Ontology:Q776

[S] social event horizon (C) 1-1-1

Core characteristics[edit]

item type: S 1-1-1
pronounced [P] label [string] (L): [S] social event horizon (C) 1-1-1; [S] Vegeta effect (C) (VV) 1-1-1; social event horizon; Vegeta effect
pronounced [P] alias (mis) [string]: Vegeta Effect (Signifier Case; MDem 5.1); Shadow effect; Entei effect; dice effect; excess (unknown information about the internal state of a Subject which prevents a person from being modeled and predicted with single-variable determinism)
QID references [Item] 1-1-1: --
color swatch references [Item]: existential materialism
sub-case of [Item]: --
case of [Item]: chance event
super-case of [Item]: --
associated Term [Lexeme]: --

Components[edit]

model combines claims: --

Appearances[edit]

appears in work [Item]

: The Excessive Subject (Rothenberg 2010) 1-1-1

Wavebuilder combinations[edit]

pronounced [P] pronounced Wavebuilder: forms result [Item]

: pronounced S–617 pronounced [S] Free Will (pronounced C) 1-1-1
along with [Item]: [S] social event horizon (C) 1-1-1
forming from [Item]: [S] social event horizon (C) 1-1-1; ??; pronounced S–617 pronounced [S] Free Will (pronounced C) 1-1-1

Usage notes[edit]

This is the non-fictional motif of individual people having a horizon around themselves in which other people have a limited to nonexistent ability either to predict how they might respond to an action or to control other people's actions. This motif is not perfectly synonymous with terms such as "free will" or "the subject". It is only one component of these proposed processes, which unlike such other components such as "the ability to do otherwise" is relatively easy to observe and detail within the material world. How many possible actions can any particular person take in response to a given ordinary daily occurrence? Can you even begin to guess at the ratio of which outcomes are more likely? Is it possible that people who are expected to do some particular thing will spontaneously do something else which they were not supposed to do? You may have just observed the beginning and end of the Vegeta effect: the apparent or hypothesized phenomenon of individual people (and possibly other organisms) behaving in quantum-like ways inasmuch as there is always unknown information about them and information about a person cannot be obtained without interacting with and changing the person.

This similarity, although it is not well investigated by science, is very interesting in terms of the known scientific problem of unifying relativity with quantum mechanics. Einstein's theory of general relativity showed that time could be split apart somewhere close to the physical scale of the smallest units of light. When photons were discovered, it only fed into an accumulating model of a universe that could be split into many levels of discrete units, or at least units which were "very close to" discrete despite apparent incidents of recombining with each other. If spacetime can be split away from light, and light can be split, what are the scales or processes in between those two kinds of divisions? How big or small is the place that gravity comes from? Studying people will not provide any direct answers on gravity, but it may provide vague insights on time. Are human beings somehow analogous to the quanta of human history? If so, at least two interesting questions come up. A) Do we need to study time as the interaction between people, or in the case of particles, very small separate objects? Is this the way to introduce relativity? B) Should we regard history like a plurality of many different chemical compounds rather than like a linear progression of all the hydrogen in the sun gradually turning into helium?

The potential implications of social event horizons are a major inspiration for meta-Marxism, as well as the more immediate study of existential materialism to characterize how they themselves even function. Although, for some, this concept can instead be a prompt to double down on the theme of "free will" somehow explaining history.