HumAnize says:
Light itself would subjectively experience frozen time, apparently. Which makes no sense, but ok. Roll with it.
One mississippi. It just went zip 186,000 miles. What did it experience? Well nothing, it is incapable of having experiences. But imagine it could, what would its experience have been like? Did it register anything that happened around it, the stuff it zipped by? Apparently not, it has frozen time. ”
It doesn’t ‘make’ sense, because neuro waves are way too slow to make a sensible quantum jump to correlate sensibly.
Light moves wether it is perceived, it can not be caused to move because it is perceived.
I think maybe the what causes what action really is noteable, because the idea of verification that was observed prior to quantum and photon, were not prevy to measurement, and science forgets the extremely small sequential tools necessary for such procedure.
There developed an indiginous sense in the conception of sensation with the source of light on which the term ‘enlighten et’ cements a pre-ordinal unity between the eye and the object precept, that formed the later use of the critical ‘test’ of this conjunction between the idea and the thought of that idea, before the velocity of light could not be tested.
Hence only at the true beginning of critical science could such postulates be taken up seriously, at a time before which spatial limits of the planetary expansion could not be envisioned by a curvature forming at the limits is extended preceotion, or something like that.
The sensory development and the sensation of ‘sense-data’ is still seriously contended as late , or as recently as the time it took neuro-science to come up with the idea that first presented that doubt with Descartes.
So when the new science generates the logical little of ‘esse est percipii’ science can only describe the whole gamut of existence as a unity between phenomenon, interaction between object and subject, with the actual measurement between preciously in correlated differences in neuroscience.
I know you guys ‘know this, or know ‘of this’ but the difference between natural and neuro science within the formerly long duration which still puzzled over the difference between subject, object and conception was still in the early formative stage.
The archaic language presumed untestable overlaps in understanding these differences.
Hope my roll with it corresponds somewhat to God’s unwillingness to play dice with It.
Kind of like an early idiot’s guide to quantum physics’ could be described at an early , pre Bell era in conventional terms.
My interest hinges around the necessary formation of in between similarly produced images , which seem to replace the growing potential uncertainty correlated with the evolution of natural v. Indicted sciences as the phenomena and the noumena diverge methodolically, as per the uncertainty between the social sciences form a second tier of uncertainty.
Where the imagination will objectify a widening or narrowing sense between conscious and sub conscious states.
Where image copying imitates a ‘photo-synthesis’ of naturally occurring phenomena.
