Trans-finite Poems

A red cardinal value-the sum total of meaning
expressing itself like a lightening bolt expanding forever
stimulated from ground charge a little
maybe cheating somewhat and not entirely self-reliant
quantum energy, vacuum energy and virtual particles
all those waves of being that divide into smallest units
shifting away with changing yet equal quantum values
so everything looks consistent, constant and staid enough
to persuade many of the cognoscenti of logical values
culminating in bureaucracies and scaffolding around the library
the Library of Babel that is mapped with Cantor's cardinals
so Escher can draw the shapes of dimensional economic policy
receding forever without debt approaching reality.

J.P. Morgan Drops Two 'Dimes'; The Prisoners' Dilemma

J.P Morgan lost two billion dollars evidently in derivatives trading recently, highlighting the point that the flim sector of the U.S. economy outpaces the production sector as it logically should. The new computing and trading algorithms that banks have to take abstract profits with trading guided by physicists not sharp enough to get academic tenure yet consoled with million dollar pay is just an example of the philosophical/sociological problem called the Diners' Dilemma or the Prisoners' Dillema.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/

If some people don't pay the check at a dinner party they profit yet if no one pays the check they go to jail or wash dishes etc. If people voluntarily comply with laws and good government, economic reason and a modicum of altruism the society flourishes generally while of they don't it piles up debt.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11532035/1/jpmorgan-credibility-cut-with-fitch-downgrade.html

It is very easy for everyone to be irresponsible on economic policy and like the President allow nature to take  its course as if it were micro-economics and required no oversight or ecological relavance-such policies of just bailing out banks and automotive corporations to let the scamming of profits from the world with trading, banking and absrract economic tricks represses the for productivity and builds a structure of world trade bubbles that collapse when so many people and businesses rely non the bunk for support. When if falters the government runs to prop it up again and again until the real day of economic judgment arrives with a vengeance.

The British rely upon global finance and trading and reinforce that policy in the English speaking world that is not coincidentally in decline economically. The United States has 30% of its 'work'force employed in financial related services; the New Freedom Bubble of global trading/derivatives/mortgage/environmental crisis probably will build up unless Mitt Romney is interested in correcting it.

A Philosophical Comment on Trans-finite Series

Perhaps there are only potential infinite series instead of actual. Numbers in some way are in individuated labels on positions (ordinality) given representative values (cardinality) within a set, and a set is a finite portion of the concept of an abstract monism or One.

Infinity is the concept that another fish can forever arise to feed the hungry or another number added to the end of a series. One might regard a pre-set potential of substance-perhaps represented by an unnumbered line as potentially given position spacing of any density designated by the order of positions or placings addressed by a number or numbers. Because the numbers are set with ordinal and cardinal values they are simultaneously finite and pluralistic abstracted from The One, and also quantum values.

To change quantum constants of a finite set such as ordinality and cardinality means changing all equations made with the set. Though obvious it is an interesting way to philosophically regard quantum physical cosmology and the new math used to discover the foundations of quantum gravity. One wonders if it is possible that investigated further into the very small realms of quantum physics creates not only new math, but new strings or membranes as well.

The quantum world seems represented by various quantum components that are believed generally to be integrated within One paradigm that potentially could be expressed representationally with geometric calculus or some form of algebraic geometry perhaps. The Universe itself if a finite substance might implicitly by divisible within quantum units, for to change quantum portions of a finite set with consistency might require changing quantum order relatively regarding spacing and magnitude.

On the Topic of Origin Sin, Faith and Proofs for Select Universal Propositions

Original sin as I think about it, originated at the fall of Adam and Eve. They were physically changed then into mortal form with that strife. Human being as a thermodynamic process is the original sin context that can be overcome through faith alone.

The ten commandments were required because people wander into sundry immoral directions without moral guidance. God provided several opportunities for mankind to become perfect through perfect obedience, yet of course they always flunked.

I read Rosenberg's 'Abraham: The First Historical Biography' last year and really enjoyed it. It is a brilliant intellectual recover and reconstruction of Abraham's life in Sumer from what data is available. It is definitely worth reading.

Rosenberg and Bloom also wrote 'The J Book'. J of course was thought of as the woman of Solomon or Rehoboam's Court who put together from various materials the book of Genesis (as well as a few other,later authors). It is very difficult today to imagine the exact circumstance in which the book of Genesis was put together, yet Rosenberg makes a brilliant, worthwhile effort.

One might also regard the history of Mesopotamia, the migration of human life to the Persian Gulf from Africa perhaps 70,000 B.C. from the Horn of Africa when the sea level was 300 feet lower (it rose quickly about 20,000 B.C.), the loss of the Eden of a Garden like Saudi Arabia and Sahara with global warming, and the later flooding of the earliest civilization on the present day sea floor of the Persian Gulf 300 feet below the surface without a trace remaining. The story of Gilgamesh definitely parallels that of Moses, and the J writer was probably familiar with Abraham's history in Sumer and of Sumerian culture. As a part of cultural history she might have added that to Genesis herself.

If the first civilization in history was lost to the rise of the Persian Gulf and world ocean. If the Bible recounts some of true human history and if the rise of humanity from the condition of innocence as animals before civilization was judged by God and drowned in order that a better civilization with rules (later even the ten commandments) maybe that was progress.

It is difficult to imagine a Universe from then point of view of God. What if he like planets, atoms and molecules and even animals but wanted some intelligent beings to experience existence with? Evolving those creatures would be a difficult process and it would be tough to get them to have a respect for their Creator especially if they make up daft pagan theories, mud gods from the plain of Tillman and cosmology theories about the Universe they experience that bring them to belief in themselves and their ability to understand a fraction of God's creative power, instead of God.

The Bible or Biblos means 'little books'. It is a compilation of many little books with different histories and contexts. I enjoyed reading Pelikan's 'Whose Bible Is It' for some background.

One should not assume (I am not saying you have) that God works with human history from the position of obsolete cosmological artifact constructed by ancient peoples. People over history have done and thought a lot of things, yet God is eternal and ahead of the game regarding human intellectual works. Urartu was transliterated by the Jews as Ararat. The hills of Ararat or Urartu was in contemporary Iraq away from the Gulf some hundred miles or so-its ancient borders may have been closer to the flooded region, that is itself rather historically vague. Yet it was a good place for survivors with Noah to come to rest after the storm with their livestock.

Original sin is in the thermodynamic process of humanity. With immortality and eating of the tree of knowledge (technology, philosophy and so forth) they might rise to consume the entire Universe, or convert it to a quantum computer and pop new Universes into being without being smart enough to pass of safety checks. For that and other reasons humanity has had it garden of Eden wings clipped a little-they just can't follow orders very well even if they are for their own good.

The Universal affirmative and Universal negative propositions in the context of the existence of God seem self-standing. I do not think its reasonable to prove one or the other by asking the someone to prove or disprove the other.

My reasons for faith are good enough yet I do not assume that one can prove the existence of God by the failure of atheists to prove the non-existence of God (the Universal negative proposition). One cannot prove the Universal from the particular. If God was found not to exist in 1000 Universes after complete search, he might still have been somewhere else-perhaps in the 1001st (or he might have moved back to a Universe not being searched by scientific atheists).

One cannot disprove the existence of extra-terrestrials just because after thorough searching with technology no sign of alien life or communication has been found. I don't think God either might place a large neon sign somewhere in the Magellenic Cloud and say 'Hey Earth-persons, I'm over here!'. Instead, one has the prophets and The Lord and faith-even with a personal, transcendent relationship.

Expecting to place God in a physically causal and contingent category isn't reasonable.

Trans-finite Series (a correction from trans-infinite) & Cosmology in Relationship to God

 I would not prefer to describe any attribute for God as necessary in any sort of sense other than for convenience in conversation, because humans simply haven't the authority, and one doesn't want to trick oneself.

That God is omnipresent or omniscient still presents difficult to define concepts (see Plotinus) especially since the nature of the Universe and of human experience is uncertain. Even so, to prove that God does not exist one should need to comprehend existence fully and completely search through it-logically. Perhaps that point is difficult to make without an example; I will write one in a minute or two.

A verse-even a uni-verse may have several definitions and boundary conditions itself that are conventions. Cardinals of trans-finite series (you are correct about Cantor's term) that are variable in reality as well as in theory representing time values for spatial size appear malleable.  The solid state Universe description is a description of human experience of mass-energy of a portion of what may be a very large Universe from an inflation or whatever event occurred during the Plank epoch.

Plotinus described the One as unextended generally. The Intelligence issued the realm of forms and the solid state Universe with its many broken forms (something like broken symmetry in a physical cosmology perhaps). It is very difficult to say anything that God must do as a necessity in His constructions because of the uncertainty of knowledge of the relationship. Logical investigations are quite useful for insight into the unknown, yet logic is for-itself a phenomenon of human reason without absolute grounding in anything besides the circumstance of being.

Karl Popper said that one can't define rationality-one just recognizes it. I believe that criteria applies to God as well; His grace is entirely agape and disclosure of teleos at soley with His will.

Perhaps a trans-infinite series of numbering might be created for infinite series with a variable cardinality or for comparing the absolute value of infinite series regarding relative location. Well, I am not a mathematician.

An example of why it is important to actually look through things sometimes to confirm a hypothesis rather than leaving it to theory.

A Philosophical Discussion Aboard the First Ship Arriving In The New World

‘Well my scientific advisor, what think ye on our prospects for finding natives in the new continent?

‘That be impossible captain. No one knows what a New World native is therefore they cannot exist.”

“Well, we have a general idea of what they might be like even if not specifically.”

‘Such be logical incoherence mon Captain amigo. There be no such thing as N.W. natives. 

“Would you like to swim ashore to look my friend, in order to confirm your theory?

‘Land be not in sight yet Colin’

‘’Ahem’

‘Let me clarify the point. N.W. natives will be some kind of generic human being with unspecified features native to New Worlders living here for thousands of years without contact with Madrid, Barcelona or Paris.”

‘Can’t be anyone lives in the New World. No one knows what they would be like’

“Mr. Science, you would need to search every bit of the continent to prove that is has no population of natives.”

“Why no my glorious Captain, you would need to prove that natives exist with logic in order to contradict my opinion that they don’t and cannot exist.”

“Mr. Science, I am asking your scientific opinion.”

‘Yes sir; my opinion is that N.W. natives cannot exist because they are not defined.

“Good God Mr. Science!”

“God cannot be defined and therefore cannot exist either my Captain.”

“Nothing can exist without a good, complete definition then?”

“That be exact and logical sir.”

“Look Mr. Science, a new continent we have never before seen is dead ahead.”

The Captain ordered the executive officer to slow the ship to let natives in canoes approach..

‘Mr. Science, I shall award you an ostrich feather for your hat. You have invented the necessary equation for de trop existence. The Mr. Science colonialist formula;

For every X, X can exist if and only if Y can define X.

If Y can define X, then X can exist.

Evolving Logically Unsupportable Opinions About Politics, Faith and Economics

'Requirements' for atheists to provide logical support for their belief may be an unreasonable expectation. I would not ask such. I merely point out that beliefs unsupported logically may not have validity. A free-floating belief without logical foundation is good enough in modern economic governance I think, at least in Washington D.C.

If the federal government had required that 25% of all gold and silver taken from federal lands went to the government before royalties Fort Knox might be better off today. If atheists realized they had no logical way to prove atheism there might be fewer.

There is a certain pragmatism requisite for philosophers I think. The possibility of a Creator of all things is implicit in the experience of being even if social knowledge increases over time surpassing prior beliefs about causality.  One might not want to use sophism to skirt meaningful questions though one must decide if the questions are meaningful.

I recollect sailing a boat and waking up in the cockpit facing the stern. Being in Montana a few days before I was a little out of place and thought the boat was nearly below the surface and I had about thirty seconds before being in the drink-then I realized the situation. Yet as Captain of a small boat one must always be aware of any circumstance, odd noise or whatever-one cannot just disregard any kind of question as unimportant, for the boat may really be in jeopardy.

 Living in the Universe could be a critical event with eternal significance though some may not be aware or regard it as such. I have noticed that bureaucracy and establishment in comfort prefer a certain changeless mileau of power and are unconcerned with transcendental concerns (they can probably evolve to the top anyway). Civilizations have collapsed because of the inability to recognize or reform, react to and respond rightly to reality.

Transcendental thought about God isn't dependent upon science or the state of the art of empirical knowledge. Empiricists have now and then sought to make belief in God contingent upon some out-dated physical cosmology or other.

Bertrand Russell took such positions on philosophical questions, yet with W.V.O. Quine one might place philosophical and theological questions within lexical ontology or sets with certain meanings. Obviously some not sharing a given lexicon have the potential for disputing the validity of some lexical sets as meaningful.

Russell working on the Principia Mathematica wasn't inclined, like many scientists today, to give meaning to non-empirical word constructions. One may still use logic to help understand what for some might be regarded as metaphysics, however if one remain purely an empiricist their are probably limits to inferences one might make about being.

One cannot disprove the existence of God. You seemed to agree with that concept, then say that it is not 'what is called for', as if one might or should be able to look into a pluralistic nature of God (more than The Trinity) as one might regard the parts of an automobile from the ground up in order to discover that it is a Car.

I do not believe that people need to comprehend or understand God any more than one needs to understand Einstein's thought process to appreciate G.R. The Son was on Earth and He we may understand well enough through the historical life and works given in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I think it is helpful that contemporary cosmology provides many helpful criteria for thinking about the Universe as an entirety, and its simple enough to think of a Divine Being in relation to what one knows or infers of the actual Universe.

Modal logic Universes in infinite number can be considered as one means of God's permutations of purpose in creating worlds or souls to share experience with Him in the eternal mystery of being (not a mystery only for God I think). Yet if an infinite number of Universe can be created in place, or always existed because God is omnipotent and omnipotent-what would be wrong with that, and why should people limit God's potential to simple causal processes that they understand with contemporary physics?

If the entire Universe were given a quantum scale and adjusts from large to small with expansions and contractions exploiting retro-causality because of directional anisotropy of space-time development, would that sort of philosophical cosmology trivia mean that one cannot consider a detached Spirit transcending the quantum disposition of energy or space or of the relationship of the Spirit to one-self?

While physics and physics lexicons may not be up to describing Spirit or the Creator that does not mean that philosophically and theologically minded people can't try a little (even if inaccurately). It is better than living an unexamined life trusting merely that politicians will evolve moral positions before the end of a second term of office and trillions of dollars of public debt.

Integrated Concepts of The One God & Trans-finite Series

I wanted to write a post on the problem of atheism (and for some conversely theism). Atheism requires a proof comprehensively regarding reality of the non-existence of God, and that cannot be done any more than one can express all possible numbers, geometries and possible maths in some kind of order of non-order or non-cardinality.

One wonders about the relationship of mathematics to physics and expressions of the real construction of the Universe(s) and of what is the progenitor of Universes and temporality. The idea that time can be all wrapped up inside the Planck epoch with space, and that perhaps space has all potential energy then is fascinating, yet one believes that the relationship of mathematic's all-potential-maths that exist as pluralist pieces of an infinite whole or One isn't restricted to any finite context such a a very tiny bubble of space smaller than the Planck length.

As I believe God is a non-locality, so perhaps might one regard the One truly infinite mathematical series as non-local in character.

Logical sets comprising a theoretical ontology are implicity incapable of providing comprehensive evidence for atheism. Logical sets of trans-finite concepts are transfonly in relation to other infinite sets, none of which can be shown to contain all others including itself. Atheism would need to provide exhaustive data representation accurately regarding all Universal, trans-temporal and pre-Universal, before the big inflation and before any possible inflation or virtual loop, before anything ever was until the end of anything that could ever be (because of Wheeler's retro-causaliity idea) ways wherein God might exist to offer even minimal credibility (and it hasn't). Atheists to attain even a shred of credibility-for-others would need to demonstrate that human logic is capable of grasping the idea of God for-himself and negate that idea.

In the Bible the prophet Moses was allowed a small glimpse of the glory of God passing before him before he died. It  isn't evident that even human philosophers are able to comprehend the nature of God or even of one Universe, as if it were a dot in infinite non-space less significant than a period at the end of a sentence.

Without such a logical set of inferences of the absolute trans-finite set that captures all sets and ideas that might be represented in sets, no reasoning about the non-existence of God could be anything more than conditional, contingent and wrong. Atheism cannot be logically proven except as an existential belief for itself held by an individual in error.

Infinite mathematical series of numbers are of much interest to philosophically inclined people. Do they really exist and what value are they since it is possible only to use a finite portion?

Gregory Cantor developed the idea of trans-infinite numbers. That means that not all infinite series are created equal, though we may be biased to believe that all truly infinite series must be eternal since if they are simply in progress of increase they are not really infinite with some sort of beginning and present terminus even if only for a fraction of an instant of time.

The series of natural numbers (positive integers) are finite in one direction; to the right, and I believe that Cantor would regard that as a trans-infinite series. What does that mean? In regard to the infinite set between the numbers 2 and 3 for example where smaller and smaller rational numbers can be expressed in fractions, the natural numbers breezes beyond it.

Infinite number series though seem to be limited and finite in some respect simply because they are not a set of all sets of any kind of number that can be represented. Even number series do not include odd numbers, and positive numbers don't include negative numbers, in fact any series of numbers or geometry is a finite slice of the infinite continuum of numbers in all forms and size.

One of the interesting characteristics of infinite sets of rational numbers  is that they seem to have the potential for being implictly contradictory in time as they are expressed. Because they cannot seemingly exist a priori in infinite numbers without continuing to diminish in proportionate size retroactively from the beginning, with a kind of reverse causality, they might need to exist just in a finite temporaly context.

Numbers seem be nominal finite, proportional sets of true infinity encompassing all directions, dimensions, ordinal and cardinal sets and so forth that is inexpressible. The relationship of that infinity non-contingent One to the expression of forms in the 'real world' studied by physicists makes one wonder of the expressions of possible cosmologies in space-time by The One.

The experience of a finite element of space-time or a given Universe is a provision of from the realm of Absolute Spirit evidently, at least as a point of faith and logical inference.