Theos-Talk Archives (June 2002 Message tt00033)

Bart:

At 07:28 PM 6/5/02 -0400, you wrote:
> Eldon B Tucker wrote:
> > Some things are of a continuous nature, like the
> > electromagnetic spectrum. But with our senses,
> > we perceive one portion of it as heat, another
> > as sound, and a third as light. In our experience
> > of life, these are discrete senses.
>
> Bite into an onion while holding your nose. The senses are not 
> all that
> discrete.
With the normal wiring of our brains, the senses
are distinct. We can experience something with
more than one sense, but the senses are independent
observations of what we're doing. The exception is
with synaesthesia. One web page of information on it
defines it as, "a neurological rarity in which two or
more senses are connected. For example music might be
'seen' in colours and patterns, taste may be seen in
shapes, letters may have textures, etc." Further
information is at: <http://synaesthesia.fws1.com/>.

My thinking is that there is one direct, primal
sense that we have in experiencing things, and
over it the possibility of many varying and
distinct specialized senses. This would be the
an analogy with the senses to the idea of our
root or unqualified consciousness over which we've
developed many specialized centers of consciousness.

> > Other things are
> > of a discrete nature like the number and type of
> > particles in a particular type of atom,
>
> If you're still living in the 19th century. In modern physics, that
> isn't quite the case.
Chemistry hasn't changed. The number of each type of
particle making up a particular atom is the same as
always. There is a specific count of each.

Light used to be thought of as a wave back then. Then
they realized it was composed of discrete particles,
photons. Then it got trickier when they realized it
could be one or the other depending upon how you looked
at it, with quantum physics.

> > or
> > particular states like alive/dead or even something
> > as simple as what channel on television that
> > we might be watching.
>
> But a channel on television is a human-made arbitrary division of a
> continuous phenomenon.
And being on planet earth is a cosmos-made arbitrary
division of the continuous phenomenon of space. We're
on a particular planet rather than floating somewhere
in interstellar vacuum. The idea is one of relativity.
Our place in the world and our existence is relative
to our home world. There is no absolute coordinate
system that tracks where we are in an absolute sense,
as the galaxy races through space, and our solar system
within it, and our earth orbits the sun and spins on
its axis. We have no way of ever knowing where we
are in terms of absolute coordinates or position in
some ultimate notion of overall space.

I'd suggest that everything that exists and can be
observed or experienced falls under some form of
arbitrary division of some greater homogeneous unity,
primal material, or root consciousness.

> > If you have a specific number of continents on
> > the earth, separated by ocean, you're dealing
> > with something discrete.
>
> Then Europe, Asia, and Africa were, until the Suez Canal was dug, one
> continent, but, when the Suez Canal was dug, Africa suddenly became a
> separate continent? Did the Panama Canal make North and South America
> separate continents? When the Bering Strait freezes, does that make
> North America temporarily part of Asia?
The number can change, and depending upon how you
judge ambiguous cases, your count can vary. But we
have naturally distinct places that are so without
regard to the arbitrary divisions that we make.

These divisions were created by the living earth,
and are a different class of divisions than those
we make when we draw up maps and outline the boundaries
of nations and have different laws and customs in
each.

> > The same might be said
> > of the globes of the Earth Chain. They are
> > discrete places where you could exist, each on
> > a different plane or subplane.
>
> Or, they all exist simultaneously as a continuity; what we call
> "globes" depends on our current level of perception.
The globes would be the discrete places where we
exist, each with its own "mother nature" and
ecology both visible and invisible and its objective
and subjective areas. The planes, though, correspond
more to your picture of a continuous scale. The
globes are positioned on different planes and are
all tending upward or downward depending upon the
trend of cyclic evolution at the time.

> > Another aspect of assigning a discrete value
> > to a particular sight or sound is with the
> > letters of the alphabet, written down on
> > paper, or specific sounds that learned as
> > words and constitute spoken language. The
> > conscious of language represents an imposition
> > of a sense of discreteness onto something
> > otherwise continuous and arbitrary in
> > nature -- the spectrum of audible sound
> > and visible markings on a piece of paper.
>
> But still arbitrary divisions made by humanity.
Yes, but which embodies intelligence for us in a
way that listening to the hiss of a radio telescope
just cannot replace.

Starting with something that appears continuous
and without distinguishing characteristics, we
make distinctions, give them names, and build on
them. We develop schools of music, art, mathematics,
and literature.

I'd see the whole process of things coming into
existence in this matter. Things are build up
upon preexisting primal materials, giving new
form, meaning, and characteristics where once
there was none. It arises in the consciousness
of those doing it. They have added something
new to existence. And others can come along and
build upon what they have done making something
yet higher.

> > It's also possible to view how gradual changes
> > along a continuous scale result in different sets
> > of discrete states. This is illustrated in the
> > bifurcation curve. Starting out on the X Axis
> > at zero and increasing, the state goes from
> > zero (inactivity) to a climbing single value.
>
> A continuity can be defined as an infinite number of discrete states.
But a continuity doesn't really exist in some
actual object. It's like Zeno's paradox. You keep
getting 50 percent closer to the wall but it's
said you'll never reach it. No matter how close
you get, there are an infinite number of further
distances to travel to get there, each 1/2 of
the previous distance.

The paradox breaks down when we consider the
granular and imperfect nature of the universe.
Approaching the wall, you reach it. You are
there for all effective purposes. The measurable
remaining distance is now zero.

If you draw a circle, it's never mathematically
perfect for the same reason. There's always some
irregularities, based upon the precision of your
media. With better media, you approximate it better,
but you never actually draw it. (It looks better on
a 1400 x 1050 computer screen than a 640 x 480
resolution screen, but no matter the resolution, it
falls short.)

When we get back to things like space and time,
we may be able to define a unit of measurement
so small that nothing smaller can be observable.
Things of finer measurement just do not exist,
as far as our world is concerned.

The theosophical scheme has a fractal nature to
schemes of existence. Each provides the backdrop
upon which lessor ones can arise. At one scale,
one scheme might be called the known universe,
both visible and invisible. A scheme at a much
smaller scale would include our earth chain.

Each scheme of existence is the effect of a
being coming into life in some greater world.
That being's life acts as the organizing
principle that draws together the raw materials
of the greater world to form something new,
something alive. The primal material that our
universe was drawn out of comes from a yet
greater scheme of things.

Because life's not perfect, everything's
an approximation and there arise limits as to what
can or cannot be. These limits form the "ring
pass not" or horizon beyond which if one passes
one departs, appearing to "cease to exist" to
those left behind.

Manifest life is imperfect. It is fractal-like
(hierarchical in nature with the whole pattern
replicated at various levels). It is the result
of the effects of living beings, co-creating
in both hierarchical (cosmos-to-man) and
joint manner (among fellow creatures within a
creation or scheme of existence).

-- Eldon

> Bart Lidofsky