Please don’t be shocked. This posting will be about some philosophy.
This is not a blog posting about science of nature, nor about science of technology, it could even be interpreted as a religious posting.
Hence, this posting is a temporary contradiction (let’s say an exception according to Heisenberg) to my principle about keeping this blog an agnostic blog.
If you cannot accept this, then please ignore this posting 🙂 .
In my latest posting about the “eight layers of the universe” (please refer to https://areasharpa.blog/2022/08/26/the-eight-four-layers-of-the-universe/ for details),
I have tried to explain that the identity of an object cannot be strictly derived by physical laws.
No, the identity of the objects is created by the physicists, when they do, what we call “modelling”.
The questions e.g. “what is an electron?”, “what is a positron?” are not physical questions per se. They are questions that are answered during the process of modelling, BEFORE we create the mathematical laws of physics, which then in turn describe the interactions of the objects.
Now one could ask: “How can we dare to think the universe IS a GROUPING OF OBJECTS AND INTERACTIONS?”
We think to know the universe is rendered by the phenomena of matter / energy and of spacetime, but what the hell gives us the right to split matter / energy and spacetime into “objects and interactions”?
Well, it’s OUR way of how we see the universe, how we PERCEIVE the universe, and this way was successful in the past. This or a similar answer would be given by a biologist, who applies the wisdom of theory of evolution.
And as we expect that one individual person would not find answers that are completely contradictive to all that, what has been found by mankind before, it actually happened to me that I found the same – or at least similar – answers, when I dealt with the implementation of the experimental SMUOS Framework.
Now you might ask: “What has the implementation of a 3D Multiuser Framework in common with the thinking about epistemology?”
Well, a lot. Which I’d like to explain in the present posting.
The SMS Framework
Well, let me start with an explanation of the acronym SMS = Simple Multiuser Scene.
My intention was, to set a counter point to the term of MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game).
The term “Simple” should indicate: SMS are intended to be used by small(!) groups of people (e.g. five or ten people). This does not preclude to re-use the same scene for several or many groups of people, but only small groups, a few people each group, would actually “meet” in the scene.
Furthermore, the term “Simple” should indicate, we would only use stable, rather old, but commonly and freely available techniques of rendering (e.g. by employing the X3D/VRML standards).
Now, what is the basic idea of the SMS Framework?
The SMS Framework should/will be an intermediate layer, which implements functions that are not (yet) available in the X3D/VRML standards, but need to be available in each and every multiuser scene.
Thus the SMS Framework should help the authors of multiuser scenes to save common efforts.
When we come back to the example of “Indirect Reality”, how would it look like?
Well, when we remember our example of the robot that is controlled via a VR headset and VR controllers,
then we could generalize the robot into a robot that needs more than one person, who control the robot (e.g. a submarine that is controlled by Alice, Bob and Charlie):
What can we see in Figure 2:
- Besides the three PSIs (Personal Scene Instances) for Alice, Bob and Charlie, we got one “Interface to Reality” (ITR), which handles the communication with the “real submarine”.
- Neither Alice, nor Bob nor Charlie can know, whether the ITR is connected to a “real” submarine, or the ITR is just a simulator that simulates a submarine.
- All four scene instances run the same Scene (red colour), which has probably been downloaded from the ITR.
- The SMS-FW (SMS Framework) is not actually a necessary part for our philosophical considerations, it could be replaced by some functions of the common Scene.
- We see two kinds of Internetworking in this Figure 2 (I call them the “3D Web” and the “Enternet”):
- “3D Web”: The common Scene must have been downloaded from some common server(s)
- “Enternet”: The scene instances must be somehow SYNCed (and they must be SYNCed with the RR)
What’s the Connection to Epistemology?
Well, in our example the “Common Scene” (red colour) has been downloaded from some common server.
Cannot we take this as a metaphor for our “common model of the universe” (i.e. for our science), which we have “downloaded” during our education from school and university?
The “Common Scene” defines, which aspects of the submarine and its surroundings can be perceived by Alice, Bob and Charlie. Additionally, each user has a “Personal Scene Instance” (PSI), i.e. a computer, some headset and so on, that specifically influences the perceived reality during perception.
Cannot we take this as a metaphor for our personal “Model of the Universe (MotU)”, which we “carry” in our mind and which influences the way, we can perceive the universe?
These considerations led me to think about epistemology during the years of 2014 to 2018 and write a few “religious booklets” in German language.
The “13th religious booklet” is a summary. It is written in English language and can be found here: https://letztersein.com/kleine-religiose-buchlein.
Have a nice week
P.S.: now this Blog will be agnostic again, from now on 🙂