A Very Brief Statement by Irvon Eugene Clear

[deleted]

Irvon Eugene Clear,

Why don't you consider saying more about this because I do not understand how you connect space as cause for these effects. Is your message kind of a spiritual insight or does it involve specifics of physics?:

7) It allows the transition from nothingness to the existence of anything that

is imperfect.

8) Human existence is one of the consequences of its creation.

9) Its creation is the initial creation event for everything that is imperfect.

It is Space.

Irvon Clear

James,

Space is potential for existence (not anything specific just anything not perfect). Human experience is within the term not anything specific. Potential is the first thing necessary in order to make the transition from nothingness to existence (within the perception of human experience...imperfect environment).

If perfection created an imperfect environment it would create a process that would evolve the creation of all possible imperfect objects, forces and relationships (explaining current human experience). Perfection would not create an imperfect environment by taking a portion of itself to create it. It would have to create from nothingness. Space would have been created from nothingness. And space would have to then evolve existence.

The only thing that is perfect within human experience is space. Space seems most likely to be the "process" for the creation of all things imperfect. There should be something characteristic of a unit of space that "creates the potential for existence." I do not know what that characateristic is but it would certainly be a fundamental physical property that we have not yet discovered.

Irvon

Wilhelmus de Wilde

Hi Irvon,

Being he last one in row has some profits, like James I am looking what is missing, but I cannot find it, it is your way of explaining, but I agree with Georgina that you could have given it some more words. We are constructing our own universe !

pls read, comment and eventually rate: "THE CONSCIOUSNESS CONNECTION"

best regards

Wilhelmus

Irvon Clear

Wilhelmus,

It is difficult to help others to focus on what they are convinced they are already looking at. In this case I am on a journey that begins with the question: why is there so much space in the universe? I am attempting to answer that question with the observation that everything that human experience identifies as exists is a result of many different possibilities. If any of the "possibles" in an event were different there would have to be additional space available to accommodate the resulting change in the event.

Changing anything in an event has to be accommodated with space available for it to become a reality. Space is possibility. Without space nothing could change and we all know that everything in fact is continually changing.

The existence of anything has to first evolve from possibility. This makes space a process for evolving existence. How does this process work? I am suggesting that the process is within some characteristic of space that we are currently not aware of and that this characteristic will in fact be a fundamental physical property.

Irvon

[deleted]

Dear Irvon,

as I see it there are two kinds of possibility. One is what can possibly become an actualisation, such as a material form or arrangement of such forms. According to the explanatory framework I am using the future is Open, not determined and already in existence at another time. I call that the Unwritten future. It does not exist, it does not contain what will be but allows the continual development of that material universe.

The other kind of possibility is to do with what will be observed, the manifestations produced when sensory data is received and processed into an output, perceived as external reality. That potential sensory data in the environment, that I call the pre-written future, is necessary for the phenomenon of relativity. It encodes far more possibilities than are selected by an observer and formed in to his/her/its fabricated manifestations of reality. They are formed from a selection of data, which is therefore incomplete. That is the connection with QM. The many possibilities are no longer considered when when the data is selected, processed and output into only one manifestation. There is a switch from considering what is in the external reality (or might be in the case of a single photon particle) without observation, to what is observed and is then deemed to exist.

For a single photon particle the possibilities are imaginary, as which that particular one is is not known, so all must be considered for an accurate probability measurement. However for a macroscopic object the data encoding all of the possibilities has its own existence in the external environment making the wave function a real rather than imaginary thing.

What I have just said would, I think, make more sense if you would take a look at my diagram 1. There is a high resolution file in my essay discussion thread. Perhaps it will assist you on your journey or if not you might care to discuss why you think it inadequate or unhelpful. I have developed this explanatory framework, and have discussed it along the way, on FQXi blogs and previous essay thread since the last competition. Kind regards Georgina

Irvon Clear

Georgina,

Thanks for directing me to Diagram.1. I am intrigued with its complexity and the indicated relationships. My immediate problem in trying to bring it into my sensory awareness is that as a human being I assess my immediate environment with "survival" efficiency. I begin by categorizing what I see and recognize as familiar. The unfamiliar is ignored if it doesn't have claws, teeth or injectible poison. What I instinctively look for is the simple origin of the evolved complexity. In this case I see "nothing" in the upper right hand corner. There are no indicated relationships. Why is it in the diagram?

Is nothing the origin of all of the processes in your diagram? If it is then what is the process of transistion from nothing?

Please understand that I am honestly asking these questions from a fundamental point of view. What is the initial state of the awareness that is represented by your diagram? And, are the diagramed relationships also continually changing? I don't mean continually within the indicated relationships but do the relationships themselves continually change? Does something that works in the present or past stop working in the future because of changed fundamental relationships?

Irvon

[deleted]

Dear Irvon,

Thank you so much for taking a look at it. There is a differentiation between reality and not reality. Outside of reality there is the Open or unwritten future which is also nothing.Contrasting with the idea of a fully existent space-time continuum in which the material future already exists and might be visited with a time machine. The Object reality is continually changing and can be thought of as a sequence of iterations of itself or as J. C. Smith describes it different configurations. Only the youngest arrangement exists. Though a sequence of such arrangements can be considered they are imaginary. There is recycling of the material.

Potential sensory data is formed by interaction of media of transmission with the material arrangements. The data persists in the environment (represented by the data pool) and can be intercepted by an observer and processed to give a fabricated and experienced reality of what used to exist.

The awareness you mention (human awareness) is of the manifestation produced from the processing of the received data it is not the external environment itself. However the output manifestation is of sufficient quality to allow for enhanced survival through navigation and location of the resources necessary for survival and procreation.

I would be happy to answer any further questions you may have about the diagram, terminology, or function of the explanatory framework. Kind regards Georgina

Irvon Clear

Honang Cao Hai,

I read your essay and I do not have criticism of your effort in contributing to our understanding of our common condition. I find the essay format to be too confining for an expressive communication and I'm going to include several poems as my further attempt to communicate my understanding of our sensory attachment to a common brain.

There is no language needed

All that is known

Can be described

With a continually expanding

Finite series

Of two simple states

On and off

Or back to one and zero

And when conceptually inflated

With existence and non existence

We can describe the universe

Its beginning, present and future

All because we understand the difference

Between one and zero

Confining space and time

With infinity

Perhaps our own condition

From the simple fact

That it could or could not be

And that magnitude

Is significant

Because

It allows

Infinite attempts

Is it possible

That all there is

Occurs

Magically

The answer of course

Is still contained

Between the ever expanding awareness

Of the evolving difference

Between one

And zero

Is potential real

Is there actually something

That is attached

Something sensed in reality

That describes

Both

The magnitude

And the significance

That measures all

That existence can be

And in retrospect

All that it could have been

All things the same

All things opposite

And all of the possible paths between

Something

Like a sky

An ocean

A desert

Or a beach

Yes

There is a measure

In reality

That is both

The glass

And the wine

All objects

Are contained within

And escaping

The simple

But infinite

Dimensions

Space

How is it that we are convinced

That everything is balanced

Sitting perfectly pitched

Geometrically secure

Like a rock

Poised in silence

What about living things that think...like us

We push and shove and tug

We run

We dance

We tear foreign flesh

With sharp and jagged teeth

We even pour chemicals

On everything

We wish were dead

Because they were

Some sort of irritant

And we curse the predicted weather

When it slips

An hour or a week

Where's the struggle

And the awareness of it

Meaningless

Because harmony contains

And ignores

The majority of things

It's in the magnitude of the mass

That's tossed carelessly

At the wall

Some will stick

Some will bounce

And some will fall

Maintaining our perception of balance

It's the reason explaining

Why a chair can swallow

And while sitting there

We still feel comfortable

In truth

The mindful eye

Is best served

With the straight forward stare

Of a learning observer

And not the fearful

Sideways glance

Of a defending believer

Note

An observation of truth

Does not require a single word

From any human language

While a defense of faith

Fills Holy books

And in turn

Endless volumes of interpretations

Will faith itself

Disappear

With the loss of a language

Isn't faith equated to truth

And therefore

Not in need of a single word

To establish its existence

And if founded as equal to truth

Isn't faith simply the courage to reexamine, modify and

expand a belief

With a truthful awareness

That itself continues to expand

And if faith remains equal to truth

It will have to continue to accept

The need to change

And keep a balanced equation

Each time a more precise observation

Results in a more accurate and truthful advancem

Irvon

Sergey Fedosin

If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is [math]R_1 [/math] and [math]N_1 [/math] was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have [math]S_1=R_1 N_1 [/math] of points. After it anyone give you [math]dS [/math] of points so you have [math]S_2=S_1+ dS [/math] of points and [math]N_2=N_1+1 [/math] is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have [math]S_2=R_2 N_2 [/math] of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be: [math]S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] (S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1[/math] In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points [math]dS [/math] then the participant`s rating [math]R_1 [/math] was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process. I hope the FQXI community will change the rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

« Previous Page