The Fog Of Reality?

In many strategy games you have very large maps. And one of the common components of such games, and maps, is that you don't know what is in an arbitrary map space until you get within some perceptual range of it.

This is taken even further, of course, in that having finally gotten to whatever point, you then get a picture that will become static once you are no longer in perceptual range; that special fog once again asserting itself.

I've been wondering of late about what might be a reality correlation to that fog.

As meaning processors, bringing our meaning space into interaction with physical space, I have to wonder about just how well defined unperceived areas of a reality are until they are a part of that interaction; especially when you couple it with how powerful the energy of belief is.

You also have to wonder about the possible difference there might be in being physically present for direct perceptive, interpretive, interaction, as opposed to getting some of the electromagnetic information left over from those interactions. I present that, of course, as a question because so much of our cosmology is based on very old snapshots of far away map points. And I am left, at least modestly convinced, that getting this information certainly does get back to the point of origin, as some, however faint, indication of being perceived; but more importantly perceived with a meaning system's set of defining assumptions, and whereupon, with which, choices are made, and probabilities realized.

How can it be overstated how profound that is, as a relationship, at a fundamental level. But I don't want to get sidetracked on that; at least not just yet.

In any case though, as already stated, in wondering about interpretive, interactive perception, and consequent action taking, you also have to wonder if, in receiving this information, despite its probable faintness, or its time displacement from a supposed, now many hundreds of millions, if not billions, of light years away, point, might not be able, even retroactively, to assert some of this "interpretive, interactive perception, back on that point.

Obviously, if you start from a specific point of reference (our singularity of expansion), most of the basics of boundary resolution, and boundary interaction (which I think is field theory in an unprofessional nutshell), are going to be set. From which, then, all subsequent interactive, structural possibilities are defined. That being said, though, doesn't necessarily preclude significant wiggle room for a wide range of connection, and transfer, variations within that overall, structural, probability distribution curve.

So here's the real conjecture I want to regale you with: What is truly possible if, very very large numbers of people, working in concert with not only of a shared meaning system, but whose work was the living example of that meaning system, thus demonstrating a concurrent level of shared belief. A belief system that might allow both for the idea that anything is possible, even if it is not very likely. A belief system that held hope, spirit, and empathy as very important things, but also did so with the same regard for logic, tradition, and great objectifications of process, feelings, or thought; struggling always to bridge the tension of that balance.

Then think about how different a reality might be if it were only one of the sides of the above balance that were in place as the dominating perceptual, descriptive, and interactive, modality of our imaginary, probably galaxy spanning, mass of working, believing people.

Just some more stuff to think about. Interesting stuff I hope.

What do you think?