Sequoias, Parkinson’s and Space Sickness

Sequoias, Parkinson’s and Space Sickness:  What these all have in common.
Set Point Model, 2.

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/COMP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014..
For some time, having been a field biologist for over 50 years, many have wondered not only why Sequoias grow so tall, but also so large. Basically theses are S. sempervirens, the coastal redwoods & S. gigantea, the giant redwoods known best at Sequoia National Park in California, which uniquely in all the world shares these two ancient species, from 100-120 megayears ago,. Florissant Fossil Beds park is where they are also found, as well as a number of fossilized trees in the so called petrified forests in North Am. But how do they get so very tall as well as long lived? Today, few have any inklings why, but the answers may be actually quite simple, if we think using the comparison process and its methods, the least energy principle and the set point model.

The set point models as has been described in greater detail, is also a comparisons method, and as such can be applied/compared to almost anything to find the relationships and connections among events in existence. These correspondences can then be sued to define uniquely many skills & methods & how those can be used to understand, as well. Wherever comparison processes can be used, there also can set point models be founds, describing series of events which are similar and also uniquely, such as languages, personalities, etc. It’s similar to reference points, but not the same as these describe the comparisons which go on which define and allow such events to be uniquely recognized, defined and their structural relationships to other similar events. Like the LEP and comparison process, these are broadly applicable to most everything and thus have a nearly universal value and capabilities to describe, both generally and in detail, well within the hierarchies, the classifications of our understandings, which are based, mostly, upon the comparison process. More has been written in The Set Point Model, 1, which will be published in time.

Essentially, why the sequoias have lasted so long has been covered in The Fox & the Hedgehog”

But one of the ways in which they have lived so long is a set point which must be discussed and is a very deep principle rooted not only in physics, but also in neurophysiology, as well as botanical physiology and has not been really very well addressed or much written about. Essentially, how do plants know which way is down and which way is up? The bean grows from a seed, which when warm & moist sends out the little root, the radical, which even if the bean is buried upside down will grow around & down into the soil. Not only the radical, but the stem & leaves know to grow upwards toward the light & sun & more warmth. But in fact, a little thought shows that these two words, geotropism & phototropism are likely misnomers, which in the latter case is also incomplete, too. The stem tends to grow up, towards the sun, but not in every case. The leaves and flowers can also detect the sun, and leaves & flowers can slowly turn to follow the sun around as the earth turns towards and then away from the sun, producing this illusion of the sun moving. Flowers sense light and will most often gloom during the day and close up at night, tho the night blooming Cereus is a notable exception although it appears to be pollinated by night insects such as moths, which are not active during the day very much. Thus the phototropic flowers can be pollinated by bees and other insects.

But phototropism cannot explain the growth of the sequoia, because if that were the case then it would bend towards the light in temperate climate, But it does not sincerely NOT do that. otherwise it’d topple over, and be unable to reach such great heights of over 360′ , 113 m. How does it do this and what are the set points which make plant growth upwards/downwards possible? These are great mysteries, but have been partly figured out except for one, big problem. In order to reach such great heights the Sequoia must be able to detect exactly, to a high degree of precision where physically, gravitationally, Down is, must it not? And while it grows it must constantly be maintaining and checking this sense, and not letting any cross section of the trunk vary by so much as a mm. or so from true vertical, maintaining this balance possibly using hydrostatic measurements. Then it must lay down bark as well as cambium exceedingly precisely comparing against its “center of gravity” detection system, too. If it cannot do this, which it most decidedly can, or if the roots are undermined by erosion over 1000’s of years, then it will topple, eventually and could not reach such heights, either.

So we have this high precision gravity detector in the Sequoia and to some extent in most OTHER plants, unless they be ground hugging vines, which will not have that system, or activated long after seeds sprouting, either. This difference in comparison must then decidedly define what makes plants grow along the ground, tho their leaves point up and face the sun, versus the Douglas fir, which must also reach great heights by having an exquisitely sensitivity gravitational set point detector, as well. Thus, the ability to detect exactly DOWN in the local gravitation field, and to adjust the growth of bark, cambium and in the upper tree limbs, that the branches should all balance, is the case.

Now note in pines that grow straight up, that we can estimate the Age of each of them by counting the branch scars of the pine, which lie at almost exactly the same heights in concentric rings around these trees, I recall observing such new growth pine forests, then realizing I could closely estimates the Ages of each tree by counting branch scar rings & up thru the crown of the existing branches, Most deciduous trees don’t have these, and they also don’t grow as tall or straight either. The apparently gave up fast upwards growth for less height and more spreading out. But they still have that problem of balance, esp. in the live oaks which spread out so very greatly. So apparently THOSE are also using a similar system of balancing growth so they don’t topple over too soon. We seen how our knowledge expands by comparing the growth of the sequoias on the coasts, to the giant sequoias, to the deciduous trees which do not reach such great heights, and then comparing them yet again to the very tall, Douglas firs which can reach very great heights, but not so well as the coastal redwoods. & thus this sets up a new field of discovering the set point models which describe how each tree, or indeed each plant knows how to grow UP-WARDS!! Comparison process creating creativity, new understanding, new areas of investigations and so forth. This is the power of the COMP, when used properly and carefully.

So therefore it’s now incumbent upon us to find out HOW this gravity sense is created, maintained and used in plants to grow upwards and straight upwards. And note that tree ferns do this also, so the mechanism must be a very old one, although the Sequoias have created a high efficiency system which not only gives long life, because they will not topple over, but have an exquisite system of how to detect gravity at every level in the tree trunk, and balance that with such precision that they can outgrow as well as outlive most all other plants known. These critical observations create an entirely new field in botany of dendro-gravitational study. And the set points whereby the trees know when they are a bit off true gravity compared to the local gravitational fields.

We often see trees which in persistently strong winds, tend to grow upwards, but see them leaning away from the average strong wing direction, too. The coastal cypress in the Monterrey Peninsula show this, and those in other places where there are trees, also do, such as inland, where the delta breeze blows often and strongly. have even seen it in trees growing near to a high sped highway, where they lean forwards in the direction of the vehicles which create the winds, which their righting mechanisms cannot correct, either.

So the field is complicated, to say the least, and not at all, for the time , very well understood, either. How does the sapling know to grow upwards away from the exact center of gravity? Weeds do this a bit, but as they grow fast and not so tall, their mechanism is not very precise. But in the cases of the Sequoias & firs, the two tallest of plants, this must be finely tuned and clearly, observably so.

Now here we come to Parkinson’s, which is a condition of low dopamine, and thus is correctable by using L-dopa which can replace much of that which ahs been lost, at least for a while, but not very evenly nor able to avoid getting used to the L-dopa, where it works less and less well, for reasons, still unknown, A process commonly called tachyphylaxis, most well described and known in addictions. (thus suggesting a new field of study) and can eventually create serious movement disorders such as the dyskinesias of high dopamine levels, too.

But what does a Parkinson patient have in common with plants? And that is easy, too.The problem is we are burdened with that ignorant, ancient knowledge that believes there are only 5 senses, where in fact there are dozens of major types and their subtypes, from touch, point detection, two point discrimination, position sense, hot/cold senses, etc., to vision of colours & of light or dark, of tastes, of sounds, etc.. So we’re going to find another sense, we must understand, one which has not been well described and is most certainly unknown in popular culture, too.

It’s been long known by such a brilliant movement disorder neurologist as Dr.C David Marsden, that if we put a moderately to severely affected Parkinson’s patient on a teeter totter, that his righting mechanisms with respect to gravity is not good. This is not due to sensory loss, such as touch, vision & so forth, but is due to an innate loss of the ability to sense where exactly, gravitational Down is. The person stands on the teeter totter, and then it’s moved upwards, from a level position. He falls forwards, unable to right himself, as most persons do when standing on a teeter totter. And also, when we walk along a steeper hillside. Parkinson’s patients can’t do this very well, either. And when the teeter totter is moved down they tend to fall backwards. This is responsible, this lack of gravitational sense, for many of the serious and damaging falls, with broken hips and such, we see with Parkinson’s, so it is NOT a minor problem, but in fact, a life threatening one.

Their sense of where down is  is impaired. This is what we humans have in common with Sequoias, which sounds astonishing, but is in fact the case. We both have gravitational downward sensors, and the straightness of our backs as we grown are yet another indication that we can grow straight up and that this gravitation sense is being fed back into our bodies growth so we don’t grow crooked off to one side or the other. Other tall animals, esp., the giraffes, must also have a built in down detector so those very long necks, like sequoias, can grow straight enough up to counter balance, the pull of gravity. That implies a physiological as well as growth physiological feedback system in both humans, giraffes, as well as trees, too. What are those? We don’t know. So the field of biology which understands how plants/animals can detest and thus KNOW how to grow up (grin) is still in its infancy, but needs clearly to be developed. All,this we learn you see from watching Douglas firs, sequoias and Parkinson’s patients!!!

Then there is an exceedingly rare case of a woman who lost completely her sense of touch and feeling, and used vision to correct her loss of down, and position sense, showing the other side of the problem, too. See “The Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat”, by Oliver Sachs, MD.

When walking we are constantly using our foot receptors via post dorsal spinal columns which tell us where down is. Our eyes will be constantly using trees, landscape and building set points, and other “set points” to know where down and up are, and making those adjustments We know this happens, when we see persons sort of wobbling back and forth while standing with the eyes closed!! Alcohol tends to disturb the balance sense.

Now we get to space sickness, right? How does this all tie in, then. It’s related to the loss of gravitational down sense in the nervous system. The inner ears, the gravity sensors. vision, and the foot sensors can’t find gravitation DOWN, anymore. This creates motions sickness, clearly. & this is where that set point model really comes into play. and have written this before, in less detail in:
Please peruse sections 1 and then 5, et seq.

So what do we do and has space sickness realty been well enough understood and how to correct it either? No. Here are some very critical and useful ways of taking care of space sickness & making it improve substantially faster and better, other than taking promethazine and dealing with days of incapacitate which can be more easily avoided & mitigated by a deeper understand of what causes spaces sickness, To whit:

Space sickness arise by loss of the comparison between the visual and gravitational senses in our inner ears, in part, to where is gravitational down. Anything which makes that better will work to relieve it. Why do some persons get space and sea sickness more than others? Because they rely too much on vestibular organ (semicircular canals) and/or comparisons with senses of pressure on the feet which tell us where down is, . Those canals tell where down is using gravity as a comparison sense. Not surprisingly and this has not been widely noted, the semicircle canals which are necessary for balance, in part, do so by have 3 dimensional semi-circular canals in roughly, X, Y, and Z axes. But it’s not complete for one big reason. As we became more upright creatures, this changed up that 3-D configuration of 4 footed animals, and the inner ears, the semicircular canals had to adjust genetically & structurally to a new configuration, which makes up, up, instead of sort of head bent forward as in the 2 footed primates. This process has not completely reached its end pint either, because those canals are not in quite an exact 3 D configuration, yet, either. Thus humans are still evolving to standing upwards, and as we become taller, the process is still taking place to adjust to greater heights, now approach 6′ averages in humans as compared to 3 1/2 feet in the not too distant past, (as any walk thru older east coast houses built in the 1700’s with their 5-51/2 tops of the door frames, shows!!).

Thus we not only have a genetic problem with greater heights recently which we must overcome, but our upwards stance has not yet been completely adjusted to by our neurophysiology, specifically in the feet, the semicircular canals and the integration fo that with our visual systems, the 3rd part of the triad of balance, and avoiding motion sickness. We know the foot problem because when people get numbnesses f\of the feet from diabetes, or other conditions, they frequently fall over & totter around, when their eyes close. Thus showing the part that vision can play in balance, which is relevant to the space sickness discussion. & there might be a hydrostatic component too, as well, because when we stand up, our blood pressure can drop and we can topple over, too. So the arteries in the feet and leg, are stimulated to contract, thus driving up more BP to the head, and this mediated by the dorsal root sensory columns in our spinal cords. The brain senses BP drop, and reflexively contract the arteries in the feet and lower body to get BP up. As we get taller this become more and more of a problem, too, thus adding to the tallness problem in up right stance exactly balancing out gravitational down when we move. It’s not a simple question either.

So it’s not at all easy to figure. But what can we do about space sickness, sea sickness and motion sickness of all sorts? That’s easy, We train these persons up to use more of the visual corrections and teach them to right themselves to independent set points , while standing on ships, using visual cues. On a ship, they can use light bars to correct these problems, and the light bar will show very accurately where down, the center of gravity is. As the ship moves and goes up and down & right to left, that large, visible light bar shows how to position the body to right that change in motion shifting. It uses a visual correction. Those who are VERY visual can’t easily tell where down is. Those who are more feet and tactile sensation and inner ear balance, also have that same problem, on board.

IN zero gee, The reverse is true. There is NO visual, tactile, or inner ear, vestibular correction possible at first. So, and we do this easily, we put the astronauts and others who will be going in to space in a motion cabin, such as are used in flight simulators & such . We orient them to the red strips on the floor and the yellow stripes on the ceilings. This tells them where up and down are. Then as the cabin is moved around, they learn to orient themselves to the gravitational light bars, and the red & yellow stripes to tell them & train the NEW SET POINTS are Visually, of down and up. Both these set points, stripes & light bars need to be duplicated in space. once they gain this orientation in a cabin, then they can more easily and quickly adjust to space using the visual cues, which are what the body uses once it gets into space, almost solely. The set points change, in each case, you see, and so the cues must change, as on board a rocking-rolling ship, to find out where down is, too. The faster the brain in space can adjust by previous practice on earth to where down is, visually, then the less space sickness that person will have. & will spend his/her time far more efficiently than puking and being sick for 2-3 days, costing $millions in lost work time.

I learned this in the Gulf Coast many years ago. I was predisposed to sea sickness from a child and had problems on the Great Lakes. Of course, no one on board had the slightest clue as to what went wrong in seasickness and so they put me below deck which made it even worse. But our marine biology instructor knew, & she looked at me and told me to sight the horizon and aligned myself with it. Let your body move forward and backward to that. My sea sickness abated almost at once, but it took a while before I could get my sea legs and do better.

Course if we where in rough water, and then the horizon was hidden by waves and such, it’d not work. In that case, we must work on our inner ears balances systems which can detect where down is, as well as the tactile clues on foot pressure which tell us where true gravitation down is as well, when the visual clues don’t work very well. Plus the light bars, bright, big and exactly horizontal to true down, gravitational. The same methods can be used to help Parkinson’s patients keep from falling, by using visual cues while walking to retrain th brain not to lose where down is. Study and time will help us find tune and find more comparison methods to deal with these problems of space sickness, sea sicknesses, motion sickness of all types, a well as imbalance caused by sensory loss of gravity sense in Parkinson’s, as well as those with loss of sense of touch and pressure on feet as well as position sense, from the same causes.

These are what we can learn from the Douglas firs & sequoias about WHERE down is, & the considerable knowledge we can gain from more investigating these events using the comparison process and methods, as well as the fine structure and more details these investigations will reveal to us. There are in fact, unlimited numbers of ways to test persons for their susceptibilities to motion and space sickness, and then train them up and use various ways to prevent that before they go ship board, or space craft board, to diminish the onset and severity of it and to specifically train the brain to compensate for it as well.

From terrestrial Sequoias to sickness in space via Parkinson’s. These are the unexpectedly useful connections which the comparison process can show us how to develop solutions to our problems, arising from the unlimited applications and methods of the comparison process.

Where a revelation in understanding creates an ongoing, unlimited Kuhnian revolution in understanding .

The Fox & The Hedgehog

The Fox and the Hedgehog**

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/COMP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014.

“User Ma’at Ra” ( Power is the truth of Ra. ) –King name of Ramesses 2, The Great. 1300- 1210 BC, Khemet (The Black Land, Egypt/Misr)

” Knowledge can be power.” –John Locke

” Least energy rules……”

** “The fox and the hedgehog” from “Preface to the Grammar of Biology” –Erwin Chargaff, PhD,, biochemist, “Science”, 14 May 1971.

The “Grammar of Biology” is an astonishingly wise & insightful article by Erwin Chargaff, the great biochemist. He discovered Chargaff’s rules, one of which was that in DNA the base pairs, cytosine amounts exactly matched the guanosine, and the adenine the same as the thymine. He wrote about the fox and the hedgehog. “The Fox knows a lot of things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing”. From the poet, Archilos of Paros.

There is further importance and practical value to the LEP(least energy principle) in terms of living systems, our societies and economies. For a very long time evolution has been thought of as being driven by population pressures of Malthus and the competitive “survival of the fittest” dicta. But what, specifically, are those? Some point out that being fit and in good health helps survival. But what exactly are the basic specifics of those? They state competition but with few instances, and indeed the whole of social Darwinism, which sounded good, but never worked out, fell into disrepute for this dearth of clearly definable, measurable specifics. & so it has remained, largely, since 1859 when evolution was first introduced.

Using the LEP, however, can greatly improve our understanding of what’s going on in the most basic processes of evolution. And like most comparison processes results in significant increases in understanding of the details and specifies, which this method can give us, Plus the practical consequences & outcomes of this kind of new model of what drives evolution. First of all, there are metabolic, structural, and genetic processes in life. There are the citric acid cycles, the glycolytic cycle of energy production and the highly oxidative processes going on in those symbionts of bacterial life within us, the mitochondria. In EACH of these cases, the specific instances of metabolic cycles can be explored in terms of their thermodynamic efficiencies. By comparing these among the living systems, we can determine which are more efficient and which are more likely to yield what is, as Einstein said, the most powerful of all forces in the universe, compound interest.

Recently, it has been found that some blue green algae’s chloroplasts can create 20% more starches than chloroplasts in our usual domesticated plants can. By this comparison, thus LEP, we know that here is a process which can be improved, and thus every 3+ years, double output. And if those chloroplasts are transplanted successfully and will integrate neatly within the metabolic specifics of our domesticated, food bearing plants, then food production can be effective increased by an extra 100% of production in most cases in just over 3 years.

This shows the power & wisdom of Dr. Einstein’s compound interest and the REAL driving force behind evolution. It’s not “competition” nor “survival of the fittest” so much as the more highly specific and useful LEP. For each metabolic cycle, each biochemical process in the cells, as has been shown, there are unlimited ways of improving those. & each time an improvement is made and significant advantages given, the species become more stable and more complete. So thus when we create ever more efficient systems, which do a very great deal with the least possible energy, we create metabolic fitness and durability which cannot be effectively nor easily undone. Look to the stability of the proton, for example. THAT is our goal to achieve.

Behaviors of food gathering and growing crops, social interactions and reproduction, physically fit and efficient body structures, as well as training of the next generation efficiently and well, to create a self-sustaining growing system, are some of the logical ideals at this point in our understanding. A society which cannot or will not transmit its wisdom of surviving to the next generation, cannot or will not train more than adequately in the technologies, the doctors, the computer and technical experts in the fields of design and construction, electronics, power systems, water and transportation systems, and so forth, will not survive. If a society destroys its intelligentsia, it’s very quickly doomed. If it HAS no intelligentsia, it cannot survive, but is likely to be absorbed by outsiders.

If it is not moral, and ethics can be very easily seen to be a series of clear, survival strategies, then it will die or be conquered. And all of these elements must be carefully integrated to create the highest possible efficiency, guided by the LEP and thus be the most stable. Those species can survive better, being the most capable of resisting those forces locally and in our planet and off, which can destroy us. Or further weaken us to the point where we can be destroyed by a 1-2 punch, or 1 thru 3 punches as have probably happened during mass extinctions in the past. Thus we must get off planet to survive and spread ourselves widely around this universe in living communities of high efficiency, in all the details. The LEP of the universe is ubiquitous. This should be our best blueprint and goal and course of action. LEP cannot long be ignored. We must implement and find specifically ways of both biological enhancements of our metabolic efficiencies, all carefully integrated into our DNA genomes. & we must find the best morality/ethics which produces the most efficient and thus stablest and survivable societies for progressing out of our ignorance and incompleteness of understanding.

Why does the human brain work so well and how did it comes about? That’s very clear using the comparison process, the Least Energy Principle(LEP). Because thinking and manipulating logically, mathematically and using complex systems gives a HUGE advantage in controlling the environment around us. We can build better shelters, do agriculture and thus build up more food and storage of foods so we are less bound by fluctuating climatic conditions such as droughts, floods, pests of food plants & animals, and so forth. The human brain in its current form evolved because it created ideas which could be put into play to model and thus control more of what went on around us. This larger advantage gave greater reproduction and growth to those groups who used those methods, their populations rose and they took over from the less intelligent and not so well organized societies, who weren’t able to use such methods.

It was both biological and social, cultural developments interacting which created the evolutionary advantages of compound interest, PLUS those societies, which most notably were able to create stable, growing agricultural systems, leading to large population growth and the cities. The increased food production compound interest outputs, gave rise to population growth. THAT is why the human brain’s physiological advantages of modern man came about. And combined with social advances made the most of those internal biological evolutionary changes, which kept feeding back to create new technologies, and then created more internal biological, genetic advantages, growing exponentially. This took over and dominated ecological niches of other creatures, as well, resulting in more land for humans to expand upon. Sadly, a serious side of effect of this has been environmental degradations and species’ massive destruction, again which will act in the long run to cut growth. Understanding these facts carefully by using the LEP will show us ways to get round these problems and bring our populations into balance with our ecologies & technologies. Otherwise, it’s likely to collapse, and not later, but sooner.

Thus it’s behavioral & structural efficiencies driven by the LEP which must guide us, as they have guided the survival of most all other species on earth to long lives, longevity of survival over the eons. Evolution is driven in most all aspects by LEP and that’s how to better understand evolution, cultural development, and behaviors and emotional systems, etc. It’s how our brains came about, because they can handle real existing events as models in brain, which are far, far easier to think about, than to manipulate events outside out brains, every single time. Thinking about doing something, becomes DOING something over time, as the models get more and more efficient. But we must NEVER forget that mind is the merest shadow of events in existence, from which it’s derived. The idea/word NEVER is superior to the force, logic and power of events in existence, against which it must most always be measured, described, and above all, compared.

The immense stability of some species is explained by the LEP. Their longevity and stabilities of a genome, and why species live so long must now be addressed. Limulus (the horseshoe crab, 450 mega years), stromatolites(algal clumps of sand/calcium, 3-3.5 gigayears), Lingula, a mollusc (480 megayears); and the Sequoia tree species (100-120 megayears), are also likely LEP. They live long and are stable by a simple mechanism which is genetic. IF a species is highly efficient in most all ways based upon the genes, then if that species varies genetically even slightly from that maximal efficiency to a lesser, the lesser will be selected against, thus returning the efficiency of the species genome and population to the maximal amount. Thus such long lived species are stable, by the LEP, which creates that very efficiency resulting in their stabilities.

Further, by inputting this recognition, If we humans wish to live long as a stable species, we MUSt be the most efficient metabolically, genetically & structurally and behaviorally around. Then nothing can compete with us successfully and we will have entered the longevity marathon with a huge advantage. This is what the long lived stromatolites, dating back to 3-3.5 gigayears tell us. They survived because they are efficient. Even the horse, which is 12 megayears old as a genus, has outlived us, by using extremely efficient genetic, metabolic, structural and behavioral adaptations to its environments. The more efficient we are, the more likely we will survive for billions of years. The more efficient our mental systems for understanding and our models are, the greater longevity we will be granted in a universe driven by the LEP. This is the key to understanding longevity of a species. The total LEP outcomes which create stabilities which can last for eons.

Further, it’s clear that human emotions and structure, and thus genetics has been stable for 1000’s of years. The article shows this:

But what happens if we begin to make changes in our human genomes? It’s very clear that each gene interacts with one or many others. If even one gene is changed, this could have a long term systemic, even lethal effects. For instance, the so called “side effects” of medications are NOT side effects at all, but called that to ignore the complex system effects of medicines. Each new drug has not just a single effect, but many effects, although our linear thinking and methods try to limit and ignore those by naming them, side effects. Drug side effects are NOT, “side effects” but rather complex system effects. In the same way, making genetic changes in humans without understanding the fullest implications of those systemic effects, which will reach in many cases well beyond a single genetic change.

Our genomes are stable, because they are efficient, by the LEP. If we make changes in the genomes without regard to those efficiencies and render the system less efficient by any single or more genetic changes, then we risk damaging the stability and efficiency of the entire genome. It’s well known in the genetics of domesticated plants and animals, that when we selectively bred for characteristics, we start seeing a significantly greater mutation rate than normal compared to wild genomes. Both dogs and navel oranges show this. We humans, if go we mucking about carelessly in our genomes, before we comprehend more fully how a single change genetically, can create many other changes, not necessarily obvious at first, but in the long run important to survive, can destabilize our own genomes as well. This will create less survivability and increased mutation rates which can be very, very dangerous and damaging. Therefore, we must be observant, carefully investigate the fullest systemic effects, not side effects, of each genetic change we plan on making BEFORE instituting those. Otherwise, there could be very serious problems down the line for those who are genetically changed, without considering most all of the major complex system effects. These facts MUST be taken into account before any such changes are made.

The facts that our emotions are stable is part and parcel of this system approach. Even a minor genetic change could change our emotional states and how we react. the moral and social implications of this could be protean. Changing human emotional outputs could render segments of our societies unstable and even dangerous. It could cause serious breakdowns socially as well as psychologically, because the old rules would no longer apply. And the new forms of human emotions could have serious long term harmful consequences in interpersonal interactions as well as social stabilities. We cannot afford to destabilize our emotional systems, which would likely result in destabilizing our societies as well. This is a very real concern based upon solid evidences. We MUST be very careful before we institute genetic changes in our species of ANY kind, because those could have long term deleterious systemic consequences of major import.

The next ideas are those of economic efficiency & stability, specifically. For some time it’s been known that there is an “invisible hand” first noted by Adam Smith, which seemed to be directing economic, industrial, development and continues today in the midst of our current economies in the service industries, manufacturing, and so forth. The efficiencies of U.S. agriculture, where less than 1.5% of the population grows food for the rest, Plus massive food exports is well established & legendary. Compared to most nations which must import much of their food and rarely have fewer than 20-30% of their people engaged in growing food is telling. And this, very clearly is the LEP as the major driver, as well. Because as been shown before, efficiency counts. Solid, efficient food production will tend to stabilize any society which uses those methods. It will also promote growth of population to such a size that it cannot easily be attacked, nor defeated.

Thus the major aspects of economic growth, which are driven by the LEP, create a massive compound interest growth, which we are seeing most clearly in the electronics and computer industries. Not only are several percent added every year, but that growth is compounded every year, becoming ever higher. Efficiency results in growth in most cases, as Apple, Inc., has shown the world, neatly. We must begin to understand our economics in terms of LEP and thermodynamics to best understand what’s going on in this complex interaction of materials, transforms, added value and output of the complex system, we call an economy.

To discuss these LEP further, consider paper & papyrus, with ink & pens. These are far, far better, faster, vastly more able to be made cheaper, though paper is not as durable. This immense LEP advantage over cuneiform tablets which were bulkier, required 100’s of volumes more storage space & heavier, & took more energy to move around, compared to papyrus & then paper with vastly higher information densities per area/volume/weight measures. & thus all around a far, far more efficient method.

That drove out cuneiform tablets by compound interest advantage very quickly, not surviving the 1200-1000 BC period where Middle East cultures all collapsed during the transition to a full Iron Age. Bronze died out, as copper & tin were far scarcer than iron resources, though harder to work, could create vastly more weapons & harder tools, too, esp. with the advent of steel. Thus, LEP played a huge part as well in the earliest economies & societies. And these pen and paper methods survive to this day, altho the far, far faster word processing methods are well nigh catching up. For the first time in over 4500 years, something can exceed in efficiency, pen and ink on paper. It was stable THAT long because of its ultra high efficiencies of use, storage (libraries/archives), and reading.

It’s the LEP which drives creativity which creates worth, value and growth, NOT some putative “invisible hand”. It was the research sections created by Andrew Carnegie, which helped him drive out his competitors by finding ever more efficient methods to create better and less expensive steel/iron. The same was true of Edison’s research labs at Menlo Park, NJ. The same is true of most all modern industries, which have active research departments all having one goal: to create faster, more efficiently, less costly products, to gain the advantages of the compound interest force over their competitors. To win that “Bottom Line” advantage. An advantage in which Apple, Inc., has led the way, to become the world’s largest and most wealthy company yet seen. By clearly identifying this source of economic growth the LEP and the creativities which drive it, we can therefore understand economics better and make it work better, consciously, instead of by Trial & Erro and guessing.

What is creativity in fact? It’s a more efficient way of doing things. Compare the methods of the ancients using circles to model the orbits of the planets. Those were complicated, used lots of epicycles and were not very accurate. But Kepler’s ellipses and Newton’s laws of motion were far, far more accurate, and in addition, could describe any such set of solar systems far, far more easily than the ancient methods. Thus they were given a huge compound interest advantage, and indeed dominate today. The fact that the orbits so computed are LEP should not come as a surprise, either, as Newton’s equations are also the LEP solutions to those orbits. This is hardly an accident!! Although we have adapted his methods to the more accurate “elements of orbit” to describe them in 3-D, those work far, far more accurately to get men to the moon and back and spacecraft exploratory probes to the outer planets, as well. LEP methods, efficient, more accurate, and they win and run the show.

The essential driving force of the comparison process, which creates the LEP methods, can be stated in a complex system way, using its characteristics & thus showing its power. The LEP arises from the comparison process & can be seen using this principle to make a creative solution. Applying (a comparison word: apply an application, apply an application of an application, etc) it comes about by comparing the outcomes in terms of energy, time, resources & costs of each method, skill, process, application or way of doing something. That which uses the least energy wins. It creates the highest compound interest benefit of growth over the long term. Creatvity is essentially a means of creating a far more efficient or effetive method/products using the comparison process.

But let us look deeper into How this comes about in detail & specifically. Comparison takes two or more ideas, words, &/or events & compares them. In finding common elements in each of them it organizes & understands them within that category, such as the analogy word cluster, which can also be considered in a more incomplete form, an antonymous form. The higher Category is the analogy word cluster, or higher abstraction, just as antonyms are higher abstractions. Therefore it unites and simplifies a whole group of similar events, words/ideas, into a single embracing, subsuming category, and thus saves energy. The many become the one. The confusion goes away, and ordering is created. Simplification of the mass takes place. LEP.

Further, consider the insects become in all of their astounding complexities & forms, members of the Arthropoda. And all of the insects are collected into their various families, all joined by common elements of genetics, appearances, 6 legs, antennae shapes and such. This not ONLY organizes but greatly simplifies the whole family, and then find the orders of insects from that. But it’s also a least energy principle. It does MUCH with less. The system of classification creates an LEP form. Thus it’s highly efficient compared to just a random listing of bugs, beetles & butterflies, and organizes it as well. & that organization can be read far faster, and the place of any known insect can be found. & more entries can be added to these lists. These classifications are thus highly organized, least energy forms. Exactly like our genomes!!

Let us take chitin, keratin, collagen, and lignin/wood/cellulose. Each of these are very, very durable, physically and are not easily broken down chemically, because they are LEP forms. It takes a LOT of energy to break down cellulose/wood, because it’s least energy. Thus animals of themselves cannot digest this to gain the sugars out of which wood is composed. But instead rely upon vast collections of bacteria and protozoa in their guts, in order to get at this sugar resource of lignin. Thus the termites, ruminants, and others must create the conditions where those bacteria/protozoans, not only thrive, but can be passed onto the next generations, without losing that cellulose breaking down process, leaving just enough sugar for the host to justify the whole long gut and cellulose digesting mix, which does the work. Those compounds are all very, very stable. They are least energy & durable compounds. This gives us an idea of how efficiently the LEP and comparison process which drive it can increase our understanding of what lies behind the essential stable structures of plants and animals. Nothing Less than the LEP has driven & created and used time and again, by the comparison process. Gaining that compound interest advantage, as well.

That is how the comparison process works, by saving energy in terms of finding places for each insect species & how, Also, it simplifies the system. It’s how any new insect can be placed by comparison, once again. Repeating endlessly the forms of comparison, ordering, saving energy. Those are the secrets of the comparison process and why it’s been selected for to work in our cortices. That’s what makes sense of how our minds work and why the comparison process works. The LEP, which is comparison process created & driven gives the compound interest advantage. These are the depths within depths within depths of siple recognition, the deeper pattern recognition such as of the Periodic table of elements, understanding, and the classifications/hierarchies methods of understanding. The comparison process taking vast amounts of data, efficiently finding the unifying, simplifying elements in them, then creating a highly energy efficient classification scheme to both organize and make it possible, predictable by trial and error methods to be both created, AND read by the same process.

These energy savings are then realized repeatedly by any reading of the classification again. It creates compound interest energy savings which are of huge advantage in the long term. Thus the entire system is least energy saving, & thus favored, thus above all, highly stable. Unless a more efficient classification method comes along, this out-competes and is favored. It’s also stable, a stability because it’s least energy. & that is how the comparison process does the deed. Least energy form, Stability, & huge long term energy savings which multiplies advantage and out competes compared to any other system, unless that is more efficient. This is the key to understanding understanding, and in fact, understanding and recognizing (reading) very likely most anything. It’s universal, unifying and simplifies greatly so we can comprehend far more with far, far less. & each time we use this system, the energy savings multiply via the compound interest rule. That is the heart and core of the comparison process and why it evolved (& our brains’ cortex came about), & why we are so successful as a species. also why it’s stable and why it’s so widely used not only in humans but all over the planet in living as well as not living systems. LEP, the Fourth Law of Thermodynamics.

This is the point of it all. The foxes, linear thinkers, know a lot of little things, but the complex system, comparison processor users know one big thing. Guess which wins in the competition of life with that huge compound interest advantage, every time they use it?

The Hedgehog. Least energy rules.

Table of Contents: La Chanson Sans Fin

La Chanson Sans Fin
Table of Contents

1. The Comparison Process, Introduction, Pt. 1

2. The Comparison Process, Introduction, Pt. 2

3. The Comparison Process, Introduction, Pt. 3

4. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 1

5. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 2

6. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 3

7. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 4

8. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 5: Cosmology

9. AI and the Comparison Process

10. Optical and Sensory Illusions, Creativity and the Comparison Process (COMP)

11. The Emotional Continuum: Exploring Emotions with the Comparison Process

12. Depths within Depths: the Nested Great Mysteries

13. Language/Math, Description/Measurement, Least Energy Principle and AI

14. The Continua, Yin/Yang, Dualities; Creativity and Prediction

15. Empirical Introspection and the Comparison Process

16. The Spark of Life and the Soul of Wit

17. The Praxis: Use of Cortical Evoked Responses (CER), functional MRI (fMRI), Magnetic Electroencephalography (MEG), and Magnetic Stimulation of brain (MagStim) to investigate recognition, creativity and the Comparison Process

18. A Field Trip into the Mind

19. Complex Systems, Boundary Events and Hierarchies

20. The Relativity of the Cortex: The Mind/Brain Interface

21. How to Cure Diabetes (AODM type 2)

22. Dealing with Sociopaths, Terrorists and Riots

23. Beyond the Absolute: The Limits to Knowledge

24 Imaging the Conscience.

25. The Comparison Process: Creativity, and Linguistics. Analyzing a Movie

26. A Mother’s Wisdom

28. The Fox and the Hedgehog

29: Sequoias, Parkinson’s and Space Sickness

A Mother’s Wisdom

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/COMP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014

“Seek and you will find. Ask & it will given to you.”

“There is more in heaven and earth Horatio than is dreamt of in your philosophy.” ”

“Knowledge is good because from knowledge comes wisdom, and from wisdom comes many good things.”

“Those who have eyes and do not see, ears that cannot hear and mouths which cannot speak.”

1. Efficiency in driving and development of skills and understanding
2. Comparing outcomes, creating the higher abstraction and hierarchies of knowledge.
3. The Least Energy Principle (LEP) and efficiencies. The compound interest advantages of the LEP, driven by the comparison process.
4. The outcomes of ethical behaviors and longer, healthier lives, as comparison process underlying morality and ethics.
5. Thinking about observations and educational skills. Preparing a life
6. Biological and mechanical engineering
7. Observational skills and biological engineering and medicine
8. Travel being an important kind of education.
9. Incompleteness of knowledge; always keep on learning
10. Comparison Process is global and everything can be compared to much else. The comparison process builds the hierarchies of knowledge and understanding.
11. The relationships of the LEP and incompleteness, and thermodynamic efficiency. Efficiencies via the LEP create compound interest growth and highly advantageous capabilities.
12. Quantum technologies of the English robin are LEP
13. Improving scientific models are also LEP, Kuhn’s “The Structure…” shows this clearly
14. The most complete theory is also the LEP model. those models are favored and succeed over less complete models, driven by the compound interest advantage.
15. Final completeness is not possible. Thus there is no real answer to Bell’s incompleteness of QM possible.
16. the LEP is an unacknowledged but effectively a Fourth Law of Thermodynamics.
17. Why photons and physical systems must follow the LEP, but living systems do not follow it strictly.
18. Breaking up the unlimited feedback loops of behaviours.
19. There is no limit to improvement and progress. Virtually everything is possible for us.    20. A plea for the sanctity and value of life.

1. Over 50 years ago, I was riding with my mother, and she’d been talking about driving skills. As both parents drove probably upwards of 50K miles each year, she had some very good driving skills. She’d been telling me that if the light were red, not to drive quickly to it, but hold back, so often times it’d change to green and you could glide right through the intersection. Saves a lot of time, stopping by braking, saving brakes ,and gasoline, too. “But,” and she looked at me, “when you’re right here on the street, if you’re driving the speed limit of 35 mph, by the time you get to the light up there on the corner of Western and Lima, it will be green. You don’t have to stop, unless there’s lots of traffic. So, you can save time, starting and stopping, too. And if you get into the groove at that point, by going a bit faster, or slower,then you can make the light easily too.”

Let’s examine a mother’s driving skills & wisdom. Essentially, the goal was to save gas, time, braking time and effort, by making the green light. The alternatives were a lot of stopping, starting, wearing out brake pads, and so forth. It was in fact, what she knew intuitively and did not express, a Least Energy Principle(LEP), which was being used to guide her driving. But how did she arrive at those efficient conclusions? Clearly, she had compared what happened to driving at other speeds and at other places approaching that light, but had noted that this certain spot on the street, if by going 35 mph would reach the light after it turned green with good margin, if the red light was on at that point on the street.

Always thinking about such things while driving, by trial and error (T&E), she had found this rule, or rather created it. So I’d used that rule many other times while driving in the future at many, many other commonly driven past intersections, so it was general rule with unlimited applicability, too. If a bit behind such a sweet spot, then I’d speed up. If behind, then slow down a bit. It was a good, general rule to use. And she had thought about it, done the outcomes comparisons and found this stable rule which worked. It might sound trivial to some, but in a nutshell this cameo of experience is the way in which most of our driving skills, and in fact, most all other of our skills are developed & created. Recognizing the light, the speed of the car & the relationships of driving too fast meaning getting there more quickly, compared to driving slower and arriving a bit later. then using that estimate, to most of the time get there when the light was green and not having to stop, but cruising through the intersections to go straight ahead or make the right turn.

2. That is the issue here. the recognition of these relationships, and then comparing outcomes by T&E to arrive at a general rule which gave predictive control of driving. She taught me that general rule for driving, which can in many ways be easily adapted to other skills and other outcomes by comparisons. I didn’t know at the time about LEP and comparison processes, or comparing outcomes as a way of learning how things worked, either. But it surely prepared me to recognize later what was going on, when the comparison model was used. It’s easy to apply in day to day life and the interesting point was, she’d learned that little driving rule so well, that it was automatic for her in most cases to make that light while green. And she would do it coming down the Lima road. even if she were coming to the same light from a northerly or southerly direction. She’d charted out a number of commonly used intersections to use this rule. and the more she used it, the more it was ingrained and automatic, too. It had become a skill. & it rewarded itself again and again, which further reinforced using it.

And what’s more the more she used it the more time, gas, brake lining she saved as well. Every time it was used, the advantages of using it built up in a compound interest kind of way. and so the LEP drives the compound interest formula which creates long term advantage and effectively creates in time, irrefutable gains and competitive advantage compared to other methods. More on this recognition/observation, later

3. Furthermore, if we only go thru a certain intersection very rarely, it’s not much of an advantage to use. But if going that intersection as we did almost daily, often several times, it became a real time saver. The next general rule up the abstraction level, the hierarchy of understanding, is that if we do virtually the same act, multiple times per day, or in the week, the more often we do that skilled act, saving time/gas, braking, etc., then the more often it’d get paid back. Suppose it were 10% more efficient to use that timing rule. Then every 7 times it was done, it gave a two fold advantage by the rule of 72 of compound interest. The method paid itself off every 7 times it was done!!.

And that’s the key to understanding, here. When a task is done repetitively, the more often it’s done more efficiently, the more time/resources, energy are saved, and the more it pays back. This is a secondary rule, which can be created by simply observing what happens with each skill we develop. Not only does it get easier to do with practice, but it pays itself off relative to the increased efficiency it gives. This is the next hierarchy up from the driving rule app of least energy. And that is a good driving, time saving, gas saving rule. All built up by the comparison process with respect to the comparison method of the LEP. She had not only taught me the LEP rule, which can be generalized to unlimited other cases of action and use, but had taught me a general method by which I could create further methods, too, Such as the more often you do something, and save time/energy, then the more you get back by making that action more efficient!

These are the hierarchies of understanding. Recognition of events and how they relate. The creation of the rules of efficiency, & Then recognizing that if the rule could be applied more and more often, the benefits would be greater, and thus by using such a rule where the most benefits could be gained repeatedly, the rule compounded the advantage of LEP efficiencies that much more.

4. A next thing she taught me was, and I recall this as if it were yesterday, from over 50 years ago, we were driving down Main St. at Lincoln, and she pointed out this older woman sort of hobbling across the street.
“How old is that woman?”
“She looks about 60-70.” I said, comparing what I knew about persons I’d met and their appearance and known ages.
“She’s my age. I graduated from high school with her.”
Mom was 41 years old. She let it sink in a bit. “That’s what happens to you when you smoke, drink, carouse around, and don’t get a good education by spending your time badly. She’s had a rough life and it shows, doesn’t it?”

Again, my mother was comparing consequences and outcomes of behaviors with the events that most often accompanied them in the long run. “By their fruits you will know them.” is a phrase which leads to wisdom. And “The days of the righteous will be lengthened and those of the wicked, (the old looking woman on the street) will be shortened.” This cameo, again, shows the bases of our morality and ethics and rules of living.

in other words, look to the future for what your actions will do to you,. And gain wisdom to do those good acts which result in longevity & healthy living compared with those which will prematurely age and cause early suffering, crippling & death. Again, recognizing what we are seeing, comparing outcomes, and making a general rule about health. As mother was an Registered Nurse, she was acutely aware of what created health and what harmed life. No one in our family smoked. There wasn’t a bit of alcohol in the house, EVER. So another comparison process series of recognitions, combined with comparing outcomes, as while driving, about how to live. Mom never lost the chance to teach, either.

5. When growing up she wanted me to go into medicine, She knew I had the abilities to become a nurse or more, as she had become. But she knew, intuitively, one highly important fact: If a medical professional cannot observe and see what’s going on, and understand the implications of it, just like the older appearing woman on the street, then he cannot examine, treat and determine outcomes of treatments very well, either, because of a lack of observational skills to do that.

So, it started early. National Geographics to learn a lot more about the world. 3 sets of books making up a rather complete encyclopedia, which I devoured when only 9-10 years old. And when I was reading through them not understanding it all, but learning still a great deal, she’d bring in cookies and milk for me, as a 10 year old, reading for hours, to make learning sweet, you see?

Then when I was 11 came a chemistry set. Dad had already gotten us an erector set, so we could learn how mechanical things worked and could learn to build things from the nuts and bolts which came with the nice set.

We eventually wore it out making things, developing our tool using abilities as well as mechanical skills. and then he found a rather larger, more complicated but older erector set from the 1920’s, which had a lot more interesting parts to it and which could be used to teach us more about mechanical engineering skills, too. Round objects, more complicated pieces and such. Motors and how those worked, with a transformer to convert wall current to usable DC voltages. The reason he did this was obvious and Mom encouraged it, too. I even used that to create a very powerful bar magnet, too. Not in the instruction manual as it involved using a bare copper wire from the DC output. I was thinking ahead and applying what I’d learned.

In addition came the train set, which ran on safe but electrified low DC current,. We could set up the tracks with one cross over with two tracks built into it, and plug those into the other straight or curved tracks, too. Then there was a special set of 2 with had a train track changer and a track coming off the main track, which could do a lot of things such as side tracks. The major problem was how to make the train go the other way around. Otherwise, it’d always go around the same way. I found out how to make overpasses using books to steadily raise the tracks up. We devoted the entire floor of the living room to that, until Mom had had enough of it, because it was hard to sweep up and clean the room with all those tracks all over everywhere.

6. Dad was a car mechanic and good one. So he was all for us learning mechanical things to work in his business. So was his brother & both made their livelihoods cars, bikes, motorcycles, etc.. So was their father, my grandfather, a car mechanic and watch maker/repairman. And so was his brother a mechanic, my great uncle, in the car business and so had been my great-grandfather of the same surname. So when I became a medical professional, basically a biological engineer, I had the family background for how and why things worked the way they did. What was more, I married a woman whose father was a civil and mining engineer. & she eventually became an electrical/electronics engineer with a degree, at my persuasion. Because I knew that electronics and computers were the coming, highly important profession. Again, tracking the course of a society by comparison processes. So did my oldest son become IEEE, and then my younger son a computer science programmer and systems analyst & engineer. & both knew the ins and outs of computers very, very well. My sister partnered with a brilliant mechanical engineer, who was also a contractor, spoke a number of languages, and they worked together at a major defense industry company running the computer section, electronics and mechanical engineering department in LA. Then my youngest sister married another biological engineer, an MD, and completed the trend, as she was a university trained biologist. There is little doubt what at least 2-3 of my grandchildren will be but will be, but engineers, either biological, mechanical, or possibly more likely, electrical/electronics.

And Mom and Dad set this all in motion in their wider wisdom over 50 years ago, as above.

7. In addition, mom got me a telescope and was soon observing the stars, planets, moon and other bodies with it, too. Not always good viewing days, but occasionally in the summer season there were those rare, cool, dry, clear days where if we went out into the nearby countryside, we could see the band of the Milky Way so bright and clear, we could almost touch it. Needless to say in medical school there were four of us who went out stargazing, because they’d done some of that as well when younger, Our parents knew about observing skills and how important those were for medical professionals.

I did well in the state tests in biology and general science, and our resident high school biology, Doc Phillips, put me in charge of the insect collection, a nice series of cedar boxes which contained the various bugs, beetles, butterflies, moths and other classes of the Insecta.

He taught me how to use a written key to ID the insects, and esp. the Coleoptera, because he was a trained entomologist. So with my 3rd butterfly net that mom helped me make up, I was off collecting during the day and at night when the line of widely lit car dealership made it easy to collect the nocturnal insects drawn to the lights which were on for hours.

8. In addition, we went on camping trips, which saved a lot of money, overnighting in tents, cots, blanket & sleeping bags, lanterns, and white gas cooking stoves. So not only did we have a good idea about how to pack things, and how to set up tents and sleeping bags, but we had a good idea about how to build fires, cook on those. Then we’d hike around quite a bit improving our navigation skills, paddling the unsinkable canoe Dad got for the family, & learning some boating skills. In addition to practicing our swimming skills that Mom made sure we all had.

There’s nothing like hiking to bring out the biologist in some, so when in the Black Hills I took off solo, with a backpack, and hiked over hills and yon, scaring a porcupine almost as much he scared me, & finding a 5# block of pure rose quartz. I had a method of hiking setting my sights on a single landmark, a line of a hill, and knowing where I was in comparison to that the whole time. I wasn’t lost, but was free hiking of the trails, too. Eventually ran into the trail to Harney Peak, climbed that and then back by that trail to Sylvan Lake campground where we camped.

We traveled a great deal about the USA, too, to Adirondacks, the Finger Lakes, the NYC 1964 World’s Fair, Expo ’67 in Montreal. And all over the tri state area, extensively. All of this prepared me well to observe and have basic skills to become a medical professional. Travel is a very good kind of education, which my mother knew and again, combined many useful outcomes from going on many camping trips.

9. But the last and most important lesson she taught me was “keep on learning”. Because if I did, by the time I got a lot older, I’d use almost all of it. And she was right. Interestingly enough the best collegiate teacher I ever had, a biologist trained at Woods Hole and Brown Uni, said much the same thing and we learned a LOT more that year than ever had before. And in addition, the best teacher I’d ever had, told me “Keep on learning. You don’t know enough.” I said, “Mark, do you?
“No, and that’s why I keep on learning, too.” he grinned.

Within these admonitions came an intuitive understanding that our knowledge was & is incomplete. & the only way to learn more to make it more complete, was to keep on learning. Since then have learned that the limits to knowledge are indeed a very critical part of knowing and epistemology, and perhaps here have made a bit of contribution to decreasing our abysmal ignorance as a species. The universe of events is far, far greater than we are, and as Lincoln said, “The Big pot doesn’t go into the little pot.” But we keep trying to get as much as we can of value into that “little pot”, the brain.

All of these efficiencies my mother knew about and applied to her work, to make it more efficient, effective and to take less time, so she (& we) could gain that compound interest, exponentiating method to do more and more. To never stop learning means there is more raw material to work with to create more comparison knowledge, which is comparison —> knowledge. Thus it’s exponentiating in most cases, as the advantage by using it repeatedly creates more compound interest & growth.

She knew this intuitively & gave this to us. My comparison process has extended that knowledge of the LEP to well past what it has been before.

For instance, why is our knowledge incomplete?

The comparison process and its major tool/method, the LEP, can give us a more complete, and deeper understanding, looking within the depths of understanding. Beauty is truth and truth is beauty. Thus, in this sense is a deeper understanding of events. IN that sense, it’s a discovery which releases dopamine. And when we look upon that which is most fair, we also get that dopamine release. & so in the same sense that we are rewarded by gazing upon beauty, we are rewarded by finding truth. So the bard was correct. IN the same sense that love, hope, faith and charity boost dopamine and positive things, so are beauty and truth. The depths with depths, we see, once again.

And in the same way, completeness is a real problem as Godel’s proof discussed in special cases of axiomatic and recursive systems, which have much in common with thinking and comparison processes. In the same way Bell’s completeness theorem in QM can be considered simply more of the same. Are there events which QM cannot discuss and describe? And we must turn again the Wisdom and insights of a quantum specialist, and have stated this before, by Dr. Richard Feynman. “Biology cannot be understood by QM. We cannot develop biology from it.” He was correct.

In the same sense Ulam stated :”Calling the universe non linear is like calling biology the study of all non elephants.” He was remarking upon the excluding going on. & the use of the negative, as has been discussed before, is very global exclusive. A or NOT A, is too broad in many cases to be helpful. The comparison process is not as globally exclusive, but as it can still be exclusive, as has been shown before because while we walk we cannot swim, while we talk we cannot swallow, and on and on in unlimited characteristics of most of words. But this kind of exclusion is hardly global and far, far more unlimited.

10. But the comparison process can be applied to anything!! It’s global, universal,and there is nothing it cannot be used for. We can compare apples and oranges, and find the similarities and the differences. We can compare comparison itself and find more comparisons by doing so. We can compare a comparison, and compare the comparison of that, and that again, endlessly, in a cause and effect chain, as well. Thus it’s a universal tool. But does it have limits? And the answer is, it must as it’s a structure. Therefore, as in “Beyond good and Evil” and “Beyond the absolute,…”, we must look for some things the comparison process cannot do, and in “Beyond the Absolute” this is partly answered, but not completely, because as will be shown below, how and why this is the case..

11. But the key to understanding our understanding is that comparison process is what drives understanding. & that for our understanding to be ever more complete, we must reach very close to better LEP solutions of thermodynamic, theoretical completeness. The least energy rule must be more closely approximated. The solutions must be more and more efficient than those before. A highly efficient method which will outperform the others, and over time by compound interest and exponential growth, rises over anything against which is far less efficient. Thus this efficiency both drives it and stabilizes it, because such efficiency excludes effective competition by ANY other, known means. But those methods which are significantly more efficient, the compound interest advantages exceed what other methods can create.

Thus completeness, that is the highest explanatory power for a new method, is LEP, and by measuring the quality of that information using Shannon’s information theory, we can reach a deeper understanding of understanding and creativity. This is the point: deep within the concept of efficiency and exclusion and negatives, lies the LEP. The most efficient system is the one which is the most complete. Should we be able to find a method which accomplishes a goal far, far more efficiently than do others, then that one will win. LEP, again. Thus completeness and LEP are intimately and necessarily tied into each other

12. Compare then the English robin’s quantum magnetometer consisting of 2 entangled atoms/molecules within a molecular cage, which tells the robin where north is to a high degree of accuracy. Humans can build such quantum magnetometers using superconducting systems the size of large closets, and weighing a better part of a tonne. But the robin does the same task, in a space so small it’s microscope and on the molecular level. Which system wins? The Robin’s by 250 millions times in terms of space alone, not to mention cost of creating and maintenance!! Robin’s solution is LEP. This shows how far we have to go. & how very incomplete our knowledge about quantum magnetometers is. by comparing the two.

13. Let us look specifically at Kuhn’s “The Structure….:” once again. He stated the earliest forms of planetary motion were very incomplete. But Ptolemy’s was far, far more complete using circular orbits and in fact was a lot more efficient in describing what was then known, compared to the Babylonian method. Then along came Copernicus and his model was even better, being more simple, and thus LEP, too. Occam’s Razor fits in here as well. The simplest hypothesis which describes most All the data without using too many other new hypotheses, is the one most likely to be correct. & thus Occam’s Razor is LEP!!! Unsuspected, but there all along, if ONLY we knew how to look at it and what to look for. simple, elegant, multiplying explanations from a simple starting point, hugely increasing efficiencies of understanding, & compounding the advantages every time it’s used, the comparison process method of the LEP!!

Kepler came along and introduced 2D ellipses and found his 3 laws. Those worked and were far more efficient when included with the solar centered model than anyone else had found. Again, LEP. Whenever his method was used, it was so much more efficient than epicycles and circles and earth centered models, it won out in the least energy contest. And every time it was used that efficiency rewarded the users by compound interest, again, and again, and again.

But, and this is the point, when Newton described all planetary orbits using his laws of motion, he reached again, a very high efficiency, because his method could describe very accurately the planetary orbits by relating them to mass & distances. These could describe orbits far, far more efficiently galaxy wide, indeed universe wide, than even Kepler’s methods, Again LEP. His methods were far, far more complete, thus LEP. Currently we use elements of orbits which describe orbits, esp. of Mercury much much better, in 3D than the Newtonian methods, tho they are more complicated, they gain by being far, far more accurate. Thus LEP, too. These are the depths within depths which we can still mine from Kuhn’s “The Structure….”

14. Therefore, to generalize from specifics, when a theory reaches the point where it, or another similar model achieves that goal of thermodynamic high efficiency, because it’s the most complete, it wins. And thus if we can compute by some means, what the theoretical efficiency of a model is compared to a run up the exponential barrier, it will tell us not only how efficient it is, but give us an idea of how far we have yet to go to reach that goal. LEP is a measure of completeness, therefore. But often we do not know of a better method, to compare it too. Thus there may be No ultimate theoretical efficiency level, no absolute, But to compare the various methods and see which most efficiently describes an event under consideration. It might be we must make a judgement about diminishing returns, before we try to find a better, rather than climbing up that expon bar again.

Clearly, if we run up the exponential barrier, or more practically, a set of “s” curves each of them exponential growth to some limit and then falls off, we can get some idea of how far we have to go. As most all of these comparisons and measures are necessarily bound by relativity, that is they are not absolute, it may be practically impossible to tell, except by the rule of diminishing return, if that model is the most efficient or not & Possible within a realistic goal of our ability to measure it.

Frankly, we cannot know this in many cases. and thus completeness very likely must be completeness with respect to some standard, which is arbitrary and frankly not complete itself. Completeness absolutely is not possible, because that would imply a system which worked by using virtually no energy at all, clearly violating physics. Neither is least energy. We can never get to nearly no energy at all to do something. It’s the same expon bar of trying to run up that greased slide of light speed, or absolute zero, or to make a perfect circle, or a perfectly straight line or other such fantasies.

15. Thus there cannot BE, very likely, or EXIST ANY final completeness. The solution to the problem of whether QM is complete, is insolvable. The only thing we can do, is what we have always done, find more efficient methods by trial and error by which we can continue to climb up the series of discontinuous “S” curves, which will continue to improve our ideas. Final Completeness does NOT exist!! It cannot be found! And the measure of completeness of our theories relates to the LEP of informational theory and thermodynamics. This is the answer to Bell’s completeness explorations. QM can most likely never be complete. No theory can. There are very likely no absolutes in our measurable universe.

16. As far as this is concerned, the LEP should be considered the FOURTH Law of Thermodynamics as it’s universally seen from particle physics and photon paths, to the arbiter of the galactic orbits and paths taken in the largest known clusters of galaxies. Therefore being a universal macroscopic principle, which also works at the quantum event level, it should be considered a macroscopic law of thermodynamics and a real, probabilistic tendency towards events at quantum levels. The LEP is therefore a corollary of entropy rules, for least free energy and for efficiency of complex systems, the least energy paths, too.

17. The interesting point to make is that we human and animals do NOT follow in all cases the least energy paths. Photons MUST, in most all cases, but we do not. We take exploratory ways which take a lot more energy than least energy. We get bored doing the same old routes all the time and branch out to find new and more interesting ones. This fits in well with habituation and boredom/ennui concepts. We get bored, and we change the way we do things, the way we arrange furniture in a room, the kinds of things we do all the time. We adopt new habits and new hobbies. I became a kitchen gardener & Egyptologist at about the same time. These broadened my knowledge, making it more complete and enhanced my understanding of western culture & origins, which again, improved my models of how our own culture came about and from where, being Egyptian, Ellenic culture, then Hellenistic back in Alexandria. then Roman culture, which gave rise to our own. Thus breaking out of the ways we do things, keeps us learning, growing and developing newer, more inclusive and thus complete models. This kind of least energy violation may in fact be explorations to find more LEP methods, and so is allowed.

18. In the same way, we easily get into feedback loops of repetitive behaviors. Some of these unlimited, dopamine reinforced feedback loops can be very dangerous such as drugs addictions, cigarette smoking, overeating and the manias of fanaticisms. Becoming bored, and having normal habituation responses built into our systems can break up and block such feedback loops and activities. It may be that boredom and habituation are ways in which becoming locked into counterproductive and even damaging habits is broken up, to prevent those endless feedback loops and keep us out of trouble. There are probably more brain mechanism, so far unsuspected, which also tend to block more of these untoward, unlimited feedback loops in our behaviors, as well. Thus boredom and habitation can be healthy. So are curiosities, a self sustaining, self reinforcing behaviors which make us look into new things. “Never stop learning” is yet another one. So is the love of travel, which is a very important kind of learning, which can again, as it did for me twice in Egypt, lead to very deep insights as to the origins of Western culture, which trends continue to this day, as well, in our lives.

19. Thus as far as we humans are concerned, improvement is endless. There is no final completeness. Our universe is that complex due to the probabilities of QM creating unlimited possibilities for us, too. Just about everything we can conceive of, as long as it does not violate a clear law of physics, can be done. There are plenty of loopholes aroudn those as we can fly by 15-20 different methods, compared to 300 years agao and the English robin can create a molecular sized quantum magnetometer at room temps. There is no mathematics, nor conceptual approach which can give completeness, any more than it can give certainty, either. or finality. It’s looking for a chimera, a fantasy, an inane search of folly within a pitch dark room for a black cat which doesn’t exist!!

There is NOT a final or finished solution to the problem of completeness. We find again, ways around the expon bar, the asymptotic limit, the rule of diminishing returns, and move on. These are the depths within depths of a mother’s wisdom. There is not final or end to progress or advancement. Our future is unlimited in this universe as far as we humans are concerned. Virtually everything is possible, in fact, and it’s only those limits between our ears which limit us. This is what Rhizobacter teaches us. This is what the English sparrow’s quantum magnetometer which is microscopic tells us. While our own magnetometers are huge things which require supercomputer superconductor devices the size of a large closet. Compare THAT inefficiency of ours to the extraordinary tiny size and completeness and LEP efficiency of the English robin’s molecular sized quantum magnetometer. It’s extraordinary!! So many times where we first try to go, living systems have been there before us tens of millions, even billions of years before. “Observe the wisdom of the ant.”

This is what all those many ways of flying, still being added to tell us. There are NO effective limits to anything, other than a few set laws of nature, such as expon bar of light speed, absolute zero, etc.!!! We can climb that series of exponential “S” curves quite a bit longer than we can ever foresee. Around every new corner there are yet other, unlimited numbers of emergent phenomena to find, yet another new antibiotic family, yet another new way to do tasks, more efficiently, more effectively, more least energy than those found before. & with the taking up of Quantum technologies, those will exponentiate as as they must, & we are with our quantum tunneling electrons in our transistors, matching the next generation of quantum computers, taking the first and hardly final but only the beginning of moving inwards. Ad astra, to the stars. & into our unlimited universe and the universes beyond that within the “Depths within Depths” of our own universe.

We have now the knowledge leading to the wisdom to know, for us, there are no limits. Why stand we here idle? This is “Human Wisdom”. There are no limits because there is no final digit to any event’s measurements. There is no precise measurement and events are irrational numbers without a final digit, either. There is not certainty, because most all is very likely to be possible, like humans flying 15-20 different ways and more coming. To flying in low gee in flight caverns in space, acting not only as exercise, but for air storage, too. These are the massive possibilities created by a NOT deterministic, not linear, but complex system universe, of which we only understand but a little at present. Our future is thus unlimited here. We have but to seize it and win our heart’s desires. We give up our absolutes & certainties, but with the higher likelihood that everything is possible. It’s very likely a fair trade.

20. There are far, far deeper meanings in all of this as well. Nanotechniology seems to be a coming thing, but an essential, critical, omnipresent piece is missing from this puzzle. Engineers are using linear, mechanical methods to try and create it. and have largely failed. But the wisdom and how to create and efficiently use nanotechnologies are all around us. Those are the living systems of of virions, cells, and multicellular organisms, which like the English Robin and Rhizobacter can do a very great deal with their “complex systems” of biological nanotechnologies. This has been developed to an ultra high degree of efficiency over billions of years, and sits there, waiting for near sighted, money pre-occupied experts, who are all but totally ignorant of biology even in their own lives, to take advantage of the limitless capabilities of the life-giving, complex system nanotechnologies of life.

Within every cell and multicellular organism, there are high efficiency complex system nanotechnologies of high power, & capabilities which can do a VERY great deal with very, very little. Far, far more than linear systems can EVER do. And for each of the species on earth which dies out, and cannot ever be replaced in most all cases, that vast wealth and storehouse of nanotechnology is being lost, probably forever. Species die out all of the time due to human ignorance and carelessness, and yet this vast treasure of information and nanotechnology goes unnoticed, unseen and ignored by most all humans, even as they destroy DAILY the richest treasure house of useful information on the planet. How do get almost anything & everything done, efficiently. & for every species we destroy, we are damaged and perhaps even destroyed, as “Medicine man” so poignantly and virtually unappreciated showed, with the brilliant, lyrical soundtrack of Jerry Goldsmith behind it. Our knowledge is incomplete indeed, and we have and are doing it to ourselves!! As we destroy life, so we very likely destroy ourselves.

As Cousteau has written, as we destroy the oceans, we also damage and destroy ourselves. Massive dead zones of 10,000’s of sq. kilometers lie off our coasts and port cities, expanding this zone of death yearly. Planet wide. the richest estuarine, intertidal zones which create more food and more livings systems compared to anywhere else on the earth. & they are dying by our dirty deeds massively off the coast of Fukushima, China and the entire west Coast of North Am. The Orca, a highly intelligent species, being extinguished down to only 70 individuals and few females, are all that’s left of vast populations in the 1000’s. & probably doomed to extinction because there is a minimal breeding, self-sustaining population needed. And it is GONE!! And no pups have been seen for at least 3 years.

We are likely next, if we do not stop this ignorant madness of species and habitat destruction. For we are not just destroying life but ourselves and our very futures here on the planet earth, which we are, whether we like it or not, in charge of. How shall we defend & characterize our custody of these children of the earth in the inexorable courts of history? The future will not think well of us, at all. If we have a future at all. For in destroying life, we have very likely destroyed ourselves, as well. The equations & balance of this universe MUST be observed.

But with wisdom, not greed. With compassion not taking from others. With love and respect for most all living things, because those lives are so very rare. AND thus life IS truly the most precious of all that which exists in all of the galaxies and the universe.

“Respect most all life.” to paraphrase Dr. Schweitzer. This is love, maternitas, AND wisdom.

Comparison Process, Creativity, and Linguistics: Analyzing a Movie.

The “Stargate**”:  Comparison Process, Creativity, and Linguistics.
**copywrite MGM, director, Roland Emmerich

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/COMP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014
Here will once again show the capabilities of the COMP, this time when viewing a movie which is full of creative events, translations, the use of smell to ID persons, thus establishing another kind of COMP tool, the bloodhound method; and the final creative event when in extremis from a nuclear device counting down to detonation, they find a way to survive, by both using the COMP in the same way, simultaneously. All of this, art imitating events. It’s best to view the original CD with this partial guide to visually experience these Creative moments and to view the Movie making methods and talent being employed there. ..

At the onset first scene is the discovery by a Swedish team, where a Viveca Lindfors, as Catherine, very young at the time, is at the Egyptian archeological site at Giza, in view of the Great Pyramids, where a large black wheel has been found. She’s given a golden Ra medallion, and carries this with her. What is this big wheel? What medallion? Emmerich creates interest and suspense, which moves the plot onward.

Next scene is Daniel Jackson, the protagonist, who makes the plot move from one major creative discovery to the next, both enlightening us about how creativity works and how the viewers minds are being taught, enlightened, until they are led to understand. Stargate is not just a movie, but a biological field trip through the human mind, how a creative script writer and director make good, entertaining movies. And WHY they are gratifying and entertaining. Spielberg does much the same. The Comparison Process, which is universal in humans, can show us many of the stages of what is going on in the minds of the viewers and how this interacts and is stimulated and given meaning, created by the multimedia, primarily visual, of the movie. This is the power of the COMP. This is how art imitates life.

In the next scene Jackson is trying to relate his theories about the Great Pyramid to a shrinking audience and finally he’s left with a friend who also leaves. They don’t want to hear his theory. Finally, he comes to the realization that all are gone and he packs up and leaves. too, going out into a pouring rain. Very dismal scene, symbolic in many ways. As he waits a car drives up, man gets out and asks him to step inside. Again, symbolic, his gateway. So he gets in dripping wet, his bags outside in the full rain, few events bleaker. &, there is Catherine, again, grown older, wearing the medallion, uniting this scene with the first. Says to him, how would you like to prove your theory? And he’s hooked, and so are we. She holds out papers, and says, “Travel plans.” short, to the point, and the audience is left to ask, travel plans for  what, to where? Thus keeping interest. At this point the viewers are trying mightily to figure out what IS that thing at Giza, what is that medallion, what travel plans? How to make sense of all of these events? Their cortices are trying by using the Comparison Process to figure out what’s going on, to try to understand this mystery. The movie makers have gotten inside the viewers’ minds, and they have become part of the plot.

Then Daniel says, “I think I’m going now.” Viveca says, “To where?” He’s lost his job, his apartment and everything he owns is with him. does he takes the plans?

The next scene is at the entry of what appears to be the entry gate of Cheyenne Mtn., in the Springs, Colorado. Jackson gets out of the car. And we see at once, Emmerich had elided over the boring journey, to Where? Once again, the minds of the viewers are asking where is this, what is this, what’s going on? Emmerich gets in their heads again. Keeps the plot moving briskly, no time left to get bored.

Daniel is introduced to Catherine and her two associates. And we know that he’s traveled to the mountain entrance, but to what?

She takes him to a blackboard where some lines of hieroglyphics are written down and translated, but not well. He looks at them, begins to translate them, and says, “Wrong. I don’t know why they use Budge anymore.” Budge is a widely published dictionary of hieroglyphics. And that’s how everything is tied once again to real, existing events, and becomes credible. It shows that Jackson can translate ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs and does it well. And it’s not a door, and Jackson calls it a “Stargate”. And THAT being the movie’s title, things come together, and the viewers minds are once again going, “What’s a Stargate?” Rolland has gotten inside their heads again, keeping their attentions and they are trying all of them to figure out what’s going on. The plot moves along. Then Daniel is shown symbols of images taken from parts of the Stargate, but not showing the whole ring structure, just pieces of it. Again, enticing, but not explaining, keeping interest going, keeping those cortices working, without answering or explaining anything. Setting up their minds to accept the answers, to be receptive, brilliantly and make them want the answers, and then give the answers. We can see the script/director working inside the minds of the viewers, leading them to where he wants them to go. Their Comps ARE GOING CRAZY trying to solve those questions. They NEED the answers.

So Daniel is told the symbols are unlike anything ever seen before, thus launching him on the Quest. And the audience goes right along with him. Time passes. Daniel is thinking, analyzing, comparing with all that he knows, working by trial and error (yet another COMP method), trying to figure out what those symbols are and how they are used, 6 of them, plus a 7th. Critical information. So we see him at night, a bit tired, disheveled, and he hasn’t figured it out. The audience is with him, inside their heads, and we can see what Emmerich is doing. So Jackson is tired, unsuccessful, goes out into the corridor for coffee and a guard there is reading the newspaper. Daniel sees the image of the constellation of Orion on the paper, looks at it, tho the viewers might not see it, grabs the paper, looks at it excitedly, and says, “Can I have this?” Guard nods, Daniel is acting like a nerd, which is funny, gets attention from the viewers, and they are asking again, what’s going on?

But THIS is the next creative insight, how creativity is created by the COMP and how Emmerich knows/understands this on a basic level what’s going on with creativity. Because what those symbols were, were constellations. And once Daniel had that clue, the creative comparison between his quest for understanding the symbols was solved by trial and error and he’d found the answer. It was when he got excited and ran off. An Eureka moment, full of dopamine burst and excitement. The Aha!! moment of creativity and discovery. It’s very realistic. But Roland once again keeps the audience guessing, keeping their minds still searching for an understanding of what’s going on. They know he’s found something, but what? It keeps them watching, the plot moving on.

The next scene is a room full of persons including the Stargate teams, Col. O’Neill (Kurt Russell), General West, and Viveca giving poise, dignity and character, and Daniel in comic relief & contrast being clumsy and entertaining, otherwise known as character development, So he distributes the maps and such, apologizing clumsily, and then explains what’s going on. The audience are ready for it now. Roland has them well prepared. The symbols are star constellations, he tells them. His first creative insight. By his next insight, creatively made using a six sided cube, he shows them how a single point on each face of the cube when connected by lines will locate a single point in space. And then one asks, but what’s the 7th for? And he shows “the point of origin”. Again, the comparison process, by which all journeys must start. The arbitrary, fixed point from which we measure all things, according to Einstein. If we are to measure from one place to another (Comparison process) we must have a point to start from. Be it time or space and that’s a fundamental part of Einstein’s theory of Relativity.

Throughout all is the constellation of Orion, which was very important to Egyptians, and we can construct a very logical syllogism showing what he found. In the 2nd case, again the 7 points are described by the 7 points needed to specify a journey. But a journey to where? Roland continues the tension.

So the Data dump is done, we get it now, but there’s still something missing. Daniel asks, what is this all about? He states what everyone is thinking in the audience. The writer/director is inside everyone’s heads, where the COMPs are still trying to figure things out. He’s directing their thinking. He knows what he’s doing. He knows how their minds are working, using COMP methods of his own, to understand their cortical processes. And using that intuitive knowledge, tho he doesn’t realize the fullest nature of what he’s doing, does it again and again. Just like the endless recursivity, repeatability of the Comparison Process, which can be done again and again, without limit.

Then Viveca says, clearly, distinctly, “He’s done it.” Everyone knows he’s explained the symbols, but what does that all mean? Emmerich has them now, inside their heads, leading them brilliantly along with credibility and interest.

Again, succinctly, Gen. West says, “Show him.” Show him what? Grabs the viewers’ attentions again, never allowing the minds to wander, beautifully timed. This is great art.

So the next scene is very overproduced, but increases the interest and keeps the audience’s Comparison processes, curiosity and everything else waiting in suspense building it up, to the unveiling of the “Stargate”. There it is, the same great black wheel seen in the first scene of the movie. Daniel asks again, what every movie viewers watching is asking, “What is it?” And Viveca states again, “It’s your Stargate.” Meaning is given. Everything is beautifully, logically prepared. Loud and dramatic music reinforces the importance of the moment. “This is Your Stargate.”

Everyone watching gets a burst of dopamine from the discovery. They get it now. Meaning is given to the word, “Stargate”, carefully built up and delivered. It’s reinforcing and when they watch the movie again and again, they get the same dopamine reward. This is the key to keeping the viewers’ attentions. Develop the dramatic tension and then reward them. They’ll be back to view the movie again and probably buy a DVD. Emmerich is inside their heads. He’s got them now. This is how a movie master works, understanding the brain’s cortical processes which create understanding and discovery and creativity, and the feelings released with those processes, which we all have, The COMP allows us to understand and get inside the minds of the movie goers and analyze how the movie makers’ art works. This is the potential of the COMP. This can be done with most any movie.

Then comes the dramatic special effects after Viveca announces that “Jackson has found the 7th symbol.” The machine gets turned on, and then the dramatic suspense with the 7th symbol being locked in. The water pool’s reflection turned on the side with a big mass of airy water comes protruding out and then settles down to a rippling, reflecting pool, on its side. Then what?

They send thru the wheeled probe to find out where it’s gone to, as Viveca says, Dramatically, “To the other side of the known universe”, and we know it’s a world. It’s handled well. And the probe sends back data showing humans can live there. The Stargate shuts down and it all stops.

Next scene is with Daniel and the team, and he’s being asked if he can bring them back from the other side of the Stargate. He thinks for a while, comparing possibilities and he wants to get there, just like everyone in the audience wants to from the curiosity piquing by Roland, and he says. “Yes.” They ask him if he’s sure and he affirms it. Viewer interest continuing thru all of it.

Finally they move thru the same Stargate, and the intense sensations of moving thru a series of wormholes, very much like in Sagan’s “Contact”, and they are there, coming out of another star gate. Daniel walks out of the temple building and looks up and sees another Great pyramid, his theory is confirmed, dopamine burst again, and he says, “I knew it.” Audience gets the same rush. He’s thinking what they are thinking. Rolland is leading them again.

Then they find out a major cognitive dissonance. Daniel can’t get them back again. He’s shunned by the other team members, outcast, where he’s been before from the first part. and he takes off, and gets accosted by an alien beast of burden. They find him there, and comes the next creative insight. Kurt says, it’s not a wild animal. There are people around here. He sees the trappings on it, and realized, creatively, that people had to make this, and leads the audience again, very logically. A Quest to find the people, as they follow the beast, which they want to learn more from. Movie leads them over a hill and down below, is the mine with 100’s of people there working.

Comes the contact with humans, but on an alien world’s species and they make some real stumbling attempts at communication. The village elder takes them inside and gives them a feast. This is where the large cooked reptile is (tho it’s rubber) and Daniel says it tastes like chicken and he make the chicken squawking sounds, which is entertaining again, comic relief, dopamine release, and foreshadowing. After the feast they make it clear he’s to marry the elder’s daughter, whose name we do not know. and this is where the COMP gets used again. We have cognitive dissonance, Daniel doesn’t want to get married, and this creates dramatic tension, makes the plot move on. Again, we see using the COMP, the movie maker’s art. It’s all perfectly understood by the viewers, too. Roland is well inside their heads.

So Daniel and Sherry are together in a tent. Hers is a woman’s name, and we know that. But it has to be introduced. Daniel is shy and so is she. He points to himself and says “Daniel”, trying to establish some common ground, verbal communication. He points at himself and she imitates it. Once again the imitation is the Comparison Process of education, teaching, learning. He shakes his head no, and then she gets it. and points to herself and says, “Sherry” and giggles. Dopamine is released with the recognition. Again, the creative act of self-identification. She gets the idea. Communication is on going. It’s the COMP in full panoply. And the viewers know it, too. Same realization, same mental process. By this stratagem, they know and understand. This is how we learn and discover things. It’s understood by most ALL of the viewers. Her name is Sherry. A woman’s name.

Then Daniel tries to write in the sand and she messes up the sand, removing the letters. Everyone knows she’s upset by that. But why? Daniel has again an insight. Do you know these symbols? And insightfully again, her Comparison Process leads her to know it. and she nods, yes. and he points to his eyes and says show me. Communication is created by the COMP, with both person’s cortices trying to make sense of what is being indicated, and the audience all understand. THAT is how the COMP works. and Roland understands it fully, master communicator that he is.

Using the COMP the next scenes show us exactly how language, translation and understanding arise. This is a deeper meaning of Stargate. So we are taken to an old, ruined temple and Sherry shows him the hieroglyphs. He reads them & begins to translate, speaking out loud. She knows he’s reading them, and after he says out loud, ” teper-i-eff”, and she says, “tepereff?” and so a pronunciation clue is given. and then he says, “netcher, netcheru”, meaning “god, gods”. and she says, “natu-ru”, and laughs. The dopamine release of recogntion, again. The words compare to each other. She understands him, He understands her. Dopamine gets released and he smiles back. Translation by trial and error, Discovery, creativity, understanding, the hallmarks of the Comparison Process working by commonality in all human cortices. Eventually, by speaking words and comparing them to each other’s words, they build up a good understanding of her ancient Egyptian dialect, similar to ancient Egyptian hnows, which he explains later.

And this is how the COMP works. It’s a natural translator, a natural, built in process that creates, actively, meaning and understanding using words, and in other ways. When the Rosetta Stone was found, with Ptolemaic Egyptian hieroglyphs on the upper section, demotic in the middle, both unknown, and then on the bottom the same text in Hellenistic Greek which WAS known, that is understandable and how those words compared to modern French & English.
When Champollion and Young translated it steadily, again by trial and error, a quintessentially organized COMP method for finding the meanings. Carl Sagan showed on “Cosmos” that the words Ptolmes and Kleopatra were both written in Hieroglyphics and compared to those in Hellenistic Greek, then translation became possible. The words in hieroglyphs were compared to the known Greekwords and translation followed, steadily slowly, building up the language letter by letter, word by word, just as a child learns it. Just as Sherry and Daniel taught each other. By using the Comparison Process, again and again, until most everything was translated.

This is the power of the COMP. It’s a universal translator. It’s how children learn language by comparing words with imitation and steady work, trial and error in pronunciation and usage. It’s how Helen Keller learned to communicate, despite blindness and deafness, also. By the process of Comparison, always seeking meaning and understanding in symbols, words, and speech. Those cortical cell columns in the brain which are very much alike in all living persons, and which create language, thru the active process of trying to understand what words mean, and succeeding by Trial and Error. The same process of discovery. The same creation of creativity from the COMP. It’s all the same cortical cell column processes, it’s all the same/similar mental processes, It’s the COMP.

So the next scene is Kurt with Skaa-ra and his friends trying to find Daniel, off in the temple with Sherry. He tried again to communicate with symbols, and imitates the glasses Daniel wears, but they don’t get it. Finally, he says chicken and makes the squawking sounds and they imitate it, too. Then Skaa-ra makes sense of it, and understands. It’s about Daniel. Creative insight again. and you can see it. He gets the idea. So does the audience. Rolland is once again in their heads, having them follow the plot with him. They are part of the movie, actively involved. This is a master’s method. And we can see it using the COMP. But how to find Daniel? They don’t know where he is. But Skaa-ra takes Daniel’s jacket from Kurt, and then gives it to that same beast beast of burden which Daniel was awakened by in the desert. It sniffs the Daniel’s jacket and says, we are sure, “Find him.” We see what the beast is doing, and what he said and we understand without words by comparing his action to his words. Context creates meanings as well as words in those contexts.

And here it is again. Skaa-ra thinks, works it out, realized that the Dan’s jacket could be used to find Daniel, because the same beast of burden Daniel met before is a bloodhound. The audience doesn’t quite get it yet and follow along, thinking, what is going on? And when they find Daniel at the temple, they know, The beast is a tracker. They compared what happened to what they knew before, and recognized by a COMP call to the Long Term memory. They all did it in the audience. They all have the same cortical cell columns which work the same ways. and they are all entrained following the movie’s plotting.

Now let’s look what has happened here. The way a bloodhound’s tracking works is that every person has a unique smell, and not having showered, Daniel’s body odor was pretty ripe in the hot desert. Skaa-ra knew that. We can see his mind work with the COMP. He’s sharp and intelligent. He thinks and finds, from his memory a method which will find Daniel. And the audience figures it out. But once again, Roland has them chasing a beast to Daniel, where the creative solution by Skaa-ra becomes apparent. Again, the beast recognizes Daniel by his scent, the beast which found him in the desert, saving his life, and also dragged him to the overlook near the mine. Integrating with high efficiency an earlier, known event with this later one by skillful foreshadowing. It knew him by his scent. It recognized him by comparing the scent on his jacket with the scent it associated with him by the Comparison Process in the beasts brain. Again, same scent, same person. Same name, same person. Same face, same person. The Comparison Process writ large, and again and again, in endless re-iterations of use, Le Chanson sans Fin..

But there’s more. Animals can recognize specific humans, just as humans can each other. They can recognize their mates, their offspring, food, prey, predators. They can establish territoriality by recognizing the landmarks near their nest or dens by means of smell, location and sight. They have LTM (Long Term Memory) which can store those memories, which they compare to where they are, what they see and smell and “KNOW” where things are, by the COMP. They compare what they see to what they remember, and create recognition. So wherever there is recognition, a cognitive process, then there is the Comparison Process. Animals share the COMP with humans. Their brain structure may not be the same, but it’s quite analogous in function. Their mental processes may be different, but we have the major brain outputs of recognitions in common with them, in many different ways.

In this the COMP and its capacities unites us with most all of the animals on the earth. They can recognize events, as can we. The porpoises also know territories and have names for each other. Most birds, mammals, reptiles and even most fish have territories. Even the sea anemones, and the sponges and corals from 100’s of millions of years ago, have had territories, and know self from other species, or how would they breed and reproduce? In this, the COMP unites not only the higher mammals, but the lower animals. It unites by a common biochemical DNA reproductions and uses, all life on earth, which complementary comparing of the DNA nucleotides to each other in DNA synthesis, is shown to be the COMP, by its duplication for growth and development and reproduction. The COMP unites most all known life on earth, thru this common biochemistry and recognition and similar functions.

So next scene is Kurt with Daniel and Sherry and he’s trying to find the 7th symbol that will get them off the earth, as he’s just found the first 6, but the 7th is worn away. Gone. Kurt leaves him cursing him. Daniel is upset, but they want to be freed from Ra, the alien being in the star ship. The quest continues. For the rest of the movie, the astute movie goer can continue using the COMP and figure out much of the rest.

So in the culminating scene of the movie, when Kurt and Daniel are fighting the soldier of Ra, Kurt is trying to get rid of him as he’s too strong for him, and tosses him into the ring site of the smaller stargate, which takes the soldier up to the ship in orbit. He suddenly realized if he hits the button on the arm he had, the soldier would lose the arm and he’d be gone. And acted on that Creative insight, again. the COMP. Logically written as, If I want to get rid of him, I get him in the ring site, and touch the button, and he’s gone. and so that happened. and the soldier was transported and because the arm was outside the ring, it was left there.

Meanwhile, the atomic bomb which Ra sent to the planet is counting down to zero, thus creating extreme dramatic suspense and desperate tension, Suddenly, Daniel and Kurt state together, “I’ve got an idea.” They both put it together, creatively. If we put the bomb in the transport ring site, and we push the button, the A-bomb will go back up to the ship, and Ra won’t be able to stop it. And Blooey!! he’s gone. It shows that humans think alike, and they also use the COMP. They work together. The thought structure is logical and it worked. The next scene is the huge burst of light as the weapon is detonated, and the scene showed Ra being vaporized by the blast. Even after he clearly knew what was going to happen with the A-bomb ticking down to detonation, but not enough time to stop it, either. The people were now free. Lots of dopamine release, The audience is in on it, and the movie is nearly over. The astute movie maven can use the DVD to find yet more examples of Emmerich’s art and methods, using the Comparison Process as a guide to the psychological processes operating in the minds of both movie goers and movie makers in the Stargate.

But everywhere, the COMP allows us to see how meaning is created, how creativity works, how language and translation are created by the COMP. It’s good way to understand movie making because the ermpical introspection insights we get form the comparison process allows us to see this.

COMP gives us in psychological fields the capability of empirical introspection, to reliably, scientifically understand what’s going on inside the human brain and mind. Once we nkow it’s the COMP working, then everything else follows. Introspection if carefully used, is no longer off limits. It allows us to realize that the major cortical function of higher human thinking is the COMP. and this insight can create a great deal of understanding about the mind & it’s workings and then be used to increase our understanding of everything else.

The Comparison Process is a massive, unlimited decoder. Which can decode not only human understanding, language, maths, and related processes, but gives us unmatched insights into how creativity and creative writing and composing come from. The COMP is a unviersal decoder for evens in existence as well and has created sciences, engineering &  technologies. Comparing ideas/words/events again and again until order and understanding are created. And when we in the next 1000’s of years travel into space, and eventually find another space faring species there, we will use the COMP to understand them and they us, uniting us by the Comparison Process. The Song Without End, endless in its variations, creating, organizing, developing, unifying the arts and sciences, communicating, recognition in all the myriad ways this multlplicit Process can perform. The Comparison Process..

” Imaging the Conscience “

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/COMP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014

As stated before in a previous article (The Praxis )

the methods of fMRI, MEG (magnetoencephalogram), and Cortical Evoked Potentials, can be used to image and detect mental events, and the duration of the recognition response and where those are being processed, often in more than one place. For instance, the introspection center has been localized since about 2001 in the studies by Gusnard,, to an area in the medial prefrontal cortex, and this area is also implicated in morals awareness, self-referential expression, and related tasks.

Gusnard, DA, et. al. “Medial prefrontal cortx and self-referential mental activity: relation to a default mode of brain function. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 98: 4259-64, 2001. Other studies have shown similar findings.

It is this examination of self, comparing our moral sense, or conscience which is related to our conscious awareness of whether or not we are behaving according to our society’s standards of moral and appropriate behaviors. When the frontal lobes are damaged, we see, clinically, very clearly that such appropriate social behaviors fail. the person becomes immoral, lacks a sense of cleanliness, or dressing properly and simply often does not even see it. Nor are they necessarily aware that they or others are behaving properly, either. Serious damage to the frontal lobes has shown this also in stroke patients, but is more often found in traumatic injuries to the brain, which are more globally damaging to the frontal lobes.

Under these circumstances, with these findings and observation, we can therefore pretty well localize the conscience function and structures to the frontal lobes. The brain neurophysiological dictum, that function follows structure and that therefore there can be no function without intact structure must be invoked. This Structure/Function relationship is key to any real understanding of the various functions of brain, not only speech, movement, sensation, but the higher functions of the cortex, such as language, music playing and appreciation, logical thinking, spatial tasks, and many other high level functions such as moral/social judgements, which subsume the conscience.

Therefore, if we are to study the conscience and inbuilt moral system, we must specifically invoke tasks in the individual which involve perceptions and recognition of moral/immoral actions, such as gift giving, or stealing, such as helping person, or harming them, and so forth. In this way, invoking these specific tasks through images of such activities, which are clearly and easily identified by the subject, the moral sense can be activated in the frontal lobes and then studied using normals. In this way, the cortical evoked response can be detected upon seeing a grossly immoral act, such as hitting a person without provocation, such as a man striking an elderly woman, or taking her purse away from her (stealing), and so forth. And in the same way, helping another person, or giving someone food, or another helpful act, such as an umbrella during a rainstorm, can clearly be perceived by most normals as beneficial and helpful While in other case, harming and hurting the individuals also be portrayed. Those which give in most subjects the highest definite, detectable response can be found by trial and error. And can be interposed with images of relatively neutral moral sights to act as controls. The contrast among these can then be studied on a fMRI system to see what frontal areas light up, compared to rest, as well as studied by a clase following MEG of the same sequence of images to see the recognition responses of the P-300, the CEP associated neurophysiogical event. In this way, the conscience and its activations in the frontal lobes can be detailedly studied by two corresponding and clear detection and recording systems. The conscience at work can thus be imaged. This is more of the fuller potential of combined fMRIO and MEG studies being done together, which synergistically enable more to be found, than either alone. And the findings of the one will not only compare, but show and confirm the reality of the conscience at work by the second.

The implications of these findings will be, clinically and legally, extremely important. Because where such activity is absent, it will indicate the person cannot perceive, that is, recognize moral or immoral activity. But where there is a detectable response, it can be and will be seen, recognized, and reported by the subject. With careful presentation of known stimuli, various kinds of moral recognitions or their absence can be detected and proven to a high degree of being present, or not. This will give a very good tool for objectively recognizing those who are unable to perceive immoral acts by themselves, that is functional sociopaths, and also detail using the MRI if there is structural damage there or not. This will differentiate necessarily between those who are brain damaged, versus those who are by experience and lack of moral training, more likely to respond to therapy, or not. Clearly, those lacking speech cortex will have disabilities in speech, while those whose area are intact, are far more likely to possess absence of normal speech due to training and socially related developmental problems. This kind of differentiation is critical to prognosis and response to treatments as well.

it will also allow better treatment of and the ability to detect any improvements or not as a result of those training sessions, which can also be combined with P-300 measures to see if the training is working. This would be a lot less expensive and easier method to use in operant conditioning and training methods. fMRI/MEG combination examinations can then be used in tandem to confirm improvements and actually measure the improvements in many cases. and no longer will a judge need to rely upon psychiatric, or his own impressions, both highly subjective and fraught with many examples of mistaken decisions, often with terrible or even lethal outcomes, to decide if a patient/prisoner is truly better enough to be released, versus those who are only good at acting. The P-300 cannot be faked. It can be interrupted and then lied about, but the recognition in such persons is almost always there, or not, and that cannot be faked, though its reporting by the subject can be. These are then more reliable and objective ways of studying, recognizing and treating such problems in conscience related brain/moral disorders.

The consequences of such findings and their utility can be extended to many areas. At age 14, many children begin to be aware of these moral and social duties, when self-awareness undergoes a marked improvement at that time. Children who do not have these adaptations and are developmentally delayed can get interventions before the personality becomes too stable and hard wired to allow improvement, and thus treat a good many developmentally and socially acquired sociopathies, and lack of insight into how they are mistreating others and how their perceptions are flawed, too.

Narcissists and spoiled children can also be detected before they get too old and if detected as young enough children, can be treated before this personality problem becomes too serious and stable to be easily corrected. Across the board, adults who are narcissistic and sociopathic are thus closely related by this lack of moral perceptions and lack of insight into their own actions and how those affect others, and damage their relationships with society and other persons, occasionally permanently. And those can be detected also by abnormalities in responses to testing. So it will permit therefore earlier detection and treatment, which often results in substantial cures if not improvements. The same can be used to ID those with encephalitis, brain trauma, stroke and other conditions to identify early and perhaps intervene to correct/improve such acquired problems, too.

In a neuroscientific, psychological sense, these studies will confirm what has been known for some time, that the conscience as an active function of the frontal lobes in most person is real and will allow its detection and study, to further enlighten us about how the brain works. By extending this model to the study of creativity, more can be learned, because the comparison process model also states that creativity is created, and is another form of recognition coming from the comparison process. In time, the activity of the comparitor in the cortical cell columns can also be identified and then studied as to how it works, providing the necessary physical detection to support the comparison process model and comparison methods which it both detects, creates and uses, actively.

The study of introspection can also be undertaken to examine the finer details of it, and thus learn more about our self-awareness. It can find the commonalities of human thought which we all share and thus can enlighten us more about how the higher level cortical functions of abstractions and abstracting work, as well, under the broader background of the comparison processing working in the cortical cell columns. And perhaps in time, begin the study of individual cortical cell columns and how they interact with others in processing information of all kinds. using the Point magnetic brain stimulater, as previously described in the “Praxis”, of a great deal higher resolution and specific information will also be found. because it will allow the conscience to be shut down, with repeated stimulation, not only to prove the conscience exists, but to interrupt the function of it, as well, thus providing a third and ever more convincing set of objective data showing that introspection, and moral awareness do indeed exist within a structural foundation in the brain. That the conscience and many elemnts of our mind are not figments of our mind, but in fact, thinking about thinking, the primary characteristic of recursivity, self-referentiality, repetitive and above all, universal nature of comparison process words and brain activities, generally.

Beyond the Absolute: Limits to Knowledge

Beyond the Absolute: Limits to Knowledge

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/COMP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014

“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” From “Hamlet” by William Shakespeare

“A society which cannot escape from its current abstractions is doomed to stagnation after a limited period of growth.”
—Alfred Whitehead

“Almost anything which jogs us out of our current abstractions is a good thing.”
—Alfred Whitehead, co-author of “The Principia Mathematica”

“I hold that a little rebellion now and then to be a good thing.”
—President Thomas Jefferson

1. No absolutes in events in existence, no absolute space or time, no infinities, certainties, perfections or other absolutes.
2. No complete models, astronomical models as solid evidence; Incomplete models of physics
3. Sphericity of the earth shown by imposing flat, 2-D surveying street grids
4. Exponential barrier of particle physics now reached, expon bars of velocity of light (cee) and absolute zero, incompleteness of human knowledge.
5. Gödel’s incompleteness theorem (AKA Gödel’s Proof), empirical evidence confirming the theorem.
6. The Structure/Function approach to knowledge’ structure but not function, or the converse method.
7. Structure/function incompleteness of the Human Genome Project showing power of the S/F method; A number of practical ways to find the missing functions of known genes; comparing normal gene to abnormal gene gives solutions to the problem.
8. S/F problem of missing information in Gödel’s Theorem.
9. Examples of Incompleteness of math/logic
10. Exponential barriers, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle as a form of ExponBar;
11. Comparison Process can go beyond limits of math/logic and related forms: Examples of the Taxonomies of living species; medical conditions also based upon comparison observations, history, examination, differential diagnoses and treatment plans, beyond mathematics: Plate tectonics and languages and taxonomies of languages and their relationships; etc.
12. Non-logical systems descriptions: emotions, delusions, rationalizations, the Mythos of gods/goddesses, animistic beliefs;
13. Source of both logic and the illogical, of math and emotions, the comparison process.
14. The one way street. Language can express all math, but math cannot express very much of language in exact, meaningful symbology. The extreme limits of math: poetry, literature, religious statements; language and linguistics. Gödel’s proof gives no clues about what specifically those incompletenesses are, where located, or their natures.
15. The alinearity of complex systems; the epistemological shift to complex systems using the comparison process.                                                                                                              15a. The ignoratio ignorationis problem and related.
16. The Exclusion Principle and the origin and limits of the negative; the negative as the source of incompleteness” Godel not necessarily applicable to logics of exclusion.
17. Examples of implicit and explicit(the global negative) exclusions
18. Many examples of incompleteness of knowledge.
19. The value of the structure/function approach to incomplete knowledge.
20. The primacy of observational/visual organized systems
21. Approximations and series’ approximation methods. Recursivity evidences.
22. The kinds of ignorances as causes of incompleteness and limits to knowledge.

23. Exclusion principle and the internal consistencies of biological systems not logical/mathematical; ideas excluding other ideas, implicitly or explicitly; idealism as a very large part of the problem of incompleteness.
24. Exponential growth of the sciences and knowledge still largely incomplete despite this, as an example of how much humans do NOT know, yet.
25. Incompleteness of the general categories, the ontologically implicit incompleteness of categories, etc.
26. Human brain outputs do NOT necessarily correspond to events in existence to any considerable degree. Models of events are not the events outside of the brain. The fatal flaw of idealisms. Historical suppressions of empirical investigation by idealisms.
27. General ignoring of most all data on a daily basis.
28 Multi-tasking methods to improve how we deal with events in existence; escaping limits by these methods. The simultaneity of 2-3 brain operations method.
28. Categories and hierarchies. The comparison process creates those and allows us to navigate up and down them, by reading them. Math cannot follow, it can mostly work inside one category, but not, as can language, move up or down. It can’t scale like language/comparison processes can.

1. Previously the idea that there is no absolute space and time has been discussed. That there is probably no such events in existence as perfection, infinity or absolutes, has also been shown to be the case by trying to describe/measure perfection and showing that it cannot, like infinity, be shown to exist. In fact, most anything which we measure does not have a finite number to describe it. Most all empirical lengths are very likely irrational, because there is not a final digit. And any attempt to find that last digit is empirically as well as theoretically very likely an impossible task, because we go up the exponential barrier, that greased slide of increasing slope and height, until we run out of energy, time and money, effectively. Also called the law of diminishing returns. These are both empirical and theoretical limits. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, where the spin and location of the electron cannot both be accurately determined is the case. But is it not true, that we cannot determine EITHER the position or the spin to a final digit of certainty?

In the case of the orbits of the planets, Kuhn’s brilliant analysis in “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” showed that the circular orbits of Ptolemy were not complete by comparing the data to perfect circles, and had to be “adjusted” by using smaller circles called epicycles. This approximated the later elliptical orbits. Copernicus showed that a simpler system put the planets in orbits, circular, around the sun. Kepler was not convinced and when he finally got Tycho Brahe’s data, and compared the figures with what Mars’ orbit was, he showed that an ellipse was the orbit of the planets, but only just. Because as we know now the orbits, by comparison with the data, are in 3-D and cannot be elliptical, either. And the orbit of Mercury also rosettes around the sun, in both space and altered time due to relativistic influences. So, currently we use elements of orbits, which Kuhn also addressed. But these are only good for 50K-100K years of theoretical accuracy, and then become useless. Of course, this 50-100K estimate has NOT been checked & cannot be at this time. No one has actually measured them. Thus even there we find a limit to measurement.

There is the finding that trans-Neptune plutoids, bodies, which are from a few kilometers to a few 1000’s kms. in size and mostly watery, rocky metallic composition like Pluto and Charon, move in highly eccentric orbits quite out of the plane of the ecliptic and some with orbits as long as 1000’s of years. Because they were so distant and so far out of the ecliptic, they were missed until astronomers could spend weeks long viewing times, using CCD’s for higher light gathering power, and the money and time to do the searching. Now they number in the scores, and probably in the 1000’s to say the least. Again, limits to knowledge, any new knowledge. Astronomy is Still incomplete.

2. Given the new ideas and findings in physics, not only was Aristoteles’ knowledge incomplete, but so was Galileo’s and as Einstein and quantum mechanics showed so was classical physics. Relativity does not seem to necessarily apply on the quantum level, because it’s a deterministic theory, not a probabilistic and stochastic one, like quantum mechanics, which so far has been shown to be the case whenever it can be tested. Sadly, QM is so complex and many of the calculations are impossible to solve using even today’s advanced supercomputers. Finding answers using the QM wave functions is simply & often impractical and unhelpful. So in a very real sense, those are real, palpable and important limits to the usage of QM, as valuable and correct as it has been shown to be.

3. In each case we have the same process. From the apparent flatness of the earth being shown to be a special case where the circularity, spheroidal shape of the earth gave the illusion of flatness. And this could have been dispelled 1000’s of years ago, simply by creating on the earths surface a planar grid pattern and then seeing that regular, clear error because the north going lines on a planar grid will diverge too much on either side of the grid, if it’s extended too far east and west. Longitudinal lines on a sphere tend towards the north or south pole, and meet, whereas on a 2-D grid plane, they do NOT meet. The planar grid does NOT compare well with the spheroidal model.

And this also applies to the space-time geometry of the universe. Thought to be 3-D, it’s in fact not Euclidean, not linear at all. There is also a divergence when 3-D is compared to the actual universe. By comparison, the model does not fit. None of these models fits completely, either.

4. When the Higgs boson was finally believed to be found, but NOT confirmed by at least two other sites/teams, because it was so expensive to do so, it marked the point, again, it should be said, that the exponential barrier was being climbed, until it was so expensive to do, it’s not likely to be tested that way again. Again, limits to knowledge using standard, scientific measuring methods, which have been shown time and again to be comparison process and methods.

But the point is this, using description and the mathematical method of description, measurement, we will most always be climbing the Expon Bar, eventually, no matter what we do. We cannot find perfection nor infinity, which have no reality. There is not absolute space nor time. We cannot reach the light barrier of Cee using normal acceleration. At the other end of the speeds of particles, viz. ultra low temperatures, we cannot reach absolute zero, where the cost of reaching it becomes greater and greater with each approaching millidegree or even more so a microdegree. There is a limit to our human knowledge, both Empirically and scientifically, as well as theoretically, mathematically and logically. The exponential barriers of measurement show us the physical reality of this limit, as does a special case of that barrier, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

So what is going on here? If both description and measurement have such limits, then most all knowledge, either theoretical(mathematics and logics) and empirically obtained is unlikely to be complete, necessarily. There is NOT absolute knowledge, either theoretically or empirically. NO verbal descriptions nor intensely worked out, pursued and highly accurate measurements can give us this. There is a natural limit to most all our knowledge, at least in a practical sense, which we cannot at this time easily overcome.

5. Let us take this point further. Godel’s Proof showed logically that and necessarily all such logical, recursive systems were incomplete. Comparing this to the current methods of the sciences and most all measurement, indicates that the ExponBar may be a physically testable form of the same thing. Thus not only is mathematics and logic incomplete, but using the Comparison processes, which create description and measurements, most all such theories cannot either be complete. There is most always something which is going to be left out. We cannot attain absolute, final, logically consistent systems, and when we try to measure and describe events in existence using such systems, there is also the same outcome. Most All of our models are therefore incomplete. The ExponBar is a physical measurement showing the reality of the limits of most all methods using the comparison process, which are provably as recursive in an empirical way as are Godel’s abstractions.

6. Using the structuralist approach of the Structure —-> Function model (S/F), a lot more becomes clear. We knew from Einstein that E=MCsquared. But there was no real way to prove that, either. We had the Function, above, but not how to do it, the S. That is, the theoretical knowledge, but not any practical way of doing it. Just like Cristaforo Colon knew that the earth was round, he had to show it was so, as he partly showed by sailing west and then Magellan and Drake showed further in making a complete circumnavigation of the earth. So with the finding of nuclear fission of uranium yielding a chain reaction and energy, and then nuclear fusion doing the same, the left side of the S/F relationship was discovered. This model fits with most all discoveries and their subsequent explanations, although it doesn’t necessarily tell us what’s going on, specifically. It DOES show the limits of knowledge, the incompleteness, which is the point.

6. Human knowledge is incomplete. We often see the S/F relationship, one side or the other. We have the structures, that is the superconductor(SC), but we don’t know how it works, the theoretical. The SC’s were found at low temps, but no one knew how those worked, until it was found later and got a Nobel Prize. Those models were still incomplete because no one knew why or how the superconductivity phenomenon was gained or lost due to temperature rise and fall, either. And then the higher temp SC’s were found which astonished everyone again. Recently some major progress in understanding those has been found. And yet again, they can create an understanding of how the High Temp SC ( HTSC) worked, but they can’t easily make more SC’s which work at higher temps, because again, the “S” side of the relationship is not fully understood. So here we have with superconductivity research and findings the incompleteness of scientific knowledge coming out not once, but THREE times more, easily understood with the S/F model!!

7. There has been a serious problem with getting useful information out of the Human Genome Project. This has resulted from, very clearly, having the Structure of the genes, but not the functions. There is nothing in gene which necessarily states or ID’s what it does, specifically. So while we have almost all the human genes, we do NOT know what a large majority of them do. This is why the Genome has not delivered on its promise, very clearly highlighted by the Structure/Function method.

Essentially, we need to understand the comparison process and how it’s used. For this begin at the introduction to the comparison process, part 1.

Scroll down about 60% of the slide bar to find:
“Any kind of error, be it a genetic error creating a disorder, or other conditions, creates a new opportunity to compare that genetic disorder to the normal. ”

This is the solution to the entire problem, in fact. If we think about it. Those who are not creative won’t see it. Those who are, well, they will create these innovations.

Create a new, synthetic allele of the gene whose function is not known. See what it does to the cells in a human cell culture. Insert it into a mouse and see what it does to the mouse genome. Does the mouse die, or does it have a serious, observable or metabolic problem? Using a chimp would be even better, though.

Compare the known human genes whose functions are well known, and the classes of genes to which they belong, be it structural, enzymes, polypeptides, regulatory, and so forth. Build up a database of what those genes’ characteristics are in each category, then begin to compare the unknown genes’ functions and find the similarities. Once those are known, then a lot more can be found.

This will require a big database, and will allow computer’s early AI to recognize similarities among the genetic DNA base code sequences and codons to make identification of the gene’s functions easier. And computers can do the job of comparison of gene functions a LOT faster than can humans, and might often find whole series of base pairs and codons strings, which are very similar to other genes, which functions we do not know. And it might even show that enzymes are created from other enzymes, simply by using chunks of DNA to become incorporated into new enzymes with new functions, too. Sort of a higher level genetics, which allows play around with the genes to create solutions to real problems. Sort of an epigenetic system, too.

Lastly, but by no means all of the methods which can be created by the comparison process, DNA hybridization. This was how the Myostatin gene was found in other species than mice, the primary species where it was ID’d. Simply take the unknown human gene, and use DNA hybridization to find it’s chromosomal location in mice, rats, chimps, and other species whose genomes are fairly well worked out. If it compares to one of those which is known, then we can surely tell a great deal more about what it does.

All of this by the method of comparison, you see. Next compare the effects of new, synthetic alleles in unknown genes to what happens to cell cultures and observable effects in functioning animals, too. There are an indefinitely large number of comparison methods capable of creating solutions to the structure/function problem now rife with the human genome.

8. And now we see the Godel’s incompleteness theorem, this important point. We have the right sided Function, but not the left sided S, Structure, which confirms it, do we not? Or do we? The huge problem with Godel was that he stated that math/logic of a recursive type was incomplete, but few have Yet given any real evidence which is convincing of that, either. Nor did the proof state WHERE and WHAT to look at or for or how to find that missing knowledge. How is this any different from E=MCsqu.? We knew it was likely to be the case, but it took until mid 1940’s before Einstein’s theory was found to be correct, too. Again, the F but not the S.

9. What then is likely shown here are some limits to math and logic, what they cannot do and are therefore incomplete about, thus beginning to complete the S/F relationship which Godel created by now providing some empirical, measurable evidence of the limits to logic/math using the COMP tool. And why moving on to a complex systems approach is both becoming successful, practical and necessary to further human understanding. That is, getting away from linear methods, to finding more of those which go beyond the absolutes of linear, mathematical thinking.

We know that our models of the solar system have been incomplete by historical evidences from Kuhn’s “The Structure…”. Here is yet more evidence of it. In the same way, math/logic and other linear methods cannot describe/understand complex systems, nor the human emotions, nor a good many other events in existence. The Comparison process is a way/tool/method to significantly advance the search to reduce those ignorances.

10. Expon barriers are likely measurable, empirical tests of the universality of these limits to current human, scientific knowledge. As stated before the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is very likely yet another form, and element of the category of the exponential barriers to complete knowledge. They are likely real and solid evidence that most all human knowledge, in some way or another, or in many ways, is incomplete. That last digit of most all events cannot ever be found no matter what we measure, nor theoretically and practically, we can’t measure it, either. Is this not a union of theory and facts based upon empirically testable events? When we exhaustively compare measurement and theory, we find these ExponBars. The Comparison Process describes measures and tests events in existence by comparing events to one another.

11. Can the COMP go beyond the limits of logic and mathematics, the latter of which cannot describe verbal concepts very well, but which math itself CAN be described by words, as well as logic? It’s likely possible. Using the descriptions of words of living systems and their relationships, something which math cannot do, for instance, in the medical history and physical exam plus the differential diagnoses and testing/treatment protocols; in plate tectonics; in descriptions of psychiatric states, (the DSM series); in descriptions of the relationships of languages to each other, the language diagrams, the entire virtually totally verbal taxonomy of all known, millions of species, etc. These suggest an approach which is superior to mathematics, that is, uses verbal descriptions to go where mathematics cannot go. The existence of the above may indeed allow us to go where mathematics cannot dsecribe as it has provably done so. These may well be solid evidences that, yet again, structures have their limits and capabilities, and of these, Godel’s proof is a part of that. Most all of our models are incomplete.

Using the body of knowledge of the “Tree of Life”, the connections among most all of the species to one another organized in hierarchical form, comprising what is called the Taxonomies of the species. This is based upon the relationships created by OBserving living species and comparing them to the others. It’s not based upon logic, nor upon mathematics, unless it be measuring, which is very limited, and for that alone it’s subjected to Godel’s limits, but not necessarily other descriptions. Therefore complex systems understanding might well lie outside of the mathematics which cannot solve the N-body problem, but which verbal descriptions using the comparison process have and can describe, but which are largely forbidden to mathematics. This shows yet again, empirical evidence for the incompleteness theorem of Godel. Or as Stanislas Ulam, the father of complex systems investigation, once stated Mathematics must become far more developed to be useful in understanding and describing complex systems.

12. Emotional systems are irrational. The comparison process shows how those arise, the delusions, the not logical rationalizations, excuses and violations of the rules of logic, including the Mythos, by which our ancestors used to explain so much of their world using gods, goddesses and animistic beliefs, and so forth. Therefore to the extent the COMP describes them, it lies outside of logic, which the emotions are definitely. Thus emotions and the ability to describe them is a not-logical description which can act outside of formal math/verbal logics, by the very nature of its descriptive existence. The limited linearity of systems can be shown logically, but necessarily incompletely. Those systems which are complex, are necessarily not completely logical and Godel’s proof does not necessarily apply, as mathematics and logic do not apply. Although, linear systems may approximate some aspects of complex systems.

13. The COMP shows itself as both the origin of logic, both mathematical and verbal logics, as well as the delusional, irrational beliefs, and the mythos of earlier religious explanations, and superstitions as well. Thus from it arises both the logical and the irrational, reason and the emotions, no mean achievement, either, for the comparison process model.

Clearly, quite something else is going on, which is outside of logical, formally logical, mathematical systems. This then shows the limits of logic and mathematics, can be breached and overcome by the comparison process in actual, empirical fact. The comparison process can create mathematics, and it can create logics, but it’s not necessarily subject to them, either, or to Godel’s proof.

14. To be more precise, language and words can express all mathematical statements. But mathematical symbology cannot express very much of verbal descriptions. Viz. these examples prove the case. It goes the one way, words speaking math, but not back again, math being largely UNable to describe language of most all types.

“How shall I compare thee to a summers day? Thou art more lovely and more temperate…” –Shakespeare.

“Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth” –Beatitudes.

“When I was 16, my parents didn’t know very much. When I got to be 25, I was surprised to see how much they’d learned.” –Mark Twain.

Shall we then expect mathematics to explain a great deal more of what is going on with these rather serious limits? Especially linguistics and the unlimited hierarchies of the languages and living systems? Can it describe the reductionist model, going from particles, protons and electrons, up to atoms and isotopes, and then onto molecules, and thence to organic chemistry, thence biochemistry and metabolism. Thence up to the living cell, the collections of cells called colonial forms, then multicellarity, etc., until we finally come to the human brain, and the cortical cell columns, from which the mental functions arise, creating the mind and consciousness? It cannot. This will be dealt with later, to explain the limits of linear mathematics and logics being unable to comprehend or model those systems.

There is no necessity that by observing events, that Godel’s proof can be tested, either. Observations of themselves do not necessarily show that Godel’s proof, which confined itself to human mental functions/processes of the mathematical and logic type, do not necessarily apply, because those observations ARE not linear, and are capable of describing complex systems, not describable by math. A further problem with Godel’s incompleteness theorem is that it gives NO clues as to what has been left out, that is, the specifics of what those omissions creating the incompleteness are. How are we to know where to look? This article is an attempt to begin that discovery of the omissions of knowledge, that incompleteness and its nature and its types within formal systems. An attempt to complete some of the structure/function relationship of Gödel’s Proof.

Simply using mathematical symbology, state the Beatitudes or one of Shakespeare’s more famous sonnets, “Thou art more beautiful than a summer’s rose…” clearly, not logical, not mathematics, but still in an emotional, mental way, comprehensible to most normal persons. Godel’s proof does not necessarily then apply to comparison process functions and descriptions which CAN in part describe such complex systems, which math and logic cannot describe, that is specifically, language with emotional and complex system content. This might well explain why complex system methods are being more and more widely used and complex system approaches are going well beyond what can be achieved with the linear, N= 2, logical, mathematical approaches. Math can approach in some cases, by approximations, and mathematical series, just as the circular orbits when modified by epicycles approached the elliptical model of Kepler. But it cannot pass over that abyss, and solve the N body problem, either.

15. For complex systems, A doesn’t always yield B. A can yield B, C, d’, phi, Xi prime and a lot of other outcomes, very similarly to the dopamine receptors, which have about 10 distinctive receptor types/functions, thus showing once again, that Godel does not necessarily apply to such complex systems. Their logic, if anything exists, more likely their organizations, their structure/functions relationship are NOT logical, but complex interactions and relationships, in fact, which can be understood in part by complex system thinking, that is, more like the comparison processes of observations.

To use a most simple and day to day event to demonstrate this complex system characteristic, suppose we walk down the street and say hello to the first person who comes by. They may say hello, but others can say, allo, or Buenas Dias, or nothing at all, to “How ya doin?”, and a virtually unlimited number of responses, in one or unlimited numbers of languages. They are are not predictable, but they ARE not linear, and instead complex systems, where there are huge number of interactive factors. Simple observation allows us to see that fact. It’s not logical, but it is organized, and the frequency of the responses can be given a probability by observing these systems working. Again, comparison process observations and methods can allow us to get information about not logical, not mathematical events and learn a LOT more about how they work.

15a. The ignoratio ignorationis problem is that of not knowing that one does not know. Ignorance of most events, concepts and mental training is a real problem. For instance, if a physician doesn’t know of a medical condition, how can he possibly make a diagnosis of it, and will miss it to the grief and too often death of his patient. Again, the cluelessness. If a person doesn’t know of the major logical fallacies, how can he avoid committing them? Overall, a good education will largely remove a good deal of this ignorance, and although it’s impossible to know everything, if one is trained broadly, generally and well, most of those kinds of problems will not occur, and the person, being well trained, will be well of aware of his limitations and most of the time be seeking to know those limits, and exceed them.

This is also a plea for far, far better education in the major nations, esp. in North America. Because not only is knowledge good because it creates wisdom, but also because it gives the comparitors in the human cortex more to work with to compare against all else. Knowledge is the deepest resource of the mind, and has been shown before, the more there is to compare, the more comparisons can be made which are useful and fruitful. And then because there is more found by those comparisons, then more can be compared against the newer knowledge and the comparison system exponentiates.

It’s simply too bad that in the USA so few have any real understanding or training in the sciences, because this is the most useful, reliable, practical and valuable knowledge known. Yet only about 5% of the US student graduate with any real understanding of their now 99% technological culture, which, with increasing computerization everywhere, only will continue to become ever more so. This is a great tragedy, because in the Eurasian nations, a 50/50 mix of math-science/humanities is required for graduation in most cases of secondary education and university degrees. It means that Eurasian graduates will simply run all over most all Americans. And that means in the long run, the US education system has simply failed to compete to the point where it must fail, weakening the entire nation vis a vis our Eurasian competitors.

Another problem is those who insist upon linear concepts and methods. They state dualities exist, without realizing the above logical fallacy of the false dichotomy. “There are always two sides to an issue.”, which false claim is yet another aspect of this problem. In complex systems, which are virtually everything in our universe, there are usually MANY sides to most all issues, and real dichotomy is more rare than common. The insistence upon the dialectic, which again has limited value due to the false dichotomy it commits, is yet another problem. Dividing events and ideas into dualities, while ignoring the continuum, upon which most dualities are in fact a part of, has been discussed before in ” The Continuum, dualities, Yin, Yang, etc. below.

Events are largely complex systems, and insisting upon dualities, dichotomies, and linear methods, where A almost always results in B, is not going to work very well. And is as shown above, yet another limit to knowledge, being the failure to understand complex systems, their characteristics, ubiquity, and how they work.

This is in fact, very likely the superiority of the COMP. It gives rise to the logics and mathematics, but it’s not subject necessarily to the same limits by the very means by which it creates the irrational emotions, as an aspect of more rational ways of doing things. It’s more effective because it has more capabilities, due to its very structure. This represents a massive epistemological shift away from strict, logical determinism to a comparison process way of thinking about anything, which can include logics as well as mathematics, but is not bound, necessarily by them. The COMP can compare anything to other events, because any event, whether internal to the brain and sensory report of the body, or externally existing events can be compared to much else, besides. There is no limit to what events can be compared to others, either. And in creating more outputs using the COMP, those also can be compared to other events, producing yet another form of unlimited functions, compound interest at work, i.e. the exponential capabilities of the comparison process.

Language also is NOT logical or rational or mathematical, and has so far resisted understanding it. But if we understand language on its own terms as being comparison processes and comparison methods, it becomes much more understandable as has and can be further shown. No mathematics can describe and give partial meaning to languages. Yet language can include and create mathematics and are expressible, describable, using language. The relationship of languages to mathematics as its parent in even found in the brain, where the math centers are located abutting the language centers from which math arose. There is no question but that language preceded mathematics. But the capabilities of math/logic do not go both ways. It can be created by the human brain, but it cannot necessarily fully comprehend it, otherwise emotions and language would be readily and easily understood, just any modern language easily states math and logic. Get away from logic, and math and use observations of what events in existence, just like in the taxonomies of the species of animals, just as medical professionals and engineers use observation of real events to understand them, etc. This very likely shows the superiority of the innate processes inside the brain, too, to describe and comprehend an irrational world, because we cannot find that last digit…… Godel was right, math and logic cannot understand many events in existence, for the obvious reasons.

16. Much more can be understood by means of the Exclusion Principle (EP), and its extension from physics into thinking. As stated before, the Exclusion Principle can be applied to motor vehicular laws and shows to be the one, basic rule largely underlying most all of it. Two fermions of normal matter, cannot occupy the same space at the same time. The electron repulsion of the EP prevents it. We see this daily that two trees cannot occupy the same space as they fall over and may push the other aside. Same for two rocks and so forth.

In the same way a comparison process exclusion principle is also acting, and this will show very simply how Godel’s Proof comes about and how the negative is created. We cannot stand or sit at the same time. Nor can we sleep or be awake at the same time. Many states preclude other states. We cannot sit, nor walk at the same time. We cannot speak, nor swallow at the same time, nor speak and hold our breaths at the same time. Thus there are in a very real way, actions which exclude other actions, states which exclude other states, and in a very real way, our language expresses and recognizes IMPLICITLY these exclusions in the ways we use words, showing the real modeling of words compared to the events to which they refer, but do not exactly nor fully describe, either. It is this implicit knowledge of exclusion, manifested by the mental exclusion principle, which gives rise to the explicit negative. The negative arises directly from the exclusion principle, a fact which has heretofore been widely ignored. This is the origin of the negative.

17. So we state he does Not run. But this tells us nothing about what he IS doing, does it? It excludes in fact, globally. The negative is often a global exclusion. There is a huge omission of data, is there not? But when we say he is running, by the very nature of both the model and reality, we know he is not sleeping, not walking, not sitting, not driving a car safely, etc., etc., etc. Which is more descriptive and complete? The negative, or the implied exclusion? Obviously the latter. And this is likely the problem with the negative, which Godel found. It eliminates too much information, virtually all of it. Using a logic of exclusion, which is what the comparison process uses, far, far more is kept into the description and thus is then more complete. Observations of events such as living species do this. Observations of the physical exam and history do this. Observations of plate tectonics also do this. Math uses the negative. So does logic. and here is the point, the comparison process doesn’t, and thus is capable of understanding much more than the math/logical linear methods can. The logic of implied exclusion is what is going on here, and that is the comparison process in most cases, and thus is far, far more capable of dealing with events in existence in terms of verbal descriptions than is formal math and logics.

In fact, was not the very phrase, “This statement is NOT true.” or a form of it, how Godel’s proof was created? By the use of the negative, again. Is this a coincidence? Not likely. The limits of using a logic and math in which the negative is used likely created the problem. Created the incompleteness. A logic of exclusion, such as used in observed systems, will likely not have the same limits as math/logic found by Godel.

By comparing directly what math can do with what words can do, we see this contrast. This may be a part of the solution to the problem of the limits to math/logic and linear methods. And it’s shown very, very clearly by using the same tool, the comparison process, which our brains use to create language, and which we have ignored far too long.

18. Essentially, there many aspects of the limits to knowledge of many kinds. Once the comparison process and its multiplicit and open ended characteristics are known, then much more can flow. Godel’s incompleteness theorem shows the logical, mathematical basis that such systems were incomplete. But simply because a statement is logical, does not mean it compares highly to events which exist. We must test those statements for completeness by comparing them to events in existence, which is the scientific method in a nutshell. It escapes beyond the limits of logic/math to find events to which those do not apply. It may be why scientific method is superior to pure thought alone, too. The mind trap of logic and idealisms.

If some other limits to empirical knowledge can be shown, which are based upon mathematics and the sciences, which are heavily mathematized, then some hitherto unspecified by Godel’s theorem, “kinds” of incompleteness would give support to it.

The Exponential barrier has been shown to be such an empirical limit to measurement. That there is no absolute space or time, nor perfections infinities, or certainties, or ultimates or absolutes of any kind, including immortalities of individuals, is very likely the case as has been shown by the limits of mathematical measurements, and it likely may also be the case for most verbal descriptions based upon language entirely.

That many statements in language CANNOT be expressed using mathematical symbolisms and methods, shows, clearly, the limits to math/logical statements stated by Godel’s theorem of incompleteness. This has been addressed before in detail and need not be shown again. That the taxonomies of the species cannot be expressed using math, nor logic by themselves, altho those can help, but is established by observations and comparisons massively is very likely the case. And this shown yet again, by comparison, the difference between descriptions verbal and mathematical descriptions or measurements. The limits of the the former are not necessarily the limits of the latter, and vice versa.

19. Essentially, we now invoke the structuralist approach. Most everything has structure, and that means the structure —-> function/output approach. For every structure there is a describable and/or measurable output, or outcome. This is essential to understanding complex systems, such as those biological and physical, too. And the premise that most all structure/function relationship have their capabilities as well as their limits. That this fits well into the findings of Godel’s theorem is clear. But the implications are as wide ranging as our understanding biological as well as physical complex systems. It’s yet another comparison process tool, i.e., a comparison method for understanding events around us, far, far better than linear, mathematical methods.

20. Whereas the logical, mathematical process builds up systems based upon concepts and ideas, the observational approach builds up systems based upon constant calls to events in existence. The taxonomies of the species, the periodical table of the elements, the IUPAC listing and organization of the compounds; the listing of all known biological proteins, enzymes, etc., much the same; the Hertzsprung Russell diagram of all known stars; the classification astronomical of all known galaxies, from the dwarf irregulars to the elliptical galaxies, to the various kinds of spiral galaxies, to the dwarf to the massive low surface brightness galaxies; and the nebulae; the planets from the asteroids to the rocky planets, to the gas giants, to the plutoids and so forth. These are most ALL classified NOT by logical forms, but by comparisons. In that sense they are NOT logical forms, nor mathematical, although those tools can be helpful, but in a limited form. These are all of different types, including the receptor sites method in pharmacology and the differential diagnoses methods plus the classification of all known human disease states, etc. But each of them has a physical basis which math and logic do not have, necessarily. Nor can they easily be described by math/logic of a linear kind, but only approximated.

21. And those approximations, which Kuhn showed were characteristic of the Ptolemaic perfect circles, then with epicycles; the sun centered solar system models, the elliptical model of same by Kepler, and the elements of orbits now used, all approximated, by the others, yet, the progression is never ending. It’s the approach by approximation which shows the exponential barrier being seen as a limit to knowledge. Again, these all show limits to knowledge, by the COMP. When we compare these as did Kuhn, we recognize the patterns above, also. Those approximations are the limits to knowledge, the incompletenesses also which are stated, but not identified as specific instances by Godel’s theorems.

As and aside, Gödel’s theorem applied to recursive systems, such as logic and mathematics. It should be pointed out that the comparison process is necessarily recursive and massively so, given the ability to think about thinking, understand understanding, writing about writing, recognizing recognition, ultimately from comparing a comparison without limit, this become very clear. This once again, the recursivity of the COMP shows a relationship to Gödel.

22. Have also addressed the limits of humans in terms of insights, from cortical blindness to lack of insight by many both normal and abnormal mental states. Of the neglect syndromes. Of the inability of animals to see the outcomes of their actions as can we, although not all humans can. These kinds are all of the same, limits to knowledge based upon structural limits of the methods being used.
Section 18: the ignoratio ignorationis problems.

23. The exclusion principle is also the case either specifically or explicitly. The consistencies of the complex biochemistry biological organisms can be seen as this, in fact, which both include and exclude specific capabilities and so forth. A poison can be seen as a biochemical inconsistency which can damage or kill the organism. Those processes of aging can be seen in the same light. The consistencies biochemical of living species are a logic all their own, observed and real. There are tasks they can do and which they cannot. They are the biochemical sum of their capabilities and limits, as well. The many truths can be seen in the same light, limits and capabilities of mathematical, scientific, logical, moral, historical, and spiritual truths, etc., each with their limits and capabilities.

Ideas and beliefs may implicitly and/or explicitly exclude other ideas. There is emotional exclusion where we simply do not like something. There is the ignoratio ignorationis exclusion which persons do not literally know what they do not know. There is the exclusion of knowledge by limited intellect, by dementias, by stupidity, by the above lack of knowledge by inadequate education, or ignorance of intellectual tools. There are many ways in which belief and ideas can be excluded directly or indirectly, such as brute force method, too commonly used, “If you don’t do/believe this, you will be shot.”

There are many other points to be made about many other aspects of this insight. Idealisms will exclude empirical methods, because the word/idea is held to be superior to events in existence, which are held to be, classically, mere shadows of the Ideal. Of course, the big pot, the universe does not go into the little pot, the brain, which shows how silly and foolish Platon’s idealistic beliefs were. We humans fit into the universe and are subject to it, not vice versa, and it was not until these exclusive, mind trapping idealisms were exposed as egocentric, homocentric, geocentric nonsense, that modern sciences came about and began their exponential expansion.

24. This also gives insights. If medical & scientific knowledge has been expanding exponentially, doubly about every 5-6 years, for the last many decades, and it seems very likely, and we still don’t know all which we need to know, is this not yet again another case of the limits to our knowledge? Having seen scientific knowledge very rapidly expanding exponentially yet we are not yet able to fully model even the brain, or complex biological systems, let alone a single cell, and much else, including living systems. Does this not also provide more evidence of the essential incompleteness of our knowledge, even though we know vastly more about our universe, compared to what was known 500 years ago, alone.

Language, like so many complex systems is unlikely to be fully understood without recognizing that linear, logical, mathematical methods are inadequate to the task. Once this realization is made, using the comparison process, then we can make real progress in understanding language and thus linguistics.

25. What are some of the other, more easily seen limits to knowledge? Let us take, as have so many times, the word, Tree. What does this have in comparison to that oak tree in my front yard? Does it give the size and structure of the roots, the size and shape of the trunk, the many branches, their locations of sizes and shape? Does it tell us about the genetics or physiology of it? Does it tel us the shape of the leaves, how they are growing or not, budding processes, or how many and where all those leaves are on the tree, or how they move in the wind, the rustling of the leaves as the poets state? No. It leaves that all out. No wonder our knowledge is incomplete!!! For these and most every other events in existence, our ideas/words are inadequate to the task. Then we wonder why our knowledge is incomplete? Gut Gott im Himmel!! It’s so obvious. Yet very much like not seeing the forest for the trees, again, by NOT comparing what we do, to what we observe, we miss the limits of ideas/words, language and math.

26. As Korzybski, the founder of general semantics, stated so many years ago, “The Word is NOT the thing.” In more general terms, the idea/word is NOT the event in existence to which it compares/refers. By confusing the two, ideas/words, brain products, with events in existence, there is the trouble. This harkens back to the philosophical idealism of Platonistic idealisms, which stated that ideas/words were the “ultimate absolutes”, and that events in existence were mere shadows of those absolute realities of ideas. We can see very quickly today, from the standpoints of our highly successful and exponentiating empirical sciences, that Platonists had it exactly ass backwards. It’s in psychiatric terminology of personality disorders, exactly the use of Projection, accusing others of those bad deeds which the disorder is doing itself. This unmasks the problem with the idealistic, self-centered, almost puerile in its origins, mind trap at last. There exists an external universe of events in existence, independent of our limited, small brains and ideas. It’s the Idea/words which are the merest shadows of events in existence, not the converse. Or as Dr. Johnson did, upon hearing of Berkeley’s absurd idealism, “I refute it thus” and kicked at him symbolically.

And is this not yet again, another implicit means of exclusion of ideas? Was not Galileo’s suppression and ignoring by the Scholasticists yet another example of how and why our ideas are incomplete? They looked away as the large and small spheres he dropped from his sedcond story where they could see them land at the same time, events contradicting Aristoteles very clearly. The Scholasticists refused even to look into his telescope where the moons of Jupiter clearly circled it, thus showing that by comparison, by extension that the earth could also orbit a much larger sun. Idealisms of all sorts are diametrically opposed to empirical observations, holding the scientific beliefs mistaken, when quite the opposite is the case, by simple observations a child could do.

27. Look once more this time carefully, at how we go about our daily business. We go over to a grocery store, and know where it is by comparing to our internal map, either by using a grid, or by comparing to landmarks, which eventually gets us there. (That some persons cannot read maps is most always shown by their inability to find north or south, or know where they are relatively, by comparing to a map. Instead they compare sites to their own idiosyncratic landmarks and few others can figure out those, so they can’t give good directions to others, either. Again, the comparison process gone badly wrong!!) But in going to the store do we see everything about us, the stores, the houses, etc.? Most of the time if you asked a person what was three doors down from a local shop they frequented, they couldn’t tell you. And there are endless numbers of examples of this, too. We miss most all the details. We deliberately ignore almost all of the universe, because of the fact we cannot remember it all due to limits of memory and processing information at less than 3-4 subjects at the same time. We are not good multitaskers for N =/> 3.

And this shows what’s going on in our day to day lives. We ignore most all of the details. We haven’t the capacity in our memories, either. And no wonder our models are incomplete!! Further, we cannot attend easily to more than about 2-3 things going on at the same time. There are limits to our awarenesses, too. This is easily shown in a practical sense by what happens when people drive and try to use their cell phones. They have about 4 times the number of accidents compared to those who don’t drive, if they use phones simultaneously. Therefore a good deal of our ignorance is not only memory capacity but channel capacity as well. Those are yet further instances of why most all our models are incomplete, as well.

28 In order to get around those limitations, let us employ the tool, the Structure/function model again. We have seen any number of people in our experience who are good multi-taskers. They can take those same tasks which many do and do a lot more in the same time and often better than most others. This is nothing new nor surprising. When Julius Caesar was dictating his Gallic war work, he had two scribes, one on each side of him. He’d dictate to the one to the point where his speaking rate was faster than the scribes writing rate, stop and then pick up where he left off with the other scribe, and repeated the process. Thus doing a lot, multitasking in the same way. Both dictating as well as composing what he would be dictating to the other. I had a college chemistry prof who not only would lecture to us in class about a subject which he knew well, but was simultaneously planning ahead about how his experiments would be done later that afternoon. He knew of others who could do the same. Many of us have.

I knew of a ward clerk who could finish up here work at about twice the rate of the other clerks in the same and other hospitals, tho her work load was not on average any more than the others. Someone in administration should have studied her, figured out how she did it, and taught the methods to the others. Not surprisingly that hospital closed 2 years later. To think that such a person could do that task so fast and well, & could be extended to other tasks in the hospital might have kept it open. Least energy rules.

Now why are these, known multitasking and brain dual tasking capabilities not being studied and then adapted to teaching others how to do it accurately and capably on a wide scale basis? Surely many others have seen and heard of the above abilities? Why stand so many here idle? The ability to double even quadruple our output by learning and having the self-discipline to learn these methods while still young is not to be scoffed at or ignore.

Let us proceed to another important issue relevant the above limits of human knowledge.

Categories and the Hierarchies

Herein, let us briefly explore how catergories come about using the comprisin process which both creates the categories, fills them in many cases with similarly structured/functioning elements and this then leads necessarily to the higher abstraions and categories of the hierarchies. Udnerstanding this relationship, and how the COMP can create and read the structure of this type, just as it both creates and reads maps, indices, dictionaires, encyclopeidas, phone book, directories, paginations, etc. It organizes the data creatively, thus building up an efficient, effectively, least energy method, which favors the creation of such organized forms.

Math cannot follow these categorical, hierarchically arranged transitional movements. The comparison process can navigate up and donw and among these changing levels, these epiphenomenological changes. The COMP can recognize, create and read them. Math can’t do this. Within categories, it can measure and count, and its other tasks. But math is ever the maid servant of verbal descriptions, not its master, which may explain some of the failures of math to describe most complex systems in the universe as well as complex systems of living species. Mathematics can describe to a limited extent within the categories, but it cannot scale up to the next. Words and the comparison process can, and this is another major limit to mathematics.