Dear Psycho-History Group Members,

Part IV. of the series "Prelude to the Psycho-Historical Equations" is set forth below.

Regards,

Psi_Sci



IV. Prelude to the Psycho-Historical Equations -- A Dialectical Model of the History of the Cosmos, up to and Including the Emergence of Planetary Humanoid Species.


Preliminaries [CONTINUED].

C. "Formal Subsumption" of Predecessor Ontology, by the Latest-to-Emerge Neo-Ontology.

Suppose we observe an historical sequence in which the ontological category connoted by q|X gives rise to the ontological category connoted by q|Y --

q|X ---> [q|X]^2 = q|X + q|XX = q|X + q|Y

-- and, later still, in which the ontological category connoted by q|Y gives birth to the ontological category connoted by q|Z --

q|Y ---> [q|Y]^2 = q|Y + q|YY = q|Y + q|Z.

If so, then we call the epoch for which the ontological category connoted by q|YX first appears, the epoch of the "Real Subsumption" of q|X, and of all of its ontological predecessors, by q|Y.

Likewise, we call the subsequent epoch, for which the ontological category connoted by q|ZY first appears, the epoch of the "Real Subsumption" of q|Y, and of all of its ontological predecessors, by q|Z.

Contrasting with those designations, we call the epoch immediately preceding that for which q|YX first appears, but for which q|XX, or q|Y, first appears, the epoch of the "Formal Subsumption" of q|X, and of all of its ontological predecessors, by q|Y.

Likewise, we call the epoch immediately preceding that for which q|ZY first appears, but for which q|YY, or q|Z, first appears, the epoch of the "Formal Subsumption" of q|Y, and of all of its ontological predecessors, by q|Z.

The above designations represent a universalization, to historical-dialectical processes in general, of the concepts developed by Karl Marx, in the specific context of the historical dialectic of capital as subsuming social relation of production, under the names "The Formal Subsumption of Labor by Capital", and "The Real Subsumption of Labour by Capital", as set forth in his [unpublished] 6th Chapter of the first volume of his treatise "Capital, A Critique of Political Economy".



D. "Ontological Self-Conversion", by "Self-Subsumption".

Can "connotograms" of the form q|XX be interpreted consistently, in the same, standard way that 'connotograms' of the form q|YX, where Y NOT= X, are interpreted, per the F.E.D. standard?

An interpreted/assigned ontological qualifier "connotogram", such as q|YX, wherein X NOT= Y, can, as noted earlier in these preliminaries, be interpeted as connoting a '''hybrid''' formation, or process, of the conversion of the ontology connoted by the "connotogram"' q|X into the ontology connoted by the "connotogram" q|Y -- i.e., the conversion of the individual "units", or "monads", that constitute the q|X ontological category / "arithmos", into the '''higher''', or '''meta-''', "monads", the "meta-units", that constitute the q|Y ontological category.

That is, q|YX connotes the conversion OF q|X-type individuals, BY q|Y-type individuals, INTO q|Y-type individuals.

The example used earlier, from the Universe-Model to be exposited here, is that of first generation stars, connoted by q|as [---> q|6, which converted "units", or "monads", of the ontological category, or "arithmos", known as sub-atomic particles, connoted by q|s [---> q|2 [mainly in the form of the units, or "monads", of the "species" of that q|s "Genos" known as protons, ionized Hydrogen atoms, "the acidic species", etc.], into individual atomic nucleus units, the units, or "monads", of the ontological category, or "arithmos", known as atomic nuclei, and connoted by q|a [---> q|4, a "Genos-arithmos" whose "species-arithmoi" include the ontological sub-categories known as Helium nuclei [or "alpha particles"], as Lithium nuclei, as Carbon nuclei, and as Oxygen nuclei, etc., whose individual "units", or "monads", are, precisely, individual Helium nuclei, individual Lithium nuclei, individual Carbon nuclei, and individual Oxygen nuclei, etc., respectively.

Consistent with this "conversion" interpretation, then, what should the "connotogram" q|ss [---> q|4 connote?

It, q|ss, should connote the conversion OF q|s-type individuals, BY q|s-type individuals, INTO -- what type/kind/ontological category/"Genos-Arithmos" of individuals?

INTO q|s individuals again [i.e., "simple reproduction", or even ["purely-quantitative"] "expanded reproduction", of the population(s) of individuals who should be classified into the same ontological category, q|s, again]?

The "self-interaction", "self-re-flex-ion", or "self-re-flux-ion" [self-action, "auto-kinesis", self-"karma", or '''self-multiplication'''] of the "monads", or "units", of q|s, under the "aufheben evolute product rule" Axiom for multiplication, as stated here in an earlier post, does encompass the "Boolean" moment of the simple [or, within the same quality, or ontological category, merely quantitatively expanded] reproduction of q|s, reflecting the "mere conservation / preservation" moment of the meaning of the Hegelian "aufheben" operation.

However, that multiplication rule also encompasses the "contra-Boolean" content, of the other two "moments" of the Hegelian "aufheben" operation, namely, the moments of "elevation" and of "transformation/transcendence", i.e., of qualitative/ontological expansion, or qualitative expanded reproduction; expanded reproduction by production of qualitatively new, unprecedented ontology --

q|s x q|s = q|s + q|ss

-- wherein q|ss connotes mainly the latter two moments of the self-"aufheben" self-negation process.

In particular, per the F.E.D. standard, "Meta-MONAD-ology" interpretation, or "Meta-UNIT-ology" interpretation, or "Meta-INDIVIDUAL-ology" interpretation, q|ss connotes the "qualitative increment" of a new ontological category, or "arithmos"-of-"monads"/-"units"/-"individuals", EACH "monad", or "unit", or "[onto-]logical individual" of which is a META-q|s "monad" / "unit" / "individual", made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of "monads" / "units" / "individuals" of the q|s predecessor ontological category / "arithmos"-of-"monads".

What kind of "monad", of what category, or "Genos-arithmos", does "an "arithmos"-of-"monads"/ontological category which has META-sub-atomic particles as its "monads", EACH one made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of sub-atomic particles sub-"monads"", connote?

To this observer, the phrase above connotes an "atom", or, more specifically, an "atomic nucleus".

Thus, to this observer, the ideogram 'q|ss' connotes the ontological category also connoted by 'q|a' --

q|s x q|s = q|s + q|ss = q|s + q|a

-- and --

q|ss = q|a, [---> q|4.


Thus, the "ontologically dynamical" process -- the process called "onto-dynamasis" by F.E.D., which results from the [neo-Diophantine] "auto-dynamis" [the "self-squaring"] 'q|s "times" q|s', or 'q|s "squared" ', connoted by --

q|s x q|s = q|s + q|ss = q|s + q|a

contains the term q|ss, which connotes processes of the SELF-Conversion of sub-atomic particles into [ionized] atomic nuclei.

Thus, " ...in the N\Q Dialectical Ideography, "auto-dynamis" signifies 'onto-dynamASis' " [Karl Seldon].

Recent cosmological research has turned up massive evidence that the production of the vast populations of atoms of the "higher atomic species" manifest in our contemporary "kosmos" was not entirely accomplished by stars alone, via the thermonuclear fusion process known as "stellar nucleosynthesis".

Prior to the emergence of stars, a process of '''cosmological nucleosynthesis''' is in evidence, which produced mainly atoms of the two "lowest atomic species" -- atoms of Hydrogen and of Helium.

The physical-spatially self-concentrating, self-densifying processes of the pre-atomic, sub-atomic particles -- the self-interactions of "free" sub-atomic particles, such as protons and neutrons, connoted by q|ss, produced these first "species" of the "Genos" of "atoms", or of "atomic nuclei", connoted by q|a.

Thus, this observer receives the symbol q|ss as connoting the self-conversion of sub-atomic ontology into atomic-nucleus ontology, via the original, or " arche' ", process of "nucleosynthesis" -- not "stellar nucleosynthesis", but "pre-stellar nucleosynthesis", or "cosmological nucleosynthesis".

Thus, "connotogramic ontological qualifiers", terms of the form q|XX, can be interpreted as connoting the SELF-conversion of individuals of the q|X ontology into individuals of a higher, "META-", ontology, and as also connoting the [cosmological] formations which accomplish said SELF-conversion.


E. "Original"/"Primitive" Accumulation of Neo-Ontology by "Self-Re-flex-ion"/"Self-Re-flux-ion" of Predecessor Ontology.

The process of "pre-stellar nucleosynthesis" referred to as "cosmological nucleosynthesis" in the sub-section above, was the process of "Initial-Only" Accumulation, or of "Original Accumulation", or of "Primitive Accumulation", for the "atoms" ontology [or, more specifically, for the ionized, cosmological plasma, "atomic nuclei" ontology], connoted by q|a [---> q|4, from out of the "resources-base" of the pre-existing populations of protons, neutrons, etc. -- of the "sub-atomic particles" ontology, connoted by q|s [---> q|2.

The process of stellar nucleosynthesis, within those "ontologically hybrid" cosmological formations known as stars, was and still is the process of "ongoing, continuing, repeated, reproduced, reproductive conversion", and of "reproductive accumulation", of atoms, or of ionic atomic nuclei, from sub-atomic particles [e.g., from "free" protons and neutrons], and also from "lower atomic species" -- all / both connoted by q|as [---> q|6.

Thus, terms of the form q|XX may be interpreted as connoting processes of "TEMPORARY, INITIAL, SELF-TERMINATING Original Accumulation" OF the q|XX ontology, BY the q|X ontology, FROM the q|X ontology itself as "resource-base".

Thus also, terms of the form q|YX, wherein X NOT= Y, may be interpreted as connoting processes of "Ongoing, Continually Reproduced, Not[-Yet]-Terminated, Reproductive Accumulation", OF q|Y ontology, BY q|Y ontology, [but] FROM q|X ontology as "resource-base".

This means that the processes of "Original Accumulation", or "Primitive Accumulation", and of "Reproductive Accumulation", described by Marx in his "Capital: A Critique of Political Economy", and in his "Grundrisse" ["Foundation" of the immanent critique of the ideological science of capitalist, "classical" political economy, or of "classical economics"], are not applicable to that human-social relation-of-production, known as "Kapital", alone.

On the contrary, these "Kapital"-relation ontology-instances, or "Kapital" human-social-relations-of-human-production ontology-instances, of these two processes -- of "Original Accumulation", versus of "Reproductive Accumulation" -- are but two individual "species" among many other "species", of these two universal "Gen-e" categories of historical-dialectical process.



3. How the "epoch-counting" tau of this --

(^1)C(tau) = (^1)[q|n]^(2^tau)

-- Model Maps to the Standard "Real" time variable, usually denoted by t: "Diachronic Meta-Fractality" and the Phenomenon of "Temporal Acceleration" as "Diachronic Scaling".

F.E.D. refers to QUALitative, and to "QUALO-Quantitative", or "Quanto-QUALitative", self-similarity structures, which feature a scale-regress in their similitude-recurrences, as "META-Fractals".

In particular, F.E.D. refers to the irreducible, non-amalgamative sum, or "cumulum", of ontological qualifiers -- generated by the --

(^1)C(tau) = (^1)[q|n]^(2^tau)

-- "Dialectic of Nature" model of the "kosmos" -- as modeling the [taxonomy level one] "diachronic meta-fractal" of this "kosmos" as a whole, viz. --

q|n + q|s + ... + q|a + ... + q|m + ... + q|p + ... + q|e + ... + q|b + ...

-- wherein q|m connotes the cosmo-ontological category/"arithmos" that has molecules as its "monads", wherein q|p connotes the cosmo-ontological category/"arithmos" that has prokaryotic cells as its "monads", where q|e connotes the cosmo-ontological category/"arithmos" that has eukaryotic cells as its "monads", and where q|b denotes the cosmo-ontological category/"arithmos" that has "multicellular organisms", or "meta-biota" -- "meta-phyta" and "meta-zoa" -- as its "monads", . . . , with each such "self-hybrid" term given explicitly above connoting a "meta-fractal similarity-recurrence" of each of its predecessor "self-hybrid" terms [if any] in the chronologically-ordered [order-of-appearance-ordered] series-sum, or "cumulum", given above.

But, if the "similitude-recurrence scale-regress" feature is a required feature of any structure that F.E.D. terms a "meta-fractal", what is the [DIACHRONIC?] scaling feature that defines a "DIACHRONIC meta-fractal"?

Well, certainly, there is a physical-spatial volume, physical-spatial size gradient in this "cumulum".

That is, proto-nuclear sub-atomic particles, because they "contain" a [usually] heterogeneous multiplicity of pre-nuclear particles -- e.g., protons "contain" quarks -- are generally physically larger than pre-sub-atomic, pre-nuclear particles in terms of their three-dimensional-spatial "size", in their "volume" -- in the amount of 3-D space that they "take up".

Likewise, atomic nuclei, because they "contain" a [usually] heterogeneous multiplicity of sub-atomic particles -- e.g., the ordinary Helium nucleus "contains" two protons and two neutrons -- are generally physically larger than are sub-atomic particles in terms of their three-dimensional-spatial "size", in their "volume" -- in the amount of 3-D space that they "take up".

And again, molecules, because they "contain" a [usually] heterogeneous multiplicity of atoms -- e.g., a water molecule, "H2\O", "contains" two atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen; a Carbon Dioxide molecule, "CO|2", contains one atom of Carbon and two atoms of Oxygen -- are generally physically larger than are atoms in terms of their three-dimensional-spatial "size", in terms of their "volume" -- in the amount of 3-D space that they "take up".

However, this "spatial size" scaling pertains more to the "one-slice-in-time-at-a-time" view of the "SYNchronic meta-fractals" that result from the DIAchronic growth of the 'multi-ontology cumula', or "multi-ontic, multi-meta-monadic cumula", which result from the DIAchronic processes -- indeed, from the concrete-time-generating processes, or "chrono-genic processes" -- that are modeled by formulae like (^1)[q|n]^(2^tau), rather than to any concept of "DIAchronic scaling".

That is, this spatial volume scaling of the "monads", or "units", of the similarity-recurrence "arithmoi", or "ontological categories", is "SYNchronic scaling", not "DIAchronic scaling".

"DIAchronic scaling", per F.E.D., refers to the time-scale of recurrence; to the time-interval between -- to the amount of duration between -- the occurrence / irruption of a given ontological category / "arithmos"-of-"monads", and of the similarity-recurrence immanent in the occurrence / irruption of its successor ontological category / "arithmos"-of-"monads".

F.E.D. holds that, generally, the successive time-intervals or duration-intervals between successive "contra-thesis", "[meta-]MONAD-ic", "[meta-]UNIT-ic", "[meta-]INDIVIDUAL-ic" irruptions exhibit a diminishing scale-regress, with shorter and shorter intervals of duration between each successive "self-hybrid" [meta-]monadic emergence in the cosmological progression.

Thus, it should have taken less time for meta-biota, q|b, e.g., fish, to emerge from eukaryotic [meta-]cellular organisms, q|e, e.g., yeast cells, than it took for the q|e to emerge from prokaryotic cellular organisms, q|p, e.g., archeo-bacteria, than it took for molecules, q|m, e.g., polypeptide, poly-amino-acid proto-proteins, to emerge from atoms, e.g., from Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen, and Hydrogen atoms, than it took for atomic nuclei, q|a, to emerge from proto-nuclear sub-atomic particles, q|s, e.g., protons and neutrons, than it took for proto-nuclear sub-atomic particles to emerge from pre-sub-atomic, pre-nuclear particles, q|n, e.g., from the various "species" of the "Genos" presently known by the name "quarks".

This shortening of the time/duration that it "takes" to get from one "self-hybrid" ontological category / [meta^(n)-]"arithmos"-of- [meta^(n)-]"monads" to the next, "self-hybrid" successor [meta^(n+1)-]"arithmos"-of-[meta^(n+1)-]"monads" -- to traverse the "whorl" on the meta-fractal, mathematically trans-spatial HELIX, of cosmological "meta-evolution", between each predecessor/successor pair of "self-hybrid", mutually-similar but qualitatively-different, ontologically-different nodes on that rising SPIRAL -- is termed, by F.E.D., "TEMPORAL ACCELERATION".

The validity of this concept of "TEMPORAL ACCELERATION" depends upon moving, from viewing "time" as an absolute, abstract "ticking" of an external-to-the-universe "clock", a "clock" "ticking" with abstract regularity for a transcendental time-keeper, who is also '''squatting somewhere outside the universe''', to a relative, universe-immanent, "contental", "concrete" definition of '''concrete duration''' [cf. Henri Bergson], in which "concrete time" is conceived as being PRODUCED; created by the inherent activity of the "[ev]entit(y)(ies)" [i.e., the "event", or "events"; "entity", or "entities"; "eventity", or "eventities"] which constitute(s) this universe -- by the self-generating events going on INSIDE this universe -- and in which a "rate of change OF TIME [with respect to time itself]" is thus measurable, IF measured relative to that event-content.

Thus, suppose that, e.g., (a.) the "distance-in-ontology-state" from a universe with atoms and earlier-emerged ontology extant, to a universe with earlier-emerged ontology and atoms AND MOLECULES extant is defined to count as one unit of ontology-state advance -- of advance in the ontology-content of the "kosmos" -- and that, e.g., (b.) the "distance" from a universe with proto-nuclear sub-atomic particles ontology plus earlier-emerged ontology extant, to a universe with earlier-emerged ontology plus proto-nuclear sub-atomic particle ontology PLUS ATOMS ontology extant, is likewise counted as one unit of 'meta-evolutionary' cosmological progress[ion].

Then, if the duration that the universe took to traverse transition (b.) is longer/greater than the duration that the universe took to traverse transition (a.), then, per F.E.D., this "speed-up" in "cosmological meta-evolution" would constitute an instance of "TEMPORAL ACCELERATION" -- i.e., of that form of "DIAchronic scaling" which is native to "DIAchronic meta-fractals", such as the taxonomy level 1 cosmological "DIAchronic meta-fractal" modeled by the N\Q formula --

(^1)C(tau) = (^1)[q|n]^(2^tau).



[TO BE CONTINUED]