Table of Contents: Le Chanson Sans Fin

Le 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

How to Cure Diabetes (AODM-2)

How to cure AODM. (Type 2 adult onset diabetes)

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

This is the first of several articles which will show how to potentially “Win a Nobel Prize”. & will be written about 2-3 per month to show creativity at work.

Within a few years AODM will become a far more serious problem because the incidence of it is markedly increasing every generation, possibly due to more person being overweight and lack of exercise, also.

From the American Diabetes Association:

“The diabetes epidemic is taking a devastating physical, emotional and financial toll on millions of people across the nation. Currently, in the U.S. there are nearly 26 million people living with diabetes and another 79 million with prediabetes. The national annual cost of diagnosed diabetes is an estimated $245 billion, representing a 41 percent increase over a five year period.””

See more at:
But there is a very real, potential cure for diabetes coming. It’s very simple, actually, and holds the key to a cure for AODM for most if not all who have it. What has been seen any times and is well documented and scientifically reported, is that when the distal 2/3 of the stomach is removed surgically, or otherwise bypassed or compromised, that within 2-3 months most of those with AODM no longer need medications. Blood sugars in almost all cases return to near normal. This is unexpected to say the least. Even those who get gastric sleeves, which decrease the digestion in the stomach also find their diabetes gone in several weeks. This does not mean the potential for diabetes is gone, but the damaging high blood sugar goes away.

How and why does this occur? No one completely knows, but it’s where the potential for a Nobel Prize in medicine and Physiology must very likely come.

But why does diabetes have such a high incidence in the first place? and the answer might be had from looking at the condition in native Americans in Arizona. Among the Pima Indians on the American side of the border, the incidence is about 85%, one of the highest in the world. It’s known that in most cases the AODM gene is a dominantly inherited gene, which means a person only needs a single gene change to get diabetes, although there may be other factors which influence the expression of the gene, both environmental and genetic.

But why should a gene which can be potentially lethal exist at a high incidence? It’s well known that in thalassemia and sickle cell disease, the diseases exist in an environment with epidemic malaria. And both those conditions provide a modest but significant resistance to malaria in those persons with one, recessive gene. This is an example of genetics which contributes to reducing mortality because it has beneficial effects, too, although it can be very bad to carry both recessive genes.

The same is probably true of AODM. Why it exists is very simple. The brain and rest of the nervous system can only survive if there is blood sugar, glucose, present in high enough quantities to keep the nervous system working and undamaged during famine. In cases of famine, which is also wide spread and endemic, if a person is moderately diabetic, this will spare the person’s nervous system from serious damage, esp. in cases of short term famine.

On the Arizona border area, this is exactly the case. On the American side there are more than adequate food supplies in most case, the person can grow obese with the rich American diet and get diabetes. On the south side, food is much less available and more traditional diets low in sugars and starches, and most importantly calories are found. Thus those south of the border are not as likely to get diabetes. But since they are essentially the same genetics, the food rich north side gets diabetes and the food poor south side does not so much, and they survive better in famines to have children and pass the diabetic gene on to their children, who also are more likely to survive. The border acts as a kind of controlled study comparing diet and obesity to incidence of diabetes type 2.

In the diverse American population, for example there is a typical Caucasian gene for diabetes, tho there are also central Asian, Suomi as well as Magyar forms of the disease exist which are not the same gene as in most of Western Europe in those of not Asian ancestries.

But everyone in all societies in the past 10,000 years has experienced famine and thus the widespread development of the gene in societies, about 30% in most, although it’s not always expressed. Thus the high prevalence of the gene in Eurasian peoples, because the diabetes is, during child-bearing years, rarely expressed. It is expressed at later ages, and thus individuals survive through the child bearing years to have children and pass it to the next generation.

The characteristics of AODM are that there is an insulin resistance in the disease, which is associated with higher insulin levels and occasionally hypoglycemia, which is often an early sign of AODM. In addition, this form of diabetes comes on with aging, usually above 45, with obesity, that is large fat deposits, and in many cases with high starch/sugar intake. In order to explain these findings, then the following hypothesis is likely to be correct.

Clearly, in the case of blood sugar control, the body has many, many mechanisms to raise blood sugar. The liver can create glucose from Muscle use glycogen stores to raise blood sugar. Release of adrenaline and cortisol during stress raises blood sugar also, as well as the obvious, taking glucose/sugar containing foods in liquid form which can raise blood sugar levels within minutes.

But where is the control on insulin levels? When blood sugar goes up too high, insulin levels rise to control that. But where is the control for too high blood insulin? Simply cutting back insulin release by the beta cells in the pancreas does little to cut back the too high insulin levels in the blood. No one knows how insulin levels and activity is controlled. As is so often the case, the absence of something is often an important clue as to what’s going on.

The stomach is a very active hormonal and biosynthetic organ. It makes gastrin, secretin, VIP’s & GIP’s of many types, and intrinsic factor, among others. These are all polypeptides. Because removing the stomach and even the distal 2/3 of it effectively eliminates high blood sugars in those with AODM type 2 within several weeks, that means a substance is being taken away which the stomach creates. Something which can compete with diabetes on insulin receptor(s). And it takes a number of weeks for those receptors to be turned over, recycled and resynthesized, thus eliminating the insulin-like binding polypeptide/protein which is blocking the insulin for control.

Interestingly, AODM is insulin resistance. In other words there is a lot more insulin in the blood than expected and it’s not as effective in acting to reduce blood sugars. This is consistent with an agent produced by the stomach which is blocking insulin on the insulin receptor(s). All too often in AODM one sees hypoglycemia, as a manifestation of this. We also know of ILGF, insulin-like growth factor, which also binds to insulin receptors, so this model has solid support from existing mechanisms.

Thus, we must look for a polypeptide/protein which is insulin-like, which acts as part of a mechanism to control too high insulin levels. Thus completing, at least in part, the other side of the equation in blood sugar control. The insulin receptors must be specifically investigated to find what else besides insulin is binding to them. This will in time show the polypeptide/protein with insulin-like activity/binding which is being synthesized by the stomach.
Simply blocking this factor will abolish the insulin resistance, which will act effectively to cure the AODM.

The surgical approach to curing diabetes is a brute force method full of problems and even can be lethal. Blocking the specific polypeptide cause of AODM is a technical finesse which is far, far safer, simpler and to the point. & by this new knowledge of what it is in the stomach which causes AODM-2, we will gain a great deal more understanding about how insulin works and is regulated, too.

Curing most all AODM with this new knowledge very likely will result in another Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology for the person/team who finds the insulin-like agent which causes AODM. And that person(s) will have the distinction of curing/highly controlling a new epidemic in mankind which will undoubtedly become much, much worse over the next generation. For which tens of millions of people will owe a huge debt of gratitude, and a Nobel Prize.

One caveat is that it’s unknown why AODM waits until middle to older age person to present itself. Finding the right polypeptide/protein which becomes more active/binding in those age groups, will be confirming evidence that’s what is going on and what, specifically, the agent or agent family is.

The Relativity of the Cortex: The Mind/Brain Interface

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

“Gnothi seauton.” —Socrates, 4th C. BC, Ellas

“User Ma’at Ra” Power is the truth of Ra.,
throne name of Ramesses 2, The Great, 13th C., BC

“Knowledge is good because from knowledge comes wisdom and from wisdom comes many good things.” —Proverbs, 10th C. BC

“Knowledge is (can be) power.”
—Francis Bacon, 16th C. England

“Least energy rules.”

“The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we CAN imagine”
—JBS Haldane, 20th C, UK, (paraphrased)

1. From the simple to the complex, the hierarchies
2. Tracing the history of mind/brain from the simplest neural nets to the human form. Cnidaria, to the worms, fish, amphibians, to birds, mammals and primates
3. Signal detection and recognition as the basic forms of early brains.
4. Long Term Memories (LTM) and.
5. Intelligence and recognition, from animals to humans
6. From the simple to the complex in the human brain/mind; input yields output, via the comparison process to create recognition
7. The Relativity of the cortex, as the COMP
8. Measurement and description as COMP forms. The relationship between description verbal and measurement numericity
9. How the comparison process models the world, recursivity without limit, processing without limit; the immense re-iterations of the “play it again, Sam” aspect of the Comparison process.
10. The input/output feedback created by the comparison process. Metaphors, analogies, parables, fables, etc. and thinking
11. Output becomes input, becomes output; the limitless recursivity of recursivity.
12. Positive feedback arising from the COMP; exponentiating feedback capabilities. Enzyme feedback and control; self governing, self-regulating capabilities of the COMP
13. Method of Comparison in the sciences; evaluating outcomes in medicine; comparing outcomes of actions/behaviors; morality as comparing outcomes; laws of the universe as outcomes’ comparisons;
“By their fruits you will know them.”
14. The conscience in the frontal lobes as method of comparison.
The behaviors of animals compared to humans
15. Garden of Eden, knowing good and evil; the mind/brain interface
16. Mind of the child and the ability to reason and think; the beginnings of reason and its relationship to maturation of the brain; logic as comparison processing
17. Difference between human reasoning and creativity and that of animals rests in lack of higher level comparison processing not available to most animals.
18. Ignoratio ignorationis problem. Dementias, children’s reasoning limits, neglect syndromes in strokes; sociopathy, narcissism, lack of psychological insight
19. Characteristics of same directly related to lack/loss of higher level comparison processing; they cannot know good or evil
20. Treatment implications for personality disorders based upon lack of high level comparison processing.
21. Problem of good and evil simply solved using the COMP

22. How recursivity of the COMP models universe of events, which are also recursive; the secrets of the COMP’s power. Hofstadter’s “Strange loop” explained by; confirmation of scientific findings and recursivity of universe of events in existence
23. Comparison process words are all recursive and identified as such by recursivity. Variations of biological themes.
24. The relationship among moral laws, the conscience, to scientific laws, and legal laws; the COMP as the lowest common denominator of higher cortical processes and thinking; the compendia of medical exams, diagnoses and treatments, as COMP
25. Relativity and the COMP
26. Development of mathematics from the COMP by input/output hierarchies and methods of comparison. Geometry and algebra arising from the COMP methods.
27. The roots and reinforcements of discovery; the pareidolias
28. Newton’s insights about the spectrum and the rainbow; discovery and the dopamine boost; how Newton’s insights were like those of a child’s discovery; curiosity as COMP
29. Reinforcement of the COMP by innate dopamine boost
30. Copying, multiplication, replication, growing, all modeled by the COMP; unifying model of the universe based upon the COMP
31. Decoding, translation of language based upon COMP; development of language is comparison processing, on many levels; the language acquisition device of Chomsky is physiological and sited in the speech centers and the babble of children and the speech initiation centers of the frontal cortex; vocalizations built in, structurally, genetically;
32. Hyoid bone and speech and Neandertalensis and humans

33. COMP as organizing process in the rain and in understanding the universe.
34. Dictionaries, thesauri, maps, taxonomies, are all ordered, created and read by the COMP as instances of its ubiquity, usefulness and value. COMP as having anti-entropic values, measurable by information theory.
35. Complex systems which mathematics cannot but slightly, partially create or describe, such as taxonomies, and the vast compendia of medical work.; Hertzsprung Russell diagram of the stars, all COMP; Periodic table of elements is COMP; periodic table of elements; IUPAC list of compounds, etc. endless, 100’s of millions of examples of the COMP at work.
36. Organization of rock types is COMP Plate tectonics as a complex system created, ordered and explained as COMP
36. Method of comparison underlies the sciences.
37. Least energy principle (LEP) and Occam’s Razor are both COMP
38 Traveling salesman problem solved by ants/bees is LEP
39. Scientific creativity and the comparison process.
40. Methods/skills of professionals are comparison methods; musical styles as keys to understanding and identifying composers
41. Creativity in computer programming; the potential unlimited of the quantum computer
42. Understanding the mind requires understanding the universe. the then interplay, input/output of both for more understanding of the complexities within our bodies and the complexities outside of us.
43. Human flight as measure of capabilities of the human mind/living systems. Rhizobacteris fix nitrogen at soil temps, which humans cannot do. English robin uses molecular quantum technology to detect earth’s magnetic field for navigation, which humans cannot do.
44. Living systems can make the highly unlikely and impossible for us, become certain. Potential of these outcomes are enormous. Is everything we can imagine, possible? Unlimited creativity/potential shown by the COMP and the understanding of the mind/brain interface.

1. In the last article “Complexity, Boundary Events and Hierarchies”, a good deal of time was devoted to describing the scale/hierarchy differences among the levels in hierarchies, such as in seen in the highly successful and nearly fully outlined reductionist model. That is, we start at the simple particle physics of the stable particles, protons, electrons, which create neutrons, and the neutrinos, from which all stable matter is created. Then to the atomic level starting with a single proton and electron, from which the hydrogen-1 atom is created, then up the chain creating all of the the atoms, elements and isotopes, then to the molecules created by chemical bonding, thence to the great carbon bonding polymers, including DNA/RNA, collagen, keratin, chitin, starches, and cellulose, membrane structures, microtubules, muscle fibrils, etc., until we get to brain, the highest order complex organic system known.

And this is the point where the boundary events/emergent phenomena which create the human mind are found. But the roots of the human mind, this complex system created from the cortical cell columns did not arise de novo, but was sequentially created by yet another hierarchy going back to the creation of cells, and then eukaryotic cells, then multicellular, simple forms, which finally led to the higher animals and their brains.

2. But let us trace back to the start, the earliest transition from nervous system, no matter how primitive, to mind. From the simple to the complex, that most fertile guidepost to understanding. The bare bones event here is signal detection, how a simple nerve network detects events outside of it and responds. There is the initial start of mind, in simple signal detection of a neuronal network. We see this in the way it interacts with the environment, creating a simple response to environmental inputs. Sponges don’t have this. The simplest neural network known are those of the Cnidaria, the jellyfish and anemones, corals, and related species. They are aware of their environment and can interact with it in ways the lesser multicellular animals cannot. They can recognize other species, and individuals who are not self, as well. They are capable of interacting with their environments in ways which are closed to lesser animals such as sponges, and they have true nerve networks, often eyes and muscles allowing the motile forms to swim whereas the sessile forms can only move a bit locally. This is where the first nervous systems of any size and complexity started.

We then move rapidly upwards in the tree of life, but at each stage there is signal detection of light, sounds, movement and acknowledgement of self and mates for sex, though their reproduction methods may be very different from our own. Can such animals be stated to be aware? Yes, but in a limited sense. When they are touched, they detect it and move. Primitive, but real. Signal detection but very little else.

The next are the worms, and then the segmented worms, from which all higher animals have developed, including primates and humans. And we can see the remnants of this segmentation in our vertebral columns from the neck on down and the segmentation of the limbs and body deriving nerves from body segments from each of the nerve segments coming off the spine, and higher. And in the higher forms of this, beginning with the fish and the amphibians, there is a new scale/hierarchy found, that of recognition. The fish are territorial. They know where they are and what their territories are and will live in and defend them. They, unlike the lower forms which know only mates and food, can detect inanimate objects and can be seen to show territoriality, which they both seek out, identify, and defend. This is complex recognition, above the level of signal detection which allows the species to recognize mates, highly necessary for survival. They can also recognize food and enemies, too.

3. Recognition is clearly seen from the Mollusca, amphibians, fish and higher life. But from what source does recognition arise? In order to create recognition, there must be at least 2 working processes. The first is Long Term Memory (LTM). From this including short term memory, or working memory as some prefer, there is set up a more or less permanent kind of memory. How this memory is encoded and the nature of it is not the concern here. We cannot be sidetracked too much by trying to understand everything. LTM is a fact which can be accepted.

4. But how does any creature recognize, once it has LTM? It has sensory inputs, and these are tied into LTM systems. When an event, be it smell, taste, touch, visual, etc., is detected, it is at once Compared to LTM tracings for recognition. If the event is clear cut enough, it will be identified by comparison with the LTM. At that point, recognition occurs. To know comes from the word, gnosis. Cognition is knowing. To re-cognize means, literally, to know again. It’s been detected before, and it’s known again. We can re-recognize, too. It can be repeated endlessly, without limit. We do this everyday, all through our lives.

This is an event above signal detection. It’s a higher brain function. Insects do it, demonstrably. The behaviors of bees show this repeatedly. So do primitive animals such as the Cnidarians, and so do the next levels up, the mollusca and chordates. There is a continuous chain of recognition from these animals to the higher animals. Exactly how their nervous systems tie together their sensory inputs with LTM to create recognition is probably not the same among the lower species of animals, but it must necessarily be analogous. In the higher mammals, it must not only necessarily be very similar to those of other mammals and possibly even in the reptiles/birds, but must as we move evolutionarily higher, be more like our own. Until finally in the great apes, the differences among those and humans are likely to be matters of variations on a common theme, contrasted/compared with analogous systems in the birds, viz., our cortical cell columns (CCC’s).

5. And the basic part of intelligence is likely recognition, based upon a comparing together of sensory inputs being to LTM. And this created the comparison process in the brains as we know it. Just how this occurs is a matter for the neurophysiologists to find out, trying to solve the complex nervous system organizations of the annelid worms, the arthopods, mollusca and into the chordates, as well.

But recall the basic guideline to understanding. Events in our universe most always move from the simple to the complex. The complexity is based upon the simplicity of the electron/proton creating an atom. The hydrogen atom being the basic source of the entire rest of the table of elements and isotopes.

Similarly, recognition and that which lies behind it, the comparison process, can be seen as the basic output unit and process/function from which the rest of complex behaviors/functions arise.

6. Again, as so often written before, we must look at the simplest form to build up the complexity of the brain. The higher functions of human brain are recognition, language, the emotions, the thinking processes, the mathematics, and creativity, among many others. These arise in the cerebral cortex, among the cortical cell columns (CCC’s), primarily, with their massive connections to other parts of the brain. But the higher processes of the brain are done in the CCC’s, not elsewhere. This is where the integration of all of those related brain functions occurs. The rest is support structure. Thinking, language, music, the emotions and so forth take place in the cortex. The lesions and structure/function relationships of the higher cortical functions are well established by neurology, neuropathology and neurophysiology. We need not know HOW the immensely complicated CCC’s function, as long as we can identify their outputs, as above, the higher cortical functions. We leave talented and bright neurophysiologists to disentangle all of the impossibly difficult brain connections from the postulated 1000’s of synapses of each neuron, with the other 50-60K neurons in each of the CCC’s and their complex ties with other neurons surrounding them. That complexity is clearly too great for any human mind to grasp, fully.
So we have simplified it down to the comparison process comparing sensory and other inputs with the LTM to create recognition. They are probably acting in parallel, massively, to do the processing in a finite time, too. Again, impossible to understand details of enormously intricate connections, beyond human comprehension, except in part.

So using once again the simple to complex rule, we start with the outputs of the CCC’s mediated by the highest level neurophysiological output, the comparison process, which puts inputs together to create the output of at least, recognition. Upon that simplicity, using the COMP, the entire rest of the higher cortical functions, that is, the mind, can be constructed. From the simple to the complex.

7. Now how has the COMP been missed all these years? We see Comparative anatomies and massive comparisons which have created the taxonomies of all known species on the earth, including viruses. These have been most all composed of large numbers of comparisons. We wrote our English class essays and were asked to compare and contrast. We look at Einstein’s relativity, where he stated the limits to measurement being relative, not absolute, that is, we must compare a set standard to any event we try to measure. And thus most all measurement is comparison process. These have been detailed before in
This is the Relativity of the Cortex, that is, the Comparison Process (COMP).

8. Measurement and description are simply two forms of the same thing. Measurement is comparison to set, numerical standards. Description is verbal comparison to other events, such as colours, sizes, shapes, images, higher/lower; simple, simpler, simplest, etc. In each case the underlying process is the COMP. The kinds of adjectives we use from description, low, lower(comparative form,) lowest, etc., show this descriptive numericity and the exact connection between verbal descriptions and measurements.

9. But what are the characteristics of the comparison process(COMP)? How does it work and why is it suited to this immense job of being at the heart and core of the mind and the higher cortical functions? It has not been found before because it has hidden, disguised and camouflaged itself in the complexity which it has created. Yet it can be shown to be the lowest common denominator of the higher level cortical functions, as has already been shown and will be shown yet again.

The major characteristics of its multiplicit capabilities lie within its recursivity. It can be performed again and again, without limit. We can compare a comparison. To identify the other words which we use in conjunction and the other processes and outputs which arise from the COMP, we note the same characteristic, recursivity. We can compare the comparison of a comparison. We can talk about talking. We can think about thinking. We can understand understanding. We can comprehend comprehension. Write about writing, talk about understanding. We can create creativity, we can recognize recognition. In most every case those words which demonstrate these recursivities arise from the COMP.

If we look at this endless recursivity of the COMP and associated, related, analogous words, we see the basis of the feedback loop. Input becomes output, and then fed back into the loop, so that output once processed again becomes output. Endlessly, and this is why the metaphor, Le Chanson Sans Finis, is so well suited to describe the COMP.

9a. Yet another piece of massive evidence showing the repetitive, recurrent nature of the Comparison process is the “re-” suffix.This is what can be metaphorically called the “Play it again, Sam” characteristic. When we see the repetition, in most cases it’s the COMP showing itself to us. It’s literally everywhere in terms of mental processes. Re-cognize, re-flect, consider/re-consider, remember. Do and re-do. Play and replay. Every time we access a memory, we are repeating the same reading of the memory trace. In speaking, hearing, writing and reading, we do this literally 10K’s of times a day.

Opening the dictionary to this section reveals 1000’s of words beginning with this “Re-” suffix. This is enormous confirming evidence about how important & literally widespread the concept of repetition of function of the COMP is. Again, unable to see the forest for the trees. It’s utterly ubiquitous and again, models so well the recursive, repetition, constant re-iteration of events in existence:  the same atoms, elements, molecules, the same clouds, rocks, trees, grasses, persons and so forth. And this is why the cortical cell columns can be structured simply, because it efficiently reflects, yet again, the modeling of the universe by the cortex, based upon the universal, repetitive events in the universe. This is no accident, and shows once more the endless millions of examples of the truth that Le Chanson is real and existing, too. The song without end, in all of its myriad, rich panoply of ways & versions, variations on the endless themes of the universe.

10. Consider that this recursivity of the comparison process has created the input/output systems of the feedback loop. Consider that at each level of comparison, more and more hierarchies of organization can be created in this way, endlessly. Dr. Hofstadter has written about “The strange loop”. The source of this feedback, which he has recognized, is a process, working endlessly.

If we look at the metaphor itself, we at once, using the comparison process, see the relationships among the other forms: the analogies, a la Hofstadter; the parables, the fables, the similes, the koans, the various myths (mythos) to explain phenomena (Explain an explanation) and on and on. In each case we compare an analogy, a simile, a parable or fable to the existing cases at hand to derive the meaning of them. This is not an accident. This is a critical insight into thinking and what is going on in our cortex.

11. The key point here is both simple and profound. The Comparison Process causes the sensory input to become an output of recognition by comparing to LTM (Long Term Memory). In this way recognition occurs, and can recur endlessly by this same series of events. But let’s take it the next step further. THAT output, the recognition, can become yet another input, which creates yet another output. Which can again become an input —> output. Recurring again and again. The various species are then recognized as being related or not. If related, they are categorized into the various genera, families, orders, classes, phyla, and kingdoms. At each stage the system becomes more ordered.

12. Let us consider even further the more important ramifications of this input/output feedback. Einstein was once asked what the most powerful force in the universe was. He said it was compound interest. This is indeed what a positive feedback system can do, such as the COMP. It can only work when it can input an event, be it sensory, visual, an idea, a word string, memory, etc. But when the person is educated, trained and experienced, and has a good memory, there is Far, far more to input. And because many inputs will produce, esp. in terms of comparisons of outputs, ever MORE outputs, the system begins to grow even faster, to the limits of the COMP’s rate of processing. This is positive feedback, compound interest. It’s growth, reproduction, replication, copying, etc. Because we can copy a copy, re-interate a re-interation, these all above also are seen as comparison process by the rule of commonality, they have the same recursivity of the parent process, the COMP built into them as well.

Consider further the input/output of the enzyme, where the output will modulate the input, where the gene output, the messenger RNA yields a protein chain which will further modulate the gene output by ITS output of product. The product feeds back into the output to modulate order, organize, and control it. Feedback can be negative as well as positive. Thus it can CONTROL, govern, and regulate itself. This genetic modulating creates a self-governing, self ordering system, which we call the living cell, which can be understood, to some extent by relating all of the myriads of input/output events to each other, which creates the complex system which we call life. By this analogy we understand the same of the comparison process, which can also self-govern, self-organize the brain’s cortex and other structures, as well as information, memories, language, morals, etc.

Now extend this model to the CCC’s which create the Comparison Process. The input is processed to an output, and that output becomes yet another input —> output. This is how the abstractions, the higher values are created, duty, honor, country, etc.

13. But let us extend this. Using this Method of Comparison concerning differing outputs, where THOSE are compared, that is the products are compared, we find differences among them. But, we MUST be able to input the last output to get that far. Suppose we have a series of antibiotics which we want to check/test for safety and effectiveness. We do this by seeing how well those kill bacteria, for instance. Then compare their effectiveness in killing bacteria in human beings. Then compare the untoward side effects of their use with respect to allergic reactions, affects on major organ systems, and so forth. In the end, we find those few antibiotics which both kill the bacteria effectively and do not adversely affect the highest majority of humans tested on. We compare the outcomes, that is the outputs of the testing, do we not?

We compare the comparisons, the input becomes output, which is compared to the other outputs. In this way one of many methods of comparison reaches a higher level of understanding, governance, order and control.

14. That is the key to evaluation of therapies for medical practice. But let us compare this comparison yet again, making the input become the output. What happens when someone kills, lies, cheats, steals, or commits other crimes? There is a bad outcome. people get hurt. What happens if persons help others to live, be honest, respect property of others, and help the many and refuse to harm others? The outcomes are maximized for life, health and the general welfare of the society. By comparing the outcomes of behaviors, versus the survivability of individuals and society, we establish the higher values of morality, again, least energy principles, the most efficient way to a good outcome. Morality is therefore a method of comparison, developed by inputting the output. People favor and behave according to those behaviors which have been shown by trial and error to promote life. They are the fruits of good actions, and we will know them. The wages of sin are death. The days of the righteous will be lengthened and those of the wicked shortened. It’s outcomes. By the same process we find out what the rules are about creating medical treatments, or understanding the laws of the universe, we find by comparing these outcomes, the higher laws. And it’s all the comparison process as the lowest common denominator of this, too. These can be done again and again, they are of necessity and value, recursive. Not only are these rules set up and created by the COMP, but they are, like dictionaries, maps, thesauri, indices, etc., also READ by the same process which created them!! One comparison process has and performs multiplicit actions.

14. By testing and checking behaviors of ourselves and others, against the moral laws, we develop our consciences. The legal laws are of the same, yet another form of a Method of Comparison. Yet again recursive. Anyone can do this and does. Our frontal lobe consciences are yet again a series of moral laws ingrained into us, against which we compare our actions and those of others. yet again, COMP.
Let us look at the animals. They do not have morals as we know them, although many have altruistic behaviors which can be considered within the range, that, is we can by comparison with our behaviors recognize them as beneficial to the species, by showing restraint in conflict, and in not killing the others, or by helping to give food to others. Yet they have no knowledge of these things, as they cannot speak, though they behave ‘as if” they are acting, corresponding/comparing to an altruistic, moral code, where the orphans are taken care of by others in the group, as yet another instance.

15. Let us take the story and metaphor of the Garden of Eden. Where humans learned to tell the difference between good and evil. Is this not the COMP in operation? That evil has resulted in bad outcomes, and they could recognize this. The first humans KNEW good and evil. And that meant, their comparison processors in their brains were doing those comparisons, making the recognitions, and comparing outcomes. At that point modern humans came about. At that point we find the brain/mind neurophysiological process and interface.

16. Let us look at children. They are simply told what to do. They cannot see the differences between good and evil. They simply learn by rote and positive and negative reinforcement how to behave. There is no reason involved to speak of. Their brains are not mature enough to vote, act responsibly, put themselves in other persons’ places, to walk in their shoes, plan for the future. In short, that cannot do higher level comparison processing. The outputs cannot yet become inputs to see the outcomes, the higher order abstractions taken from events in existence. But Jean Piaget in his studies of children’s mental and personality development HAS shown us that reasoning begins, albeit it simple, about age 12-14. At that point, near puberty, the child begins to be able to tell the difference between right and wrong on his own. He begins to judge what is good and evil. He is confirmed into the churches and many societies mark by rituals and ceremonies, this as the age where young people become more mature, entering into adulthood.

This correlates highly with the above. Output becomes input. The child begins to reason. If A = B, and B = C, then A = C. This is simple logic, again based upon the comparison process. This is the recognition of identity, of matching of marked similarities.

All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Ergo, Socrates is mortal.

At this point, reasoning begins. It will often be faulty at first and requires a lot of training to avoid the known fallacies, but this maturity starts at about this time, and is socially recognized by puberty, change of status celebrations, etc.

But let us be clear, this is ALSO neurophysiological maturity onset, the beginning of the comparison process where output becomes input, and children can begin to recognize as adults the OUTCOMES of their behaviors and those of others. The conscience begins to be created. The self-organizing of the brain in the frontal lobes where the comparison process begins to do this. This is where neurophysiology impacts and continues to create mind. This is the mind/brain interface developing.

17. Comparing this to the animals, they cannot recognize much of this. They take food from others, and have little regard for others of their own species, stealing where they can. And they cannot see this higher order of things. They do not know good nor evil. They cannot make a recognition output become a comparison process input, either. The higher values, the higher abstractions are closed to them. They can recognize, but they cannot reason, they cannot see, they have no insight into, they cannot understand the higher abstractions. This marks a major difference between animals and normal humans. Although we do see some reasoning, and tool making, and other creative acts from time to time among the animals. These lower animal brain processes are not higher level abstractions, omnipresent as they are in humans.

Now let us compare that to the ignoratio, ignorationis problem, where persons, literally, DO NOT know, that they do not know. The dement which for any cause of dementia, who has lost the ability to realize that he is dementing, cannot know that he does not remember. Consider the right sided parietal strokes/injuries which result in neglect of the left side. When we hold up their left hands to their right visual fields, they do NOT know that is their left hand. Nor can they see anything to their left, either. They do NOT know their left sides, the syndrome of neglect. & unless they improve greatly, they may never fully recover this loss of mentation. Knowledge of self is reiterative comparison process.

Let us compare this to the child who does not reason, nor know logic. Let us compare this to the sociopath and narcissist who do not know how others feel, and have a near absence of concern about how they have hurt others, though they know if others have hurt them, they have no empathy for others. Let us compare this to many personality disorders who have no insights into the nature of their problems, because literally, they do NOT know, that they do NOT know. And why? Because their cortical cell processors cannot take an output and input it. The comparison processors are not working properly.

19. Now how can we further evaluate these people? The dements can’t figure out metaphors. They can’t understand “people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”. They respond to the question of what that means by saying, “the glass breaks”, or variations on that clearly uncomprehending statement. The narcissists cannot understand parables, or Aesop’s fables, or similes, or any kind of metaphors involving people, either. The comparison processors are NOT working at a level much higher than simple recognition. Something has been lost, as in frontal lobe damage, or something has never developed, either. It is, by its very nature, a problem with the comparison processes in the cortical cell columns. They cannot know good and evil, either. They have not gotten out of the Garden of Eden.

20. The implications for treatment of these disorders is clear and protean. There is cortical cell column dysfunction. Treatments then become an attempt, in the narcissist and sociopath, and delusional, to make them understand, show insights into how others feel. This can be done to some extent by exercises in how they think and act and how others think. But if the behaviors are too well established, the brain hard wiring too ingrained and highly set in its ways, there isn’t much chance for change. They have no insight. In children under the ages of 16-20, it’s often possible to intervene and begin to develop this higher reasoning, through education, training and therapy.

But in many, it can’t be changed, and certainly in cases of acquired dementias and brain injury, within 6 months of the injury, a good outcome is not likely if there has been minimal recovery of normal thinking. (More in Brain Hard Wiring article to come). They literally cannot know good versus evil, either. Their ability to handle the higher abstractions, to understand metaphors and fables, is also impaired, although training in these examples can help, if cooperative.

21. Let us take the problem of good and evil and do a comparison process on that. Many ask why evil was created? It damages people and the good is to be preferred. That can be a hard problem to solve, because if God created evil, is he not therefore the author of evil? After all, he created Satan and he knew Lucifer was going to go bad, did he not? But there is a simple solution using the COMP. How do we know the good? By the good outcomes, longer lives, better health, more domestic tranquility and peaceful, crime free societies with some measure of prosperity. Evil creates just the opposite, crime, drugs, diseases, disorganization, failure of essential services, severe grinding poverty, bad roads, etc. By their fruits you will know them. When we see the COMPARISON of the outcomes, then we can know what good and evil are. We can only know the good by comparing it with the evil outcomes, and vice versa. The good is known by comparison with the outcomes of the evil. Therefore, without evil, we could not know good, nor vice versa. And this explains why each is necessary to know the other. It’s very simple comparison process by the method of comparing outcomes. This is why good and evil both must necessarily exist.

This has been an important digression, but will return to the recursivity of the COMP now.

Just why this recursivity arises is simple to see. The universe around us is composed of stable elements: electrons, protons, atoms, elements, isotopes, water/carbon dioxide, etc. Trees, plants, rocks, bodies of water, etc. Each of these is seen again and again, the same recursivity we see in the COMP. It models by its innate recursivity because the universe itself is massively recursive. The same events occur again and again. The same quantum tunneling of the electrons which create the technology of the transistors is recursive. The same falling of the apple in a gravitational field, occurs again and again. The same orbiting of smaller bodies around larger ones. The radioactive decays occur again and again. The universe is composed of both simple and complex events which are recursive. and upon these stabilities the COMP calls up and reinforces the pattern recognition functions which are stored in the LTM, knowing they will be used again and again. The COMP has developed its unique functions, because it very closely mimics, models and follows the very nature of natural, repeated events. This is the basis of recognition. The very stability of the universe, as was related in “Depths within Depths…” shows this. The feedback loops, analogous to the “strange loop” of Hofstadter are but pieces of the vaster picture, the COMP.

Any new scientific finding which has been published must be confirmed by at least 2 other well done, carefully controlled studies to show that it’s valid. That is, its findings are existing and real. That anyone can find this recursive, real event, must be confirmed to show that it recurs in events in existence, again and again. The confirmations by using the scientific method, again, massive measurements and comparison methods, show this. The sciences find the stable, recursive phenomena, events in our universe, as an aspect of the comparison process of recognition, pattern recognition.

The other characteristic of the comparison process, about the closest a human phrase can be to that cortical phenomenon, are associations, relationship, similarities, matching, identifying, etc. All of these words are also comparison process words. There have been so many forms of the same word, it’s been missed. It has so surrounded itself by analogies, contrasts, antonyms, synonyms, and homonyms that it’s been disguised by the very complexity and wide usage this simple event has created. From the simple to the complex. The COMP is now seen for what it is, in all its complexity and many variations on a single theme, that is the musical version of it. The variations on the simple theme of the Coleoptera, all of them compared to each other and being seen, provable to be of a type, established by massive comparisons of each of the insects with each of the others. The same is true of the Scarabaeidae. Again, a biologist would see this, while others might miss it.

24. But think of this. Once we begin to compare the moral laws to the physical, scientific laws, to the legal laws, and then to the conscience, we see they are all of the same type. We compare our behaviors and actions to those of others, comparing to the moral laws, to derive meaning and decide if we are acting properly. We internalize those moral laws to create the conscience, by which we do the same thing. We extend those moral laws to events outside of us, find those patterns, and then create the physical laws, to which we refer in EXACTLY the same way as we did the moral laws, to see how the universe of events behaves. And then the legal laws, as adjuncts to the moral laws, all of the same type, the same variation on a single theme. We compare again and again, to figure out how things work and to predict events in nature and in the same way we compare again and again our actions to make sure they are moral & legal. They are of the same kind of thing. endlessly recursive, showing their origin in the COMP. All based at each point of laws, or morality, or legality, by comparing events to the standard of the law. And there is it. Again and again, endlessly, without limit of application. The comparison process points to itself, in time, eventually, inevitably, being the lowest common denominator of the higher cortical processes.

In the vast compendia of medical diagnoses, we see exactly the same thing. The History of the patient, being compared to what has been experienced and seen before. The physical examination of the patient, and even the massively complicated neurological exam, all are comparison processes, repeated again and again, and repeatable again and again because they are fundamentally, the COMP. The differential diagnoses, how the diagnoses compare to each other, and differentiate by comparing and contrasting most all known disease states and normal conditions. Again, massive, repeated, recursive comparison processing. It’s always been there. The forest has been missed because of the massive, virtually unlimited number of trees.

Again, the relativity, invariance theories of Einstein, have at their heart that there is NO absolute space or time. Anything to have meaning, must be compared to something else, be it physical, verbal descriptions, or measuring or both. The heart of Einstein’s relativity, that everything which can be measured, must be compared to set standards via measurement, is the comparison process, innately.

25. Note that Einstein’s relativity theory was not really mathematized. It was largely verbal, and he had to enlist the mathematical genius of Minkowski to formally mathematize his relativity. It was translated into a mathematical form. This again, is a clue to where his creativity came from, in short, the comparison process, in yet another of its multiplicit guises.

26. Mathematics, at its heart, is the comparison process, simply, provable, clearly. Take the simplest form of math, the counting. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, … We see at once, the combinations of numbers, one after the other, the not infinite, but yet endlessness of the number line, which began with counting. Again, the COMP. We see at once that all numbers on this line have relationships to each other. That is, we can COMPARE the 2 to the 4, or the 4 to the 12, and derive simple mathematics of arithmetic. Once we see this, additions and subtraction are seen to be comparison process forms/methods, basically derived from comparisons. Multiplication and division are simply emergent phenomena based upon addition and subtraction done by 4 threes are 12, for instance. They are created by the output of addition, becoming an input for another output, that is addition becomes multiplication and subtractions becomes division. From the Simple, counting down or up, or instead using division and multiplication as short cuts. Least energy processes, you see? Instead of counting up and down to understand the differences among numbers we MEMORIZE the arithmetic tables. So to save more adding we MEMORIZE the organized, orderly table of 7 X 7, 7 X 8, 7 X 9, for example, to save time. Least energy principles (LEP) driving the recognition of multiplication and division, again. Powers of 10 or 2, the squares, cubes, exponents, are the next successive emergent phenomena, skills/methods upon which we can calculate and save time. Overall the the comparison process combined with the LEP which gives value and meaning to the methods of arithmetic.

To summarize: counting, counting up, adding, multiplication, powers of 2, cubes, etc., exponentials, powers of 10 scientific notations.
Counting, counting down, subtracting, division, square and cube roots, logarithms and exponents.

At each state we see the output becoming the input to create the next level of ordering, again and again. Largely the same it true of the rest of mathematics, including geometries, spherical, analytical (which provides VISUAL meaning and uses, also. What we can see, we can deal with in yet another way. Essentially the difference between Schwinger’s massive computations versus Feynman diagrams, the latter preferred due to LEP value of his creative output.

Additions can be added to additions. Numbers can be divided again and again. We can multiply multiplications and yet again, endlessly. We can recombine the recombinations. In each new term, new method, lies within in the veriest Song Without End, the comparison process which is the parent form.

Geometry is simply more of the same. What is the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter? Pi, simply. The ratio of pi. We use this to create an entire spherical geometry, based upon going from the simple to the complex. The ratios of right triangle legs to each other is simply trigonometry, using the trig functions. This is how the legs of a right triangle all COMPARE to each other.

The same it true for basic algebra, which is simply the mathematics of ratios and proportions, that is multiplying and dividing. And in teaching algebra, we start with the simple arithmetic and go from there, to the more complex do we not? And is this not the method of teaching, of learning, or showing, of demonstration? We can teach how to teach, can we not? We can learn how to learn. We can know knowing. And the COMP thus must necessarily underlie all of education and teaching. We learn by doing, showing, demonstration, by imitating and mimicking, all of them comparison processes.

And then geometry and trig, from the simple to the complex. Again, the same modus operandi, the same comparison process, repeated endlessly as we can measure and compare shapes endlessly. Just as we can count again and again, without end. Just as the number line extends without limit. Le Chanson San Fin.

27. Discovery comes from this as well. Discovery is the finding of something new. But how can we know/recognize discovery? This shows what is going on. The comparison process in our CCC’s is constantly looking to make sense of the world. It’s an ACTIVE process. When it hears words, it tries to make sense of them, occ. making mistakes, which types often show the comparison process at work. We hear what we want to hear, again, actively seeking to make sense of the world around us. We often miss making discoveries because we ignore those events which might upset our world view, which we have constructed. It even creates by this drive, the pareidolias. And neatly explains those as well.

Within the rainbow, as has been shown very clearly in

28. It is the very simple which illustrates and enlightens about how the very complex was created. Newton found the rainbow using a glass prism through which he directed a sun light beam. He saw a spectrum of sunlight on the wall, which he at once recognized as the rainbow. By making this connection using the comparison process, we can see inside his mind’s creativity. We can think about thinking. What does this sequence of light and colors I see here remind me of? And he realized it was the rainbow. The creative instant. The exact creative point of his empirical introspection which the COMP allows us to see. That was his discovery. He had explained, understood, recognized what the rainbow was. The refraction of sunlight.

We understand by our experiences the thrill of discovery from this simple event. We understand the appeal and thrill of ALL discoveries and novelties, because of this commonality. The events which on the Internet “go viral” by their novelty, the punch line in a joke, the curiosity which gets a dopamine boost out of seeing something new.

I recall when my oldest son had found a lizard and brought it into the house in a glass jar. “Daddy, Daddy!! look what I found!!” And in this tiny event we once again see a universe in a grain of sand, as Blake wrote about and so well understood. Because this is basic discovery. And the release of dopamine by that recognition, which also underlies discovery. Newton and my son both had the same recognition, a discovery, which using the least energy principle, brought together by combining two apparently disparate events, that they were the same. Newton had found something new. A child had found something new. Both had made discoveries. Both got the dopamine boost. Because creativity, discovery, curiosity and recognition are all forms of the same process, the COMP.

29. And by this means, the comparison process re-inforces itself. So the discoveries want to be made, again and again. Can we not then more completely understand how the COMP works to reinforce itself? And upon this basis an entire framework of our emotional system can be created. and also explains humor, curiosity, and even those videos and images and jokes which on the Internet “go viral”, multiplying, copying, replicating themselves over, again and again. Reinforced by the “look what I found” dopamine boost.

And this reproduction, this copying, multiplication, replication, duplication all are the comparison process. Because we recognize near identity because the two match each other, do they not? And the basis of copying and recognizing events as copies necessarily uses the COMP to make the re-cognition. We can duplicate a duplication, copy a copy, add to an addition. Plants and animals and living systems can reproduce themselves. Our bodies can develop limbs by growing them. Plants branch out their limbs and growing branches, and their roots in analogous ways. So does the living tree of life show all those branchings and developments of new species over time. It’s all understandably by the same source, the COMP. The same, simple recursivity of the universe. Do you see? It unites most every event into a unified whole. It is unifying theory/model. That is the power of the comparison process and why it has evolved and is the basis of thinking.

31. It’s previous been shown that the COMP underlies decoding and translation of languages one into the other. It also underlies developing of new models/theories which explain what’s going on in the universe. The COMP is a universal decoder, from cryptograms, to lost languages of the Rosetta stone, the cuneiforms, and Linear B, to translating languages every day wherever that is needed. By comparing a single phrase in one language, to another, we translate, and understand. the comparison process, again and again.

At the root therefore of modeling and understanding language must lie the comparison process. We start at the simple and move to the complex as our guideline. The child begins to babble, thus creating the vocalizations which can be reworked into language. The babbling, like the suck and withdrawal movements are built in. The speech initiation centers working in the frontal. interhemispheric cortices. We know of those, because if those cortical sites are damaged by trauma or stroke, the patient becomes aphasic and cannot speak. With some recovery, language generation begins again, but never as fluent and spontaneous as before.

But the vocalizations are built in. His larynx/voice box/vocal cords are built in. The infant who babbles shows us this. Slowly, steadily by reinforcement and teaching and imitation by the mother, these babblings become “ma-ma.” Simple, basic, repetitive, syllabic. The roots of language, from the built in language acquisition devices (LAD), the cortical cell columns in the left hemisphere usually, plus the medial interhemispheric speech drive centers in the frontal lobes. This is Chomsky’s LAD. From “ma-ma” the infant is re-inforced. But that too is built in as the dopamine releaser. We see how children do this. They hear a word and they go wild with it. Repeating it again and again, reinforcing it into working memory, the LTM. This is how they learn. God help us if we say a swear word and they hear it and say it again and again around others!!

This is the LAD, the comparison process, working from the babble center which drives the system to work. Reinforced by the dopamine and the innate desire, purposefulness, goal oriented, drive to understand built into the CCC’s and expressed by the comparison process. From this simple basis each language is built up from speech, NOT the written word. It explains the idiolalias as well. We start with the simple infant speech and build up the rest of the complex language until we get to the most complex of them all, professional speech and writing. Then we add the written word, as the secondary reflection of the language development, as a higher system, based upon an output becoming input —-> output. Writing then feeds back into the entire system via the COMP, to create higher and higher categories, better memory systems(books and libraries) and more complexity and capabilities. Using the comparison process the entire structure and development of each language can be shown to be generated from a few simple rules. That of the ‘ma-ma” reduplication of simple syllables, up to complex polysyllabic languages, just as we develop arithmetic from the simple additive number line.

It’s the same process, do we see that? It’s the COMP driving it on. It’s ancient going back 100,000’s of years. We see the hyoid bone reflecting the existence of the larynx, the “voice box” in the earliest humans and the Neanderthals and probably Homo erectus. Because of this, we know the same cortical structures which we have, have their ancestry there as well, because Neanderthalensis is FAR, far older than we, 100,000’s of years older.

By making these known comparisons we can discover a great deal. We see the driving, purposeful force of the comparison process working in our cortex to create meaning from words. Reinforcing discovery, creativity as recognition. But this is only the beginning of the power of the COMP, going from the simplest form to the most complex.
The evidences and the substantiations of the comparison process’ use and existence have been addressed very well in previous articles. The essentials of these will be repeated here for emphasis and extension.

The COMP is a an organizing process built in. It will spontaneously seek to understand and order as has been shown above. Even school children on the playground over time will seek to order their play by new rules they create. Societies are also stratified into classes by this same process. Even the great ape societies do much the same, to show this is not unique to humans. Dogs, elephants, and other social, herd animals, even the birds in their flocks and fishes and amphibians do much the same.

34. The Comparison process can order and organize the brain along the lines of similarities, recognition, identity and language. The organization of our dictionaries, thesauri, indices, the pagination of books, and addressing of sites on maps are all aspects of the comparison process in action. This has been previous shown in
about 3/4 of the way down using right menu bar cursor, starting with:
“When the Rosetta stone was found….” and continues into part 3

35. In the organization of the Taxonomies of millions of species the comparison process is at the heart and core of it. Having done a great deal of biology, esp. with identifications of the animals, plants and the Coleoptera, where we simply compare and compare and compare again the beetles we find, and organize them by visual inspection and type, and recognize same when we see them again, it’s at once obvious what is going on. Every single species can be observed carefully for its characteristics, then compared to the Kingdom, phylum, order, family and genus and species of hierarchies where it belongs. It’s not only the creator of this order, but we can also read it by comparison, (just as we read a dictionary, index, or map), to find out where EACH of those species belongs, exactly. The same process, universal and ubiquitous. The Comparison Process. Most all of the millions of species have been organized and identified and re-identified, endlessly, in this way. Mathematics cannot but be a handmaiden in the description of these taxonomies, and cannot at present symbolically describe these taxonomies, as it cannot describe medical methods, disease conditions, differential diagnoses and treatment protocols and testing of complex human living systems.

In most all of our dictionaries, thesauri (synonyms/antonyms; homonyms, indices, maps and street addresses, paginations and lists, we find the same. See:
Check about 40% of the way down using the right slide bar

That’s 100’s of millions of examples of the comparison process at work, alone, every day in our lives. To which many 1000’s of species and words are being added yearly, without limit. Le Chanson Sans Fin.

In the organization of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram of stellar development and kinds of stars, mostly the same has been done, as most all known stars can be placed on this organizational diagram with respect to comparing their colors, sizes, composition and ages. It’s clearly most all COMP in action. A similar system has been created to organize the types of galaxies, too. 100,000’s more examples to add to the above. The galaxies are also organized along COMP methods.

Regarding the periodic table of the elements, each of these has been classified in a continuum of atomic numbers beginning with 1, that is, hydrogen-1 atom, and with adding more protons, and neutrons, the entire systems has been built up. In addition, comparing the chemical characteristics has resulted in families of element being grouped together, which was Mendeleev’s important insight. The noble gases, the calcium series, the ferrous metals, the alkali metals, the halogens, the rare earths, the platinum group metals, again, all comparison process created on a number line of the atomic number. From the simple, to the complex, once again, organized and recognized and identified by the COMP working endlessly.
The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) of organizing all known chemical compounds, both organic and inorganic has proceeded upon the same basis. At last count this was about 34 millions of chemical compounds, all of them confirmations of the COMP at work.

36. The organization of the kinds of rocks as compared to their types, is just more of the same in geology. The organization of the movements of the earth’s surface upon the basis of plate tectonics is yet another example. The basic, simple process of seafloor rises of spreading and upwelling, creating continental drift; subduction destroying the same seafloor created by seafloor upwelling, and great earthquakes and volcanoes as the rock thrusts down into the magma layers, where the lighter rock melts and rising up to create inland volcanoes; the drifting of the continents and oceanic floor over hotspot plumes which are surprisingly stable; and at last the rifting zones on land, esp. in East Africa and the various kinds/types of faults accompanying this continental drift. A complex system, as it’s impossible to predict where this huge interacting system will be in millions of years, because it’s non-linear, yet described in great detail by verbal comparison processes, from the simple characteristics to worldwide. And cartooning and visual, but clearly NOT mathematical, but descriptive in the main.

The comparison process is ubiquitous in describing, measuring, making sense of our world through its organizing, self organizing and ordering means. It creates predictive control by recognizing these patterns, and then uses those events to create technologies, as well, stable because they reflect stabilities in our universe, which arise from what we call natural laws and the consistent recurrence of those processes and stabilities. It consistently acts to govern and create order. The moral laws have been created by observing patterns in behaviors and noting those which results in bad outcomes in terms of survival. By their fruits you will know them.

37. In the sciences the method of comparison is widely used in all areas to compare outcomes of treatments, or other methods in terms of developing a better understanding of what is going on.

37. Most everywhere we look, there is the COMP. In one of the most important principles in physics, the least energy principle, which according to the “McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, states that the LEP has proven to be able to solve even those problems which are intractable by other means. It has many names, the minimalist principle, the least action principle, the least free energy principle, again, the SAME multiple forms of the comparison process methods. It’s essential to understand this principle, and has been discussed before in detail. That which is least energy will prevail by the rule of 72, the compound interest formula, which also drives competition in the markets and in the evolution of life and development of societies. It’s a general principle which compares, again, outcomes, in this case, which processes/methods use the LEAST energy to get to the goal. Those are favored. Again, COMP

Occam’s Razor by simple comparison can be shown to be yet another form of the comparison process. It states that the simplest model/hypothesis which explains the pertinent data with the least number of new hypotheses/ideas, is very likely the right one. It doesn’t take a genius to see that this is the LEP, which is also based upon the COMP. It’s everywhere, disguised by the complexity it creates & hides itself. Subtle, yet real.

38. Taking this further, the traveling salesman problem is of this type. Which is the route passing by all of the destinations which must be visited which gives the shortest route in the least amount of time, with the best work at each site? Again, this was solved by the ants and the bees at least 100 M years ago or more, and perhaps by the termites even earlier. It has been found to be, of course, a least energy principle system, showing the ubiquity and value of it. By comparing different routes to food by the ants laying down pheromones, where the shortest route gets traveled more and the pheromones get denser and more noticeable. “Observe the wisdom of the ant.” To the honey bees which recalls which routes to the flowers were faster and gave more honey, and comparing the lengths of different routes based upon a very simple algorithm, “go to the next nearest nectar source” they solved the problem simply to about a 75% optimum level. Again, Comparison processing by the ants and bees. Comparing outcomes. Again, LEP.

These traveling salesman solutions have been applied again and again to deliveries of the UPS, FEDEX, and other related systems worldwide, saving huge amounts of money, time and resources, every day they are used.

39 Creativity of all sorts has also been discussed before in the articles in many occasion. But suffice it to write once more, creativity is a LEP which comes about by comparing at least 2 events/idea/memories, sensory inputs, in any combination which gives a result of value/meaning. Darwin and Wallace did this by comparing the plants and animals on isolated isles in the Galapagos and Indonesia, found massive similarities among the species there, which simply, and conclusively shows that species evolved from species previously existing. It was both a recognition and creativity.

When Newton created his mathematics to describe motions of objects and orbits of planets, it saved a LOT of time. Each orbit of the planets could now be encoded in a simple equation, whereas before they were complicated sets of data. He simplified with his laws, the complicated to the simple. He saved a LOT of time for all those following him. and when the newer data came in, those were compared to the old, yet again, revising orbits and learning more. Again, output became input, and far more precise orbital data eventually led to the “elements of orbit” methods in use today. Comparison process all of it, from the measuring to the creation of a newer, more accurate method than Keplerian ellipses.

40. Have previously discussed to finalize this article, about the skills and methods used by professional writers, composers of music, those of craftsmen and even those who create newer and better computer programs, the systems analysts which give our computers greater and greater capabilities with more efficient use of computer time and outputs. Essentially, the difference between an amateur and a professional is the latter has a whole series of methods/skills based upon constant use of the COMP to figure out simpler, more capable methods to do the same tasks again and again. They create, in effect, more hierarchies of methods which are faster, give a better output, and more capabilities.

Consider Tchaikovsky, Grieg, and Chopin three of the best, most lyrical, most popular classical composers of the romantic period. Each of their music is at once identifiable by its sound, phrasings and characteristics, is it not? And because of this each uses a unique style, we call it, to create/compose the music. Significantly each of those styles is created by their special skills which should be identifiable as creative methods using the comparison process. It should then be possible, among creative composers to create more music which sounds a great deal like those 3 composers. And it should be possible, using the methods of creativity innate in the COMP to create 4-5 new symphonies by Tchaikovsky and his ballets as well, full of lyricism, originality and remarkable tunes he w3as so capable of doing. By recognizing that STYLE is in fact created by comparison process methods, as seen above, it should be also possible to re-create more Grieg and even Chopin.

By extension, more Mancini, more Beatles, more ELO and so forth, without limit. Any dead composer, or living could also be by computer methods able to have that very original musical output analyzed for its peculiar, identifying styles of composition, duplicated, now that we KNOW the basis of creativity being the COMP. This would lead to a modern Renaissance and output of musical creativity which is unmatched in the past.

41. But suppose, in addition to this, we could find out exactly how, using the COMP that the most creative computer programmers find their new, original programs and devices? Suppose we could build THAT human creativity into a computer. Imagine what that computer, since it works a great deal faster than humans, could do, could compose new lines of programming creatively, far, far faster than humans. Would this not increase progress in the field?

And if for computer programming, once the methods are found, could it not be extended to writing Chopinesque pieces, to Quincy Jones and Elton John, or anyone else? Would this not create a renaissance as well?

What then if the same principles of creativity which are now known to be due to the comparison process in the sciences, could be also programmed into a computer, say for genetic research? Would this not create an accompanying renaissance of growth and progress in the sciences?

Now let us us add another input. The quantum computer is potentially trillions of times faster than the silicon based chip. In other words, it can do in a few minutes what would take using silicon chips 1000’s of millions years to do, or potentially faster. Combine THOSE capabilities with the capabilities of creative computers for composing Grieg, to computers capable of duplicating the outputs of few more Einsteins, Schrodingers and Edisons. Would not this revolution then dwarf anything seen in the past, by a vast amount?

Is this not part of the singularity spoken of by futurists?

42. Yet this is what can happen buy using the comparison process. In order to understand our minds, we must understand more of the universe. This scientific knowledge is then fed back into our brains so we can better understand our neurophysiology and our minds. And on and on, all made possible by the recursive, reiterative nature of the comparison process and compound interest formula. This is the potential, capability and promise of the knowledge based upon the comparison process. This is what can happen if the principles and this new understanding of the brain/mind interface are applied. A renaissance in the sciences and the arts and in every other field, which has never been seen before, vastly outstripping what has come before, as well. Interstellar travel, quantum technologies never even imagined before.

43. Consider these facts. The universe is a very, very huge place and enormously complex. Our brains are very tiny compared to all of that. So tiny, that in fact almost everything we can imagine can be done eventually, as long as we do not directly try to violate a physical law. But, consider, can we not fly by hot air balloons, by gliders like planes and hang gliders? Can we not fly using parasails attached to boats and other moving craft? What of jets, prop planes and even rockets? We can fly in huge numbers of ways, too.

Consider yet another input. The Rhizobacteria can do at soil temperature what we can only do efficiently using 100’s of atmospheres of pressure and 1000 degrees of temperature. They can fix nitrogen in the atmosphere combining with with H2O to create nitrates/ammonium, the very bottleneck of growing plants and food sources. A tine bacterium in the roots of the beans, can do what we cannot. This may show that what is impossible for us, in most cases, is hardly impossible at all.

Consider that the English robin uses a pair of atoms in a molecular cage, and entangles them using quantum effects, in fact quantum technology to detect with great precision the magnetic fields of the earth so that it can navigate. We cannot do this with even a box the size of a portable toilet turned on its side, using superconductive methods and liquid helium, too, what the robin does at room temps.

Consider that the simple enzyme does at room temperature, what we must do with far, far vaster amounts of energy and input to do at all.

44. Can we then conclude this? That living systems can achieve far, far more than we can, and what is impossible for us, is therefore possible for living systems? That in fact, whatever we can think of in this far, far vaster universe, more immense and unlimited that we can even imagine, is in fact possible? That for us, all that we can think of and then again, is more possibilities than we can even imagine? Quantum mechanic states that not much is impossible, just highly unlikely. And we know that living system can make the virtually impossible highly likely even certain.

Everything may well then become possible, well past what we can even imagine. This is the universe we live in, and to reach that state, we have only to use our understanding of our brains/minds to create it. And using creativity from computer programming to create ever more creativity in the arts and sciences, that we can create anything we imagine.

Just this caveat, use it well and use it wisely. The universe is very likely unlimited for us, as unlimited as our comparison processes are also.

Unlimited creativity is promised by the comparison process. Unlimited creativity can very likely be created by computers as well. Using quantum computers then creates unlimited creativity within a very short time. And anything can be done. All problems can be solved, beyond our imaginations. This is the future coming, fast approaching. Use well your days.

Let a revelation in understanding become a Kuhnian revolution.