Einstein’s Visualizing, Mountain Passes, Weather Radar, & Predictive Control

 

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/CP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014
Copyright © 2019

 

.
What do all of the above have in common?They are all complex system (Cx Sys) manifestations of Least Energy(LE) rules, in all of its enormous, unlimited applicability.
.
How did Einstein do what he did?  That’s a deep question.But mainly answerable, now. By using CP (a detector of LE, Comparison Process), LE, S/F(Structure/Function)  & Cx Sys’s processes and methods we can cut thru the complexity and reach a better understanding of understanding and then of events.
.
Einstein was a good visual thinker. Sagan’s “Cosmos” points that out with Einstein’s thought experiments. First of all he asked what it was like to ride on a Photon?  And he realized that at light speed, all time stopped for the events around you, but the photons were still in process, which is time. Thus most all of everything around that photon is either instantly processing, or not processing at all. That is QM instantaneity, which is the case. All processes appear by the photon to stop outside of the photon, or they occur so quickly, that it’s not detectable. This gave rise to a basic part of his Relativity.
.
The second visualization was how is being in a gravitational field like being in an accelerating system at 9.8 m./sec.sq.? The answer he gave is that we cannot detect the difference. & he used that comparison process of visualizing those two very similar states to make another part of his Relativity. But that assumes that the acceleration is regular/smooth, and in a gravitational field it’s VERY regular,. And that was the point.
.
However, they are NOT the same, exactly. They are not Quite alike, and thus the regularities of acceleration does NOT match what’s going on in real events with gravity fields. That is a disparity and from the “cognitive dissonance” ideas of Festinger, which are comparison process detections/mediated, we see this. And those create scientific progress when they are seen, recognized and then largely solved. “Thomas Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific…” clearly shows that, successively. Much like the 1/3 neutrino’s seen compared to the predicted, expected, 3 times as many. And that led to a major advance in particle physics. CP mediated, most all of it.
.
Relativity is CP mediated. Einstein stated in his “Physics and Reality” 1936, that “our understanding is based upon finding the relationships among events in existence” And that’s exactly the case. IOW, the cognitive neuroscience of Comparison Processing (CP) is finding of the relationships among events, by CP of those events. Much as he did with riding on a photon, compared to events around it, comparing acceleration to gravitational fields, AND the relationship between Mass and Energy, the famous E=MCSq. So we see relativity everywhere in these cases of understanding what’s going on in events within and around us, do we not?
.
Now, when we want to understand how arithmetics and most of math is created, we looking for the relationships among the numbers. We count, and create information along the number line starting in base 10 at 1, 2, and up the hierarchical organization of 1’s, 10’s, 100’s, 1000, 10K, 100K ,1 Millions, 10 Millions, etc. And the hierarchies are created by CP, as well.
.
So we take 2 and 8 for example & from that create the entire sets of basic arithmetic. When we count from 2 to 8, laboriously,  we get 6 numbers. Thus the relationship of 8 to 2 is counting up 6!!!  And when we count back down, we get 6 also. So the relationships between 2 and 8 is 6.
.
And then we abandon counting for the addition and subtraction tables, which efficiently, LE wise summarize the relationships among all of the numbers on the number line. It’s the first hierarchy after counting, viz. addition and subtraction. is it not? And thus we have short cut the counting, by using Long Term Memory of the addition and subtraction tables to SAVE a lot of time with counting. Least energy, yet again is not? But we are not done yet, we have counting which created information, and we have the addition/subtraction tables which efficiently short cut that counting. & save us lots of time, too. But what of the relationship among 2 and 8 as a function of 2?  We move from 2 to 8, by addition, giving 4 twos to get to 8, do we not? Thus we have more efficiently added, and counted that 2  Fours are 8!! Yet another relationship, Einsteinian in form, which give us the Multiplication function. is NOT?  And from there we count down, multiply down & realize that the 8 divided by 2 is Four!!!
.
As Feynman once said, If I cannot generate an outcome, then I cannot understand it. The above model generates basic mathematics, where tested so far.
.
Thus we have by this simple means created the “Einsteinian Relationships” which give us an understanding of adding/subtracting, the next hierarchy of multiplying/dividing, and we can successfully with the latter find more quickly, than counting OR adding, that 4 times 12 gives us 48 and that 48 divided by 4 (or vice versa) gives us twelve. We shortcut the adding process and the counting processes every more, do we not? It’s all consistent. And that consistency ALSO is comparison process.
.
And what of the NEXT hierarchy? And we see by comparison processing we create the relationships of the numbers in our cortices next to the anatomy of words, Math grows Right out of word processing, left post temporal speech/language centers. & if we damage those centers by anything, the structure/function (S/F) relationship shows us that language is damaged, as well as the math. But the verbal functions came first and are extended by math in that area, as well. This is the case. Thus we have used the S/F relationships created and driven by CP to understand how math works, as well, as language.
.
And we can state almost everything in words, including all of math, but the converse is not true. Unlike 4 X2 = 8, and 8/2 is 4. It’s not the same. We easily use words to express virtually all of math. But math cannot speak or process language very well. “How sharper than a Serpent’s tooth is it is to have a thankless child!” shows this 1 way function. And it’s humbling, too. The origins of descriptions and language/speech came first and out of those came maths. Very clearly.
.
So we have this finding. The what are the origins of language/verbal functions?
.
And using Einstein once more, we come to this huge epistemology implication which works in physics and is likely true. When we take a piece of cut lumber, how do we measure it? We take a relatively fixed, stable, but with arbitrary units to measure it. and we come up with say, 16 inches, or about 40+ cms. The relationship among the conversion from inches to cms. is 2.54 slightly+. The ratio of 40 cms. over 16 is 2.54. Comparing those two, is a ratio, a proportion, is not? Comparing the circumference to the diameter gives pi, does it not? Comparing distances/time gives speed/velocity, and all the rest of the constants, such as E = h/ (Planck’s) constant times nu, the frequency. For THAT relationship & the quanta, Planck got the Nobel prize. Finding once again how energy of photons is very precisely related to its frequency. And by a simple math we can determine the wavelength of that light photon. & this also works for sound, as well. It’s most all about relationships, and those are detected and created by CP.
.
All of those relationships are found by CP of information. Density is the same, mass over volume. From the famous “Eureka” of Archimedes, which solved his problem and spared his life. F is m1 X m2 times g, over r. Sq, the square of the distance. Again, more ratios, proportions and their relatedness to each other. And 1 more constant, too. IOW, comparison process writ large. It’s a universal processor.
.
So, if the epistemology of Einstein is based upon finding a standard, efficient measuring scale, and its methodological limits, And it’s creation of data, numerical information by those comparisons, then what of verbal descriptions? And we know they are related, but exactly how was not previously known, or figured out. But it is now. When we, for distance describe colours, we use the famous Mnemonic acronym, ROY G. BIV. And by applying the relatively set, stable, fixed method of arbitrary, verbal standards of what the colours are, we can describe the color of most everything around us using those standards. We create information by using VERBAL set standards & comparing those to all around us,& within us, too. Roses are red. So is blood. Much tree bark is brown, & so can skin be. Efficient, widely useful, too.
.;
The hugest example of this, which is confirming without limits, are those of the verbal adjectives, and their characteristics. We have the base form of the adjective, such as high. And the extreme form, at the other end of the Linear line, highest. The superlative and we can also tell that because its moST “signal detection” ending in -st. nearly universally. And the middle form, Higher? The Comparative, and there it is again. It’s most all CP, we see. The 1000’s of words which can be used in this way, are almost all comparison processed. High, higher highest, or some tall, more tall, or most tall, in all the myriads of ways. All of it comparing to how big is it, is it as big as a bbee, as big as a house, an elephant, or the size of a pinhead. All relative to our descriptive standard, by which we describe and not only count, and measure which CREATES information, but by using the Einsteinian methods, the verbal  Descriptions which apply those same set, VERBAL standards, altho still arbitrary in which sounds/spellings we use. But they are efficient and stable, & thus, LE events.
.
This then shows the common origins of math/measurement, and Verbal descriptions, and sets up a clear cut Relationship between the two, which is Einsteinian. Math measures, words describe. They both create information of each type by comparison to those measuring, or verbal descriptions.  Both act in the same ways, as the math arises from the set standards based upon the set description standards of the words we use. Thus we have it that Words/ideas/descriptions are related exactly to how numbers/maths/measurements work to create information & thus equivalent by the same by set, fixed stable standards, he one with words, the other with numbers. That is the Relativity to The Cortex, is not?
.
And the CP which creates those relationships AND generated the information are one and the same for both words/descriptions : math/measurements. Is not?
.
So if we can create basic math arithmetician by relations among the numbers, using more and more efficient, and hierarchically arranged, counting, adding, multiplying, then in the same way we can generate all languages & words by using the arbitrary designations(set points) & the relationships among the words,or the meanings of words by sound, as how to generate most all languages. And translation is of the same.
.
.
About 1/2 the distance down, see this rigorous comparison of word meanings which leads to nearly exactly as possible, most all of the translations.
.
There is NOT likely a universal grammar, but this nearly universal processor in the language cortex which generates the arbitrary sounds, gives then meanings, but which are fixed, efficient and thus stable, which creates our languages, is not? It’s simply the repeated use of the repeating cortical columns which encode the standards of words, which create language. AND information verbal. And information numerical, is not?
.
Simple, complete, elegant, and highly efficient, & thus LE explanation of the origins of language from Einstein’s epistemology which is altogether true in physics  & thus empirically the case, is not?
.
That’s what we see by looking at Einstein’s brain/mind, the structure/function of an engineer’s mind & how it worked. is not? Incredible abilities to visualize events. His father was an electrical engineer as was his uncle. He sat for hours at a time in the Swiss patent office, examining designs & models and figured out how those worked, visually, to see if they were original enough to get a patent. By a massive comparison of what he was testing for originality, to the hierarchically arranged classifications of the patented designs/mechanisms. The Relativity of the Cortex, indeed!!!
.
Now we can move on with the higher hierarchies of math. The exponents, which take massive numbers and expresses them most easily & efficiently. 10 exp. Or another form of it, “e”. And then the scientific notations which arise as well as very efficiently more than counting, adding, multiplying act to allow us to LE handle large numbers most efficiently, is not. LE Rules!!!
.
And the hierarchies of the exponents? 10 exp. X, and then 10 exp. 2, 3, 4, etc., thru those hierarchies; and then the 10 exp X, to the exp Y, exp Z until we get a googleplex. All hierarchies, all efficient, all generation of information with measurement, and that is numerical modeling and descriptions.
.
Now with the adjectives we get a linear system, do we not? High, higher, highest and Low lower lowest. It’s easily convertible to a number line, is not? & that dear readers, is HOW math is created. We create relationships among the number line, & then use that linear scale to measure high, higher, highest and low, lower, lowest. Or Smallest, smaller Small to Big, bigger biggest, and so forth. Then assign the numbers by measurement & thus we see what’s going on. That mathematics of the Adjectives is not? The exact correspondence between verbal, linear descriptions to the more precise, more efficient numbers, which allows us using math, to more accurately describe events. Thus the utility and value of math. It does many jobs better, more exactly and thus with increased information.  & thus due to Shannon’s IT foundational concept, entropy declines, as  the description holds MORE information with math, than the verbal. Thus yet another hierarchy, is not?
.
It’s that simple. It’s nearly universal and it applies to most all information be it verbal or numerical, be it description or measurement.
.
How Physicians create information shows this very, very clearly once more. & how we read most all radiological images by standard, set rules of what is normal, versus what is not. It’s a universal visual processor, visualizing the standards & then applying, comparing them in each case, to chest x rays, angiograms and venograms, CT and MRI images, and so forth.
.
And how do we figure out the S/F relationships in the function MRI (fMRI)? We set up the baseline resting image, first, and then activate part of the brain, and see what lights up BY Comparison Processing!! And every single image read is CP at least twice. We see the resting image, and we know it’s normal, then we do the activation of the brain and see by CP where it’s located in all the myriad ways, without limits.  Simple, efficient, highly descriptive and yet, highly likely to be the case. And if we also then compare the fMRI to the magnetoencephalogram (MEG)?  We gain ever more information creation as well. Triply so!!! Thus does CP create information visual and verbal in radiology. & the Readings of most all images is largely CP to set, fixed stable(efficient) standards, too.
.
And this realization shows us how to create AI to read images. We use the expert skill sets of radiologists to show us what standards they use as normal, and how in each set of skills they interpret (compare) the images. And once we have those standards, we program the computer by recognition methods (bayesian statistics) to abide by & use those exacting standards. It necessarily creates AI for imaging reading. & saves the radiologists a lot of time on CXR’s, too!!! More income!!!
.
Thank You, Albert!!
.
.
Now, how do we get Mountain Passes from Einstein? And that’s simple. We use the LE, CP standard. Why do we preferentially use mountain passes, rather than other routes? Because those are least energy & often very time saving. We climb the least, and expend the least amount of energy. The pass is nearby to areas which are convenient and easy (LE) to get to. And we know that by crossing them without measurements, that it takes lots less time and energy to climb up them and then walk or travel down them.
.
This is what opened up the far Kentuckee & Tennesee areas. The Cumberland Gap, known by the Indians, which went along the Cumberland River, which had cut a deep channel through the Appalachian Mountains into the interior. And it’s least energy, too. We know that by verbal descriptions the energy taken crossing into those areas. The reduced cost in time, food, and materials & wearing out of the wagons and horses. & when we measured the other ways to get over the mountains? By math we found it was the Lowest, comparatively way, as well. Thus the math confirmed precisely the routes to taken, as well, because the altitude numbers were lower. The energy was lower, the cost in terms of wagons and times were less. It’s all been there for 1000’s of years, from the Kyber Pass, to the Berthoud pass, from the South Pass at the end of the Wind River range, to the passes through Nevada and the Sierras. From Echo Lake Pass to the lower, I-80 pass via Donner Lake and Summit. All the same, all the myriads of duplicating equivalent ways, world wide. The universal, nearly, processor, Least energy, least energy, Least energy rules. Detected and used by CP, nearly universally, we see. And verbally describe and more accurately described then by mathematics, which confirms in most all cases, that those passes ARE the short cuts, the shortest, easiest most efficient routes, is not?
.
And it’s Einsteinian, too.
.
Now we look at weather radars, for more. What’s the use of radar to detects storms of all sorts? The basic concept is that of visual tracking, which is a series of comparison processes of what happens to events over time. When we see a bird flying, we see it move, as our visual systems sample each image over 100 msec. or so, and then begin to compare them automatically because it’s built into animals’ visual systems for at least 300 megayears to do so. When we see a walker coming down the sidewalk or trail, we use the same CP to detect what direction they are moving and if they are getting larger and large, CP, or smaller & smaller and thus moving towards, or away from us. It’s most all CP. Its’ done by most all the animals, as well. It’s universal method for understanding events. It’s how the birds get from place to place and catch bugs in flight, too. It’s how the insects do the same.  It’s tracking, from the clouds moving against the side of a building, or relative to a telephone we detect the movements of the clouds by entirely arbitrary, but fixed and stable standards, do we not? And the illusions are created by such arbitrary standards, as well.
.
So this relates to radar, because we can see the weather images coming in, updated from time to time and how THOSE compare gives us the direction the clouds and storms are going to. We detect and have learned by T&E what constitutes rain, and other phenomena. Then we use those visual standards to See what’s going on. Is the storm moving towards us or not? If we mark the edge of the image at a certain town, then watch as the storm moves to the edge of another town, we simply do a distance/time and we get the speed of the approach. Then we do a simple measurement of how far that set standard, Einsteinian point is from where we are, using the D = Rate X Time, a ratio, a proportion, an algebraic expression, A Comparison Process all of it, and that gives us how much time we have before the storms gets to us, is not?
.
So we see the verbal image, mathematize the verbal description and thus get more precise information about it reaching us. That’s how it’s done. Tracking visual, become a mathematical expression by creative means of seeing the comparison (the Einsteinian relationship) between Distance, time and speed. Again, CP, again description  &measurement equivalences. And that’s how math is created in a practical sense from verbal descriptions. &  it gives us predictive control over storms coming in, tornadoes being seen, hurricanes’ speeds and so forth. All of it Einsteinian relatively fixed, set standards being used. And we can warn of such dangers & prevent a lot of damage, deaths, and costs, too. It’s efficient for survival. And thus moral, too.
.
For this statement here, we see the most profoundest insights into math creativity as well. “Any society (or group in a society” which cannot break out of its current abstractions, after a limited period of growth (LE growth), is doomed to stagnate. It’s the “S-curve of growth” case converted into mathematics from an easy visualization.
.
This shows how practical empirical maths are created. Note in conclusion, that Einstein’s Relativity was largely verbal, with some math in it. And it took Einstein and Minkowski to cast the earliest version largely descriptions into Space/Time 4 dimensional math models. Those could then be tested more precisely by measurements. The ideas, words, descriptions came first and THEN the math followed, by comparison process of the outcomes of the math to follow more accurately the verbal description, which anatomically and evolutionary Preceded the math.
.
We can make do without math. We cannot make do without languages. We do MUCH better, though,  with the efficiencies of math, than without it, however. As the mountain pass confirmations of altitude measurements show.
.
& that, dear readers, is how verbal descriptions  create information & how measurement creates information &  how BOTH in an Einsteinian way are related very exactly, and ontological and neuroscientifically to each other..
.
With Simplicity. CP  creates the LE outputs. Then the S/F relationship to further tie them together & f/b the higher nearly universal as well, applications of Complex system descriptions, which are far, far better than the linear, as well.
.
And as Ulam stated, Math must greatly advance if it’s to describe complex systems. But we can do that, too, NOW that we know how math creativity is in part created. Now that we know how to create creativity & Understand understanding and then think about thinking and then think about that, too.
.
And it’s most all from the great, intuitive, neuroscience visualizer, Dr. Albert Einstein who showed us very like how it works, from words to description from  the creation of maths in verbal centers of brain, to the CP creating our empirical mathematics. Simple, elegant, nearly universal, and because we can see the Relationships among the languages to each other, & those relate to math, a higher degree of understanding, as well.
.
.
Simple, elegant, explains a LOT with a little, CP, LE rules with S/F, & complex systems.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s