Hold onto the question about the ontological distinction between planets or worlds and universes, particularly with reference to observability. What if any are the distinctions between ontology and epistemology?
While you're holding that thought, I have to go deeper into that last distinction, between ontology and epistemology......
More particularly, I'm thinking of the distinction between energy and information. This distinction defines the crux of the distinction between materialism and immaterialism.
IOW, we get to choose between food and circuses. Off the top, everyone would prioritize food, but we're going to go deeper.
Which is the priority...... food for the body or food for the soul? Yes, without food for the body, nothing else matters. But, if the choice were to minimize one in deference to the other, it would be rather more frought.
To put it another way, not many mothers would place their own survival above that of their child. Is this choice only due to our DNA, as too many would have us believe? I'm thinking not.
IOW, consider love v. food. Nolo contendere.
Ok, let's get back to energy v. information.......
It's not hard to view the cosmos as a cosmetic or ornament, from our POV, without considering the Sun, specifically. The Sun is a lot more to us than an ornament. It provides light and food.... information and energy. Turn off the Sun for a week, and the Earth becomes an ice-ball.
Do we, immaterialists, not get the point?
We get it, but.......
The materialists have their 'ifs', we have our 'buts'. The materialists can 'threaten' to turn of the Sun, we can threaten to turn off the 'light', i.e. consciouness (Cs). So what...?, say they. They dare us to blow ourselves to bits, and they'll even provide the means. Hmmm.......
The materialists do have a big stick, and they don't mind wielding it. Any time we start to get uppity, they can shove the universe in our face. If we suggest that the universe looks too special, they can wave the Multiverse at us.
We can point out that science is the special province of sapience. Sure, they say, but am I disbelieving the results? I don't disbelieve any of the measurements, it's the literal interpretation that I question.
Well, it's the materialist interpretation that I question. In its place, I'm suggeting an information circuit... a singular 'CTC'.
The starting point for this alternative interpretation is Wigner's UEM. Mathematics and logic are the most basic forms of information.
But who breathes the fire into the math? Scientists would point to the initial conditions that caused the universe to be what it is. As an informationalist, I could equally point to the final conditions.
Ok, I'm welcome to invoke teleology, but, then, what is the universe for? It is for the self-realization of.... ourselves. It is a cosmic bootstrap. But this is a special bootstrap, in that it is eternal.... it is the best possible bootstrap. So, there.........
No, Virginia, there's no smoking gun. But, yes, Virginia, there's all the holism that you could ask for. How much, exactly? Exactly?!
Everywhere you look, you can find it.... so much so, that scientists find it downright embarrassing. They seek to ignore it, even to cover it up, or so it might seem, if we fail to fully appreciate the enormity of their myopia.
But, still, won't we need a smoking gun, in order to convince the public? Well, quite obviously, we are lacking something. Until three months ago, I was nearly convinced that Disclosure would be the smoking gun. But then the CtN came and went...... nowhere. Now what? Your guess is as good as mine. But, hey, do we really suppose that our destiny is not in the very best hands? God has only to lift a finger. We just don't know which finger it will be.
I mean, hey, surprise us......!!!!!
Yes, I do occasionally wonder, who is to get the fickle-finger-of-fate award?
Informationalism would put sapience at the center of the action. We would be at the center of the cosmic informational circuit, CIC/CTC.
The Sun is only secondarily an energy source, mainly being the source of the informing light. Photosythesis is seen as just a part of eco/metabolic circuit. Yes, it is a crucial part, but energy does not motivate the informational circuit. We do that. We are the driving force. The Sun remains well in the background of the informational scene.
Yes, I can thank Gary for keeping my feet to the fire of information. We have then a crucial logical chain.......
UEM => Informationalism => Logos. (UIL)
This chain of reasoning should given a place in the mnemonic.
Yes, we have the information explosion, motivated by science and technology. But, with the MoAPS, there will be an information implosion into coherence. At the same time there will be a phase change of the Noosphere, from pupa to chrysalis. This phase change is the primary energy source of the cosmos. This is the true, metaphysical source of solar energy.
(Technically, I'm referring to the metamorphic stage between larva and chrysalis, as I've explained before. There probably is a technical name.)
As with the transition from water to ice, there is a great deal of 'energy' given off as with 'latent' heat. This is our metaphysical/cosmic energy pump. This is what drives the cosmic CIC/CTC.
PK HMT/ATO UIL 1550 CS2 Co2 P2LS uC/MR 2dT MB PPKHWTB ()() MMN SM/PW TS.
We don't have much room left for the mnemonic on a single line. There is no acronym for the MoAPS to be viewed as a metamorphosis of the noosphere. Would that be MMN? Ok, there it goes into overflow mode......
Being able to find a place for the Sun in an informational economy is quite a relief. We'll see if it stands the test of time. I had always implied as much, but there's nothing like 'spitting' it right out.
On Nov 24, p.21/300 there is reference to us as the multiple personality disorder (MPD) of God. Also mentioned is the CTC as an ERB.
On Sept 24, p14/200, I refer to the ring-pass-not of the MoAPS. That probably has some to do with the Vectors and the September surprise.