Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2008
    Please make sure this happens again, as I'll be out shitting in the woods that weekend, but will love the chance to talk some philosophical-shop.

    (malformed comment regarding user defined realities through custom sensory inputs and communication breakdown between different user "desktop settings")
    • CommentAuthorWiseEyes
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2008
    Holy shit! If I weren't trapped in a military quagmire half way round the world I would be all over this like a deranged, PCP ridden eskimo on a pack of defenseless baby seals. As it happens, I'll have to wait until I get back and get to move to the west coast.

    @Willow - I thought it was interesting how you mention having to determine truth and lies from an array of information as this is what we're already dealing with in regards to the internet. There are many different pools with opinions on the validity of internet based information and most all of them have a bit of truth at their core. Ultimately, it's up to the viewer to discern what e believes or not and then to be able to provide convincing arguments/sources for when relating this information to others.

    @aike - What you're talking about is actually reminiscent of higher-dimensional awareness. I've been doing reading/studying on that lately, and one of the things MIchio Kaku was talking about in Hyperspace was a set of numbers able to describe all attributes of any point in a higher dimension. Unfortunately, I can't remember the name of system/matrix or who developed it presently, sorry. Anyways, how you mentioned "sensing" fields of numbers reminded me of this. If we're able to sense hyper-dimensional field calculations, we could become somewhat aware of our movements/actions within that hyperdimension and their relations to our movement/actions in our own 4-d space/time. I don't know how we'd become aware of the hyper-dimensional fields, but considering we already have the tools to calculating these "coordinates" it seems conceivable to me. Any further information on the stuff you're talking about? Any authors or books you can suggest or a wiki article perhaps?
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2008

    the neuroscience part, I think Jeff Hawkins is one guy to look out for, also DARPA is running a couple programs on BCI. I would wiki BCI for a few good links. I know Carnegie Mellons HCI department was working on stuff, but I don't know their current status.

    if you want information about the mathematics of higher dimensional space, I'll warn you it gets a little rough. Look up Hypersphere or N-sphere or Polytopes, there are a number of books on the subject, but all require a good foundation in maths. I haven't done this sort of maths in a number of years, and I got all my knowledge via a giant math suppository inserted without lubrication, so I couldn't tell you which books are good or not.

    If you want a more physics based bit of information, Hans-Peter Dürr is a good person to read up on. Hes a (the) leading quantum physicist, one of Heisenbergs students and probably his direct successor. He talks a lot about quantum entanglement at a field, or non-matter level. (his quote, paraphrased: "After having studied matter for 50 years, I was a bit disappointed to come to the conclusion that it really doesn't seem to even exist.")

    Lastly, if you are interested in systemic informational fields (my thing), I highly recommend reading Rupert Sheldrake. His theories on morphogenetic fields are extremely interesting, imo (and he's a stunningly nice guy). There are a number of ways of actually dealing with / understanding systemic informational or morphogenetic fields, that range from very fluffy woo-woo crystal ball, magic dildo and sacrificing chickens kind of stuff to still very weird, but mostly scientific stuff. Sheldrake keeps, more or less, away from the woo-woo and in the realm of science.

    @Willow: I think it is great to see people talking about this stuff, too bad I'm so far away, but if you get anything online at any point please send up a flag. I'd love to hear/see/feel where it goes!
    • CommentAuthorWiseEyes
    • CommentTimeJul 28th 2008 edited
    @aike - ow... my head hurts now. I'll look into the stuff you're mentioning here, but a lot of my experience with theoretical physics is really conceptualization. I love physics but I'm kinda shit with math, so I like to play around with and try to understand the theories without actually figuring anything out. =/ I think this is part of the reason I like writing so much though... As far as hyperdimensional stuff goes, well my experience is limited to the first hundred pages of Hyperspace by Michio Kaku, I lost it after that and am waiting on the new copy, Imagining the Tenth Dimension (on online flash vid that outlines higher dimensions for 10 dimensional string theory) a few other essays and Hawking's books (The Universe in a Nutshell goes over String Theory and hyper-dimensions, somewhat briefly though). I've just downloaded an ebook from Kaku, Parallel Worlds, I think it was, and am planning on reading that in the near future. So which of your guys dumb stuff down enough for the pseudo-laymen like me? You know, someone who wants to know but couldn't work calculus to save his life?

    EDIT: Theoretical physics gives us a magic dildo? Must investigate further...
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2008
    Basically, string theory, quantum physics etc gets so weird that dumbing it down is not possible or really useful. To paraphrase Feynman: If you think you understand quantum physics, you don't understand it. If you are reading something and you think it makes sense, it almost assuredly isn't right. I always get to the point where I have a feeling I am beginning to understand something, only to then quickly realize I dont get it in the least.

    My interest are systemic fields, more along the lines of Sheldrake's stuff. He's reasonably understandable and easy enough for anyone to read. It has links at some levels to quantum physics, but doesnt require them, it is a different thought space. The example most often used (and I have mentioned it here before) is how does a stem cell in your body decide whether to become a liver or bone or eyeball cell when you are developing? There is no information the cell as such can have (genetically, all stem cells are identical), and it is almost entirely spacially defined (otherwise you'd have eyeball cells, liver cells etc all spread through your body, rather than in one organ). Somehow there is information that is spacially coherent available and somehow it is accessible to the cell to tell it to become a kidney or a bone or a neuron. There are many other examples of this kind of informational fields, some very weird...

    The general idea is that informational fields exist in societal contexts, too. So assuming those are true, wouldn't it be interesting to be able to 'feel' or 'see' those fields... what the systemic field of your friends, family or work environment 'looks' like? How much do your environment or your social circles affect you like this without you being aware of it? Like I said, there is a fine line between the esoteric stuff and the scientific, but it's fascinating, imo.
  1.  (3113.6)
    For the people who are not close to Seattle but have shown interest:
    I think I should be able to set up some sort of live podcast, I'll be chatting with someone about this soon. Perhaps anyone interested could listen in and have a group G Chat discussion. I can't promise it will affect what we're talking about in person due to conversational cohesion and time limits, but we can figure it out.

    Also, if anyone is interested in starting up a discussion group (for H+ or comics or anything) in their local geographical location, let me know. Always happy to help people get together to think.
      CommentAuthorThom B.
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2008 edited
    Oooo, this sounds great. Sadly some inconsiderate freinds of mine are getting married that day so I can't attend. Glad to hear you plan for this to be ongoing though, I'll certainly try to make it to future meetings.

    Do you plan for a mailing list or any other system for notifying people of upcoming events? Or will you just continue to post it hear?
    • CommentAuthorWiseEyes
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2008
    @aike - isn't this kind of a push pull thing though? We're affected by one circle and bring it to another circle, altering that one in a new way. Thus all our separate circles are linked and changed, continuously evolving into something else entirely. More so, what about the digital age? In a time where entire relationships are online and the two never actually meet but know each other for decades, how would we "feel" those relationships/circles? What about Whitechapel, for instance?
  2.  (3113.9)
    @Thom B. Yay for friends getting married! Hope to see you at future events.

    Also, I usually do Facebook invites, but I suppose a mailing list would be best. Again with the getting back to people.

    On the podcast note, I think we're going to go for a recording which will be posted about in one spot so we can have further discussion on it. Does anyone have a favorite venue for such things?
    • CommentTimeAug 1st 2008
    If there's going to be a mailing list, I would like to be on it as Seattle is a long way from Michigan and I would like to access the podcast.
  3.  (3113.11)
    Would it be ok to attend just to listen? (I don't think I presently know enough about H+ that I'd be able to contribute much to the discussion.)
    • CommentAuthorJo
    • CommentTimeAug 6th 2008
    Full disclosure: I'm underinformed re' H+, not a tech head, and not anywhere near Seattle.

    However, @Willow, Ariana, and Warren:

    I like that as our access to information (and our bombardment by cultural stimuli of all sorts) gets bigger and wider-ranging and gnarlier all the time, it's basically forcing us to do things like talk about information-as-entity-and-resource on a very personal level. Also neat that there does actually seem to be a natural progression. The curatorial concept is one that I had as a very young person (I had this very old-world idea about memory and mental storage as museums), later encountered as an internet-wide organizing principle, and now see cropping up again. I think Ariana is right--the idea of curation is not obsolete at all, it's just been re-scaled. There's enough going on now that the only approach that makes sense is a highly personalized, by-me-for-me one. Lots of tiny windows, access to other people's perspectives and virtual lives on highly-invested, intensely self-curated level. Smaller, more agile social networks. Gangs of New Web.

    Good on you for setting up the discussion, and best of luck.
  4.  (3113.13)
    I don't know if i can make it.
    It's looking like i have serious errand running to do that evening.
    When is this happening again?
  5.  (3113.14)
    @LastImaginaut of course you're welcome to come to listen!

    @k.dissident The next one will likely happen in about 2 weeks. I'll certainly post about it.

    @everyone There will indeed be a recording of the event, as I have awesome friends that like to help me with things. Please e-mail me at if you'd like to be on the mailing list, receive a copy of the recording, etc (specify what you want in the e-mail please). I'll transcribe it as soon as I can, post it to so we can have an exchange in the comments section unless Warren is ok with having it happen here. Or both.
  6.  (3113.15)
    Warren is okay with it happening here. I'll check with Ariana, but we can probably host the recording for a while, too.
    • CommentTimeAug 7th 2008
    Yeah, no problem -- we'll stick it somewhere and can use the mp3 player in a post along with the transcript.
  7.  (3113.17)
    You are so good to me. I'll break up the recording and post it to Warren. Or throw it up on an FTP for you to grab it. Whatever's clever.
    • CommentTimeAug 7th 2008 edited
    How big is the file? If it's under 20MB, either of our gmail accounts will take it (mine's arianaosborne). If it's larger, FTP's fine.
  8.  (3113.19)
    Not sure yet, but I'll likely break it up by general topic trend though. Will get it to you tomorrow, or late tonight.
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2008
    well damn, I wish I didn't have to work tonight!