The origin of Japanese culture and, the world view as its logical conclusion.
	It revised the former edition. Hiromasa Noguti. December 18, 2011.     It fixed the language of html in February 10, 2017.       --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------    To old edition.
	6. The physical world the cognition-subject sees. (Characteristic time, Subjective time, and Objective time.)
	In fifth knot, it explained the special worldview which is based on the monism like dualism, developing logically the worldview Jomon people thought on. And, that was the worldview to be based on the relationship between the cognition-subject and the " object for cognition". However, that also is the worldview to be based on the pluralism. It is because it is supposed there are countless aspects at the relationship between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition". Why the countless aspects like that are supposed is because there are the countless things to be supposed to be a cognition-subject or a "object for cognition". Therefore, at the world to be based on the pluralism, there are the various worlds corresponding to each cognition-subject into the same space-time. Needless to say, those various worlds all are subjective world. But, it is possible to find out the common point to each subjective world like that, with objective thinking. The tools for the works like that are the logical thinking and the viewpoint of the natural science and social science. Actually, mankind continued to find the objective world while considering the causation and logical relations between the various things or phenomenon, with using the tools like that. And, the works like that are continuing also now. In former knot, it stated that the cognition-subject always is in the center of the space-time. Needless to say, that is the center of the subjective world. However, the form of the aspect of space-time at the subjective world is also the footing of the objective world. The following is the explanation of the form of the space-time like that. First, it makes the following three dimensional graph about the space-time though the space-time originally has to be expressed in the four dimensional graph. The origin of the coordinate is the mathematical speck to be possessed always by the cognition-subject as for the space, and is the speck called present being on the time axis for the cognition-subject as for time. The vertical axis is the axis of the cognition-subject's characteristic time connecting the future and the past through the cognition-subject. Then, the space is expressed with the two dimensions(a surface) at right angles against the axis of time. Furthermore, the two dimensions expressing the space are expressed by the X-axis and Y-axis which crosses at right angles to each. In passing, the X-axis and Y-axis each express the distance and direction at right angles to the axis of time. So, since in this case, the X-axis and Y-axis only are set up to show the position of the object on this graph, it isn't the position of the object in the space-time shown in four dimensional graph. Therefore, even if the direction shown by X-axis and Y-axis accords to the direction in four dimensions because of someone's intent, it especially is no problem for this explanation if above-mentioned conditions are kept. By the way, if it observes the above graph, it notices that the cognition-subject can see only the surface of the cone which spreads from the origin of the coordinate toward the past. It is because the quickness of light is in the fixed condition under the vacuum condition. In passing, it is natural that the cognition-subject always is in the top of the cone. Then, the above-mentioned perception, that is, the seeing means the cognition-subject looks at the object directly. It never be the indirect perception from the books, pictures, and so on. Therefore, it has to think that all part of the space-time expressed by three dimensional graph exists as the possibility, except the surface of the cone the cognition-subject sees. Even if a person relies on the other's memory about perceiving the part of the space-time he can't see, he has to confirm with another memory, whether the memory he relied on is right. The verification of one memory only relies on the consistency in between others' memory including a book, and so on. And, the means of the verification of memory is nowhere, besides that. At any case, the consistency between each memory only shows us the possibility that certain memory is right. So, it stated before that most of the space-time exist as the possibility, for the said cognition-subject. As it stated before, since the above graph only shows the relationship between the position of the cognition-subject and the position of "object for cognition", the sight shown there is different from the sight of so-called space-time. In other words, that is the space-time, characteristic in the cognition-subject always possessing the mathematical speck of the present time. Then, all the mathematical specks on the cone's surface each are expressed with the half arc, as for the so-called space-time. And, if the length of the half arc like that is set up as R, next inequality is found out. "0 < R < or = infinity". * In passing, since my computer hasn't the mathematical symbol of "infinity" or other in English font, it expressed it with the above inequality. By the way, the angle of cone and the characteristic time are decided by the quickness of light. Therefore, the characteristic time like that concretely is calculated by the relationship between the quickness of light and the distance between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition" emitting the light. And, if it explains it about the so-called space-time, it has to calculate, with tracing the path of light emitted from the object. But, when it is calculated on the above graph, it is natural that the characteristic time and the distance between the cognition-subject and the "objects for cognition" are expressed with the straight line. In other words, in this special space-time, the time and also space don't shrink and also expand. Therefore, it can get the next equation. "CT = a L / c". In this case, the characteristic time is "CT", the constant is "a". The length between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition" is "L". And, the quickness of light is "c". Then, it sets up the following two variables, that is, the A and B necessary for the next consideration for the "a" which is the constant. The "A" is the migration length of the cognition-subject looking to have been carried through the time axis, to the present position, that is, the top of the cone from the supposed position of him on the time axis in the moment where the said object gave off light. The "B" is the length of straight line drawn upon the cone between the "object for cognition" and the cognition-subject possessing the top of the cone. Needless to say, the distance between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition" has to be the length of the moment where the light given off from the " object for cognition" arrived at him. So, it seems that the constant is given the value one if it is seen from the viewpoint of the beauty about the graph. And, since it can't find out the reason that the constant has other value, as it thought, the value to be given to the constant would be 1. However, this explanation looks to include the contradiction apparently. If the constant is given the value one, by any chance, it is because there may be the person having thought the cognition-subject can see one's self existing in the past. But, no one can do such a thing, in reality if it doesn't use the mirror. Why would it be so? If it observes the space-time of the cone, it notices that the cognition-subject can't exist on the surface of the cone at any time. Because of that, the cognition-subject can't see one's self exist in the past. In other words, the universe he can see is limited to the surface of the cone persistently. Then, in this case, the quickness of the cognition-subject running toward the future through the time axis is same as the quickness of light. Needless to say, it is because the A(length) is equal to the B(length) at the above graph if the value to put in the above constant is 1. However, the cognition-subject in the above graph can't move from the present time. Therefore, it has to think that the characteristic time and light each are running toward the converse direction against each with the same quickness. It is expressed by next equation. That is, it is "the quickness of the current of characteristic time" = -1 "the speed of light". And, it seems that this equation is very important for the perception. But, as for the thing, it is stated later. Anyhow, the space-time shown by above graph is the space-time, characteristic in each cognition-subject, carrying the universal form of the perception for all the cognition-subject. And, it also expresses the fundamental structure of the subjective space-time putting the cognition-subject on the center of the space-time. Therefore, it whole isn't the expression of the subjective world. The contents of the subjective world persistently are created by the relations between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition" and by the form and ability of the perception the cognition-subject has. However, the above mentioned characteristic time is related not only to the subjective space-time but also to the objective space-time. As for the thing, it is stated after the consideration of the subjective space-time. By the way, the quickness of the current of the time in the subjective space-time is decided by the relationship between the cognition-subject and the amount of information he accepts. In other words, the subjective time shifts to the shorter condition than before if the amount of information the cognition-subject perceived decreases. If conversely, the amount like that increases, the subjective time shifts to the longer condition than before. And, the information like that is the stimulus the cognition-subject perceives as the information, is the stimulus emitted from the outside world as the undulation. Furthermore, the subjective perception like that relies on the space-time, characteristic in the said cognition-subject fundamentally. Therefore, the subjective time also has to be based on the characteristic time. So, it can suppose the next equation. That is, it is "ST = CT Ifm". In passing, the "ST" is the subjective time. The "Ifm" is the amount of information. As for the value of "Ifm", it is restricted by the next inequality. That is, it is "0 < Ifm < 1". As it stated before, it seems that all space-times can be born because the illogical existence, with illogically jumping to the relationship in between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition", is given the conceptualization called the distinction. It is because the illogical world includes the logical world. And, the cognition-subject is distinguished from whole of the "object for cognition" first when the space-time is given the birth. That is, one cognition-subject and one "object for cognition" first appear at that time. But, this doesn't mean that it is only one cognition-subject. It was already stated in "Civilization and living body" or other. Anyhow, all the stimuluses emitted from the space-time are only the expression of whole of the "object for cognition" like that. Therefore, it thought that the "Imf" has to be expressed by the fraction. Be aware of the fact that the Imf expresses the amount of the information of moment which were perceived by the cognition-subject within the information the whole of the space-time emitted. Needless to say, the object to be perceived like that always is in the surface of the cone. In passing, it is natural that the stimulus the cognition-subject accepts from the object decreases as the distance between the cognition-subject and the object becomes longer. By the way, It can get the "ST = L/c Imf" if it substitutes the right side of the "CT = L/c" to the "equation for subjective time". And, if the "Imf" is limitlessly close to 0, the length of subjective time is "1/infinity" when it calculates the "ST = L/c Imf". In other words, the quickness of the current of the time is infinite. (The "L" is finite). But, it is said that the object quicker than light doesn't exist in the material world. And, it seems that the thing can be applied to the current of the time at the above graph as well if the idea about the characteristic space-time is proper. In other words, the quickness of the current of the time can't be faster than the quickness of light in at least the material world. If so, it seems that the result in above calculations means that the cognition-subject disappears, flying away from the material world. That is, it seems that it means at least the physical death. If so, about the thing, would the above graph show the aspect of the objective time how ? Next, it thinks about that problem. The length of objective time changes, corresponding to the physical relationship between the observer and the object. And, at this reasoning, the major premise for the objective time is the characteristic time. So, it can suppose "OT =L/c Gn", with multiplying the "Gn" by the right side of the equation of the characteristic time. In this case, the "OT" expresses the objective time. The "Gn" is the value gotten from the curvature of the space to be calculated between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition" in the so-called space-time. So, it wants to rely on a person good of math as for this equation and also the "Gn". By the way, it can suppose the next inequality for the "Gn". That is, it is the "infinity> Gn >or= 1". Needless to say, at that time, the "L Gn" logically can get the value bigger than the "L" or the value of the "L", corresponding to the circumstances. It is because the "length between the cognition-subject and the object" in the objective space-time can't be shorter than the "L". The reason why the minimum value in the above mentioned inequality is 1 is because the space-time had the size at the beginning of the big bang. It seems that the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition" appear in the same time as the birth of space-time. And, light has the finite quickness. So, it thinks it is natural that the perceived space-time has the size even if the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition" are in the beginning of big bang. In passing, if the inequality about the Gn is proper, it is possible to suppose "Gn = b Cur Ep" for the moment. In this case, the "b" is the constant. The "Ep" is the unknown variable. Then, the value of the "b Ep" is restricted by next inequality. "1 < or = Ep < infinity". So, the "b Ep" is the reciprocal of the "Gn". Then, the "Cur", that is, the curvature of space is restricted in the next inequality. "infinity > Cur > 1/infinity". Then, in the "OT =L/c Gn", if the "Gn" is the infinity, the "OT" also is infinity. In other words, at that time, it can think that the length of objective time be limitlessly long. And, the quickness of the current of the objective time becomes slow limitlessly. Then, since at that time, it seems the space-time is the mathematical speck, it seems that this is the condition to appear immediately before the big bang occurs. But, the turn in the above things is the logical turn, not causation. Conversely, if the value of "Gn" is 1, in this case, the "OT =L/c Gn" is same as the "CT =L/c". In other words, in this case, the objective time is same as the characteristic time. And, it seems that it means such a space-time is the empty world, for every observer. It states the reason next. In this case, the distance between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition" is the "L" purely. In other words, the "L" is straight purely. And, it means the energy doesn't exist. But, it doesn't seem that the objective space-time like that can exist, in reality. It really is the death of the space-time. And, if the above consideration is proper, it can suppose next inequality. "c > (the quickness of the current of the objective time)> 0". On the other hand, this inequality also is applied to the quickness of subjective time's current as well. And, as it stated before, it seems that the cognition-subject goes away from the space-time if the quickness of the current of the subjective time becomes close to the quickness of light limitlessly. Furthermore, it tallies with the death of objective space-time entirely. Therefore, at least for one cognition-subject, his physical death also is the death of space-time at least for him. Anyhow, if this consideration is proper, as it thought before, the subjective world and the objective world both are based on the relationship between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition". And, the value of the "Gn" and the value of the "Imf", if each equation of time is compared with each, are in the relationship of the inverse proportion. Needless to say, as for the amount and contents of "Imf", it is natural that it is related to the form and ability of the perception. By the way, as it stated before, the relationship between light and time is expressed with the next equation. "The quickness of the current of characteristic time" = -1 "the speed of light". Needless to say, it is because it apparently seems the time goes toward the cognition-subject to the converse direction of movement of light. It makes me recall the relationship in between the electric current and the current of electron. In other words, the time and light may be the concepts expressing two aspects of the materialization of the same existence. It is said the perception is given when the particle of something emitted from the eyes arrives at the object, according to Empedokles who is the philosopher in ancient Greece. Apparently, it looks to be the terrible error. But, I understood this particle to be the "will for perception" emitted from the individuals' mind. If so, it is possible to think the time and light which originally are the same existence are the first expression of logic providing the relationship between the cognition-subject and the "object for cognition". So, it seems that the logic like that is shown us with the next equation. That is, that is the "quickness of the current of the characteristic time" = -1 "the speed of light". As it stated before, the mathematical speck possessed by the cognition-subject always is the center of the space-time, is always the present time. And, it seems that it is the only place to create his perception and universe. I named the place like that the singular point of perception. Caution ; Since it noticed that the parts it revised in the former edition were worse expression though it doesn't know why, it revised those again here.
NEXT PAGE			Introduction. The mental problems of Japan. # 1. Culture and civilization. Ecosystem and the diverse human world. # 2. The fundamental understanding to Japanese culture. # 2-1. The formation of Japanese peoples. # 2-2. About Japanese language. # 2-3. Japanese culture and the Japanese people's brain. # 3. The soul of Jomon lurking to Japanese gods and goddesses. # 3-1. The origin of Japanese double standard. # 3-2. The divine nature of the gods of the Koto-ama-tu-kami. # 3-3. The change in the divine nature at the gods and goddesses. # 3-4. The country of the gods and goddesses.
	# 3-5. The birth of Ebisu. # 4. The world view Jomon people think. # 4-1. The Jomon world : The profit and the barter economy. # 4-2. The religion for Jomon people. # 4-3. "The myth of birth of Japanese countries" and "the thought of Itak". # 4-4. The world view lurking to us. # 5. The subject and object to realize into "Kan-musubi" and "Takami-musubi". # 6. The physical world the cognition-subject sees. (Characteristic time, Subjective time, and Objective time.) # 7. The information and the cognition-subject.
Cotosiro