Notices
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: First Philosophy — The Basis of All

  1. #1 First Philosophy — The Basis of All 
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    I am Questor, an experienced poster elsewhere who has given and taken in a lot of science over the years, much of which is also in video on YouTube, under Austintorn. I will post an introduction eventually.


    First Philosophy

    Philosophy is most useful when it’s arrived at logically from empirical grounding, especially the first philosophy of Totality, this being the Why and the How. Ungrounded beliefs are, well, just wishes, of which there are many, just being theories with no basis. First Philosophy, too, must be said to be a theory, but at least one based on the empirical.

    Totality must necessarily be infinite and eternal, or it is not the All, and thus must be its own prime mover, the causeless state, requiring nothing but itself, since there can be nothing outside it. So, then, Totality is a forever system, with cause-and-effect having to be thrown out as its bottommost basis, having to be replaced with an equation, in order to avoid infinite regress, although there is certainly some cause and effect on upwards, thereafter.

    It is problematic to have actual ageless stuff itself to have been around forever, for then it would have been already made and defined in its many properties without ever having been made and defined, its Where and its What. Yet, something had to be forever, no matter how strange this may be to accept, so, alternately, whatever makes this stuff is perhaps that which was really around forever and ever doing so, such as the pair production from the zero-point-energy, but perhaps not quite the case, for example, because matter and antimatter make light, not zero.

    Note that the only choice is between actual stuff forever its creation basis being forever; however, also note they these two choices are much closer than one might think at first glance, for if the creation basis had been going on forever, so too would it be that actual stuff was forever [being made], and thus around, forever, even though not the same exact stuff forever. The only difference is that stuff may not be ever-during, it coming and going, being emitted and annihilated, or formed of an equation that nullifies all of existence, in the overview only, for here, all is as real as real can be, but still leading to the conservation laws: that all energy, momentum, etc., must sum to zero (a new statement of the laws).

    Will continue.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Curiously, forever systems always have access in the ‘past’ to their present and future products, such as making matter requiring light beforehand and making light requiring matter. It is even said that stellar ignition requires some amount of higher atoms, which, of course, are only produced by stars. So, there was really no first star, or first anything, again hinting at an equation.


    Empirically, it appears that Totality is electrically neutral, there being as many positives as negatives. There are only two stable matter particles—the electron(-) and the proton(+), as well as neutral(-+), and one form of energy, the photon, an electron and a positron together, somehow at peace in that form.

    It seems that there are only two ways for things to be, this leading us to note that all that we see can only be the way it is. Clearly, though, there is nothing to make stuff out of, but that actually provides us with the answer for the How, the Why being that this Nothing is perfectly unstable.


    We also note that complexity gives way to simplicity as we delve downward, leading us to derive that the ultimate basis will be a simple state indeed, the simplest of all. A boring result? Perhaps, for some, yet it must be necessarily so. We will find no Great Universal Minds down there, but perhaps in the future, at the complete other end of the spectrum. Many had looked in the wrong direction.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    So, here we exist, in the finite region, perched at the exact mid-point between infinite largeness and infinite smallness (infinitesimal smallness). for the Largest infinity times the Smallest infinity equals unity, or 1. The finite 4-D hypercube is a singularity of sorts, the one and only boundary condition of Totality.


    Einstein’s 4-D block universe suggests that there is a finite 4-D hypercube consisting of slices of 3-D infinite spaces that are indexed by time, the infinite spaces being the 3-D ‘surface’ of the 4-D hypercube. Time is the difference of space. The speed of light (c) is the underlying dimensional relationship between time and distance, and, it would seem, there can be only one such relationship.

    Time, like space, is an inevitable consequence of hypervolume. Space might constitute the composition of reality, but time is the cause and effect binding it all together. Time is not a compositional dimension; it is a difference dimension.

    The hypercube has dimensions of quadratic distance; however, any incomplete representation of this hypercube, such as half of unit hypervolume, has units of time-distance^3. Totality is neutral and symmetric, whereas its internal composition is polar and asymmetric.

    Time is the dimension that bounds, not extends, three-dimensional space.

    Distance^4 = c(time-distance^3)
    ‘c’ is a ratio!

    Distance^4 / (time-distance^3) = c = distance/time

    Why three spacial dimensions? The singularity of nothingness (ah, ha!) demands existential closure, which demands compositional parity, which demands cubic space. Our universe’s dimensionality is as inevitable as its existence.

    The space of our universe is three-dimensional because this is the only dimension whose volume is compositionally consistent through all levels of infinite size while forming the surface of its own hypersphere.


    Necessarily, too, we derive that the Cosmos contains its own history, due to eternity, and even many times over, due to infinity. We all exist, right now, somewhere else, as well, although we don’t feel it. The narratives may come to differ, but any narrative will do, really.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: First Philosophy — The Basis of All 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by questor
    Philosophy is most useful when it’s arrived at logically from empirical grounding,
    Will you confirm that you are arguing for a blend of the Empiricist and Rationalist approaches? Or, since you speak of empirical grounding, are you declaring yourself as fully in the empiricist camp?

    Quote Originally Posted by questor
    Philosophy is most useful when it’s arrived at logically from empirical grounding, especially the first philosophy of Totality, this being the Why and the How.
    Are you following Dooyeweerd’s views here?


    ......just being theories with no basis
    Statements, or combinations of statements without basis are not theories. This seemingly minor point is important, since terminology is paramount in establishing the basis of your ideas.

    Totality must necessarily be infinite and eternal, or it is not the All,
    This is circular reasoning and so remains undemonstrated and unproven.

    So, then, Totality is a forever system, with cause-and-effect having to be thrown out as its bottommost basis, having to be replaced with an equation
    Very well, give us an equation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: First Philosophy — The Basis of All 
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by questor
    Philosophy is most useful when it’s arrived at logically from empirical grounding,
    Will you confirm that you are arguing for a blend of the Empiricist and Rationalist approaches? Or, since you speak of empirical grounding, are you declaring yourself as fully in the empiricist camp?

    This Balance of Nothing theory (via opposites summing to zero) cannot be totally in the empiricist camp yet. It is only logically led to.


    Quote Originally Posted by questor
    Philosophy is most useful when it’s arrived at logically from empirical grounding, especially the first philosophy of Totality, this being the Why and the How.
    Are you following Dooyeweerd’s views here?

    No. No God. The Deity can be disproved by self-contradiction, while the Theity, who is supposed to be everywhere, behind everything, can be disproved by not being found anywhere. Only the natural is found; no super-, extra-, or beyond.


    ......just being theories with no basis
    Statements, or combinations of statements without basis are not theories. This seemingly minor point is important, since terminology is paramount in establishing the basis of your ideas.

    The Church would still try to claim some basis, such as revelation, but, all in all, it’s all really of invisible imaginaries (faith). If there were any firm basis, there would be no need for faith and no need for unbelievers; However, they’d never be totally honest and say say “It’s just a theory or a wish”, for then not as many would believe. (So, we’ll call it a wish or a desire rather than a theory.)


    Totality must necessarily be infinite and eternal, or it is not the All,
    This is circular reasoning and so remains undemonstrated and unproven.

    Yet, if something were beyond or before then we’d not be discussing the All or Totality, but something secondary.


    So, then, Totality is a forever system, with cause-and-effect having to be thrown out as its bottommost basis, having to be replaced with an equation
    Very well, give us an equation.
    All sums to Nothing in the overview. The polarity of positive versus negative charge nullifies existence. (Not matter vs. antimatter)

    It is being proposed that an absolute stable Nothing cannot exist as such, which is precisely the Why of there having to be something, albeit of fluctuations in and out of existence that sum to zero at the level of Totality. This is in line with the simpler states being more unstable and readily going through phase changes and/or recombination toward higher complexity—and that the quantum realm requires uncertainty and certainly not a definite number like zero.

    The only candidate for a prime mover that is infinite and eternal is Nothing.

    There are no stockpiles of material lying around to make things of; therefore, all must be a balance of nothing, a balance of opposites summing to zilch, which is the How of existence; however, nil can never come to pass, or it would have stayed that way, not to mention that this would be a stable situation that would take some kind of outside force to keep it that way. The ‘great’ question of why there is something rather than nothing is stated backwards. ‘Something’ is the norm, not Nothing, as well as movement being the norm, not stillness.

    No infinite regress of smaller and smaller stuff leads us to the basis of the causeless state, the simplest of which is Nothing, or even, the land of the law of no laws.

    No where else to go; no other prime mover is possible, for proposed Minds are complex composites, not fundamentals.

    This Balance of Nothing that must be maintained leads us into why the conservation laws are so, plus the determinism that becomes of infinite precision of infinite (really eternal) history of what goes into a particle.

    (What went wrong with my quote boxes?)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: First Philosophy — The Basis of All 
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by questor
    (What went wrong with my quote boxes?)
    You haven't made enough posts yet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Proof of the Non-Statistical Universe

    (In favor of one with infinite precision from a zero-balance)

    Stuff had to be; no alternative; it’s here.
    ‘Nothing’ can’t stay. No choice; no mystery there.

    …Eternal basis of the stuff, or the stuff itself,
    And probably to infinite extent (at least space is).

    Nothing for a Creator to do,
    For the basis of all was never created.

    It is almost an open question
    As to whether all is completely random,
    Just random statistical,
    Only partly random,
    Or all determined,
    (Even given a random initial condition)
    By some kind of perfect equation
    Granting the conservation of energy law, etc.?

    Yes, nearly, but we will close it.

    These are even things that can be tested
    By looking at the arrangements in the universe.

    Also, if we can we get down to
    The itsy-bitsy ‘fundamental substance’,
    Then we can try to see if it is unbreakable,
    And therefore unmakable.

    A truly fundamental entity of stuff should
    Have no pieces that it can be broken into;
    So, if it doesn’t break…

    However, without infinite power,
    I guess we’ll never know.

    The only nagging thought would be:
    How could elemental stuff be already made,
    Without it ever having been made?

    Yet that must also apply somewhat
    If stuff comes and goes as balanced opposites,
    For there is still a basis of some medium,
    Even if of zero energy,
    But at least it is only one basis.

    So, we conclude, still, going either way,
    That the necessarily ultimate and causeless basis
    Must have been around forever, it being eternal,
    Thus, it, itself, could have had no creation.

    A heck of a lot of stuff is out there,
    In unimaginable quantities,
    Maybe even an infinite amount,
    If there is an infinite space to hold it;,
    But I’m not so worried about this one, exactly,
    Since there is truly at least an untold amount of stuff.

    Since there would have been nothing prior
    To be able to decide a specific amount of stuff,
    If it were really fundamental,
    I’d rather think
    That basic stuff probably springs up all over,
    Going away, as well, everywhere, varying,
    Or at least that it is infinite.

    Getting rid of the ‘chicken and egg’ problem,
    Such as there being no first thing, no first star,
    No first light needed first to make matter,
    Mo first matter needed first to make light, etc.,
    Would seem to require that all be made at once,
    But I haven’t settled on that.

    At any rate, The Mother of all Science,
    In her karmatic carriage, runs over the Godma.

    The GodMother was then run over by a reindeer.

    And the funny thing is, too, that life always was.
    Does anyone realize this?

    There could not have been a first star!

    Nor any first light of photons
    That split into the matter
    Of an electron and a positron,
    Nor any first electron and positron
    That annihilated and produced a photon of light.

    Nor any first electron,
    Nor any electron before there was a positron.

    What are the implications of all this?

    That’s what I like to think about.

    I have only solved the last one so far:
    Electrons & positrons are made at the same time.

    No first life, no first kiss, no earliest history,
    No last star, no last kiss…

    Other matter and antimatter, too,
    Besides electrons and positrons,
    Like maybe quarks and antiquarks,
    Produce light when they meet,
    The matter converting to energy photon waves,
    Their plus & minus aspects living on in neutrality,
    But at some point arising again, separately,
    Back as and into the matter/antimatter.

    There’s no memory needed for the first doings,
    Since there weren’t any earliest ones, plus
    The history of all events repeats everywhere,
    And always will, forever, and always has.

    Are we getting anywhere? Yes.

    What does all this mean
    For local human perspectives,
    Worries, and so forth?

    I have some proofs showing that
    The distribution of energy in space (everywhere),
    At this very moment is not a statistical accident,
    But is, in fact, an absolute certainty.

    There are several proofs,
    Each of which can each stand on its own.

    (Note, that for my notation here,
    Totality more or less
    Equals the one and only universe
    Equals space-time
    Equals everything
    Equals the Cosmos
    Equals reality.)

    Aside: It should also be
    That all is electrically symmetric:
    Being 50% matter and 50% antimatter,
    Although this may not matter,
    Except for the 4th proof.

    (to be con't)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: First Philosophy — The Basis of All 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    You haven't made enough posts yet.
    au contraire
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    #1.
    The Fixed Equation

    Existence contains all the details and information
    In an infinitely precise balance.

    It is not a gigantic chaotic contraption
    Forced to obey some general rules.

    Reality is an utterly flawless system
    Even though the basis itself
    Is causeless, eternal, and infinite.

    Every electron and photon
    Has the exact momentum
    It is supposed to have,
    To infinitely fine resolution,
    Because a photon (or an electron)
    Has a history,
    And the energy of which it is composed
    Has an infinite history.
    Thus, infinite precision.

    There could not be a different Totality
    Exactly the same as ours,
    Right at this moment,
    But with one of its photons
    Displaced by one centimeter,
    For that would break
    Its connectivity to all else.

    Photons and electrons cannot
    Just randomly do any old thing;
    Besides, they are not miniature first causes,
    Not to mention that then everything
    We use then for sure would also go haywire.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    #2.
    Conservation

    Energy, and more, must be conserved,
    And so the total amount cannot change.
    A photon or an electron
    Cannot do other than it must,
    Else the conservation laws would fail.
    There are no such ‘special’ universal moments,
    Not even any special moments at all, as we will see.

    Energy level change vanishes in the Overview
    Because of this infinite precision,
    For all particles must move in a precise way,
    Which we will get to as more ‘why’ later,
    As it is the basis of the conservation laws.

    Universal energy distribution is fixed,
    For, if it wasn’t, then it would mean,
    From any new information
    That the prior state was incomplete.


    (About the completeness of All)

    The infinite life span of All
    Provides more than enough time
    For the energy and matter of which it is composed
    To shift through every available internal state;
    Eternity is long enough for a large
    Or infinite amount of matter/energy
    To express every possible spacial distribution.

    All history and future occurs all of the time,
    Totality containing its own history and future;
    So, the universe’s energy is complete.

    Of course, very large distances,
    Even infinite ones,
    May intervene,
    As to Earth’s nearest moment elsewhere.

    This is all showing how vast
    And immutable Totality is.
    It’s not like we can actually go large distances;
    However, nothing is ever lost;
    Each and every kiss lives on, somewhere.
    We are all of the indelible community of certainty.


    (Infinite Eternity—
    Interlude about some reminders of eternity)

    The Earth is here,
    Somewhere in a non-special place in Infinity,
    At a non-special time,
    In a small parentheses of Eternity.
    No moment has any meaning more than any other,;
    So, essentially, they are all the same.

    Eternity means no first origin
    For our boundless reality,
    But that is not the only example.

    Matter is necessary to create light
    And light is necessary to create matter.

    Stellar ignition of stars also requires the presence
    Of heavy and perhaps even radioactive elements,
    Yet the only place where these are created
    Is in a star’s core.

    So, since reality had no first origin,
    Neither did its fundamental energy forms or stars.

    The key is balance and equilibrium.
    There will be no chicken and egg problem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    # 3. Variability Inversion

    The larger an object, the less its universal variability, which is precisely the opposite of what would be expected in a statistical universe.

    From a purely statistical standpoint, an object’s variability ought to increase with size—the larger the object, the more complex; however, although large objects appear to express greater diversity, they are physically unable to achieve it, their size dictating their cosmic number density, this in turn limiting their cosmic variability.

    As the scale of size extends, cosmic variability continues to fall off. There are fewer stellar patterns than atomic patterns. There are fewer galactic patterns than stellar patterns. (The total number of different galaxies is at least a hundred billion times less than the number of different stars, since the average galaxy contains about one hundred billion stars.)

    There are fewer supercluster patterns than galactic patterns. Going on up to Totality itself, variability continues to fall off, finally reaching the cessation of variability, it looking like some kind of stringy, uniform foam.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Proof # 0

    Of the Non-Statistical Totality, as well as the solution of the Chicken and the Egg Problem

    We know that Totality could have had no origin, this meaning that it is causelessly eternal, Because, if not, it wouldn’t be the All, plus that there cannot be an infinite regress of other, smaller entities, forming the stuff.

    Systems with no origin are called ‘temporally closed’. Strangely, they have to be their own precursors. Since the basis can have no cause, we must drop the cause-and-effect at the base level, replacing it with a perfect equation. It is as if no-origin systems go round and round, everything they need being there beforehand. More like a perfect equation than any prior cause-and-effect, which is impossible anyway.

    Now we also have that matter requires light for it to come into existence, but that light requires matter for it to form, plus, that stars (of which there was no first one) require their own future byproducts in order to achieve ignition. We didn’t take the implications of eternalness far enough, halting too soon.

    It means that there is a definiteness and a certainty as to always having what is required, plus, it is ever repeating by going through all of the possible events, even multiple times, due to eternity, plus, even more multiple times, due to infinity.

    Think of two locked boxes, each of which contains the other’s key. It seems that both boxes must remain locked, yet, due to eternity, each of the Yin/Yang boxes can be unlocked at once. Eternal systems are ever their own prior state, running like a Mobius strip in which their present can utilize their future. How amazing is this!

    It’s all of a piece, The entire future and history of the universe existing all at once, inside it, Since everything exists everywhere, many times, and also because it can use its own products of the future in the past, all of its Totality connected, post and prior, and operating with absolute precision, like a clockwork orange, it being the only way that it could be.

    There is also the aspect of the three and only three stable particles, The electron(–), the proton(+), and the photon (‘–’ and ‘+’ as neutral), which hints of only two ways to make things, which is a part of the ‘why’ of the top-secret proof #4 that the world may dread to see. (The Pope will cry for more than three days.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    #4 The Prime Mover

    The universe is a perfect equation because Its precision is required for it to sum to nonexistence(!), For the only possible infinite and eternal prime mover is Nothing (else, an infinite regress) or a very near Nothing. All that we know and love is but a distribution of Nothing, such as nearly noted in the opposite pair production of virtual particles, some of which stick around for a while. This is all because the necessarily ultimate and causeless basis had to have been around forever, it being eternal; thus, it, itself, could have had no creation. This alone made the Popes cry, from the pain and injury of their old dogma in stone falling, from there being no creation or Creator of the eternal causeless. Adding insult to injury, we now see that All could merely a balance of nothing. Well, we knew that the TOE had to be simple, and thus not all that interesting.

    Since there would have been nothing prior to decide about any specific amount of ever-existing stuff, plus, more, if it were truly fundamental, then it’s more likely that stuff springs up all over, going away, as well, in time, everywhere. There’s nothing else to make stuff of. And so that must be of what it is made.

    Getting rid of the ‘chicken and egg’ problem, such as there being no first thing, no first star, no light needed first to make matter, no matter needed first to make light, etc., would seem to require that any opposites somehow be made at once, or as said, always available, since no-origins systems are their own precursors.

    The perfect symmetry of Nothing, combined with it not being able to stay as such, not even for an instant, due to it being the simplest state—and thus perfectly unstable, is the basis for all the conservation laws.

    There are only two stable matter particles, Electrons (–) and protons(+), and their antiparticles, because pair production has only two states able to generate separate matter particles, these being the two canceling halves of Nothing. The only non-matter particle, the photon, has neutral charge, being of both plus and minus combined. Only these 3 particles can be stable, No more, no less!

    It is the summation of equal amounts of opposite electric charges that nullifies existence in the overview of the distributed form of Nothing. We, too, are where we must be: at the finite midpoint between infinite smallness and infinite largeness.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14 Re: First Philosophy — The Basis of All 
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    You haven't made enough posts yet.
    au contraire
    Zing
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    The Nullification of Existence

    We have seen how the universe has three compositional dimensions (space) and one closure dimension (fourth dimension)—having a finite four-dimensional hypervolume, its one and only one universal boundary condition, one that is proportional to the product of Planck’s constant and the speed of light divided by the average universal energy density, the forth root of the universe’s hypervolume becoming an absolute unit of measurement whose length, amazingly, is but a fraction of a millimeter. But, remember, the 4th dimension touches the 3rd everywhere; so, it is extensive, this tiny extent being the same everywhere—which is why universal constants control all, it being the only connection between the micro and macro universe, for it is the the finiteness of necessity that exists at the midpoint of the universal size scale between infinite largeness and infinite smallness (infinitesimal).

    The four-dimensional size of the universe represents the quintessential quantity—the quantity of quantity. The only way it can exist within nothingness (the prime mover) is by being voided by some internal relationship—a substructure allowing for complete and utter cancellation. Nonexistence is the same vacant truth on both ends of reality and existence is everything in between. The nonexistence of half of the universe must be equivalent to the existence of the other half, this being called existential parity.

    The two halves satisfy the completeness of the universe, but what about its voided nature? Some operator—a difference operator—has to offset the cumulative effect of the summation of nothing; the largest possible difference in the universe is the one occurring between its two halves. Positive and negative directions along the fourth dimension are entirely equivalent; the only difference is their opposition to each other—a polarity inherent in the fourth dimension required by the symmetry of totality. That is why there is an infinite wealth of positive and negative electric fields scattered across space. Yet, the universe is electrically neutral.

    Totality’s hypercube consists of an infinite number of layers of three-dimensional space at various fourth-dimensional elevations, this fourth-dimension not containing points because it represents their fourth-dimensional deflection—a difference of position. Space exists because the sum of nothing is nothing and the fourth-dimension exists because the difference of nothing is nothing.

    The positive and negative fields of energy are physical deflections of space along the fourth dimension. Since all is composed of space, anything not strictly space is spacial distortion. Polarity nullifies spacial magnitude. A spacial point and its deflection are not separate entities. If we could superimpose the two halves of totality, the result would not be space, but nothingness. Existence contains the exact amounts of positive and negative electric fields (spacial deflection) necessary to provide perfect four-dimensional symmetry.

    What is fourth-dimensional, intrinsically polar, external to space, and a metric for spacial distance? Time. Time, like space, is an inevitable consequence of hypervolume. Space might constitute the composition of reality, but time is the cause and effect binding it all together. Time is the difference of space! Time is not a compositional dimension; it is a difference dimension. The hypercube has dimensions of quadratic distance; however, any incomplete representation of this hypercube, such as half of unit hypervolume, has units of time-distance^3. Totality is neutral and symmetric, whereas its internal composition is polar and asymmetric. Time is the dimension that bounds, not extends, three-dimensional space.

    Distance^4 = c(time-distance^3) !

    The speed of light (c), is the underlying dimensional relationship between time and distance; it provides the standard for unbounded duration, much as the universes “diameter” provides the standard of unbounded distance. ‘c’ is a ratio!

    Distance^4 / (time-distance^3) = c = distance/time

    Why three spacial dimensions? The singularity of nothingness demands existential closure, which demands compositional parity, which demands cubic space. Our universe’s dimensionality is as inevitable as its existence. The space of our universe is three-dimensional because this is the only dimension whose volume is compositionally consistent through all levels of infinite size while forming the surface of its own hypersphere.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Dude... seriously, please stop posting while on hallucinogens.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Life is kind of a high within itself. I only smoke cigarettes.


    ‘Nothing’ never sleeps, but is ever up to something. Motion never ceases; for there is no ceasing center. No uncertain quantum property can ever be zero, for zero is a precise amount. This road from ‘nothing’ to something goes in both directions, in the ZPE. The so-called ‘vacuum’ is creative. The field fluctuates this way and that, but, on average, the net energy is ‘zero’. Fields can never go away, as they’re part of the structure of the vacuum. When in their quietest possible state they are the vacuum.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    We have to face that the ‘fundamental’ substance is here, existing; so it must be made of something; yet, there is no material just sitting around and available to make it of. So, then, to achieve the TOE’s completion, we must say of what it is made, and why—or end up with an incomplete structure. Its only possible constitution is to be a balance and distribution of nothing at all—the only infinite, eternal state of the perfect symmetry of the perfect equation that provides the balance of opposites everywhere that we look: that all must sum to zero, although it never does so, for that state is too precise. To know how the universe operates, on must first know why anything exists.

    There’s only one way to have the speed of light, it being the dimensional ratio of space to time; the plus and minus charge polarity, matter and antimatter, and the only two stable particles—the electron and the proton, the one workable set of electron/proton sizes, one way to regenerate the universe via recycling, only one way for the quantization of photons, and only one way of quantization of particles. All is as it must be, as the only way that it can be, thus making it the one and only TOE, meaning that the universe is the only way it could be. Or so it seems.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    We can not ever just assign more and more downwards and infinite regresses of causes for the fundamental eternal causeless, as funny as this evens sounds, either as scientists of the totally natural, or, as believers in the supernatural, they stopping at an even larger cause, not a lessor one, which then should be investigated with at least the same vigor, but then is never done, of course, halting at the word being that which explains everything perfectly.

    So, for the most underlying basis, we must throw the notion of cause and effect right out of the window, being careful to first open the window. Cause and effect is dear to human mammals, since it holds, all the way up, after the causeless basis, and so even when it appears that it has been thrown out, the often words return again, to that cause and effect, such as ‘design’ and ‘designer’, and other causes. Now one must obtain a catapult and really heave the notion really far out of the window.

    What is its replacement? It can only be an equation, and a perfect one at that, the only one, if that is any consolation, which it should be, since it makes us free. One could also just leave it alone as “don’t know”, which also makes us just as free to be. Freedom only disappears if one goes to the supernatural, which isn’t here, being proposed as 'out there', and then goes further to say what it wants from us, and why, and all that extended kind of jazz and fabrication.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •