W a l t e r z A l t e r
p o r t f o l i o

a r t i c l e s


the multi-screen setup

why is the multi-screen TV setup the intrinsic shape of the medium?
why will the number of screens you can read and operate from
simultaneously become the preeminent measure of human intelligence?

imaging screen technologies now dictate the shape of societies, their
cultures and their potentials. those citizens most able to uptake local
and remote information via imaging screen technology will be better
informed, less prone to error in analysis and trend projection, and, hence,
in a position to exercise leadership and policy determinations. there is
no such thing as "information overload". there is, however, such a thing
as cognitive underutilization. we can train ourselves to increase the
throughput density of information and invent new interpretive frames of
reference for realtime evaluation of information.

amplifications OF a single screen and ON a single screen such as big
screen projection and screen insets (computer pull downs and windows)
are an evolutionary dead end for imaging technology no matter what the
resolution, screen size or screen write speed. a multi-screen array
consisting of a tailored number of monitor modules will become the
universal application of 2-D screen imaging. every office and home will
have banks of monitors tuned to various media feeds, displaying
computer functions and acting in a variety of gauge roles. Marshal
McLuhan correctly concluded that any new technology tends to
incorporate the new function within the shape of the older replaced
technology. hence, television kept the single screen of cinema as did
cinema keep the proscenium stage attributes of theater and so on.

breakouts from this chronic backwards referencing of new technology can
occur wherever the pressure of necessity requires accurate and predictive
data. television was little more than a curiosity until WWII, when CRT
imaging was accellerated by the indispensability of radar, wherein the
extension of view out across space equated to a higher resolution in
prediction models. the abstraction of information onto a realtime over-
the-horizon view on a picture screen (rather than a telescope eye piece,
for example) meant a quantum leap in information processing potential
from the mechanical domain to the electrical domain. banks of radar
screens allowed the orchestration of complex vectoring of attention and
its subsequent materiel in the high velocity = high necessity situations of
aircraft control centers and cockpits.

the principle of military intelligence is non-delusional and survival
dependent. this is applicable to domains other than military. human
intelligence is very much dependent upon visual uptake and its cognitive
apparatus of the brain. our brains devote about half of their total function
to the reception and evaluation of visual data. direct picture cognition,
(as opposed to print-symbol cognition) integrated into our our concept of
space geometry, can be accellerated to multiply our IQ (heretofore
primarily evaluated based upon print literacy). there is a simple exercise
to give one a taste of this ability. if you place two TV sets side by side,
tuned to two different channels, volume up on both, and concentrate on
following the information flux simultaneously, within ten minutes of
moderate concentration you will have eclipsed 500 years of obsolete
sequential print patterning. multi-screen image literacy will position
your perceptions within a flux of simultaneous info, ie., a more accurate
model of the real 3-d world of simultaneous events.

why multi-screen array with 6, 8 or 10 screens rather than a single screen
with insets or message overlays? obviously, a multi-monitor setup means
independent, autonomous modular circuitry, so that a fail-safe redundancy
is inherent to the set-up. but as a cognitive tool, modules of the same
screen size breaks down impediments built into the hierarchy of subject
object predicate sequential print uptake. in an array of screens, you define
a frame of reference consisting of equal domains where important info can
pop up and be recognized anywhere on the array. with the peripheral visual
field sharing a conscious role, a secondary hierarchical dominance is
defeated, that of the pencil thin cone of the central visual field which is
lessened, allowing for an awareness of field interplay, rather than an
awareness of only point objects acting upon an inert background. point
scanning is the dominant uptake mode of print literacy. the TV's electron
scan already does this for us at a far greater velocity than our eyes.
instead of mimicking the thin visual uptake tunnel of print reading, we can
begin to apperceive in blanket areas and allow the eye to "read" the
situation as the situation dictates instead of being trapped in a line by
line, left to right, top to bottom and other rigid physical and cognitive
schema. the primary result is an increase in interpretive flexibility,
tending to downplay expectations based on sequential linearity and thus
allowing for the discovery of new and unexpected patterns via inductive
projective synthesis rather than a deductive extrapolation on an
preexistant theme, ideology or mood on the part of the analyst. a second
result is a cognitive breakout from the specialists tunnel vision. no longer
are phenomena, particularly social phenomena, allowed to exist divorced
from relationship, as existential isolates. the wider the field of view, the
more apparent are actual operant causalities across previously
exclusionary categories. the third result is the repatterning of thought
from words into pictures. if a picture is worth a thousand words, thinking
in pictures is a three orders of magnitude increase in efficiency.

in a multi-screen array, the eyes, jumping from screen to screen, look for
important data at a rapid rate. this makes the domain boundaries (screen
borders) become more and more permeable. this is diametrically opposed
to the single screen (theater/cinema) limitation of having the viewer
captive to a single bounded area. any singular oriented media of
communication which attempts to overlay itself upon plural fields is an
unfaithful model of the field fluxes of the real 3-d world and does not
prepare us to act effectively in the 3-d world.

breakthroughs in human invention are characterized by the translation of
concepts across boundaries, usually by the synthesis of several existing
processes into a new process. to perform such an inventive synthesis
requires a breakdown of conceptual boundaries and a reintegration of the
contents. the nice thing about using boundary crashing activity within a
defined array of monitors is that the array itself is less able to be
conceived of as an isolated single domain, ie., a single tool for a single
problem, and the processes occurring within it are encouraged to breakout
and be applied synthetically to other areas. electronic imaging technology
is essentially the first ever tool intrinsically capable of performing
multi-functions. the activity of intensive image integration into
meaningful patterns can be one of the most powerful tools ever invented
for the propagation of human invention itself.

that activity also consists of more than shifting attention from screen to
screen. it also consists of zooming in and out on a single screen to pick up
detail. the zoom in\out action of attention focus is as important as
domain jumping in the breakdown of conceptual boundaries, possibly even
more so since it essentially turns any visual field boundary into an elastic
one. conceptual synthesis and conceptual elasticity work hand in hand to
create human genius.

when both operate in concert, a powerful amplification of information
throughput and analysis can come into play for the first time in human
affairs. a great deal of human misery is caused by the inability to
reintegrate new information with old information in a way that reflects
adequate problem solving within a new situation. the simple tyranny of
word categories wherein a single entity word is used to describe
impossibly complex ideas as in the case of the word- "life" attempting to
convey anything close to the concept; does more to keep humanity from
discovering its potential than any other single impediment. a single
picture (read "diagram" into this notion) can provide far more info on the
subject, a motion picture even more, and an array of video screens with
realtime programming can begin to approach the kind of modeling we
need in order to act in a problem solving manner. this schematic also
holds for inner visual imagination processes as well, although our ability
to inner visualize with full memory and in color, stereo with synthetic
freedom is almost totally inhibited by our endocrinal dampening system
which has been genetically developed for far more hostile circumstances
and historically overexercised by physical want and emotional trauma.
insofar as vision is the one human perception capable of the most
information flux density, having both breadth and simultenaity, then
inner imaging exercises a corresponding proportional ideational mix on
the inside. as previously stated, over half the brain's neurons are used to
process and understand visual input. its visual input data channel has a
bandwidth estimated to be about 2 gigabits (billion bits) per second.
total memory recall is probably more than half visual and obviously the
key factor of photographic memory in human genius. any effort we make
to undampen human visual perception, both inner and outer, will pay off
by increasing human intelligence.

to recap- the concept of unitariness (as opposed to a flux of necessity-
based emphases, ie., an emphasis field) is the single most intelligence
inhibiting factor in human affairs. unitariness has the irritating
capability to take "a" visual field and turn it into "the" visual field, a
dangerous game when the game board of perception consists of an infinity
of internal and external fields both within the individual and within the
interplay of individuals known as society. singularity is thus,
paradoxically, chaotic because it inhibits meaning formation. again, this
can be best illustrated in the verbal domain where unitary word symbol
packages come to stand for pictures. this is obviously quicksand when you
add the difficulty of synonyms and inflection. it is easy to see how a
unitary word symbol can mean a range of things not intended. imagine if
humans spoke a single word, waited for a single word reply, spoke a single
word again, etc. the essence of the problem is apparent, though probably
not to Deconstructionist ideologues. with word-string sentences the
problem of accuracy remains, although the setup is workable in a one on
one situation, even a one on several situation but begins to break down in
a one on many situation and absolutely does not operate in reverse, not to
mention a many to many situation. verbal communication is sequential
and slow, 700mph. visual communication is simultaneous and fast,
186,000 mps. the creation of a new visual language capable of
communicating within an electrical social matrix is the one key invention
that will unlock the future in a more unlimited sense than ever imagined.

the application of boundary crunching concepts to organize data
dynamically into temporary clumps of greater specific utility is an
impulse towards efficiency. of course a dimension with no time would be
the most efficient of all, everything simultaneous. our dimension
contains/is contained by time, but since all dimensions connect, overlay
and superimpose to varying degrees, our closest perceptual approximation
of trans-dimensionality is the visual field in which a picture consisting
of many elements is perceived at once.

continuity, any continuity, whether conceptual or visual, is easily seen as
being a sort of timelessness. so if we overlay visual meaning upon data
fields, and make the process dynamic by relating them into greater
efficiencies, we are participating more and more in timeless dimension,
and if that aint cosmic, kids, i don't know what is.

so find two TV's and clump them together into a field and engage the
clump with your significance amplifier lobes. it doesn't matter what the
programs are since the meaning of the exercise is not "what's on" the
screen, but what's on in the head, ie., what cognitive tools are being
fashioned irrespective of program content. the overriding consideration
is the formal arrangement of 2+ screens and the cognitive rearranging it
instigates to cause simultaneous mini-continuities to occur within the
maxi-continuity of consciousness. my bet is that anyone seriously
experimenting with this setup will eventually find themselves filling the
screens with whatever program material best serves the primary
function of gauge/diagram. this is because the multi-screen setup not
only encourages domain jumping but also makes it very easy to exercise
comparative judgement in a field free of constants. the yardsticks are
relative, no inches, pounds or btu's. constants are replaced with
threshold awarenesses which would indicate subsequent efficient
actions- a range of actions that could be tailored with a high degree of
differentiation. this is to say that problem solving actions would be
more likely to solve the problem (and solve it personally, with personal
responsibility rather than bureaucratic evasion) than be an exercise in
role playing or intellectual whacking off. the only universal constants
are those which are the intersection of all dimensions. life itself is
such an intersection. time itself is such an intersection. its hard to use
the real constants/statics for a yardstick because everything is in a
process of becoming. (try having an inch be one ten flymillionth of the
universe) so we humanize our gauges and use inches that are the average
length of a thumb to the first knuckle because we can build apparatuses
with that constant which allow us to approach a more refined threshold
of instrumentation with, ratcheting up, a more refined (universal)
constant etc. etc. the inherent result of this process in human terms is
that we find ourselves living a very long time and knowing a very great
deal. there is a workable refinement in which the pi relation between
the radius and circumference of a circle is a harmonic.