Hi Brendan,
There is not much to read on this topic, as I have not published professionally on it. I should develop a reading list though. In terms of professional publications, you can go to my home page,
gregghenriques.com, although it needs an update.
What happened was that after I feeling into the rabbit hole that is the Tree of Knowledge System vision of the universe in 1997, I dropped into physics quite deeply and studied string theory, loop quantum gravity, and black hole thermodynamics
to obtain a strong grip on the relationship between energy, matter, space and time. General relativity, quantum field theory and thermodynamics were all essential in obtaining an optimal grip. My approach was, as with the ToK System in general, obtain a picture
that ties together the key known insights in a coherent way. And that led me to develop this STEPPing Stone representation of the Standard Model. Note it is only “original” in the way it visually depicts the Standard Model, which I do think has value. And
I think it should properly be called the Standard Theory, because it is more than a taxonomy, but is causal explanatory in nature (some physicists also make this argument).
The squiggly lines represent the particle wave duality, and the weird relationship particles have with space and time. My conclusion of what was going on with quantum field theory back in 1999-2000 was essentially identical to what is
now called
relational quantum field theory, and it is basically also the interpretation of Eastman. This stemmed from the way I placed the human observer (and any measurement system) in the larger field. Here is a visual:
Note that the observing eye is placed on the iQuad Coin, which directly relates to and ultimately aligns with the Identity function in the fundamental equation of matrix mechanics (which is the “I” in the equation at the bottom). The descriptive
metaphysics afforded by the ToK System helps sort all this out.
I probably should write all this out. As this diagram suggests, this formulation that places the knower-observer-measurer in the field is crucial both to the ToK System and, ultimately, to the Coin. Together, the Tree and Coin afford us
a full and complete onto-epistemological picture of the relationship between physics and our individual unique particular psyches.
Best,
Gregg
From: theory of knowledge society discussion <[log in to unmask]>
On Behalf Of Brendan Graham Dempsey
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 10:56 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Process Philosophy and the Metamodern Metanarrative
CAUTION:
This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Derick, thanks: I'll definitely check that out!
Gregg: Wowza, I didn't realize UTOK theorized at the level of fundamental physics. Have there been any updates to this lately (I see this diagram is from 2001)?
Untying the Gordian Knot looks like a dense, fascinating (and expensive) read! Perhaps this question has already been discussed before, but is there an essential UTOK reading list/bibliography anywhere I could get my hands on?
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 7:57 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
John Vervaeke and I did a “mini book club” on Eastman’s book.
His take on quantum field theory aligns directly with my view, which is symbolized by the “STEPPing Stone” in the Garden….
From: theory of knowledge society discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Derick Galea
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 4:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Process Philosophy and the Metamodern Metanarrative
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Thank you Brendan, this was a great chat, you ask incisive questions!
Matt has been hosting a series of discussions with Timothy Eastman on his book "Untying the Gordian Knot" at the Cobb Institute. I have found them enlightening and inspirational, so if you have some spare hours (just play them at 1.75 speed and you will feel like you are time travelling) I recommend delving into those. And when you grok his insights you can feel relatively smarter than Einstein (this might be an effect of listening at high speed, I don't guarantee any actual increase in intelligence).
But seriously, if you want to tap into the unbounded potentiae, give it a listen.
Cheers,
Derick
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 4:44 AM Brendan Graham Dempsey <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi all,
Thought some folks here might find this conversation pertinent. We discuss TOK and the complexification narrative through the lens of Whiteheadian process philosophy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-EgCakXA9Y
SUMMARY:Dr. Matt Segall joins Brendan to talk about the relationship of process philosophy and the thinking of A. N. Whitehead to the formulation of an emerging metanarrative in metamodernity. In the context of our 13.7 billion years of emergent complexification, how does the story of consciousness evolution relate to issues such as dualism and the hard problem of consciousness, panpsychism, divine creativity, and mystical union?
Dr. Segall's bio:
Matthew D. Segall, PhD, received his doctoral degree in 2016 from the Philosophy, Cosmology, and Consciousness program at CIIS. His dissertation was titled Cosmotheanthropic Imagination in the Post-Kantian Process Philosophy of Schelling and Whitehead. It grapples with the limits to knowledge of reality imposed by Kant's transcendental form of philosophy and argues that Schelling and Whitehead's process-oriented approach (described in his dissertation as a "descendental" form of philosophy) shows the way across the Kantian threshold to renewed experiential contact with reality. He teaches courses on German Idealism and process philosophy for the Philosophy, Cosmology, and Consciousness program at CIIS. He blogs regularly at footnotes2plato.com.
Cheers,
Brendan############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1