Sketch for a New Physics
Using a topographical metaphor, this diagram shows the relation of significance in direct proportion to the dimorphism of space and time. I call this eigenmorphism. For example, as human beings, our native frame is the Autobiographical level (top). Our experience has a high significance, which means
1) rich qualia – larger nows and more nesting of personal, sub-personal, and super-personal frames allow for deeper sensory vocabularies.
2) a highly divergent space-time presentation (space and time are opposite for us, but identical for quantum phenomena or astrophysical phenomena).
3) a highly divergent spectrum of realism. The Matroyshka dolls with reflection underneath represent this range of clear/real, vs blurred/intuitive, and reflective/fiction. By contrast, the entangled reflections of the microphysical level of physics are neither real nor fictional. With space and time fused, matter and energy become interchangeable foregrounds for information processing.
What is the relationship between what you are calling significance and what we commonly call complexity?
I am delighted that you assign the highest significance to the (locally energized) sense of self importance. That corresponds with my own view that vanity emerges with increasing complexity in locally energized systems (such as the Earth). . .
Ah, that’s an interesting question. Some of the things that I think that significance includes are 1) saturation of sense (heightened feeling and attention), 2) prolific association (many meanings are referenced simultaneously), 3) aesthetic prestige (qualities which are admired and esteemed – celebrity or infamy). 4) augments motive (increased power to inspire voluntary action, imitation, reaction, etc).
Complexity overlaps in the second sense, as far as significance being associated with integration of information. What complexity doesn’t explain, however, is why complexity cares about complexity, or why qualities of significance are often tied to simplicity (logos, icons, etc can have high significance derived from graphic simplicity).
At the same time, the development of richer, more significant layers of awareness is invariably shadowed by increasing levels of mechanical sophistication. I would tend to think of this as a matter of appropriateness rather than mechanism. It is appropriate, for instance, for significant works of literature to tend to use more sophisticated vocabulary (with notable exceptions), but it is not the vocabulary itself which causes the author’s work to become significant. It isn’t the syntax which generates meaning, but the syntax is a vehicle which contributes to it.
I agree with the vanity connection. Along the lines of the ‘aesthetic prestige’ I’m pointing out, significance corresponds to proprietary distinction. When awareness experiences itself as unique, it experiences everything else in degrees of generality and multiplicity. In recent centuries, we have developed a way of turning this around, so that identifying with the generic side of existence can become a counter-vanity vanity. To deem oneself beyond merely human conceits of anthropomorphic views becomes an image of pragmatism and maturity. By fully embracing mortality and insignificance, we transcend both and identify ourselves with the disembodied voyeur of physical reality or science.
P.S. Your artwork is magnificent, by the way. 😀
Thanks Robert! It would look a lot better if I could really make it look like I wanted it to
Very much endorse this comment on the quality (and intrigue) of the artwork here, and indeed throughout the multisenserealism log. Are these artworks from one mind or several (multiversally creative)?
Thanks Thomas. Mostly the graphics here are my doing, but in this case the cool purple topographical image was just snagged from the internet.