Terry, list
I think there is confusion over the nature of the semiosic triad and
the nature of the three categories.
1] That star is existent as a semiosic triad [O-R-I]; made up of
input and output energy, as organized by the mediating laws of
physics. This is a triadic semiosic action. Then, due to some
physical law, it imploded. This too is a semiosic or triadic action.
And I'd say that all three categories are involved in the functioning
of this star - sensation of input of energy 1ns; reaction/acceptance
of this input 2ns, and organizing this energy according to its
physical laws 3ns.
2] Of course you can experience 1ns!! That sensation you have when
touching the flame of the candle - is an experience within your body
of 1ns!
3] The gravity waves of matter are moving through the atmosphere in
a semiosic triadic process; ie, the atmosphere is being affected by
the input of energy, pushing its content around [minute particles -
ie, space is not a vacuum]. this is both 1ns and 2ns..with an output
of lesser energy - and according to the laws of physics 3ns. Again,
all three categories are involved.
4] And as you note - these actions certainly affect the stars around
- and within all three categories. After all, each star is a semiosic
triad, a Sign, [O-R-I] and the input of energy from this explosion
[received as first 1ns then 2ns and then 3ns as the input energy is
dealt with by the 3ns laws that operate that star]….
5] Same thing with the human observer - who receives the input
sensation from the star -and using, Robert Marty's outline, I
explained it in a previous post: first the sensation without
consciousness of 1ns [1-1-1] ; then, the awareness..in 2ns..and on to
a final analysis within the mediative 3ns of the human mind.
6] My view of the gravity waves, at the instance of their emergence,
is that they were, in themselves, immediately functioning as a
semiosic triad, a 'Sign', following the analysis of Peirce where an
Interpretant becomes an Object of another triad. That is, the Star,
already operating as a semiosic triad [O-R-I]...had, using its
mediating laws of physics 3ns, interpreted its energy content to
result in an Interpretant ….a new triad, an explosion of
matter/energy....And - ALL Three categories are operating in this NEW
semiosic triad. And - in answer to your specific question - I'd
consider that all three are immediately operating because even to
form the waves, even to explode, involves 3ns, the laws of physics in
this action.
Again, consider this explosive 'thing', made up of matter/energy -
as a new triadic entity....operating within the relational capacities
of O-R-I. It's no longer a star. We view it as a number of gravity
waves of matter/energy. It has an identity both temporal and spatial
- [very spread out in space!!!] - and is organized according to the
laws of physics [3ns]. These gravity waves are in themselves, a
semiosic entity - with all three categories operating. There's
quality, reaction and laws.
7] That is - I think that some people are mixing up the functional
identity of the semiosic unit [O-R-I] and the triadic categories.
The categories refer to how the energy/data/ is organized within an
interaction. The semiosic triad refers to how the energy/data is
organized in-itself.
Edwina
On Wed 10/03/21 5:00 AM , Terry L Rankin [email protected]
sent:
Jon, Edwina, List:
I don’t think I stated or implied (or at least didn’t intend to
do so) that we can directly “experience” 1ns. My intent was
actually to suppose that it is only via the 2ns of the gravity waves
per se (i.e., cycles of compression/decompression affecting whatever
media those waves move through, e.g., as magnetic fields of nearby
stars are affected or as eventually detected by the LIGO observatory
instruments), as an indexical 2ns “event” – i.e., as change per
se.
So my question now is, in what sense are those gravity waves, at the
moment of their initial physical manifestation, 3ns or even 2ns? At
the instant of origin of the waveform itself -- not when or after
they’ve begun to propagate to impact other stars nearby (or at a
distance), or finally when LIGO instruments detect them, or reports
are written about them in the scientific literature – but at the
moment of their ignition or inception in the 1ns of that inspiral
collision? At that moment of origin, are they not purely iconic 1ns
(becoming indexical 2ns upon completion of the first gravitational
waveform, perhaps, 1ns prior to becoming ongoing cyclical change?)?
What am I missing about CP 5.484, EP 2:411, 1907 (as quoted by JAS
below) that rules this out?
TR
From: Jon Alan Schmidt
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 8:56 PM
To: Edwina Taborsky ; Terry L Rankin ; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; Mauro Bertani
Subject: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Bruce's 'Twisted, Closed Loop'
Terry, Edwina, List:
TR: Do I have that right?
No, I frankly do not see it that way at all. Again, the closest that
we can come to "experiencing" 1ns is perceiving an unvarying sound or
color, and even this is a poor approximation because it requires
either the compression and decompression of air molecules or the
oscillation of light waves at a certain frequency. According to
Peirce, any event is a manifestation of 2ns (not 1ns) because it
involves change, and any laws governing events are manifestations of
3ns--no human participation is necessary. All signs are also
(paradigmatic) manifestations of 3ns, although they are iconic (1ns),
indexical (2ns), and symbolic (3ns) to varying degrees.
ET: Every 'action' is triadic. So, the stars imploding is a triadic
action ...
On the contrary, according to Peirce there are dyadic actions (2ns)
and there are triadic "actions" (3ns), although I advocate confining
this term to the former since it has the same root as actual. Terry
even cited one of the relevant passages, but since he did not quote
it, I will.
CSP: All dynamical action, or action of brute force, physical or
psychical, either takes place between two subjects,--whether they
react equally upon each other, or one is agent and the other
patient, entirely or partially,--or at any rate is a resultant of
such actions between pairs. But by "semiosis" I mean, on the
contrary, an action, or influence, which is, or involves, a
cooperation of three subjects, such as a sign, its object, and its
interpretant, this tri-relative influence not being in any way
resolvable into actions between pairs. (CP 5.484, EP 2:411, 1907)
The stars imploding is a dyadic/dynamical action. So is the brute
effect of the resulting gravity waves on a scientific instrument.
However, the detection of the waves--i.e., the recognition that the
instrument's behavior is an indexical sign of their impinging upon
it--and the interpretation of them in turn as an indexical sign of
stars imploding are triadic/semiosic processes. Obviously, any
subsequent communications about these matters are, as well.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt&data=04%7C01%7C%7C9a4f8fbd41a44efe01ae08d8e367bea7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509381999265608%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=lumbvoPvvEys0bxLHnh8CoMZ7%2BzanjuT4ROWs2F43HM%3D&reserved=0
[1]" target="_blank">www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt -
http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt&data=04%7C01%7C%7C9a4f8fbd41a44efe01ae08d8e367bea7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509381999265608%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=w%2BZenLpo1DMu0SzTtkX2bxI5ryA9mpEeTYL7JgXGC7s%3D&reserved=0
[2]" target="_blank"> twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 7:09 PM Edwina Taborsky wrote:
Terry, list
I'll take a different view. Every 'action' is triadic. So, the stars
imploding is a triadic action - and I'd say it has all three
categories functional in this implosion - regardless of who saw it,
heard it or when. Other stars certainly were 'aware'.
Now - we can consider our reception of this event centuries after
the event. I consider that Robert Marty's outline of the lattice is
an excellent analytic framework for working through these steps from
first input of data to some kind of conclusion.
1] First - that human observer 'receives' this data input - as a
triadic sensation, a 'Rhematic Iconic Qualisign', ie, the triad's
three relations are all in a mode of 1ns.[1-1-1] All that this means
is that the sense data has been received. No interpretation.
2] But this first 'hit' immediately must acknowledge the
differentiation between the input external data [from the imploding
star] and the receiver. So, the experience could move into a rhematic
iconic sinsign -[1-1-2] which introduces the differentiation of 2ns
as mediator by the sinsign of 2ns.
3] Then, this moves through the human observer's system - and -
Thirdness moves in, as this individual begins to get an 'idea' of
what's going on...and the sense data becomes a Rhematic Iiconic
Legisign [the legisign is 3ns].1-1-3 which makes use of this human's
scientific experience stored in 3ns.
.- and then into a Rhematic Indexical Legisign [1-2-3] which
continues with the analysis of the actual indexical data in 2ns by
using the knowledge-based 3ns analysis [legisign]. Our individual
might end the process there...an individual interpretation of local
stimuli as referenced to a general rule.
or..might go further..and come up with a Dicent symbolic Legisign
[2-3-3]..which is viewing the input data as a conclusion of the
analysis and, eg, deciding that all this data is the 'particular
attribute of the law-of-imploding stars. It becomes a part of the
'scholarly analysis'...and can be what is reported in journals.
I hope this isn't too confusing. [Robert Marty also explains how
this path, moving from first sensate input can also go very wrong,
and can move away from the actuality of the hard data in 2ns...and
move into 'magical thinking'!
Edwina
Stars imploding long before humanity came into being and presence
on Earth (an event of 1ns) emit gravity waves [4]. Those waveforms
travel through time and space until eons upon eons later they’re
detected by a human observer on Earth (2ns) in 2015. After
confirmation and concurrence, the data and event are reported in
scientific journals (3ns). While semiotic 2ns is an (indexical?)
relation connecting the waves with the collision, semiosic 3ns
relations only began in 2015 with the human observation and reporting
thereof (EP 2.411).
Do I have that right?
Terry
Links:
------
[1] https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=<a href=
[2] https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=<a href=
[3]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'[email protected]\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[4]
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://scitechdaily.com/violent-neutron-star-collision-sends-gravitational-waves-shuddering-through-the-fabric-of-space-and-time/%23:~:text%3DWhen%2520two%2520neutron%2520stars%2520spiral%2Ccollision%2520of%2520two%2520black%2520holes.&data=04%7C01%7C%7C9a4f8fbd41a44efe01ae08d8e367bea7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509381999275564%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=XwTMyIPvjd62nUxsNPOOKLn0bEgrfGqEdfCgDKBSLoY%3D&reserved=0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected]
with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of
the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
