New version of summary:
On Jul 1, 8:44 am, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, I was recommended to check out this group and before I really get
> into it, I wanted to post some information about my ideas in their
> pristine state, and then I can relax and let my mind be invaded by
> what the other members here have been talking about. I would recommend
> to the reader as well, that they try to, as much as possible, come to
> this information from a completely neutral perspective, ie, as if they
> were hearing an description of the cosmos for the first time rather
> than putting it into existing philosophical categories (again, 'as
> much as possible')... because I think that there's a chance that I'm
> saying something new here.
> Here is an executive summary of my executive summary (http://
> s33light.org/SEEES) :
> A. Semiotic Cosmology
> 1. All phenomena can be described in terms of patterns, but not
> all patterns can be understood as objects.
> 2. Objects are a second-hand experience.
> 3. Sense is a fundamental, universal property (cosmos has to make
> sense before we can make sense out of it)
> B. Proposed Unified Electromagnetic-Sensorimotive Topology
> 1. Rather than consciousness being 'caused' electromagnetically,
> consciousness is an elaboration of awareness>feeling>sense>detection,
> which is the "interior" manifold/topology of electromagnetic patterns
> within matter.
> 2. Electromagnetism does not exist as a freestanding phenomenon
> in space, but rather it and all forms of energy are experiences of
> matter - telesemantically shared sensorimotive experiences which are,
> to varying degrees participatory and defined by the interference
> pattern between the public electromagnetic and private/shared
> sensorimotive rather than purely passive/deterministic.
> 3. It could be said that Electro-sensory is like the Read/Input
> privileged format, Motive-magnetic is the Write/Output privileged
> format. (Not necessarily strictly true, but useful in relating the two
> topologies..you could use magnetic or electrical stimulation to push
> changes to consciousness in the brain I would imagine).
> 4. The entire Standard Model becomes obsolete as an authoritative
> cosmology. Rather than a Quantum Limit, we run into a Copernican
> Limit, beyond which the purely exterior topology becomes inappropriate
> and we need to re-imagine Quantum Observations as something more like
> shared atomic moods.
> C. ACME-ΩMMM Continuum
> 1. Human philosophical and psychological perspectives can be
> organized meaningfully through a spectrum ranging from extremely
> literal/generic/objective to the figurative/proprietary/subjective.
> 2. In the center of the spectrum, phenomena can be described as
> mundane and straightforward, with the difference between the interior
> essential topology (i.e. Mind) and the exterior existential topology
> (Matter) is maximally divergent and dimorphic (yet most intertwined).
> Think of this as the crossover point in a figure eight.
> 3. The 'ends' of the continuum are opposite: profound and
> esoteric (think Psychedelic Shamanism on the subjective end, or
> Quantum Physics on the objective). The two ends meet in the ineffable,
> monastic Zen of self-realization/annihilation.
> D. Perception is Relativity
> 1. Relativity orders physical effects into inertial frames,
> while perception organizes sensorimotive gestalts through experiential
> frames of reference.
> 2. Perception is the private, signifying, perspective-twisted
> subjectivity correlate to public, a-signifying, generic objectivity.
> E. Space, Time, and Gravity are Void
> 1. Space is a logical projection of perception-relativity to
> describe the relation between the exterior of phenomena. If you
> imagine a universe composed of an ideal sphere and nothing more, there
> is no possibility of externally realizable movement (since there is
> nothing to compare it to as a frame of reference). Space is nothing
> more than semantic orientation.
> 2. Time is an interior logic of subjective experience, an
> aggregate measure of 'change' (semantic comparison of one condition
> and another remembered or recorded and observed condition) modeled in
> a linear fashion. It has no existence of it's own beyond our sense of
> sequential causality (which evaporates predictably under altered
> states of consciousness - dreams, drugs, trance, etc). We are the ones
> who interpret the digits on the clocks and the calender squares as a
> shared temporal text. In reality, there are no days, just
> astrophysical orientations woven together by our memories and
> monitoring of regular oscillating patterns.
> 3. Like space, time can only be as discrete or continuous as
> the substances and processes we use to measure it. What we are
> measuring is not an objective condition, but our own normalized
> intersubjective detection of relations between patterns of energy/
> 4. Gravity is the evanescence of electromagnetic-sensorimotive
> momentum. It's matter wanting to return to the singularity. It's the
> entropy which collapses the projection of spacetime.
> Let me know what you think. This is sort of something I've been
> thinking of for almost 40 years, so I would encourage any reader to
> really let it sink in. I know my writing style may be offputting to
> some, but please try to get to the ideas underneath here. This isn't
> about me being right, I really could care less, I'm just interested in
> finding out how exactly I'm wrong. Otherwise I'm tempted to proclaim
> that this worldview takes a significant step toward resolving a lot of
> timeless philosophical questions as well as contemporary conundrums in
> physics and neurology. Delusions of grandeur? Probably. What's the
> harm in considering it though?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at