anything performing measurement inside its own sample is subject to undetected variance.
i’m sure there is a scientific principal out there
or has to be
basically am stating that no reading from within a sample can be presumed absolute.
weight, for instance — is measured by a tool inside its own sample. therefore the tool as well as the sample are subject to variance within an accord.
measuring distance while on a road … both the ruler and the road are on the plane of earth, and so both are subject to undetected variance. basically would be a law for meters, that states that measurement from within a sample cannot be treated as an accuracy.
because it is only measuring differences within a larger correlative process. for example, you could weigh 50 pounds heavier today, and if both you and the scale are affected by the increase in weight — then the variance will go undetected.
so when the CAUSE for (metered) variance is part of a larger set, where the meter itself is a subset — then accuracy is only within a correlative structure of elements, NOT with the measurement itself. in other words, the only thing that can truly be known, is the “yes/no” that all things under the same cause are reacting equally.
the basis of consistent laws, is that they are consistent. if those laws are formatted from within the causal range, then the law itself is only a measurement of bond between reactive elements, not a definitive principle of matter. or rather, it COULD be a definitive principle of matter, but the chances for it to not be a correct law are greater than the chances for it to be a correct law.
what is chaos? random? things that quantify on levels outside of determined principles of measurement. that doesn’t mean they are unstructured. it only means that the structure used for metering is functioning under a different principle. it only means that as that element dances, its rhythm is different. there is absolutely no way to determine if it is you yourself that is displaying a chaotic rhythm, rather than the chaotic dancer.
it’s why i believe that it’s just as possible that the earth is inside a sphere, not on its surface. because from within the causal range, the two positions would look identical.
and it’s why i look at every single scientific principal regarding matter as “isn’t that special.” because any variance can be one carried out upon everything and only effecting some. the driving of scientific law to the point of excruciating and minute measurements … is a little moot when an undetected causal variance could be creating perceived differences. it’s like going off track, and then mapping minute changes in direction while off track.
it seems a little pointless to me. and the odds against stumbling onto something fundamental are pretty high.
it’s the calibration effect. the fact that you are measuring the temperature of the soup while you are floating around in it. it is the reason that you sit in a car and get the odd sensation of moving backward. but it is really the car next to you moving forward.
it’s the reason i take nothing in life seriously. because i know i’m only measuring it from the inside. i know the precarious nature of balance itself. it’s why i stare at the wagon wheel that appears to be slowly moving backwards as it quickly cycles forward, and realize there is no way to know for sure if it isn’t actually moving backwards while causing a forward motion.
the defining principle of life — to make sense of things — consistency. there is no way to know if our measuring sticks are off along with the rest of it. no way to prove anything but the relation to each other, the correlation that can make things appear as if the world is rocking out of control, when it’s standing perfectly still.