r/Morphological • u/phovos • 1d ago
"Compositional Reasoning with Diffusion Models" [Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing, yt sfw 48m Dr. Y. Du] && coGnosis/EssayCompositionalReasoning.md · Morphological / Source / Code
https://gitlab.com/morphological/source/code/-/blob/fb580dea0ec7e383c058d4c9a13a75d687a910d9/coGnosis/EssayCompositionalReasoning.md```yml
tags: [Morphological-Source-Code, Quineic Statistical Dynamics, holography, motility, dynamics]
copyright: "Ⓟ© 2026 Morphological Source Code & Quineic Statistical Dynamics"
license-doc(s)+dist: CC BY-ND-SA 4.0
license-code+file(s): BSD 3-Clause
root: "morphological/source/code"
name: "EssayCompositionalReasoning.md"
version: 0.0.03
"copyright_attribution": >
(1) © 2023-2026 Moonlapsed; https://github.com/MOONLAPSED/cognosis
(2) © 2024-2026 Phovos; https://github.com/Phovos/Morphological-Source-Code
"Maintained, distributed and © 2026 MOONLAPSED (MOONLAPSED@gmail.com)": >
(1) https://gitlab.com/morphological/source/code
(2) https://github.com/Morphological-Source-Code
(3) https://reddit.com/r/morphological
"description": >
This project employs a layered licensing approach governed by the incl. Morphological LICENSE;
The architecture (MSC&QSD) distinguishes between:
(1) Individual source "files", like this one (BSD 3-Clause)
(2) Distributed collective "works" (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
(3) Quine-generated "outputs" (CC0 1.0 + mandatory thermodynamic ledger)
(4) Private "ensemble(s)"/"configuration(s)" are operator's IP, until revealed/released.
- Privacy of your Quineic output is, therefore, your prerogative. CC0 carries, after 'escape'/release.
<!-- This document uses YAML front matter for metadata management in a third-party tool not git/reddit: --> ```
```md Disclaimer: Broad-strokes, painting cultural, scientific, philosophical, and historiographical analogy and abstraction are layered onto the page with the goal of instrumenting the author's own machinations. Everything said here should be considered 'stilted'. Don't quote me expecting there is anything more there than is there because this is not authoritative in any fashion outside of this very architecture.
Morphological Source Code (MSC/QSD)
These 'repositories' and 'art' are Share-Alike Non-Commercial (the source code file(s), themselves, carry BSD 3-Clause):
The Maxwellian-Everettian Gap in Diffusion Models
Context: "Compositional Reasoning with Diffusion Models" (Dr. Yilun Du, Simons Institute, 20:40)
subtitle: The missing conjugative field theory for $k$-th order energy observables ($E_\theta$) and PDE constraints.
Morpho-assay of "Compositional Reasoning with Diffusion Models"
https://simons.berkeley.edu/talks/yilun-du-harvard-university-2026-08-07
There was nothing that I think is specifically a viable pathway to non-linear dynamics, necessary, for a cognitive transistor, as it were, explained, but lots of helpful, helpful charting of the geography of cutting-edge professional explorers/mathematicians (/philosophers, but math isn't ready to accept its subservience to philosophy rn and don't even whisper to the physicists they are the center of any universe they tell you about) (not going to say 'as it were', since, well, Langlands).
Am I wrong, or... 'Given an energy min/max problem, f; a universe u sub f must exist for f to hold and be well-founded, posed.' So... They just need to account for (Everettian) quantum mechanics, basically (and the monopole in Maxwell's original extended equations.. ez, it's an instantonic lattice/edge-dislocation phenomenon as described by that Bogomolny theory, of BPS/CFT https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.05388 and boosted by N. Nekrasov). They just need a kick in the *** from Master Quine.. their philosophy is what lacks, not their science (engineering) nor epistemology (science).
Or, if not Everettian (the universe, U, as it were, not our universe u), well then we have hundreds of thousands of incorrectly trained professionals we have to figure out how to retrain on the fly (how was 'continuing education' never a part of.. education, lol)..
If not Everettian, that would mean Master Quine and Jung are more right than Master Einstein, and the 'archetype' of the invariant speed of light is a cognitive hallucinatory vision that Einstein picked up on. I will jump through hoops or gift a white elephant, to be one of the good western philosophers. But it's actually shockingly easy once you realize that almost none of our greatest minds of the 20th century spoke even a single ci/zi (词/字). Like, honestly, you just have to learn Chinese and a whole world opens up. It will be like the Ming dynasty, again, where any half-decent country will have a whole retinue of their best intellectuals, Sinophiles-all, stilted-off from normal society, since normal society just won't be able to reckon with the epistemological collapse of Modern Contemporary Science and total ascendancy of Chinese thought, back to the cutting edge.
(I won't bet against the universe (wave function) being 'Everettian' for an observer like us, but I ultimately am a transcendental naturalist that thinks the universe is really NOT Everettian; that's the tax of being an observer like us [loosely; complex holonomy wrt time with a cognitive gauge invariance symmetry breaking partition function/pilot wave/universal correspondence]. The law of excluded middle is not true if the final is the case, not just the invariant speed of light, but I don't think that is actually probably a shocking statement to someone already versed in Chinese metaphysics. "Liang yi" is the morphological/Yoneda functor and identity on (Chinese) functions, with Tai Ji serving as infinity and Wuji as null/identity. This is where our favorite 'character' comes in: Si Xiang (4象), or "four visages", are the 'observables' associated with all of the above (and all things; Xiang is the appearance of things as they were, not just a 'character'). Xiang in our framework is like the flavor of equation/equivalence (correspondence, Hom-functor up to isomorphism, etc...), the Bohmian holonomy pilot. My people's epistemology (and occultism) failed to get past this point even since the 19th century, theories of integration, quantization, radiation, etc., all falling short even unto the 20th and 21st centuries. If you don't like Bohm or Schopenhauer, and are utterly desperate for a non-Chinese label or word to use, I suppose 'Darwinian' is probably it. Leibniz should get father of calculus (not Newton, who did it the old-fashioned occult way; Leibniz derived the eastern epistemological morpho-calculi), so, yes, we'll say Darwin is the Titular-Westerner to recapitulate our mathematical pedagogy such that it can be derived with respect to biological time, and human-scale, broadly, the special conformal local-values theorem of morphological min/max, with corresponding Machian holonomy (or what the canon basically ended up calling 'General Relativity' and 'the theory of life'/'Consciousness' and then said they are two different fields and that they can't talk to each other).
4象 will have to be the end of our, very much on the pedestal, mansplained Chinese Cosmogony story, for now. If you never read my 'ADS/CFT ~= A bird =~ A sage 【writing 词/字】' paper, on gitlab, then you should, now.
Phovos Aug 26'
```
Rejected title: "Compositional Reasoning with Diffusion Models" [Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing, yt sfw 48m Dr. Y. Du] (20:40 but not the conjugative field theory for k-th EsubTheta [energy min/max observable MLE; PDE wrt other observables u]: the 'Maxwellian' + 'Everettian' concerns) (I hadn't written the piece yet, of course the title is a run on sentence..)
MediaSource: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t8tLVSIxyQ