Beautiful not being a bad reception either. On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 3:54:18 PM UTC, archytas wrote: > > Thank you for that Hope - so much clearer than Andrew's original version. > Suffering another day without Gabby, I went in search of solace to Hope > Sunshine's web site. How 'Breezy' it all was. I nearly died, even though > the sugar was all virtual. > > Thanks Andrew - I suppose we are still pretty clueless what energy is, > though know not to pick up a live wire. One of my first reads as a > research was a book called 'Patterns of Plausible Inference' - so > complicated my head spun with the idea I could never research anything. > Hope is obviously so impressed she has set it off in her own > deconstructive simulacrum, fond as she is of copying copies and being a > mirror image - http://www.sunshinehope.com/ - if only Gabby was here and > I could free myself of a ten-year trivia diary preventing the important > quest for find her Ark (for the best love stories must have trivial > obstructions - like WW2 in some Soviet wit - or we'd have no literature to > read). > > There is much in what Andrew says here, if not taken in mean spirit. The > indirect observation of unobservable things is a major topic in the > philosophy of science. One can go back to Chauncy Wright -'unobservables > postulated by science are “for the purpose of giving a material or visual > basis to the phenomena and empirical laws of life in general'. There is a > form of synthesis and this is always important in trying cyclic thought. > One can quibble on assumptions and conclusions, but anything can be so > picked apart by vultures. > > I just agree really - patterns, some sort of attempt to grasp what many of > us think about and have no certain answers to. Machines are certainly > telling us much we though uniquely human can be simulated as 'seen' a they > operate in flexible logics. We often hope our children will 'have it > better than us'. A creator might want this too. Machines are now > simulating creation, though we might still be in garbage in garbage out. > Patterns we can't see do emerge from machine abilities to keep iterating > simple ideas with a myriad of numbers, perhaps Sunshine's subtle point > here. How convenient an eclipse is coming on Friday. > > Observation 8 is referred to as simplexity. I think imagination is in a > cycle of outside-in-inside-out and perhaps Molly's 'coming again through > it'. What is in things is a matter of a lot of consideration, which goes > into another pattern tangle as Andrew suggests - tensor equations being an > example.. Dog walk time here. Any attempt like this comes up short, but > the triumph is probably creating some frame to think about for others. > Almost a life-world Andrew, not left in secret. Thanks indeed. > > > > On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 11:03:11 AM UTC, Hope Sunshine wrote: > > Beautiful, Andrew! :-) > > Am Dienstag, 17. März 2015 11:29:26 UTC+1 schrieb andrew vecsey: > > Dear members. > I had an idea that I have been thinking about for some time. I think that > this topic is a relevant place to share my ideas. It involves "imagination" > and I hope you will share your thought on it. It starts with some > assumptions and using observations it leads to some conclusions. It > proposes that god is an artist and that we are his works of art. > > *Assumptions:* > 1. The golden middle defined as being between 2 extremes is where > things operate optimally. > 2. The laws of chaos is in the golden middle between chaos and > order. > 3. Our universe operates under the laws of chaos which contains > patterns within patters, all similar yet never exactly the same. > 4. We humans find ourselves in the middle of it all. > > *Observations:* > 1. Nature operates under the laws of chaos which shows patterns and > cycles of patterns. > 2. Nature is in the middle point as far as size is concerned > between atoms and galaxies. > 3. Matter is condensed energy. It can be likened to “things” and > “thoughts”. > 4. Imagination is thought that comes from outside. They are ideas > or intuitions that appear without thinking. > 5. Imagination precedes thinking and thinking precedes creating > things. > 6. Imagining is faster than thinking and thinking is faster than > creating things. > 7. Our creations are built on already existing things and are > superior or an improvement of what already exists. > 8. All complex things that are not understood can be simplified by > analogies that are understood. > > *Conclusions:* > 1. > > ...
-- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
