Re:

to say I understand something the contexts are the dimensions and the recursive process allows you t close in each dimension building up the obejct. . almost like a camera focusing its lens , except they au images they are concepts ,

I am not certain that "well ordering" fits here

it doesnt. it only does in one dimension

BTHW, I am going tonight to Princeton for a lecture by Mariano Sigman -- do you know him?

also I will will meet a Russian/American biologist-pharmacologists who's fed 1000 drugs to 15 000 mice,

I think he is great friends of Ariely. both politically correct. so their work is blather. they do not explore gender race. age in their statistic usauly so garbage in garbge out .

political correctness blinds only one eye

and stops only one tongue

And there is a secret what you see with both eyes open

see, ? perceive? understand? illusion? all but i like the recursive shape space more and more. with closer iterations to what it means to understand. . my model is comprised of a set function that after recursion comes closer to coherence . but also depends on the subects algorithm. its very nice.

Probably, I have o think more, but once you start thinking about how you think you never accept what everybody else think about how you think.

i dont think many algorithms should be part of the brain. I believe that turning input into a coherent shape is similar in vision hearing and thought. we know more about vision. edges verticals horiz etc. why not the same for concepts. ideas. . the image i see must be decoded into a whole . the concepts i imagine need the same program. first black and white, shapes , etc. for vision. as the feedback loop develops. things come into focus. . same with thoughts. . I am still perplexed by how little control we have over the thing we call " I " / it does most things , it wants , it reacts without "I " input. the signal for repair is not under control , cuts breaks stings. all done by the magician with no way to override it.