Poly-Perspective Synthesis Analysis

Poly-Perspective Synthesis Analysis
On the use of Multi-Valued Logic

O#o van Nieuwenhuijze MSc, MD (c)
Independent Research Scientist

06 December 2004 17:53:00

to be continued ...

In relating a part to a whole (as needed in healing) we compare one side of a boundary with another.
This means that we need to integrate the differences across that border.
This calls for the implementation of a multi-valued logic, to see the sameness in the difference.
We need to deal with a 4D dimensional transition between a closed and open system: the nature of the border.

The use of multi-valued logic,
calls for the ability of multi-valued thinking.

Abstract

Science has come to use a single point perspective as basis for its observations. As a logical result, it finds singular realisations for all phenomena that do not operate a one point local focus of control. This is the case for e.g. all social systems, where many points of view play a role. A different concept is needed - poly-perspective synthesis analysis - by which all those viewpoints can be integrated in a non-singular way. the paper presents a summary of a history of developments in mathematics and science to come to propose a 4D Gabor point as a likely candidate for total systems integration' in science and in society. It does however require a change in our own understanding of our involvement with/in creation

key words

referon analysis, poly perspective analysis, total systems, science, society, involvement

Introduction

Reality, as cosmology shows, is a dynamic process.

Ultimately each formulation of reality is a reflection of our interactive involvement, thus participation.
The reality that we describe is the reality that we behold, thus expression of our interpretation.
The result is that reality is a realisation.
This is the finding of cosmology, and of neurophilosophy - all perceived states are the result of the confluence of dynamic processes.

Every description of our body, be it of body, mind, soul or spirit, refers to the way we interface with our context.
Every description of our body is based on our interfacing characteristics, and how we can change those.
This implies that every description based on our use of our body - all findings of science - are determined by the conditions of the interfacing characteristics.
Dimensional Analysis can define the critical conditions of the interfacing characteristics (the System Singularity Set).

The following combines these notions to come to a formal definition of system synthesis, to complement system analysis.
This by definition means that we need to regard the system with/in its context.
This also means that we need to simultaneously address the dual and complementary system state descriptions, on each side of the system border.
This calls not just for a dual description (one side and the other) but also for a description in and of the interface itself (the per- and trans-variable of the border).

Tenschnally this means that there are by definition 4 aspects to any such description.
Traditionally these are known as the four faces (phases) of god (g.o.d.).
Because of our knowledge of interfacing logic, we can be very specific on the relationship between these four phases.
The point of this paper is blunt and simple: we need to understand the relationship between those four facets.

To this purpose this paper first addresses the 4D logic in its core form: as a Gabor point (to be defined).
Secondly it addresses the implications for mathematics: it is a language which reflects our personal territorial involvements.
This leads to a more general consideration of languaging, communication, conditioning and consensus.
Finally we will seek, and see, the solution in the functioning of our body: the logical organisation of our body relates to different levels of consciousness - which we nightly activate in the sleep cycle - which help realise that we need to be able to - consciously - integrate those four forms of awareness.

The conclusion will be that science - poly-perspective synthesis analysis - will require that scientists learn to master meditation: the integration of thous four levels of consciousness/awareness.

1) Defining a Gabor Point

A Gabor Point is a much more logical candidate for describing our realisation than an Euclidean point.
A Gabor Point can be understood as a virtual point, of intersection of the processes that run through it (Hanappi Loop Juncture).
By varying the orbit of the Gabor point the full range comes to view of these process dynamics. This includes both the (quite precise and specific) 'fuzzy' logic of the system, as well as the Variational Set of its system dynamics.

As a result of the change of radius of a Gabor Point, its formulation includes the full range between the local focal Euclidean Point, and the universe as a whole.
This means also that a Gabor Point - which is a point of reference - includes other Gabor Points within it (latently, as zero point dimensional nodes, or patently as transient' or temporal points of profess dynamic confluence)
This likewise means that a Gabor point spans the full range from a Closed to an Open system.
Technically this means that the Gabor Point of zero curvature is a pivotal singularity, at infinity (full) radius it comprises the universe as a whole.

Because of the nature of a Gabor Point, the point itself operates a System Inversion.
If represented as a lemniscate (or Möbius Loop) then the inner curvature and the outer curvature of the point are the same and the inverse of each other.
It means that the cosmic representation and the internal representation are duals of each other.
It also means that minute zero Point fluctuations in a Gabor Point will severely affect the relationship between the one and the other.

Any Gabor Point is thereby a high power amplifier of Freedom of Choice.
The minimal (sub-Planck) system oscillations will lead to system scale re-definitions of the singularity set of the system.
This resets the system border (definition) and thereby the operation of the integral system.
This can (dis)Integrate the system with respect to its context.

In terms of the topology of the system inversion - the lemniscate, as example - the system definition (simultaneously) hinges on the internal and external definition of the system.
This is what we effectively see in the double lipid layer of an Eukaryote cell membrane.
This is also what we witness in the dynamics of cell division.
It is also the mechanism for organisation of the integration of the system Singularity Set, throughout cell division.

Any living system is defined in, and by, its interfacing with/in the context.
Every system definition must therefore be based on the interface of the system.
In this interface, the system boundary is experienced as systemic field.
It means that the system description is, must be, based on the principles of 4DD Logic.

Characteristic for 4DD Logic, this requires a 4D system description.
The system, relationship, interaction and integration therein all need to be addressed.
This requires the (modulo) combination of a 0D, 1D, 2D and 3D description.
The simplest way to integrate this is by the use of a Vortex based Referon system (Edwards, Winter, O#o).

This can be combined in, as, the definition of the 4DD unit referon; the 4D Gabor Point.
Such a point will have a vortex nature, as described by Edwards and represented by Winter and calculated by Tiller.
The vorticity is the consequence of the integration of the Dimensional Transition which is characteristic for the Dimensional operator.
This is but a graphic geometric representation for the properties of a system border in phase space.

Essential is that the description is 4 Dimensional.
The reference base is defined in the interface of the system.
The interface is a singularity of (regulated) total system inversion.
This requires a simultaneous description of all 4D aspects of this transition.

Combined, this opens the possibility for poly perspective analysis as the subset of Gabor points within a Gabor Point. (a constellation.)
As the Gabor point is defined by the confluence of process, this does not imply any contradictions.
Crucial is that the description, and definition, of such a Gabor Point defines the interfacing in any system border with/in/of any system.
This specifically means, and implies, that this Gabor Point reference system also defines and describes us, including the way we make choices and come to decisions.

In an integrated universe, everything will be part of the same ongoing process, and reflective of it.
This means that everything - every thing - needs to be understood and described in this manner.
It also means that nothing - no thing - needs to be understood in this way as instance of this ongoing process.
This poses requirements on all descriptions. They need to be reflective of all perspectives of all involved. And they need to be in reference to the overall process, instead of the singular objects.

It means a shift of perspective, from singular identified, to integrated involved.
There is a substantial body of languaging in Mathematics to describe this; all forms of process languages reflect this. Fluid mechanics, and quantum theory, all those descriptions that operate with variations and matrices: all are examples of the need to describe the dynamics of states in terms of an integral process.
What needs to be added to this description is the emergence and immergence of these so-called ‘Objects’ in terms of the amorphous ongoing process. And to understand that we too are only an instance of expression of that ongoing process; and that our involvement too needs to be part of the description. Including the reasons and choices that we make for taking any specific perspective for our description.
This, together, is described here as Poly-Perspective Analysis

One of the facets of describing Perspectives, lies in the aspect of Changing Perspective.
This includes the choice in taking or making a different perspective. I.e. it includes all those ‘territorial’ negotiations of discernment, distinction and judgement, together with their evaluation.
It means that politics and survival are - explicitly - part of the art of mathematics. Mathematics is no longer Objective ( it never has been) but it is totally subjective. This is what Poly-Perspective Analysis brings out in the open.
Mathematics is a language, like any other. It forms part of the social discourse, like any other. And it is - always - based on our subjective interpretation, thus involvement.

2) On the Subjective Nature of Mathematics

Mathematics is often represented as a language of exactness and precision. This it is not.

Mathematics is a language like any other, one of the many languages that exist, with many dialects within it. As with any other language, mathematics lends itself to poetry and prose, journalism and lies.
As any other language, mathematics is developed and designed to suit the needs. Mathematics is like a landscape: it is sculpted and re-sculpted until it serves its purpose. If not, it is discarded as is the case with so many other items that this society throws away.

Sometimes it is said that mathematics differs from other languages because it has logic. This is not quite the case: mathematics does not have logic, it has logics. There are many different types of logic; again each is tailored to a need, and disregarded if unsuited.

This makes mathematics a tool, like language, for mental reflection and expression. It is perhaps more precise to state that mathematics is a form of psychologic experience and expression.

Mathematicians are quite aware that this is the case. They speak of the Beauty of mathematics, and of Feeling if a calculation works well. Indeed there is a kind of relaxation, like the dwindling of a noise, when a mathematical result has been found. It is akin to the Collapse of the State Vector that physics describes: a complex situation is suddenly appreciated as simple. A calm pervades the sensations. An ease and clarity are perceived.

Sometimes this calm requires effort, sometimes much effort. It may take many years and people, before a new form of mathematics is explored and can be exploited, to reformulate the known in a new way, due to which the complex appears simple. The simplicity is not the result of the formulation in mathematics, but of the way mathematics encodes different modes of experience and expectation, expression and realisation. By changing from one mode of logic to another, our perceptions are found to differ. By creating a news form of mathematics - a language - in which complex patterns are the based, than the perception of those complex patterns becomes simple.

Even the bases of mathematics are psycho-mental constructs. The language always expresses both modes of thought and linguistic structures. What is described as variables and equations, parameters and functors, are merely codes for conditioning consensus. As such they have no meaning. They acquire meaning only because of consensus agreement. They could acquire a different meaning, or be expressed by a different symbol. Often this is the case: the same symbol that is used in one branch of mathematics has a different meaning in yet another.

Psycho-mental functions are not only mental: they can be cognitive as well as emotional, conditioned as well as conditional, and so on. What is expressed in mathematics depends on the functioning of language in our mind, which depends on the processing of somato-sensory impressions in our cerebral cortex, which again form part of our normal cell body dynamics.

Mathematics, as any language, is a tool for consensus, is thus based on consensus.