Is the observation anonymous?

     The scale of the observation seems to be relative in some way with
     the ability for one/many people to realize the observation.

     The observation could be a grand and comprehensive model of the human
     system as a whole, or it also could be an individual observing another
     individual (and not necessarily a totally objective observation).

     So, with the different observations happening, and on different scales,
     it seems that "the observation" would be more like "many observations"
     observing the individual human, and the degree of anonymity changing,
     possibly relative to "physical noticeability of the observation."

     Then also, the many observations may have many degrees of scientific
     evaluation.  Some may be only visual, and some purely mathematical.

     Some examples of different observtions are...

     (1)  Automobile Highway Survellience Cameras

     (2)  E-Sweat Design workplace with Survellience Camera, etc.

     (3)  Automatic-Teller-Machine with Survellience Camera

     (4)  Television Interview; Interview of an Entertainer

     (5)  Television News Report; Speculative Reporting on a Murder;
                                  with observation of the suspected.

     These examples are not very broad in the realm of "observation" but
     the observation seems more obvious with the realm of video cameras.
     There is something physically observing and in some cases "the viewer"
     is "seeing the observation" from the same lens, as maybe in television,
     and sometimes "the viewer" only sees "the observer" or camera, possibly
     without considering much further- who is the observing?

     i hope this does not limit the question you ask to an extent that it
     becomes less concrete and more abstract, but, as you ask about what
     might lie at the foundations of science, it might not be mathematics
     in the beginning, but rather predictibility of repeated events, and
     exploration and experiment and discovery from this base knowledge.

     It seems that the language of mathematics unify many sciences as being
     equally transferrable or compileable in the empirical sense of proof
     of a hypothesis.  And if the base of mathematics is used, it might be
     the indication that the "mind/body" of the human, you/me, is then
     transferred as a data-you or an information-you, and the switching in
     the observation into a "objective scientific obserservation" might be
     also the switch in the human to a system of statistics or as a system
     which exists only as a _representation_ of a human being.

     To me this means that the observation is not, with mathematics, very
     obvious, and as a whole (being the many observations happening at once)
     is very anonymous.  Of these many observations, something either being
     public or private can gather the mathematics, or link the resources,
     to make even more empirical proofs in their observation of the data-me
     or the information-you.  These big observations, like data-portfolios
     that Insurance or Credit checks have, or Government or University or
     Medical files contain can now, with the mathematical computer, become
     One.  This public/private information exists, and now this information
     will soon be manifest in the form of data-cards, with which the human
     identification will become #1444444, or #476-44-4444, just as these
     numbers which represent me as University ID or my Social Security ID.

     I also have a drivers license ID, and an Insurance ID, and a Bank ID,
     and these and my mathematical and statistical history will some day
     be contained in _one_ identification card.  And this card will be in
     the International Nature of being a human system, as the passport is
     replaced by this _one_ world identification card.  Who knows? maybe
     even GIS location will be incorporated into this representation.
     To glorify this is to propel the regression of human freedom, and
     the ability of humans to act in their human interests, long term.

     This ID, aka UN World Information and Communication Order, is also
     refered to as the Internalizing Death card, or I.D. card.  It seems
     consistent with the mathematical interpretation of human life that no
     more is expected of a human than to act predictable, and most simply
     in this, to want to live, as every animal should.

     This I.D. card, no matter how abstracted in its introduction is spun
     in the media (that which is in the same realm of observations), will
     still be a "physical manifestation" of the scientific you/me.  What
     seems obviously predictable is the non-event such a card will be in
     its entering into the lives of every living human being.  It will not
     make any "splash" when entering into the society, because as it is
     to the benefit of the system of observation, it will be presented as
     good by scientific values; system, order and control, but said so in
     terms of economics, politics and social efficiency and delight, maybe
     even -grand representation- and this will be "our" hope, or presented
     as such, for our observations to become even more statistically sure
     in the goals and visions of the human endeavor.

     Everyone will have this artifact of human-as-information artifact, but
     will, as you say, the null point in the subject's consciousness allow
     this physical evidence to be some proof that these are the terms of the
     observation, and this is the limit to human action in this and future
     centuries?

     Assuming this observation will remain anonymous, for the majority, the
     ability to represent the human as more than an objective observation
     would need to be guaranteed in the public representation in the policy
     and regulation of this advance of the information-you/me, and as the
     representatives these days are equally observed by this more grand type
     of observation, these public representatives are also more experienced
     and adapted to this observation, for they have interfaced with this
     economic/social/political realm of observation through the media or
     through scientific research, or by going to the Moon and back.  The
     public representation, and direction, now depends on those whose ethics
     have been formed by this interface of objectivity, and these public
     people are increasingly movie stars, television broadcasters, corporate
     scientists, etc, who "know how to play the game, and compete" in this
     dimension of difference.  Competition of Entertainers, and of public
     presidents, is our public representation for the anonymous observation.

     i wish i could better address your question, and help in thinking
     through some of these scenarios, and yet "the observation" can mean
     many things, and i know others on this list know the sensual and the
     seduction of things like the media, or the data-you/me much better and
     more completely than myself.  this text may not be expandable, but if
     there is a connection, please feel free to construct the bridge across
     the river.

tired of making airplanes.
bc