wave function explained in terms of tao.special f uwot

[jackles]

tao is unmoving nonlocality that has never happen but creates the location.the yin and yan represent the a field of happening events in general flux.the brain is a yin yan local product with a tao subconsiousness.tao consciousness does not look.the yin yan product looks as a part of brain function.its this difference that is the cause of wave function collaps.yin
and yan are local fiction to the tao fact.heinsebergs uncertaintiy principle is a tao fact in fiction.?

[uwot]

tao is unmoving nonlocality that has never happen but creates the location.

In terms of ontology (what exists), it sounds like you think there is some 'stuff' the everything we experience exists 'in'. The location only means anything if it is relative to something else. If there were an infinite universe made of uniform 'stuff', and something happened to one bit of it, how would you describe where it happened? If that's what you mean, I agree.

the yin and yan represent the a field of happening events in general flux.

I don't really know enough about Chinese philosophy to comment. The flux sounds a bit like Heraclitus, if the universe is actually made of some stuff, then it is constantly changing. In that sense, if the 'general flux' corresponds to the 'stuff' above, there may be 'a field of happening events'.

the brain is a yin yan local product with a tao subconsiousness.

So the brain is a product of the field of happening events. I think in one sense that is almost certainly true. I'm not clear about how tao sub consciousness fits with "tao is unmoving nonlocality that has never happen but creates the location." I think all of us are trying to make sense of a very confusing world, jackles. It's difficult for us to understand each other sometimes, because very often, we give different names to the same ideas and it can take ages to work out that we are talking about the same thing. I get the feeling that what you and I think are quite similar, but we describe it very differently. I reckon that's enough to get on with, what do you think?

[jackles]

yeah reckon its like you say.it only takes a small diffrence on description like you say to send it spinning out of understanding.