Re: Quantum questions !

From: Kenneth Van Oost (
Date: Sat May 26 2001 - 20:58:29 BST

  • Next message: "Re: Quantum questions !"

    Received: by id UAA22857 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Sat, 26 May 2001 20:22:45 +0100
    Message-ID: <001901c0e61e$53fbeb80$209ebed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <>
    To: <>
    Cc: "dinij" <>
    References: <3B0EABE4.18352.2ABDE5@localhost>
    Subject: Re: Quantum questions !
    Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 21:58:29 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Precedence: bulk

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: <>
    To: <>

    Hi joe,
    Thanks for answering.
    Something went wrong with the list I suppose.
    But that is now in the clear I hope !?
    Anyway, you wrote...

    > Memes have not to do with the matter/energy in which they are
    > encoded, or even the code itself, so much as the signification
    > which is encoded therein. Otherwise, the entire concepts of
    > memetic hooks and filters would be incoherent, as these devices
    > disciminate on the basis of semantics (the meaning within the
    > message).

    << I just want to understand this issue better....

    << If memes have nothing to do with the dichotomy matter/ energy in which
    they are encoded,... if memes are not/ or have not any matter or energy
    of themselves... what are they made of !?
    Out of what they do exist !? I think this is a fair question to ask.
    You will probably answer, memes are made out of info.
    Ok, I go along with that, but out of what consist info !?
    Is it matter or energy or what !?

    You write, that otherwise, the entire concepts of memetic hooks and filters
    would be incoherent, as these devices disciminate on the basis of semantics.

    << Wouldn 't that be just the question where memetics is all about_ how
    and why these hooks and filters are not the same for everybody !?
    Even granted that they rely on semantics_ for each of us a word/ an ex-
    pression etc. can mean something different even that there is a general
    social/ political or cultural consensus about these !?
    IMHO, we have particle and relationship.

    I agree with the fact that memes are just seen as " meaning- holding-
    entities ",
    so in a way to give an interaction or a relationship a meaning,..a
    So, can we say that memes provide the meaning for/ of a bosonic conden-
    sate, seen here as the probably unit of consciousness, in a quantum social
    way of speaking !?
    That is in a way, any given meme(plex) we know of, is a probability for
    investigation and at the same time is ' definite ' just because of the lack
    proof that the meme(ples) we know is the final outcome of any given evolved
    process !?

    Is a meme a (semantic) expression of the definite outcome of one probability
    by which a Bose- Einstein condensate collapsed !?
    And are all the different ' memes ' we all use to determine the same odd
    thing out, not just definite outcomes of a multitude of probabilities by
    a multitude of Bose- Einstein condensates collapsed !?

    How on earth we go from the quantum mechanical world to the reality
    wherein memes exist is something of a different matter, I know, but just
    for the sake of the argument...

    << I think that the concept of hooks and filters is in anyway incoherent,
    because, like I said_ you can 't to the full extend grasp in what ways
    click; and for what ever reason they click, and in what ways they/ or we
    give/ experience/ determine/ interpretate (the) meaning to and for their /
    actions and behavior.
    Can we say, that memes in a sense act as they could have (a) Bosonic
    behavior !?
    After all, the last few months I have tried to advocate my point of view
    at several occasions ( Lamarck/ Darwin and how a Lamarckian reaction
    falls into, collapse or what ever word I used to get my message across, into
    Darwinian definitions/ structures/ traits and habits ( my fractal- idea
    culture and society)) and with all do respect to everyone, what is advocated
    in social quantum theory comes close to what I have said upon this list.

    IMO, but I have to check this further, much further, I think that memetics
    and quantum theory can be linked.
    IMO, an idea, any single meme out there appears to exist in a multitude
    of states ( any individual has his or her own ' idea' about something),
    somebody, or something tips this into a definite outcome ( a definition,
    proof of any kind, a behavior). And still, IM- most HO, that goes for
    any form of our existence.
    Society and culture are just the general outcome of a multitude of definite
    outcomes/ behaviors/ traits and habits.

    What I have learned so far about quantum theory, is that it lacks an experi-
    mental bias, can memetics be the one !?
    Or vice versa, can quantum theory be the background for finally seeing
    the first meme ( or its existence anyway) !?
    After all, we only see/ determine/ experience any meme or its outcome in
    any given social and cultural behavior/ trait and habit we have, a meme in
    itself is not yet been observed, well the outcome...

    Thanks for your time,


    ( I am, because we are) trying to get some insight

    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 26 2001 - 20:26:28 BST