“All reasonings concerning matter of fact seem to be founded on the relation of cause and effect.” (9 David Hume)
“The bread, which I formerly eat, nourished me; that is, a body of such sensible qualities was, at that time, endued with such secret powers: but does it follow, that other bread must also nourish me at another time, and that like sensible qualities must always be attended with like secret powers?”
Secret Powers are at the core of Hume's Inquiry into the Human Understanding. For causality is only a figment of the understanding, a connection we make between things that happen after another in time and not attributable to the things themselves.
In his sceptical criticism of all the things that we hold true and self-evident Hume deliberately chooses to name a hidden connection, at least hidden to us, a secret power. It is something that acts at a distance, an imperceptible force that makes it so. Understanding the inquiry formally, Hume postulates that if we look at the world of continuous motion at a lowest possible frame rate, if we were to slow down the world of experience to a single moment, if we were to stop the continuous world of sense perception, we end up with a picture, the world picture. Hume plays this mind experiment by fabricating an instant of time, the world picture, the atom of time/experience and reduces all human experience to a basic binary pair: the world picture of the past (0) and the world picture of the present (1) .
It is clear that this series can indefinitely repeated, as soon as we make a world picture of the present it becomes a world picture of the past, by the mere fact that time never stands still. So in simple terms this would be n = n+1, the series that defines natural numbers. But Hume's aim with this sequence was to demonstrate that if we look at each picture all by itself, there is nothing in it that suggests that one will turn into the other. There are many deductions we can make by working out the relations between elements, but because all motion is removed, there is no telling what will happen to the world picture or that there even is another.
Things in and by themselves, without human perception and understanding have no time or space.
This cardinal argument would later wake up Kant, as he put this: "I freely admit that it was the remembrance of David Hume which, many years ago, first interrupted my dogmatic slumber and gave my investigations in the field of speculative philosophy a completely different direction." Without time there would be no causality, or causality is not knowable without time. If we look at the world as a series of moments in time, and we certainly can understand this, nothing in a world picture implies that there is motion at all. There are only relations between immovable things. It is the atomisation of time, the reduction of experience to a series of world pictures. The smallest possible frame for experience is the moment everything stands still, the world picture. Within this we can clearly deduce many relationships, but not the existence of another.
What could this possible atomization of time be? It is clear that Hume strives for the smallest possible change because he has to make his argument stick. Causality can only be attacked if it is indeed made out of moments in time. Otherwise this whole posturing serves no purpose and may even sound absurd: How can there be no cause and effect is this is clearly observable? The reduction of continuous motion into descreet entities, numbers if you will, is at the core of the argument. Without this dichotomy there would be nothing to observse at all. So Hume can only make his suspicion count if he demonstrates that indeed time is not continous, but discreet, that there is some kind of undestructable unit, the atom of time, without which nothing can be enumerated, counted or timed. The underlying reason d’ etre for us is here the smallest unit of time we can measure. Indeed in the future this will be discovered, by none other than Planck and then of course named after him, as Planck time. Max Planck’s aim was of course not philisophical. He was a strict adheremt to materialism as it was prevalent in the late 19th century, so he would have no idea that Planck time will endorse Hume skepticism on causality, no make his stance possible at all.
Let us think this through one more time: Hume’s disapparence of causality in the World Picture is a unit of Planck time. There is the Hume folly of “Obscurity, indeed, is painful to the mind as well as to the eye;”, but now we see very clear with:
World Picture minus Causality equals Plancktime.
The world picture, once established, has no time and therefore can not cause or be the cause of anything.
"I shall venture to affirm, as a general proposition, which admits of no exception, that the knowledge of this relation is not, in any instance, attained by reasonings a priori, but arises entirely from experience, when we find that any particular objects are constantly coinjoined with each other." What happens to this relation if the experience has nothing in it that is constantly conjoined? How do we experience the absence of cause and effect, of any kind of conjointment? Hume clearly shows that cause and effect arise from experience which is made up of a series of world pictures who in and by themselves have no time. Yet, the understanding of this does require time, but a time which is not necessarily sequential. This random time has only relationships that are within its own moment, it does not refer back to past or anticipates a future. The time of the world picture is random. It is still a series of countable numbers but in no particular order.
Uniform Random Distribution: In a series of events where any event follows any other with equal probability what do we experience? Boltzmann and the boxed universe
If music is events organized in time, what is music that has no time or space, or an infinite amount of time or space. What does it mean to listen to music if there is no causality between events?
We will establish a pattern. Is this “we” the understanding a priori? If the conditions for experience are time and space, what do we designate as time and space? What pattern will be imposed, what causality recognized if there is none? At what point becomes an event something in space or something in time?
Envelope Algorithm: a time axis independent Gaussian Process
In mathematics, the Wiener process is a continuous-time stochastic process named in honor of Norbert Wiener. It is often called standard Brownian motion, after Robert Brown. … In applied mathematics, the Wiener process is used to represent the integral of a Gaussian white noise process, and so is useful as a model of … unknown forces in control theory.
This distinguishes the Wiener process from the Random Walk, which is a discrete stochastic process. In computation the Wiener process is only approximated and the Random Walk converges on the Wiener Process by the Central Limit Theorem.
The human ear can nominally hear sounds in the range 20 Hz (0.02 kHz) to 20,000 Hz (20 kHz). The upper limit tends to decrease with age; most adults are unable to hear above 16 kHz.
Human perception is continuous but shows discrete properties in frequency hearing.
Algorithm and Authorship: Who creates in the Random Process?
Observation is Creation: Schroedinger's Cat and the Random Stream
The Wiener Process asks:
What is spacetime?
Let's assume that the 2nd law of thermodynamics is a gravitational effect towards equilibrium, towards the state of entropy. As soon as there is mass there is also momentum, as soon as there is something rather than nothing, it expands and is as such not a uniform distribution but strives toward it. Could the rate of expansion be a part of a movement within an equilibrium of an enormous scale? Can what we see as expansion just be part of a uniform equilibrium whose magnitude we don't comprehend? Furthermore, does the uniform distribution have any meaning if the elements are so far apart that they don't "see" each other, if the objects are so far apart that there is no gravitational effect? Would the object have any space or time at all? Will spacetime-less objects still be distributed? Or to ask with Leibniz: Les monades n'ont point de fenêtres par lesquelles quelque chose y puisse entrer ou sortir thus: Do monads that have no windows still see everything?
What is embedding?
The Wiener Process structures time like a 24 hour clock. It divides the day into 24 equal sized portions, it tells time to the granularity of the hour. The Wiener Process is 24 moments that are 1 hour apart. The hour itself has no time. Statistically, every minute in each hour is identical, shows the same random distribution, than the next. In a way, each hour is a stretched out moment. As we usually perceive only moment after moment, say one per second, the moment in and by itself has no time, much like the mathematical point knows no dimension. Each moment is so short that within it we do not perceive a before or after. Our threshold of perception is the moment and we are unable distinguish events within it. They happened "now" or "at the same time". We are only capable of perceiving time as the space or difference between moments. Even if each moment appears identical to the next, and there are no absolutely identical moments, there is space in between them to make them 2 moments instead of one. Each hour of the Wiener Process opens up the previously imperceptible worlds of the moment, it breaks open the former atoms of (time) perception. We have a here is rescaled or restructured time. Similar to magnification of under a microscope that lets us see all the way to subatomic levels. The world of subatomic particles is described with Quantum Mechanics, which is part of physics. The laws of physics have no time - let's ignore the 2nd law of thermodynamics for a moment - but mostly describe the properties of space through differentiation. Time has an arrow, the laws of at least Newton's physics do not. Our current laws of everything do not have an arrow of time. They work forward in time the same as they work backwards. To the composer of music this can be frustrating.
The world of quantum mechanics is not made up of laws in the classical sense of certain causality, but of probabilities. Right now we live in 2 worlds simultaneously: The world of the cosmos, that is of everything, and the world beyond everything, which is the world of the super small, the world of subatomic particles and black holes.
There are 2 remarkable features in the 24 hour Wiener Process: Each hour shows no signs of development from state A to state B - it remains in 1 state - and the transitions between each hour are abrupt - they appear instantaneous. So the only change in state is the one from one hour to the next and this change is not a transition with cause and effect, but an instantenous shift from one state to the next. The hour is a quantum state.
what we hear depends on what kind of audio environment we are in.
signal masking: Any event in auditory space can be masked by an event of equal amplitude and frequency. The most effective masking is white bandpass filtered to frequency around the event frequency. 200Hz
In Csound the way to generate a uniform distribution at sample rate is with amplitude k1 is
asig randi k1, sr
introduction to psycho-stochastics
How is PS possible?
the science of psycho-stochastics deals with experiences/perceptions a posteriori a priori exposed to random distribution.
The Wiener Process as a computational artifact of psycho-stochastics implements the Entscheidungsproblem as it applies to human experience and understanding. It formalizes the proposition that entropy, the end game of all possible combinations within a finite set, can be experienced as a stochastic process.
This threshold of hearing is very relative to the environment we find ourselves in. The quieter it is the more sensitive the hearing becomes. Therefore if there is no sound environment at all, we start to hear the sound of our own body. As such, we always hear these sounds, but are usually never aware of them. Unlike the eye, the ears are never closed, so the only mechanism of shutting out sounds is not to pay any attention to them.
Music is usually used to cover the sound environment, to replace the existing multitude of intentional and unintentional acoustic phenomena with an uninterrupted series of evenly spaced periodic tones and aperiodic pulses that blanket everything. The loudness of the uninterrupted series in relation to the environment determines the aspect of its power. Amplified music is now pervasive. Consumed music is always better loud. The loudest sound get our attention. We can only follow one task at a time, we round-robin attention, splice it up into time slots that pay attention to one task. Just the speed of changing from one task to the next gives it the appearance of multi-tasking, of paying attention to different tasks at the same time. Music asserts always the loudest part of the environment and therefore commands our attention. Yet all the multitude of nerve perceptions still exists, the sounds of everything else is still present and, if not masked, still perceptible. Because the ear like the brain and the heart, never shuts off everything is still processed all the time. To deal with the information density the brain is capable of processing 300kb/s Everything else is beyond our resolution of understanding, all perception throttled through this gate. There may be a world in higher resolution out there but we will never know as the understanding is conditioned by 300kb/s. The world that is real to us is always only conditioned thru our perception and always limited by our understanding, our ability to process information at a certain rate. The heart beats at an average rate of 80 times a minute. All of our perception underlies this inner perception of our pulse. But I getting ahead of myself because we will talk about time later. The brains inability to multi task, or its particular way of switching from on task to next in a round robin fashion, is what makes music. We pay attention only to the loudest thing in the environment and follow the perceptions. Examples concert/cough club/ringing.
j's animal model of Tinnitus. limbic system and signals. Habituation.
“Time is a child moving counters in a game; the royal power is a child's.(52)” (Heraclitus)
1. Sound, speech, music only exists within the human mind, they are not functions of the external world.
2. Sound and it’s meaning is a basic faculty of the mind such as the understanding, reason and perception.
3. Sound exists as a function of the brain, as an ordered set of external random stimuli.
4. Frequency is the understanding of a repeated perception of periodic waveforms.
5. The act of brain functioning, the act of thinking makes sound we attach meaning to.
We ask the question of what is sound, what is music?
Here we have our ordered set of frequencies, ordered only because we connected the incoming stimuli in time. So to have any kind of sound, we do not need just external stimuli, but we need sequential stimuli. Therefore m = s(n1, n2, n3, …) . This set of stimuli is only a set because we recognize it as such, because we attach a series of natural numbers to it. The ability to generate ordered sets is a function of our brain, but is not present in the random external stimuli. Following Kant, time and space are the conditions for experience, but not experience itself. So time and space are functions of the brain, operations of the human mind, and not attributable to the things in and by themselves. The hypothesis is that things in and by themselves are random, in a state of total entropy.
This means there is no signal but only noise.
We generate signals both time and space and both are a function of our brain. Ordered sets are essentially human. The world is not ordered but we are. In order to make the world appear as it does, we group, arrange and connect it. As we do so persistently we can not think of the world in any other way, or we can think of other worlds but none of them make up what we call reality. Reality is self-consistent and comprehended with what we call the laws of nature. Therefore reality is a fixed convention, the only ordered set humans make of random stimuli, at any given moment in time. The basic proposition of predicate logic a=a b<>a etc.. are true for any given moment in time, however eternal we think them to be - as our construct of eternity is something of indefinite time - as we can not think outside of time and space. Even if we did we can not attach any reality to this, it would be meaningless. So the laws of nature are only true for any given moment in time and space and they would have to be regenerated by us at any given moment.
It is easy to lose sight of this fact, that what we hold true as a sequentially ordered set of stimuli, the world, is only true for any given instant of time and space and we, as humans, as a function of the brain, as a mind regenerate this constantly. They are not only relative, as Einstein showed, but are made for each instant of time and for each splice of space. This point is easy to comprehend if we look at the way humans perceived of the world a few hundred years ago. Well, they thought the earth in the center of the universe. Bloodletting was considered a medical treatment. Needless to say, our contemporary conception of the laws of nature and mind have changed, they have been regenerated each instant of time, but random mutations occurred and here we are with the sun in the center of our solar system. It is obvious what happened to our bloodletting, it vanished from the book of medical treatments.
But this also means that our current conception is undergoing regeneration and random mutation any moment.
This of course does not disprove the validity of our past and current conceptions, they are true, they were true, and they will be. So it is time then to rethink our basic concepts of sound, time, space, music and the mind.
Am ärgsten sind wir jedoch der Technik ausgeliefert, wenn wir sie als etwas Neutrales betrachten; denn diese Vorstellung, der man heute besonders gern huldigt, macht uns vollends blind gegen das Wesen der Technik.
David Hume - Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding
Immanuel Kant - Prolegomena
 (Bosse Lincoln)
8 Isaac Newton (reverseability)
9 David Hume
10 Immanual Kant (Free Will)
11 Max Planck
12 Sadi Carnot (2nd law of thermodynamics)
13 Gustav Fechner (psychophysics)
14 Heinrich Boltzmann
15 Albert Einstein
16 Werner Heisenberg
17 Heschl's gyri (Auditory cortex)
18 Norbert Wiener
19 Donald Knuth
20 Max Matthews
21 Chuck Moore
22 Karlheinz Stockhausen (long time)
23 Luc Ferrari (field rec)
24 Iannis Xenakis
25 John Cage (substractive organisation)