[Paleopsych] Re: Big bang in mm sizes

Joel Isaacson isaacsonj at hotmail.com
Sat Jun 11 01:49:29 UTC 2005

Yes, Howard, we are talking about same/similar stuff.   I was surprised to 
see Nils Basse's
suggestion of mini-big-bangs...  especially since I have been talking about 
that possibility
for some time now...  albeit from a different perspective.

My perspective is tied to CA-like processes that are anchored in perception. 
   The self-similarity
at all scales of those Ur-Patterns is a reflection of the self-similarity of 
the underlying processes,
effected recursively.   Those underlying processes are CA-like and their 
basic rule is
local distinction-making.

The scheme is not quite mathematical in the ordinary sense, although it is 
well-defined and readily representable by ordinary computational processes.  
  Many of the usual CA rules have some mathematical flavor.  However, here 
we have the rule of distinction-making that is a natural process common in 
the biology of perception -- not necessarily thru formal mathematical means.

I do agree that mathematics serves via metaphors vis-a-vis natural processes 
described by same,
and that all we could expect is finding/adopting the best mathematical 
metaphor that
may fit a particular natural phenomenon.   My CA-like processes, while not 
strictly mathematical,
serve the same purpose;  i.e., are metaphors aimed at a sweeping capture of 
phenomena, from visual perception (and perception in general) to processes 
elementary particles, and big bang-like scenarios, and many things in 

Btw, I corresponded with Noam Chomsky in 1972 about those CA...  but it has 
obviously premature...  he has been very polite but professed to not 
the import" of these things.    Nevertheless, I did adopt his notions of 
and deep structures and incorporated those into the patent application in 

-- Joel

>From: HowlBloom at aol.com
>To: isaacsonj at hotmail.com
>CC: paleopsych at paleopsych.org
>Subject: Re: Big bang in mm sizes
>Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 01:03:14 EDT
>As always, we are on the same wavelength, Joel.  This article has Ur
>Patterns written all over it--patterns that show up on multiple level of  
>patterns that metaphors can capture.
>Why are these patterns so easily graspable by metaphor?  Because  metaphor 
>one concrete example of an Ur Pattern that repeats itself on  multiple
>levels.  Meaning that metaphor is not just a literary trick.   It is a way 
>capturing something deep and repetitive in this cosmos--a deep  structure 
>if you
>prefer to use Noam Chomsky's vocabulary.
>Not all metaphors are valid.  But when you find the right one for the
>phenomenon you're watching, you've hit gold.
>And never forget, math is metaphor in disguise.  Onward--Howard
>In a message dated 6/9/2005 2:23:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>isaacsonj at hotmail.com writes:
>Plasma in reactors echoes distribution of galaxies
>11 June  2005
>NewScientist.com news service
>Mark Anderson
>NUCLEAR fusion  reactors could be used to study what the universe was like
>just after the  big bang. So claims a physicist who noticed that the plasma
>created inside  these reactors is distributed in a strikingly similar way 
>galaxies in  today's universe.
>Nils Basse of the Massachusetts Institute of  Technology does not normally
>concern himself with events in the early  universe. Instead, he studies
>turbulence in the plasma created in fusion  reactors. But when he chanced
>upon the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) -  which is mapping a quarter of 
>sky in detail - he noticed something  uncanny. The mathematical equation
>governing the distribution of voids and  galaxies looks remarkably like the
>one describing the millimetre-sized  knots and clots of plasma in the
>Wendelstein 7-AS "stellarator" fusion  reactor in Garching, Germany 
>Letters A, vol 340, p  456).
>Basse argues that the distribution of galaxies today could be the  result 
>variations in the density of plasma after the big bang. "I think  it all
>comes from turbulence in the very early universe," he says. "[The  galaxy
>distribution today] is just a blow-up of what was going on at that  point."
>This suggests that stellarator reactors could serve as models of  the early
>But cosmologist Daniel Eisenstein of the  University of Arizona in Tucson,
>who works on the SDSS project, disagrees.  He points out that the kind of
>plasma that Basse describes existed only  for the first millisecond after 
>big bang, and that epoch ended too  soon to influence the large scale
>structure of today's universe.  Eisenstein calculates that the largest
>structure that could have arisen  because of any such primordial density
>variations would only stretch a few  light years across today.
>“The plasma created inside fusion reactors is  distributed in a 
>similar way to galaxies in today's  universe”Eisenstein also says that
>Basse's claim is difficult to reconcile  with the results of the Wilkinson
>Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), which  has mapped the distribution of 
>oldest light in the universe dating  back to some 380,000 years after the 
>bang. This "baby picture" of the  cosmos yields markedly different density
>fluctuations to the SDSS map. "I  don't see any way to get turbulence into
>this mix without throwing out all  the [WMAP] data," Eisenstein says. "And
>that's very powerful  data."
>From issue 2503 of New Scientist magazine, 11 June 2005, page  8
>Howard Bloom
>Author of The Lucifer Principle: A  Scientific Expedition Into the Forces 
>History and Global Brain: The Evolution  of Mass Mind From The Big Bang to 
>21st Century
>Recent Visiting  Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New York 
>Core Faculty  Member, The Graduate  Institute
>Founder:  International Paleopsychology Project; founding board member: 
>of Evolution  Society; founding board member, The Darwin Project; founder: 
>Big Bang Tango  Media Lab; member: New York Academy of Sciences, American
>Association for the  Advancement of Science, American Psychological 
>Academy of Political  Science, Human Behavior and Evolution Society, 
>Society for Human  Ethology; advisory board member: Youthactivism.org;
>executive editor -- New  Paradigm book series.
>For information on The International Paleopsychology  Project, see:
>for two chapters from
>The Lucifer  Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History,
>see  www.howardbloom.net/lucifer
>For information on Global Brain: The Evolution of  Mass Mind from the Big
>Bang to the 21st Century, see  www.howardbloom.net

More information about the paleopsych mailing list