The Multi-Screen Setup

why is the multi-screen TV setup the intrinsic shape of the medium? why will the number of screens you can read and operate from simultaneously become the preeminent measure of human intelligence?

imaging screen technologies now dictate the shape of societies, their cultures and their potentials. those citizens most able to uptake local and remote information via imaging screen technology will be better informed, less prone to error in analysis and trend projection, and, hence, in a position to exercise leadership and policy determinations. there is no such thing as “information overload”. there is, however, such a thing as cognitive underutilization. we can train ourselves to increase the throughput density of information and invent new interpretive frames of reference for realtime evaluation of information.

amplifications OF a single screen and ON a single screen such as big screen projection and screen insets (computer pull downs and windows) are an evolutionary dead end for imaging technology no matter what the resolution, screen size or screen write speed. a multi-screen array consisting of a tailored number of monitor modules will become the universal application of 2-D screen imaging. every office and home will have banks of monitors tuned to various media feeds, displaying computer functions and acting in a variety of gauge roles. Marshal McLuhan correctly concluded that any new technology tends to incorporate the new function within the shape of the older replaced technology. hence, television kept the single screen of cinema as did cinema keep the proscenium stage attributes of theater and so on.

breakouts from this chronic backwards referencing of new technology can occur wherever the pressure of necessity requires accurate and predictive data. television was little more than a curiosity until WWII, when CRT imaging was accellerated by the indispensability of radar, wherein the extension of view out across space equated to a higher resolution in prediction models. the abstraction of information onto a realtime over- the-horizon view on a picture screen (rather than a telescope eye piece, for example) meant a quantum leap in information processing potential from the mechanical domain to the electrical domain. banks of radar screens allowed the orchestration of complex vectoring of attention and its subsequent materiel in the high velocity = high necessity situations of aircraft control centers and cockpits.

the principle of military intelligence is non-delusional and survival dependent. this is applicable to domains other than military. human intelligence is very much dependent upon visual uptake and its cognitive apparatus of the brain. our brains devote about half of their total function to the reception and evaluation of visual data. direct picture cognition, (as opposed to print-symbol cognition) integrated into our our concept of space geometry, can be accellerated to multiply our IQ (heretofore primarily evaluated based upon print literacy). there is a simple exercise to give one a taste of this ability. if you place two TV sets side by side, tuned to two different channels, volume up on both, and concentrate on following the information flux simultaneously, within ten minutes of moderate concentration you will have eclipsed 500 years of obsolete sequential print patterning. multi-screen image literacy will position your perceptions within a flux of simultaneous info, ie., a more accurate model of the real 3-d world of simultaneous events.

why multi-screen array with 6, 8 or 10 screens rather than a single screen with insets or message overlays? obviously, a multi-monitor setup means independent, autonomous modular circuitry, so that a fail-safe redundancy is inherent to the set-up. but as a cognitive tool, modules of the same screen size breaks down impediments built into the hierarchy of subject object predicate sequential print uptake. in an array of screens, you define a frame of reference consisting of equal domains where important info can pop up and be recognized anywhere on the array. with the peripheral visual field sharing a conscious role, a secondary hierarchical dominance is defeated, that of the pencil thin cone of the central visual field which is lessened, allowing for an awareness of field interplay, rather than an awareness of only point objects acting upon an inert background. point scanning is the dominant uptake mode of print literacy. the TV’s electron scan already does this for us at a far greater velocity than our eyes. instead of mimicking the thin visual uptake tunnel of print reading, we can begin to apperceive in blanket areas and allow the eye to “read” the situation as the situation dictates instead of being trapped in a line by line, left to right, top to bottom and other rigid physical and cognitive schema. the primary result is an increase in interpretive flexibility, tending to downplay expectations based on sequential linearity and thus allowing for the discovery of new and unexpected patterns via inductive projective synthesis rather than a deductive extrapolation on an preexistant theme, ideology or mood on the part of the analyst. a second result is a cognitive breakout from the specialists tunnel vision. no longer are phenomena, particularly social phenomena, allowed to exist divorced from relationship, as existential isolates. the wider the field of view, the more apparent are actual operant causalities across previously exclusionary categories. the third result is the repatterning of thought from words into pictures. if a picture is worth a thousand words, thinking in pictures is a three orders of magnitude increase in efficiency.

in a multi-screen array, the eyes, jumping from screen to screen, look for important data at a rapid rate. this makes the domain boundaries (screen borders) become more and more permeable. this is diametrically opposed to the single screen (theater/cinema) limitation of having the viewer captive to a single bounded area. any singular oriented media of communication which attempts to overlay itself upon plural fields is an unfaithful model of the field fluxes of the real 3-d world and does not prepare us to act effectively in the 3-d world.

breakthroughs in human invention are characterized by the translation of concepts across boundaries, usually by the synthesis of several existing processes into a new process. to perform such an inventive synthesis requires a breakdown of conceptual boundaries and a reintegration of the contents. the nice thing about using boundary crashing activity within a defined array of monitors is that the array itself is less able to be conceived of as an isolated single domain, ie., a single tool for a single problem, and the processes occurring within it are encouraged to breakout and be applied synthetically to other areas. electronic imaging technology is essentially the first ever tool intrinsically capable of performing multi-functions. the activity of intensive image integration into meaningful patterns can be one of the most powerful tools ever invented for the propagation of human invention itself.

that activity also consists of more than shifting attention from screen to screen. it also consists of zooming in and out on a single screen to pick up detail. the zoom in\out action of attention focus is as important as domain jumping in the breakdown of conceptual boundaries, possibly even more so since it essentially turns any visual field boundary into an elastic one. conceptual synthesis and conceptual elasticity work hand in hand to create human genius.

when both operate in concert, a powerful amplification of information throughput and analysis can come into play for the first time in human affairs. a great deal of human misery is caused by the inability to reintegrate new information with old information in a way that reflects adequate problem solving within a new situation. the simple tyranny of word categories wherein a single entity word is used to describe impossibly complex ideas as in the case of the word- “life” attempting to convey anything close to the concept; does more to keep humanity from discovering its potential than any other single impediment. a single picture (read “diagram” into this notion) can provide far more info on the subject, a motion picture even more, and an array of video screens with realtime programming can begin to approach the kind of modeling we need in order to act in a problem solving manner. this schematic also holds for inner visual imagination processes as well, although our ability to inner visualize with full memory and in color, stereo with synthetic freedom is almost totally inhibited by our endocrinal dampening system which has been genetically developed for far more hostile circumstances and historically overexercised by physical want and emotional trauma. insofar as vision is the one human perception capable of the most information flux density, having both breadth and simultenaity, then inner imaging exercises a corresponding proportional ideational mix on the inside. as previously stated, over half the brain’s neurons are used to process and understand visual input. its visual input data channel has a bandwidth estimated to be about 2 gigabits (billion bits) per second. total memory recall is probably more than half visual and obviously the key factor of photographic memory in human genius. any effort we make to undampen human visual perception, both inner and outer, will pay off by increasing human intelligence.

to recap- the concept of unitariness (as opposed to a flux of necessity-based emphases, ie., an emphasis field) is the single most intelligence inhibiting factor in human affairs. unitariness has the irritating capability to take “a” visual field and turn it into “the” visual field, a dangerous game when the game board of perception consists of an infinity of internal and external fields both within the individual and within the interplay of individuals known as society. singularity is thus, paradoxically, chaotic because it inhibits meaning formation. again, this can be best illustrated in the verbal domain where unitary word symbol packages come to stand for pictures. this is obviously quicksand when you add the difficulty of synonyms and inflection. it is easy to see how a unitary word symbol can mean a range of things not intended. imagine if humans spoke a single word, waited for a single word reply, spoke a single word again, etc. the essence of the problem is apparent, though probably not to Deconstructionist ideologues. with word-string sentences the problem of accuracy remains, although the setup is workable in a one on one situation, even a one on several situation but begins to break down in a one on many situation and absolutely does not operate in reverse, not to mention a many to many situation. verbal communication is sequential and slow, 700mph. visual communication is simultaneous and fast, 186,000 mps. the creation of a new visual language capable of communicating within an electrical social matrix is the one key invention that will unlock the future in a more unlimited sense than ever imagined.

the application of boundary crunching concepts to organize data dynamically into temporary clumps of greater specific utility is an impulse towards efficiency. of course a dimension with no time would be the most efficient of all, everything simultaneous. our dimension contains/is contained by time, but since all dimensions connect, overlay and superimpose to varying degrees, our closest perceptual approximation of trans- -dimensionality is the visual field in which a picture consisting of many elements is perceived at once.

continuity, any continuity, whether conceptual or visual, is easily seen as being a sort of timelessness. so if we overlay visual meaning upon data fields, and make the process dynamic by relating them into greater efficiencies, we are participating more and more in timeless dimension, and if that aint cosmic, kids, i don’t know what is.

so find two TV’s and clump them together into a field and engage the clump with your significance amplifier lobes. it doesn’t matter what the programs are since the meaning of the exercise is not “what’s on” the screen, but what’s on in the head, ie., what cognitive tools are being fashioned irrespective of program content. the overriding consideration is the formal arrangement of 2+ screens and the cognitive rearranging it instigates to cause simultaneous mini-continuities to occur within the maxi- continuity of consciousness. my bet is that anyone seriously experimenting with this setup will eventually find themselves filling the screens with whatever program material best serves the primary function of gauge/diagram. this is because the multi-screen setup not only encourages domain jumping but also makes it very easy to exercise comparative judgement in a field free of constants. the yardsticks are relative, no inches, pounds or btu’s. constants are replaced with threshold awarenesses which would indicate subsequent efficient actions- a range of actions that could be tailored with a high degree of differentiation. this is to say that problem solving actions would be more likely to solve the problem (and solve it personally, with personal responsibility rather than bureaucratic evasion) than be an exercise in role playing or intellectual whacking off. the only universal constants are those which are the intersection of all dimensions. life itself is such an intersection. time itself is such an intersection. its hard to use the real constants/statics for a yardstick because everything is in a process of becoming. (try having an inch be one ten flymillionth of the universe) so we humanize our gauges and use inches that are the average length of a thumb to the first knuckle because we can build apparatuses with that constant which allow us to approach a more refined threshold of instrumentation with, ratcheting up, a more refined (universal) constant etc. etc. the inherent result of this process in human terms is that we find ourselves living a very long time and knowing a very great deal. there is a workable refinement in which the pi relation between the radius and circumference of a circle is a harmonic.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: