ISOTHEOCEPT

FILE ISOtheocept 11:22 am Oct 24, 1994 11:42 am April 27, 1992/Oct 18, 1991

ISOTHEOCEPTS

Isomorphic systems of explanation or theories

There are theories of science or other fields of knowledge that can have isomorphic theories that predict just as well but have a different perspective on the subject. The reason that we should pursue these other theories if they only predict as well or worse is that they may have advantages that the original theory does not have. If we as scientists get caught up in the pursuit of truth fallacy we may miss out on theories that can be very useful. The human brain may not have a complete grasp of reality and the theories that we produce may not be close to reality. We have a tendency to believe that the universe is run by a few simple laws and if we understand these laws then we can understand the universe and predict its behavior. But there is no law that says that the universe has to be simple. In fact the more we learn the more complicated we find the universe to be. Luckily we can find some principles that make life easier to predict but we may be in a part of the universe that is simple. In other areas of the universe, this may not be the case at all. Our life forms; humans, may have developed in a region that is simple enough so that we can believe that we can understand and predict the way the universe will effect our lives. Intelligent life may not be able to form in the other parts of the universe. because it may be so complex that the brain confers no evolutionary advantage because it can not make valid predictions for behavior. If there exists such a place then life may not be able to form. There may be also times that are unpredictable. These times may be in our universe and some day be effecting us. In a world that we think is real this may be very hard to believe is possible, but what if our world is a created illusion that only seems real to us because we have nothing to compare it to. The real world may not be any thing like we believe it is. What I mean by the universe may be a region of reality that is much larger that what we presently believe is the size of the universe. I do not believe that by looking at the universe in all possible ways we must wave our hands and believe in things that we can not understand but we need to have very organized ways to view the world in all it possibilities. This is so that we can make the full use of our knowledge. We can not say that the laws that we find here to exist are to be found every where else in the universe. If we can find It to be the case then we will have an easier time however, this may not even be true because complexity has its benefits for things that will not work here may work some where else. Also, adversity can lead to greater things. It seems that we have been lead down the trail of the pursuit of knowledge because of problems. If we had not had problems then we would not have been forced to learn and predict about our environment. We need to study all the possibilities there are in every possible light, systematically, and that is what epistemology does. Of course, there are so many possibilities that we have to find ways to simplify or we will be lost is a quagmire. The basic principle that we can use is easy. What one does is break concepts into parts that can be understood in some way and that can be put back together in many different ways. This is similar to how chemistry does it. It has a certain amount of elements and a certain allowable set of combination rules. With this language it goes on to predict the possibility of different molecules and how they will behave. The process is supposed to be based on experimentation. But it is based on as much the rules of how elements are supposed to behave. It is both a concatenation of rationalism and empiricism or the theory (rationalism) and experience (empiricism). The reason that it is a concatenation of both views is that we have to get our information from some where. We get our information from our senses and the way that the brain works do to the genes and the environment such as injury of the brain. once we have information we have to process that information. The processing of that information is what is called the analysis and synthesis of that information. We must remember in creating this scenario there are many isomorphic theories that will do the exact same thing.

An isomorphic theory can be a theory that is the same except that it is written in a different language or written with different words. If we take an object we can look at it in all sorts of different lights, angles, shadings or other concepts The brain has the ability to take a concept and manipulate like other objects that it has in it mind. A bizarre example would be taking this theory and throwing it across the room. What we have done it take"a concept and given it properties that it may not otherwise have had such as in this case body it has to become material or have material properties for it to be tossed around the room. What is the brain doing when it can do this with incompatible ideas. How are the neurons responding to allow this. We could imagine that the brain has reduced the concept to a neural impulse and that impulse is what is traveling around the brain making strange ideas. But when the idea is needed the parts of the brain that represents the hole idea can be stimulated.

Conscious subconscious

It may be the difference between the conscious and subconscious is that all the possible neural line ups make the subconscious but only the ones that are being stimulated at a certain time are the ones that have consciousness. This means that a diversion in the thought will stimulate the neural path ways that were not stimulated before causing consciousness that was before subconsciousness. It would seem that our subconsciousness could be developed in certain situations without us knowing it. The brain structure and the functioning of the brain cause the brain to change so the some pathways are easier to stimulate so that certain paths ways will be more apt to be encouraged that others which would lead us to certain thoughts rather that others and to a certain line of consciousness rather that another. There will be many possible subconscious routes that the conscious could take like differences in the color of your grand mothers eyes One thought leads to another which leads to another. Our thoughts are cycling through the neurons each cycle picks certain neurons to fire and discourages some from firing. The possible set of neurons that could fire and the ones that do fire are the difference between consciousness and the subconsciousness. Of course, it is probably much more complicated than this simple scenario. But it does have a powerful concept. Certain levels of consciousness will not be aviable from one stage to another but the external set of neuronal stimulation will be able to change the consciousness faster than any internal change. A question is posed without external stimulation will the brain stagnate on certain paths of consciousness and not others. It would seem that this would be the case because certain thoughts would strengthen while others would not be used so much. The neurons that produce that particular consciousness would strengthen while the other would become weaker and possibly die. It would consequently take more to get certain neurons to fire and less stimulation to get others to fire. It seems that certain parts of the brain that deals with external stimulation would die or be severely restricted. while the other parts of the brain would be straightened. it would get more nutrients and as the other cell die more space. How ultimately would the brain fare if it had no external stimulation? Certain parts and path ways would be straightened and others would be weakened or die. Would the person go crazy? Because certain pathways would be very week and others would be stronger. This persons behavior may not be appropriate for some one that had to survive in the real world. So that person may seem crazy but the brain may well be working correctly within those bounds.

Isomorcepts

Isomorcepts are theocepts that are isomorphic to each other. They are important in the study of mathematical epistemology because there are many theories that are or do the same thing as another theory but are differently expressed or laid out in a theocept. Who do we know if one theocept is isomorphic to another? It can be very difficult to tell if one theory is isomorphic to another. There is another type of theocept an it is a parallel theocept or paralcept. It is exactly like another theocept but runs parallel to the original. This means that it is some area is different by an exact amount. a paralcept can be parallel in more than one dimension of change. But in each dimension there is an exact amount of difference at all time. When the difference between the two theocepts is not the same all the time, but can be defined by one or more well defined mathematical functions then we have an isofuncept. All the theocepts that are isomorphic to another theocept can be defined as isovenuefield, there then is the different types of isotheocepts.

GLOSSARY

Isomorcept, an isomorphic theocept

Theoisomorphic

Theoisomorph

Theoisomorphism

Isotheocept, an isomorphic theocept

Isotheoceptic

Isotheoceptology, the scientific study of isotheocepts

Mathematical Isotheoceptology, the mathematical study of Isotheocepts.