural weights can then only assume values within certain boundaries . The values within these boundaries are discrete (the logic comes from from synaptic levels) . Pauli's principle comes into play . There are a finite number quantum states any system can have .
If this number is exceeded , the system becomes bored and assignes values to the new item outside of the existing set of values .
The more civilized , the smaller the number of acceptable quantum-states . The more likely revolution .
Boredom and boredom breaking is thus a mechanism that flows from subatomic and quantum arguments .
The above argument is relative . Notice that the number of quantum states acceptable to an entitity might be very small
("I can't wear these shoes to to the ball ! " )
So , electrons , protons etc can be bored . But they have a large number of possible states . Complex feedback systems limit the degrees of freedom . You , as a person , have fewer degrees of freedom than an electron .
Another proof of why a Theory of Everything is not possible . The moment there is a self-aware observer , the degrees of freedom decrease rapidly (it does not collapse to a singularity , but to sets of axioms that decrease to a singularity.)
So , the next time you get bored , think of all the electrons in the wires about you .
They are really , really bored . When all the quantum states (Pauli states) on the planet are filled , you will hop . The greater the degree of interconnectivity , the smaller the number free quantum states .
Ho-ho-ho!
But of course , you need not wait until all the Pauli states are filled . Little bubbles of filled states will pop up all over the place , in statistically meaningful ways .
The little bubbles will inflate to create Turing self-aware entities .That's you , if you have'nt noticed .
Andre
-----Original Message-----From: Andre Willers [mailto:andre.w@absamail.co.za] Sent: 18 October 2007 08:04 AMTo: 'Botha, Aniki'Cc: Michael Reid (michael.reid@dpi.vic.gov.au)Subject: RE: Incase you weren't doing enough work
Hi,
Some processing tends to be done in different halves of the brain , but there is heavy interconnection . It is a tendency only , and of no use trying to suss out a persons personality .
In other words, a party trick .
A similar trick is seen as follows:
Draw the edges of a transparent 3 dim brick as if looking down at one of the corners . You can then switch the perspective (the point coming out at you , or facing away from you) by concentrating .
Greetings
Andre
-----Original Message-----From: Botha, Aniki [mailto:abotha@kpmg.com.au] Sent: 10 October 2007 07:10 AMTo: andre.w@absamail.co.zaSubject: FW: Incase you weren't doing enough work
Oom Andre,
Wat is die verduideliking hier agter?
Die persoon wat dit vir my gestuur het, sien "anti-clockwise" en ek sien "clockwise".... http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22556678-23272,00.html goes anti clock wise for me – but then after a while it was going everywhere
Monday, October 08, 2007
The synapse seen as a Quantum device
The Synapse seen as a Quantum Device .
Andre Willers
8 Oct 2007
Summary :
The synapse is described in terms of a two-slit quantum device . Some more speculative consequences are derived.
Discussion :
Why have synapses in the first place ?
Most of their supposed functions ( like counting the frequency of pulses ) are in any case done in the receptor neuron . The thresholds are likewise done in the receptor neuron . The splitter effect could be done with direct neuron contact without the expense and sheer bother of finicky synapses .
The answer is , of course , feedback .
The system requires two types of feedback : general (hormones , general neurotransmitters) and specific commands from the brain which have to be amplified and applied in specific ways .
The structure of the synapse :
The emitters and the receptors , within nanometers of each other .
The synaptical fluid between them , consisting of water and folded proteins .
Let us first examine a synapse with just water as a synaptical fluid . From the docking mechanisms involved in getting molecules into cells , we know that water close to the cell-surface form template layers of the receptor site . (We are talking nanometers here) . The efficiency of the docking of the incoming molecule is greatly enhanced by the subtle template layers of the water molecules . (See articles in New Scientist and Scientific American describing this phenomenon .)
Think an aircraft coming in to land on a mist shrouded airport with multiple runways . From far off ,the pilot sees a general blur . As he comes closer , a runway becomes clearer . But a very slight change in incoming direction will have him seeing a different runway . He twists and turns the plane to land .
The layers of water-molecules act like multiple slits , both at the receptor and emitter sites . They also interfere with each other , forming in effect two virtual slits . If the receptor sites are close enough to each other , quantum interference effects can be detected (ie wave interference .)
Docking efficiency is greatly enhanced , since the incoming molecule is oriented in just the right way by the water layers to land correctly . There are three spatial and four spin vectors to align . (Four spin vectors since the molecule might be a toroid.)
(I am following the Copenhagen interpretation here . It might be incomplete , but it is not wrong . )
Of course , evolution could never keep it’s sticky fingers off such a set-up . Water is not the optimal synaptical fluid . Think folded proteins . Think quantum catalysts . Synaptical fluid can be used to program body-stem cells .
This means that the mind (see Topos articles in http://andreswhy.blogspot.com)
can interact with each synapse individually or collectively . The word “can” is used advisedly .
Ho-ho-ho!
This means that body functions are dependant on mind-image .
Another Ho-ho-ho!
This effect is becoming more pronounced . Humans are changing . Human self-image is having a greater effect on actual body than before .
Quantum diseases .
Obesity and diabetes can be described as quantum diseases .
Old age ?
Another example are eating disorders . Anorexia can be described as a human trying to be an Elf . Try a community of elves as therapy .
Epigenetic effects are quite capable of resurrecting hidden expressions in the human genome . A measurable effect would be on the BMI (Body Mass Index) . This is normalized on the MkIII Human . The index is rapidly becoming meaningless as more and more people are expressing genes of previous racial groups under the influence of body-images formed by previous genes and games .
Are you big , blocky , fatty and strong ?
You would be a freaky MkIII human , but a perfectly normal Homo Erectus . More significantly , if you look around a bit , you will find Ms Erectus (so to speak) .
The same for Neanderthaloids and the other homonin species subsumed by the Matriarchy .
Why now ?
It is a way of saying “Sorry” .
See the “Origins of Peace and War” in http://andreswhy.blogspot.com
The question always was why there were so few singularities in human history .
The answer , of course , that there was at least one .
The Matriarchy was not killed off by the their rejected sub-humans and mutants . They simply left . Like thistledowns on the winds of space-time , they blew away to other realms . Leaving behind their twisted offspring .
The various homonin species that might have achieved singularity on their own before their germ-plasm was suborned into the Matriarchy’s schemes are now surfacing close to the singularity .
Hey , the Bene-Gesserit had nothing on these dames .
Maybe you will meet the person that rejected your DNA millennia ago .
What will you say ?
There is only one thing that will fit . Not a punishment . A consequence .
“Mummy dearest .”
Andre.
Andre Willers
8 Oct 2007
Summary :
The synapse is described in terms of a two-slit quantum device . Some more speculative consequences are derived.
Discussion :
Why have synapses in the first place ?
Most of their supposed functions ( like counting the frequency of pulses ) are in any case done in the receptor neuron . The thresholds are likewise done in the receptor neuron . The splitter effect could be done with direct neuron contact without the expense and sheer bother of finicky synapses .
The answer is , of course , feedback .
The system requires two types of feedback : general (hormones , general neurotransmitters) and specific commands from the brain which have to be amplified and applied in specific ways .
The structure of the synapse :
The emitters and the receptors , within nanometers of each other .
The synaptical fluid between them , consisting of water and folded proteins .
Let us first examine a synapse with just water as a synaptical fluid . From the docking mechanisms involved in getting molecules into cells , we know that water close to the cell-surface form template layers of the receptor site . (We are talking nanometers here) . The efficiency of the docking of the incoming molecule is greatly enhanced by the subtle template layers of the water molecules . (See articles in New Scientist and Scientific American describing this phenomenon .)
Think an aircraft coming in to land on a mist shrouded airport with multiple runways . From far off ,the pilot sees a general blur . As he comes closer , a runway becomes clearer . But a very slight change in incoming direction will have him seeing a different runway . He twists and turns the plane to land .
The layers of water-molecules act like multiple slits , both at the receptor and emitter sites . They also interfere with each other , forming in effect two virtual slits . If the receptor sites are close enough to each other , quantum interference effects can be detected (ie wave interference .)
Docking efficiency is greatly enhanced , since the incoming molecule is oriented in just the right way by the water layers to land correctly . There are three spatial and four spin vectors to align . (Four spin vectors since the molecule might be a toroid.)
(I am following the Copenhagen interpretation here . It might be incomplete , but it is not wrong . )
Of course , evolution could never keep it’s sticky fingers off such a set-up . Water is not the optimal synaptical fluid . Think folded proteins . Think quantum catalysts . Synaptical fluid can be used to program body-stem cells .
This means that the mind (see Topos articles in http://andreswhy.blogspot.com)
can interact with each synapse individually or collectively . The word “can” is used advisedly .
Ho-ho-ho!
This means that body functions are dependant on mind-image .
Another Ho-ho-ho!
This effect is becoming more pronounced . Humans are changing . Human self-image is having a greater effect on actual body than before .
Quantum diseases .
Obesity and diabetes can be described as quantum diseases .
Old age ?
Another example are eating disorders . Anorexia can be described as a human trying to be an Elf . Try a community of elves as therapy .
Epigenetic effects are quite capable of resurrecting hidden expressions in the human genome . A measurable effect would be on the BMI (Body Mass Index) . This is normalized on the MkIII Human . The index is rapidly becoming meaningless as more and more people are expressing genes of previous racial groups under the influence of body-images formed by previous genes and games .
Are you big , blocky , fatty and strong ?
You would be a freaky MkIII human , but a perfectly normal Homo Erectus . More significantly , if you look around a bit , you will find Ms Erectus (so to speak) .
The same for Neanderthaloids and the other homonin species subsumed by the Matriarchy .
Why now ?
It is a way of saying “Sorry” .
See the “Origins of Peace and War” in http://andreswhy.blogspot.com
The question always was why there were so few singularities in human history .
The answer , of course , that there was at least one .
The Matriarchy was not killed off by the their rejected sub-humans and mutants . They simply left . Like thistledowns on the winds of space-time , they blew away to other realms . Leaving behind their twisted offspring .
The various homonin species that might have achieved singularity on their own before their germ-plasm was suborned into the Matriarchy’s schemes are now surfacing close to the singularity .
Hey , the Bene-Gesserit had nothing on these dames .
Maybe you will meet the person that rejected your DNA millennia ago .
What will you say ?
There is only one thing that will fit . Not a punishment . A consequence .
“Mummy dearest .”
Andre.
Near tech
Hi,
Not science , but technology .
Brains+hands+culture=technology .
Stone-age technology (fire , nets , stone tools) were sufficient to lead to extinction singularities for societies like the Maya .
The problem is evolutionary specialization caused by intra-species conflict . The fittest end up in very narrow specialized niches .
These niches are very vulnerable to environmental changes (especially if they are overpopulated , as they are by definition-ref Malthus).
Getting out of these local optima is impossible for beings using their bodies as tools (eg Smilodon , etc) .The DNA system cannot backtrack .
Cultural systems are the DNA of humans societies . Humans will usually die before they change them .
I refer you to the excellent example of the Norse in Greenland . They starved to death in the Little Ice Age next to rivers teeming with salmon , because some bishop told them that fish should not be eaten . This sounds unbelievable , but it is true . Archeologists always have to check the middens of the extict settlements for themselves before believing it . There are no fishbones in the middens .
Humans are group animals : you cannot change their mind one at a time . You have to change groups .
There is one reliable method of changing human cultures without killing most of them : break down individuals and build them up .
The first to evolvel :
1. The Army : by trial-and-error , a personality demolition and rebuild of new groups evolved . Anybody who has been through basic training knows exactly what I am talking about . Each Army unit is a new culture .
2. The same principles were then used in Organised religions because they work .
3. Cultures then accreted around these two entities .
Ho-ho-ho!!
Won't this stick in the craw of liberals!
Armies are the basic building block of all present societies and religions . And the mechanisms of conversion are the same .
Assyrians and Romans were needed before Christians.
The recipe is simple :
1. Induction of learned-helplessness (cf Sapolski) by random stimuli and deprivation in an environment that is completely controlled .
2. Rebuilding of personalities by switching to a strict set of rules after personality demolition . The person's new personality forms around the new set of rules . The Rules Must Be Strict and very clearly delineated .Otherwise the neural networks cannot learn the new behaviour patterns .
The new set of rules can be Army (your unit) , Christian , Islam , Buddhist , residence , gang , organization , job , sect , etc, etc .
The New Persons will literally die before they leave their unit-comrades in the lurch .
The system is remarkably successful .
Before about 1800 :
Only about 3% were unteachable . These were usually autism , psychopaths , criminals and a tiny few rebels (though the system saw them as one of the three above)
After about 1800 :
About 20% are unteachable at present , and the percentage is rising .
As described in previous posts , (http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/) : mild autism (Aspergers) is heavily selected because of the nature of technology : concentrated , repetitive work for long periods .
The selection mechanism operates on an epigenetic level , so it is very fast .
Induction of learned-helplessness works on anything that has a neural-network (cockroaches to computers) .
But New Rules that involve empathy has shallow ground for a MkIV Human .
You won't find him in the ignorant armies that clash by night in the plains . He is the one sitting on the cliff with a torch , reading the manual .
He is also in control of most of the energy on the planet and all the weapons of mass destruction .
So , as you stated , the problem is not technology or science , but in human's ability to change their culture (which will automatically change their technology) .
They already have a mechanism for changing their technology , but the traditional religions are appealing to fellow-feeling , something aspergers (MKIV humans) do not have in abundance .
A very good example is Kitchener's campaigns in the Sudan and South Africa .
This scenario still ends in mass-depopulation . But it can be gradual instead of abrupt .
And so it goes .
Andre .
-----Original Message-----From: Michael.Reid@dpi.vic.gov.au [mailto:Michael.Reid@dpi.vic.gov.au] Sent: 08 October 2007 08:43 AMTo: andre.w@absamail.co.zaSubject: RE: How to be a refugee .I think a large proglem in waiting for a 'super-hero' has been our heavy reliance on science to solve the problem, where in fact science has been the soluation to problems but also generated greater environmental issues later.... rather the solution relies in critically reflecting from a society point of view.....
"Andre Willers"
06/10/2007 06:15 AM
Please respond toandre.w@absamail.co.za
To
cc
Subject
RE: How to be a refugee .
Hi, Thank you for your reply . I have read Jared Diamond's various books , as well as other similar ones . History does not repeat , but it rhymes . See http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/ "The Origins of War and Peace" "What is to become of us?" "Prodigies" "War warnings" etc . We are facing imminent collapse and depopulation of the order of the Late Bronze Age civilization . One of the symptoms is that none of the negative feedback mechanisms that used to keep societietal growth in check are working . Everybody hopes that insane exponential growths can be maintained by some trick . Some technological Deus-ex-Machina . Some Super-Hero that will clean up the mess , wipe all the asses and snotty noses . (The latest candidates are entities deep in the Singularity.) On the other hand , nobody gets out of here alive . Andre
-----Original Message-----From: Michael.Reid@dpi.vic.gov.au [mailto:Michael.Reid@dpi.vic.gov.au] Sent: 01 October 2007 08:53 AMTo: andre.w@absamail.co.zaSubject: Re: How to be a refugee .Andre, My name is Michael, one of Aniki's friends from Australia - father a fugee from South Africa came over on a boat. Anyway, thanks for your email - reminds me of a book I read and think you would find enjoyable, it is called 'Collapse: How socities chose to fail or succeed' the author is Jarrod Diamond - provides a really interesting case studies societys and their demise - check out the review http://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Societies-Choose-Fail-Succeed/dp/0670033375 Regards, Mike.
"Andre Willers"
01/10/2007 08:21 AM
Please respond to
To
"'Botha, Aniki'", "'jade chilvers'" , "'Bradley, Angie'" , "'Lappin, Renae'" , "'Simon O'Malley'" , "'Imogen'" , , , , "'Kleyn, Johan (JM)'" , , "'Johnston, Andrew'" , <2004007858@student.uovs.ac.za>, , , , "'Zubko, Inna'" ,
cc
, "Eben Swart" , "Ermeine Louw (Ermeine Louw)" , "Inge Willers" , "Jana Botha" , "Johan Willers (Johan Willers)" , "Leslie Clarke" , "Marika" , "Renschia Swart"
Subject
How to be a refugee .
How to be a refugee . Andre Willers 1 Oct 2007 Valuable lessons in how to survive as a refugee are documented all over , mostly in verbal memories. But nowhere are they drawn together . (I looked on the Internet) . “Refugees for Dummies” “The Idiots Guide to being a Refugee” We need this desperately . Most of you who are reading this are refugees (ie the South African diaspora ) or descendants of refugees . All of us hope never to become refugees . But given the world climate change and overpopulation giving rise to political instability , it is nearly inevitable . We desperately need a “How to” guide . Most middle class Westerners have not the faintest clue on how to survive when their social support system collapses . So how did our ancestors survive ? Unfortunately , they did not like to talk about it . The information is there , but not easily available . I am not talking vague generalities . What we need is a site like HowToBeARefugee.org that spells it out , organized on the lines of Wikipedia . The people of New-Orleans is a good example . It is no use saying to a mother of three small children standing on a roof while the water is rising that she should have been prepared . What is she to do NOW ? Should she stay ? Run ? What must she take , not only for immediate survival but for survival in a week , 2 weeks , a month ? . Dive in and rescue her documents ? The radio ? A bottle of Southern Comfort ? Baby formula ? This is the question facing generations of humans . Remember the newsreels of long lines refugees in Europe , with grandma’s bed on a rickety cart while planes are strafing them and tanks bulldozing them out of the way . How much do you bribe a guard or a border official ? Do you trust fellow refugees? Share your food , water or information ? By the time you learn these lessons , you might well be dead . Does a woman trade sex or money , or both ? If so , in what proportion ? All things learned the hard way by millennia of refugee women , but not shared except in strictest confidence with their daughters . Needless to say , this is not an optimum strategy . General Rules : 1. Band together . (Make friends . Network) 2. Move . (If you’re being killed here , it can only be the same or better elsewhere.) 3. Share . (Critical . A group less than about a 100 never has diversity enough to survive.) 4. Carry documents.(Critical in civilized or semi-civilized disasters.) 5. Have a way of making fire . (Signalling , heating , cooking , weapon , etc.) Human societies have superb built-in memes for surviving disasters , given some time . The trick is to survive until these kick in . If you are excluded , the above principles still apply . Ask the Aztecs , Mongols , etc ad nauseam . Lone , stationary , selfish individuals do not survive in poor environments without self-regenerating support systems . Notice that the studies done on very poor structures that survive in the present world are based on these principles . Ho-ho-ho ! The first Christian communities were found on these very same principles , for the very same reasons . If you were dropped into a SA township , or a Brazilian favela or a Darfur hut , would you survive ? More importantly , would you even know how to go about it ? Where could you find out really , really quickly ? Remember , this is not like the training special forces undergo to survive in the veldt . That relevance disappeared about 500 years ago . I hope that some of you get busy and organize it . You will probably need it . Andre
Not science , but technology .
Brains+hands+culture=technology .
Stone-age technology (fire , nets , stone tools) were sufficient to lead to extinction singularities for societies like the Maya .
The problem is evolutionary specialization caused by intra-species conflict . The fittest end up in very narrow specialized niches .
These niches are very vulnerable to environmental changes (especially if they are overpopulated , as they are by definition-ref Malthus).
Getting out of these local optima is impossible for beings using their bodies as tools (eg Smilodon , etc) .The DNA system cannot backtrack .
Cultural systems are the DNA of humans societies . Humans will usually die before they change them .
I refer you to the excellent example of the Norse in Greenland . They starved to death in the Little Ice Age next to rivers teeming with salmon , because some bishop told them that fish should not be eaten . This sounds unbelievable , but it is true . Archeologists always have to check the middens of the extict settlements for themselves before believing it . There are no fishbones in the middens .
Humans are group animals : you cannot change their mind one at a time . You have to change groups .
There is one reliable method of changing human cultures without killing most of them : break down individuals and build them up .
The first to evolvel :
1. The Army : by trial-and-error , a personality demolition and rebuild of new groups evolved . Anybody who has been through basic training knows exactly what I am talking about . Each Army unit is a new culture .
2. The same principles were then used in Organised religions because they work .
3. Cultures then accreted around these two entities .
Ho-ho-ho!!
Won't this stick in the craw of liberals!
Armies are the basic building block of all present societies and religions . And the mechanisms of conversion are the same .
Assyrians and Romans were needed before Christians.
The recipe is simple :
1. Induction of learned-helplessness (cf Sapolski) by random stimuli and deprivation in an environment that is completely controlled .
2. Rebuilding of personalities by switching to a strict set of rules after personality demolition . The person's new personality forms around the new set of rules . The Rules Must Be Strict and very clearly delineated .Otherwise the neural networks cannot learn the new behaviour patterns .
The new set of rules can be Army (your unit) , Christian , Islam , Buddhist , residence , gang , organization , job , sect , etc, etc .
The New Persons will literally die before they leave their unit-comrades in the lurch .
The system is remarkably successful .
Before about 1800 :
Only about 3% were unteachable . These were usually autism , psychopaths , criminals and a tiny few rebels (though the system saw them as one of the three above)
After about 1800 :
About 20% are unteachable at present , and the percentage is rising .
As described in previous posts , (http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/) : mild autism (Aspergers) is heavily selected because of the nature of technology : concentrated , repetitive work for long periods .
The selection mechanism operates on an epigenetic level , so it is very fast .
Induction of learned-helplessness works on anything that has a neural-network (cockroaches to computers) .
But New Rules that involve empathy has shallow ground for a MkIV Human .
You won't find him in the ignorant armies that clash by night in the plains . He is the one sitting on the cliff with a torch , reading the manual .
He is also in control of most of the energy on the planet and all the weapons of mass destruction .
So , as you stated , the problem is not technology or science , but in human's ability to change their culture (which will automatically change their technology) .
They already have a mechanism for changing their technology , but the traditional religions are appealing to fellow-feeling , something aspergers (MKIV humans) do not have in abundance .
A very good example is Kitchener's campaigns in the Sudan and South Africa .
This scenario still ends in mass-depopulation . But it can be gradual instead of abrupt .
And so it goes .
Andre .
-----Original Message-----From: Michael.Reid@dpi.vic.gov.au [mailto:Michael.Reid@dpi.vic.gov.au] Sent: 08 October 2007 08:43 AMTo: andre.w@absamail.co.zaSubject: RE: How to be a refugee .I think a large proglem in waiting for a 'super-hero' has been our heavy reliance on science to solve the problem, where in fact science has been the soluation to problems but also generated greater environmental issues later.... rather the solution relies in critically reflecting from a society point of view.....
"Andre Willers"
06/10/2007 06:15 AM
Please respond toandre.w@absamail.co.za
To
cc
Subject
RE: How to be a refugee .
Hi, Thank you for your reply . I have read Jared Diamond's various books , as well as other similar ones . History does not repeat , but it rhymes . See http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/ "The Origins of War and Peace" "What is to become of us?" "Prodigies" "War warnings" etc . We are facing imminent collapse and depopulation of the order of the Late Bronze Age civilization . One of the symptoms is that none of the negative feedback mechanisms that used to keep societietal growth in check are working . Everybody hopes that insane exponential growths can be maintained by some trick . Some technological Deus-ex-Machina . Some Super-Hero that will clean up the mess , wipe all the asses and snotty noses . (The latest candidates are entities deep in the Singularity.) On the other hand , nobody gets out of here alive . Andre
-----Original Message-----From: Michael.Reid@dpi.vic.gov.au [mailto:Michael.Reid@dpi.vic.gov.au] Sent: 01 October 2007 08:53 AMTo: andre.w@absamail.co.zaSubject: Re: How to be a refugee .Andre, My name is Michael, one of Aniki's friends from Australia - father a fugee from South Africa came over on a boat. Anyway, thanks for your email - reminds me of a book I read and think you would find enjoyable, it is called 'Collapse: How socities chose to fail or succeed' the author is Jarrod Diamond - provides a really interesting case studies societys and their demise - check out the review http://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Societies-Choose-Fail-Succeed/dp/0670033375 Regards, Mike.
"Andre Willers"
01/10/2007 08:21 AM
Please respond to
To
"'Botha, Aniki'"
cc
Subject
How to be a refugee .
How to be a refugee . Andre Willers 1 Oct 2007 Valuable lessons in how to survive as a refugee are documented all over , mostly in verbal memories. But nowhere are they drawn together . (I looked on the Internet) . “Refugees for Dummies” “The Idiots Guide to being a Refugee” We need this desperately . Most of you who are reading this are refugees (ie the South African diaspora ) or descendants of refugees . All of us hope never to become refugees . But given the world climate change and overpopulation giving rise to political instability , it is nearly inevitable . We desperately need a “How to” guide . Most middle class Westerners have not the faintest clue on how to survive when their social support system collapses . So how did our ancestors survive ? Unfortunately , they did not like to talk about it . The information is there , but not easily available . I am not talking vague generalities . What we need is a site like HowToBeARefugee.org that spells it out , organized on the lines of Wikipedia . The people of New-Orleans is a good example . It is no use saying to a mother of three small children standing on a roof while the water is rising that she should have been prepared . What is she to do NOW ? Should she stay ? Run ? What must she take , not only for immediate survival but for survival in a week , 2 weeks , a month ? . Dive in and rescue her documents ? The radio ? A bottle of Southern Comfort ? Baby formula ? This is the question facing generations of humans . Remember the newsreels of long lines refugees in Europe , with grandma’s bed on a rickety cart while planes are strafing them and tanks bulldozing them out of the way . How much do you bribe a guard or a border official ? Do you trust fellow refugees? Share your food , water or information ? By the time you learn these lessons , you might well be dead . Does a woman trade sex or money , or both ? If so , in what proportion ? All things learned the hard way by millennia of refugee women , but not shared except in strictest confidence with their daughters . Needless to say , this is not an optimum strategy . General Rules : 1. Band together . (Make friends . Network) 2. Move . (If you’re being killed here , it can only be the same or better elsewhere.) 3. Share . (Critical . A group less than about a 100 never has diversity enough to survive.) 4. Carry documents.(Critical in civilized or semi-civilized disasters.) 5. Have a way of making fire . (Signalling , heating , cooking , weapon , etc.) Human societies have superb built-in memes for surviving disasters , given some time . The trick is to survive until these kick in . If you are excluded , the above principles still apply . Ask the Aztecs , Mongols , etc ad nauseam . Lone , stationary , selfish individuals do not survive in poor environments without self-regenerating support systems . Notice that the studies done on very poor structures that survive in the present world are based on these principles . Ho-ho-ho ! The first Christian communities were found on these very same principles , for the very same reasons . If you were dropped into a SA township , or a Brazilian favela or a Darfur hut , would you survive ? More importantly , would you even know how to go about it ? Where could you find out really , really quickly ? Remember , this is not like the training special forces undergo to survive in the veldt . That relevance disappeared about 500 years ago . I hope that some of you get busy and organize it . You will probably need it . Andre
Friday, October 05, 2007
Topos and Topos2
Topos
Andre Willers
7 Sept 2007
For Ermeine on request .
Sources:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0703060
http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0646
“Physics from Fisher information” by B.R.Frieden ISBN 052163167X
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/ : see in general , or search for “mining the Oort” ,
Topos is simply a new name for non-Aristotelian logical systems .
Gauss saw it , but did not publish , deeming it too controversial . (He hated controversy.)
Russell and Whitehead proved that A and not-A is less than the Universum .
Godel’s work was a consequence of this .
What does it mean?
If you say that something exists (say A) , it means it must be defineable in some way , separate . In other words , the person talking about A plays a role , he defines it . Even using a symbol like A makes it separate .
But there is then always something left over . The indefinables . In other words , A and not-A is not the Universum .
This has been rigorously proved . It is obvious from the above .
True is defined as existing . Existence is defined as defineable . Something that is not defineable then is true and not-true . The essence of quantum systems .
If you have read and understood what I wrote before , you know more about these systems than the Topos authors .
Unless a Wright-proof (ie an undeniable physical gadget ) results , these theories become froth on the gales of history .
Andre
PS
Topos is a typical publish or perish phenomenon . Dress up old , known things in a new guise . Some quotes from the Topos paper :
“Intuistionic logic” : what does not fit , gets swept under the carpet . They should get a fuzzy logic Roomba .
“Heyting algebra” : fuzzy logic , as used by your fridge or microwave , but a neat term .
“Sets” is used in the argument : sets? Sets are a number of similar identifiable items , these being identified and counted by the hypothetical observer . This directly contradicts the basic assumption of Topos .
Notice how classical set theory warps if you add the hidden assumption of somebody doing the defining and counting .
Topos is not a very good attempt . Frieden did better .
---
Topos 2
Andre Willers
10 Sept 2007
For Ermeine on request .
Sources:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0703060 The topos articles.
http://.arxiv.org/abs/0704.0646
“Physics from Fisher information” by B.R.Frieden ISBN 052163167X
Alternative Topos-type derivation of physical laws .
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/ : see in general , or search for “mining the Oort” , “Topos ” , Transcendent numbers ,etc.
Topos (plural topoi) is simply a new name for non-Aristotelian logical systems .
Perhaps I should clarify a bit , as my previous post could do with some expansion .
The Aristotelian system . Binary logic .
Definition : Something is true or not-true . The middle (ie something that is both true and untrue) is excluded .
Our purest expression of this is in computers : binary language (1 or 0) .
Now translate this into reality .
Current flow is equivalent to 1
Non-Current flow is equivalent to 0 .
But how are we to distinguish between a string of 0’s and somebody cutting the wire ?
We cannot , except by way of a third signal . In computers , timing is used (pulses of current at varying times .)
Can you see the uncertainty inherent in this worldview ?
Using two variables to describe a 3-variable environment . There is always uncertainty . Hence quantum systems .
Try to construct different ways . It is not possible . There is always a different third state , denoting no-signal .
For example , (+1) + (-1) = (0) … three states .
The reason is in (A) U (~A) < n="1" yn="0" yn="1" yn="any">1
Y+N+YN=any . Strong godlike . YN>1
For example , to describe a real thing we have to say:
Reality(Class =1, Y=1) for our traditional Aristotelian reality.
Reality(Class =2, Y=0.9 , N=0.02 , YN= 0.08) for our Quantum reality.
Reality(Class =3, Y=0.7 , N= 0.1 , YN=0.3) for our creative , bootstrap,weak godlike reality.
Reality(Class =4, Y=0.7 , N= 0.1 , YN=5) for strong godlike intervention reality.
Why the Classes of Reality ? Because of the phenomenon known as “wave-function collapse” . This is a Procrustean human system whereby the Y,N,YN of Class 2 realities are summated and then selected : the lowest summation of YN value is selected as the “wave-function collapse” . High N values are ignored . This is called quantum physics –Copenhagen interpretation . (This is already breaking down from experimental evidence. )
The “reality” is that there is no wave-function collapse . The thingies happily keep on being what they are . Humans pick the creamy , chocolate ones and ignore the rest . Typical .
Topoi as formulated do not take the observer into account . This limits them to distributive-logic systems . The Mathematician plays the role of the observer .
Unfortunately , science requires replication of experiments by different observers (ie distributive-logic . )
.
Yet we routinely use quantum devices with a high degree of certainty . The trick is in two parts :
Expand the quantum bubble (ie , move closer to macro-state)
Quantum-tunneling is a transfinite process found everywhere , on macroscopic scale as well .
See :
http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.0681 : photon tunneling of up to 1 meter was experimentally verified , using very simple apparatus . See also New Scientist 18 Aug 2007 p10 “ Light seems to defy its own speed limit.”
Tunneling seems to play a role in fusion and fission processes . Indeed , if tunneling over macroscopic distances is routine , why does cold-fusion not occur regularly ? Maybe it does/did . Ref natural Okra fission reactor in North Africa .
Jupiter’s energy budget seems to indicate that some low-temperature fusion reactions are occurring because of meson-tunneling between large crystals formed in the atmosphere and sheared in two by violent storms .
The Sun’s energy output is too high for its temperature . This crack is papered over by postulating additional energy formation in the corona . But this is exactly where heightened fusion because of tunneling would be expected . This layer is also very susceptible to magnetic effects from the planets . Thus , Earth’s weather, via the Earth’s magnetosphere can have an effect on the sun’s surface fusion energy production . The effect is non-linear , so even small changes in earth’s magnetosphere can have large effects on the surface fusion on the sun .
Consciousness : quantum effects have long been postulated . The general prevalence of macro-tunneling makes this 0.99 likely .
See “Non-locality” , http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/ , etc
Error-correction (Pinch)
Set “Usable=True” .
Then pinch your apparatus from a higher uncertainty to a lower uncertainty . This is a system like a transistor , or in general most non-linear amplifying devices .
Note that the entropy inside the device decreases , a general prerequisite for life .
Trial-and-error in a system designed to pinch Class2->Class1 Realities will give a fairly reliable quantum based system . (Like your computer , hifi,etc)
Ditto for Pinches of Class3->Class2->Class1 Realities , but the viability decreases drastically as YN increases . This is the definition of lifeforms like humans , advanced computers , etc .
Class4 pinches : highly dangerous . Not recommended unless you are a god .
See Prediction below .
Prediction and Postdiction .
Let YN>0 , like in the observable Universe .
This means that there are finite (0Define the paths as AB(1) , AB(2) , …,AB(n)
If any particular path AB(i) lies within the lightspeed cone from B , then any point on it can be accessed from A without violating relativistic (and thus causal) constraints . Note that the mechanism is probably tunneling .
There is some good news and some bad news .
The good news is that prediction is possible .
The bad news is that only a future AB(i) , not the future can be predicted .
The future is at B , where all the possibilities AB(i) are summed .
A further limitation is that only the futures entangled with A can be predicted . Influences outside AB path or outside the light cone cannot be predicted .
Algorithms for sampling AB(i) pathways can easily be constructed for Reality Class2 , and indeed are (quantum devices).
A corollary is that prophecies and mind-constructed scenarios are the same .
Seeing some futures are equated with intelligence and creativity . There is no functional way of differentiating them . Some think that the ability of the brain to pick up these small lengths on alternate futures is the human ability to foresee and create .
The problem here is that humans think that what they foresee is THE truth . Hence prophets like Cayce , hypnotic progression , etc do not realize that what they see are but one pathway , one possible future .
Creating algorithms for Reality class 3 systems is thus indistinguishable from intelligence and creativity enhancement .
This will involve powerful forces in the human sphere .
Just collating all the prophecies won’t hack it either . The prophet has to be entangled and free of Aristotelian prejudices . Nobody qualifies .
PostDiction
The past is even more unknowable than the future . Literally .
Since for paths AB(i) , we can also have DB(j) , postdiction from B has to involve both pathways . Even if there is a wave-function collapse , the AB and DB paths cannot be distinguished .
For Class 3 and better realities:
Ford was right . History is bunk .At best , it is an intellectual exercise .
Oh well .
Andre
Andre Willers
7 Sept 2007
For Ermeine on request .
Sources:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0703060
http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0646
“Physics from Fisher information” by B.R.Frieden ISBN 052163167X
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/ : see in general , or search for “mining the Oort” ,
Topos is simply a new name for non-Aristotelian logical systems .
Gauss saw it , but did not publish , deeming it too controversial . (He hated controversy.)
Russell and Whitehead proved that A and not-A is less than the Universum .
Godel’s work was a consequence of this .
What does it mean?
If you say that something exists (say A) , it means it must be defineable in some way , separate . In other words , the person talking about A plays a role , he defines it . Even using a symbol like A makes it separate .
But there is then always something left over . The indefinables . In other words , A and not-A is not the Universum .
This has been rigorously proved . It is obvious from the above .
True is defined as existing . Existence is defined as defineable . Something that is not defineable then is true and not-true . The essence of quantum systems .
If you have read and understood what I wrote before , you know more about these systems than the Topos authors .
Unless a Wright-proof (ie an undeniable physical gadget ) results , these theories become froth on the gales of history .
Andre
PS
Topos is a typical publish or perish phenomenon . Dress up old , known things in a new guise . Some quotes from the Topos paper :
“Intuistionic logic” : what does not fit , gets swept under the carpet . They should get a fuzzy logic Roomba .
“Heyting algebra” : fuzzy logic , as used by your fridge or microwave , but a neat term .
“Sets” is used in the argument : sets? Sets are a number of similar identifiable items , these being identified and counted by the hypothetical observer . This directly contradicts the basic assumption of Topos .
Notice how classical set theory warps if you add the hidden assumption of somebody doing the defining and counting .
Topos is not a very good attempt . Frieden did better .
---
Topos 2
Andre Willers
10 Sept 2007
For Ermeine on request .
Sources:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0703060 The topos articles.
http://.arxiv.org/abs/0704.0646
“Physics from Fisher information” by B.R.Frieden ISBN 052163167X
Alternative Topos-type derivation of physical laws .
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/ : see in general , or search for “mining the Oort” , “Topos ” , Transcendent numbers ,etc.
Topos (plural topoi) is simply a new name for non-Aristotelian logical systems .
Perhaps I should clarify a bit , as my previous post could do with some expansion .
The Aristotelian system . Binary logic .
Definition : Something is true or not-true . The middle (ie something that is both true and untrue) is excluded .
Our purest expression of this is in computers : binary language (1 or 0) .
Now translate this into reality .
Current flow is equivalent to 1
Non-Current flow is equivalent to 0 .
But how are we to distinguish between a string of 0’s and somebody cutting the wire ?
We cannot , except by way of a third signal . In computers , timing is used (pulses of current at varying times .)
Can you see the uncertainty inherent in this worldview ?
Using two variables to describe a 3-variable environment . There is always uncertainty . Hence quantum systems .
Try to construct different ways . It is not possible . There is always a different third state , denoting no-signal .
For example , (+1) + (-1) = (0) … three states .
The reason is in (A) U (~A) < n="1" yn="0" yn="1" yn="any">1
Y+N+YN=any . Strong godlike . YN>1
For example , to describe a real thing we have to say:
Reality(Class =1, Y=1) for our traditional Aristotelian reality.
Reality(Class =2, Y=0.9 , N=0.02 , YN= 0.08) for our Quantum reality.
Reality(Class =3, Y=0.7 , N= 0.1 , YN=0.3) for our creative , bootstrap,weak godlike reality.
Reality(Class =4, Y=0.7 , N= 0.1 , YN=5) for strong godlike intervention reality.
Why the Classes of Reality ? Because of the phenomenon known as “wave-function collapse” . This is a Procrustean human system whereby the Y,N,YN of Class 2 realities are summated and then selected : the lowest summation of YN value is selected as the “wave-function collapse” . High N values are ignored . This is called quantum physics –Copenhagen interpretation . (This is already breaking down from experimental evidence. )
The “reality” is that there is no wave-function collapse . The thingies happily keep on being what they are . Humans pick the creamy , chocolate ones and ignore the rest . Typical .
Topoi as formulated do not take the observer into account . This limits them to distributive-logic systems . The Mathematician plays the role of the observer .
Unfortunately , science requires replication of experiments by different observers (ie distributive-logic . )
.
Yet we routinely use quantum devices with a high degree of certainty . The trick is in two parts :
Expand the quantum bubble (ie , move closer to macro-state)
Quantum-tunneling is a transfinite process found everywhere , on macroscopic scale as well .
See :
http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.0681 : photon tunneling of up to 1 meter was experimentally verified , using very simple apparatus . See also New Scientist 18 Aug 2007 p10 “ Light seems to defy its own speed limit.”
Tunneling seems to play a role in fusion and fission processes . Indeed , if tunneling over macroscopic distances is routine , why does cold-fusion not occur regularly ? Maybe it does/did . Ref natural Okra fission reactor in North Africa .
Jupiter’s energy budget seems to indicate that some low-temperature fusion reactions are occurring because of meson-tunneling between large crystals formed in the atmosphere and sheared in two by violent storms .
The Sun’s energy output is too high for its temperature . This crack is papered over by postulating additional energy formation in the corona . But this is exactly where heightened fusion because of tunneling would be expected . This layer is also very susceptible to magnetic effects from the planets . Thus , Earth’s weather, via the Earth’s magnetosphere can have an effect on the sun’s surface fusion energy production . The effect is non-linear , so even small changes in earth’s magnetosphere can have large effects on the surface fusion on the sun .
Consciousness : quantum effects have long been postulated . The general prevalence of macro-tunneling makes this 0.99 likely .
See “Non-locality” , http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/ , etc
Error-correction (Pinch)
Set “Usable=True” .
Then pinch your apparatus from a higher uncertainty to a lower uncertainty . This is a system like a transistor , or in general most non-linear amplifying devices .
Note that the entropy inside the device decreases , a general prerequisite for life .
Trial-and-error in a system designed to pinch Class2->Class1 Realities will give a fairly reliable quantum based system . (Like your computer , hifi,etc)
Ditto for Pinches of Class3->Class2->Class1 Realities , but the viability decreases drastically as YN increases . This is the definition of lifeforms like humans , advanced computers , etc .
Class4 pinches : highly dangerous . Not recommended unless you are a god .
See Prediction below .
Prediction and Postdiction .
Let YN>0 , like in the observable Universe .
This means that there are finite (0
If any particular path AB(i) lies within the lightspeed cone from B , then any point on it can be accessed from A without violating relativistic (and thus causal) constraints . Note that the mechanism is probably tunneling .
There is some good news and some bad news .
The good news is that prediction is possible .
The bad news is that only a future AB(i) , not the future can be predicted .
The future is at B , where all the possibilities AB(i) are summed .
A further limitation is that only the futures entangled with A can be predicted . Influences outside AB path or outside the light cone cannot be predicted .
Algorithms for sampling AB(i) pathways can easily be constructed for Reality Class2 , and indeed are (quantum devices).
A corollary is that prophecies and mind-constructed scenarios are the same .
Seeing some futures are equated with intelligence and creativity . There is no functional way of differentiating them . Some think that the ability of the brain to pick up these small lengths on alternate futures is the human ability to foresee and create .
The problem here is that humans think that what they foresee is THE truth . Hence prophets like Cayce , hypnotic progression , etc do not realize that what they see are but one pathway , one possible future .
Creating algorithms for Reality class 3 systems is thus indistinguishable from intelligence and creativity enhancement .
This will involve powerful forces in the human sphere .
Just collating all the prophecies won’t hack it either . The prophet has to be entangled and free of Aristotelian prejudices . Nobody qualifies .
PostDiction
The past is even more unknowable than the future . Literally .
Since for paths AB(i) , we can also have DB(j) , postdiction from B has to involve both pathways . Even if there is a wave-function collapse , the AB and DB paths cannot be distinguished .
For Class 3 and better realities:
Ford was right . History is bunk .At best , it is an intellectual exercise .
Oh well .
Andre