Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Telepathy: the story of a synchronization, explained
Posted:
Feb 18, 2012 3:19 PM
|
|
I board the subway train and find in the car a meaningful character,
not the first time it happens, this time she is who seems to be the
stray daughter of MP and TA from primary school. Since we were applied
Islam and the Qu ran so the outcome has to be no females left in the
generation the encounter is meaningful but the girl already knows that
maybe her mother or aunt or both were tortured. It seems a very
miraculous event I ve been going through for a while but it is very
easily explainable as just solving a system of differential equations.
In this case, all that the mind that effected the synchronizations
needs to output as outcome is very simple: the time at which to wake
me up. All other variables are already known and standard, all _that_
mind has to know is the time the girl and her tutoress are boarding
the train to calculate at what time to wake me up for me to arrive at
the synchronization and all the control that mind has to have, very
likely an old woman interested in the issue, is (basically) to wake me
up in time. All other variables are known: the distance between the
place I was asleep in the terminal and the train, the distance between
the car and the subway entry, the pace at which I walk, the train
speed, the moment the couple entered the subway and boarded the train,
my route... All this forms a model of the world that is not completely
or truly conscious but unconscious, that mind does not have to know
the exact measurements in terms of meters or have measured the average
speed of subway lines at every moment, which is unwieldy, but the
brain is recording such facts as almost meaningless data constantly
and storing them so they are available to make formal calculus of
consistency and coherency that enable it to solve a differential
equation system the way numerical methods do, and arrive at a simple
quantity-control model it can effect.
It was already known, even obvious, that I had to be in the zone I was
going to at the time I had to be there. I was awaken _just in time_ to
decide it was not too late to move and be there in time. The control
variable was in this case a man who sit in front of me in the table I
had my head over my luggage and who pretended to make a phone call
then went away. If he had remained in place for longer, I would have
pretended I was still asleep and wait for him to leave, even fall into
slumber again; the moment the man stands up there is time enough to
see it is not to late but just in time, pick the luggage and leave, so
that there is no implicit assumption of social interaction, but that
is very basic and _automatic_ social understanding among Humans. If
both had stayed longer in the same table, it would seem we are
actually friends and sitting together when in fact he just took
advantage of the free chair while I was a socially distant and
disengaged figure. The mind that perform the operation just had to
enact a simple control: *contact* the man at the right moment for him
to engage in his conversation and wake me up. Such mind was most
likely aware of the position of the girl-woman couple when they
boarded and where they boarded the train, probably at a very nearby
station in a line that has very near stations. Then since I woke _just
in time_ to arrive to where I had planned, my next decision is to take
the shortest path to the train. Some minutes earlier I would have
taken a different path and even changed my plans; some minutes late
and I would have missed it completely and stayed in the place to fall
into slumber again. This calculus is also rather simple and very
likely standard (average) among Humans, the relationship between time
to travel, time of appointment, slack time to be late or early, the
probability to change plans at the last moment, etc., so not much
additional information is needed here.
I take the shortest path and am ready to go into the subway without
wasting time in lines, but that is also a known fact at this time of
the month, so in that respect I am quite predictable, all the
differential equations system still has to produce is the moment to
start my walking. The stairs down to the train are the closest to the
entry and straight into the line direction I have to travel; I come
off the stairs as the train is just arriving. At this point there is a
fifty-fifty chance the synchronization will fail as I can choose to
take either car, one leads to the girl, the other _might_ have
produced a different meaningful encounter as there is a blonde female
hairdo that calls my attention, but the girl s encounter is more
meaningful overall than some possible flirting.
The same kind of simple control as the man making a fake call to wake
me up just in time can be conceived for the train system,
particularly, since conductors (there are actually live conductors)
can receive telepathic signals. In fact, the train _was_ traveling
rather slowly, but on that end it is conceivable necessary ONLY to
have one person receiving the signal and **manipulating** the girl-
woman system in a standard way. Particularly, assuming the couple
entered the car next to the library, they naturally end in the car
that has the closest path from subway entry to same car, but THAT is
data that is also relatively simple for a mind that is implementing
automatic, numerical calculus to produce two points of control and one
one time variable, since in the end the subway system does have fixed
distance-time relationships. Other assumptions on this freer (more
degrees of freedom) end of the system to take into account when
monitoring the schedule of the girl-woman couple, would have only led
to a different time to wake me up... or to a total abandonement of the
**plan** to synchronize _this time_ and begin immediately the next
possible plan for synchronization. But it is assumed at the outset
that the mind that is _dedicated_ to solve this problem of solving a
system for minimum variable-minimum control under constraints and
fixed relationship data does have the advantage of being dually
(duplex) capturing the signal from at least two of the actors in the
synchronization and most likely of more than two actors, which in this
case instead of adding complexity to the computation can actually
diminish its complexity in several ways, just by adding more fixed
elements to control the situation.
The unconscious mind can then act in parallel in different subsystems
to solve the different elements in the system, but in essence it can
solve the problem just be RECEIVING and EMITTING a signal
independently of its content to the different, in this case two points
of control (or maybe three, the conductor), and in real time perform
any adjustments necessary. All this effort can be done automatically
in parallel by a massively connected computing process with very
little conscious effort for a mind that is already obssessed
(dedicated) to the problem of connecting people with me. I think it is
an old woman s mind for whom additionally the problem of connecting
people and *finding the girl* is already structural.
So it can be seen that it is not a big problem, as has been the
possibilitating thesis since the beginning, to perform synchronization
even among parties that are not directly connected, as stream of
meaning, to the **central processor**, not even as signal reception,
as long as there are enough points of control (direct schizophrenics)
and monitoring capabilities (carrying fields) to provide information
over a fixed set of structural relationships like a city and the
subway offer. In other times in the fields it would have been simpler
probably though instead of personal synchronizations the outcome was
mobs, ordered mobs, **commercial** movements, sagas, cities... needing
only a few carrying fields, their control points and dually connected
central processors...
Danilo J Bonsignore
|
|
|
|
