TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Sat Oct 20, 2018 8:30 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:50 pm
Elaborate further.
My current stance is what I call a mirror function, it is in the mathematics section and you should take note of the latter updated pages.
If language attempts to describe the world, and the arrow of time goes in one direction (as we currently experience it), then any phenomenon we attempt to explain can be described as a series of events e.g time-series (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_series ). Think - movie. 24 frames (descriptions?) per second.
Language is like a movie: "Today I went to the shop and bought some icecream"
This sentence is a movie at a time-scale of 3 frames per hour.
Frame 1 (sets context): Today
Frame 2: Me walking/driving to some shop
Frame 3: Me buying icecream
It is similar to what physicists call 'world line':
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_line
Calculus is the mathematical language for describing change in respect to some variable. In this case - change in respect to time.
Agreed...but I have to make a few remarks considering the directed nature of phenomena is not limited to "time" alone, and can reference a form of consistency as self-directed timeless movement where all "being" (whether physical and material or abstract and mental) exist fundamentally as 1 moment approximated through time.
The premise for this "consistency" or nature of "absolute" truth comes from a perspective where we merely "quantify" everything as "1".
This leads to questions about the nature of cause.
****Bear with the "( )" marks.
The series of events in time necessitates a premise where the events are structures. For instance if I view one event, lets say a cat playing with a ball (A), progressing towards another event, lets say me feeding the cat (B), these events are effectively instantaneous "structures" of time where the event as a cause leads to the event as effect.
(A) → (B)
Now if I break down each structure further, where the cat playing with the ball (A), is broken down to the cat looking at the ball (Aa) and the cat moving towards the ball (Ab), we are left with the same cause and effect structure which composes the structure. So each structure of time in itself is deterministic in the respect is exists as the manifestation of one set of movements towards the other which gives foundation to the structure of time as a series of movements in itself.
(((Aa)→(Ab))(A)) → (((Ba) → (Bb))(B))
In turn all effects act as causes in themselves as evidenced by (((Ba) → (Bb)→(Bc))(B)):
(((Aa)→(Ab)→(Ac))(A)) → (((Ba) → (Bb)→(Bc))(B)) → (((Ca) → (Cb)→(Cc))(C))
Now the event as a structure observes that the cause cannot exist without the effect, as the effect is a cause in itself. Hence what we understand of effect is the repetition of cause through itself where cause exists as an everpresent median as structure.
So where cause exists as effect, the effect is in itself is a cause that exists through cause and is approximated. Hence the cause cannot exist without the effect which in itself is a cause, cause is merely directed through itself as itself as:
with the premise of
(((A) → (B)) ↔ ((A) ← (B))) ∴ ((A) ⇄ (B))
Where this "therefore" statement observing a dual symmetrical "because" nature:
(((A) → (B)) ↔ ((A) ← (B))) ∵ ((A) ⇄ (B))
With (B) ↔ ((A) ⇄ (A))
And
(((Aa)⇄(Ab)⇄(Ac))(A)) ⇄ (((Ba) ⇄ (Bb)⇄(Bc))(B)) ⇄ (((Ca) ⇄ (Cb)⇄(Cc))(C))
In these respects all "cause" is an everpresent median that is fundamentally self-directed through itself as itself with the "multiplicity" of these "structures" as "cause" being an approximation of the 1 cause conducive to a dual form of randomness as absences of structure. In these respects all structures as an extension of an ever present cause that exists through itself as itself with any form of multiplicity observes all structure as an extension of this 1 cause while dually observing time as premised in "localized" movement as 1 directional linear movement.
However if this "cause" is directed to itself through itself ad-infinitum it becomes 1 in itself as it becomes constant. Hence we are left with the premise of this "cause" being everything as Unified and 1 through pure "movement" and fundamentally sizeless as it alone exists. Under these terms we are left with a purely theoretical 1d point which is necessary but paradoxically can never be proven as it is its own standard of truth and the foundation of all "proof" as pure "symmetry" and "order".
Under these terms all directed movement exists from this 1d point that is everpresent. All "causal structures" under these terms are an approximate of the "1" quantitatively and "Unity" qualitatively. In these respects all "phenomena" are a multiplicity of "points" as "point" in itself where all structure exist as cause.
Now the mirror function threads, preferably the latter parts, give more definition to this from a quantitative perspective considering the standard linear expression (or quantitative "sentence" if one wants to play with words) 1+2=3 is merely a 1 directional projective statement and changes when observed as directed towards itself simultaneously as ⨀(+1,+2) ⧂ (+1,*1,+2,*2,+3,*3,+4,*4).
****This statement may have to be elaborated on considering the localization of symbolic phenomena such as "1" , "+", "2", "=" and "3" results in a different observation of symmetry compared to the same localities are inevitably observed as "connected" such as "+1" and "+2".
The same nature applies to qualities.
We can observe this premise in strictly 1 directional linear terms as existing through "time" where this intradimensional self-maintainance is observed under a particular nature of 1 directional Linearism (as a "part" of the whole with the "whole" being all directions as 1). So the statement of:
(((Aa)⇄(Ab)⇄(Ac))(A)) ⇄ (((Ba) ⇄ (Bb)⇄(Bc))(B)) ⇄ (((Ca) ⇄ (Cb)⇄(Cc))(C))
Changes to:
(((Aa)→(Ab)→(Ac))(A)) → (((Ba) → (Bb)→ (Bc))(B)) → (((Ca) → (Cb)→(Cc))(C))
where (A), (B), (C) are means of movement in themselves and inevitable result in not just a "causal structure" as (ABC):
((((Aa)⇄(Ab)⇄(Ac))(A)) ⇄ (((Ba) ⇄ (Bb)⇄(Bc))(B)) ⇄ (((Ca) ⇄ (Cb)⇄(Cc))(C)))(ABC)
but effectively a localization of movement as well through:
((((Aa)→(Ab)→(Ac))(A)) → (((Ba) → (Bb)→ (Bc))(B)) → (((Ca) → (Cb)→(Cc))(C)))(ABC)
leading to:
In these respects (ABC) exists as both a "causal structure" and "acausal progressive median as locality" considering:
(ABC)→(EFG)→(HIJ)
Where the "Point of Origin" of (ABC) effectively is directed back to itself through "infinity".
((ABC)→(EFG)→(HIJ)→ ∞) → (ABC)
This nature of "localization" not only necessitates a "timezone" in and of itself, but existing of and composing further timezones:
Now the question occurs how this relates to language. Language maintains this self-directed nature where the letter forms the letter through the letter, word through word, sentence through sentence, etc. While we observe the directional qualities of language as manifested through time as being 1 directional so to speak, as language is an extension of a cultures perception of movement (hence "time"), a form of "replication as mirroring" occurs as evidenced by the properties of definition observed in a dictionary.
However where the letter "A" progresses to "B" which progresses to "C", "A" is fundamentally directed back to itself through these letters giving premise to words. All words are the cycling of letters so to speak, with these cycles resulting in words and the cycling of words resulting in sentences, etc.
The coherency of this cycling, considering "A" may cycle to some gibberish word as "acrvtra" and another word such as "acre", observes:
1) Language is formed through time.
2) What is deemed as "gibberish" and "not-gibberish" is determined by the connectivity the word has to a phenomena.
3) This connectivity demands a form of alternation between the observer and the phenomena, the observer and observers, and the observers and the phenomena.
