Greetings,
Apologies to Chris as I began to read, but did not finish the linked paper he suggested. I shall take that up when there is more time.
For Frank Martin; I have time for only a brief comment now, but your last comments were sufficiently lucid to leave me with something coherent to respond to. Some of your other comments will remain unaddressed.
When you say "the fundamentally interactive nature of being and experience (including thought) in and with time" this relates to the quantum-mechanical measurement problem in Physics. But your usage seems also to imply you advocate a process-oriented view of reality, where experience and time have the nature of an evolving process. And your earlier statement suggests you feel time is non-linear, where are individual timelines of experience are threads in the larger fabric. Your insights offer some pretty cool possibilities to explore or examine.
Have you heard about the research by Paul Kwiat and colleagues, on 'Interaction-Free Measurement'? They found that even the possibility for measurement was enough to change the outcome of some experiments, but were able to 'stretch the envelope' somewhat by obtaining useful information a percentage of the time, without interrupting quantum coherency.
When you say "The ability of thought to describe or reconfigure sense is ultimately dependent upon the extent to which thought is similar to sensory experience." this addresses an issue more germane to Cognitive Science, but certainly a factor in how humans practice Physics. The ability to integrate input from various senses, in order to form an impression of the world, is indeed important in cultivating a transformational capability in our quality of thought - in any field of endeavor. In many ways, the kind of abstract thinking demanded by theoretical Physics is an extension of the cross-linking of sensory information in the associative cortex, to create an integrated experience of life.
The sad part of this story is that young people growing up in developed nations are showing less of this kind of neurological development. Rather than more shades of grey, green, and blue, studies show that today's young people distinguish fewer - which some researchers attribute to the barrage of intense stimuli they receive. Likewise; there seems to be a trend toward less integration of thought from different senses, in modern children growing up in a technological society, as compared to those from more 'primitive' cultures. Joseph Chilton Pearce believes that this may be because engaging the natural world encourages the integration of sensory data in ways that engaging with technology does not.
We have to reverse this trend, if the 'integrated extensiveness of being and experience' is our key to advancing progress in Physics. My essay does assert that there needs to be more integration of thoughts from different kinds of exploration and observation, rather than less. So; in that regard, we are of like mind. I think we may differ on the cognitive state of chimpanzees (which you referenced in earlier comments), so there is some disagreement to speak of, but I won't go there.
Oh well; perhaps this is a longer thought, after all. But hopefully one that addresses your last comment.
All the Best,
Jonathan