Principles of a Great Library
For me, ‘New Alexandria’ has already represented that symbol of a more-perfect global library. I would seek to continue to build that ‘library’ in all the formats - digital, physical, process, community, etc.
one of the guiding principles has been to understand why all the great libraries have ended in cataclysm. Babel, New Alexandria, al Hakam, the Maya/Aztec system. There seems to be some mystery yet, about drawing together all wisdom and language
I would think this is to be avoided, the lesson finally learned, and build in a format allowable to the Divine Mind / universal holofractal
Then another guiding principle to me has been mereological breadth. Not leaving anything out, and seeking an organization crosslinking that is ‘peaceful’ and at rest. Many library and archival works are a fever of lost fragment organization. Cultural POVs on, archetypal understandings, get left ‘unintegrateable’, at worse due to will or fatigue.
Somehow in this latter one i suspect the key to the former. I consider the possibility that the great libraries have been profane because they decided to omit certain ways of thinking. Truth is often painful, and requires personal development. This challenge is as much for the archivist as for those that look upon great libraries ‘from the outside’.
Then perhaps in anticipation of another principle, I wonder that a great library faces a challenge that the Gnostics identified with as ‘the demiurge’. The mirroring of ‘The Great Mind’ itself creates a kind of golem that may cause reshapings upon the world. The mere act of making it harder or easier to navigate certain paths of knowledge, may itself do this. (in fact we may see it in the bias claimed of educational curriculum and media broadcast) If we are to avoid yet another catastrophe, another principle may be needed for the ‘cognitive ergonomics’ of a great library
§The Morphogenics of Libraries
I had this dream, where I realized that the library isn’t books, it’s language itself. In the dream i was processing all kinds of languages, including so-called machine languages, meta languages, and i think others. The languages build every story that will be. Books are as much the memory palace as the library/architecture itself.
AI seems like a kind of foam. The structural filler in a 3D printed model. We’re going to render some new kind of language.
§A Consequence of Libraries
§Babel, Babel, Toil and Fable
I saw this meme, and it made me think of a relations between lived work, and nearness to the Divine.
![[babel-worker-language-infinte-long-tail.webp]]
Holofractal, ‘as a practice’, takes us into spaces of new language. Both because of the development of fractality as a linguistic construct – and because praxis is ‘scoped to infinity’ so we will ever be inventing new language to describe where we are in the event horizon of time.
The Library of Babel held that same pattern - approaching the infinity of heaven and ‘the Divine itself’. To build [a tower] toward such ‘place’ and ‘being’ one would legendarily find oneself building in ways that were different then when one started. ‘The workers all now speak new languages’
Whether that quote was ever part of the lore of Babel, I think it has worth and meaning in the narrative. Maybe part of the ‘cataclysm’ of great libraries is the inevitable granularity + variance of language(s). Variances which, in the worse cases of human nature, lead to anger, strife, and violence. AI will obviously have these problems, too, as an implicit ‘great library’. Is vectorization a new means toward fractality in language?
I think it may be that a true revelation of ‘AI’ will be linguistic forms that merge spatial patterns and temporal patterns through the semiotic patterns of relationship. Human brilliance and creativity has long been associated with this matrix of association - so much that our sci-fi about AI has made this one of the dimensions of AI-apotheosis. AI tooling crossed a threshold when visualization systems began to demonstrate the same broad associative connection - so much that the outputs were dubbed ‘deep dreams’.
I don’t think it’s a stretch to mention that around the same cusp of years, the movie Arrival dreamed out a language beyond linear time, based on the structure of projections from high-dimensional maps within 12-D space.
i wonder that there are envelopes within the vectorspace of meaning. Like envelopes of scale. Not clusters, but something that is like a bubble or strata. For instance, maybe a coherent ‘sentence’ comes from expressing things within such an envelope. Or maybe they are rules to cross envelopes. Like if time were a scale the death would be such envelope, and we see traditions of religiosity have linguistic formula for expressing communications that cross envelopes.
With realizing such superstructures, we might come to use new symbolic forms in language. Again, the fractality concept. e.g. maybe memes are this - a formula for a set of linguistic concepts. By encapsulating those patterns in glyphs / words / new-linguistic-elements, we could then build higher order expressions. Thus a kind of compression that minimizes the need for decoding. We could thus communicate vast complexity in normal time
When we all have AGI or SAGI at our personal ‘command’, we regardless will need a means to communicate with each other about our expectations of how each person is to use it. Like a national leader giving expectations to a regional governor or general. (rough metaphor) I think that some of this suggests why some memes ‘seem right’ and others do not. Why some can be viral, etc
maybe they’re akin to schnorr signatures? Some kind of ‘schnorr bubble’ ? if a schnorr bubble is a thing, then wonder that ‘recognition’, e.g. ‘witnessing’ and other ‘inherent realization’, are equivalent to ZKP / zero-knowledge proofs.
the analogue to schnorr sigs also implies a scenario where secrecy / unavailability is necessary. That some things should not be heard/understood. This returns to the matter of Babel.
Does performing Work on Infinity demand, or inevitably lead to, divergent language such that understanding is not available in all contexts? Does work within an envelope demand an ‘isolated frame’ or enforced ‘bubble’, e.g. holography of all other knowledge outside the envelope of scale integrates to [some color and temperature of] noise? i.e. so that self can work with a formula of contextual being, for action to occur?
i wonder if the energy for encryption could be akin to gravity, or similar energy-boundary dynamics, complete with analogues to accretion, ‘event horizon’, etc. That would bring back the analogue between encryption and Time.
Deja Vu would be another one of these envelope concepts. In physical space, envelops of scale are nested geometrically to the observer (the human, and anthropically proportioned to the sensory apparatus + consciousness). But the logos can have different overlaps of envelopes. Or that higher-dimensional sphere/toroids are the model of the logos, and their encapsulation / envelopes are not constrained as the physical world, and seem to have intersections when projected into ‘incarnated space’.
