From: ken@iat.holonet.net (Ken Easlon)
Subject: Space, where to put it.
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:51:25 GMT




In article <BzBK0M.J5L@iat.holonet.net>, I introduced the elements of an
expandable digital conceptual model of a self conscious entity in it's
environment (boy, if that ain't a mouth full).

Before I go on with expansion of the model, I would like to back off a bit
and put the model itself into some kind of perspective.

If we imagine a tangible cube, such as a child's building block, we tend to
think of it in a way that allows the perception of tangibility and
visibility.  We can imagine the relationship of this block with other
nearby imaginary manipulable objects by placing them in a particular
location in what I'll tentatively call hand-eye-coordination (HEC) space.  

If we ignore gravity in our conception, when we lie down, the relationship
of this HEC space with our hands and eyes can stay constant i.e. when we go
horizontal (with respect to gravity) the HEC model goes horizontal.  If we
turn our head with respect to our hands, our eyes tend to track the model,
whose position stays constant with respect to the hands.

If we imagine that we are lifting a large block against the pull of
gravity, then we can imagine the relationship of this block with other
nearby imaginary heavy objects by placing them in a particular location in
what I'll tentatively call inertial space.   

We don't ignore gravity in this conception.  When we lie down, the
relationship of inertial space with our head does not stay constant i.e.
when we go horizontal (with respect to gravity) our head orientation shifts
90 degrees but the heavy models stay put.

If we imagine a intangible cube, such as a mathematical model, we tend to
think of it in a way that allows the perception of visibility, but not
tangibility.  We can imagine the relationship of this block with other
nearby imaginary intangible objects by placing them in a particular
location in what I'll tentatively call head space. 

If we ignore gravity and tangibility in our conception, when we lie down,
the relationship of this head space with our head stays constant i.e. when
we go horizontal (with respect to gravity) the head model goes horizontal. 
Also, if we turn our head with respect to our hands, the relationship of
the model to the head remains constant.

I've found these notions of different kinds of space to be useful in a
range of philosophical problems.  For example, in distinguish dreams from
reality, gravity plays a big role.  If you can feel the tug of gravity, and
it's coming from the direction of your feet, chances are you're awake
(unless you're a sleep walker, or sleep standing up).  

In the hypnagogic state between wake and sleep when there is some interplay
between the dream world and the waking world, it's interesting to note the
point at which dreams/concepts/plans begin to shift 90 degrees.

These three different kinds of space (HEC, inertial, head) will figure in 
when we start to talk about orientation inside our model.  When we talk
about the model itself with respect to the observer, we'll be thinking of
it as being located in head space, or conceptual space.

I've also been told the model can be placed in rectal space, but I haven't
figured out yet how that fits in.

--
Ken Easlon
ken@holonet.net