[Fis] New Discussion Session--Complexity & feedback

[Karl Javorszky]

References:

   1. Javorszky, K. (2024). Liaisons Among Symbols. Curr Res Stat Math,
   3(3), 01-08
   2. Yi (义) in Confucianism <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://confuciuspedia.com/yi/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RwkQNhLWukcEuuPGlFw5zNkhU8fuwJ36ul4VKtEanEw6KS4Pi2wAzbvbVUyp_GBVxMCogVtEkTNvbZWE63ZH6CTfOFw$ >,
   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://confuciuspedia.com/yi/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RwkQNhLWukcEuuPGlFw5zNkhU8fuwJ36ul4VKtEanEw6KS4Pi2wAzbvbVUyp_GBVxMCogVtEkTNvbZWE63ZH6CTfOFw$ 


Am Fr., 1. Nov. 2024 um 15:18 Uhr schrieb Karl Javorszky <
karl.javorszky at gmail.com>:

> *Explaining the previously unexplainable*
>
> 20241101
>
> *Part II.  **The Oriental way of creating context for the observation*
>
>    1. *Finding common context in the conversation*
>
> Prof. Zhensong shares the opinion of Terrence, expressed a few months ago
> here, that science is what scientists of the day agree to call science.
>
>    1. Social coherence maintained by reaffirming common emotions
>
> The essence of a religious festival is that people share a common
> experience. The sharing of emotions in a common catharsis has actually very
> little to do with details of which religious figures did or suffered
> specifically what. Science festivals obey the same mechanics of rules of
> social psychology. The stricture of adherence to rules and beliefs is
> paramount, e.g., the requirement that a submission necessarily includes
> citations of research in the field discussed. (This is a subtle marketing
> device to keep new entrants away. He who has no ancestors and predecessors
> he can refer to, such may not enter the brotherhood. Guarantee that people
> who think up new stuff will remain unheard.)
>
> Taken as a spectacle in the field of social psychology, the value of a
> contribution to science is indeed correlated with the echo and omnipresence
> of communications relating to that subject.
>
> The intrinsic value of the subject that society has agreed upon as valid
> science may not exactly correlate with the socio-cultural reception of the
> idea. In Europe we have the folklore of the change to heliocentric basic
> setup and how that played out as a social process. This ignorant person
> knows of no comparable tale in Chinese history. One has found Laozi telling
> Confucius “…do not assume that you are wiser than others, and as a subject
> of a king, do not assume that you are nobler than others.”
>
> The summary to point (a) is that the extent of social jubilation on the
> perception of a new idea is not a reliable predictor of the intrinsic value
> of the idea.
>
>    2. The object and its picture
>
> The idea that information has been invented as a subject of intellectual
> study a few decades ago is comparable to the idea that a fever was invented
> by Lord Kelvin who gave the phenomenon an exact frame of reference.
>
> The savants who were paid well for reading the flight of eagles, just like
> their colleagues, the temple priestesses at Delphi, sold real, useful,
> actionable information to their customers. The two tips on the end of a
> snake’s tongue deliver information to the snake on the optimal direction
> towards the prey, by contrasting the differing intensities of molecules’
> densities in the air. One may see in the snake’s technique of sniffing by a
> forked tongue the epitome of information processing, information being
> defined colloquially as “the extent of being otherwise” (and formally by
> using cycles 3, 6 of the reorder *ab ↔ ba* of the etalon collection as
> carriers of deviance of two related extents as Unit of Information. [1]).
>
> This sub-monster has already been found, caged, measured, and named by
> FIS, in the last ~ 10 years. The sub-monster ‘information’ is a part of the
> great intellectual monster of ‘life,’ of which we are presently assembling
> a picture in our head. Information has an objective existence like
> electricity, magnetism and gravity, Information is caused by the artefact
> of counting entities in the foreground without taking care that we use two
> slightly differing backgrounds afore which we count the contents of the
> foreground. The very slight relative mis-calibrations of the two
> backgrounds create a great many of incongruences, limits, levels, etc. The
> general idea is to call the totality of the relative deviations of two
> combinatorial functions ‘information.’ That would be a natural unit, as a
> concept. (The underlying philosophical problem is that it is false that ‘=’
> and ‘≠’ are nothing but the other side of the other, but rather it is true
> that both each have their own logical existence, which does not spring
> immediately to the eye, the relative inexactitude being roughly *10-92 %.*
> )
>
>    3. Why involve classical thinkers in today’s problems
>
> The inclusion of classical thinkers in a discussion about the philosophy
> of information is an exercise in futility for someone from a culture three
> thousand years older than the Western one (if there is such at all). We are
> still at the stage where individuals make up a world wherein individual
> cases are free to discuss whether and how they find the groups they belong
> to. The Chinese concept of the pre-axiomatic existence of a group, within
> which elements can become individuals, maybe, appears to me deeper than the
> idea that individuals first exist out of which groups are created. So, in
> the West, we need to go back and explicitly leave a Void or Nihil which
> never started, or has long ago finished, existing in China.
>
> It is usually practical to listen to what the Greeks say about rules of
> thinking. They discussed the facts, and the implications of the facts, that
> things are often otherwise than expected.
>
>    4. Not only is the grass greener, but science is also deeper across
>    the road
>
> There is absolutely no need to visit other scientific festivals. If anyone
> by any chance had solved the information theory behind biology, the news
> would reach you in any case. Title pages would scream „Number line not
> really straight! Hills and valleys along the number line! Ongoing fights
> reported on the subject of “not-enough – too-many” among the natural
> numbers!“.
>
> Furthermore, that person who finds a rational solution to the wonders of
> biology would have to contact this insignificant person, because the
> quintessence of the story has already been entered in the Oeis.org/A242615.
> (The Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences is the patent office
> repository of anything having to do with sequences, and the DNA is a
> sequence.)
>
>    2. *Retelling the story by using Chinese terms*
>
> As to telling the story in a Chinese set of contexts : please excuse the
> barbarian simplicity.
>
> Laozi speaks at great length about three main points of a well-ordered
> kingdom.
>
> a.      Li
>
> Li is the measure of order outside of the individual members of society.
> The objective facts, visible for everyone. The Li account shows how well
> the subjects obey the rules that govern them. These realized works are the
> results of the inner dispositions of the subjects, which rules they follow
> the most willingly.
>
> In terms of the etalon collection, Li is the collection of matches *{q}
> is on place {r}*.
>
> b.     Ren
>
> Ren deals with the inner harmony within each of the subjects of the
> kingdom. If the subject is loyal in proper proportion to his ancestors, his
> lords, the kingdom, his family, his village, his peers, etc., then this
> subject leads a moral life. A moral person does not enter contradictory
> loyalties and maintains his integrity while being also open to new
> endeavors, everything in measured serenity.
>
> In terms of the etalon collection, Ren are the *136 *individual data
> depositories (formerly called ‘elements’) and the *46.260 *basic
> collectives (cycles of the etalon collection, indexed on the *from ↔ to*
> parameters of the reorder the cycle is a member of). The data include also
> the lien values that bind each part of the personality of the subject to
> its romantic partners (co-members of the cycle, loyalty groups).
>
>    3. Yi
>
> “The standard of Yi lies in conformity with Ren and Li. Therefore, Yi
> means conformity to all moral standards” [2] The works of the subjects
> shall be moral if the sub jects are moral. The congruence between what the
> subjects do and how the subjects are educated is measuring the efficiency
> of the educational mechanisms of the society, therefore the inner structure
> of the society’s state of order. The world of facts and the world of the
> soul need to be both harmonious (moral) in order that society be harmonious
> (moral). Yi has two main aspects among which its dialectic moves: stricter
> adherence to rules against higher immediate benefits.
>
> In terms of the etalon collection, information comes into play in the form
> of Yi. If both the possible works that the subjects can do, and the
> potentials of the subjects to do such works, were in balance, Yi would not
> be necessary. The fact that the two measurement systems are in a slight
> deviance makes a mental construct necessary that establishes how much the
> Li side of the assembly agrees to the Ren readings of the same assembly.
> The difference is that Li is counted in units that in themselves (as such)
> are of no properties, but have a structure of order, which is based on the
> units of Li being equal among each other; while Ren is based on the
> constituents of one actor’s loyalties being intrinsically different among
> each other, within the same actor, ordered only by their extent. The
> adherence – benefit conflict is understood as variants of optimization on
> shorter or longer terms, assembling more immediate, smaller realities or
> build reserves toward a longer and more ambitious reality.
>
> The interplay of Li, Ren and Yi can only function, if Li and Ren both use
> such units in their accounting which they present to Yi which Yi can
> understand and act on. This means that both Li and Ren have to relate to
> their own central elements and communicate to each other and to Yi *how
> usual *resp *how deviating *their respective morality is in the moment.
> Communication among the subsystems happens in terms of *how much
> deviating to the expected,* which is the definition of information. The
> artefact of not relating the two statements of Li and Ren each to their own
> central elements, but to a fiction external to both is causing many of the
> manifold bias applied science reports in the most diverse fields. The
> geometry of the interplay emerges in which two similar, but not identical
> 3D structures relate to twins of two 2D planes which are similar but not
> identical. In fact, such a geometry can easily be drawn if one rotates the
> expression *a + b = c *and fills the places created by the rotation with
> values from the reading in the form of *2(a+b) *of the same sentence. The
> liaison system among symbols is by its nature romantic, because so many
> different continuations of the story are created that one can encounter the
> simplest plots mixed with patterned, repetitive stories and developments of
> high suspense, big dramas, and monotonous, predictable certainties
> similarly.
>
> At the close of this essay, may this academically non-recognized person
> politely offer to you a hypothesis: Assuming that the ancient observation
> is true, that the more usual an object is, the nearer to the middle of an
> assembly of its peers it is to be found, and the coordinates of the
> archetype of a logical 3D space being *x: b-2a, y: a-2b, z: a+b*, as one
> finds when rotating the etalon collection, would it be a possible
> hypothesis in your judgement, that the so-called *astrophysical jets*,
> which appear to us as a number line crossing in the middle of a plane,
> appear to depict the *idle state *of an assembly yet to gain its
> properties? The jet’s contents have all and each a value of *b-2a = a-2b
> = 0, *while their *a+b *value greatly varies. The plane of diversity is
> crossed by the line of similarity, a way to order a collection which Nature
> appears not disinclined to use at times, namely in cases where nothing else
> is remarkable about the collection. The jets with their collars are a
> picture of *a+b=c & 2(a+b)*.
> Here end the irrelevant notices about some of the forms of the bias,
> caused by the artefact of using two different backgrounds for counting
> appearances of the same assembly.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20241101/f51de7ea/attachment-0001.html>