RS2 Postulates

[MWells]

Ah, taking a closer look at how he qualified what he said, I was arguing for Gopi's point that Euclidean doesn't work well for "time region", not against it.

bperet wrote:

Space and time are the same thing--from TWO different perspectives. When you have ONE perspective, as in the case of an observer, they appear different.

I thought it'd be the other way around. If you had one perspective, then they'd appear the same. The dualistic perspective is what creates the dichotomy, right?
bperet wrote:

Just a question of where you put the dichotomy--on the reference frame, or the objects in the reference frame.

The reference frame is also the dichotomy, that is, it is also the perspective. There is no "perspective of a reference frame" unless there is more than one reference frame. Of course, defining two reference frames requires yet another reference frame.
bperet wrote:

With two, concurrent perspectives--an eye in each realm--both will appear Euclidean, but then you may have difficulty correlating the motions with each other, since space and time would be the same thing and your consciousness could not distinguish them from one another.

This is the "nondual" cognition. But the "realms" are created by the perspectives. In other words "realms" don't only exist to be perceived or discovered by our perception, as "an eye in each realm" would suggest, because the eye and the realm are not independent concepts. That is, unless you were to define multiple reference frames.

[Gopi]

Quote:

And we also have to deal with the fact that quantized motion appears continuous in the reciprocal reference frame.

How does that come about from the reciprocal geometry?

[bperet]

Gopi wrote:

Quote:

And we also have to deal with the fact that quantized motion appears continuous in the reciprocal reference frame.

How does that come about from the reciprocal geometry?

As I understand it, these are analogous:

Quantized = Local = Particulate = Object

Continuous = Non-Local = Waveform = Function

The reciprocals are thus:

yang/yin

quantized/continuous

local/non-local

particle/wave

object/function

rectangular/polar

location/connection

locus/nexus

Unit boundaries are reciprocating lenses. Whenever you look through that lense, you see the inverse--inside-out.

Understand that it is not "reality", per se, but the illusion created by our physical senses interpreting "reality".

Our physical senses interpret "yang" reality, so we see what is discrete and localized, and do not see the continuous and non-local (waves, energy fields, etc).

Our metaphysical senses interpret "yin" reality, so they see what is continuous and non-localized, but then have to be translated by our consciousness, which is biased to the yang interpretation of our physical senses.

In Projective Geometry it is known as a "duality". In three dimensions, points (yang) are represented by an (x,y,z) location. It's dual is the plane (yin), an infinite structure that passes through the points (x,0,0),(0,y,0),(0,0,z). Both point and plane find their orientation by a distance out along each X, Y and Z axis. The intersection of the three forms a point, yet the plane IS the intersection of the three.

The reality is the three numbers (magnitudes). Given just the 3 numbers, there is no way to tell if I am referring to a point or a plane. Additional context, one side of the yang/yin duality, must be provided for the interpretation of those numbers.