That is the common concept of the Fourier Transform as applied to signal processing where we understand the duality of time and frequency space. The Fourier Transform can be applied to other fields besides signal progressing as in voltage signals.

A lens performs a Fourier Transformation of the light waves passing through the lens.

View attachment 215724

Nice! But I would still argue that at least as far as sensing light goes, we can effectively ignore that effect.

 

The perception of 3D is a brain thing not an eye thing. Close one eye and depth perception is a whole lot more effort and less accurate. And there is also the fact that in many cases we know what an object should look lioke and so the 2D picture implies 3D reality. We see 3D things on or quite flat monitor screens but we visualize the 3D portion in our minds. That is also how we can see through a brick wall or a steel bulkhead. Not X-ray vision, but experience.

 

Nice! But I would still argue that at least as far as sensing light goes, we can effectively ignore that effect.

But what we can't ignore is the geometric data retention and transformation function not discussed basically anywhere.

For the record, I don't believe "metaphysics" really exists: that's a catch-all term to describe "physics not yet known." The two men to bring some of the greatest awarenesses and inventive thought to the world were first self-professed metaphysicists — Newton and Tesla. It's the fringe, probing thinking that yields new insights. It's also simply highly interesting...

Here, light is clearly acting as a "mobile database" of sorts: It strikes an object, and then develops what I'd like to hi-falutinly call a "mimetic geometric bias" of that object's form. It mimes the form's contours and stores it within itself temporarily in a completely non-spatial(!) manner until it encounters a surface where it discharges the data on a 2D/3D plane in a lossless, data-conserving manner.

All electromagnetic waves are storing complex geometric data. Where does this 3D metadata exist, if it's not in the wave? The brain, even if it has geometric data, does NOT contain this information in a contiguous, nor observably identifiable manner (i.e., a line is mathematically \( y=x \) in the mind, with contiguous, indissociable bivalent points over ℝ but only such when contextualized by a spatial Cartesian plane). It's as if light is "effectively" treating target surfaces as some kind of "address."

 

No, the light is not Miming the geometric form. It is being reflected and that portion being reflected in a specific direction is being detected. The fact that adjacent beams are traveling different distances is not information contained in the beam. Al that we see is magnitude, direction, and color. Hacing two eyes makes determiing distance a lot easier, but that is a brain function.

 

No, the light is not Miming the geometric form. It is being reflected and that portion being reflected in a specific direction is being detected. The fact that adjacent beams are traveling different distances is not information contained in the beam. Al that we see is magnitude, direction, and color. Hacing two eyes makes determiing distance a lot easier, but that is a brain function.

It is, though. In the same way the electromagnetic wave of a satellite signal strikes a dish antenna, and then when processed through the transceiver deck and is displayed on a 2D pixelated screen, you see the 2D/3D information it stored as a 1D wave.

In this case, light isn't going through any electronics and is doing it directly after being refracted.

In the same manner as a non-visible electromagnetic 1D wave above, visible light strikes an object as 1D wave state \( P \) and then modulates into 1D wave state \( Q \) to encode dimensional data of what it struck.

It then strikes a plane as transposed 2D state \( R \). State \( R \) is no longer a 1D wave. State \( R \) is a 2D image formed as some function of the light's interaction with the 2D plane.

 

It is, though. In the same way the electromagnetic wave of a satellite signal strikes a dish antenna, and then when processed through the transceiver deck and is displayed on a 2D pixelated screen, you see the 2D/3D information it stored as a 1D wave.

In this case, light isn't going through any electronics and is doing it directly after being refracted.

In the same manner as a non-visible electromagnetic 1D wave above, visible light strikes an object as 1D wave state \( P \) and then modulates into 1D wave state \( Q \) to encode dimensional data of what it struck.

It then strikes a plane as transposed 2D state \( R \). State \( R \) is no longer a 1D wave. State \( R \) is a 2D image formed as some function of the light's interaction with the 2D plane.

One wonders why Des Cartes and Leibniz, Newton, Faraday and others theorized about a “parent substance.”

Consider also that a 1D 30 GHz satellite TV signal wave can contain not only 2D information of 3D space and objects therein, but even the light rays and how they’re used in the space! You can video multiple waves of light in a room, and their independent interaction with objects in it, and the 3D information is all compressed to a 1D wave, just as a function of the “shape“ of it over time t? And that’s before we even discuss the embedded sound waves for the same event, or the experiential time correlation to each element all within it.

Alternatively, the wave has no data in it at all other than an encryption key which “unlocks” the pre-existent dimensional data within the being, since in order to recognize the information as meaningful, it must be in a database within the being to begin with at unspeakable resolution (576 megapixel retinas!?) along with every conceivable analysis and interrelation tool for it. Where is that 2D/3D database? Not certainly the non-dimensional info processing, material brain. CT and other scans proves zero dimension to its neurons correlating to concurrent thought forms.

The entire electromagnetic spectrum acts as a mobile, multimedia numeric system of reality-based geometric forms, their every conceivable interaction, the light and sound involved with such, and the mind knows just what to do with every wave, every sub-wave, the 3D data it correlates to, and in turn correlating them, instantly fourier transforming them, in every imaginable context, creating new waves within itself to connect meaning to them, etc. It can recognize and correlate any amount of constituent waves from other waves, all while keeping them discrete and addressable.

I argue we will never figure such things out if “the physical brain alone is the exclusive universe of discourse.”

 

No, it is not at all like a radio wave that has been encoded with processed and formatted data. No similarity between them at all. The radio waves of a TV signal bear no similarity to the encoded image, lust like an ascii file does not look like the text it contains.

 

No, it is not at all like a radio wave that has been encoded with processed and formatted data. No similarity between them at all. The radio waves of a TV signal bear no similarity to the encoded image, lust like an ascii file does not look like the text it contains.

Of course, that’s my point... The waves bear ZERO resemblance geometrically to the 3D information they encode, whether radio or visible.