Notices
Results 1 to 15 of 15
Like Tree4Likes
  • 2 Post By John Galt
  • 1 Post By John Galt
  • 1 Post By Kalopin

Thread: A Theory of Matter1

  1. #1 A Theory of Matter1 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    72
    In this theory there are two axioms from which all else follows.
    Axiom one: all matter is alive
    Axiom two: all matter is made of light
    If all matter is alive then the physicist is the biologist, is the psychologist, is the artist.
    All matter is alive, its just a question of degree. We call some matter dark matter and dark energy because its matter so alive its beyond our comprehension. So matter is an interpretation we are making: what some call dark others call bright -- but the use of the word 'bright' is technically incorrect, as should become clearer later.
    Light travels in circles: since planets orbit and they are made of light then light travels in circles. If I bend a piece of wood in an arc then I am getting light to travel around the arc.
    All matter is light slowed down.
    Just as people have characters matter has characters which we call properties. We label an element according to how it responds to a stimulis compared to how other elements respond to the same stimulis.
    A basic property is weight or mass. So elements are defined by how much relative weight they have.


    I am seeking supporters for a qualitative basis of science, not quantative. Quality: precision,shape, color, pitch. Quantity: power,size,brightness,volume. A quality can be found as a ratio of quantities. Mass is a quality.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Axiom 1 is so silly, the rest is a moot point.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Since axioms are givens they need to be self evident, or unlikely to be subject to dispute by a reasonable person, or offering clear practical advantages, or have significant evidentiary support, or some combination of these. Your first axiom fails on all counts. Of course, Wayne said all that much more succinctly than I, but I thought I should explain to you why your axiom is silly. Wayne was also being kinder than I. I am tempted to call it worthless.

    Had you opened your post with words along these lines, I might have been more inclined to consider them of value.
    In this imaginative flight of fancy there are two 'what ifs' I should like to consider, from which all else follows.
    What if one: what if all matter is alive
    What if two: what if all matter is made of light
    If all matter is alive then the physicist is the biologist, is the psychologist, is the artist.

    etc.

    What do you think?
    Last edited by John Galt; June 25th, 2012 at 09:12 PM. Reason: Saying your axion is silly is casting aspersions on your neurological structure. Best I change it to axiom as was meant.
    Strange and adelady like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Since axioms are givens they need to be self evident, or unlikely to be subject to dispute by a reasonable person, or offering clear practical advantages, or have significant evidentiary support, or some combination of these. Your first axiom fails on all counts. Of course, Wayne said all that much more succinctly than I, but I thought I should explain to you why your axion is silly. Wayne was also being kinder than I. I am tempted to call it worthless.

    Had you opened your post with words along these lines, I might have been more inclined to consider them of value.
    In this imaginative fight of fancy there are two 'what ifs' I should like to consider, from which all else follows.
    What if one: what if all matter is alive
    What if two: what if all matter is made of light
    If all matter is alive then the physicist is the biologist, is the psychologist, is the artist.

    etc.

    What do you think?
    Mmm, all matter made of light? What a bright, shiny world it would be!
    [More like this, and you guys may feel forced to lighten up on my comments!]
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua Stone View Post
    Axiom one: all matter is alive
    Are you proposing that my toilet seat is alive ?
    Gosh, you are making me scared of my morning bathroom routine !!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor pyoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,095
    Think he could be referring to something along these lines:

    Crackpot 'Theory of Everything' Reveals Dark Side of Peer Review | Case Western & Erik Andrulis | Inanimate Objects Are Alive & Lifelike Gyres | Scientific Peer Review Process | LiveScience

    A "theory of everything" from a scientist at Case Western Reserve University got a lot of attention for positing that inanimate objects, from planets and water to strands of DNA, are alive.
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by pyoko View Post
    got a lot of attention
    From who, exactly ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    72
    I think the axioms are more useful because they are true. If axiom one is untrue then a unified theory will never be found because each study area will be considered different.
    I am seeking supporters for a qualitative basis of science, not quantative. Quality: precision,shape, color, pitch. Quantity: power,size,brightness,volume. A quality can be found as a ratio of quantities. Mass is a quality.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua Stone View Post
    I think the axioms are more useful because they are true.
    You have offered absolutely no evidence to demonstrate their truth. You have offered absolutely no logical arguments to suggest they are true. The utitlity of an axiom is irrelevant to its truth or falsity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua Stone View Post
    If axiom one is untrue then a unified theory will never be found because each study area will be considered different.
    You cannot justify the truth of an axiom on the basis of a supposed undesireable outcome.

    Moreover you have offered no evidence that a unified theory requires life as being the linking factor. Your proposal is as silly as this:

    Axiom one: all matter is blue
    Axiom two: all matter is made of asparagus
    If all matter is blue then the physicist is the colour coordinator, is the interior decorator, is the artist.
    All matter is blue, its just a question of hue. We call some matter dark matter and dark energy because its matter so blue it's beyond our comprehension. So matter is an interpretation we are making: what some call dark others call bright -- but the use of the word 'bright' is technically incorrect, as should become clearer later.
    Asparagus grows in circles: since planets orbit and they are made of asparagus then asparagus travels in circles. If I bend a piece of wood in an arc then I am getting blueness to spread around the arc.
    All matter is blue slowed down.
    Just as people have characters matter has characters which we call properties. We label an element according to how it responds to a stimulis compared to how other elements respond to the same stimulis.
    A basic property is weight or mass. So elements are defined by how much relative weight they have.

    adelady likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor pyoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by pyoko View Post
    got a lot of attention
    From who, exactly ?
    The paper, by CWRU biochemist Erik Andrulis, was published in the journal Life
    From Life peer reviewed journal, I guess.

    .. whom* :P~

    ...all physical phenomena can be explained by "gyres." Gyres, according to his theory, transform energy, matter and information to create the physical systems we're all familiar with, such as the phase transitions of water and the chemicals life is made of. It also includes a few that aren't familiar, like quantum gravity (a theory which hasn't been invented yet).
    Essentially, objects — atoms, cells, molecules, chemicals and so on — are packets of energy and matter that are described by gyres – spinning spirals. Gyres are defined by the singularity at one end and the changing shape of the spiral at the other. Everything around us oscillates between excited and ground statesas they pivot around the center of these lifelike gyres. He doesn't say that everything is alive, exactly, though he says gyres have "lifelike characteristics."
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    608
    Sorry, but how can either thoughts be considered a starting point for reasoning?
    An axiom is something commonly understood [like the sky is blue], a premise so evident as to be accepted as true without any controversy. It appears that both "ideas" being considered "axioms" have caused controversy. Ideas, sure, but not axioms.

    If all matter was made of light, maybe we would change colors with different moods, like a human mood rings...
    John Galt likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Professor pyoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,095
    I believe this has something to do with the topic at hand. Maybe.

    Weird World of Quantum Physics May Govern Life | LiveScience

    The bizarre rules of quantum physics are often thought to be restricted to the microworld, but scientists now suspect they may play an important role in the biology of life.
    Evidence is growing for the involvement of quantum mechanics in a wide range of biological processes, including photosynthesis, bird migration, the sense of smell, and possibly even the origin of life.
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by pyoko View Post
    I believe this has something to do with the topic at hand. Maybe.

    Weird World of Quantum Physics May Govern Life | LiveScience

    The bizarre rules of quantum physics are often thought to be restricted to the microworld, but scientists now suspect they may play an important role in the biology of life.
    Evidence is growing for the involvement of quantum mechanics in a wide range of biological processes, including photosynthesis, bird migration, the sense of smell, and possibly even the origin of life.
    Now, that should be an "axiom"!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by pyoko View Post
    got a lot of attention
    From who, exactly ?
    From people saying, "what the!? How did that get through peer review". I saw some quite amusing articles about it at the time. Someone suggested it was a spoof but people who work with him claim he is serious (but presumably in need of professional help).
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalopin View Post
    Sorry, but how can either thoughts be considered a starting point for reasoning?
    An axiom is something commonly understood [like the sky is blue], a premise so evident as to be accepted as true without any controversy. It appears that both "ideas" being considered "axioms" have caused controversy. Ideas, sure, but not axioms.

    If all matter was made of light, maybe we would change colors with different moods, like a human mood rings...
    Blimey! Kalopin just posted something that makes sense. There is hope for humanity after all.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Zero Space-Time Theory-Grand Unified Theory of the Universe
    By tianman32 in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: September 27th, 2013, 01:31 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 19th, 2011, 05:07 PM
  3. Dark matter theory resolved or just a new theory?
    By tbraun in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 31st, 2009, 01:23 PM
  4. Valence Bond theory? Molecular Orbital theory?
    By oceanwave in forum Chemistry
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: October 10th, 2008, 08:36 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 5th, 2006, 01:51 PM
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
  •