Notes
[Notebook: TURKEY DB 55]
[Sunday 24 August 2003 - Saturday 30 August 2003]
Sunday 24 August 2003
Monday 25 August 2003
Some intellectual energy is returning [age seems to be showing, I am beginning to feel the cold of winter] and plans about how to spend it. Write the PhD thesis on the dole - forget the grant, although it is three times as much. - On the other hands, if a few hours arguing with the powers that are will yield $50k, that is good. But the money will come in when I can show that the object is of value and can be realized. The only way to show that something can be realized is to realize it, so the task becomes to write a 10k word version of the story that is impeccable from an editorial point of view. So we aim for Theological Studies, and we
[page 363]
Quantum property of no-cloning with Lonergan's argument for the existence [of empirical residue]. Lonergan, page 50 sqq
"The quantum no-cloning theorem and Lonergan's argument that the world is not god
Economist essay: Unnatural Constraint, finished and submitted on Friday.
Do we draw the line at self-pity, not being prepared to accept and submit to the slings and arrows (and moments of sublime bliss) of outrageous fortune? One must play the hand that is dealt one, but whingeing can help if the audience is benevolently minded and susceptible to wringers.
Have I been whingeing to the Australian Catholic University? Probably. Insofar as I want them to listen to an idea rather than submit to their discipline and in some way be derived of the idea because [all the documentary evidence says] this idea invalidates the conceptual foundation of the Roman Catholic Church to which the Australian Catholic University gives institutional fidelity. (Encyclical? John Paul II, para 27)
I am continuously rewarded with small victories in the most demanding game of all, physical reality.
Heisenberg-non-commutative-multiplication: order is essential in quantum mechanics.
. . .
Trance == give away your mind == cease consciously controlling mental contents, ie observables of mind.
Is a language a metric space? In quantum mechanics we use the metric space in which certain sums (integrals) are normalized to 1. The metric in effect is a tool for telling us what can and what cannot happen.
[page 364]
We set up a permutation space and evolve the standard model from it?
PHYSICAL CONSTRAINT - NORMALIZATION - METRIC
The observable world has measure zero in the spiritual world, but is nevertheless essential.
Let us think of the flow of meaning.
A communication [flow of information --> flow of meaning]
The invention of writing crystallized the interpersonal flow of meaning. Like snapshots of motion too quick for the eye writing allows us to analyze meaning at our leisure instead of having to keep up with a lively flow of conversation between a number of people.
WRITTEN LANGUAGE --> logic, mathematics, linguistics, hermeneutics, information theory, computation
Aristotle linguistic analysis gave us potency and act, and subordinated potency to act (?) [or did this come later with Thomas/Albert.
Act of god == no explanation known
[end of notebook TURKEY DB 55]
Tuesday 26 August 2003
Wednesday 27 August 2003
Thursday 28 August 2003
Friday 29 August 2003
[Transfinite Field Theory TFT DB 56]
[page 0]
Saturday 30 August 2003
We have two axioms a) the physical world is adequately described by certain structures in function space
and
b) the spiritual world is the transfinite expansion of the physical world.
Lonergan sets out to prove that the set WHATIS can be partitioned into two sets CREATION and NOT CREATION. In the western theological tradition descended from the ancient Mediterranean, NOT CREATION has come to be called god. In earlier times gods were conceived as the personalities executing the world of experience. The theory of monotheism is that all these invisible personalities can be seen as sub-processes in the whole process. WHATIS may be interpreted both statically (as a body of text) or dynamically. Here we show how Lonergan's proof (derived from ancient tradition) can fail, and suggest that the partition C, NOT_C is unreal, an artifact of a particular model of whatis.
We follow ancient tradition in attributing personality to subprocesses of WHATIS.
what is (lower case) glossary.
ie the partition of whatis into creation and not-creation is meaningless. Yes and no. We must distinguish between open and closed sets of processes.
Although viewed statically the world appears to be an aggregate of independent entities in need of a puppet master, dynamically discrete processes unite seamlessly w, and may pop in and out of reality as they are connected and disconnected to different subsets of whatis, which we model with a transfinite network.
[page 1]
Thesis: Short form 10k Words; long form 100k.
a) introduction, the god question - history and motivation,
breeding vs Lonergan.
b) a model, introducing to scientific method and mathematical
modelling to metaphysics
c) expression of the C, not-C hypothesis (Creation, not-Creation) in
terms of the model using Aquinas/Lonergan terminology.
d) critique of c)
e) consequences for models of god
f) quantum mechanics, no cloning, superposition, observability,
Hilbert space
g) the transfinite network
h) practical consequences: education, religion, technology, human
relationships; practical love (economics, politics etc)
A point in a Hilbert Space can represent the whole lifetime of an entity no matter how long and complex that life may be. Each subsystem of what is has a life which maps its inputs (domain) into its outputs (range).
A model of whatis is a subset of whatis.
Kreyszig page 18: Kreyszig
'A subset M of a metric space X is said to be open if it contains a ball about each of its points. A subset K of X is said to be closed if its complement (in X) is open, that is KC = X - K is open.
Closed = does not contain a ball around each if its points, ie points of a closed set have no size(?)
Open ball = open set; closed ball = closed set.
Natural concept of distance(to us, large subsystems of whatis [are] Euclidian - other distances are metasemas of Euclidian distance. This is [how] we construct function space from Rn (or Nn).
[page 2]
The spiritual asymptote : sensation without consumption. This is in effect the Thomistic view of the vision of god = beatitudo. Aquinas 608.
In the real world all sensation involves consumption we may seek to minimize both consumption and unpleasant (disruptive, damaging, plastic) sensation. Maximize health and complexity.
How do we model meaning in function space? in mapping space (many-many rather than many-one) ie 'reversible' space. [reversibility can only take between peers, ie sets with the same cardinal number]
Quantum mechanics is modelled in function space. Spirit is modelled in mapping (permutation) space.
METRIC is foundation of SAMENESS and DIFFERENCE
Two strings of different cardinal are always different, but one may contain the other, so that sensuality serves as a model for beatitude.
Open and closed sets are populated by two distinct classes of points (point-space duality).
open - blurry set, blurry points (ie points with size)
closed - sharp [set] (ie points with position (name) but no magnitude
(points of measure zero?)) Points are small enough to define a
boundary.
Kreyszig page 21 Separable space in which a countable subset (like the rationals in the reals) can be identified.
Sequence is a process that describes a real number derived from a metric space of infinite dimensionality (complexity)
A continuous mapping models an event.
MEANING == TRANSLATION/TRANSFORMATION.
