JET Psychology Notes

BGA for LA:

Helping Dr. Winter with his BGA.

Yes.  He DOES have a BGA.

==========================================================
Current BGA Form: (Cut and Paste this form for each action)

1) Type of BGA:
Scientific Research (working with Archibald prolly)

2) Short Descriptio - I am attempting to investigate how the hive works as a memetic processing machine. Do they work together as a computer, unconsciously playing the role of cogs or cells in a macro-social-organism? Or are they autonomous thinkers in a state of competition for which the hive-collective is but a temporary respite until resources become scarce? Or what?

3) Relevant Proficiency, Skill or Contacts:
Liberal Arts, Hypertech, etc.

4) Where are you doing this thing (geographically): @ the hive, at Ambassador Aye’s request, ostensibly as initial cooperative research between Berkeley and the Hive

5) What do you expect the outcome to be (select one, erase the others): Learn info, help “manage” the hive

6) Maximum Points to devote to this BGA (file BGAs in order of priority) as many as necessary

7) Long description - If necessary

Branch theory:  Soacetime branches with each possibility until damocles.  Were the most significant branches predicted by primitive psychicly-attuned peoples, such as those who envisioned the mayan calendar and stonehenge?

Ages Categorization Theory:  Are the tech levels as Penn State has defined them analagos to eras on the mayan calendar?   Do any divergence dates correspond to the mayan calendar?

Damocles Operand Theory: Secret theory, awaiting results of double-blind experiment.

Psychic Instantiation Theory:  Econ is instantiated consensus energy (can I generate it somehow?) experiment pending; measurements necessary; instruments need to be fine-tuned.

This ones’s giving me some headaches…

Terms to define:

-Divergence  Axiom  = the axiom that caused a thread’s divergence; the theory is that threads diverged because of a unifying axiom

Key Concept:

- Time passed normally until it stopped.  Once it did, any spacetime shards that were supported by enough focus of will / belief  / what I call consensus energy diverged from the string of time; in the past.

Hypotheses:

- There should be no post-damocles divergences; no threads other than Technosphere that remember the damocles project happening a significant amount of time prior to their divergence.

Axiom:  A theory of psycho-social consensus as an animating force for thread stability

Henry Talbot, PhD, UC Berkeley Department of Psychology

Berkeley Journal of Advanced Psychology, 45(2), July 2057

 

Abstract Precis:

 

A theory is presented that proposes that socio-cultural self-awareness in a thread is related to the animating force of the thread.  Multiple competing hypotheses are generated.  This is a theoretical proposition designed to generate testable theoretical propositions.

 

Keywords; Paris, Consensus Energy, (Life Energy), Axiom, Chaos, Feedback, Observer Effect, JET

 

 

Introduction

From a psychological, sociological and economic perspective, threads have maintained shockingly stable from their time of severing for the most part.  Some threads have greatly magnified the socio-cultural-religious zeitgeist (or collective social self-perception) that was present at the time of their severing, either through magical or technological focus.  A good example of this might be Los Angeles .  The socio-economic relations inherent in LA in 1948 persist today, regardless of the fact that their technology has improved from high TL 5 to high TL 6.  The increase in technology in LA is, in fact, a result of the society-wide cultural obsession with technological improvement (especially in luxury items and military technology) present at the time of its severing.  The technosphere is another example; at TL 7, we have maximized our technology possibly beyond pre-divergence maximum tolerance levels (Devlan, Z., 2015).  Other threads have had additional increases in psychic phenomena commonly known as “magic” without altering their socio-cultural-religious zeitgeist. 

 

Because the Observer Effect implies that human belief defines reality, the cultural reflexivity of a thread defines the actual existence of the thread at the time of its divergence.  The term “axiom” is proposed here as follows:

 

Axiom – A thread’s people’s collective socio-cultural self-awareness at the time of its divergence.

 

Current thread-state theory proposes that a thread’s axiom (using the new vocabulary) is defined at the time of divergence due to the Observer Effect (ATIC Report 4.1.6, 2034).  This theory proposes that a thread’s axiom cannot diverge from its axiom at the space-time of divergence very far or very rapidly without drastic consequences.  This theory is based in part on the outcome of the naïve experiment conducted by Mesmer et al in the Paris/Revolutionary Era thread.  Consequently, there this theory generates testable hypotheses relating to the limit of axiom, defined as follows:

 

Axiom Limit – The tolerance for deviation from a set axiom.

 

Theoretical Propositions

The concept of axiom limit can be used to generate theoretical propositions, which we will generously call hypotheses for ease of communication.  Considering axiom and limits of axiom, two competing hypotheses and a null hypothesis inhere, relative to axiom limits:

 

H0:  Axiom does not have a limit; deviation from axiom has no perceptible result on a thread’s consensus (”life”) energy levels.  Corollary to this, the relationship between axiom deviation and the desolation of the Paris/Revolutionary Era thread is hypothesized to be spurious.

 

H1:  Axiom limits are a gross distance limitation (distance only); that is, a thread’s axiom cannot deviate significantly without a significant and corresponding drop in consensus energy levels.  Paris/Revolutionary Era thus violated the axiom distance limitation and suffered a precipitous drop in consensus energy.

 

H2:  Axiom limits are a rate limitation (distance*time); that is, a thread’s axiom can only deviate slowly over time without a significant and corresponding drop in consensus energy levels.  Paris/Revolutionary Era thus violated the axiom distance too quickly and suffered a precipitous drop in consensus energy.  Corollary to this is that axiom can change, setting new axiom limit boundaries relative to the new axiom.  For example, had Paris moderated its socio-cultural-religious deviation and conducted the planned changes at a slower rate, the desolation observed by the Lincoln County JET expedition would not have occurred.

 

Related to these hypotheses is whether the rate of loss of consensus energy is related to the rate of deviation from axiom.  Each hypothesis other than the null generates a concurrent subset of hypotheses related to the axiom/energy relationship proposed.

 

H1.1:  There is a hard limit, up until which consensus energy continues to maintain the thread in a positive generation/consumption system (extrapolating rather far from ideas proposed by Devlan, Z., 2026).  Beyond the hard limit of deviation, the system is interrupted catastrophically.  The lay reader should imagine a wine glass on the edge of a table.  You can push it further toward the edge only so far before it falls off and shatters.  There is no change in the wine glass’ state at any point up to the moment it falls off of the table.

 

H1.2:  There is a soft limit.  The consensus energy of a thread continues to maintain itself in a positive generation/consumption system the efficiency of which is inversely related to the gross deviation from axiom.  The lay reader should imagine walking up an incline.  The angle of the incline increases until you can no longer walk up it easily, through a gradual progression of greater and greater resistance, slowly approaching the end-point.

 

H2.1:  There is a hard limit on a rate limit.  The consensus energy of a thread continues to maintain itself in a positive generation/consumption system.  If the rate of deviation from axiom ever passes a hard limit, the system is interrupted catastrophically.  Imagine a glass marble being heated.  If it is heated slowly, it will eventually glow red-hot without breaking, but if heated too quickly, it will shatter.

 

H2.2:  There is a soft limit on a rate limit (a fourth-order mathematical relationship is difficult to conceptualize, but valid).  The consensus energy of a thread continues to maintain itself in a positive generation/consumption system the efficiency of which is inversely related to the rate of deviation from axiom.  The rate is self-limiting, applying the chaos concept of feedback.  The most apt analog for the lay reader for this hypothesized scenario is that of an ecosystem.  If, for instance, the ph of a stream changes slowly, the ecosystem of the stream will be weakened but it will respond by adapting slowly, so that over years, the number and type of plants and animals in the stream will change.  If you alter the ph faster, the ecosystem is weakened further, and the rate of change in the ecosystem’s makeup may be able to keep up, but it will be less healthy.  At a certain rate, the ecosystem reaches a limit where it can no longer keep up with the rate of change in the ph level, and the stream dies. 

 

If H2.2 is true, by the way, the chaos-theoretical implications of the feedback potential are chilling.

Welcome to Threads of Damocles Community Site. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!