Untitled, unowned, unhindered

​

 

I placed a scene from George Orwell's 1984 on the Home page and it has remained there.
George Orwell was, as most know, prophetic.
Here is another pertinent scene from a newer movie version of his book.
Can we help, but draw parallels from current events in our Intelligence Agencies from this scene...

​

 

We all live on two levels, don't we? At least? There is always an abstraction I am working on expanding and clarifying, sort of in the back of my mind, as I go on about surface issues of the day I feel are important. The abstraction I experienced hearing Langan speak that was difficult to describe at the time I wrote the above. Not, that I have not considered this very premise on many, many occasions until it fades again into the background.

So, Langan stated (PARAPHRASED): Everything we experience is in the past before we experience it. I could state that idea to nearly everyone around me and they would look askance, file me in their list of woo woo beings, and change the subject. But, if only looking slightly beneath the surface: Langan has just stated we are all prime movers, hasn't he? If what we consider to be the present experience is actually in the past, then it would follow we reside in a space prior to our experiences! Our actual selves are existing ahead of our seemingly current events. Under some circumstances, not intruded upon by other prime movers, wouldn't that indicate we are creating our realities?

Anyway, today, I happened upon this video.
Something clicked and I was moved to return to this thread and post it as pertinent to this subject:​

"The ice that you skate on with the water below."

So... Our "seeming" present might be chaos if we do not pre-create order from where we actually exist?​

 

​

 

Langan is billed "The Smartest Man in America" with his 210 IQ.


One small item in his theory has been with me today:
Everything we experience is in the past before we experience it
http://www.ctmu.org/Articles/IntroCTMU.htm​

 

​

 

.
​

 

Woke up with the necessity to search CTMU for "magic glue" and "self-resolving paradox" today...

(1) "Thus far, it has been widely assumed that reality theory can be sought by the same means as any other scientific theory. But this is not quite true, for while science uses the epistemological equivalent of magic glue to attach its theories to its observations, reality theory must give a recipe
for the glue and justify the means of application. That is, reality theory must describe reality on a level that justifies science, and thus occupies a deeper level of explanation than science itself. Does this mean that reality theory is mathematical? Yes, but since mathematics must be justified
along with science, metamathematical would perhaps be a better description… and when all is said and done, this comes down to logic pure and simple. It follows that reality theory must take the form of an extended logic…in fact, a “limiting form” of logic in which the relationship between
theory and universe, until now an inexhaustible source of destructive model-theoretic ambiguity, is at last reduced to (dual-aspect) monic form, short-circuiting the paradox of Cartesian dualism and eliminating the epistemological gap between mind and matter, theory and universe. "

(2) "In effect, syndiffeonesis is a metalogical tautology amounting to self-resolving paradox. The paradox resides in the coincidence of sameness and difference, while a type-theoretic resolution inheres in the logical and mathematical distinction between them, i.e. the stratificative dimension of an infocognitive lattice. Thus, reducing reality to syndiffeonesis amounts to “paradoxiforming” it. This has an advantage: a theory and/or reality built of self-resolving paradox is immunized to paradox.

Also. a great bit incorporating sentential logic, but I will get to that tomorrow (hopefully).
​

 

From: :http://www.inphinet.net/threads/hop...e-addiction-80-success-rate-unprecedented.631

.
It just so happens that last night, after the first time through CTMU audio (newly adjusted to -28% as opposed to -23% speed) with completely (ahhh) functional new earbuds , I turned the audio off before the first loop restarted and, almost immediately, went into what I would describe as a Telic Recursive trance like episode! The time frame was 1969 to Present and back and forth again. I saw these years from both my own past perspective and that of, then, loved ones (observers) perspectives.

They certainly had a point. But, I also did. Coincidentally, since you both (David and Brook) have touched upon this subject in "Reply to Hopkins...", psilocybin and LSD played a large role in my past referenced drama. So, last night, I began to wonder: Where would I be today if those influences had not been extant? I carried a complex alternative reality forward and asked myself numerous necessary questions. (Answers do not exist in our intelligently self-designed, self-organizing reality until questions are asked? Am I right about that?)

Anyway, no, I could not have done it their way. It would have amounted to marching lock step. I agree it would have been much easier, though. But, more than likely..... Well, I don't have adequate time to consider this further at this time.​

.
.​

Telic Recursion
Telic recursion is the process by which Universal Free Will is exercised. Before the universe determines its next state; it takes all of reality and every past and future contingency into account and then chooses a particular state on the basis of its own values ( the exercising of a generalized utility function); this is known as Telic Recursion.

Telic
A central argument of Teleology says that the world has clearly been constructed in a purposeful telic rather than a chaotic manner, and must therefore have been made by a rational being.

Recursion shirloc


.
The Fibonacci sequence is another classic example of recursion.






​

 

Thanks for the encouragement, David. At this time, I am just working on developing a firm grasp of the terms as they are mentioned. If you have any thoughts that would offer further clarification of the terms, please let me know. For instance, I had a difficult time with Bohm's Implicate/Explicate orders until the Ink Drop analogy.

Today's Term:



Conspansion

In the CTMU, conspansion is the alternating process by which reality evolves. Conspansion is so called because it involves material CONtraction during space exPANSION. Material contraction is what the objects in the universe are undergoing from a global vantage (each future state is being injected into the previous state and everything is shrinking within its own boundaries along with the measurement metric for space time). Spatial expansion is what the universe looks like it is undergoing as a function of time from a local vantage. The "dual" relationship between these two vantages is called conspansive duality.

Roughly speaking, conspansion has reality undergoing a 2 step process of self creation. The first step involves reality considering all the information it currently holds and all future and past possibilities and its own values and then restructuring a "present" state from of all of that. It is a descriptive phase of reality where it manipulates the underlying language that describes reality (the SCSPL). The second phase of the process involves the present literally coming into being in some objective form that you can point at, a form in which reality PHYSICALLY contains objects. When speaking about reality as a whole these two phases are called Incoversion andCoinversion or alternatively, phases of Descriptive Containment and Topological Containment. By the very nature of constantly descriptively containing itself topologically containing itself descriptively containing itself topologically containing itself.... and so on, the material objects in the universe are shrinking INTO themselves while the boundaries of the universe remain fixed. Each future state of an object is injected INTO its previous state.

If Incoversion and Coinversion are the global processes of topological and descriptive containment, then inner expansion and requantization are those processes happening at a local level. Inner expansion involves objects (syntactic operators) hollowing out their current "insides", interacting with one another and then mutually absorbing information from each other to create future states INSIDE their individual previous states. They inject their future states into their previous ones or inner expand. "After" they are done inner expanding, everything "requantizes" and the next physical appearance of the position and properties of objects appear. The process then repeats as each new state of reality is created following the previous one.

As the objects in the universe shrink into themselves, from a universal vantage there is a contraction of all matter. However from the vantage of the individual syntactic operators, space appears to be expanding. Therefore the appearance of an expanding universe from a local perspective is the shrinking of matter and the rescaling of measurement metrics from a global perspective. Putting these two perspectives together we get conspansion.

http://ctmucommunity.org/wiki/Conspansion

 

Note that conspansion explains the “arrow of time” in the sense that it is not symmetric under reversal. On the other hand, the conspansive nesting of atemporal events puts all of time in “simultaneous self-contact” without compromising ordinality. Conspansive duality can be viewed as the consequence of a type of gauge (measure) symmetry by which only the relative dimensions of the universe and its contents are important

 

infocognition is analogous to spacetime

telic recursion

bbl

 

​

 

Just as the experiments with "coca cola" flashing on the theater screen just out of the range of conscious awareness sent many movie goers to the lobby for a coke, subliminal learning works. And, subliminal cues happen all the time whether it is recognized, or not. In my opinion, everyone should experiment to learn to take more control over their own subconscious processes, use them for their own benefit, and learn to recognize when attempts are made to subliminally influence them without their approval.

One personal experiment I conducted after beginning to seriously concentrate on this subject employed the use of personal software that allows one to flash words or phrases of their choice (I easily quit smoking, for example) on their computer screen just outside of their conscious awareness. The program allows choice of placement, adjustment of speed, and duration so, if you can still see the words, you continue to adjust speed and duration until the text is outside conscious awareness and subliminal. So, It is possible to test efficacy for one's self. If nothing else, you are certain to catch yourself thinking of whatever the words or phrases without intending to often.
.

 

And, you know, I just realized the reason for my focus on the importance of the word:



Subliminal learning has a tendency to do just that!

Eventually, I am certain I will be able to read the entire CTMU theory and understand it.​

.

 

Note to self: The Bohm connection....

The Super-Copernican Principle reflects the distribution of the creation event over every point of spacetime according to the Extended Superposition Principle, which describes the way consequent states and events are atemporally superposed in their antecedent states and events. Generalized consciousness, the unitary reflexivity of the universe, is a fair description of the self-configuration and self-processing capacity of SCSPL as captured by the Telic and M=R Principles, while conspansive spacetime links spatially and temporally distant objects in a web of contact and communication exceeding even the neural connectivity of a human brain. And the CTMU describes the universe as just the sort of complex, teleologically self-variegating, selfsynthesized information system prescribed by more is different, telic-recursively explicating multiplicity and diffeonesis from the unity and synesis of distributed SCSPL syntax, the (unique) CTMU counterpart of what has sometimes been called “the Implicate Order”.49

49 The Implicate Order is a concept championed by the late physicist David Bohm in connection with his interpretation of quantum mechanics. Using the analogy of a hologram, Bohm proposed a species of self-similarity whereby "everything is enfolded into everything". According to Bohm, this “implicate order” is complementary to an “explicate order”, the result of unfolding it through a process called the “holomovement”. This bears mention because of its superficial resemblance to the conspansive unfolding of state from syntax in SCSPL, which displays its own version of logical hyperconnectivity, and the similarity between hology and holography. However, since the CTMU intersects only partially with Bohm’s theory, the analogy should not be overextended

 

CTMU Thought for the day.
The waking word was MAP...

Syntactic Closure: The Metaphysical Autology Principle (MAP)

All relations, mappings and functions relevant to reality in a generalized effective sense, whether descriptive, definitive, compositional, attributive, nomological or interpretative, are generated, defined and parameterized within reality itself. In other words, reality comprises a “closed descriptive manifold” from which no essential predicate is omitted, and which thus contains no critical gap that leaves any essential aspect of structure unexplained. Any such gap would imply non-closure.

Diagram 8

​

MAP, a theoretical refinement of the self-containment criterion set forth by the Reality Principle, extends the closure property of the definition of reality to the set of all real predicates. MAP effects closure on the definitive, descriptive, explanatory and interpretative levels of reality theory by making it take the form of a closed network of coupled definitions, descriptions, explanations and interpretations that refer to nothing external to reality itself. Another way to state this is that MAP, like the Reality Principle, requires that everything to which any reality-theoretic definition, description, explanation or interpretation refers be located within reality. This has the effect of making reality responsible for its own structure and evolution in the abstract and concrete senses.

Continued on page 21

 

Yes, that is is. And, if attuned, it is the intense experiences that echo loudly from their time-point of occurrence into what was our past and what will be our future. They seem to occupy a larger space in time expanding out in both directions.

And other than intensity, I have noticed duration in time also echos. Existing in one place for a long time echos back. I have experienced an echo back from 25 years in the future. That has only happened once in my life to my remembrance.

 

MMM was more dificult to find, I began to wonder if I was just longing for some candy coated chocolate, lol...

Page 15:
Because our three principles correspond to the 3 C’s, and because they all begin with the letter M, we might as well call them the “3 M’s”: M=R, MAP and MU, respectively standing for the Mind Equals Reality Principle, the Metaphysical Autology Principle, and the Multiplex Unity Principle. The M=R principle, a tautological theoretical property that dissolves the distinction between theory and universe and thus identifies the real universe as a “self-reifying theory”, makes the syntax of this theory comprehensive by ensuring that nothing which can be cognitively or perceptually recognized as a part of reality is excluded for want of syntax. MAP tautologically renders this syntax closed or self-contained in the definitive, descriptive and interpretational senses, and in conjunction with M=R, renders the universe perfectly self-contained in the bargain. And MU tautologically renders this syntax, and the theory-universe complex it describes, coherent enough to ensure its own consistency (thus, the “C” corresponding to MU actually splits into two C’s, consistency and coherence, and we have four altogether). To each of these principles we may add any worthwhile corollaries that present themselves.

Since it is the lot of every reality theorist to use properties of reality to explain reality, and these properties are recursively defined, we will sometimes implicitly or explicitly refer to various properties in the descriptions of other properties. This precludes a neat series of cumulative definitions, which is possible in any case only by taking for granted the content and wherewithal of theorization (unfortunately, one can take nothing for granted in reality theory). As we will see below, the recursive nature of the CTMU is unavoidable. Secondly, the CTMU is developed “backwards” with respect to the usual deductive theories of science and mathematics, by first peeling away constraints and only then using the results to deduce facts about content. Most theories begin with axioms, hypotheses and rules of inference, extract implications, logically or empirically test these implications, and then add or revise axioms, theorems or hypotheses. The CTMU does the opposite, stripping away assumptions and “rebuilding reality” while adding no assumptions back.

Supertautology:
http://ctmucommunity.org/wiki/Supertautology

 

A quick search for "midget" and I was there ....

Page 27-28:
Conspansive Duality This principle was to some extent adumbrated by the following wry quote attributed to Arthur Eddington regarding the expanding universe:

“We walk the stage of life, performers of a drama for the benefit of the cosmic spectator. As the scenes proceed he notices that the actors are growing smaller and the action quicker. When the last act opens the curtain rises on midget actors rushing through their parts at frantic speed. Smaller and smaller. Faster and faster. One last microscopic blur of intense agitation. And then nothing.”

Eddington’s surreal vision accompanied a tongue-in-cheek proposal that the theory of the expanding universe might be replaced by a theory of the “shrinking atom”. It was thus a bit overdone for the sake of humor. Indeed, Eddington was not sufficiently interested in the idea to develop its implications beyond a very rudimentary level. However, it turns out that he was skirting the edges of an important duality principle.

Cosmic expansion and ordinary physical motion have something in common: they are both what might be called ectomorphisms. In an ectomorphism, something is mapped to, generated or replicated in something external to it. However, the Reality Principle asserts that the universe is analytically self-contained, and ectomorphism is inconsistent with self-containment. Through the principle of conspansive duality, ectomorphism is conjoined with endomorphism, whereby things are mapped, generated or replicated within themselves. Through conspansive endomorphism, syntactic objects are injectively mapped into their own hological interiors from their own syntactic boundaries.

In the language of TD and CF duality, this shifts the emphasis from spacetime geometry to descriptive containment, and from constructive to filtrative processing. As a result, new states are formed within the images of previous states. Nothing moves or expands “through” space; space is state, and each relocation of an object is just a move from one level of perfect stasis to another. This ties conventional motion, in which worldlines are constructively created by additions of state in Minkowski diagrams, to differential endomorphism, in which the internal descriptive potentials of attributes are cumulatively restricted.

Note:

 

Night #3.... 23% slower audio track... had a thought a very light moody blues instumental behind audiobook track would improve learning experience. may take time to locate correct track.

Wide awake moments I must search text for today... Eddington...
midget actors moving faster and faster getting smaller and smaller ..shrinking atom... MMM.

Had a dream about an interesting road trip and a desire to stop and purchase placemats, lol. This morning I felt almost as if I had a great acid trip. And, Brook, seriously and synchronically, at one point last night memories were triggered of those exact Bohm videos. How great to read your Uncle Jack posts and find them here.

 

Can a woman with no physics background whatsoever familiarize herself with a cognitive theory of the universe, written by a man with a 200 IQ, subliminally??? If so, how long will it take??? Will there be any side effects???

Stay tuned to find out if there is anyone out there.

 

Last night, I decided I would like to test the CTMU audiobook at a slower speed for a more hypnotic subliminal effect.
I have edited a 23% slower version for that purpose.
I have a link available if anyone is interested.

 

.
​

 

I will repost the CTMU PDF link: http://www.megafoundation.org/CTMU/Articles/Langan_CTMU_092902.pdf

And, I will mention that one of my wide awake learning timeframes last evening (night #2) included the John Wheeler segment of the CTMU referencing the animation Brook suggested that serves as promotional logo for the Chris Langan thread (I had been pondering the intended meaning):

​

"The Future of Reality Theory According to John Wheeler In 1979, the celebrated physicist John Wheeler, having coined the phrase “black hole”, put it to good philosophical use in the title of an exploratory paper, Beyond the Black Hole,8 in which he describes the universe as a self-excited circuit. The paper includes an illustration in which one side of an uppercase U, ostensibly standing for Universe, is endowed with a large and rather intelligent-looking eye intently regarding the other side, which it ostensibly acquires through observation as sensory information. By dint of placement, the eye stands for the sensory or cognitive aspect of reality, perhaps even a human spectator within the universe, while the eye’s perceptual target represents the informational aspect of reality. By virtue of these complementary aspects, it seems that the universe can in some sense, but not necessarily that of common usage, be described as “conscious” and “introspective”…perhaps even “infocognitive".

Continues on Page 7 of the PDF...