reality in layers

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Radium, Oct 30, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    i was thinking about this this morning and i just wanted to write it out bf i have to go. i guess i had this kind of a view for a while but i never really ordered it around coherently. i realized that its important to create a full, working model of reality so that whenever you interpret new data you would know where and how it fits into the larger image of everything. this is necessary to create any kind of an overview. and i realized that inability to create an overview for any subject is probably the biggest hurdle to true intelligence. the point of doing this was to try to create a really basic model of reality that we could somehow fit humanity into to give it a point of reference and then use that as a way to accurately predict future events. this is going to sound sort of jumbled but i am going somewhere with it.

    reality actually is structured in layers of ascending prominence/complexity where every layer necessitates the next layer to exist from bottom to top.

    from bottom to top, reality starts out with a single base layer on the bottom and goes up to ever smaller layers that are necessitated by the larger layer below it. the reason to assign sizes to layers is just to effectively demonstrate how each lower layer necessitates (holds up) the next layer. try to visualize this.

    so using this as your model reality would be shaped like a pyramid (large base that converges at a zenith)

    but what i found that was interesting is that at its zenith there is actually a switch point where an inverted pyramid starts and begins to expand out (possibly indefinitely)

    that switch point is humanity.

    so lets back-track and try to look at the larger layers below that point which stack up and necessitate its ability to exist:

    the base layer is the first and most important layer. therefore its the largest layer. we can reason this because by removing this layer, every other layer that can exist on top of it would ultimately stop working. this layer is: the physical laws of the universe

    the next layer that sits directly above this layer is: the physical universe. note that physical laws would have to exist first before creating the physical universe itself. so note that this upwardly necessitating wave is a repeating theme

    the layer above this is: a solar system. the layer above that: a planet. the layer above that: a habitable ecosystem. the layer above that: organic life. the layer above that: cognizant existence/humanity

    so stopping here its important to note that there was an ever diminishing scale per layer the further up you went, resembling ultimately, a pyramid.

    but i argue that starting from humanity this changes. so that instead of layers shrinking to ever diminishing scales (like a pyramid) as they had always were previously doing in leading up to this point, layers instead start to expand out to increasingly larger scales of extreme complexity

    [​IMG]

    so now starting again at humanity as your new turning point, the layer stacked on top of this is: human law. the layer on top of that: human civilization. note that the reasoning for this is exactly the same as the reasoning for our very first base layer (the physical laws of the universe) and the layer that it necessitates (the physical universe itself) in that by taking away the former, the latter would stop working. you should by now see here an inverted pyramid starting to form.

    the layer on top of that: human culture. the layer on top of that: the individual human person.

    i argue that these last two layers are the largest kinds of layers that can possibly exist by showing that human law necessitates human civilization, which then necessitates many different kinds of human cultures, which then necessitates the creation of many different kinds of human beings which is always expanding out indefinitely

    so i hope that makes sense. using this model i think is an effective way to structure different things. for example its a good way to structure the different sciences and where they fit into the larger image of things (eg hard sciences would fit into the lower pyramid from the physical laws layer to the organic life layer; w soft sciences fitting into the inverted pyramid above it with things like psychology, sociology, economics) so students who study the different sciences can know where and how to piece together a larger, better working image of reality that hopefully combines completely together towards shared goals (eg physicists ought to not make war weapons because sociologists warn this may lead to a war society and then ultimately a war culture which psychologists warn is disruptive to human intellectual wellness)

    hmm trying to think of something i forgot probably

    idk

    i just realized i probably would have to paypal you for taking the time to read everything i just typed

    alright peace hmu
    • Hot Thread Hot Thread x 1
    test
  2. Look im Gangsta

    Look im Gangsta New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Messages:
    58,433
    it all sounds a bit arbitrary.

    i dont think a singular approach would help science or society in general. plus youre just asking a lot of a selfish, triabal race.

    assuming im understanding you correctly.
    test
  3. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    re: arbitrary

    yup ^^^^

    i think its arbitrary in three ways

    1. everything in this universe is happening at the same time. its really just a big mix of things clashing against themselves constantly, and theres really no sequence to it.

    2. so, you dont need to make some kind of model that has humanity sitting at the top of a chain of sequences like i have. depending on what you wanted, you could have made a model that had a chain of sequences w something like flowers sitting at the top of it. that is, if you feel like creating a chain of sequences that ultimately lead upwardly to something to begin with. you really dont have to.

    3. but i thought it was important to orient certain things to the rest of the universe just as a way to understand how it works and how it fits into everything around it. the pyramid shape model is just a thinking tool to make it easy to understand how humanity is oriented to other things in the universe. i think its true that there is a certain chain of events that must stack themselves in the right kind of sequences (layers) to ultimately create something like humanity. this chain of sequence can be debated tho and i really just gave a very rough idea of what they might be.

    the choice to show humanity as an inverted pyramid on top of a regular pyramid was arbitrary too. but i thought it was important to give it that shape to show the way culture and individual human personality expands out indefinitely. it shows the difference between hard sciences (bottom pyramid) and soft sciences (top, inverted pyramid) effectively that way too.

    http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/7154/ca26679583393f57fd59ffo.jpg

    i just read back that bottom piece about the different sciences that i typed out about how to actually apply a model like this again and i dont really like it. i think your criticism about it was on point. i actually have some better examples about ways to apply this kind of a model.

    its something ive been thinking about a lot lately

    -- but i have to come back later
    test
  4. Nu'maaN

    Nu'maaN Anu'naki, Nuqqa.

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    25,669
    so with your theory, at which point would the inverted pyramid end?

    or it just keeps expanding with complexity as you said?

    wouldn't that mean the more it expands, the easier it will get to topple?

    obviously it'll be more difficult to build an inverted pyramid.

    :numaan:
    test
  5. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    it would just keep going out indefinitely unless one of the layers beneath it that holds it up (culture, civilization, law, nature, physics) stopped working

    that was the point of showing pyramidal layers in a sequence
    test
  6. Nu'maaN

    Nu'maaN Anu'naki, Nuqqa.

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    25,669
    yeah, but you mentioned humanity being the new starting point.

    so according to that image you attached, humanity would be the one on bottom.

    this will then spread out upwards as an inverted pyramid, no?

    what i'm saying is what if building upwards just ends up collapsing on humanity?

    there must be a limit, or a destination point.

    either that, or i'm reading into what you wrote in a totally different perspective.

    :numaan:
    test
  7. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    yeah i guess there is a destination point but any attempt at figuring out what that might be would just be conjecture - but thats really not a bad thing.

    for example, newton said that humanity would end no sooner than the year 2060 i think

    not bad, but from his time here on earth there would have been no way for him to know the true extent of what our technology could do and what kinds of society we might try to make. basically, its very hard for anyone presently to predict way out into the future. hence, a need for an open ended view of humanity and its future.

    but i say, to go for it. conjecture isnt a bad thing

    but i was going to make a larger post about this whole thing for ratiko but i keep slacking <3
    test
  8. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    ok

    this is dumb but i started to think about this as i was looking at this dmx video on youtube



    idk why but that day the only thing i could think of was everything happening in the background. dmx and the girl he was trying to get w were secondary to that even though that was the major story. and the hook just kept repeating in my head over and over. i had this video on repeat when i actually typed this thread out that day.

    i guess it was really strange just looking at them again. the events from this video happened in the late 90s - so many things have changed and the things that were frozen in time by the technology that created this video don't exist anymore. i think that year, michael jordan hit his last shot. i guess it struck me that i was now actually looking at a dead world.

    but this made me wonder how the things captured by this video could have come into existence and next how and why they were pushed out of existence. in that context everything becomes interesting. the streets, the clothes, the cars, everyone, everything, had something to say about that. everything in that video was holding a tiny part of the whole story about why they had existed and alternatively why they dont exist now.

    for example the american economy was more robust back then. dmx as portrayed in the video had things like jewelry, different cars, a motorcycle. the girl he was courting is shown going out shopping. those were just signals, to me, of what was a better functioning economy that existed back then. these things allowed dmx to qualify himself in the eyes of this woman who he was competing for. this single phenomena of course being something that is repeated out in every human society that has ever existed - and a strong way to explain why humanity is the way it ultimately is, for better and for worse. this was explained for the first time as an evolutionary argument by darwin The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    logically, he would have had first access to creating that kind of an argument w humans that existed pre discovery of evolution not yet having an ability to form such a thought. so starting w this man, humanity now had an ability to project more accurate truths about itself and the ultimate goals that it attempts to reach by creating (and sometimes, exploiting) society as a bridge to unlock them.

    so in its own way this video was ultimately telling a story of where humanity was at to that extent during the late 90s, specifically, on the north east coast of america with dmx and this woman being held up by numerous layers of infrastructure to produce that effect. these layers of infrastructure are hard to quantify exactly. for dmx to court this women on the north east coast of america in the late 90s many, many different things had to happen.

    eg somebody had to create the motorcycle he was riding and the apartment he was living in. the engineers had to go to schools to learn how to build machines like that and architects had to design the buildings like the one he was shown living in. for that to have happened, somebody had to create a society that had conditions which were conducive to the creation of an intellectual class, which not every society has an ability to effectively provide. to do that, the right kind of laws and government would have to have been created. and to get to that stage, humanity would have needed to create agriculture and livestock as ways to support large sedentary groups w specialized roles as part of a greater shift away from a more primitive hunter-gatherer style of society that cripples the ability for role specialization and large scale populations to exist.

    but they would need to be hunter gatherers too, before they could make the necessary shift out and go do that. and to do that, humans needed technology - specifically throwing spears and various other hunting tools. to have that, humans would need to have specialized hands w opposable digits. but before they could even have that, they would need to have basic primate hands.

    these hands developed as a shift over from the ground to the trees by what would ultimately become primates. this was a necessary change so that these primates could safely navigate the branchy environment up in the trees. they had probably been pushed up into the trees to begin with as a defense against ground predators. this move was significant in many ways. most importantly it allowed for the creation of hands, which are requisites for the creation of technology, which would become more important down the line. just looking at the human body today betrays our past as tree dwelling primates. our body plan has not really changed and looking at us we should see pretty quickly that what we really are, are structures w long extendable poles (arms) with hooks at the end of them (hands) that are designed to reach out and grab branches. the cylindrical shape of branches actually still follows us closely to this day: many of the things we have in society that interact with the hand are really just revisions of that ancient hand-to-branch relationship (cups, shovels, hand rails, steering wheels, umbrella handles, tooth brushes, bicycle bars - if you can think of more try to, the next time you go out. its sort of an inside joke about our past as primates living in the trees)

    additionally, had we not been pushed up into the trees as a novel strategy to escape ground predators, we would still be living on the ground, following out on the same chase/evade evolutionary strategies that the many other ground animals are forced forever to do; thus never unlocking things like society and technology as they simply chase and evade each other to the point of the sun's collapse in this solar system or some other kind of extinction event.

    so this relationship that we had in our past w tree branches was absolutely profound. had plants not evolved in that way then there would have been no way to necessitate hands which we would see go on to unlock even more profound things later on. had plants not evolved specifically into grass (Evolutionary history of plants - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) that would have had a hugely negative impact on our ability to have agriculture and support livestock, as animals like cows and horses are grazing animals that require large patches of grass to feed. not having an ability to unlock that phase in our history would have trapped us into an extremely primitive state to this day. had plants not existed to begin with, we would have never even made the shift out from the oceans. and its thought that it was actually in the plants creating branchy, leafy swamp waters, that fish developed limbs as a way to better navigate through them without getting blocked.

    we can keep going back in this way until we exhaust our returns and hit the point of ultimate causation, whatever it was. the point is to show how critical certain things have been at stacking up in a larger chain of sequences to create greater effects to the present day. we can see that by removing some of them, the whole structure falls completely apart and threatens to warp into some other thing entirely. i think its important to try to have some way to organize this greater structure of events and their sequence.
    test
  9. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    tl;dr

    what type of games are being played, hows it going down
    test
  10. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    test
  11. Rape Artist

    Rape Artist Ghet: Stand Alone Complex

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2011
    Messages:
    511
    There is what you are sensing and there is what you are perceiving to sense. All organization is instinctively arbitrary. Science is so useful because it is the only discipline capable of discerning which organizational patterns are reproducible and which ones are anecdotal.

    I'd start with Cartesian Dualism, first.
    test
  12. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    but where do we put cartesian dualism

    that was the big question here

    its ok to know any single thing but how do we ultimately know what role that thing plays in the larger scheme of everything that is happening

    and what is that larger thing even doing - where is it even going

    f.e. whats going to happen in the next 1000 years? what do you think is going to happen?

    i was trying to bait you into that question in the other thrad but
    test
  13. Rape Artist

    Rape Artist Ghet: Stand Alone Complex

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2011
    Messages:
    511
    One step at a time here! It's easy to get overwhelmed.

    What you are talking about is causality.

    If event A occurs, it leads to some event B. Likewise, if event B occurred, it was caused by some event A. This is a basic concept of causality.

    Now, there are ---alot--- of factors associated with trying to determine if B was caused by A. And there are a whole slew of other factors associated with trying to figure out of A can cause B. This whole process of trying to figure this crap out is what we call "science".

    Religion, politics, anecdotal, and other crap does the same thing with far, far, far less discipline. It is much less rigorous about determining the causality of events.

    Somewhere between the two is sociology and economics.

    Your ability to figure out if event A can cause event B is based on, solely, on your ability to ask questions about the event and about your perception of the event.
    test
  14. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    these are accurate points ...

    so like you say, causality starts at event a, whatever it was, then moves to event b, event c, event d, event e, event f ...

    and we can just go out that way presumably to the end of this universe. this string of causality thus creates some kind of a form or structure that constantly changes its shape as it constantly unfolds out to its ultimate end. so we know two things for sure: 1 matter has existed since at least event a and 2 its moving

    a problem that i keep bumping into, that maybe you have too, is that i dont really have a good grasp of what shape that string of causality streams out as. i know it exists but its hard to really know what it looks like, and how it moves

    so what happens is whenever i get any new information its really hard to know how it fits into that larger shape of this moving causality you're talking about. i needed to make a way to organize it and i needed to have some kind a map just to look at it. so thats just why i argued that this would be useful. i think actually people that dont do this never create an overview or create very fractured and incomplete overview that can see some things here and there but never the whole thing. this is something you should want to not be guilty of. i know that losing sight of your overview can make people very frustrated and even lose a sense of hope as they are so easily knocked off course by anything when lacking an overview

    its important to create that bigger overview as a way to accurately know anything so that you dont get caught in just knowing incomplete versions of things and being knocked around to this and to that because you have no overview to map the new information that comes in


    i asked you about the next 1000 years just because i wanted to know what you think and yu make a good antagonist. part 1 of this thread was using past evolution to show how that causality works because its a really effective example to that and i wanted to throw charles darwin's name in to show how humans pre darwin wouldnt have had an ability to incorporate the idea of evolution into their overview. thus post darwin we then had an ability for humans to create more effective overview than pre darwin. this is the same way for many things. f.e our generation; the internet kids

    part 2 was supposed to talk about the future specifically the next 1000 years just because i think things should be just about finished by that time. i just needed somebody to start that discourse w and this thread was kind of dead

    so with this thread i had to lay down some layers (lets say a a dmx layer, a evolutionary history of plants layer, and a charles darwin layer, to later on unlock the possibility for talking about the next 1000 years - just an example of how to apply this towards things)
    test
  15. Rape Artist

    Rape Artist Ghet: Stand Alone Complex

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2011
    Messages:
    511
    What you are concerned with is known as Newtonian Determinism.

    A long time ago, some guy named Isaac Newton was asked a question. He thought about it and said, "Good question. Lemme figure that out."

    So he went about figuring it out and went back to the person who asked him the question. He said "Here's the answer." When asked how he figured it out, he told the man that he had to invent a new theory of mathematics to answer the question.

    This is why Isaac Newton is God. That, and he set the international price of gold for 200 years.

    He posited that the universe was like a game of bollards. If you strike a ball here, you can measure exactly where it is going to go and what the ramifications are going to be. You can predict the "state" of a system at any point in time provided you could measure every prime mover in the system. The impetus of the prediction, then, depends on your measurement tools and which prime mover you are following.

    And this outlook of the world stood until the 1920s in nearly every academic circle of note. What isn't widely known is that Newton had a hard time understanding light. He couldn't determine if they were particles or waves because of the edges of shadows. (LOL @ a guy pondering one of the most important questions in the universe based on the shadow being cast from an object in the 1700s... this is how amazing this guy was)

    Then some guy named Thomas Young comes along and demonstrates that light are particles and waves at the same time. Well, this throws a pretty hefty wrench in the whole determinism outlook. If a critical variable of the system (light) can be in multiple "states" simultaneously, which state is it in at any given time? You can't make predictions anymore. Any attempt at atomic determinism collapses completely.

    Now... with that said...

    What you are trying to figure out is our collective trajectory. If you want to know the trajectory of any object in motion, you need to observe the difference in positions over time.

    We used to be nomads. We used to be farmers. We used to be machinists. We are currently information workers. If you want to figure out what the next phase is... find what is common between all of these "states".
    test
  16. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    i like isaac newton too. you can make the argument that he was the smartest human being ever. you can probably make the argument that he was the most important human being ever. i know that many scientists look at principia as the most important text ever created - and i know that newton is generally looked at as the most important scientist ever. its interesting to think about what kind of things in this universe had to stack themselves in the right kind of sequence just to create someone like that. newton actually believed he was sent here by god. he was definitely motivated by something bigger than regular to want to try to discover these things about the universe. yet i dont think he was motivated by power. i dont think he was a tyrant. i think he just was like a child. i think that, because he believed so strongly in god, he just wanted to know why god would ever do something like this. why would god bother to create light, to create gravity, why would god ever bother to do these things. what was god trying to prove .

    anyway i brought this up a few posts back: he thought that humanity would end before the year 2060

    thats a pretty interesting thing to think. i think the story was that it was unclear what he meant by that - maybe he meant we would be destroyed and/or be transformed into something completely different than human

    an interesting forecast, from an interesting overview. as smart as he was tho, ultimately, he was born in the 1600's so his overview would have lacked so many things that even me and you have an ability to now phase into what are our overviews. ..

    so there is a trend i think: that any overview that can be created about this universe, becomes increasingly efficient w time

    so a question i ask really quick:

    what would this say about the humans in the future and the kinds of overview that they can make about our universe - say, even just 48 years from now

    i dont think you were here but mcgirth posted a thread about an essay by this biologist named jbs haldane. it was really interesting and it was fresh that he would share it like that.

    heres the link

    Daedalus, or, Science and the Future

    anyway, like you, jbs haldane shows that humanity has been guided largely by what were a series of technology revolutions. he even predicts an information revolution and its amazing that his overview had an ability to say that considering this essay was made in the 1920's. to put that into frame, the great isaac newton never would have had an ability to predict even an industrial technology revolution. jbs haldane crowns this essay with something someone like isaac newton definitely wouldnt have had an ability to think about: what he predicts as being the last great technology revolution, the biological revolution.

    there are technology revolutions beyond even that tho I.E. nikolai kardashev came up with an even more advanced overview with the Kardashev scale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in 1963 just roughly 40 years after jbs haldane's essay. in the same way that an overview involving a biological revolution would have been just beyond the range of what a person like isaac newton (1642 – 1727) could know, an overview like the kardashev scale would have been just barely beyond the range of what a person like jbs haldane (1892 – 1964) could know too. i think these examples are significant and that they say something important about humanity.

    but anyway

    obviously a biological revolution would precede that.

    and supposing jbs haldane was right about it, this then asks many new questions. like who is going to create this technology first? what kind of society would probably be most likely to want to pursue a biological revolution? we can rationally conclude that implementing many of the things jbs haldane was talking about would completely re design our current society and the way it works. things like resource allocation, job availability in the economy, social security, and of course birth rates

    these things must be completely re thought. the power system that exists, must be completely re thought.

    so my question to you is: what do you think they would do?
    test
  17. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    LOL yes

    [youtube]_MwwHJXLjg4[/youtube]

    [​IMG]
    test
  18. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    re: whats going to happen in the next 1000 years?

    does anybody wnt to try to answer this

    you really dont need to have some big grand answer

    i just wanted to talk about the next 1000 years because i think they are the years that we change into something new or stay stuck forever as what we are right now. i want to talk some more about DMX and what is ultimately his fate in our universe
    test
  19. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    good thread

    i think about some of the stuff you've laid out in here sometimes, in a more limited sense. like if i'm eating an apple and the bag says it was grown in cali, i think about how foreign that really is to be eating fruit from 3000 miles away, and whats more all the work that probably went into growing this exact apple. just simple shit like that makes me appreciate the progress humanity has made.

    with regard to the future, 1000 years is hard for me to even imagine. but i would expect to see some major changes within the next century.
    test
  20. SAMARA

    SAMARA truth is a sword

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    1,151
    i figured

    when i lay on your back upon the ground I am facing into space. the atmophere permits me to breathe and the earth holds me down. i exist in the lowest layer of space we know, our air our atmophere is space - an element.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)