Representational Encodings

Representational Encodings

The type of encoding used by a representation confers upon it unique properties and abilities enabling each type of representation to serve its distinct purpose. Without their distinct encodings, the three types of representation would not possess the properties and abilities required to represent existence, thought and information respectively. Only by understanding the advantages and disadvantages of the different types of encodings can we know how best to utilize each encoding and each representation that uses it.
There are two basic types of representational encodings: Fixed, and Relative.


Fixed Encodings
Fixed encodings represent each symbol with a constant fixed code or fixed numeric value, or fixed pattern. Information uses fixed encodings. For example in a computer, the ASCII code for the letter ‘A’ is always decimal 65 or binary 01000001. Every computer that uses the ASCII encoding represents an upper case A as the decimal number 65. In printed text using the Latin alphabet, the uppercase letter ‘A’ is always represented by a character that looks like ‘A’. Fixed encodings are typically based on standards, conventions or agreements. Fixed encodings are context free. The value of the code used to represent each symbol is fixed. It does not change as a function of the context it is used in. Information uses fixed encodings. Fixed encodings are well suited for communication. Their weakness is they are not very compact, and they do not scale well when representing complex, context dependent information.


Relative Encodings
In contrast to fixed encodings, relative encodings have no public fixed “symbols”, fixed codes, or fixed values. Relative encodings are private and context dependent. Relative encodings encode the representation of particulars in terms of how they ‘relate’ to ‘other particulars’, where the ‘relations’ and ‘other particulars’ are defined relative to the context in which they are used, or they are represented by an instance of a previously defined relative encoding within the context of definition of that which they participate in the definition of.

Both fixed and relative encodings can represent how things relate to each other, but they do so differently. Fixed encodings represent relationships external to the encoding of an entity; that is the relationships are used to define the intension of an entity, but the encoding of the relationships themselves is independent of the context they are used in. For example, in a fixed encoding the representation and meaning of an addition operator is defined outside of the context in which it is used. Its’ encoding and meaning are not affected by the context it is used in. In a fixed encoding, the relationships are represented by the encoding, but they are defined external to it. Hence, in a fixed encoding, the relationships have an existence and a coding independent of their use in the intensional representation of an entity.

Relative encodings embed the encoding and representation of the relationships between entities as part of the representation of the entity itself. The entity being defined encodes the representation of the relationship relative to, and in terms of the entities own existence or direct representation. The relationships are internal to the encoding of the representation and are defined by, in terms of, and relative to it. The encoding of the relationships is inseparable from the encoding of that which they relate. In a relative encoding, the relationships do not have independent context free definitions. They are only defined by and only have meaning relative to the context they are used in. This is a critical distinction. With a relative encoding, either all the parts of the representation of a particular are embedded inside the particular, or the particular does not exist.

Relative encodings encapsulate the representation of their component parts. Fixed encodings do not. With a fixed encoding, each part of the representation is separable and context independent. Fixed encodings allow partial representations of particulars. Relative encodings do not. The use of relative encoding to encode the direct representation of existence is the cause of the bivalence of existence. At the level of quanta in Physics, quanta exist fully or not at all. Empty space has physical existence because it has dimension. Distances can be measured in space. If space did not exist, there would be no measurable distance between objects in space. Space can be curved. Space also contains vacuum energy fields, also known as the zero point field, or dark energy, thought to be responsible for the cosmological constant and the accelerating expansion of space. Additional physical evidence for considering the physical existence of space will be covered in more detail later. Fundamental particles (i.e., fermions) and bosons also exist fully or not at all. Nothing physical partially exists at the fundamental level of physical quanta.

The relative encoding of existence is also the cause of the Pauli Exclusion Principle in Physics. It is the reason matter cannot pass through matter, even though according to the standard model of particle physics, matter is known to be 99.999999999999% empty space. Matter is composed of curved or knotted zero point energy vacuum fields. The space-time encapsulated in matter is part of the representation of matter. It is not possible to separate matter from the space-time that composes it because the direct relative encoding of matter encapsulates the representation of the space-time from which the matter is composed. Removing the space-time from the representation of matter, or changing the space used in the representation of matter would be the same as removing part of the representation of matter. It would break the encapsulation of the representation of existence, which would make it inconsistent and the matter would cease to exist. It is not possible to break the encapsulation of the representation of existence without destroying it. The encapsulation of the representation of existence is a fundamental property of existence.

The encapsulation of the representation of existence is responsible for the bivalence of existence. If the existential representation were not encapsulated, existence would not be bivalent; i.e. quanta could partially exist, and quantum states would not exist, and the universe would not exhibit quantum behavior or operate according to the laws of Quantum Mechanics . The encapsulation of the representation of existence is the cause of all quantum states in Physics. If the fundamental building blocks of existence did not have quantum states, then the conservation of nonexistence would be violated (we'll cover this later after we formally define the representation of existence), it would be possible to destroy nothing, and the laws of Physics would be inconsistent.

Without quantum phenomena, the fundamental building blocks of existence could partially exist and existence would be continuous, incomplete and inconsistent instead of quantized, complete and consistent. Partial existence does not occur at the quantum level. Nothing that exists can exist half inside and half outside the universe. An individual quantum property must be in one quantum state or another. It cannot exist at a level partly between two different quantum states. Quantum behavior is a fundamental property of existence precisely because it is dependent on the representation of existence. It is a necessary fundamental property of existence because of the bivalence between existence and non-existence and the encapsulation of the representation of existence.