Notes
[Sunday 7 August 2011 - Saturday 13 August 2011]
[Notebook: DB 71 Israel]
Sunday 7 August 2011
Monday 8 August 2011
[page 48]
Tuesday 9 August 2011
The battle between right wing fantasy (God will provide) and left wing reality (we must learn how to make our own way in the world). The left is favoured by science. While the right would
[page 49]
like to minimize tax and leave everyone to their own devices, the left sees that there are things to be done which need research, design and execution. We design civil structures according to the laws of mechanical engineering, stresses, forces, etc etc. How do we design a good society? The starting point is theology, and it seems to me that defective theology is the root of all our troubles.
Natural religion is not something we invent but something we discover. From our point of view the old religions were inventions rather than discoveries, but when we look at the Old testament / Jewish Bible, we see a rendering of the world as it was in those days, and the models or interpretations that the writers placed on local events.
Theology: the theory of everything.
Contrast the scientific and the christian theory of everything.
Knowledge advances when we are politically (socially) free to think and say new things and compare them to our own ideas and reality.
The way ahead.
Society grows as more dimensions become transparent and independent.
All this is just repetition of now oldish ideas but the trick is to get a hearing, and this means producing a clear and simple platform.
[page 50]
The root of the trouble is the divine right of kings to the exclusion of all others. In fact we all exist and act by divine right, but like good divinities, we must exercise our rights prudently.
The divine right of kings is mixed up with the idea of trial by battle, God engineering the outcome to benefit the king he prefers.
Wednesday 10 August 2011
Thursday 11 August 2011
Have spent some time flirting in my mind with popular appeal but keep falling back to my cherished aim, to be scientific rather than political, to let the politics take care of itself driven by the transparency of the scientific picture (transparency? clarity). The outlines of this program seem clear to me. Just have to get the langage right, Time to subscribe to Nature again. To reconsider the Masters of Theology? This might bring a bit of institutional backing and people to talk to.
Nature is the target, but I have plenty of copies to work from, yet need the search ability provided by a subscription. Is this necessary with all the other stuff available, and most of my foundations lie in classic papers.
It seems safe to say that theoretical physics has reached an impasse in trying to comprehend the relationship between gravitation and the other forces of
[page 51]
nature. This seems to indicate the need for a more wide ranging model. Zee sees that we must go beyond the harmonic paradigm. Here we introduce a 'communication paradigm'. Our most telling item of evidence for this approach is the observed quantization of the Universe. Shannon's theory of communication explains this quite simply. To prevent equivocation, it is necessary to place distinct messages as far apart in message space as possible, separated by regions that do not represent valid messages, the continuum. This is tantamount to quantization, picking out the addressable integers from the reals.
'Secrecy, once accepted, becomes an addiction' Edward Teller in Goodman, Guardian Amy Goodman
Back to my earliest question : what is the hardware of the Universe? And the earliest answer : consistency. Hardware, like stockyards, 'channels' a process to make it to some extent at least deterministic and predictable.
The bridge between continuous an discrete was built by Cantor, who showed how to use integers to build a continuum and vice versa (?).
Logical space, the noosphere. Noetic space. Teilhard de Chardin
Quantum mechanics binds the frequency of messages on the global network to their content, ie the probability of a transition from state a to state b.
[page 52]
Perhaps it is a matter of drumming up sufficient political motivation within myself to wrote something vaguely scientific.
I walk in the flesh of the Lord: God and I are one flesh and everyone can say this truly. Perhaps it woud help to compile a list of statements that everyone can truly say.
The big issue is understanding myself which is the dual of my environment, the microcosm / macrocosm idea. Each of us is born into the macrocosm and adjusts our microcosm yo become fit, survive and reproduce (physically and mentally).
