I will take both concepts seriously and see how they interlace.
My colleague Mr Weir quotes an irrelevant Nietzsche and that's a non sequitur. Poor form!!!
The Nietzschean concept of the Eternal Return, Eternal Recurrence or Eternal Return of the Same has to be established. There are various interpretations from the analytical to the continental and current hybridities.
To allow for easiest alignment to the physics I will view Nietzsche through a Cartesian coordinates frame. Such a reading will allow and interstitial transdisciplinary movement from philosophy to science - Descartes being the confluence between these two continuing rigours.
Thus I will choose Eternal Recurrence as the model - leaving the Eternal Return of the Same as a postmodern perspective and the Eternal Return as an existential/phenomenological ontotheology. [I don't have all day and this is a FREEBIE!]
Eternal Recurrence - Nietzsche qua Cartesian is thus quite easily graspable - eternal recursion, a if-then goto programming looping subroutine! So it's a recursion. Let's keep there and not yet evoke presumptions such as circular or spherical just yet...let's walk!
As looping recursion through the Cartesian coordinates reading this then systematises via x-y graph plotting and tesselation our looping recursion. Systematising via graph function, as any systems thinking does will lead to Cybernetics systems theory. Welcome mid 20th century! From Descartes to German bombast idealist [and great STYLIST!] to Norbert Elias, Gregory Bateson, Margaret Mead and Buckmister Fuller. Historically and discursively getting cuddly with science! All these thinkers span fields and approached science. They all interacted with science but let's go straight to physics but approach cosmology from behind, like Deleuzian hip hop doggy style!
Bateson as cyberneticist saw systemics and then an overarching systemics he called Universe or Mind. I though think this is a clumsy conflation - sorry fella, you move too fast! Let's just call it Universe to pay loving attention to such a great question. So there are systems, and they can be river systems, weather systems etc those natural systems are a biosphere or biome [to me these are interchangable - if anyone can delineate and/or differentiation them please be my friend and let's have skype or coffee if you live in Sydney AU]
Natural Systems, then we have constructed systems - infrastructure, energy, architecture, military, governance, finance, economics, these are human made, for the sake of overall brevity, let's called the constructed system GRID. [made up of many spheres - networks, cultures] There are many other such spheres
let's evoke them - abstractly Teilhard Chardin posited the noo-sphere. A sphere where ideas congregate, thus why inventions happen simulataneously. The infosphere, blogosphere, the semiosphere [for you language buffs out there]
Multiple spheres. Interlacing spheres because it all overlaps, interlaces, doubles, phases in and out, [like solid geometry Venn Diagrams in TIME] move.
And what began as linear system, line becomes geometry becomes solid geometry, then multiple hypergeometries and if they are in motion [time] then from these planes, multiplanar and dimensional moving solidity ie 3 dimensional with time. Then that's the 4 dimensions. Moving allows for VECTOR and immediacy within vector...that allows for inertia AND the concept of NOMADISM in Deleuze and Guattari continental philosophy. AND remember Gilles Deleuze wrote a book, amomg his catalogue, on Nietzsche.
I understand in Quantum early copenhagen interpretation there is theory, physics, mechanics and field theory. Various Quantum theories applying to their particular intensity [both science and Deleuze - here Deleuze is your buddy hi fiving you all the way on a surfboard! You can paint him Silver if you want! LOL]
Some key notions that contemporary philosophy and science share are non-locality, knot theory, field [habitus of Elias, Bourdieu and later Copenhagen] uncertainty, partiality, shifting scale,
And I have my own contributions and talk about things like continua [multiple continuums and their recursions], philosophically let's return to Derrida
his "differance" [not difference] is another type of difference.
Tradition difference encapsulate quantitative and qualitative difference. Pure Qualitative difference is differance!
Pure quantitave difference is I DUNNO ASK LEVI BRYANT hahahahah or someone.
Daniel Dennett thinks Multiverse theory qua the SAME, ie the same universe repeating like a photocopy, is absurd! Perhaps! But Daniel, if you're reading where is your POETIC side and your literary flair!!
Science allows for multiverses - the Big Bang theory as immersive universe means we are embedded and talking about a before-the-big-Bang is bullshit. This has consequences for our friend Bateson. Me sorry, you can't have second level cybernetics - there is no mind or overmind, or second order or meta level in this sense ie even meta level is still a level!
Or corrollary to Derrida "even metalanguage is still language"! Whoah, deconstruction and science. Martin Hagglund is an expert here. He's my friend on FB, he goes for Netherlands in the World Cup. Chile drew 1-1 with Brazil and lost on shoot out. My cousin is shitty! LOLZ
I am putting my smiley happy facebook face on because the Internet is from the US and so is Facebook! Otherwise, I'm Benicio del Toro and all the hotchicks, cool architects and even my philosophical and art frenemies wouldn't begrudge me if YOU PAID ME or gave me a job.HAHA Long live fair economies where someone with my mind is on struggle street. Please friend me on Facebook if or twitter if you think I rock the socks of the locks!
But just cos my colleague Rob is BLOWN OUT OF THE WATER
By a Sydney University poetry nerd who knows the one inch punch this can also mean he is free to find his portal here in what I've written and contribute at his best.
But I'm telling ya, Sydney Uni is kicking the shit out of Harvard here!!!
Big deal it's quora...gimme your money sez Morrissey in one of those songs by The Smiths.
This was written in fell swoop, any typos, please allow me grace.
I'm a writer not a grammar nazi AHEM rude proofreader who doesn't know their place!!! :)
