BrainMeta'   Connectomics'  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> The Relation Theory
Shawn
post Jun 02, 2003, 05:18 PM
Post #1


God
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 1498
Joined: Jan 22, 2003
From: CA
Member No.: 9



an interesting theory a friend, Anders Lindman, wrote and shared with me, and that we thought others may find of interest:


"The Relation Theory"

Hypothesis: Everything in existence is relations, and only relations.

This means that there are no absolute objects in the universe, except relations. Physical objects, molecules, atoms, particles, waves, quantum fluctuations, superstrings, e t c are relative objects. A relative object is a system of inter-connected relations. A system is always a subsystem of a larger system, except for the universal system called absolute existence.

Even something seemingly absolute, like the starting point of the Big Bang, is only absolute in relation to every other point in space. If all other points in space were to be removed, the starting point goes away as well and spacetime as we know it vanishes into nothing.

The only conclusion we now have is that all of existence is an inter-connected net of relations without any absolute objects. A relation is a correlation between two relations. A relation is timeless, and cannot be changed, for a relation cannot change another relation, and relations is all there is. This inter-connected net of relations is constantly evolving in the present moment of now.

Each relation is a correlation between one relation and another relation. From every relation there are relations to every other relation in existence. The result is an infinite inter-connected net of relations making up all of existence. We call this net of relations the Timeless Matrix. This is all of existence. This is an eternal, infinite, ever present, utterly complex inter-connected indestructible wholeness made of relations and only relations.

So, how can this simple but utterly complex matrix produce the world we see around us? The matrix itself has no substance, size or form. How can this matrix produce such thing as space, time, motion, physical matter and consciousness? As we have seen, the matrix is all there is; with no space, time, matter, energy, wave-functions, quantum fluctuations, random generators, natural laws, or divine entities outside it. So how can this beautiful, marvelous and complex living universe be the result of a inter-connected set of relations?

The answer is simple. The physical universe and the living world we experience is nothing but a subset of this matrix. When we say subset here we do not mean subset in the standard meaning of the word. Normally, set theory deals with elements, and elements are absolute objects. Following the initial hypothesis there are no absolute objects in existence, only relations. Therefore we have to use another kind of set theories dealing with inter-connected relations. A subset in a relational way still has relations to its superset, because the net of relations is an inter-connected wholeness without absolute borders.

We can make a model of absolute existence by starting with the whole of existence and then divide it into smaller and smaller relational subsets. Starting with the whole of existence as a single absolute entity at a given moment of now, we unfold this static snapshot of existence by dividing it into smaller and smaller relational subsets. First absolute existence is divided into two subsets, then these subsets are in turn divided themselves. This dividing procedure continues in an infinite number of iterations. The picture below illustrates the first four iterations in this process.


user posted image



We begin with the complete snapshot of existence (1). The first iteration (2) divides the whole of existence into two identical subsets as pictured by the two dots. The line between these two dots depicts the correlation between these two identical subsets. In the next iteration (3) existence has been further divided into four identical subsets with the possible configurations of correlation between them marked by six lines. As we continue the iterations, the number of identical subsets increases by 2n, and the number of relations (a relation is a correlation between the subsets) increases by n!. It takes an infinite number of iterations to complete the unfolding of a single snapshot of existence. When the iteration process is complete, the illustration will form a continuous, perfect circle with an infinite number of 'points', but these points do not have an existence of their own, they are only virtual connection points around the circle. Each point on this circle is identical. Whatever point we select on this circle will be identical to any other point selected. The circle forms a perfect symmetry of inter-connected points.

The snapshot of existence we have modeled as a continuous circle makes up a perfect, symmetrical and infinite inter-connected net of relations. Each point is identical to every other point in the model. In order to get a unique view in this model we need a pair of points. When we choose one point in relation to another point in the circle, this pair of points is unique in the sense that there exists other pairs of points that are entirely different. The possible combinations of different pair of points are mind boggling, and the complexity involved is stupefying. Each pair is at the same time connected to every other point, pair of points and combination of pairs in the model. In the end, everything in existence is an inter-connected wholeness, without absolute borders and without independent, absolute individual existence.

In order to get a unique view in this snapshot of existence we only need one pair of points in the model. The complexity involved in this simple model is so enormous that one pair of points could possibly represent the quantum state of the entire known universe at any given moment of now. But how can we describe change, motion and the sense of time in this model? The model we have described so far only represents a static snapshot of existence at a specific moment of now. Here is why we call this model the Timeless Matrix: all there is, is in the present moment of now. Past and future are only concepts without any real existence outside the moment of now. Starting from a specific pair of points in the model, we can unfold a certain quantum state that represents the entire evolution of the observed universe including the entire history record from the beginning of the Big Bang to present existence as human beings here on Earth. There is no time involved here; the unfolding process containing an infinite number of iterations is instantaneous. It takes no time to unfold a specific snapshot of the entire existence. This unfolding in the form of an iterative process takes place constantly in the present moment of now. In each moment of now the model represents a perfect circle. But a perfect circle is never complete. The unfolding process will continue forever.

So when did this unfolding process first start? When was the first iteration made? The answer is simple and obvious: the first iteration to the last is performed now. There is only the moment of now. There is no such thing as absolute time. There has never been any past and there will never be any future. It can be difficult for the human mind to get around this concept, but we can explain the non-existence of the past in the following way: Every person has a sense of have been living a life during several number of years. But this sense of having lived during a certain period of time is only a memory and nothing else. If we were to compress the time scale for these memories so that what feels like having lived for many years actually only have been a second using the compressed time scale, the sense of having lived for several years will still be intact, but the actual time we have lived will only be one second. Since the sense of our past is only a memory there is no time involved except the feeling and experience of the past. A memory including the experience of a long life and a good sense of time does not contain time itself -- a memory is static and timeless. What happens if we use infinite time compression? The answer is that all the past will be entirely compressed into the present moment of now. What we think of as the past; our own life, the geological record, the entire history of the universe since Big Bang will be compressed into the single moment of now. What we think of as a history record of 15 billion years will in fact be created in zero seconds in the present moment of now.

So here we have the answer to the question: when did time begin? The answer is that time begun now. This means that in reality we have no time, only an eternal moment of now. The present moment of now is forever unfolding -- the process of iterations, although being infinite fast, will never end since infinity has no end. The circle in our model will never be complete, or as Leopold Kronecker said: there is no such thing as pi (p).

This is the Timeless Matrix forming all of existence. There is nothing outside it. This matrix is eternal and has never been created and can never be destroyed. The physical universe we live in is an utterly tiny subset or view of this matrix. Everything from quasars to human bodies to a grain of sand are "only" infinitesimal subsets of the matrix. The creation power of the matrix is infinite.

Reality does not play dice. There is no real randomness in reality, but any degree of randomness and complexity is possible because of the infinite possible combinations of subsets in the matrix.

Death is only a relative view -- nothing is destroyed in reality. Once a part of the Timeless Matrix, always a part of an eternal reality. As human beings we are part of a larger superset that includes every other person on the planet. Mankind itself is a subset of the superset of our planet Earth. Everything is connected. Everything is synchronicity. Each individual human being is a part of all of mankind, all of planet Earth, all of the Milky Way and so on. A relational subset can never exist in isolation. The free will of a person is dependent on the overall will of mankind which is dependent on the "will" of Earth changes within the solar system in a particular galaxy among other galaxies in a universe that itself is only a tiny view of an infinite, ever evolving reality. So there is never such thing as an isolated free will. But as evolution continues, there is no limit to what a human free will be capable of. There may be that mankind is only in a very early stage of evolution and that there in fact are more things between heaven and earth than dreamt of in our philosophy.

So the last question is: when was the universe created? You already know the answer to this.


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
joe
post Jun 03, 2003, 03:16 AM
Post #2


Unregistered









Desire creates motion.
Creation begins with motion
When consciousness moves creation happens.
What was will always be. What is will always be and not be.

To be or not to be that is a question.

The theory has been experienced.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Jun 03, 2003, 09:42 AM
Post #3


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



QUOTE
Hypothesis: Everything in existence is relations, and only relations.

this hypothesis is fundamentally confused, as object/relation is a dualism. (this is evident in calling relations 'things')
'Relation' is what we say when talking of connections between 'objects', and 'object' is what we mean when we talk about a nexus of 'relations'.  
'Property' is perhaps a better way for constructing a subjectively conscious dualism that describes 'objects', as one can take property as the 'qualia' twin of 'object'. (this implies a subjective nexus as primitive, thus there is no 'relating' that is not perceived directly)

the rest may be good, though, I just don't want to read it at the moment  (I shall later, though)

8)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
joe
post Jun 03, 2003, 12:34 PM
Post #4


Unregistered









Just a little note about the theory.
I read this same description in a book written by Jane Roberts in 1975. I think it was the nature of reality or the nature of personal reality, something along that idea.
Anyway Jane Roberts was an author and clairvoyant. She channeled an entity who called himself Seth. Similar to JZ knights Ramtha, only Seth was not available for public discussions.
He pretty much described the same theory and I have been using a similar diagram in my teaching for the last 7 years. It is a great analogy of the idea of consciousness or God creating, yet never being separate from its parts or the parts being separate from the original.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Jun 04, 2003, 06:08 AM
Post #5


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



this theory is basically short-circuiting the object/relation dualism by calling objects 'relations' but also calling relations 'relations'.  The following treatise falls prey to the inherent logical inconsistency of this error, as seen in the logically necessary and trivial 'generation' of a theory of physical structure.  Major red flags are the implication of a 'complete' physical infinity and the associated timeless 'unfolding' process (as the word 'unfolding' implies a process in time, but is simultaneously described as instantaneous)



It seems to me that this person is a little confused
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
joe
post Jun 05, 2003, 03:05 AM
Post #6


Unregistered









From the reality of duality and Time it is barely comprehensible. The mind that is stuck in the relative cannot accept that what it sees, hears and feels is anything other than real. The intellect needs relative parameters to understand the nature of its self so it does not to get lost.
The description given in relative terms is a pointer to another dimensional reality and leaves the mind to ponder its reason.
The intellect represents rationality. The Self IS multidimensional in nature. Relationships are descriptions in relative values they (the intellect and the Self)  both are interpreted and contain within the nature of reality, The Self

 The theory inspires critical thought. Thoughts are relative and carry no weight or value other than to the knower in the known and the process of knowing.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shawn
post Jun 05, 2003, 03:34 PM
Post #7


God
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 1498
Joined: Jan 22, 2003
From: CA
Member No.: 9



hello Dan, Joe,

those are some interesting thoughts, Joe,  about something similar being found in a book written by Jane Roberts in 1975.  You've been teaching for at least the last 7 years, and using a similar diagram?   I'm curious, what else do you teach?

QUOTE
 Major red flags are the implication of a 'complete' physical infinity and the associated timeless 'unfolding' process (as the word 'unfolding' implies a process in time, but is simultaneously described as instantaneous)

It seems to me that this person is a little confused

[color=Red][/color]

I agree with you, Dan, about the 'red flags'.  I don't think this person is confused, though, just extreme.   And maybe not even that extreme, if all he's saying is that everything stands in certain relations to others things (i.e., that nothing is completely isolated from everything else).   The assumption that "All is relation" doesn't, on the surface, seem to account for things like qualia, unless we further stipulate an identity at a fundamental level between 'qualia' and 'relations', which is the sort of thing I did in my little structural identity theory of consciousness at http://brainmeta.com/consciousness3.html .   But the problem I have with this concerns the precise definition of "relation".   What types of relations are we talking about?   Given any two things, an infinite number of different relations can be proposed.   Is this satisfactory, or do we specify a particular type of relation as being more important than others?

QUOTE
 The theory inspires critical thought. Thoughts are relative and carry no weight or value other than to the knower in the known and the process of knowing.


this is an interesting thought, and may fall under the category of 'cognitive relativism', which is defined as "Truth is subjective, never objective", or alternatively, "Thinking something to be so makes it so for anyone who thinks it".   Is this along the lines of what you were getting at, Joe, or were you thinking of something else?

I think it would be nice, perhaps, to make this 'relation theory' more mathematical, in the sense of having axioms, precise definitions, propositions, and proofs.    The axiom, or at least one of them, is that 'everything is relations, and only relations', but we'd need to precisely define 'relation' and work thru the logic of such an axiomatic system (please, no mention of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem and the ramifications it has for axiomatic systems!).   I know axiomatic systems are, of necessity, incomplete, but they can be helpful sometimes, if we bear in mind their limitations.  Setting out this 'relation theory' axiomatically would help the more mathematically minded appreciate it better....maybe....maybe not.   Any takers?




User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Jun 05, 2003, 04:38 PM
Post #8


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



QUOTE
But the problem I have with this concerns the precise definition of "relation".   What types of relations are we talking about?   Given any two things, an infinite number of different relations can be proposed.   Is this satisfactory, or do we specify a particular type of relation as being more important than others?

I would say that tracking energy (manifested in physical interaction) is as sound a 'relation' as one might hope to trust.  Energy is the currency of physicality (implying a fundamental connection of all objects that constitute the universe), thus tracking it provides objective knowledge about the structure of the universe

8)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
joe
post Jun 06, 2003, 03:26 PM
Post #9


Unregistered









QUOTE
those are some interesting thoughts, Joe,  about something similar being found in a book written by Jane Roberts in 1975.  You've been teaching for at least the last 7 years, and using a similar diagram?   I'm curious, what else do you teach?


I teach the differences between the subjective and objective relationships of the self and the Self and their relationships to the infinite unchanging One and how to experience the difference in the expansion of awareness.
I liked the diagram that was presented by the author. The idea being simple gives the relative mind a point of reference in what the mind is used to in coming from independant awareness of self.

QUOTE
this is an interesting thought, and may fall under the category of 'cognitive relativism', which is defined as "Truth is subjective, never objective", or alternatively, "Thinking something to be so makes it so for anyone who thinks it".   Is this along the lines of what you were getting at, Joe, or were you thinking of something else?


The knower, the known and the process of knowing is always relative. It allows the freedom of independant thought and interpretation. It is dualistic in its nature and is limited to its relationships.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
P JayS
post Mar 31, 2013, 01:32 AM
Post #10


Demi-God
*****

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 588
Joined: Apr 04, 2012
Member No.: 34146



QUOTE(Shawn @ Jun 02, 2003, 05:18 PM) *

an interesting theory a friend, Anders Lindman, wrote and shared with me, and that we thought others may find of interest:


"The Relation Theory"

Hypothesis: Everything in existence is relations, and only relations.

This means that there are no absolute objects in the universe, except relations. Physical objects, molecules, atoms, particles, waves, quantum fluctuations, superstrings, e t c are relative objects. A relative object is a system of inter-connected relations. A system is always a subsystem of a larger system, except for the universal system called absolute existence.

Even something seemingly absolute, like the starting point of the Big Bang, is only absolute in relation to every other point in space. If all other points in space were to be removed, the starting point goes away as well and spacetime as we know it vanishes into nothing.

The only conclusion we now have is that all of existence is an inter-connected net of relations without any absolute objects. A relation is a correlation between two relations. A relation is timeless, and cannot be changed, for a relation cannot change another relation, and relations is all there is. This inter-connected net of relations is constantly evolving in the present moment of now.

Each relation is a correlation between one relation and another relation. From every relation there are relations to every other relation in existence. The result is an infinite inter-connected net of relations making up all of existence. We call this net of relations the Timeless Matrix. This is all of existence. This is an eternal, infinite, ever present, utterly complex inter-connected indestructible wholeness made of relations and only relations.

So, how can this simple but utterly complex matrix produce the world we see around us? The matrix itself has no substance, size or form. How can this matrix produce such thing as space, time, motion, physical matter and consciousness? As we have seen, the matrix is all there is; with no space, time, matter, energy, wave-functions, quantum fluctuations, random generators, natural laws, or divine entities outside it. So how can this beautiful, marvelous and complex living universe be the result of a inter-connected set of relations?

The answer is simple. The physical universe and the living world we experience is nothing but a subset of this matrix. When we say subset here we do not mean subset in the standard meaning of the word. Normally, set theory deals with elements, and elements are absolute objects. Following the initial hypothesis there are no absolute objects in existence, only relations. Therefore we have to use another kind of set theories dealing with inter-connected relations. A subset in a relational way still has relations to its superset, because the net of relations is an inter-connected wholeness without absolute borders.

We can make a model of absolute existence by starting with the whole of existence and then divide it into smaller and smaller relational subsets. Starting with the whole of existence as a single absolute entity at a given moment of now, we unfold this static snapshot of existence by dividing it into smaller and smaller relational subsets. First absolute existence is divided into two subsets, then these subsets are in turn divided themselves. This dividing procedure continues in an infinite number of iterations. The picture below illustrates the first four iterations in this process.





We begin with the complete snapshot of existence (1). The first iteration (2) divides the whole of existence into two identical subsets as pictured by the two dots. The line between these two dots depicts the correlation between these two identical subsets. In the next iteration (3) existence has been further divided into four identical subsets with the possible configurations of correlation between them marked by six lines. As we continue the iterations, the number of identical subsets increases by 2n, and the number of relations (a relation is a correlation between the subsets) increases by n!. It takes an infinite number of iterations to complete the unfolding of a single snapshot of existence. When the iteration process is complete, the illustration will form a continuous, perfect circle with an infinite number of 'points', but these points do not have an existence of their own, they are only virtual connection points around the circle. Each point on this circle is identical. Whatever point we select on this circle will be identical to any other point selected. The circle forms a perfect symmetry of inter-connected points.

The snapshot of existence we have modeled as a continuous circle makes up a perfect, symmetrical and infinite inter-connected net of relations. Each point is identical to every other point in the model. In order to get a unique view in this model we need a pair of points. When we choose one point in relation to another point in the circle, this pair of points is unique in the sense that there exists other pairs of points that are entirely different. The possible combinations of different pair of points are mind boggling, and the complexity involved is stupefying. Each pair is at the same time connected to every other point, pair of points and combination of pairs in the model. In the end, everything in existence is an inter-connected wholeness, without absolute borders and without independent, absolute individual existence.

In order to get a unique view in this snapshot of existence we only need one pair of points in the model. The complexity involved in this simple model is so enormous that one pair of points could possibly represent the quantum state of the entire known universe at any given moment of now. But how can we describe change, motion and the sense of time in this model? The model we have described so far only represents a static snapshot of existence at a specific moment of now. Here is why we call this model the Timeless Matrix: all there is, is in the present moment of now. Past and future are only concepts without any real existence outside the moment of now. Starting from a specific pair of points in the model, we can unfold a certain quantum state that represents the entire evolution of the observed universe including the entire history record from the beginning of the Big Bang to present existence as human beings here on Earth. There is no time involved here; the unfolding process containing an infinite number of iterations is instantaneous. It takes no time to unfold a specific snapshot of the entire existence. This unfolding in the form of an iterative process takes place constantly in the present moment of now. In each moment of now the model represents a perfect circle. But a perfect circle is never complete. The unfolding process will continue forever.

So when did this unfolding process first start? When was the first iteration made? The answer is simple and obvious: the first iteration to the last is performed now. There is only the moment of now. There is no such thing as absolute time. There has never been any past and there will never be any future. It can be difficult for the human mind to get around this concept, but we can explain the non-existence of the past in the following way: Every person has a sense of have been living a life during several number of years. But this sense of having lived during a certain period of time is only a memory and nothing else. If we were to compress the time scale for these memories so that what feels like having lived for many years actually only have been a second using the compressed time scale, the sense of having lived for several years will still be intact, but the actual time we have lived will only be one second. Since the sense of our past is only a memory there is no time involved except the feeling and experience of the past. A memory including the experience of a long life and a good sense of time does not contain time itself -- a memory is static and timeless. What happens if we use infinite time compression? The answer is that all the past will be entirely compressed into the present moment of now. What we think of as the past; our own life, the geological record, the entire history of the universe since Big Bang will be compressed into the single moment of now. What we think of as a history record of 15 billion years will in fact be created in zero seconds in the present moment of now.

So here we have the answer to the question: when did time begin? The answer is that time begun now. This means that in reality we have no time, only an eternal moment of now. The present moment of now is forever unfolding -- the process of iterations, although being infinite fast, will never end since infinity has no end. The circle in our model will never be complete, or as Leopold Kronecker said: there is no such thing as pi (p).

This is the Timeless Matrix forming all of existence. There is nothing outside it. This matrix is eternal and has never been created and can never be destroyed. The physical universe we live in is an utterly tiny subset or view of this matrix. Everything from quasars to human bodies to a grain of sand are "only" infinitesimal subsets of the matrix. The creation power of the matrix is infinite.

Reality does not play dice. There is no real randomness in reality, but any degree of randomness and complexity is possible because of the infinite possible combinations of subsets in the matrix.

Death is only a relative view -- nothing is destroyed in reality. Once a part of the Timeless Matrix, always a part of an eternal reality. As human beings we are part of a larger superset that includes every other person on the planet. Mankind itself is a subset of the superset of our planet Earth. Everything is connected. Everything is synchronicity. Each individual human being is a part of all of mankind, all of planet Earth, all of the Milky Way and so on. A relational subset can never exist in isolation. The free will of a person is dependent on the overall will of mankind which is dependent on the "will" of Earth changes within the solar system in a particular galaxy among other galaxies in a universe that itself is only a tiny view of an infinite, ever evolving reality. So there is never such thing as an isolated free will. But as evolution continues, there is no limit to what a human free will be capable of. There may be that mankind is only in a very early stage of evolution and that there in fact are more things between heaven and earth than dreamt of in our philosophy.

So the last question is: when was the universe created? You already know the answer to this.

"The Relation Theory" and the "Timeless Matrix" work well with a rational pi as an invisible point within the sizeable Pi Time Photon within my own Theory "Creative Pi & The Theory of Space 0/0 Dynamics".

In my theory the "superset" is the perfect Body of God or the complete universe. The body is now a Temple of Time. Outside of this "Container of Time" remains God as a neutral entity not requiring worship anymore but existing as God in among the digits of phi outside the "container" with the void. On the other hand we have Father on the inside of the container as our Creator and most Courageous Leader in the Moment with "averaged phi space" in the "Room of Objectivity on a Mathematical exercise board" in the moment of time and in relation to everything else.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th August 2017 - 01:51 AM


Home     |     About     |    Research     |    Forum     |    Feedback  


Copyright BrainMeta. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Last Modified Tue Jan 17 2006 12:39 am

Consciousness Expansion · Brain Mapping · Neural Circuits · Connectomics  ·  Neuroscience Forum  ·  Brain Maps Blog
 · Connectomics · Connectomics  ·  shawn mikula  ·  articles