I love patterns and/or I love 'perceiving' patterns.If a pattern exists,there is satisfaction in discovering it.If there is no pattern,there is dis/satisfaction.

Thrill of the chase and chase of the thrill.Security in certainty and excitement in uncertainty.Witnessing the past,visualizing the future and presenting the present.

Real or perceived,food for thought.

Random patterns and/or patterned randomness.Mhhhh.

Do you study dreams?

Careful! Remember what happened to John Nash (he of 'A Beautiful Mind'). He started seeing patterns even where there were none. Then he went crazy.

On a different note: perceiving patters is one of the key ways we lend meaning to reality - highly constrained by the boundaries of space/time of course. As such 'random' is only a 'pattern' that we have not lent meaning to, yet.

Nothing in this world is random, it all has a mathematical pattern.

What pattern found you?

Ah!

Words often fail me my friend. And these days I try to avoid baiting my brother Tycho, its my Christmas present to him. But, here is what I meant, to say (the long version).

Patterns, and their perception thereof, is the process by which consciousness generates the illusion of space/time, without which reality, as constructed within the 3D frame, would lack meaning.

In other words: you need a plurality of objects (at least two) to create pattern (Singularity is patternless and therefore meaningless). You also need consciousness to interpret that pattern (give it meaning).

How does that sound?

Consciousness is not really equatable to life and death. Death is the absence of body animation - up to a certain extent. But consciousness I believe exists even in 'things' that could be termed by humans as 'dead.'

Consciousness is not something within you. Just the reverse. In fact I believe there is only one consciousness, within which all reality manifests. It does not stop because your body stops.

Still does not sound right, brother Wakanyugi.

I think patterns are independent of perception. Patterns preceed the knowledge of them. That is why and how they are perceived. Patterns exists first then they are known of after. Therefore, consciousness cannot generate pattern.

And, how can there be plurarity when there is singularity? If indeed there is pattern, hence, plurarity then there cannot be singularity. Consciousness that perceives pattern conceives plurality.

Needless to say I love the idea of plurality, for it accommodates the concept of 'renegadeness'.

Let me try once again: patterns do not precede knowledge (my view). They come into existence once consciousness (we/observer, if you like) interprets them, gives them meaning. Without an observer to give them meaning there is no pattern and the object or event described by that pattern is invisible to us.

The story is told that when Columbus landed in the America's the natives who first saw him and his team come ashore could not see the ship anchored behind them. Their conceptual reality held no idea of a 'house' floating on water. The pattern we call 'ship' was invisible to them. Of course that later changed.

As for the plurality/singularity maneno, I think we killed that horse, several times. All I am saying is, if we take space/time as real (it is not) then you need a plurality of objects or events existing within the space/time matrix in order to perceive pattern, or space, or time.

Consciousness interprets the relationship between two or more objects or events as pattern. If you existed alone in the Universe there would be no pattern and therefore no space and no time as we know them.

I hope that is vague enough?

P.S. I often wonder how much of the reality around us remains invisible to us simply because we can not perceive the projected patterns.

"There are more things in heaven and earth Horatio..." quoth the Bard