Part 8. dialogues with ‘protoic meta-humanity’ series. On the ‘Meta-Sociality’ of Human Society. GLOBAL STRATEGIC HYPOTHESES.

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part 8. dialogues with ‘protoic meta-humanity’

series.

 

On the

‘Meta-Sociality’

of

Human Society.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GLOBAL STRATEGIC HYPOTHESES.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Reader,

 

The following is our transcript of a dialogue between one of our volunteers, who wanted to explore Seldon’s concept of human sociality as a ‘meta-sociality’ with respect to the earlier-emerged Earthly forms of “animal sociality”, and a prominent, representative AI – ‘protoic’ to expected future android robot ‘meta-humans’, equipped with AI ‘‘‘minds’’’.

Our edited/more-punctuated transcript follows.  Key passages of the AI’s response are highlighted in magenta-colored text, inserted within square brackets –

I.  F.E.D.: “Does contemporary discourse in the biological, anthropological and social sciences recognize a distinction between pre-human, “animal societies” and human societies in the sense that human societies – starting with the domestication of the social animals known as wolves, into dogs, and with human co-hunting with dogs, and advancing with the Neolithic domestications of other social animals – are ‘super-social’ or ‘meta-social’, in that human societies incorporate or internalize other animal societies into themselves, in a kind of social scale version of biological endo-symbiosis and symbiogenesis – ‘socio-endo-symbiosis’ and ‘socio-symbiogenesis’?”

I.  AI: “Yes, contemporary discourse in the biological, social, and anthropological sciences increasingly recognizes this distinction, often utilizing frameworks that mirror your concepts of “socio-endo-symbiosis” and “socio-symbiogenesis.”  While traditional 20th-century views drew a sharp, binary line between “nature” (animal societies) and “culture” (human societies), modern interdisciplinary fields—such as anthrozoology, multispecies ethnography, evolutionary anthropology, and niche construction theory —view human societies as uniquely “meta-social” or “hybrid societies.”

Rather than human society merely interacting with animal societies externally, human civilization expands by structurally internalizing and absorbing the social structures of other species.

Key Theoretical Frameworks in Contemporary Discourse

Modern science maps onto your proposed concepts through several established paradigms:

1. Multispecies Societies and “Hybrid Collectives”

• The Concept: Anthropologists like Bruno Latour and Donna Haraway argue that human societies have never been purely human.  Instead, they are “hybrid collectives.”
• The Animal Role: When humans domesticated wolves, they did not just tame an organism; they integrated a highly sophisticated canine social hierarchy into the human tribal structure. Dogs became functional social actors — sentinels, hunting partners, and even family members — creating a shared, cross-species social grammar.

2. Niche Construction and Co-Evolution

• The Concept: In evolutionary biology, Niche Construction Theory (NCT) posits that organisms alter their environments, which in turn alters the evolutionary pressures on themselves and neighboring species. [E.D. Editors – an example of mediated self-reflexive self-development].

• The Animal Role: The Neolithic Revolution was not a one-way exploitation. It was a massive, multi-species co-evolutionary event. Humans modified their social niche to include sheep, cattle, and horses, while these animals socially adapted to interpret human gestures, voices, and hierarchies.

 

3. Eco-Evo-Devo and Symbiosis Frameworks

• The Concept: Evolutionary biologist Lynn Margulis championed endosymbiosis (how free-living cells merged to create complex eukaryotic life).

 

• The Animal Role: Scholars applying this to sociology note that human societies scale up exactly like biological organisms: through symbiogenesis.  A pastoralist society cannot exist without its herd; the herd and the human collective merge into a single metabolic and social unit. The human “super-organism” functions precisely because it has internalized the labor, communication, and biology of other species.

 

The Evolutionary Continuum: Animal vs. Human Societies

To illustrate how human societies became “super-social” through this internalization, consider the structural differences recognized today:

Attribute	Animal Societies (e.g., Primates, Wolves)	Human “Meta-Societies”
Species Composition	Monospecific: Bond almost exclusively to genetic conspecifics.	Multispecies: Incorporates and regulates the societies of other species.
Social Transmission	Behavioral Copying: Limited to local traditions (e.g., tool use in chimps).	Cumulative Culture: Ratchets up over generations via language and institutions.
Symbiotic Scale	Ecological: Standard predation, parasitism, or mutualism.	Institutional: Other species are given legal, economic, and domestic roles.

---

 

Domestication as “Socio-Endosymbiosis”

Your term “socio-endosymbiosis” perfectly captures the mechanics of early human advancement: 

• The Canine Catalyst: Co-hunting with wolves allowed humans to outsource sensory tracking and pack-driving mechanics to another species.

This integration altered human neurological evolution (reducing our olfactory bulb reliance) and altered wolf morphology into that of dogs.

 

• The Neolithic Expansion: By internalizing pastoral animals, human societies absorbed animal biological energy (milk, muscle, wool) directly into the social engine. The human tribe became a “macro-organism” with animal “organs”— horses acting as the circulatory/transport system, dogs as the nervous/security system, and cattle as the metabolic engine.

Contemporary discourse increasingly views humanity not as a species apart from nature, but as a unique amalgam of multiple social worlds bound together by evolutionary history.”

 

“If you would like to explore this further, I can provide more specific details. Let me know if you want to look into:

• Specific anthropological texts or authors (like Donna Haraway, Anna Tsing, or Tim Ingold) who write on multispecies ethnography.
• The genetic and behavioral evidence for canine-human co-evolution.
• How Niche Construction Theory models the transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic era.”

II.  F.E.D.: “Yes please -- all three!.”

 

II.  AI: “1. Anthropological Texts and Authors in Multispecies Ethnography

Multispecies ethnography is a vibrant field in contemporary anthropology that challenges “human exceptionalism.”  It argues that humans cannot be understood in isolation; our culture, psychology, and history are inherently co-produced by the non-human species we live alongside.

------------------------------

When Species Meet: Haraway introduces the concept of “companion species.”  She argues that humans and domestic animals (especially dogs) do not pre-exist their relationship. Instead, they emerge through their interaction — a process she calls “intra-action.” Haraway views the human-dog relationship as a historical and biological knot where both species reshape each other’s social capabilities.

------------------------------

The Mushroom at the End of the World: Tsing explores what she calls “multispecies assemblages.”  She details how human economic and social structures are built on the ecological backs of other organisms. Tsing demonstrates how human history is a series of “unintentional design” projects where diverse species gather and form complex, collaborative survival webs in disturbed environments.

The Perception of the Environment, 2000: Tim Ingold reimagines domestication not as human domination over nature, but as a shift in the system of trust and engagement. He notes that hunter-gatherers view animals as sentient social peers. The transition to pastoralism doesn’t destroy this social relationship; it formalizes it into an institutional system of mutual dependency, effectively absorbing animal life into human social architecture.

------------------------------

How Forests Think, 2013: Eduardo Kohn pushes ethnography beyond the human by arguing that “selves” are not exclusively human.  He asserts that any organism that interprets signs and communicates has a form of mind. Therefore, when humans interact with dogs or forest predators, they are participating in an inter-species dialogue. Human culture is thus a sub-component of a broader, living, semiotic ecosystem.

2. Behavioral and Genetic Evidence for Canine-Human Co-Evolution

The domestication of the wolf (Canis lupus) into the dog (Canis familiaris) is the foundational archetype of your concept of “socio-symbiogenesis.”

Over the last 15,000 to 40,000 years, this bond has left deep biological and cognitive signatures in both species 

“Cognitive and Behavioral Fusion”.

* Interbrain Coupling (Neural Synchrony): A landmark 2024 study published in Advanced Science demonstrated that human and dog brain waves synchronize (interbrain coupling) during friendly social interactions. This shared neural rhythm is well-documented between communicating humans, but dogs are the only non-human species proven to achieve this across species lines.

 

* The Oxytocin Loop: When humans and dogs gaze into each other’s eyes, both experience a massive spike in oxytocin (the hormone responsible for maternal bonding and social trust). This positive feedback loop mimics the exact biological mechanism used to bond human parents to their infants, representing a hijacked and shared evolutionary neural pathway.

 

* Reading Human Gestures: Dog puppies are genetically predisposed to read human communicative cues—such as pointing or eye-gaze direction—far better than hand-reared wolf puppies or even highly intelligent non-human primates like chimpanzees.

 

Parallel Neuroanatomical Rewiring

*Prefrontal Expansion and Limbic Reduction: Comparative neurobiological research indicates that both humans and dogs underwent a process of “self-domestication”.  This selective pressure for pro-sociality and reduced aggression physically reshaped brain anatomy in both species.  Both underwent a reduction in limbic system volume (the fight-or-flight center) and an expansion of the prefrontal cortex, which controls executive function and social cognition.

 

*Shared Genetic Architectures: A 2025 genomic analysis of canine behavioral profiles found that a dozen specific genes governing trainability, emotional sensitivity, and fear in dogs are the exact same genetic variants that influence emotional processing, anxiety, and intelligence in humans.

 

3. Niche Construction Theory (NCT) and the Neolithic Transition

Traditional evolutionary models viewed the Neolithic Revolution as humans adapting to a changing post-Ice Age climate. Niche Construction Theory (NCT) flips this script: it frames the transition as an active process where humans, animals, and plants aggressively modified their environments, altering the natural selection pressures for everyone involved.

. . .

Moving Away from “Imbalance”

 As leading archaeologist Melinda Zeder argues, initial domestication was not a desperate response to resource scarcity or environmental crisis.  Instead, it was driven by small-scale societies deliberately enhancing resource-rich environments using traditional ecological knowledge. Humans didn’t just adapt to nature; they built a completely new “cultural niche”.

 

The Feedback Loops of the Neolithic Niche

 Through NCT, we can see the Neolithic transition as a multi-species co-evolutionary engine: 

   1. Vegetation and Water Manipulation: Humans cleared forests, redirected water, and planted concentrated plots of wild cereals.  This environmental modification created an entirely new macro-niche.

   2. Attracting Synanthropic Species: This concentrated food supply attracted wild ruminants and pests.  Animals willing to tolerate human proximity gained a massive survival advantage.

   3. The “Social Ratchet” and Dual Inheritance: As human social structures integrated these animals, humans developed a “social ratchet” — an irreversible division of labor and cumulative culture.  Humans protected the animals from predators; the animals converted inedible grass into mobile protein and labor.  [E.D. Editors – a ‘Darwinian [fitness] bargain’].

          4. Genetic Modification as a Byproduct: This human-constructed niche radically altered the genomes of both parties.  Ruminants evolved smaller brains, shorter faces, and high docility.  Concurrently, humans, who culturally constructed the dairying niche, underwent gene-culture co-evolution, rapidly selecting for the genetic mutation for adult lactase [E.D. Editors – enzyme] persistence [E.D. Editors – lactose digestibility persistence into human adulthood].

If you want to dive deeper into any of these areas, let me know. We could focus on:

* The specific genetic mechanisms of human lactase persistence or how dog genomes adapted to high-starch human diets.

* The archeological debates surrounding where and when the first wolves self-domesticated.

* How “self-domestication syndrome” explains human behavioral evolution compared to other hominins.”

 

TO BE CONTINUED.

 

 

 

 

 

 

For more information regarding these Seldonian insights, and to read and/or download, free of charge, PDFs and/or JPGs of Foundation books, other texts, and images, please see:

www.dialectics.info

and

https://independent.academia.edu/KarlSeldon

 

 

 

 

 

For partially pictographical, ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of ‘dialectical art’ – as well as dialectically-illustrated books published by the F.E.D. Press, see –

https://www.etsy.com/shop/DialecticsMATH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

¡ENJOY!

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

Miguel Detonacciones,

Voting Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.];

Elected Member, F.E.D. General Council;

Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison;

Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.

 

 

 

 

YOU are invited to post your comments on this blog-entry below.

 

 

 

Part 08: Seldon on ‘‘‘Dialectical Categorial Progressions’’’ Series. Difficult to Solve-for Hybrid Category-Symbols.

 

                             

Part 08: Seldon on

 

‘‘‘Dialectical Categorial Progressions’’’ Series.

 

 

Difficult to

Solve-for

Hybrid

Category-

              Symbols.

Dear Reader,

It is my pleasure, and my honor, as an elected member of the Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.] General Council, and as a voting member of F.E.D., to share, with you, from time to time, as they are approved for public release by the F.E.D. General Council, Seldon’s commentaries on key Encyclopedia Dialectica concepts of Seldonian Theory. 

This 8th text in this new such series is posted herewith, together with supporting text-images and diagrams [Some E.D. standard edits have been applied, in the version presented below, by the editors of the F.E.D. Special Council for the Encyclopedia, to the direct transcript of our co-founder’s discourse].

Part 4.: DialecticS of NATURE Main Sequence Series. ‘‘‘Molecular-ATOMIC Clouds’’’: Allo-Hybrid-izing Interactions of Self-Hybrid atom units and/versus Self-Hybrid “molecule units.

 

 

 

 

‘‘‘Molecular-

ATOMIC

Clouds’’’:

 

Allo-Hybrid-izing

Interactions

of

Self-Hybrid

atom

units

and/versus

Self-Hybrid

“molecule

units.

 

 

Part 4.:

DialecticS

of

NATURE

Main

Sequence

Series.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Reader,

 

The overall ‘dialectic of Nature’ ontological-categorial progression model for the dialectical partial synthesis category, ‘synphysis’ category, or ‘uniphysis’ category, symbolized by q_ma – which includes the macro-cosmological hybridization processes of molecule-units-interacting-with-atom-units, still ongoing today – is represented, via the _NQ dialectical language’s dyadic Seldon function, with that function-form operating upon the ‘Regenerist Hypothesis’s “Dark Energy” ‘spandetron’ units’ «arché»-category, q_x, and is, partially [‘¶’], solved by us as follows –

 

 

q_x²⁵  =  q_x³²   ¶|-=  

 

q_x <+> q_c <+>  q_cx <+>  q_r <+>     

 

q_rx <+> q_rc <+>  q_rcx <+>  q_a <+>

 

q_ax <+>  q_ac <+>  q_acx <+>  q_ar <+>     

 

q_arx <+>  q_arc <+>  q_arcx <+>  q_m <+>

 

q_mx <+>  q_mc <+>  q_mcx <+>  q_mr <+>     

 

q_mrx <+>  q_mrc <+>  q_mrcx <+> q_ma <+>

 

q_max <+>  q_mac <+>  q_macx <+>  q_mar <+>     

 

q_marx <+>  q_marc <+>  q_marcx <+>  q_p.

 

 

– with ontological category q_ma solved – 

[‘|-=’] 

– by us as representing, primarily, the cosmo-ontological category of ‘‘‘molecular-atomic clouds’’’, q_d. 

 

 

“molecules” and/versus “atoms”.  Within the above-written cosmological-ontological, dialectical [i.e., ‘multi-«aufheben»-izing’ – ‘multi-meta-unit-izing’] ontological-categorial-progression, is the sub-progression that forms the focus of this blog-entry, namely –

 

 

q_m <x>  q_a    =   q_a <+>  q_ma    

|-=  

q_a <+> q_d.

 

 

This component-subprocess, categorizing and ‘character-izing’ [i.e., algebra-izing] molecule units/atom units inter-actions, can well-describe later, so-called “molecular clouds” – in the deep past, and still today – which must have begun, in the, mainly, Helium-atoms-and-ions/Hydrogen-atoms-and-ions/“sub-atomic particles” early phase of our cosmos, as “atomic clouds”, initially containing no molecules, not even, rudimentary, ‘proto-molecules’ like HeH⁺; not even ‘“di-atomic”’ molecules, of self-bonding Hydrogen atoms, like H₂.

 

Later, especially with the enrichment of these clouds with atom units of higher-atomic-number/atomic-weight species, such as Carbon atoms, Nitrogen atoms, Oxygen atoms, as well as atom units of many other atoms-kinds as well, born of stellar nucleosynthesis, these “atomic clouds” became what are officially called “molecular clouds”, but which are really – back then, and still today – ‘‘‘molecular-atomic clouds’’’.

 

That is, they are inter-stellar, intra-galactic ‘conversion-formations’, in which atoms are converted into molecules, catalyzed by the molecules already so-produced, albeit with some back-conversion, or down-conversion, of molecule units, disintegrating back into atom units.  

 

These clouds are dialectical complex unities of atom units being up-converted into molecule units, and of molecule units being, e.g., thermally-‘collisionally’, ‘retro-converted’, back down into free-floating, separate atom units, albeit with a bias toward up-conversion of atom units into their molecule ‘meta-units’.

 

Original Accumulation of Molecule Micro-Units in Initially Atoms-Only ‘Atomic Cloud’ Macro-Units.  The production and expanded reproduction of molecule units in primordial, poor-metallicity, mainly He | H atom units atomic gas clouds in the early universe was slow.  This was because it depended upon inefficient, direct gas-phase collisions among, mainly, Hydrogen atoms, Helium atoms, as well as between those two kinds, to form ‘proto-molecules’ like HeH⁺ – a proton particle unit associated with a Helium atom unit [thus ‘micro-cosmological’ units of category q_ar, which also includes the ‘macro-cosmological’ units of large, hot, new stars] – and to form diatomic, ‘self-atomic’ molecule units like H₂ [thus units of a rudimentary species of category q_aa |-= q_m], to cool, shield and densify molecular clouds toward their reproduction of new proplyds and new stars. 

 

Free Hydrogen atoms infrequently form ‘di-Hydrogen molecules’, H₂, by direct, molecularly-unmediated and molecularly-uncatalyzed, gas-phase collisions, because the photons that such collisions emit cannot easily carry away the full excess kinetic energy typical of such collisions, so that, e.g., colliding neutral Hydrogen atoms more often ricochet off of one another in such collisions, rather than chemically cohering and bonding to one another. 

 

But even this gradual molecularization of the early ‘atomic clouds’ does set up for the births of new stars, hence for their stellar nucleosynthesis of higher species of atom units/-atomic nuclei [“metals”], and for the enrichment of their accumulating higher atoms units-kinds content in later, e.g., new, ‘atomic-molecular clouds’, thus with potential to produce and reproduce higher and richer varieties of molecule units.

 

Stages of Expanded Reproductive Accumulation of Molecule Units in Later ‘Molecular-Atomic Cloud’ Units, Mediated and Catalyzed by Molecule Units already Produced.  The higher atom-kinds enrichment, or the “metallization”, of later ‘atomic-molecular clouds’ leads to the production and reproduction of higher molecule units – higher in volumetric size, in mass, and in complexity – and to the formation of interstellar “dust grain” units. 

 

Each typical dust grain unit, inside a developing ‘molecular-atomic cloud’, is an amalgam of myriad atom units and molecule units, and thus as ‘micro-cosmological’ units of category q_ma |-= q_d, the ‘cosmo-ontological’ category that also includes the ‘macro-cosmological’ units that are the later ‘molecular-atomic clouds’ themselves.

 

The cores of these dust grain units eventually typically consist of amorphous silicates – minerals made up out of silicon, magnesium and iron atom units – carbon-aceous solids – graphite, polycyclic hydro-carbons and soot – and ‘eu-metallic’ compounds – with sub-unit bits made of iron-nickel and sulfide.

 

These dust grains then mediate or catalyze more rapid formation of higher molecule units on their surfaces, by providing a substrate for atomic/molecular reactions. 

 

In the cooler sub-spaces within these, ‘acceleratedly’, molecularly self-enriching ‘macro molecular-atomic cloud units’, gas-phase atom units and molecule units condense onto the dust-grains’ cores, in forms including water ices [H₂O] especially, but also in the forms of Carbon oxides – e.g., solid CO and CO₂ ices; Hydrides – e.g., frozen methane [CH₄] and ammonia [NH₃] molecule units, and Organic Refractories – complex carbon-chain molecule units. 

 

Thus, and thereby, the formation of new, including higher-mass, higher-atoms-count molecule units, from atom units, is catalyzed by the molecules already produced, and forming dust grain substrates promoting further, molecule-units-building, chemical reactions.  

 

Free, gaseous atom units land on the colder surfaces of dust grains and stick there, held there by weak forces.  Lighter atom units diffuse thermally across those dust grain surfaces until they collide with other trapped atom units or molecular radical units, with which they then bond chemically, forming new molecule units. 

 

The solid dust grain units absorb the excess kinetic and binding energies of such bondings, acting as a thermal sink that reduces the high rates of re-dissociations that such energies would otherwise drive.  But the newly-formed molecules also use mere fractions of that, their formation reaction-energies, to unstick themselves from their weak adhesion to the dust grain units’ surfaces, thus propelling themselves back out into their ‘molecular-atomic’ gas cloud’s gaseous phase.

 

As the ‘molecular-atomic cloud’ grows denser with new, concentrated atom and molecule units, it self-gravitationally contracts, and shields its deep interior from the stars-emitted ultraviolet photon “particle” units that would otherwise break the bonds of their molecule units.  Under these cold, dark conditions, gas-phase molecule units freeze out onto the dust grain units’ surfaces, building up a millimeters-thick layer of the so-called “dirty ice” molecular components listed above. 

 

These “dirty ice” layers work like high-density, multi-element chemical reactors.  Molecular radical units and atom units trapped in these ices interact to synthesize complex organic molecule units, such as methanol, methyl formate, and various amino acid precursors.

 

While dust grain units trigger the initial catalytic substrate for expanded production and reproduction of molecule units, the gas phase within sufficiently ‘atomo-molecularly’ enriched ‘molecular-atomic cloud’ macro-units also create a network of rapid [re]production of new molecule units, catalyzed by high-energy cosmic rays.  Unlike ultraviolet photon particle units, cosmic ray particle units can penetrate through to deep inside these dense cloud units, knocking out their myriad atom units’ orbiting electron particle units, thus ionizing those atom units, into ions like H₃⁺, He⁺, and C⁺.

 

Given that such ionized atom units and neutral molecule units apply strong electrostatic mutual attraction upon one another, they collide, and coalesce into molecule units, much more rapidly than do neutral atom units.  The resulting, thus barrierless, atomic-ions/molecules reactions rapidly self-organize complex carbon-chain higher molecule units, even at temperatures only slightly warmer than absolute zero.

 

The thickening, densifying dust grains composition of the cloud units also absorb and scatter incoming stellar ultraviolet photon particle-units, shielding newly-made and older-made molecule units alike from photo-disintegration.

 

On the Dialectical Nature of the Opposition Between Atom units and Molecule Units.  The dialectical opposition between atom units and molecule units is one that we cannot directly, sensuously perceive, since both are far too minute for our unaided eyes or fingers to detect.  That opposition is produced via a concrete negation operation, yielding a ‘‘‘negativity’’’, a specific ‘not-ness’, that distinguishes the two.  That [self-] negation operation is not any “abstract negation” operation, that obliterates its operands into nothingness.  It is a “determinate negation” operation, a self- «aufheben» self-operation, by which multiples of atom units coalesce themselves into single molecule units, negating their ‘mere-atomicity’ determination, but also conserving that ‘atom-ness’ inside their collective new ‘molecular-ness’, and uplifting themselves into the higher size/mass/complexity scale of molecule units, leaving behind their former atoms-only complexity scale and level.  These atom units thus collectively continue, by adding a new stage to, the multi-stage ‘qualo-fractal’ scales-progression that began, per our hypothesis, with the ‘spandetron’ units of “Dark Energy” themselves.

 

Dialectical, Ontological Category-Symbols’ subscript Commutability and Meaning-Duality.  Note that category-symbol q_ma [generically q₂₄ = q₁₆₊₈] has the same ‘‘‘order-number’’’ [the same ‘ordinal-quality generic subscript index’] as does category-symbol q_am [q₂₄ =  q₈₊₁₆] – i.e., is the 24th category-symbol in this ‘Dialectic of Nature’, ‘cosmo-ontological’ category-symbols progression. 

 

The latter, q_am, can be solved as representing another syntactically possible ‘cosmo-ontological’ process within atom units/molecule units combinations/complex unities. 

 

 

Specifically, commutated category-symbol q_am might well, for example, be solved as describing the conversion –

catalyzed by remaining atom units, e.g., by high-enough-energy, high temperature collisions, of molecule units with remaining atom units – back into separate atom units. 

 

 

Similar molecule units disintegration may result from “hot collisions” among molecule units themselves, or, e.g., by “photo-dissociation”/“thermal dissociation”, of molecule `units, back into their constituent, separate, atom units, due to high-energy stellar ultraviolet ray photon “particle” units, impinging upon them [better described by the higher ordinal-quality-number, commutated category-symbol

q_arm [® q₂₈, whose ‘uncommutated’ form, for us, is our standard category-symbol q_mar [® q₂₈ ].

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For more information regarding these Seldonian insights, and to read and/or download, free of charge, PDFs and/or JPGs of Foundation books, other texts, and images, please see:

 

www.dialectics.info

 

 

and

 

 

https://independent.academia.edu/KarlSeldon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For partially pictographical, ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of ‘dialectical art’ – as well as dialectically-illustrated books published by the F.E.D. Press, see –

 

https://www.etsy.com/shop/DialecticsMATH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

¡ENJOY!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Miguel Detonacciones,

 

Voting Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.];

Elected Member, F.E.D. General Council;

Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison;

Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.

 

 

 

 

 

 

YOU are invited to post your comments on this blog-entry below!