Containers of Containers -- A pamphlet on the Notion of Cosmolosophy and the Need For Change: Could Implied Measurement Be Another Elemental Intent?

[Post Note: The "See Also" section here, at the bottom, has a review of what I believe are most of the posts associated with my alternative view of a Cosmological Model, as it exists as of this moment in time, including the Cosmolosophy Diagram. These are presented in a descending order from most recent, to last (except for the diagram itself). J.V.]

We can imply centripetal force after all. That tension along a vector perpendicular to the center of rotation that has to be implied because there is no actual thrust coming out of the object in question to create that tension; the angular momentum having to be translated in some fashion or another, to an ultimate net effect.

This is simply the implied measurement that must be in place so that, in an iterative system that must register specific state changes, at some sort of regular timing interval, a specific amount of change can be applied to the operating environment in which the system exists in, so that new state can be the input for the next experiential time step.

And could the implied measurement be thought of as taking place as a part of the meaningful connection that made having that interaction take place at all? The channel of the meaningful connection itself being not only the conveyor of information, but its own, implicit generator as well for what an amount, in various characterizations of course, that corresponds to an affective aspect the link just existing at all.

Then the question becomes: why should a person care?

I think it is because this adds a further element to thinking about a Cosmology where meaning (or gravity as others might call it) doesn't curve spacetime; it is just another field effect, Elemental Intent, that can be handled by field effect equations. And how you might ask?

Well, I think it goes like this: why does a satellite orbit around a planet, or an electron around a nucleus, and so on? With meaning curving spacetime, of course, we know why: the velocity of rotation around the larger object is not enough to overcome the attraction of the larger amount of meaning. But if meaning doesn't curve spacetime, what then?

What if the "Elemental Embrace" itself was the implied need to feel some sense of the entanglement we all know now that measuring anything can impart. Does the measurement create the entanglement, and the entanglement create the attractive force? After all, how else would the system know that the orbital velocity was still not too much, or too little, to keep the orbiting in place as originally found in an arbitrary span of observation.

See Also: