Wednesday, June 20, 2012

The Paradoxical Timewave Singularity

Here is more stuff to chew on from the Timewave-Eschaton dialogue:

John Sheliak (JS): "… the Eschaton - … 'End State' has always been somewhat uncertain ... Heisenberg's uncertainty principle almost certainly applies here - the more we know about the 'momentum' (the product of magnitude and velocity) of any given historical event, the less we know about it's position (i.e. when it occurs in time); and conversely the more we know about the 'when' of any historical event, the less we know of its magnitude and direction." 
Zy: "… the Eschaton Event … has been predicted with great accuracy, in fact right down to the day, i.e., December 21, 2012. Accuracy and magnitude are mutually exclusive, so it makes the chances that a major historical event having a profound effect on civilization occurring this day vanishingly small. But that's what the prognosticators are saying, and that's what will make (they say) this day especially significant - predicting the unpredictable."
JS: "… the Timewave, as a mathematical expression of 'Novelty' over historical and contemporary 'Time', then a reasonable and plausible analog would be through the application of the uncertainty principle …"

Even if we’re speaking in terms of Fourier and Wavelet Transforms, when speaking with respect to the Timewave, as JS noted, they are (some of the) subheadings of the more general Uncertainty Principle, which again, as JS noted, is a “reasonable and plausible analog.” If I were to take a hardnosed stance, I could say that it is merely a “reasonable and plausible analog,” but I’m not a science-fundie so I won’t go that far. But an analog it is, of that there’s no doubt.

The best analogue of the Timewave-singularity, in my opinion, is the Schrödinger Hamiltonian (with classical flavor) with respect to one particle (the Singularity). I suppose the analogy can be applied to n >1 particles (up to infinity) also, which would be in terms of the McKenna-esque / Whiteheadian “concrescence,” a totalization of all spatiotemporal confluences of states and events. Either way, the analogue is with regard to its being the sum of dichotomous operators, and this applies well to the idea of the dual, entangled state of the Singularity in terms of its being an eschatological superposition of ‘momentum’ (JS def = ‘the product of magnitude and velocity’ (because of the analogical usage of terms, equivocations are starting to happen here)) and ‘position’ (occurrence in time), or more generally, JS:>>temporal and physical manifestation<<.

I’m presuming we’re all in agreement here that wave-function collapses do occur by way of the conscious agent, and that we’re not subscribing to (the patently sickening) epistemological realism of infinitely multiplying orthonormal tendrils of probabilities, and in my opinion just as bad, to classical EPR-type views. And so on. So, taking that into consideration, I’ve conjured some flotsam-jetsam tidbits regarding the quantum-theoretical approach to the Timewave Singularity (i.e., the Eschaton Event): Granted, everything under the sun is a quantum-mechanical event, so we can’t take the Singularity out of the “equation” either. But the Singularity has been treated hitherto by pundits and doomsday salesmen in very “classical” terms: as far as they’re concerned, “position” and “momentum” are both pretty damn certain. So hats off to JS and Zy for this Copenhagen treatment of the subject.

1) Concerning the idea of “measurement” per se, since we’re speaking analogically here, I suppose the quantum wave-function collapse via measurement would apply to the act of “prognostication.” But prognostication does not have the rigorous connotation of measurement; we could just as well speak of prognostication in classical terms, and argue that the Eschaton is a macro, rags and bones historical event which is “measurable” with accuracy for all dichotomous, dual parameters involved (whatever they might be).

2) So the question is, how does prognostication happen? By virtue of hermeneusis of I’Ching patterns, numerological patterns, the Galactic Alignment, the end of the Mayan long-count, and so on … and there’s also (nonlocal) remote viewing (c.f. the works of R. Targ et al. on the subject of nonlocal remote viewing). The term ‘Singularity’ is well chosen, because again, analogically speaking (and analogies are valid, because of the fractal-hologramic interfusion of everything), there is no “light” forthcoming from it, due to its “gravity.” Thus it is surrounded by the Event Horizon, the threshold of information negentropy (or entropy, depending on whether your glass is half full of half empty); anything beyond it is abuzz with the whorl of history densely compacted into a Planck-instant of absolute Novelty.

3) Now prognostication and “prophesy” could be two different things. A flim-flam doomsayer can prophesy that a solar flare will blow the fuck out of the “grid” and all faithfuls will rise to meet their lord in the clouds, but those kinds of things are not tantamount to “prognostication” as analogue to “(quantum) measurement.” It’s a measurement of the Event Horizon, and one horn of the quantum dilemma has been grabbed, viz., that of the time (as Zy noted, Dec. 21, 2012). Thus, in terms of quantum uncertainty, absolutely nothing can be known regarding just what this Event Horizon is, and needless to say, what lies at the heart of it (Singularity).


4) Has the Timewave-function been collapsed already at the Zero-point Singularity? This is a key question. By nonlocal remote viewing (“measurement”), the answer is No, the Singularity is absolutely unknown, unseen, unheard, unmeasured, uncollapsed. The Event Horizon, on the other hand, has been “collapsed,” and its temporal location is known to coincide with the Galactic Alignment and the end of the Mayan long-count calendar. Contradictions seem to arise from conflating the Event Horizon with the Singularity. Hence the Singularity is known to “ingress” only by indirect “measurement,” by virtue of pinging off the Event Horizon, and making inferences about what lies immediately beyond.


5) Speaking of the Singularity as the Attractor that has been pulling history hitherto from the Future is an attractive concept, so to speak. It resonates with me on many levels, but I won’t get into that here. Since we’re basking in analogies, we might as well throw in the deterministic Chaos Attractor for good measure (so to speak). Even the Noise of the chaotic whorl of history bifurcates (note: bifurcates, which accords with non-deterministic quantum duality) into an emergent pattern, a mode, if you will, of the Singularity.

6) There is a problem with the following:
JS: "It seems that Terence and many who have followed his 'Timewave' prefer to see this event as having a very specific and very large 'momentum' - i.e., that of a transformational singularity. This preferred choice dictates that almost nothing can be known about the actual timing of this 'event' - i.e it is spread over a very broad time-span.. This is actually how I tend to see it - i.e. an event spread over a very broad time-span.”
The very idea of Novelty precludes anything being known about it, paradoxically except for its being “novel,” to be tautological. The ontology of the Singularity, i.e., in terms of its existence-assertion in the universe of Timewave discourse, provides us with no information whatsoever with regard to just what it is. Hence the designation of ‘Novelty.’ Therefore the Singularity is, because of the Event Horizon, “unmeasured,” still resonating, attracting in a state of superposition … perhaps the superposition of all modes of reality-as-such. Beyond such abstruse statements, nothing more can be concretely said. There is no way to “measure” the Singularity.