A Structural Theory of The Anomalous

"The formation in geological time of the human body by the laws of physics (or any other laws of similar nature), starting from a random distribution of elementary particles and the field is as unlikely as the separation of the atmosphere into its components. The complexity of the living things has to be present within the material [from which they are derived] or in the laws [governing their formation]."
- Kurt Godel

“Entropy requires no maintenance.”
― Robert Anton Wilson, Schrödinger's Cat 1: The Universe Next Door

Courtesy of my favorite physicist, Brian Josephson comes a link to what could be described as a structural theory of the anomalous. This is a apt basis of comparison to the patent nonsense we are surrounded by and, of course, the nonsense is a form of cultural scripting. 

Why do I appreciate Josephson? He asks questions rather than providing answers.

I see ideology as physic robotics or zombie intelligence. Take your pick. Certainty extracts a price.
 I know this from personal experience.

We live in a era not that much different than those that preceded it in that everyone seeks an explanation handed to them s a matter of consensus being an arbiter of their reality rather than learning to learn of their own volition. Surrealists consider the role of the expert a sham as well as identifying oneself with any one"expert" as a binding principle.

“Tell me whom you haunt and I’ll tell you who you are.”
― André Breton

Sometimes I think we are ghosts chasing ghosts. Do we swim against the current or be carried by it?  One requires no effort, the other has no preconceived answer. One is safe and the other is a slippery slope.

Several years ago I made the connection between the deconstructive semiotics of surrealism to quantum theory that led to a hybridization of art as science and science as the same in relation to certainty. 

Both represent the art of painting images open for interpretation beyond the empirical nature of effects whose origin remains veiled. Lodged as a bridge perhaps comparable to that of the Chinvat Bridge lies the anomalous.

“The outcome is the understanding that organised activity at deeper levels can result in the emergence of entities such as universes, and phenomena in these universes, including possibly life and the evolution of life. It is argued that agential realism is not essentially new to science, differing from the kinds of ordered structures familiar in physics mainly through the role played by the semiotic, or interpretive information-processing, aspects of the theory.”  

( See Note Below)

http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.02429

Another potentially interesting and sober consideration is found here:

http://www.mcfarlandbooks.com/book-2.php?id=978-0-7864-7916-0

Note: According to Barad's theory of agential realism, the world is made up of phenomena, which are "the ontological inseparability of intra-acting agencies". Intra-action, a neologism introduced by Barad, signals an important challenge to individualist metaphysics. For Barad, things or objects do not precede their interaction, rather, 'objects' emerge through particular intra-actions. Thus, apparatuses, which produce phenomena are not assemblages of humans and nonhumans (as in actor-network theory), rather they are the condition of possibility of 'humans' and 'non-humans', not merely as ideational concepts, but in their materiality. Apparatuses are 'material-discursive' in that they produce determinate meanings and material beings while simultaneously excluding the production of others. What it means to matter is therefore always material-discursive.