1
New Theories / What is THE PANOPTIC CHALLENGE? Can you meet the challenge?
« on: 01/10/2017 05:08:17 »
The Panoptic Challenge is to establish an ABSOLUTE MINIMAL self-consistent basis for the Universe from which ALL other contents can be derived whilst simultaneously allowing for extensibility that is beyond our current pelop (pronounced pee-lop and is the “Perceiving Entity’s Limits Of Perception”), whether natural or augmented.
The word Panoptic means “Can be seen everywhere”. Seen is the loose term for which I mean ‘exists everywhere’, whether within our current human pelop or not.
Apologies for the length of this post but some explanations are necessary. I hope it provokes some thinking ‘outside the box/container/other limiting structure”.
Here is my attempt as the primer for the challenge.
ZERO ORIGINATORS
(0) There is, by definition, only one Universe. Uni means “1”
(2x0) The Universe contains all that exists.
(3x0) The Universe is a closed system in perpetual change.
(4x0) There is only one smallest Universal element called a “point” which is “The Originating Element”.
(5x0) There exists at least one second point.
(6x0) Points tend to separation and non-reactive stasis
ORIGINATING POSTULATES
(O1) A point is indivisible.
(O2) Points have interaction potential.
(O2) A point has elemental potentials.
(O2) Elemental potentials are mutually exclusive.
(O3) There are only 2 (two) elemental potentials from which all of the Universal contents emanate (a) Time and (b) Energy.
(O4) Time is the measure of proximity (relativity).
(O5) Energy is the measure of all Universal structures.
(O6) Points in contact enable potentialities.
(O7) A Dimension is a collection of points.
Note (Alpha):
Due to pelop (the Perceiving Entity’s Limits Of Perception), other Elemental Potentials may exist, but need to be identified and included ONLY IF they are Mutually Exclusive with all the other defined elemental potentials and ALL of their enabled consequences and/or interactive lineages. That is, adding another Elemental Potential is the ABSOLUTE last resort not a relative or convenient one needed to explain something, and MUST NOT be linked in any way to either Time or Energy.
Note(Beta)
Human concepts of a point being a very small circular structure should, in fact must, be re-imagined. Within the above definitions, a point has no shape. It is a conceptual element. If you want to imagine such a point and the way it may interact with other points, you can loosely imagine ANY irregular shape or boundary, though the above defined point has no boundary as we conceive it, despite the fact that as humans within our pelop, we need to infer such a boundary. In order to help re-conceive, the sides of your imagined shape should not necessarily be considered straight. You may even imagine the point as a surface, or a 3D object. Whatever you choose for your imagination, your conceptual shape needs to be completely flexible with the freedom to reshape your conceptual bases and ideas as your cognitive constructs require.
ORIGINATING POSTULATE COROLLARIES
(OC1) The Complement of the Universe, by definition, cannot exist.
(OC1) Contacting points initiate consequences for potentialities.
(OC2) Contacting points initiate Time, Energy or both.
(OC3) Mutually exclusive dimensions maintain the potentiality of their constituent points.
(OC4) Intersecting or coincident dimensions exist where points contact.
SUPPLEMENTAL:
Can you map what we actually know scientifically (or otherwise) to only these two elemental potentials?
We must allow for future evolutionary lineages of ourselves, or even entities outside our pelop.
Example. Higgs-Boson… If I correctly understand current human modelling using the language of mathematics and scientific methodologies… A particle (Higgs particle in this case) implies sub-divisibility and a structure based on energy. A Boson is a particle, similarly based on energy. Slowing down (or speeding up) is a relative situation. This relativity is defined above as ‘Time’ and is a concept of proximity. Interaction of the two energies gives rise to mass? Separately nothing happens. With proximity, or time as defined above, the two structures interact.
Note: Some Other Propositions For Ideation... Singularities are instances of Points in contact? Black holes are instances of dimensions in contact? (More Dimension postulates and corollaries have been created to link to perception and will be available later)
WHAT LEAD TO MY CREATION OF THIS CHALLENGE (if you are curious):
What lead me to this point of discussion was having thoughts about developing originating statements for perception and its manipulation in human society. When creating postulates on perception and its origins, I encountered the need for the concept of ‘time’. It has diverted me to the point where I needed to consider the nature and construct of the Universe and add about 5 extra chapters to my book "On the Origins Of Perception" (not yet available). The Originating Statements and the Panoptic Challenge has been one of the consequences. I have two chapters of postulates and corollaries, relating mostly to dimensions, that link from the above, to my main focus which is that of the nature of perception.
To that end, I do not wish to spend an inordinate amount of time on discussing the physics of the Universe, or the current human understandings of its implications other than to point out the need for the constant realisation of working within human pelops. For now I will have to get back to finishing my book on perception, and will leave that to those who, given entries in this blog, enjoy such things and the underpinning structures and applications of the language of mathematics and poeticising about them.
My only requests are these…
(1) There are to be no mentions of belief systems or the existence, or not, of deities which, if they can eventually be established as existent, will be a part of ‘everything’ and justifiable under Zero Originator (2x0) and will need to fulfil evidentiary requirements other than just claims or beliefs. As would the counter example for proving that they do not exist.
(2) Focus on the word “minimal’ within the current Panoptic Challenge. Please, no theses that are lengthy to wade through. Ours lives are short and valuable.
(3) Keep It Simple, Scientists (and other wonderful non-scientists) and self-consistent. No circular references.
I welcome your discussions and suggestions for alternatives to mine provided the statements are minimal (think also Ockhams Razor), self-consistent, have the ability for current confirmed modelling of our Universe to be mapped to them, and allow for future flexibility when we eventually evolve or encounter other entities which may only exist at present in our imagination since they would be currently outside our pelop.
Please let the challenge begin….
The word Panoptic means “Can be seen everywhere”. Seen is the loose term for which I mean ‘exists everywhere’, whether within our current human pelop or not.
Apologies for the length of this post but some explanations are necessary. I hope it provokes some thinking ‘outside the box/container/other limiting structure”.
Here is my attempt as the primer for the challenge.
ZERO ORIGINATORS
(0) There is, by definition, only one Universe. Uni means “1”
(2x0) The Universe contains all that exists.
(3x0) The Universe is a closed system in perpetual change.
(4x0) There is only one smallest Universal element called a “point” which is “The Originating Element”.
(5x0) There exists at least one second point.
(6x0) Points tend to separation and non-reactive stasis
ORIGINATING POSTULATES
(O1) A point is indivisible.
(O2) Points have interaction potential.
(O2) A point has elemental potentials.
(O2) Elemental potentials are mutually exclusive.
(O3) There are only 2 (two) elemental potentials from which all of the Universal contents emanate (a) Time and (b) Energy.
(O4) Time is the measure of proximity (relativity).
(O5) Energy is the measure of all Universal structures.
(O6) Points in contact enable potentialities.
(O7) A Dimension is a collection of points.
Note (Alpha):
Due to pelop (the Perceiving Entity’s Limits Of Perception), other Elemental Potentials may exist, but need to be identified and included ONLY IF they are Mutually Exclusive with all the other defined elemental potentials and ALL of their enabled consequences and/or interactive lineages. That is, adding another Elemental Potential is the ABSOLUTE last resort not a relative or convenient one needed to explain something, and MUST NOT be linked in any way to either Time or Energy.
Note(Beta)
Human concepts of a point being a very small circular structure should, in fact must, be re-imagined. Within the above definitions, a point has no shape. It is a conceptual element. If you want to imagine such a point and the way it may interact with other points, you can loosely imagine ANY irregular shape or boundary, though the above defined point has no boundary as we conceive it, despite the fact that as humans within our pelop, we need to infer such a boundary. In order to help re-conceive, the sides of your imagined shape should not necessarily be considered straight. You may even imagine the point as a surface, or a 3D object. Whatever you choose for your imagination, your conceptual shape needs to be completely flexible with the freedom to reshape your conceptual bases and ideas as your cognitive constructs require.
ORIGINATING POSTULATE COROLLARIES
(OC1) The Complement of the Universe, by definition, cannot exist.
(OC1) Contacting points initiate consequences for potentialities.
(OC2) Contacting points initiate Time, Energy or both.
(OC3) Mutually exclusive dimensions maintain the potentiality of their constituent points.
(OC4) Intersecting or coincident dimensions exist where points contact.
SUPPLEMENTAL:
Can you map what we actually know scientifically (or otherwise) to only these two elemental potentials?
We must allow for future evolutionary lineages of ourselves, or even entities outside our pelop.
Example. Higgs-Boson… If I correctly understand current human modelling using the language of mathematics and scientific methodologies… A particle (Higgs particle in this case) implies sub-divisibility and a structure based on energy. A Boson is a particle, similarly based on energy. Slowing down (or speeding up) is a relative situation. This relativity is defined above as ‘Time’ and is a concept of proximity. Interaction of the two energies gives rise to mass? Separately nothing happens. With proximity, or time as defined above, the two structures interact.
Note: Some Other Propositions For Ideation... Singularities are instances of Points in contact? Black holes are instances of dimensions in contact? (More Dimension postulates and corollaries have been created to link to perception and will be available later)
WHAT LEAD TO MY CREATION OF THIS CHALLENGE (if you are curious):
What lead me to this point of discussion was having thoughts about developing originating statements for perception and its manipulation in human society. When creating postulates on perception and its origins, I encountered the need for the concept of ‘time’. It has diverted me to the point where I needed to consider the nature and construct of the Universe and add about 5 extra chapters to my book "On the Origins Of Perception" (not yet available). The Originating Statements and the Panoptic Challenge has been one of the consequences. I have two chapters of postulates and corollaries, relating mostly to dimensions, that link from the above, to my main focus which is that of the nature of perception.
To that end, I do not wish to spend an inordinate amount of time on discussing the physics of the Universe, or the current human understandings of its implications other than to point out the need for the constant realisation of working within human pelops. For now I will have to get back to finishing my book on perception, and will leave that to those who, given entries in this blog, enjoy such things and the underpinning structures and applications of the language of mathematics and poeticising about them.
My only requests are these…
(1) There are to be no mentions of belief systems or the existence, or not, of deities which, if they can eventually be established as existent, will be a part of ‘everything’ and justifiable under Zero Originator (2x0) and will need to fulfil evidentiary requirements other than just claims or beliefs. As would the counter example for proving that they do not exist.
(2) Focus on the word “minimal’ within the current Panoptic Challenge. Please, no theses that are lengthy to wade through. Ours lives are short and valuable.
(3) Keep It Simple, Scientists (and other wonderful non-scientists) and self-consistent. No circular references.
I welcome your discussions and suggestions for alternatives to mine provided the statements are minimal (think also Ockhams Razor), self-consistent, have the ability for current confirmed modelling of our Universe to be mapped to them, and allow for future flexibility when we eventually evolve or encounter other entities which may only exist at present in our imagination since they would be currently outside our pelop.
Please let the challenge begin….