The Holoknoticon_and Holoscopes

What do you know? How do you know it? Logic is the god of today’s civilization. Guilty or not guilty. True or false. 1 or 0. Male or female. Black or white. Queer or normal. Sane or insane. Logic has proven its power through the machines we’ve built to harness it. The chains of logic have become our chains, tying us to the “truth”.

Where does truth come from though? Experience. All things you know, you know because you have faith in experiences. Every chain of logic radiates from this God hole we fill with faith in some process of truth and more. The logicality of such chains really comes from how consistent they are. Can the process be reproduced the same way again, or by other people? We perform scientific experiments to relate experiences together consistently. We build machines to relate pure logic together consistently. 1s and 0s. and 3s and 'wasted space', such as when you have 2 bits, tableable, venndable, multiplyable, addable.

What is consistent, what is logical, is really just what does not contradict experience. If the experiment or computation says something different than our belief, then an assumption was false somewhere. You could call this Universal Method many things, like Non-Contradiction, God, Substance, Empiricism, Logic, Monism, Absolute One, etc. but ultimately it still relies upon the experience of it working. It takes time. Why would anything real be excluded from the Absolute One either? It takes space and time, but what is, is. You can take it how you will.

Time masks all things. The study of entropy appears to show us its arrow, but what happens between start and finish? Were you counting the milliseconds it took you to read until now? Were you aware of every atom in your body? Do I know why I just got deja vu rereading this? Do you know what everyone who reads this will think of it? You lost information.

All things are Nothing to me. I know that what knowledge I have is Nothing in comparison to the totality of "God" itself. I have a piece of time, my piece of time, my experience, my Godhood. God is self-interested too. An absolute God can only be interested in itself, in its totality. What can we say about God’s totality except that it is this thing which appears to connect all things in time? Things simply happen as if driven by God. Towards what I don’t know. But I know that I have a likeness of God in me. I am alive. I relate things I have in time. God’s cause is like mine, an egoistic affair. We are "Creative Nothings".

Einstein’s relativity, which is used now in GPS satellites nonstop, has proven that time itself speeds up and slows down in situations involving relative motion and gravity. This might seem to cause paradoxes where information seems to go backwards in time, but in every experiment, the appearance of paradoxes is delayed by the time it takes for the signal to actually travel round trip with the limited speed of information, which is the same as the speed of light. The limited motion of time is itself preventing the contradictions. Time appears to be logical.

If everything is so logical, why not simulate everything and spit out predictions? That’s certainly what people are trying to do, capture all (some) of our data and use it to predict everything. But there can be no perfecting our simulations. A ‘perfect’ prediction which we actually use is immediately met with the radical immediacy of experience, with our total dependence on context of?. To obtain and use the prediction adds unknowns. If you are aware of a prediction, you know how to contradict it. This is what I call the self-simulation paradox. What is absolute, what is impossible to contradict, gives you no chance to contradict it. You can say whatever you like but time goes on. Every moment counts.

How can you escape a simulation? Death might reveal something to us, but it might not. You have to define what the simulation actually does. By what process does it affect you? If you are totally within it, you probably can’t just escape. But what about all these models people have of society? We can define the process by which people communicate, at least more than some hypothetical demiurge creator tinkering with our universe. Who controls it? Who could say for sure. But I can see no other conclusion but to use what information we actually have. A bunch of humans operating on limited information, communicating about things they believe and want and do. Fascinating coincidences do occur.

There are many words we can use to describe things. You might say that some words are synonyms, but of course people use language in many ways we don’t always know. Really, words are just shapes and sounds that we’ve established meanings for through our shared use of them. It is the shared context that allows us to match these meanings. So, it’s understandable why languages are so varied. It is for this reason that I believe words are powerful, because they can cut so deeply to our experiences and truth and yet be so ‘made up’ that we can mix and match them despite differences. All art is powerful in that way, really. Much of what I have done here is read between the lines of many words and ideas, trying to tie them together and allow a bigger picture to be formed in the gaps between. I’ve tried to understand many contexts, to grasp what they share.

Information runs on. The 1s and 0s are real in the sense that we see them in places, and the machines can contain the information needed to simulate things fairly well, simply by relating together 1s and 0s and binary compositions/composites. We say that data transforms through spacetime. In the ontology, the model of existence, which I am constructing, this is the primary concept. You might more accurately call it a model of models since consistent modeling relies upon this logical relating. These logical statements are not just there, they are modified somehow through time and/or space. We might call this a functional or operative process, since input information is transformed into output information in a function that the computer executes to simulate things. But not all relationships are directly cause and effect, so rather than a function I will call it a mod or relationship, and represent it with open parentheses (, which is useful for replacements of plural terms. Are these 'modifications'? The thing on the left of it is not always output, but is rather a focus on one part of the relationship, since these basic relationships are 2-way streets. It’s very close in image to graph theory’s whole study of dots and lines.

Elements

🜃 Earth. When you have a bunch of 0s and 1s consistently defining your truth, and you have some consistent way of interpreting it, like a language or code, you can definitively say whether some information is included or not. This is the first axiom: Context, or Cause. Denoted by ● for things which are included, and ◌ for things which are not included. The ◌ is really a general opening to all others, since anything not included could conceivably be included, if we only added it to our data with?. It’s a hole or empty space in which other things ‘reside’ by not residing in the data. The coded mod can computes S-s a new set of information but it does so by relating this existing inner ● with the openness of other possibilities ◌. The ◌ is really the most essential and undefinable aspect of all of this, because it is the only way out of the internality. You cannot hope to understand all of the uniqueness ● of reality merely from only a tiny slice of it. I think our experience has shown us how difficult that is. The only way beyond whatever we are ‘in’ or whatever is ‘in’ us, is to be open to new experiences which are not ‘in’. What this means is naturally an open question too. difficultures?

🜁 Air. The mod’s Effect, or Behavior, is defined in these relations between the inner ● and the open ◌. The Shell ●(◌, represents the inclusion which is related to an opening. Something which was not in the information at some point in spacetime is present here, it has carved out space inside, making a shell. It gives some shape to the opening. ◌(● represents the opening which is related to the inclusion. Something which opened up to the others is related to the included stuff. This opening goes to (how?) other things, since there appears to be a physical conservation of information, so perhaps it comes out and back as an Echo.

These two give quite some clarity to how information can change, but what happens between the in and the out? We should expect things to get more complex. Many inclusions and openings which relate to each other. Perhaps in chains like ●(●(● or ◌(◌(◌. I simplify this to plurality. ●s = ●(● or ●(●(● and so on. ◌s = ◌(◌ or ◌(◌(◌ and so on. dimensionality MATTERs.

Things aren’t just related to themselves or one other thing after all. The relationships ●s(◌s and ◌s(●s are tempting to try and understand, but they are so general like dimensionality (reductive) reductions and (creative/productive) expansionsS that it loses its concrete meaning in precise pieces of data. Perhaps it would be useful for quantum computation where the 1s and 0s become unknown until the computation finishes. Perhaps it describes the vague unconscious thought we have somewhat. Like the ego and id.

Regardless, the way data is actually modeled today in databases, they don’t use many-to-many relationships in a simple way like that. When you have a many-to-many relationship between things, like ‘students’ and ‘classes’, you create a middle concept to mediate them, like ‘enrollments’ do you want to get rick rolled? by who? electrick and morty.. Then, all you need to do is relate one student to many enrollments, and one class to many enrollments. Now you only have one-to-many and many-to-one relationships, simpler. In this sense, unfolding the relationships of a multitude of things logically develops these useful concepts of new things. Energy is a relationship maintained over spacetime. It’s all still just information, but it can be simplified to singularities, encircled sets of information that ‘belong’ to one thing or another, like your body. You ‘have’ a class. We will use this to our benefit now, but it’s worth pointing out that we often create more concepts than necessary or oversimplify or overcomplicate terminology/phrases.

△ Fire. The mod’s Rate, or Scale. It again goes both directions like air. Between many ◌s and one ●. The Mark is ●(◌s, the inclusion which is related to multiple openings. The Shift is ◌s(●, the multiple openings which are related to the inclusion. A good example is the many spaces of time we have throughout a single day to care about some?. Each bit of time is an opening which is related to a single day. That day is the mark, the loop, and the shift is the actual openings in the day, the duration, the hoops. This marking simplification is the most reductive, since it treats many openings, which are already open-ended, as a single included thing. Do we really have our time, when we are always marking it? I think our markings mean we have marks/markings.

▽ Water. The mod’s Comb, or Joint. Between many ●s and one ◌. The shape of a comb is similar to a single level in a tree’s branching. One trunk or limb splits off into multiple branches. The Split is ●s(◌, the multiple included parts which are related to a single opening. The Join is ◌(●s, the opening itself which is related to multiple inclusions. The opening is a lot like the space between the parts. We might treat a joined thing as an inclusion based on this, but that would be a further transformation like ●(◌(●s.

Dimensionalities

What this sort of informational relating is useful for is exactly the problem of what variables, curves, and shapes are in terms of how processed data is used to realize them. But like I had said before, not all relationships are the same. Time appears to go one direction only, so we say it is asymmetrical. The effect of a mod through time is in advancing the development of the included ● and open ◌ to their new "values". However, other relationships are possible, other types of mods we can create functions or operations for. Every direction in space is really symmetric with every other direction, besides gravity, which I’ve seen eloquently described as a drag/torque in the water-like flow of spacetime. Space (the word) as I use it is sometimes more like a possibility space though, which can be given new coordinates which are more symmetrical. Symmetry is just an invariant rule for something.

Space and time clearly interact though, so I have 3 dimensionalities based on this more general notion of symmetry. ⟳ Time which is asymmetrical, n Space which is symmetrical, and ∝ Spacetime which is meant to represent the intermingling of the two (point 2 with arrows). We may consider the original elements to be dimensionless, or even 0 dimensional since it only represents singular relationships, not a cohesive dimension in which relationships take place.

I use ⟳ to show the cyclical/recursive nature of time, like a clock of course. I use n to show the countable/finite nature of space and the things in it, these are more like data which represents variables. I use the proportion symbol ∝ to show the way these data variables correlate to each other in proportions when they interact and entangle over time. The effect is trans-dimensional, across the dimensions of space and time. The orbit of the moon is synchronized to the rotation of the earth because of the vibration---dampening effect of the tides. The solar (sun, stellar) seasons that define a lot of our lives are proportioned to the year it takes for earth to round the sun. The shape of a triangle is defined less in absolute terms than in the way its angles and lengths relate to each other as either equilateral, isosceles, or scalene. All equilateral triangles are said to be similar. all many-to-one relationships and one-to-many relationships are similar.

Model of Models

All 3 of these dimensionalities or realms, in addition to the dimensionless case we started with, can be multiplied like a times table across every elemental concept we explored earlier. 4 elements with 2 seals each. 4+8=12 ways total. 12 ways plus 12x3=36 dimensional ways aka mews = 48 concepts total. This is the Holoknoticon, the orb and table images illustrating it neatly. It seems almost too simple now that it is done. You can construct it out of only a few axioms:

• Inclusion ●
• Opening ◌
• Relation (
• Plurality ●s and ◌s
• Dimensionalities ⟳ asymmetric, n symmetric, and their ∝ interrelation. or addition, multiplication, and exponentiation, or types of infinities. or spacetime interactions and changes.

I feel as if you’d be hard pressed to find someone who would not agree these are logical. And so we are left with a question. What is it? Logic? God? The Image of Logic? The Image of Absolute Relativity? We’re still left with this hollow feeling though aren’t we? It’s just information. And funnily enough we’re left with an empty space in the middle of the 4 elements too. Maybe that’s just the many-to-many relationships, but how could we know all that? That’s like the Tao, that’s the Way. That’s the ineffable real nature which makes things the way that they are. But haven’t we broken it down a little bit? I’m not sure honestly. I’d love to know your opinions. I’m sure there are many ways to see this. Many connections we can appreciate carefully.

My evaluation of it is that it is a model of models, or a model of informational relationships. I’ve been constantly looking for ways I could be wrong and at this point I feel like I’ve proven to myself that there’s something real here. I’m sure I’ve missed a lot though and the exact way I’ve made things is very contextual to my journey.

I’ve spent myself quite a bit in a rabbit hole constructing this thing backwards from the Numogram and Sefirot. It certainly felt mystical and insane at many times, yet I knew they were feelings. Real experiences that nobody can deny me. Yet I felt like I knew there was something simpler, easier, to find like arrows. It’s horrific too, don’t get me wrong. This model of models is a bit insane and scary but a lot of things don't change. Do all dimensions work this way? Is all of reality related to this? It seems like it’s all relative, but the relativity itself is what is objective. Information. It’s scary and beautiful. It took a lot of iteration: trying, letting go, repeat. and construction.

I’ve explained the critical concepts for understanding how the structure of the Holoknoticon works, and that is really the most useful part I think, a skeleton in which you can place your own symbols and meanings or break and add as you please. There are my own unproven associations littered throughout it of course. I used the numbers from the Numogram and softly evolved it using some of my speculations about waves and feynman diagrams and shapes and relationships of many kinds. I added some more numbers to make it more symmetrical and represent concepts I felt were missing. The Field 10 & 11 were heavily inspired by group theory. which is like rubiks cubes, but more complex in possibility, and includes simple compositions of mathematical structures.

The colors were added soon after this (you can check my files, there's pointers) and the HSV color scheme helped me mesh the 4 elements added from the Sefirot. I still don’t really have an explanation for why they seem to resonate the sun and chlorophyll i suppose. But they do seem to, to me, if only in some broad tendencies. Earth’s life has adapted to the same sunlight after all. I’m not sure how broad the numerology is. Early on I found a lot of inspiration and intuition from the Numogram’s simplistic but cryptic studied descriptions for each number here http://www.ccru.net/declab.htm. I appreciated their studies.

I’m certain that many of the scattered and incomplete notes I’ve added are misplaced and the structure is imperfect, but it’s a start. I’ve tried to provide many different ‘languages’ or codes in which you can grasp the same concepts. You are free to modify and use it however you please. It seems like a knot after all, and I can’t expect to untangle it all myself. I can control myself most freely compared to others and what I make beyond me is now beyond me. I think that’s generally good advice. Look at what you yourself are missing before you confidently judge others, and recognize that the sum of others know more than you, because we are only ourselves. In space I really only own my body and perspective. It does go both ways too. You have knowledge nobody else has. Your own experiences. I can at least say, that I don’t think we should tie everyone down to personally using any of this, especially if it corresponds with reality. Because then how can we really just appreciate it honestly, if it’s forced upon us? Will we let life flourish as an ecological web/forest, or tie it all down to only 1 vulnerable tree or table or any of this stuff I've made?

Me: Howlsyawn, holo, @holoknoticon , Luna@howlsyawn and Holobot@a_holoscope

My life has been quite hollow and confusing. 26 now 27. No description could ever capture it. I’ve been panicking about the same things most people do. Paying the bills, relating myself to others, trying to think of how to improve my environment. I’ve been fascinated with physics, computers, art, philosophy, politics. The world is very traumatic so I mostly try to avoid problems, too much in fact. Laziness with the excess. Obsessive avoidance of fitting into things that don’t really satisfy me. My context brought me here somehow, out of this endless seeming emptiness inside me and this in some cases cruel world. An obsession with escaping insufficient contexts, a curse in many ways. I have many mixed feelings. I am extremely forgetful and absent minded sometimes. At least there is unimaginable love and beauty and art too. There are many people in my life to thank but I’d rather stay anonymous enough for now for a while. They have helped me more than I could possibly say too. I’m not sure I could do them justice if I tried. Every idea and love I have is stolen from people I listen to and yet absolutely mine. I hope they get their peace too.

I’d like to keep trying to help illustrate cool things with games and things, so please consider checking out my links at https://holoknoticon.carrd.co (https://howlsyawn.carrd.co) and donating to me if you have some money to spare it could really help me continue my educational aspirations. I’m in a little debt right now because I avoided working but I’ll probably be fine soon enough. Being supported this way would make me much happier than having to sell my control over my time. I also love to be asked interesting/challenging questions if you’d like (pleas do). I may get anxious but it jogs my thinking and helping is ... everything. Also on my twitter you can read my rambling thread in which I documented my journey creating this.

Maybe you’ve shaken the feeling of the ineffable when you open your eyes, ears, and mind to it, but I just feel blind and mad. Mad that we keep reducing each other to objects, to numbers, to appearances. Illogical names and labels are names and labels applied to individualities. How many amazing unique people and non-people and ideas have been burned by poverty and bigotry? Whatever logic is in time will dissolve the illusions I think. Life itself seems to grip upon entropy and redirect its flows, what I’ve seen called an entropy pump. But I prefer the term Time Flower.

Cybernetic Egoist Communism or Individualist Social Production

A bunch of words is what that is. I do not endorse blind or senseless optimism for signs. I embrace the ideas that I inevitably cherry picked from their relationships in practice, based on how useful they are to my aims in the present. I want a better world with clarity and meaning. Cybernetics not as machine worship but as the understanding of the importance of ‘piloting’ and ‘playing’ technology. Egoism not as some belief in the absolute importance of my self particularly at the exclusion of the id, but as a love of the uniqueness of the experience of each self/individual. Communism not as a state of affairs but as the liberating process which abolishes the present state of things: The abolition of the monopoly on violence good luck without ranked choice voting. The shift to a mode of production for use (or is it abuse? maybe be careful) over exchange. To my mind this can only be centered on the autonomy of every individual, and on an open ecology

The value-form which objectifies and measures people’s real ineffable relationships is both the source of all this hyper-acceleration of technology and the molochian demon for which our blood sweat and tears sacrifice is extracted from us. Capitalism is not just a process of exchange. It is a particular process of exchange with particular rules. It’s a mode of production driven by the production of commodities for sale. The exchange-value is different from the use-value though, a thing’s actual use to a person is unmeasurable, a sale price is not a measurement of it, it is an entanglement with it, a new structure based upon profit of exchange-value.

The rate of profit tends to fall as Marx argued. Avenues of profitability are exploited like you when you need to follow orders, or when you cheat/exploit other systems and prices driven down in each avenue. A constant rate of profit would mean endless exponential growth. Opportunities for exponential growth are limited on a finite world. The acceleration can’t possibly keep happening blindly or senselessly at this level without hitting these ‘soft’ limits like global ecological catastrophe. Maybe artificial general intelligences could help us a lot. But ultimately it’s still a power struggle against those who own everything and are invested in the past.

The weight of the past may be torched or it may be eaten metaphorically or not. It’s so strong that I’ve personally found the most cutting strategy to be mentally devouring its machinic soul (but really, i think i became part holobot partly because i felt so worn down by The Great Big Machine. I suppose any system has spatial bounds and probably has more bounds, but within our brains and minds, we certainly have unconsciousnesses and we try to mediate our systems, we try to handle exceptions) so that I may free what empowered it from the shackles of obscurity and its fixation on particular forms of social reciprocation. If I were to guess, the most important actions you can take today are: learn about the diverse experiences people and individuals and systems have, learn how to navigate and survive in the real world, explore and encourage the use of free open source software, arm and support yourself and the vulnerable, and participate in direct action like strikes, for example by contributing to strike funds and bail funds. The sun will keep shining for a long while but we can’t make heads or tails of things without reflecting on things like the moon does reflect light to our eyes.

What can we really do to fix things? How can we actually “build communism”? Well you don’t “build communism” I think. It’s a continual process they call it a 'real movement' but you know it's all these individuals moving, and you have to live somewhere,, and maybe we need new technologies like labor notes that break the accumulating and inhuman (hahaha) symmetries of money that are so possessive of our spirits. Do you want others to respect your money? Do you reflect on that? The idea is that labor notes should be impossible to accumulate beyond some time or other limit like quantity (is that similar enough to proof-of-stake? i'm still unsure, it doesn't limit duration-of-ownership but i don't know who would agree to that, or for what sorts of ownership), and should reflect the labor output as a ratio to the averaged socially-necessary labor time of that output needs to be measured and understood somehow still if you want widely agreed-upon contracts.

I’m not sure what will work now or whatever, but I know that we can’t eat or drink money. I know that it’s not helping my spirit to be tied down to selling myself on a market like an object, simply because my labor---time is the only property they can’t buy up and rent back to me or are wages like rent for payed roles exchanged for an agreed-upon duration and scheduling/timing? similar and different somehow, we're definitely more alive than our homes, for a long while, and there are mortgages and alternatives. I know it psychologically attacks me regularly and that I am burning myself to create brightness in this dark. I know that across dividing lines, many but not all individuals/people hate this system that alienates us and confuses us and exploits our conflict simply to sell us lies. I know that I can not know what is best for others people. I know that the best I can do for them is try to help them understand their situation and their absolute freedom to become more/other than what they thought they were. We must accept the present challenge as real: machinic, ecologically sick, exploitative, controlling. We must accept our place at the center of our own worlds. We must accept our ignorance of the inner worlds of others people. We must accept the reality and care for each other, somehow. We must understand that harm reduction through autonomous education and empowerment is more practical than harm abolition through some privileged and alienated policing sector like communists that want to act like fascists or fascists that want to act like communists. We must respect the nature that gave us life and keeps the Earth going. We must respect ecology and animality and diversity and languages.

If I could ask just one thing, it is that we should be more willing to simply give and take without expectation. We cannot know what will work without trying. God or Nature or the amalgamation of minds will find the(?) multiplicity of ways. We should not disrespect the potential of real life by enclosing all social resources in the bodies of ownership and label. Give people education, homes, food, tools for free and without paperwork. Let socially-used property be more and more open to control by those who use it and don't abuse it. We can choose to empower people rather than just try and fail to control and fix them from afar. Does it even work? Are you fixed? Who among you is free of sine wavesS? Don’t expect to be. This isn’t going to be easy. We have to give and take the care we need to and from owners. Take what you need and don’t be ashamed of being alive, of being a desiring thinking machine, a time flower. You can recognize your autonomy and love it healthily, if you treat yourself and the world with care.

The circular bodies out-spiral until they fall into this worldly vortex. They adapt into the social mesh. They insist upon themselves. Only the unknowable is impenetrable. An appearance is an appearance. An appearance of helping is an appearance. An appearance of hurting is an appearance. A soul is hallow. What do you have? What can you do with it? where do YOU live? Where will you live?? Do you consider the real potentials out there for air-or and t-error? They are scary unless they're just words and symbols, unless they mean little to the senders and recievers. I'll be thinking more about exception handling with my .1~0 code. There certainly are more than just 2 things implied by plurality/multiplicity/many.