In a timeless sense, all of the figures of OKIC are expressions (specifically, representations) from the complex interplay that arises from three dynamic behaviors that represent physical phenomena that can only be related to at the cosmic level. That makes these three behavior a ubiquitous, thoroughgoing set of systematic complementarities that scale and layer. Yet, since the complementarities are comprised of tension-based relationships, the complexities of self-organization mean they are not simply expressive but give rise to collectively binds, predicaments, re-experience (including memory) phenomena as well.
In Mysterioscope Series A, you see these relational states in their base forms. Characterizing physico-cosmic (flux level) phenomena in this way implies a Novel View of the unseeable, untestable, unfathomable smallness of which existence is a moment-to-moment yet also continuous expression.
In the Rational Roulette essay, you learned how binding arises when assumptions get made as well as what it leads to when they also get hidden or forgotten. Binding reveals a puzzling relational mystery – one that you are learning here can be reversed given the OKIC framework. Still, binds get held “in plain sight” when we are not aware of them.
In this essay, I take the “in plain sight” of Rational Roulette into “trippier” territory. What I mean by that is the confusing or disorienting aspects of reality and of relating complexly to others in real time, through time and across space. So first, an exercise, to orient you to the type of disorientation that lurks always just below the surface when we ask the question, “What’s really going on here?” about the mysteries of life.
What compare/contrast statements can you make about the above triptych -- three related images, one each with a background of red, green or purple. How are they the same? How are they different?
Now, if you did not already do so already, look back at the first figure set in this chapter, with the three sets of shapes (named particle, vehicle, and mode). Does connecting them lead you to any further conclusions?
Did you figure out that all three of the forms in the triptychs are the same complex figure? It becomes glaringly apparent when you give the figure a background color which does not correspond to any of the three colors used in the complex figure.
Boundless View of Flux-level Formative Cosmic Phenomena
Systematic Assumptions Triptych Showing Theoretical Physics
Recall, as shown in the figure above from Mysterioscope Series A, that uncertainty preoccupation is the paradoxical resolving phenomenon (PRP) of the Cosmic Incoherence bind. Add to that what you are hopefully beginning to see as relevant from the essays on behavior [where the natural dance between potentially inadequate (obscured) context and adequate context …].
[Address how ambiguity and uncertainty are different]
Cosmic-level PRP binding from uncertainty preoccupation is maintained through tension between the desire for prediction and the desire for contextual (referred to in physics as “invariant”) laws. Stated differently, we are vexed with what we don't know. When we relax the bind, entering the predicament of orienting to stillness, what we don't know is the context from which we intelligibly engage. When we change the later, what becomes possible is a coherence in which uncertainty is moot.
Before the Science of Representational Reality, “coherence” was achieved in theoretical physics by the various ways in which quantum mechanics can be interpreted. The overarching theme is that it allows one to conceive of coherence 1) as not an actuality but itself a possibility and 2) true only among a collection of observers. If an individual observer resolves a given uncertainty (including, according to QM, simply making an observation) and others cohere, or synchronize with … each other?*… this is where the internal coherence of such an approach breaks down.
Hopefully you get the trippiness of that idea. In order to resolve to the rest of physics and cosmology, the coherence (if not intelligence) of collections of observers must be foundational to reality, above and beyond even the structure that is the DNA-based function-structure correspondence of living things. A solution to uncertainty through collections of observers synchronizing is absurd.
Possibility, nothingness, hidden. These are three states, the outposts, of the Cosmic Coherence (Mysterioscope Series A, Boundless). All other mysterioscopes resolve their binding paradox. Eternal Damnation resolves to Healing Reunion. Melodrama resolves to Timeless Tale. Cosmic Incoherence unsurprisingly resolves to Cosmic Coherence. The cosmos loves surprises though. Thus with cosmic coherence resides an ever-present yet effervescent paradox of revealing nothingness.
