Formal mathematics groups dimensional structure by the power function. However, suppose dimensional structure accumulates by dynamic emergence; then, there is an inherent difference between the mechanism in which complexity develops and its representation.
The Cartesian plane is used as a toy model to illustrate the difference. The Argand plane is the quantum equivalent of the Cartesian plane. The Argand plane has only one “real axis in its orthogonal structure, the x-axis. The vertical axis (iy) is imaginary.
When the dimensional level is dynamically raised (emergent by one) to two dimensions, the x and y axes are both real. A pointer can be moved (in time) from one real location to another for all locations and not just along one reference plane (the x-axis) for a quantum basis.
For quantum mechanics, calculating the evolution of the quantum state is a mathematical operation on a consistent mathematical basis and not one of emergence across increasing dimensional complexity that cannot be formally grouped (the basis is inherently inconsistent).
The degree of freedom will increase in such an emergent system, which means that the backward direction to the emergent framework is smaller, not equivalent, and inaccessible. This accounts for the time reversal prohibition.
Agree. Physics is finally thinking more about its assumptions and foundations, but the consequence is a firework of new ideas and it is becoming difficult to keep track of all. The thing which interests me is what is an observer and I do not have hints from this interview.
Summarizing into Questions and Answers sounds like a great idea. I have started making transcripts for myself using Whisper. As you say / files are huge - easily close to 100 pages.
I noticed the word presence and its clash with SR. I believe that what physics account for presence is different from a psychological one. By this I mean that when we say We cultivate a state of presence, this is valid for each individual specifically and does not mean that every individual have synchronized 'clocks'. My understanding of time is that it is like a rubber band, not only varies from places to places, but is nonlinear in nature. Time and consciousness (who is the observer) are close friends as well.
She is amazingly articulate in her perfectly formed answers, and when it's finished it's finished, full stop.
Formal mathematics groups dimensional structure by the power function. However, suppose dimensional structure accumulates by dynamic emergence; then, there is an inherent difference between the mechanism in which complexity develops and its representation.
The Cartesian plane is used as a toy model to illustrate the difference. The Argand plane is the quantum equivalent of the Cartesian plane. The Argand plane has only one “real axis in its orthogonal structure, the x-axis. The vertical axis (iy) is imaginary.
When the dimensional level is dynamically raised (emergent by one) to two dimensions, the x and y axes are both real. A pointer can be moved (in time) from one real location to another for all locations and not just along one reference plane (the x-axis) for a quantum basis.
For quantum mechanics, calculating the evolution of the quantum state is a mathematical operation on a consistent mathematical basis and not one of emergence across increasing dimensional complexity that cannot be formally grouped (the basis is inherently inconsistent).
The degree of freedom will increase in such an emergent system, which means that the backward direction to the emergent framework is smaller, not equivalent, and inaccessible. This accounts for the time reversal prohibition.
https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/ks458_v4
With the amount of information floating around today, summarization appears to be more effective and to me more preferable.
Agree. Physics is finally thinking more about its assumptions and foundations, but the consequence is a firework of new ideas and it is becoming difficult to keep track of all. The thing which interests me is what is an observer and I do not have hints from this interview.
Wow. Ok. Not how I thought my Sunday was going to go but this has made my brain do a happy dance
Yes. Summary is a good idea. Except for the Iceburgs perhaps. I've been hoping for a full transcript of the excellent consciousness iceburg.
Summarizing into Questions and Answers sounds like a great idea. I have started making transcripts for myself using Whisper. As you say / files are huge - easily close to 100 pages.
I noticed the word presence and its clash with SR. I believe that what physics account for presence is different from a psychological one. By this I mean that when we say We cultivate a state of presence, this is valid for each individual specifically and does not mean that every individual have synchronized 'clocks'. My understanding of time is that it is like a rubber band, not only varies from places to places, but is nonlinear in nature. Time and consciousness (who is the observer) are close friends as well.