The Task of Science Is To Find The Laws of Facts… Helmholtz

Whoever in the pursuit of science, seeks after immediate practical utility may rest assured that he seeks in vain. --Academic Discourse (Heidelberg 1862)

Well Tim, I had a whole post ready to go, and my computer had one of those famous critical crashes, so I lost it__I just love these new operating systems__the bigger they get, the worse they are... Anyway, as you can see by the title and the notes posted below, I'm working in very similar areas as you... I've been playing with the c-velocity capacities of brain waves to process concepts at one time__and just how much information can be packed into our ideations__as per the frequency, amplitude and wavelenght mechanics involved, especially as relates to the real c-velocities, when constrained within our physiological brain systems, at the much reduced c-velocities. I been looking at this for about 6 months now, as to me, only a certain amount of information is possible of packing into a single concept, even with the help of the best compression algorithms, as even alrogithms have c-limits of compression capacity also. To me, much of what's mentioned in the notes below is related more to physical capacity of c-mental wave-capacity, within Planck lengths and or volumes, etc., than to any real 'Aporias', unknowabilities, incommensurabilities or indiscernibles__but it's up to us to find the newest 'Laws of Facts' that must be applied to this mechanics__to make it plainer to our understandings... All I'm talking about is looking at the facts of what can possibly be processed of all the systems we work with__and to me, this is where Peirce's categories, and Helmholtz's 'Laws of Facts' come into the picture... It's more complex than this, but I'm just putting forward my general ideas, right now, as over the next week, I've got to beat my way up through tornado alley, and back to Maine__Then I'll settle down and explain this all much clearer__but it's generally the same direction you seem to be traveling...

Later...

Absolute infinity is not a number__It’s a dialectic logic statement about an abstract image…

Dialectic logic goes to absolute infinity__Beyond number__‘Aporia…’

Mathematical infinity does not logically reach absolute infinity…

The Empty Set Paradox__Absolute Empty Sets Can’t Exist, Except Abstractly…

The First Number Has No Predecessor__Wrong__Images Precede Numbers…

Complexity is c-dependent unprovable__at certain limits…

Information is c-dependent concept mechanics’ knowable__Too much knowledge in one concept at a time, c-shorts out into ‘Aporia…’

‘Aporia’ is a physiological meta-physical state of imagination…

The Absolutely Physiological Mind, Perception, and Comprehension…

P.s.
Here's part of that original post, that did get saved as draft, I just noticed:

Hi Tim, below are some of the ideas I'm presently working with, that closely relates to your ideas also, as per the title of this post from Helmholtz. My ideas are trying to work out the wording for a c-conceptual system's capacity to process the maximum amount of information__and what may actually be needed for new algorithms, to possibly process more universal and particular information at once__without exceeding what light's motion is actually capable of at our brain constrained concept velocities...

We can only process what the speed of light in brain-matter allows of its mechanics__though this can be much extended with better 'Laws of Facts', better compression algorithms, and much better ordered category systems, imo...

That 'Laws of Facts' from Helmholtz, really rings a bell for me__as I stated earlier, he was Peirce's contemporary scientist, in Germany, and of course known as the true father of the 'Conservation Laws...'