Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id HAA26657 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 18 Jan 2001 07:58:52 GMT From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on... Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 19:06:34 +1100 Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIGEMJCMAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <005701c080c7$16be6e80$e502bed4@default> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Hi Kenneth, Gerry, et al,
Kenneth, your comments re the speed of light as a variable rather than
constant reflects
my very point re methodology, as does Gerry's outline of the wave/particle
debate in Physics.
Classical methods favour eternal concepts, as in
the speed of light. When we 'keep looking' so classical will eventually
change
into non-classical where there is an increase in context sensitivity and so
the
universal constants are deemed to vary in different contexts. (What is
noteworthy is that if the constant is a fundamental part of our mapmaking
then
we will not notice changes since any change in the fundamental causes the
whole
mapping system to automatically adjust to conform to the fundamental
paradigm!)
The point is that the METHOD of analysis guarantees you will follow the
path,
from classical to non-classical. Out of the non-classical can emerge
classicals,
'new' constants that someone somewhere will question eventually applying
more
non-classical analysis.
The classical and non-classical perspectives develop out of a general
methodology our species uses to identify and so establish meaning. These
perspectives have properties and we often confuse these properties with what
we
are studying.
For example, within the classical perspective we will insist that 'X is a
particle' and 'Y is a wave'. We will then even allow for 'no..mistake... X
is a
wave' but we will NOT allow 'X is both particle and wave'.
When we move to a non-classical perspective, where we spend more time
reviewing
the relationships of X to context, both local and non-local, then we find
that,
*depending on context*, X will be seen as either a particle or a wave or
something oscillating between the two 'fundamental' distinctions. That
context
includes artifical ones created by us as part of the experimentation
process.
As we move more and more into non-classical perspectives so we see an
increase
in the use of statistical analysis, wave emphasis, and even particle
differences
within the same class -- e.g. the 'consciousness' in each photon! (gets into
such concepts as pan-psychism). Note that it is a non-classical perspective
that
introduces these sorts of 'difference' concepts. In the 'purist' classical
world
so all photons are 'the same', all electrons are 'the same' and everything
is
mechanistic. In a species context this sameness is reflected in the concept
of
genes where context can allow for local differences in expression but
underneath
we are all the same.
Move into non-classical perspectives and we can 'swap' genes with other
species
(e.g. jellyfish genes in a monkey). The emphasis here is that the change
from
classical to non-classical changes morality issues from rigid classical to
more
context sensitive, and so flexible, non-classical. IOW as we shift to
non-classical so we shift to a more organic perspective and that perspective
favours quick change, relativity, and so context sensitivity.
In the context of memetics a gene view is a classical view (which within the
discipline of genetics has camps that span the classical to non-classical
approaches)
A meme view is non-classical but has within the discipline of memetics the
span
from classical to non-classical approaches.
from a sociological perspective, a classical view trusts noone, the trust
emphasis is on yourself. The non-classical view has dependencies and so
forces a
'trust others' perspective. Note in this the links, in classical linkage is
within, self-contained, like a species/gene. This is a Darwinian approach
that
works classically and yet within Darwinist camps emerge non-classical
perspectives.
The Lamarckian approach is non-classical in that the linkage emphasis is
other-contained, it is the relationships with other species that are
reflected
in evolution and this is a more dynamic, as well as more context sensitive,
emphasis than the classical perspective.
These days we are entangling these perspectives where we now see genes in a
non-classical way but still with classical influences, we emphasise the gene
as
'eternal', there is a 'core' element around which variations form. As you
move
more to non-local perspectives even the absoluteness of the gene dissapears
and
the word 'gene' points not to a thing but to a group of relationships,
strange
attractor if you will, where various relational processes are attracted to a
point where there is nothing -- a bit like a hurricane where there is an
'eye'
:-)
The distinctions of classical vs non-classical are abstracted to that of A
vs ~A
and that forms a fundamental dichotomy structure that is then applied
recursively to give 'inbetween' states.
It is this process that is fundamental (!) to our species as a method of
indentification (classical EITHER/OR emphasis, WHAT IS, precision) and
RE-identification (non-classical, BOTH/AND emphasis, WHAT COULD BE,
approximations).
The dynamics is in the oscillations of our brains across these two
fundamental
distinctions and out of that process comes mind and all other X-otomies.
best,
Chris.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Kenneth Van Oost
> Sent: Thursday, 18 January 2001 7:50
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> Hi Chris...
> Just interupting things here,
> About the speed of light....
>
> Last details about that state it clear that the speed of light is not a
> constant
> ( anymore).
> Einstein formulated his Cosmoslogical- Constant- concept of which he
> thought it was completely wrong.
> Nowadays, scientists are picking up back the idea to proove that the
> universe is expanding. That is, new evidence shows that the speed with
> which stars are moving away from us, is faster in the outskirts
> of the uni-
> verse than it is ' here '.
> This means that the universe is far more greater than exepted because
> the light from so far away has not yet reached us.
> This theory also claims that they can explain how the universe came into
> existence.
>
> Regards,
>
> Kenneth
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 12:32 PM
> Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
>
>
> > <Thus in the world of classical physics a particle is a particle and
> > a wave
> > > is a wave; one cannot suddenly become the other, these concepts do not
> > > share
> > > the same space.>
> > >
> > Don't take this as encouragement, but isn't light both a wave and a
> > particle?
> >
> > By the way, that reminds me that you never answered that question
> > about the invariability of the speed of light.
> >
> > I can't help thinking that if you ever put any of this stuff up for
> > publication in peer-reviewed journals, rather than self-published
> websites,
> > then people more expert than I would tear your paper house down.
> >
> > Vincent
> >
> > ===============================================================
> > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
> >
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
>
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 18 2001 - 08:00:29 GMT