Part 12:
Seldon’s Message Series --
‘Actual Metafinity’
versus Fanciful, Fallacious Infinities:
‘Metafinite’, ‘‘‘Meta-Dynamical’’’, Ontological Change and Mathematical-Model “Singularity”.
Dear Reader,
It is my pleasure, and my honor, as an officer of the Foundation Encyclopedia
Dialectica [F.E.D.]
Office of Public Liaison, to share
with you,
from time to time, as
they
are approved for public release by the F.E.D. General Council, key excerpts from the internal writings, and from the internal sayings, of our co-founder,
Karl Seldon.
The twelfth such
release in this new
series is
entered below [Some E.D. standard
edits have been applied, in the version presented below, to the direct
transcript of our co-founder’s
discourse].
This instalment addresses the Seldonian view of the relation between the bandying
about of fanciful
and even mystical “infinities” in descendence-phase
“pure” mathematics and even in mathematical physics, vis-a-vis the Seldonian concept of ‘metafinity’.
For more information regarding,
and for [further] instantiations of, these Marxian and Seldonian insights, please see --
For ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Marxian and Seldonian insights -- specimens of ‘dialectical art’ -- see:
ENJOY!
Regards,
Miguel Detonacciones,
Member, Foundation Encyclopedia
Dialectica [F.E.D.],
Participant, F.E.D.
Special Council for Public Liaison,
Officer, F.E.D.
Office of Public Liaison.
“...leaving aside any extended commentary upon the contra-factual,
‘contra-actual’ axiomatics of Cantorian, “mathematical-Platonist” mysticism, and its deductively
rigorous phantasies, for now, this is to register a few remarks regarding the
mathematical “infinitism” that invades even the ostensive realism of
mathematical physics.”
“The more-realistic, nonlinear partial [integro-]differential
equations that abound in modern mathematical physics are prone to predict -- precisely
because of their nonlinearity
-- bouts of divisions by zero in real finite-time, divisions by zero which can
be interpreted as representing infinite values for key physical metrics
and variables: so-called “singularities”.”
“Such conjunctures in the modeled
time/history of a physical phenomenon or system are rightly regarded as mathematically
meaningless by many of the more realistic physicists, and as marking physical
conjunctures for which the equations, and the “laws” that they formulate, “break
down”.”
“There are, of course, some “mush-minded”
‘mystoids’
among “physicists”, who want us to believe that, e.g., the gravitational
collapse singularity of the Einstein General Relativity system of “simultaneous”
nonlinear partial differential
equations means that there is some kind of ‘“actual, physical infinity”’ at the core of every “black hole”,
as well as at the “Big Bang” natural-historical «arché»/core of our cosmos as a whole itself.”
“However, in a metaphoric
manner, there is something meaningful about such a zero-division “singularity”
in an otherwise physically accurate, highly-predictively-valid equation or
equations-system. Instantaneous ‘‘‘infinite
quantitative’’’
change, from the very instant in which a denominator-resident dynamical factor-variable
takes on the value 0
in such an equation or equations-system, and/or in its/their
solution-function(s) [in the few cases in which such functions are known in “closed
form” for nonlinear
equations], might signify, and might be the only way to signify, a finite
but qualitative change,
e.g., an ontological change, within a mathematical language which is
capable only of “purely” quantitative
expression(s).”
“This kind of change is what we
call ‘metafinite
change’, whereby the also ‘meta-dynamical’
character of an also dynamical
system becomes manifest.”
“And, indeed, we find that,
quite typically, zero-division singularities in the equations of physics and of
engineering occur at critical points in the cumulative course of at first
apparently only quantitative
change, at which qualitative
change, in the form of the self-expansion
of the ontology of the phenomenon or system that the equations model, bursts
forth. And this irruption of additional
ontology typically also coincides with the ‘meta-dynamical’ transition from a predecessor
dynamical system to its qualitatively,
ontologically different -- ‘‘‘evolutely’’’
expanded -- successor system, that may also «aufheben»-
‘‘‘contain’’’ and incorporate its predecessor system.”
“Division-by-zero singularities
typically mark, not [impossible] actual, physical infinities, but
transitions from a predecessor system to its successor system: revolutions
in natural history.”
“Beginning with the seventh
system of dialectical mathematics in the “slow”, “training-wheels” version of our
solution to our ‘meta-equation’ for the systems-progression of the axioms-systems
of dialectical mathematics, the “purely”-quantitative equations of mathematical
physics become ‘[re-]qualified’, by fully-arithmetical, fully-ideographical,
fully-algorithmic ‘mathematical qualifiers’. These comprise ‘metrical qualifiers’, that
arithmeticize, e.g., the more primitive, “syncopated”, “dimensional analysis” expressions
like ‘sec.’, ‘gm.’, & ‘cm.’, as well as ‘ontological qualifier’ mathematical
ideograms. ... We say ‘re-qualified’, because these
ideographical ‘mathematical qualifiers’ bear a psychohistorical resemblance to,
and resonance with, the ‘Monad’ arithmetical qualifier ‘‘‘numeral’’’ of the psychohistorically
pivotal ancient proto-algebraic work of Diophantus of Alexandria, entitled The
Arithmetica, which launched modern, algebraic mathematics, while
still evincing salient ‘psychoartefacts’ of the ancient Mediterranean mathematical
«mentalité».’
“Per a key axiom of that
seventh dialectical-mathematical axioms-system, and beyond, the
multiplication, by ‘empty zero’, 0, of a ‘‘‘[re-]qualified’’’, ‘quanto-qualitative’
mathematical expression, whether that expression be ‘metrically-qualified’
only, ‘ontologically-qualified’ only, or metrically and ontologically ‘co-qualified’,
yields a new kind of arithmetical value and ‘meta-numeral’, which we call ‘full
zero’.”
“Occurrences of that, ‘full
zero’, value, signify, in that axioms-system, and beyond, that a new
successor system has emerged, starting from the moment of a sustained such
singularity, such that the mathematical language of the old, finite equation(s),
that may have “miraculously” well-described and predicted the finite development
of the predecessor dynamical system, up to that very moment of division-by-zero
singularity, is no longer adequate to describe the ‘new finite-y’
of the successor dynamical system, that has «aufheben»-irrupted
from out of the very heart of the predecessor dynamical system, as an
expression of the very nature of that predecessor system itself; as an
ultimate, immanent, ‘‘‘evolute’’’ self-transcendence
of that predecessor system, via the irruption of a new ‘qualo-fractal’ scale of
-- still finite, but ontologically-expanded -- ‘cosmo-ontology’. ...”
No comments:
Post a Comment