Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: The explicate order
Replies: 20   Last Post: Feb 14, 2014 12:58 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 hanson Posts: 1,651 Registered: 12/13/04
Re: The explicate order
Posted: Feb 12, 2014 11:45 AM

Potter, this is good tripe that you wrote. However,
it is not going far enough to break new ground,
nor will it be accepted the by s.p. & the general
crowd, since you posted new definitions and
equations for well known, otherwise explained
issues.
>
Whenever you post equations, s.p. & s.p.r. readers
do freeze, especially when they cannot google
for it or look it up in their old text books.
>
So, go the belletristic way and dig deeper,
by explaining physics in a NON anthropic way.
>
Remover all human connected interpretations and
especially any and all observers, and get even
yourself out of the picture, except for you telling:
>.
... the story of physics the way particles do see it.
e.g. what the particle feels & does when it moves,
(NOT what you/humans see it do), etc, etc.
>
It wont be easy to get the human ego out of the
pix/story, but it will get physics off Einstein's
useless relativity crap which has retarded any &
all advances in fundamental physics for over a
century now, and only accomplished to breed vast
hordes of Einstein Dingleberries who worship
Albert's Sphincter.
>
Potter, Kudos and keep at it.
hanson

"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@yahoo.com> wrote:
in message news:ldg34s\$gpv\$2@dont-email.me...
> The explicate order!
>
> Reality is composed of properties, not objects.
> ( Objects arise from real and imagined properties. )
>
> 1. There is only one property in the universe and that is:
> closed cycles about geodesic paths.
>
> 2. These cycles can be clockwise or counter-clockwise.
>
> 3. These cycles combine algebraically.
>
> 4. What we call bodies are aggregates of cycles which we perceive to be
> associated.
>
> 5. Time arise from three H's. ( Cycles or angular displacement )
> a. H(M), the H to be measured.
> b. H(big), an H which can be used as a reference with which to determine
> when H(M) has completed a cycle.
> c. H(small), an H which can be counted to determine "how long" it takes
> H(M)
> to complete a cycle.
>
> What we call time is H(small) / H(M). In other words, time is the H(small)
> of some outside reference system per H(M) as referenced against the most
> stable background possible, H(big). Perhaps, H(big) should be called
> H(small) as many cycles of H(big) occur for small angular displacements of
> H(small).
>
> 6. The Uncertainty Principle arises, because we can only count whole
> cycles
> of H(Small). ( The use of neutrino's rather than electrons as our
> reference
> would reduce the uncertainly enormously. )
>
> 7. What we call an interaction is when two aggregates of H are perceived
> to
> influence each other in some way. Interactions basically change the H of
> the
> systems under observation. Interactions involve 4 H's.
>
> a. H(A) - the cycles perceived in body A.
> b. H(B) - the cycles perceived in body B.
> c. H(C) - the cycle of the bodies about a common center.
> d. H(D) - the cycle ( precession ) of the bodies about the universe.
>
> The relationship between these cycles is:
>
> H(A) * H(B) = H(C) * H(D)
>
> Note that this equation equates particle-like properties to wave-like
> properties. H(A) and H(B) are associated with bodies ( particle-like )
> while
> H(C) ( period ) and H(D) ( Precession ) are associated with times (
> wave-like ).
>
> 8. The dimensionless ratios of these cycles are commonly called beta.
>
> beta(A) = H(C) / H(A)
> beta(B) = H(C) / H(B)
>
> These beta's are sine functions. The corresponding cosine functions can be
> used to compute conventional Special Relativity problems.
>
> length = length(0) * cosine(A) Fitzgerald contraction
> time = time(0) * cosine(A) Time dilation
> mass = mass(0) / cosine(A) apparent mass increase
>
> 9. Some conventional properties expressed as betas and cycles:
>
> period = 2 * pi / H(C)
> radius(A) = C / H(A)
> radius(B) = C / H(B)
> velocity(A) = beta(A) * C
> velocity(B) = beta(B) * C
> mass(A) = beta(B)^3 / H(C) * U ( Kepler's law )
> mass(B) = beta(A)^3 / H(C) * U ( Kepler's law )
> force(A) = beta(B)^3 * beta(A) * U * C
> force(B) = beta(A)^3 * beta(B) * U * C
> energy(A) = beta(B)^3 * beta(C)^2 / H(C) * U * C^2
> energy(B) = beta(A)^3 * beta(B)^2 / H(C) * U * C^2
>
> where
>
> C = the speed of light. ( Distance per time constant. )
> U = C^3 / G ( Mass per time constant. )
> G = the universal gravitational constant.
>
> ** Note that some of these properties are composite. That is, they cannot
> exist unless two bodies are involved.
>
> ** Also note that the are TWO masses, energies, forces, etc. associated
> with
> a closed system. The conventional system tends to ignore this.
>
> ** There are also TWO RADII involved in interactions.
>
> Conventional physics tends to define ONE radius as:
> radius = C / ( H(A) + H(B) )
>
>
> 10. Angles are cycle ratios multiplied by some constant.
>
> constant(angle) = 2 * pi or 100 or 360 ( Commonly )
>
> 11. There are four distinct sets of bi-directional cycles. These are
> associated with time, charge, baryon number and what I call "weakness".
> weakness = strangeness + baryon number - charge.
>
> *** Weakness needs to be defined as neither strangeness nor hypercharge is
> symmetrical.
>
> Time is associated with left handed neutrinos.
> Time and parity are the same thing.
> Time and parity violations are associated with right-handed neutrinos.
>
> ----
>
> Some of the advantages of this system over the current system include:
>
> 1. No infinities.
> 2. Only one fundamental property.
> 3. Is symmetrical, whereas the conventional system tends to emphasize the
> mass of more massive bodies and the velocity of less massive bodies.
> 4. Clearly shows the particle-wave duality.
> 5. Indicates why uncertainty exists. ( Smallest cycle is our scale )
> 6. Eliminates errors caused by the radius concept.
> 7. No constants are needed.
> 8. Makes clear what constants are for if they are used. ( Scaling )
> 9. Energy-like angular displacement ( H(D) ) is velocity invariant.
>
> ---
>
> The implicate order!
>
> Does a deterministic reality "unfold" from chaos?
>
> Bohm says in his book, Wholeness., ('82,US ed) p.77: "we assume that psi
> is.in a rapid random, chaotic fluctuation. Values of psi in quantum
> theory.must be long, compared with [these] fluctuations [which] can be
> regarded as coming from a deeper sub-QM level, [as a] Brownian motion of a
> microscopic liquid droplet comes from a deeper atomic level."
>
> Note that these fluctuations would cause the smallest cycles ( Those
> associated with neutrinos and electrons. ) to deviate from perfect circles
> but as they
> would average out and we have no smaller cycle to use to detect them, we
> could not observe them directly.
>
> It seems to me that these "chaotic fluctuations" would let some kind of
> underlying "implicate order" modulate uncertainty chaotically ( Rather
> than
> randomly as Bohm indicated. ) and interface with the classical world in
> such
> a way as to allow a deterministic world to arise from it.
>
> This makes sense to me because:
>
> 1. If there was an underlying "Planck's Constant", we could use it to
> perform
> Fourier transforms on uncertainties which occur at a higher level and
> detect
> fluctuations. ( There may be a "Planck s Constant" associated with
> neutrinos
> but chaos would ultimately lie under this order and any future unfolded
> order. )
>
> 2. If the underlying fluctuation was random, negative entropy would be
> randomly distributed rather than associated with certain kinds of
> "things".
> The distribution of negative entropy seems to indicate that what arises
> from
> uncertainty is not random.
>
> --
> Tom Potter
> https://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com/
> http://prioritize.biz/
>

Date Subject Author
2/12/14 Tom Potter
2/12/14 Sam Wormley
2/12/14 hanson
2/12/14 Tom Potter
2/12/14 Sam Wormley
2/12/14 Michael Moroney
2/13/14 Tom Potter
2/13/14 Michael Moroney
2/14/14 Tom Potter
2/14/14 Tom Potter
2/14/14 Tom Potter
2/13/14 benj
2/12/14 Tom Potter
2/14/14 Brian Q. Hutchings
2/12/14 Tom Potter