What kills me is that I understood what Rigged Hilbert Space with Chinese Remainder Theorem for the Ideal Ring means 7 years ago in 2013.
I’ll get it back again though.
Well, I consider the brain as extended to paper, google, other people’s thinking processes etc. Part of a community as it were.
Will a couple of neurons knit together in an individual brain? Probably but I think it works just as well if it’s happening in a computer that we made or on a diagram on a piece of paper somewhere.
Indeed. It’s musical motifs, echos into the future where the act of recall is actually the act of recreation. Not stepping in the same river twice sort of thing.
I don’t think any of it is lost though. Ingredients to a cake don’t get lost but they bake together into who you are presently.
SO those insights are a part of you, even if finding where the eggs went in the baked cake is difficult.
Like for me in this case, it’s not that I don’t understand it: I know they’re connected. It’s “baked into me”.
But explaining it is something I can’t yet do, which is why I need to find the words, which is I think what I mean by “understanding the concept”. In my mind I get visuals showing how they tie together.
Ultimately, I think it probably speaks to the necessary arbitrariness of subjectively, that continuous is a smearing of distinct parts which aren’t distinct but connected just not always in a nice, neat continuous function way but more akin to why clock math (chinese remainder theorem) works so well in creating a pseudo-uniqueness in encryption. Substitute various algorithms (which follow patterns that are not always discernable once the code is compiled), for basic mod math and it’ll work. I think it’s how we do it, really.
How to describe, “We’re all unique while also being all the same”.
So, yeah, I gotta work on it better than this description.