The Communal Particle

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

The Communal Particle

Postby James S Saint » Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:55 pm

The Physical Particle
In nature, in extremely dense regions such as the center of a star, subatomic particles form due to electromagnetic noise being so high that it congests into "traffic jams" that don't go away. A sub-atomic particle is simply a traffic jam of perpetual EMR noise. The noise didn't think to itself, "We need to form a particle". Each tiny bit of noise was independently and simply trying to go its way. The particle formed because noise slows other noises in the same way that cars on a highway can slow other cars into a "slowdown" or even "traffic jam". And at a certain critical density, the traffic jam simply won't go away because for every bit of noise or car that leaves another is already arriving.

And what is called the "potential" or "charge" of the particle is determined by whether most of the noise was of increasing potential or of decreasing potential (commonly known as "electric potential"). If there is the same amount of increasing as decreasing noise potential, the formed particle is neutral (a neutrino or neutron). If most of the noise was increasing, the particle is called "a positive charged particle" (a positron or proton). And if most was decreasing, the particle is called "a negative particle" (electron or anti-proton).

Each particle type can only exist in an ambient field of its relative opposite; a positive particle can exist only in a relative negative field and a negative particle can only exist in a relative positive field. And that is how you get the notion of the familiar Yin-Yang symbol, although it doesn't reveal the common neutral particle that can exist in a neutral ambient field.

But don't be mislead by the tempting and common notion that these particles are "Equal and Opposite". They most certainly are not. Even though they are opposite in potential and have many similarities, the end result of being negative in a relative positive environment is significantly different than being positive in a relative negative environment. And that is why they find that the common negative particle, an electron, is much smaller than the most common positive particle, a proton. A positive particle tends to acquire more mass (amount of noise) than a negative particle. The traditional Yin-Yang symbol is misleading. Let me explain the significance of that issue as it relates to people.

Enough of the physics.

The Communal Particle
Similarly if 1000 people were to be placed out in a wilderness with no means to be anywhere else, a "Communal Particle" would automatically form. Again, it need not be that anyone thought, "we need to form a community". Each person need merely to try to live. The interaction of such people forms a community without anyone deciding to form it. It is a natural occurrence that is in fact difficult to avoid.

As the community begins to form, there is almost never anyone saying, "Okay Mr Jones, you be the farmer. And Jacob, you be the carpenter. And Goldstein, you be the banker....". Instead, the people simply do what is more natural for them to do at that time, in that circumstance, and with their experience. The interaction of what is simply their effort to live and go their own way becomes a stable community, without intent to form it. And through time, even though the people come and go, the community will generally continue (assuming it was stable). Such is a natural occurrence, not in need of design or intent (assuming there were enough people with the right talents = "dense region").

And as the communal particle forms, it will most naturally have both "positive affects" and "negative affects", "cooperative people" and "uncooperative people", or perhaps "constructive people" and "destructive people". And what determines the "potential" of the community is the balance of how much positive-noise to negative-noise happens to be there as the community forms, how many constructive people vs destructive, or cooperative people vs antagonistic people. If the number of positive people and negative people are the same, the community will be a neutral community having both within. Of course people are not really entirely positive or entirely negative, just as EMR noise isn't, but if gauged by their average, each person will register as more of one than the other in that environment.

But note that a charged particle can only exist within an ambient field of its relative opposite. For a "positive community" to be stable, it must be within a region of negative (destructive or uncooperative) influences. Perhaps those influences are merely the natural weather or soil conditions of the region. Perhaps there are a great many random trouble makers. But there must be a negative influence, else the positive community will simply dissipate. In society, as with a mind, this is seen as "the goal to achieve" or "the purpose of the gathering". If the goal or purpose is already achieve and no longer has anything destroying it, the society cannot be maintained. Once the emperor conquers all of the lands in sight, the empire falls because they were only being held together for the purpose of conquering.

A community forms naturally by people merely trying to live. But a kingdom or empire forms by specific people artificially trying to form it, people using people only for the purpose of forming a gathering (a communal particle) which they can be reign over. That one aspect of human behavior is what sets it apart of other animals of nature. It causes great conquest, but also leads to eventual failure soon after the conquest or purpose is achieved. A kingdom or empire is not a stable communal particle except while it is growing or fighting a war (the required negative influence).

Note that the positive or negative nature of the community is not specifically chosen, but rather the natural consequences of the nature of the people involved. The attempt to demand that the community be specifically positive or negative in any regard after a gathering has already accumulated would be a tremendous struggle against nature and reality. To intentionally choose what is to be considered positive or negative is tampering with the forces of life itself. If a governance attempts to demand obedience to an architecture or even subtly trick people into unwitting obedience, it is challenging natural physics and will have a great endless struggle on its hands which will eventually lead to great success and certain imminent failure.

An artificial society; kingdom, empire, socialistic, unrestricted capitalistic, or communistic can be formed and do quite well.. until it runs out of enemies. And then it requires artificial adversaries; created terrorists, false flag attacks, criminal or antithesis organizations. A natural society; tribal, township, or restricted capitalistic can remain stable simply because it never runs out of natural adversaries.

Every stable particle, whether a simple physical sub-atomic particle, a particle of the mind, or a communal particle can only be stable within an ambient field of its antithesis. When that field becomes too positive favoring the communal structure, a catastrophic failure of the community or society cannot be avoided. And what is declared positive or negative is not a choice, but decided by the ambient.

The fact that a community cannot stably choose its positive nature, is why religions, such as Christianity, attempt to "spread the word" concerning the benefits of being harmonious. By creating an ambient field of cooperative people, a positive, constructive society can form. But if whatever has been dubbed "negative" is not the true exact opposite of Life itself, Life will not be the positive nature of the gathering. Life will be lost by the sacrifices from an attempt at artificial structure and conquest. In the fall of an artificial community, artificiality is lost rather than as the Life it tried to control.

Life and physical nature are workable, programmable, and tolerant, but they cannot be entirely controlled without being entirely lost. And they don't lose easily. My suggestion is to stop trying to create artificial communities unless they are the very definition of what Life is so that the only required and supporting antithesis will be natural physical anti-life and thus have no need for artificial, very expensive, and inherently catastrophic controls attempting to keep it together.

Life is a very specific, although difficult to discern, architecture in nature. It requires neither artificial adversary, Man, artificial incentives, nor machine. When a society is forced to focus too much on artificial adversaries, the structure of Man, artificial incentives, or utilization of machines, it is facing immanent catastrophic failure from which it cannot change its own nature and thus once close to conquest, cannot change its course into oblivion.

In all societies, a tipping point is reached where there is no longer a choice, whether the society has artificial support or just happens to have chosen the wrong thing to call "Positive".

And by the way, a digital world is entirely artificial and far from the definition of Life.



Brought to you by:
Rational Metaphysics: Affectance Ontology: Sociology 101
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby Orbie » Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:48 pm

James S Saint wrote:The Physical Particle
In nature, in extremely dense regions such as the center of a star, subatomic particles form due to electromagnetic noise being so high that it congests into "traffic jams" that don't go away. A sub-atomic particle is simply a traffic jam of perpetual EMR noise. The noise didn't think to itself, "We need to form a particle". Each tiny bit of noise was independently and simply trying to go its way. The particle formed because noise slows other noises in the same way that cars on a highway can slow other cars into a "slowdown" or even "traffic jam". And at a certain critical density, the traffic jam simply won't go away because for every bit of noise or car that leaves another is already arriving.

And what is called the "potential" or "charge" of the particle is determined by whether most of the noise was of increasing potential or of decreasing potential (commonly known as "electric potential"). If there is the same amount of increasing as decreasing noise potential, the formed particle is neutral (a neutrino or neutron). If most of the noise was increasing, the particle is called "a positive charged particle" (a positron or proton). And if most was decreasing, the particle is called "a negative particle" (electron or anti-proton).

Each particle type can only exist in an ambient field of its relative opposite; a positive particle can exist only in a relative negative field and a negative particle can only exist in a relative positive field. And that is how you get the notion of the familiar Yin-Yang symbol, although it doesn't reveal the common neutral particle that can exist in a neutral ambient field.

But don't be mislead by the tempting and common notion that these particles are "Equal and Opposite". They most certainly are not. Even though they are opposite in potential and have many similarities, the end result of being negative in a relative positive environment is significantly different than being positive in a relative negative environment. And that is why they find that the common negative particle, an electron, is much smaller than the most common positive particle, a proton. A positive particle tends to acquire more mass (amount of noise) than a negative particle. The traditional Yin-Yang symbol is misleading. Let me explain the significance of that issue as it relates to people.

Enough of the physics.

The Communal Particle
Similarly if 1000 people were to be placed out in a wilderness with no means to be anywhere else, a "Communal Particle" would automatically form. Again, it need not be that anyone thought, "we need to form a community". Each person need merely to try to live. The interaction of such people forms a community without anyone deciding to form it. It is a natural occurrence that is in fact difficult to avoid.

As the community begins to form, there is almost never anyone saying, "Okay Mr Jones, you be the farmer. And Jacob, you be the carpenter. And Goldstein, you be the banker....". Instead, the people simply do what is more natural for them to do at that time, in that circumstance, and with their experience. The interaction of what is simply their effort to live and go their own way becomes a stable community, without intent to form it. And through time, even though the people come and go, the community will generally continue (assuming it was stable). Such is a natural occurrence, not in need of design or intent (assuming there were enough people with the right talents = "dense region").

And as the communal particle forms, it will most naturally have both "positive affects" and "negative affects", "cooperative people" and "uncooperative people", or perhaps "constructive people" and "destructive people". And what determines the "potential" of the community is the balance of how much positive-noise to negative-noise happens to be there as the community forms, how many constructive people vs destructive, or cooperative people vs antagonistic people. If the number of positive people and negative people are the same, the community will be a neutral community having both within. Of course people are not really entirely positive or entirely negative, just as EMR noise isn't, but if gauged by their average, each person will register as more of one than the other in that environment.

But note that a charged particle can only exist within an ambient field of its relative opposite. For a "positive community" to be stable, it must be within a region of negative (destructive or uncooperative) influences. Perhaps those influences are merely the natural weather or soil conditions of the region. Perhaps there are a great many random trouble makers. But there must be a negative influence, else the positive community will simply dissipate. In society, as with a mind, this is seen as "the goal to achieve" or "the purpose of the gathering". If the goal or purpose is already achieve and no longer has anything destroying it, the society cannot be maintained. Once the emperor conquers all of the lands in sight, the empire falls because they were only being held together for the purpose of conquering.

A community forms naturally by people merely trying to live. But a kingdom or empire forms by specific people artificially trying to form it, people using people only for the purpose of forming a gathering (a communal particle) which they can be reign over. That one aspect of human behavior is what sets it apart of other animals of nature. It causes great conquest, but also leads to eventual failure soon after the conquest or purpose is achieved. A kingdom or empire is not a stable communal particle except while it is growing or fighting a war (the required negative influence).

Note that the positive or negative nature of the community is not specifically chosen, but rather the natural consequences of the nature of the people involved. The attempt to demand that the community be specifically positive or negative in any regard after a gathering has already accumulated would be a tremendous struggle against nature and reality. To intentionally choose what is to be considered positive or negative is tampering with the forces of life itself. If a governance attempts to demand obedience to an architecture or even subtly trick people into unwitting obedience, it is challenging natural physics and will have a great endless struggle on its hands which will eventually lead to great success and certain imminent failure.

An artificial society; kingdom, empire, socialistic, unrestricted capitalistic, or communistic can be formed and do quite well.. until it runs out of enemies. And then it requires artificial adversaries; created terrorists, false flag attacks, criminal or antithesis organizations. A natural society; tribal, township, or restricted capitalistic can remain stable simply because it never runs out of natural adversaries.

Every stable particle, whether a simple physical sub-atomic particle, a particle of the mind, or a communal particle can only be stable within an ambient field of its antithesis. When that field becomes too positive favoring the communal structure, a catastrophic failure of the community or society cannot be avoided. And what is declared positive or negative is not a choice, but decided by the ambient.

The fact that a community cannot stably choose its positive nature, is why religions, such as Christianity, attempt to "spread the word" concerning the benefits of being harmonious. By creating an ambient field of cooperative people, a positive, constructive society can form. But if whatever has been dubbed "negative" is not the true exact opposite of Life itself, Life will not be the positive nature of the gathering. Life will be lost by the sacrifices from an attempt at artificial structure and conquest. In the fall of an artificial community, artificiality is lost rather than as the Life it tried to control.

Life and physical nature are workable, programmable, and tolerant, but they cannot be entirely controlled without being entirely lost. And they don't lose easily. My suggestion is to stop trying to create artificial communities unless they are the very definition of what Life is so that the only required and supporting antithesis will be natural physical anti-life and thus have no need for artificial, very expensive, and inherently catastrophic controls attempting to keep it together.

Life is a very specific, although difficult to discern, architecture in nature. It requires neither artificial adversary, Man, artificial incentives, nor machine. When a society is forced to focus too much on artificial adversaries, the structure of Man, artificial incentives, or utilization of machines, it is facing immanent catastrophic failure from which it cannot change its own nature and thus once close to conquest, cannot change its course into oblivion.

In all societies, a tipping point is reached where there is no longer a choice, whether the society has artificial support or just happens to have chosen the wrong thing to call "Positive".

And by the way, a digital world is entirely artificial and far from the definition of Life.



Brought to you by:
Rational Metaphysics: Affectance Ontology: Sociology 101





ok, James. I understand Your argument, in terms of connecting the physical with the metaphysical. This connection, is arguable from both sides, and the genesis of the problem is metaphysical, or, deductive. It is this form of argument, which only fairly recently, say the last few hundred years, which has been replace by inductive reasoning. I find with a kind of cognitive, existential leap, that we are not dealing with displacement of one type of argument with another, existentially speaking(either/or), but a mixture of both. One never covers, or overlaps the other, the noise is not only physical, but it is like wise conceptual. The affectance, You mention are overlapping yes, and i am groping around how to think about this new thought, but affect each other. So if the conceptual visualization of this process is to imply an effect of one to the other, then the overlap of the two may form/reform as focus is placed on either one or the other, as in the early Heisenberg double slit experiment seems to indicate. My approach tends to be deductive/metaphysical, however the history of science bears witness to primordial hypothesis seeking verification, as the basis to further innovation. Therefore, the hypothesis , eve if, not borne out on further analysis, tends to create shock effects of the negative of that false assumption, as in the patterns of growing diameters of circular patterns as the effect of throwing a pebble into a pond. That negation in a very simple and early Archemedian sense,sets into motion the conceptual antithesis of presuming an opposite, and working negatively toward the opposing, 'noise', which i am using in the wide sense. The Ying Yang, is a visual symbol to a metaphysical and not a physical demonstration, but really who knows?

The duality is the most general which subsists within it all the either/or's which can be thought about, and the visual symbol of duality, in 'effectance' goes a step further, it crosses the line into the auditory allusion, by the physical description of 'noise'-a subatomic idea,process.


What You see, generally can correlate to what there is, but not necessarily what you hear. What You hear, organizationally, within groupings, may physically represent an effective result of being within the context, proximity, of it's neighbor. It is probably due to constant, ongoing reorganization be it within it's self, or without, as a result of effectence. Am i on course with this? Nuclear reorganization can occur physically/metaphysically as in shooting small elemntary particles into the nucleus, creating fission, for example. Or natural processes go on all the time as in radioactive decay.

My problem with correlation, is, in relation to the above , that correlation may because of effectence, produce entirely new byproducts, and which implies in the metaphysical sense, that such products and byproducts, are not merely correlational, but synthesized on account of the correlation? Synthesizing from elements new material may correspond to the extreme example of creating new proto symbols consisting of both types of understanding and knowledge, elementary (sight+sound) and complex, as constituted by social and subatomic organization.

If, You are going to argue in the above mode, than a synthesis of both kinds is arguable. Therefore, even if enemies are needed,(to me this could be much simpler understood, by the deductive claim, that in order to assert one type of forcefield, the reason an antifocefield has to be placedagainst it, is for reasons of stability, ex: all interpretation has to be done in context, or even defining certain ideas in relation to one type of social organizations, and merits thereof, needs an antithesis for that reason. Evil has to be placed next to Good, in order to be able to interpret what that good consists of.

Capitalism needs an enemy, because only in that way of interpreting social organization can it's merits be seen. Terror is a poor substitute for Communism, but i am afraid it's very much of an instance of an easy convince. Communism has not been defeated, it merely has been put on hold, and terror happens to be a convenient smoke and mirrors type attack on gross societal consciousness.

Because of this, i believe, the antithesis is not something created out of the thin air of some intelligencia, but equally, and un admittedly, the natural dialectic process's natural outcome. It reorganizes it's self, more so, than externally manipulated. The word on dialectic, whether material or spiritual,(and the distinction is tenuous and equally artificial), has been not a new idea only lately realized, the early forms of which, as seedlings,have always existed, just as the idea of the early Atomists have had notions which fairly well albeit, from a seemingly diametrically opposite view, realized.

Although i agree with the preponderance of misinterpretation of effectence, it is because of the lack of awareness of it being what it contingently may not, rather then what it may necessarily represent.
'
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby Arminius » Sun Jun 22, 2014 12:05 am

Interesting, James, but please tell me what is life for you!

You are projecting physical phenomenons on sociological phenomenons.

And how does it end when a society has a "negaitive" ambient field or nature as an antithesis? Does it end with, in, or as a synthesis?

Or for example: If the thesis is a society with entropy (or anti-entropy) and its antithesis an ambient field with anti-entropy (or entropy), is then the synthesis a society with an-entropy, with "anentropic harmony"?
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby James S Saint » Sun Jun 22, 2014 1:09 am

Obe, I'll have to reread that post several times to try to figure out what you are trying to say. I suspect that perhaps you have equally misunderstood what I was trying to say. We'll have to work that out.

But in the mean time..
Arminius wrote:Interesting, James, but please tell me what is life for you!

You are projecting physical phenomenons on sociological phenomenons.

And how does it end when a society has a "negative" ambient field or nature as an antithesis? Does it end with, in, or as a synthesis?

Or for example: If the thesis is a society with entropy (or anti-entropy) and its antithesis an ambient field with anti-entropy (or entropy), is then the synthesis a society with an-entropy, with "anentropic harmony"?

There are only two kinds of anentropy;
1) Chaotic
2) Harmonic

The first is scripturally known as "Eternal Hell" and the second, "Eternal Heaven", both being stable.

A particle formed of merely chaotic anti-entropy has entropy as its adversarial ambient. A particle formed of harmonic anti-entropy has disharmony as its adversarial ambient.

And I am not "projecting physical phenomenons". I am explaining physical reality and using the sub-atomic model of nature and requirements as analogy for the sociological requirements. It actually isn't a mere "theory". It is a logically derivable and unavoidable fact of the universe. We could get into the mathematics, but that doesn't change the logical nature of it.

Imagine a homosapian, perhaps 50,000 years ago, with no communal society around, alone. Does he just die because of nothing to do? If he has a fear of death due to lions or bears chasing him, that would certainly keep him active. But if those things were not there, would he just stop breathing?

Natural life needs no artificial or exaggerated adversaries for its continued existence. Short bursts of threats might spur it into being more precise, removing distractions or corruptions, but it must always return to being merely satisfied with living, void of outstanding threats.

Life is a balance of the perception of hopes and threats toward its anentropic harmony. Life is not of the first type of particle, but rather of anentropic harmony. And it is the exact process ("synthesis" if you like) of no more or less than:
"Clarifying, Verifying, Instilling, and Reinforcing the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony"

Everything else it does is variation and distraction, most often leading to its corruption and critical failure, ie. death. What is called "Evil" is merely Anti-Life, "l-i-v-e <> e-v-i-l". And is formed of that exact same stated process except being toward either "Anentropic, Entropic, or Anti-entropic Disharmony". Anentropic and Anti-entropic Disharmony produces an eternal hell situation, a normal sub-atomic particle, a stable gathering of chaos. Entropic Disharmony produces utter annihilation into the ambience, known as "The Abyss".

When an artificial or mis-designed society is established, anything different than its artificial structure is its adversary. If that structure is not the process of Life itself, then Life is its adversary. Such is the cause of the fall of ALL large societies throughout the history of Man. They have always been mis-designed just enough to cause life itself to be inherently against them.

In a machine world, Life is the inherent adversary. In a society of life (anentropically harmonious) machines can only be used to assist each life within the society toward the very process that defines life, as stated above;
"Clarifying, Verifying, Instilling, and Reinforcing the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony".

Any other use endangers the society and everyone in it.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby zinnat » Sun Jun 22, 2014 8:07 am

James,

I agree completely as far as the Physical Particle is concerned but not completely with the explanation of the Communal particle.

A communal particle or community does not necessarily has an enemy to survive. Theoritally, it can survive without it also, though cannot expand.
An invidual human is also some sort of communal particle but it can survive without an enemy.
Having said that, surviving without an enemy does not happen in the most of the cases of communities.

with love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3514
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby James S Saint » Mon Jun 23, 2014 9:49 am

zinnat13 wrote:A communal particle or community does not necessarily has an enemy to survive. Theoritally, it can survive without it also, though cannot expand.
An invidual human is also some sort of communal particle but it can survive without an enemy.
Having said that, surviving without an enemy does not happen in the most of the cases of communities.
James S Saint wrote:Imagine a homosapian, perhaps 50,000 years ago, with no communal society around, alone. Does he just die because of nothing to do? If he has a fear of death due to lions or bears chasing him, that would certainly keep him active. But if those things were not there, would he just stop breathing?

Natural life needs no artificial or exaggerated adversaries for its continued existence. Short bursts of threats might spur it into being more precise, removing distractions or corruptions, but it must always return to being merely satisfied with living, void of outstanding threats.

The natural adversary ("enemy") to natural life is merely the lack of sustenance, shelter, or understanding. The same is true of a "natural communal particle", such as a small town.

So actually, you agreed with me entirely.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby James S Saint » Tue Jun 24, 2014 10:51 pm

A part of the effort to conform all of Mankind into one big happy family, a mono-particle, involves removing all symbols of individual national, civic, and personal identity: one money, one religion, one language, one ontology, one spirit, and one mind. It is imagined as a single positive monoparticle floating in space. Such will require either a mechanized, blind servitude (constituting the only single life on the planet) or a state of Hell on Earth for all inhabitants. To avoid the Hell on Earth scenario, androids will be required, not merely preferred. The definition of "human" (the hue of Man) must become the same as that of "Android".

Alternately, rather than having a mono-particle, a poly-particle can be formed wherein there are slightly distinguishable nations that are largely interdependent. Each nation would be constructive, but with different emphasis on purpose and function, much like the organs of a body. This arrangement would constitute the common nucleus of an atom.

But what happens with you get a single positive particle floating in space? A negative particle WILL find it. And if that positive particle is a large poly-particle, it quite naturally breaks apart (becomes radioactive), forming a multitude of separate positive particles with strong aversion to each other - back to where the world started, multi-nationalism or even tribalism.

If the goal is not to be "positive" (in this case "constructive" or "advancing"), the entire world of Man could become neutral, very busily accomplishing nothing at all, having as much negative, "deconstruction", within as positive, "construction or advancement". In that case, an additional negative influence would not be attracted to it. But then again, nothing would ever be accomplished or accomplish-able by it either.

There are only two possible states for such a particle.

The first being a chaos of mindless conflicting activity = "Hell on Earth". The second being a harmony of distinguishable positive and negative portions; nations or organizations. In such a case, the organizations must (and will) always remain very distant yet ever hovering around each other, an "atom floating in space". The larger portion would be like a positive, constructive nucleus and the others would be independent "terrorist organizations". And whatever good was accomplished by the nucleus of the world, would be destroyed by the necessary orbiting terrorist organizations. The terrorist organizations would be required and thus manufactured if not naturally formed and maintained.

This atomic structure for Mankind would never know true peace and still be composed of merely a few actual life forms, the positive particle(s) and negative(s). Within each particle, either Hell or absolute servitude would still reign. And if invaded from outside, would not be able to accomplish anything in any intelligent or conscious manner.

In all of these case, the Man being manufactured, although filled with great knowledge, would not be a conscious entity. Mankind, as a whole, would be a scrambling, buzzing, mindless particle as seen from the outside.

Such simple minded overall structures for Mankind prevents any hope for Man to be a living conscious and coherent creature from the purview of the universe or visiting life forms. For Mankind as a whole to function as perhaps a living coherent and intelligent creature, a much more complex structure of very many separate components (organizations) must be arranged, more like a DNA molecule and its housing cell multiplied millions of times and networked together, independent, but cooperative.

And that type of order is what I have been referring to as "Social Anentropic Molecularisation" formed of largely independent anentropic "families", "small groups", or "small corporations" networked together by proximity and each taking care of itself for sake of itself. Not requiring a single religion, single mind, single money, single language, single ontology, or single spirit. Each family constitutes a particle, some positive, some negative, of varied colors and types and in harmony merely because of the one thing common among them - an understanding of how to be an anentropic corporal life.

The state of Heaven on Earth, is a state wherein millions of mostly independent lives are making their own choices in accord with their own situational needs, not in servitude of an artificial higher design, not in fear of death or torment, not in blind faith of some higher purpose, but rather in consequential service to an aberrant higher order, never designed, merely formed by the needs of reality - the very definition of a living creature.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby Arminius » Fri Jul 04, 2014 11:33 pm

zinnat13 wrote:James,

I agree completely as far as the Physical Particle is concerned but not completely with the explanation of the Communal particle.

A communal particle or community does not necessarily has an enemy to survive. Theoritally, it can survive without it also, though cannot expand.
An invidual human is also some sort of communal particle but it can survive without an enemy.

That does not correspond to what life experience teaches. Life experience teaches that an enemy is necessary to survive. (Compare all living beings.) If a living being, especially a human being, survives without an enemy, there is no expanding, as you rightly suggested, and if there is no expanding, then in the long run (in the long run!) there is no life anymore. In the long run living groups (for example: packs, prides), especially human groups (for example: tribes, communes) decline and die out, if they have no enemy. They die out because of too much energy, wealthy, hedonism, "individualism" and other nihilisms, and one of them is the ism of "having no enemy", "world peace", "universal peace" ... and so on.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby Innovice » Sat Jul 05, 2014 12:52 am

I like this thread :-)
Innovice
Thinker
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 7:27 am

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby Dan~ » Sat Jul 05, 2014 2:17 am

Arminius wrote:That does not correspond to what life experience teaches. Life experience teaches that an enemy is necessary to survive. (Compare all living beings.) If a living being, especially a human being, survives without an enemy, there is no expanding, as you rightly suggested, and if there is no expanding, then in the long run (in the long run!) there is no life anymore. In the long run living groups (for example: packs, prides), especially human groups (for example: tribes, communes) decline and die out, if they have no enemy. They die out because of too much energy, wealthy, hedonism, "individualism" and other nihilisms, and one of them is the ism of "having no enemy", "world peace", "universal peace" ... and so on.

The commonly known psychology that battles and enemies retard the developing mind of a child shows that what you are saying is wrong.
I like http://www.accuradio.com , internet radio.
https://dannerz.itch.io/ -- a new and minimal webside now hosting two of my free game projects.
User avatar
Dan~
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:14 am
Location: May the loving spirit of papa hitler watch over and bless you all.

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby Arminius » Sat Jul 05, 2014 1:41 pm

Arminius wrote:
Dan~ wrote:
Arminius wrote:That does not correspond to what life experience teaches. Life experience teaches that an enemy is necessary to survive. (Compare all living beings.) If a living being, especially a human being, survives without an enemy, there is no expanding, as you rightly suggested, and if there is no expanding, then in the long run (in the long run!) there is no life anymore. In the long run living groups (for example: packs, prides), especially human groups (for example: tribes, communes) decline and die out, if they have no enemy. They die out because of too much energy, wealthy, hedonism, "individualism" and other nihilisms, and one of them is the ism of "having no enemy", "world peace", "universal peace" ... and so on.

The commonly known psychology that battles and enemies retard the developing mind of a child shows that what you are saying is wrong.

Rhetoric?

I didn't say anything about a child, but about groups of those living beings (including human beings) who survive or not survive in the long run - in the long run! Therefore I marked that term already in my last post. A "child in the long run" is no child anymore. In the long run a child is already an adult. A child is no adult. Children need protection, so they don't need an enemy, except when they play adult roles, but that's merely a play. Life, especially life in groups (for example: tribes, communes) - and I merely spoke of groups in my last post (please compare, also above) -, needs an enemy in the long run. Without an enemy groups can't survive in the long run.

Your conclusion, which is a result of a complex comparison, is false.

Notice the term "in the long run" which means for a person about 30 years and more, and for a group (for example: a tribe, a commune) - and I merely spoke of groups in my last post (please compare, also above) - about 100 years and more.

Here in this thread we are talking about "the communal particle" (title of this thread), not about a person, not to mention a child. A life of one person lasts about 80 years (on average), a childish life lasts about 14 to 16 years (on average) - that's too less when it comes to "the long run" of a group (for example: a tribe, a commune): about 100 years and more. In addition: children need protection, and if they are not protected, they die (in the most cases of living beings) or become diseased. And pleace notice that an enemy for a living being doesn't necessarily always be another living being. Forces of nature are often also experienced as enemies. And not seldom they are challenges in order to form and justify cultures (compare the theory of Arnold Joseph Toynbee).
Last edited by Arminius on Sat Jul 05, 2014 3:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby Arminius » Sat Jul 05, 2014 2:59 pm

Besides:

Whatever psychology is (do you know what "psyche" really is? [Compare the Ancient Greek mythology!]), it is no science of children - a science of children has to incorporate all realms of science (because of the complexity) - and it merely shows statistics, manipulated data, manipulated information, mainstream statements, political correctness, thus the ideology of the rulers. I am not very much interested in ideology (modern religion).
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby James S Saint » Thu Jul 17, 2014 1:31 am

Slight edit to the OP;
But note that a charged particle can only exist within an ambient field of its relative opposite. For a "positive community" to be stable, it must be within a region of negative (destructive or uncooperative) influences. Perhaps those influences are merely the natural weather or soil conditions of the region. Perhaps there are a great many random trouble makers. But there must be a negative influence, else the positive community will simply dissipate. Although in society, as with a mind, being rid of the negative is seen as "the purpose of the gathering" or "the goal to achieve". If the goal or purpose is already achieved and no longer has anything destroying it, the society cannot be maintained. Once the emperor conquers all of the lands in sight, the empire falls because they were only being held together for the purpose of conquering
.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby Arminius » Sun Jul 20, 2014 12:24 am

James S Saint wrote:The Physical Particle
In nature, in extremely dense regions such as the center of a star, subatomic particles form due to electromagnetic noise being so high that it congests into "traffic jams" that don't go away. A sub-atomic particle is simply a traffic jam of perpetual EMR noise. The noise didn't think to itself, "We need to form a particle". Each tiny bit of noise was independently and simply trying to go its way. The particle formed because noise slows other noises in the same way that cars on a highway can slow other cars into a "slowdown" or even "traffic jam". And at a certain critical density, the traffic jam simply won't go away because for every bit of noise or car that leaves another is already arriving. And what is called the "potential" or "charge" of the particle is determined by whether most of the noise was of increasing potential or of decreasing potential (commonly known as "electric potential"). If there is the same amount of increasing as decreasing noise potential, the formed particle is neutral (a neutrino or neutron). If most of the noise was increasing, the particle is called "a positive charged particle" (a positron or proton). And if most was decreasing, the particle is called "a negative particle" (electron or anti-proton).

Each particle type can only exist in an ambient field of its relative opposite; a positive particle can exist only in a relative negative field and a negative particle can only exist in a relative positive field. And that is how you get the notion of the familiar Yin-Yang symbol, although it doesn't reveal the common neutral particle that can exist in a neutral ambient field.

But don't be mislead by the tempting and common notion that these particles are "Equal and Opposite". They most certainly are not. Even though they are opposite in potential and have many similarities, the end result of being negative in a relative positive environment is significantly different than being positive in a relative negative environment. And that is why they find that the common negative particle, an electron, is much smaller than the most common positive particle, a proton. A positive particle tends to acquire more mass (amount of noise) than a negative particle. The traditional Yin-Yang symbol is misleading. Let me explain the significance of that issue as it relates to people.

Enough of the physics.

The Communal Particle
Similarly if 1000 people were to be placed out in a wilderness with no means to be anywhere else, a "Communal Particle" would automatically form. Again, it need not be that anyone thought, "we need to form a community". Each person need merely to try to live. The interaction of such people forms a community without anyone deciding to form it. It is a natural occurrence that is in fact difficult to avoid.

As the community begins to form, there is almost never anyone saying, "Okay Mr Jones, you be the farmer. And Jacob, you be the carpenter. And Goldstein, you be the banker....". Instead, the people simply do what is more natural for them to do at that time, in that circumstance, and with their experience. The interaction of what is simply their effort to live and go their own way becomes a stable community, without intent to form it. And through time, even though the people come and go, the community will generally continue (assuming it was stable). Such is a natural occurrence, not in need of design or intent (assuming there were enough people with the right talents = "dense region").

And as the communal particle forms, it will most naturally have both "positive affects" and "negative affects", "cooperative people" and "uncooperative people", or perhaps "constructive people" and "destructive people". And what determines the "potential" of the community is the balance of how much positive-noise to negative-noise happens to be there as the community forms, how many constructive people vs destructive, or cooperative people vs antagonistic people. If the number of positive people and negative people are the same, the community will be a neutral community having both within. Of course people are not really entirely positive or entirely negative, just as EMR noise isn't, but if gauged by their average, each person will register as more of one than the other in that environment.

But note that a charged particle can only exist within an ambient field of its relative opposite. For a "positive community" to be stable, it must be within a region of negative (destructive or uncooperative) influences. Perhaps those influences are merely the natural weather or soil conditions of the region. Perhaps there are a great many random trouble makers. But there must be a negative influence, else the positive community will simply dissipate. In society, as with a mind, this is seen as "the goal to achieve" or "the purpose of the gathering". If the goal or purpose is already achieve and no longer has anything destroying it, the society cannot be maintained. Once the emperor conquers all of the lands in sight, the empire falls because they were only being held together for the purpose of conquering.

A community forms naturally by people merely trying to live. But a kingdom or empire forms by specific people artificially trying to form it, people using people only for the purpose of forming a gathering (a communal particle) which they can be reign over. That one aspect of human behavior is what sets it apart of other animals of nature. It causes great conquest, but also leads to eventual failure soon after the conquest or purpose is achieved. A kingdom or empire is not a stable communal particle except while it is growing or fighting a war (the required negative influence).

Note that the positive or negative nature of the community is not specifically chosen, but rather the natural consequences of the nature of the people involved. The attempt to demand that the community be specifically positive or negative in any regard after a gathering has already accumulated would be a tremendous struggle against nature and reality. To intentionally choose what is to be considered positive or negative is tampering with the forces of life itself. If a governance attempts to demand obedience to an architecture or even subtly trick people into unwitting obedience, it is challenging natural physics and will have a great endless struggle on its hands which will eventually lead to great success and certain imminent failure.

An artificial society; kingdom, empire, socialistic, unrestricted capitalistic, or communistic can be formed and do quite well.. until it runs out of enemies. And then it requires artificial adversaries; created terrorists, false flag attacks, criminal or antithesis organizations. A natural society; tribal, township, or restricted capitalistic can remain stable simply because it never runs out of natural adversaries.

Every stable particle, whether a simple physical sub-atomic particle, a particle of the mind, or a communal particle can only be stable within an ambient field of its antithesis. When that field becomes too positive favoring the communal structure, a catastrophic failure of the community or society cannot be avoided. And what is declared positive or negative is not a choice, but decided by the ambient.

The fact that a community cannot stably choose its positive nature, is why religions, such as Christianity, attempt to "spread the word" concerning the benefits of being harmonious. By creating an ambient field of cooperative people, a positive, constructive society can form. But if whatever has been dubbed "negative" is not the true exact opposite of Life itself, Life will not be the positive nature of the gathering. Life will be lost by the sacrifices from an attempt at artificial structure and conquest. In the fall of an artificial community, artificiality is lost rather than as the Life it tried to control.

Life and physical nature are workable, programmable, and tolerant, but they cannot be entirely controlled without being entirely lost. And they don't lose easily. My suggestion is to stop trying to create artificial communities unless they are the very definition of what Life is so that the only required and supporting antithesis will be natural physical anti-life and thus have no need for artificial, very expensive, and inherently catastrophic controls attempting to keep it together.

Life is a very specific, although difficult to discern, architecture in nature. It requires neither artificial adversary, Man, artificial incentives, nor machine. When a society is forced to focus too much on artificial adversaries, the structure of Man, artificialincentives, or utilization of machines, it is facing immanent catastrophic failure from which it cannot change its own nature and thus once close to conquest, cannot change its course into oblivion.

In all societies, a tipping point is reached where there is no longer a choice, whether the society has artificial support or just happens to have chosen the wrong thing to call "Positive".

And by the way, a digital world is entirely artificial and far from the definition of Life.



Brought to you by:
Rational Metaphysics: Affectance Ontology: Sociology 101

Well done, James!

I took the liberty to highlight some words, because I think that they indicate that the "communal-particle-idea" is similar to the "back-to-nature-idea" that Kant has put into Rousseau's mouth, as well as some ideas of Heidegger and, later, the ecological party "Die Grünen" ("The Greens" - since 1990 this party has been being no ecological party anymore).
Last edited by Arminius on Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: The Communal Particle

Postby James S Saint » Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:11 am

Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm


Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: surreptitious75