[HydrogenBond]

I thought of this plilosophical angle for correlating human thought to mathematics several years ago. Here goes. There are three levels of human thought, 1-D thought , 2-D thought and 3-D thought. 1-D thought is linear. These are thoughts with a linear or 1-D correlation. For example, trhe letters of an alphabet are 1-D. Good scientific data that is beyond question is 1-D, i.e., it is what it is. 2-D thought is the basis for rational thinking. Rational thinking sets up 2-D axis of cause and effect, right and wrong, good or evil, etc.., This 2-D plane is where rational comparison is made, similar to drawing a line or curve on the plane between the axis. The third level of thought is 3-D thought; this is spatial thought. The right side of the brain is spatial or 3-D while the left side is more rational or 2-D. One can appoximate a 3-D thought with many rational planes intersecting at various angles overlapping a common center point. For example the unification of force would be the synthesiis of all the rational force equations into one 3-D or integrated theory.

Since 1-D thought is a line than dimension greater than 1-D, say 1.1-D would add curvative to the line. This type of thought would be language, where words have a linear ordering of letters, yet words can have many meanings, i.e., adds a twist to a linear relationship. At 1.5-D thought the line will curve onto itself to form a circle. The circle or ring is the symbol of marriage or unity of desire between two people. 1.5-D thought begins the thought dimension of material prestige. For example, a wearing wedding ring creates certain subjective signicance. If one took off the ring, they are the same person but would get a different subjective reaction from the environment.

As thought dimension get greater than 1.5-D the circle expands until at 2-D the circle become the infinite plane of cause and effect. As thought get closer to 2-D, say 1.9-D the circle of prestige increases from the prestige of two to universal prestige. These may be thoughts like cars and gold which are objects of desire which have universal appeal and availability and which can induce subjectivity in others. At 2-D subjectivity reaches its limit and become rational objectvity. This is the basis for law. Law provides a grid of cause and effect that is not open to rational argument. For example, the speed limit is 65. If you obey the law it is good, if one does not obey the law it is bad.

Since 2-D thought is based on the 2-D grid, thought dimensions greater than 2-D say 2.2-D would imply drawing rational drawings on the grid of law; one can rationalize the lspeed limit law at thought dimensions higher than 2-D. At 2.5-D thought the rational drawing become a spatial image. A spatial image is similar to an artist drawing a 3-D sketch on a 2-D piece of paper. Often the 3-D assisted with shadowing. For example both the Demoncratic and Replican platforms are 2.5-D thoughts. Both express truth but neither expresses the whole truth. The denial of the other half of the truth provides shadowing for the 2.5-D spatial image.

Thought dimension beyond 2.5-D can be understood as intutiive relief drawings where denial of truth becomes converted to depth of understanding. This might be the thought dimension of a conservative demoncrat or a liberal republican, who are attempting to reconcile the truth within both sides. Such synthesis is not longer entirely rational but has a layer of intuitive synthesis. The intutiive third dimension is why the bridge makers do not seen as determinant as the strick party members. Denial is solid but synthesis is nebulous or intuitive. As our intuitive relieve drawing approach 3-D they lose their rational framework and become more free standing sculptures. Symbols like God are 3-D; these symbols go beyond reason. It usually requires intuitive relief drawings to do the symbol complete justice, which why religion often seems nebulous.

The thought dimensional analysis, and our ability to percieved each dinension, implies that memory is stored at all dimensions. The ego can change thought dimensionality and focus itself or become conscious at any dimension. If one remains focused at material prestige, thought remains between 1.5-D and 2-D causing one to become subjective and irrational, i.e., materialist. If one remains focused at reason from 2-D to 2.5-D, it become hard to undertand human subjectivity or human intuition, i.e., logical scientist. If one remains focused at 2.5-D to 3-D, one can lose their sense of reason and materialism, living in an intuitive world that is difficult to define and close, i.e., philosophy/religion.

I will stop here but there are also thought dimensions from 0-D to 1-D and and 3-D to 4-D. These are biochemical potentials or to use traditonal language, the spirits or time projections that animate the soul (1-D to 3-D).

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

If one remains focused at 2.5-D to 3-D, one can lose their sense of reason and materialism, living in an intuitive world that is difficult to define and close, i.e., philosophy/religion.

Fractal Philosophy; I love it. Put me down for the occasional 4.6 burst off a roller coaster over the whole range. Here's a view from my car:
http://hypography.com/gallery/showim...c=3&userid=796

[HydrogenBond]

There as also thought dimensions from 0-D to 1-D and from 3-D to 4-D. Using the mathematical analogy since 1-D thought is a line, 0-D thought would be a point. As dimension increases from 0-D the point becomes lines of increasing length. At 1-D the line becomes infinite. 1-D thoughts are those that remain continuously, such as the letters of the alphabet are always in our minds, Dimensions less than 1-D are memories that remain for a finite duration. At 0-D this would be an instant. For example, the creation of the universe lasted the smallest duration of time and was a 0-D thought. As we increases from 0-D we enter the realm of nuclear transitions, then chemical transitions. At 0.5-D we enter biochemical transitions. The range from 0.5-D to 1-D are biochemical potentials, such as instinctive potentials which focus the mind along certain lines of memory for a finiite duration of time. For example, the hunger impulse will animate the body and memory along the lines of food, food gathering, food prep and eating. This time projection or finite duration memory organization lasts maybe 20mins to an hour. After that, that line of coordinated thought ends. One can work through lunch thereby overcoming its finite duration; the hunger will expire.

Thought at 0.5-D appears to be fear associated with survival. It last maybe 10 sec. After than either the animal was caught or it escape. At the upper end near 1-D is sleep whic last say 8 hours. Here the time projection is connected to dreaming.

Thought dimensions from 3-D to 4-D are also time projections which use spatial memory organization. At 3-D the time projection is for an instant, while at 4-D it would be to eternity. In the middle at 3.5-D is the time projection associated with life expectancy. From conception or birth the genetic potential lasts a lifetime. Between 3-D and 3.5-D is the realm for human time projection. If one can plan the integrated activites of their day thay are using 3+-D thought. If they can plan their life they are using thought dimension approaching 3.5-D. Beyond 3.5-D is less connected to the individual as it is connected to the evoltuon of the species. For example, Einstrein's theories of relativity outlived him and has provided a basis for contemporary and future human thought. Jesus time projected even further since the ipact of his teachings are still going strong after 2000 years.

The time projections from 3-D to 4-D are not just composed of conscious planning of spatial memory but also unconscious planning of spatial memory. For example, the stages of life, from youth into adolescence, to adulthood, into middle age then to old age are each genetically programmed time projections of everything we are, i.e., time projection of a human spatial integration. There are also time projections stemming from internal personality software. This is a realm that is unconscious in most people so it will not be discussed further.

Creativity, especially that which leads social change, is often beyond 3.5-D. Sometimes ideas are out of time until the future. Bible prophesies, fact or fantasy, helps the human mind to focus itself at higher than 3-D. One must plan for what appears to be the inevidable future. While religion projection into infinity or life after death is a way to help the mind focus itself beyond 3.5-D. That is why religion actual helps science because it allows one to evolve their human conscious capacity.

[CraigD]

Interesting. Philosophical. Reminds me of John Lilly’s descriptions of various systems describing “levels of consciousness.”

A couple of serious questions:

• Must the system stop by definition at 4-D? or are higher dimensionalities possible, even if not describable in natural or formal language?
• Have you considered describing your system's different thought dimensionalities from the point of view of an individual person transitioning between them? Lilly’s use of this descriptive technique was very effective, accomplishing in a few paragraphs what would have taken many more, or perhaps failed altogether for many readers, if described more abstractly.

[HydrogenBond]

Stopping at 4-D keeps things in the realm of possible human experience and what the brain wiring can easily provide and what the ego can experience. Higher dimension than 4-D becomes abstraction and speculation. As far as an integrated example, if one went to a book signing of a philosophical author one may try to memorize some of his lingo in case one gets a chance to talk one-on-one, (1-D to 1.5-D). After seeing the author one may like the way he is dressed (1.5-2-D), like his arguments, (2-D to 2.5-D) but be turned off by his esoteric explanation of certain points (2.5-D to 3-D). After talking briefly with him one begins to realize he is marketeer, making one animated with anger (0.5-1.0-D). After returning home one begins to plan a discrediting stategy for fighting the author (3+-D). In the process or organizing ones approach one comes up with a profound way of looking at things that helps others (3.5+-D).

[Turtle]

___I understand your generalized assignment of data points & think we now require the specifics. Which anger is .503 & which is .521 for example & how is that established?
___Assuming that task is accomplished, is there a set of operations whereby 15 angrys = an epiphany; so to say an addition or multiplication or some accumlative function?

[Mercenaryend]

so what happens if something speculated becomes proven , do you just add it to 4.- what ever?

[HydrogenBond]

The theory was only defined for the half dimensions from 0-4., so one can get a feel for what each range implies. To fill in these sub ranges is not an easy task . Anyone is welcome to try but it is hard to get agreement. Higher dimension can be better but is not always better than lower. The whole range are natural parts of our human range. Thinking close to 3-D seems great but it is so hard to put into words that it would hard to share with others. Staying in the rational from 2-2.5-D is good for science but it can make one lose their ability to have fun and be silly at less than 2-D. The idea is try to be complete instead of a specialists.

[questor]

H2, i think the brain has been fairly well mapped as to areas where different thought centers are located. you may remember some years ago a man had an accident losing a large part of his skull. he agreed to experiments which consisted of stimulating his bare brain to elicit reactions. the thought centers may be similarly located but the thought processes are quite different. i believe the ''wiring '' is different for different people and this accounts for our great political problem of having the country about 40% liberal and 40% conservative with the rest somewhere in between. this prevents the country from reaching a political consensus and generates great animosity. left brain-right brain research results can be found by googling

[questor]

just an opinion of mine, which may engender great anger from some. i think the liberal, or right brain thinkers cannot think but one step ahead. they can recognize a problem and pose a solution. they cannot see the consequences of the solution.welfare is a good example, political correctnesss another. this is why we are constantly spending huge sums of money for social experimentation. e.g. the education system. left brain thinkers can usually rationally consider all aspects of an issue and handle it in a business like fashion.
these are not scientifically proved facts--just my own observation.