On Sep 17, 2:40 pm, "Stephen P. King" <stephe...@charter.net> wrote:

> Hi Craig,
>      What if the "state of zero latency change synchronization across
> space" idea where recast into notions of minimal latency between the
> concurrent sequencing of multiple observers?

Yes. Although it might be saying that the more people who watch
something the longer it takes, which would be bad. But yes, I like
minimal latency between synched perceivers instead of zero latency.

> Space would be defined in
> terms of the differences between observational content parametrized by
> variations in 'point of view".

Yup, yup. Perceptual inertial frames. Sensorimotive quantum waveform

>      This would further cement the relationships between the notions of
> time and space in our collective phenomena, among other implications.
> The idea is to use the substract out the anthopological content of the
> concept of an observer and is that remained as the basic block of our
> explanatory models. This is what Leibniz attempted with his Monadology.

Right. We couldn't have perception on an anthropological scale if
there were not sensorimotive relationships on other scales. It is
possible to generalize that phenomenology with a model that recognizes
both the invariance among and variance between different perceptual
relativity (PR) inertial frames.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to