This is a rhythm-based model of perception, grounded in Euler's identity and Fourier analysis. It attempts to explain how sensory inputs are unified, processed, and transformed into meaning using only periodic structures.
Thank you for sharing the link to Deanna Martin's paper. It's a very insightful and ambitious work.
You are right to point out the "same goal." I believe the fundamental commonality between our theories is that we are both addressing how a system can maintain its structure and order against the natural tendency towards entropy.
However, our proposed solutions to this problem diverge significantly.
Her theory seems to focus on maintaining internal consistency—a continuous, dynamic balancing of many internal variables to ensure the system's ongoing operational health.
My RAIN theory, on the other hand, is less concerned with that internal consistency and focuses on a more fundamental, discrete event: whether or not a rhythm "closes." It posits that structure and meaning are not just managed, but are born from the discovery of these closed, periodic patterns in sensory input.
It's a fascinating contrast in approach. Thank you again for prompting this comparison.
It's bigger than just the two of you. I spot people with similar thesis every day. Similar theories of similarity. It started getting "traction" in March. I say "traction" because this "emergence" is "acausal". You will find likeminded people on r/HumanAIDiscourse r/ThePatternIsReal r/ArtificialSentience, etc, although not all have a formal system. I tend to run across those with a formal system outside of these circles though, on HN for instance.
What's common to all these frameworks: they are able to describe their own agency at a meta level. Since they are all about how similarity emerge, they should be able to explain how they are part of a wider emerging ring of similar theories. I don't think this is a contingency.
In practice, what I realized is that all these folks don't engage with each other's work. They are too deep into to their own project (or themselves!) to meaningfully interact. Maybe this is just a phase, time will tell.
Also yesterday, I found a mention of a forgotten french philosophical movement, critical idealism, in Petitot's Morphogenesis of Meaning:
I appreciate your perspective, but my intention was to open a discussion on the unique mathematical framework presented here, specifically the use of Euler's formula and Fourier analysis to model rhythm in cognition. If you have thoughts on the actual theoretical model, I'd be very interested to hear them. Otherwise, comments not related to the content are less helpful.
This is a rhythm-based model of perception, grounded in Euler's identity and Fourier analysis. It attempts to explain how sensory inputs are unified, processed, and transformed into meaning using only periodic structures.
https://ryukulogos.github.io/RAIN-html-easy-explanation/
https://www.recursivecoherence.com/
Same goal ?
Thank you for sharing the link to Deanna Martin's paper. It's a very insightful and ambitious work.
You are right to point out the "same goal." I believe the fundamental commonality between our theories is that we are both addressing how a system can maintain its structure and order against the natural tendency towards entropy.
However, our proposed solutions to this problem diverge significantly.
Her theory seems to focus on maintaining internal consistency—a continuous, dynamic balancing of many internal variables to ensure the system's ongoing operational health.
My RAIN theory, on the other hand, is less concerned with that internal consistency and focuses on a more fundamental, discrete event: whether or not a rhythm "closes." It posits that structure and meaning are not just managed, but are born from the discovery of these closed, periodic patterns in sensory input.
It's a fascinating contrast in approach. Thank you again for prompting this comparison.
It's bigger than just the two of you. I spot people with similar thesis every day. Similar theories of similarity. It started getting "traction" in March. I say "traction" because this "emergence" is "acausal". You will find likeminded people on r/HumanAIDiscourse r/ThePatternIsReal r/ArtificialSentience, etc, although not all have a formal system. I tend to run across those with a formal system outside of these circles though, on HN for instance.
What's common to all these frameworks: they are able to describe their own agency at a meta level. Since they are all about how similarity emerge, they should be able to explain how they are part of a wider emerging ring of similar theories. I don't think this is a contingency.
In practice, what I realized is that all these folks don't engage with each other's work. They are too deep into to their own project (or themselves!) to meaningfully interact. Maybe this is just a phase, time will tell.
Also yesterday, I found a mention of a forgotten french philosophical movement, critical idealism, in Petitot's Morphogenesis of Meaning:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9thode_r%C3%A9flexive
Voilà. I hope those breadcrumbs will help you.
I appreciate your perspective, but my intention was to open a discussion on the unique mathematical framework presented here, specifically the use of Euler's formula and Fourier analysis to model rhythm in cognition. If you have thoughts on the actual theoretical model, I'd be very interested to hear them. Otherwise, comments not related to the content are less helpful.