Redefining the notion of ‘machine’



A machine1,2 is defined as a procedure3 that emerges an outcome.4


A procedure is defined as a set of constraints.5


An outcome is defined as an emergent6 generated by a procedure.7



The Universal Machine8 is defined as the basic9 procedure that generates all emergents.10,11,12,13



























© 2022 by Victor Langheld







1.     The NOD defines machine as: an apparatus using or applying mechanical power and having several parts. The word machine is derived from the ancient Greek: mechos, meaning contrivance.

2.     For the Communications Age the definition of machine is loosely derived from Alan Turing’s definition of machine, namely: ‘A set of rules (i.e. regulations = constraints) that emerges (generates) an outcome.’

3.     A procedure (i.e. as set of quantised = limited) rules/regulations) affects/regulates digitally, i.e. step by step. An observer (i.e. a quantised (i.e. unitised) auto-regulator), hence a receiver, emerges as response to (i.e. a stopped or blocked, hence quantised) ‘other’(i.e. hetero)-regulation.

4.     For outcome read: emergent. Emergents auto-(i.e. self-)regulate as response to limited hetero-regulation (i.e. random and later on selected data impact). Auto-regulation is organised/decided by the need/urge to survive, i.e. to prolong.

5.     And which Turing called ‘rules.’ A constraint is defined as ‘a random contact/strike that blocks/stops absolutely, hence really/truly, hence is undeniable.

6.     Understand emergent to mean: an identifiable reality. The latter emerges as a stopped, blocked or cut procedure (as set of constraints, elsewhere called conditions). Since an emergent is dynamic it is dissipative. In short, a dynamic emergent has the consistency of sandcastle on a beach or of a cloud. Thus did the Buddha rightly observe that: ’Whatever is born dies!’, and: ‘Things are born (i.e. emerge) subject to conditions and die subject to conditions!’ The conclusion he drew, namely that life was transient, conditional and bereft of an abiding outcome, hence absurd, and that therefore the escape from life (Sanskrit: samsara) could be life’s only goal, was infantile. The same silly conclusion was drawn by Samkya-Yoga and Vedanta.

7.     A procedure happens as the application of a set of constraints/blocks within an unidentifiable sub-stratum field of quantised procedures.

8.     i.e. as dynamic ground or substrate (i.e. primary) constraining operation (elsewhere, viz. Spinoza crudely named substance.)

9.     i.e. as Basic Operating System. In the past some have chosen to name the BOS (nirguna) BRAHMAN or GOD, its initial emergents being named (saguna) Brahman or God, sometimes personalised.

10.    All emergents/outcomes operate (i.e. proceed, autoregulate = adapt) as limited, hence quantised applications (i.e. recursions, variations or elaborations) of the procedure that emerged them.

11.    The Universal Machine as set of basic procedure modules (i.e. of fundamental natural forces/constraints, i.e. as regulated turbulences) activates as response to turbulence, i.e. to impact by quantised random momenta (i.e. energy packets/modules). The basic emergent generating procedure’s response is automatic and blind, hence functions as automaton. Hence ‘Nature (= GOD)’ functions as automaton.

12.    Since the Universal Machine (as quantised procedure of quantised constraints) operates prior to the identifiable reality (i.e. outcome) it emerges, it (as procedure) cannot be identified.

13.    The upshot of the foregoing is that the identifiable universe and each bit of it auto-emerges as a transient picture show (recall the Vedanta’s ‘The Play of Maya’, and Shakespeare’s ‘All the world’s a stage …, etc) in 1 + 4 dimensions, the 1st being quantum contact in a relativity vacuum the generates the affect/experience of realness.