Seeing the world through two slits

 
    
I'd be careful when using an overloaded word like 'experience'
which implies both memory (space) and a mechanism for its use.

Are all such mechanisms analogs of spectral analysis and/or
adaptive time-series projection ?

These two are dual complementary approaches and there is an
intrinsic uncertainty relation between them.

Window sizes (context) are important, and spectral analysis
degenerates into adaptive time-series projection when the
window size is unity. Vice versa, adaptive time-series
projections "degenerates" into spectral analysis when the
context is large or even infinite.

The same can be said of Saussure's Synchronic and Diachronic
analysis respectively yielding Quine's Translation Indeterminacy ?

Hence we see the world through two 'spatial' slits.
One the experential memory and the other the window of context.
The interference between those slits is the superposition
of our finite experiential memory of the past and the finite 
context of the window we see the world through in the present.
Perception becomes a Young's experiment.


In quantum theory, two entangled systems remain correlated
after having interacted in the past.

Like two bells which have clashed they each maintain separate,
correlated memories of that event, but their memory decoheres
when they are no longer in very close proximity to remain
resonant of each other[1]. The resonance may be restored but
only via a local channel. Non-local communications is not
possible and Einstein was correct (EPR).

The analog is also possible with two people having interacted
and maintaining separate memories fading with time after
they have parted company an no longer constructively reinforce
or interfere each others' common memories[2].

Hypnosis may restore those memories separately but they will no
longer be dynamically entangled. Similarly to people with
photographic memories remain visually entangled when parted,
but this entanglement is static, unless there is a local channel
established between them.

No doubt the resonant 'frequencies' or the spatial frequencies of
experiential and contextual memories play a large role in determining
how strongly systems interact and how long they remain correlated
after that interaction.

The Casimir effect comes to mind when considering if two "bells"
in close proximity interact 'spontaneously', and so become to some
extent entangled.

Gravity does not affected by entanglements to any noticeable
degre,e and seems neutral with regard to superpositions...?


[1] This metaphor of clashing bells no doubt brings to mind the
old Zen question: What is the sound of one hand clapping? Or,
which bell rang the other ? The "answer" is not completely obvious
in a relativistic sense.

[2] There are no non-local subjective communications like 'telepathy'.



In a TOE, which must comprise both generality and specificity
as dualistically related, it transcends generality, and specificity,
in terms of establishing a relationship, transform, translation,
morphism,...  between them.

What can be more than "general", than such a relationship ?