Being Cellular - From Optical-Symbolic Learning to Electrical Pattern Learning to Learning Chemically by Diffusion & Osmosis

Lessons in Intelligence Environments from Cellular-Biological  MorphoSpaces

from Google AI:

"Learning by osmosis" refers to an informal, passive absorption of knowledge, habits, or culture. In science and biology, chemical and electrical refer to the fundamental driving forces behind cellular transport. 

Chemical forces rely on concentration gradients (particles moving from high to low). Electrical forces rely on membrane potentials (charged particles moving toward opposite charges). Together, they form an electrochemical gradient. 

Chemical vs. Electrical in Cellular Transport

• Chemical Gradient: Driven by a difference in the amount of a substance. Molecules naturally diffuse from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration to achieve balance. 
• Electrical Gradient: Driven by a difference in charge. Because cell interiors are typically negatively charged, positive ions (Na+, K+) are naturally attracted into the cell. 
• Osmosis (Special Case): While diffusion moves any particle, osmosis refers exclusively to the movement of water (solvent) across a semipermeable barrier. Water moves toward the area with a higher solute concentration to equalize the concentrations on both sides. 

Chemical vs. Electrical in the Brain (Synapses)

In neuroscience, these concepts describe how neurons communicate: 

• Chemical Synapses: Information is transferred between cells via the release of neurotransmitters (chemicals). This is the most common form of synaptic communication in the brain. 
• Electrical Synapses: Cells are physically connected by gap junctions, allowing an electrical current (ions) to pass directly from one neuron to the next without a chemical intermediary. 

"Learning by Osmosis" in Cognitive Psychology

While biological osmosis involves the physical movement of molecules across a membrane (or Markov Blanket), the phrase is used metaphorically in psychology to describe absorbing knowledge: 

• Mechanism: It involves picking up nuances, office culture, or social behaviors by simply being immersed in a specific environment or observing peers. 
• Real-World Context: Learning a language through native immersion or picking up technical skills by sitting near experts are classic examples of this.

From Mythos to Logos: Meden Agan!

Within Any Given Set of Facts, Care (Relevance) Organizes the Facts (and builds a Hierarchy) in a Narrative/ Story"

from Google AI:

"Meden agan" (nothing in excess) represents the historical shift from myth to reason (logos) by replacing fear of capricious gods with a rational, self-regulated ethical framework. [1] In early Greek myth, breaking boundaries invited divine retribution (nemesis). [1] In the era of logos, moderation became a conscious, human-driven choice for psychological and social harmony. [1] 

The Mythological Roots: Divine Boundaries

• The Delphic Maxims: Inscribed at the Temple of Apollo at Delphi. [1]
• Divine Warning: Served as a literal reminder to humans that they are not gods. [1]
• Punishing Hubris: Mythical figures like Icarus or Phaethon ignored limits and suffered catastrophic destruction. [1]
• External Enforcement: Cosmic balance was maintained by the gods punishing human overreach. [1]

The Philosophical Shift: Internalized Logos

• Self-Regulation: Shifted the responsibility of balance from the gods to human reason. [1]
• Aristotle’s Golden Mean: Transformed the maxim into a systematic ethical framework where virtue is the middle ground between deficiency and excess. [1]
• Political Harmony: Applied to the Greek city-state (polis) to prevent the extremes of tyranny and anarchy. [1]
• Psychological Health: Framed emotional mastery as a rational necessity for living a good life (eudaimonia). [1]

Desert de Retz: Building a Home Within a Crumbling Folly 

Reality's Quantum Image-Generating Framework

Andrea Oldofredi, "Hume, Rovelli, and why the quantum world contains no objects"

Nothing exists on its own

Physicists have long known that quantum objects behave nothing like the solid, independent things of everyday experience. But the implications run deeper than strange behaviour. Carlo Rovelli's Relational Quantum Mechanics suggests that quantum systems have observer-dependent properties—what they are depends on their interactions with other systems. Drawing on a tradition running from Hume to contemporary metaphysics, philosopher Andrea Oldofredi explores this novel relational perspective on our world, arguing that objects are not the fundamental furniture of reality.

Quantum Mechanics is arguably one of the most successful theories in the history of science, for its predictions are confirmed by countless experiments, making it a cornerstone of contemporary physics. However, a century after its inception, the theory still challenges our classical worldview, offering a counterintuitive description of nature at microscopic scales. Contrary to classical mechanics, where objects are individually distinguishable and possess well-defined attributes at all times, QM speaks about indistinguishable systems with indeterminate properties, superposed states, and non-local interactions. Unsurprisingly, then, questions concerning its ontology, i.e., what fundamentally exists, are still vividly discussed to this day.

Despite its empirical success, however, physicists and philosophers alike enquire whether QM should be considered a true description of the natural world, because this theory is affected by conceptual conundrums and formal difficulties (e.g., the measurement problem). To address such issues, new quantum interpretations emerged from the 1950s. Among the many existing alternatives, here we consider a widely discussed framework that turns thirty this year, Carlo Rovelli’s Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM).

RQM is motivated by Rovelli’s work in loop quantum gravity, where spacetime is not a substance existing per se, but rather it emerges from a dynamic network of relations, providing a relational perspective of it.

A new ontology for RQM

Now, with MBT in mind, let us introduce a new way to conceive objects in RQM. According to Rovelli, a physical system can be characterized “by a family of yes/no questions that can be meaningfully asked of it”, where such questions are measurements that can be performed on physical observables, i.e., properties, attributable to the system under consideration. An observer O may ask a set of potentially infinite questions Q1, Q2, …, Qn to the system s, obtaining the string

(e1, e2, …, en) (1)

where each ei;represents a specific answer. Nonetheless, RQM postulates that “there is a maximum amount of relevant information that can be extracted from a system”. Hence, Rovelli says, a complete description of a physical system s is given in terms of the string

[e1, e2, …, ek] (2)

with k < n , which is a subset of (1). Because in RQM information about systems is obtained through interactions, and questions are measurements on the system s performed by some observer O, (2) contains O’s knowledge about s. Clearly, this string represents the description of s relative to O; indeed, another observer P may ascribe to s a different list of properties/values.

Since in RQM physical systems are defined via a specific set of observables, it is then reasonable to characterize them as mereological bundles of qualities. In this way, RQM can be provided with a property-oriented ontology in which objects are defined straightforwardly, for in MBT they are reduced to properties. However, given that the values of the properties of quantum systems in Rovelli’s theory are observer-dependent, we can define the objects of RQM as mereological bundles of properties whose values depend on the perspective from which they are observed.

More precisely, one should say that there is a set of inherent properties characterizing a certain species of particles—such as mass, charge, spin, etc.—which are not observer-dependent, so that their value remains constant. On the contrary, the values of extrinsic properties (such as energy, position, momentum, etc.) are observer-dependent and change relative to specific observers. Additionally, in virtue of contextuality and the algebraic structure of QM, not all observables associated with a certain system can have definite values.

To give an example, in RQM, an electron is characterized by inherent properties such as mass, charge, and spin-1/2, and extrinsic properties such as momentum, energy, angular momentum, and position. These latter have relational and contextual values which depend on the specific interactions of the particle under consideration with different observers.

Conclusion

Elaborating on Paul’s MBT, we saw in this piece that RQM is compatible with an ontology of properties. This fact has interesting consequences, since it shows that quantum objects need neither be thought of as bare particulars nor as Aristotelian substances. On the contrary, following Hume’s tradition, we can define them as bundles of qualities, where intrinsic properties characterizing a certain species of particles have constant values, extrinsic qualities take definite values relative to particular observers, and not every observable defining a system can have a definite value in virtue of the quantum formalism. Additionally, from our perspective on RQM, we can properly speak about material objects in motion and interacting in spacetime. Hence, we can enrich and clarify its event ontology, making it a full-fledged realist interpretation of quantum theory.

Let’s step back from the technical details for a moment and consider what this picture is really telling us. We live our lives taking for granted that objects exist. This seems an obvious fact. The chair you are sitting on, the phone in your hand, the body you inhabit, the most solid and unquestionable features of reality. But what Rovelli’s quantum mechanics suggests is that this intuition, while practically indispensable, is not the deepest truth about our world. Underneath the solid, stable objects of everyday experience, there is no hidden substance giving things their identity and independence. There are only properties, interactions, and the relational facts that such interactions generate. What we call an object is not a “thing in itself,” but a bundle of properties that holds together reliably enough at the scales we inhabit to function as a thing. But zoom in far enough, and the thing dissolves into its relationships and qualities.

From NEETS to Hikikomori to Cloud-Serfs...

 

from Google AI:

NEET is an acronym that stands for Not in Education, Employment, or Training. It is a socioeconomic classification that refers to young adults or teenagers who are unemployed and not enrolled in school or vocational training.

The Social and Economic Phenomenon

Originally coined in the United Kingdom in the late 1990s, the term has become a widely used metric for economists and sociologists globally to track the health of youth labor markets.

The Classification: It applies to individuals, typically between the ages of 16 and 24, who are either actively looking for work or have stopped participating in the labor force entirely.

Global Scope:

• The phenomenon exists globally, with higher percentages often exacerbated by complex factors such as mental health struggles, caregiving responsibilities, or difficulties transitioning from school to work.
• Cultural Slang: In internet culture and some countries like Japan, the term can sometimes be colloquially used to describe individuals who intentionally retreat from society, often spending their time at home.

Other Meanings

If you are not referring to the socioeconomic acronym, you might be thinking of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET). This is a massive, highly competitive medical entrance examination in India required for students seeking admission to undergraduate medical and dental programs.

The Commodification of Information

...from Leisure to unpaid Labour

and BACK!  Everything is Kayfabe Now!

Avoiding Civilizational Collapse - 3 Strategies

If man wants to progress, he must create new forms of energy of greater and greater densities.

-Lazare Carnot (1784)

Why Complex Societies Collapse

Can Catastrophic Collapse (ie Bronze Age Collapse) be Mitigated thru Simplification?

Hands Up! Georges Bataille: The Threadless Minotaur Living Inside Goedel's Labyrinth

Heidegger's hand is tied to the terrestrial order. Thus, it does not grasp the human future. Human beings have long since stopped dwelling between 'earth' and 'sky'. On the way towards the un-thinged [Unbedingtheit], they will also leave the 'mortals' and the 'divinities' behind. The last things (τὰ ἔσχατα) will also have to be eliminated. Human beings soar up towards the un-thinged, the unconditioned. We are headed towards a trans-human and post-human age in which human life will be a pure exchange of information. Human beings shed their being be-thinged, their facticity, even though this is precisely what makes them what they are. 'Human' is derived from humus, that is, soil. Digitalization is a resolute step along the way towards the abolition Of the humanum. The future Of humans seems mapped out: humans will abolish themselves in order to posit themselves as the absolute .

Byung-Chul Han, "Heidegger's Hand"

Losing Ipseity in the Second-Order Observation Perspective of Profilicity.

from Google AI:

Ipseity is the quintessential element of identity, derived from the Latin word ipse (meaning "self"). It refers to selfhood, individuality, or the unique quality and nature of being yourself.

Where You'll Encounter the Word

• Philosophy: Used in phenomenology and existentialism to describe the first-person perspective, "mineness," or the foundation of human consciousness.
• Psychology: "Ipseity disturbance" (or self-disorder) is a term used to describe a foundational rupture in an individual's sense of existing as a distinct subject.
• Theology: Often contrasted with aseity (existing entirely of and from oneself)

Emile Durkheim: Sociology, Suicide, and the Nature of Religion

Social Ecosystem: environment, population, technology, and social organization

Marcel Mauss: A Century of Symbolic Gift Giving

The 'Gift' of 9/11

The twin towers were not destroyed by terrorists. The twin towers committed suicide. They collapsed under their own weight. When the two towers collapsed, you had the impression that they were responding to the suicide of the suicide planes with their own suicide. It has been said that even God cannot declare war on himself. Well he can. The West in the position of God, divine omnipotence and absolute moral legitimacy has become suicidal and declared war on itself.

-Jean Baudrillard, "The Spirit of Terrorism"

from Google AI:

Continental Philosophy (The Event as Rupture)

In Continental philosophy, an "event" is often viewed as a sudden, unpredictable rupture or breakthrough that changes everything—it alters how we perceive truth, language, or history. 

• Alain Badiou: A French philosopher who defines an event as an unpredictable, ground-breaking rupture that brings forth new truths. According to Badiou, an event shatters established norms and forces individuals to take a leap of faith to remain faithful to this new truth (e.g., a revolutionary political movement or falling in love).
• Gilles Deleuze: Drawing from the ancient Stoics, Deleuze viewed events as "incorporeal" entities. Rather than physical actions, events are the meaning or sense of what happens, which subsist at the surface of things and transform how we understand ourselves and our realities.
• Martin Heidegger: In his later work (Contributions to Philosophy), Heidegger conceptualizes the event (or Ereignis) as a moment of appropriation, where human beings and the meaning of "Being" come into a mutually revealing relationship.

The End of Pure Positivity

Adjusting the Markov Blanket (It's Location And/Or Transparency)

More on Plur1bus

More on Markov Blankets