KARL  JASPERS  FORUM
TA111 (Beamish)

Commentary 9 (to R7, Beamish)


( REALITY IS NEITHER ABSURD NOR PARADOXICAL )
by Robert N Boyd
17 December 2008, posted 27 December 2008



[Klein & Boyd]
"<2> - standard Quantum descriptions of energetic phenomena, totally ignore the Informational aspects of energetic behaviors, thus often reaching incomplete, or straightforwardly erroneous conclusions regarding the actual physics involved." - - - [References: <www.kjf.ca>]

---------------------------------------------------

 

[Beamish]

Dear Drs. Klein & Boyd, Information, one of two phenomena, of our world, is contained in: A) Mass and/or Energy, and B) "Rhythm Based Time, RBT." The former is scientific the latter seems to be scientific or spiritual! We have evidence of B) from The Great Whales, and name it "informaTion."

 

---------------------------------------------------

 

[Boyd]

Dear Dr. Beamish, You have not produced any proper and clear distinction between your simple "reading of a clock", and Time Itself, which is not the mere reading of a clock. Time proceeds for all matter and all forms of Consciousness, whether or not they have access to a clock and can read it. Clocks are an invention of human beings, and are not Natural.  For you to assert that reading a clock actually has anything to do with Time Itself, is irresponsible.

----------------------------------------------------

KARL JASPERS FORUM, TA111  Com. 7,

[Muller]
SPACE-TIME: ANAXIMANDER, HER- AKLEITOS, MINKOWSKI-BUT WHO COUNTS?
<1> Allow me to discuss some of the points you raised in a different context: space and time. - - - Experience is extended, initially without structure & without limits, Anaximander called it 'apeiron'.  Experience also flows, and Herakleitos called that 'panta rhei'. And in the absence of structure (at most, one could call flow and extension 'qualia'), they are also not separated from each other, or in any case less distinctly than red from blue, or hot from cold." - - - [References: <www.kjf.ca>.]

 

---------------------------------------------------

 

[Beamish]
Dear Dr. Müller, When one flies, drives, or walks, one is NOT "flowing!" Such is transportation by plane, car or mechanisms of one's leg muscles! Similarly, "Mental Vector Processes, MVPs," _transport_ mass &/or energy from the edges of one's mind, to one's "Mental Thought Processes, MTPs;" "From One's Objective To One's Subjective Realities" (To "One's Essos"). Thus, experience is the object of such transportation processes ("MVPs") from: 1) one's external, mind edge and 2) one's internal, mind edge, the inside of which contains one's memory (please see new, mind definition). Just as your red and blue are scalar labels ("colourtags") so also: "ALL TEMPORAL CONCEPTS ARE TEMPORAL SCALAR LABELS" and must be "transported." On the other hand, "spacial concepts" are VECTORS and NOT scalar labels. Thus "time-in-space" seems paramount for all new 21st century semantics.

 

----------------------------------------------------

 

[Boyd]
We disagree. The reading of a clock has nothing whatever to do with physical Time, nor its passage. The reading of a clock is a learned behavior, requiring as an additional prerequisite, a technical progress which includes being able to produce a clock in the first place. To call time, as read on a clock, "a temporal scalar label" is confusing the Objective Reality of Universal Physical Time, as referenced in our paper,   with the mentally abstracted process of "reading a clock". The operation of an oscillator of any kind  may be used to produce a clock, But the oscillator and its oscillation, are not actually and physically Time.   In the altogether, your "rbt" and its offspring are merely concepts related to the simple reading of a clock.

All of Nature gets along quite famously, without clocks, and without such obfuscatory nonsense as your "rbt", and "time tags" and etc. Humans do not require clocks to experience and observe the passing of  time. Your discussions of the mental processes associated with mere telling of the time, by way of a clock,   should not be presented as though they were astounding technical breakthroughs regarding Universal Physical Time.

To be honest, you can only claim to be exploring the mental processes associated with "telling the time" by means  of a clock.  Certainly, this is not a cosmically applicable principle, but applies only to the mental processes of  exactly and only those human beings who have clocks available to them, and who have been trained to read them.

----------------------------------------------------

 

[Muller]

<2> 'Space' and 'time' are identified in a clear way only after structuring, which in this case includes quantification (with the aid of structures called 'dimensions'); the quantification is a defining aspect, there are no [spaces and no times] without it. If you doubt that, you have to explain why there are so many discussions about whether 'reality has' three or four (or more) dimensions." - ["3 OSDs!"]  

---------------------------------------------------

 

[Beamish]
Dear Dr. Muller, Quantification does not produce, nor define, time. Quantization is involved with
the physical properties of the media, as commonly related to Planck's constant, which is not a constant at all, but can vary wildly under some circumstances, according to experiments performed during 2002.

----------------------------------------------------

 

[Beamish]
Dear Dr. Müller, We gladly explain that 'reality' has three & ONLY three Orthogonal Spacial Dimensions ("OSDs"), & that temporal concepts are NOT "spacial dimensions" (either orthogonal or at any other axes angles), &, in fact, temporal concepts are _ALL SCALARS_, having NO AXES WHATSOEVER. To solve confusions, we should ALWAYS modify "dimension" with "spacial," and, use the concept of a "variable" for any changing scalar quantities. One can then have an "n-variable matrix," with 0 - 3 spacial dimensions.


----------------------------------------------------

[Boyd]
Dear Dr. Beamish, The term "temporal concepts", implies studies of physical time, but your actual study does not involve time, in any regard, but the mental interpretations surrounding the mere reading of a clock.  It would serve everyone if you took pains to make that distinction clear.

----------------------------------------------------

Robert Neil Boyd, Ph. D.
     e-mail <rnboyd7 (at) bellsouth.net>