New version of summary:

On Jul 1, 8:44 am, Craig Weinberg <> 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://
> :
>   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
> 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.
> (mural:
>        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/
> change.
>         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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

  • SEE TOE Craig Weinberg
    • Re: SEE TOE Craig Weinberg

Reply via email to