Depending upon the level of magnification, the scale or lens through which one perceives, society and its rules/laws change.
It does not stop there, in but a single dimension. Levels can overlap and can affect one another and send vibrations through the levels. What is being perceived, or conceived, or even social systems or social institutions within a society or within a framework of a corporation can change depending on the level. In other words, there are systems within systems, societies within societies, tangents within tangents, and all are approaching convergence without actually ever arriving definitively at a point of convergence, there is no real convergence coordinate, only a continuous—sometimes discrete—movement towards convergence.
Also, similar to the idea that there are small pockets of movements (social movements, civil rights movements, etc.) occurring simultaneously, often with none of the participants aware of the participation of the other participants [this idea is like the idea of cooperation, but like a prisoner’s dilemma inverted cooperation. The prisoner’s do not know each other, but in the act of operating selflessly—the movement itself, advocating civil rights or something like that—cooperate with one another to cause the same outcome, that of ending suffering and obtaining civil rights]). These are magnifications (magnifications also because each individual has an amalgamation of cells and genes and symbiosis with one’s environment through those cells, comprising a group, which operates like a cell, comprising a movement, which operates like an organ. All of this swinging from quantum to macro), protrusions into this “dimension” called Reality or The World.
But what we’re really talking about are cultures, or a culture, and there are cultures within cultures. To look at cultures is a big scale, I think (well, relatively. Not relative to, like, the sun or something, but relative to say groups or departments or neighborhoods, which, incidentally can all be cultures. But I’m actually referring to volume in this line of thinking). So, at what level do we stop and say here is where we know what we are seeing? It’s like the Wave/Particle Problem. Why does a photon behave as a wave when unobserved and behave as a particle when observed? What is it about this observation that alters the potentialities of the atom? So, do we run into a problem (or did we run into a problem) when trying to ascertain from what level of magnification to begin? From where the problem can begin to be addressed? How to remove the self as the observer? Or, remain the observer while subjectively interacting with the environment that withdraws the elements that serve as catalyst for the movement?
We are the rudimentary manifestations of the quantum behavior of a photon.
*Image credit (used with permission through CC license)–
“Eclipse” by Mario in Arte Akeu
“Escher 3000” by Roberto Rizzato
- Quantum microscope for living biology (sciencedaily.com)
- Quantum dots deliver Vitamin D to tumors for possible inflammatory breast cancer treatment (eurekalert.org)
- Of Einstein and entanglement: Quantum erasure deconstructs wave-particle duality (phys.org)
- 21 Fascinating Images That Make Simple Things Profound (collective-evolution.com)
- In Mysterious Pattern, Math and Nature Converge (wired.com)
- Does probability come from quantum physics? (nanowerk.com)
- Physicists develop method for quantum computers (phys.org)
- Quantum crypto still not proven, claim Cambridge experts (sott.net)