The way of the materialist explanation of the paranormal and the supernatural by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich

Boris

Your wording is awkward to my English.

You begin with what I consider to be the most insightful verse in the bible. I note here the equivalence of mind (word, symbol, concept...) and the reality of God. The word was with God and the word was God. Your approach to one of the most fundamental distinctions of space - matter is fascinating. Your distinction between human and animal cognition is an important clue toward understanding reality. Human cognitive abilities evolve to math. Agreed. On evolutionary timescales, we just recently realized that objects do not actually get smaller with distance as an ape would suppose. We suppose our conception of space and time can only be understood in conventional Euclidian terms. It is instructive to speculate alternative conceptions leading to future understanding. You are looking at the big picture and recognize many things I also see. We see ourselves looking at it and understand that what we see is determined, at least in part, by how we think. I'm thinking the "warehouse" (of functions) metaphor is my "Superposition". (Bottom of page 1). I am greatly intrigued by your work. Unfortunately the academic community is not open to revisionist theories. Especially ones that re-organize the implicit assumptions of conventional theories. I for one am convinced that there may be any number of ways to correlate experience with mathematical relationships to effect explanatory and predictive science. But for now the consensus is exclusive theories that do not admit alternate reconstructions of axiomatic time, space, mass, and charge. I think your work is truly heroic and all the parts of the process work together in the big picture. It is very difficult to see beyond preconception, and more difficult to help others see beyond their own preconceptions. I spent 30 years in a government science lab and I can tell you none are interested in anything other than career ambitions. I pray someday more of us will advance beyond supremacist belief systems. As for my essay I have proved nothing beyond the inadequacy of traditional reasoning. My intention was only to see if I have an audience to support my idea of writing a book towards the end of the reconciliation of science and belief systems. Thank you for writing this worthwhile essay.

Vik

Dear Dizhechko,

You are wise to understand that you are not worthy to preach the Word of God because you have also sinned. We are all in that condition, which is why God had his Son Jesus Christ (the Word of God) live a sinless life as a man in this world and then offer himself up to die for us, so that we could receive him as our Lord and Savior and ask God to forgive our sins in his name and have our sins forgiven. Once we then receive and understand his Word and love him, he promises to come into us and live in us, which converts our spirits to do his will. Then he promises that God the Father (God the Spirit) will also love us and come into us and raise up our mortal bodies to do his will. Once this is accomplished, God the Father shows his Son what he is doing and the Son tells us and we then do God's will, which includes preaching the Gospel to others, so they can also be saved and joined to him as his body members. It is then actually God preaching the Gospel through us, so our worthiness is no longer of any importance. Like everything else there are more details, but that is the general overall way it works. In my paper I covered one place in the scriptures where God talks about the creation of the world at the beginning of Genesis. I will repeat that part here: Although the heaven is mentioned here to show that the creation includes both it and the earth, the words that follow concern only the earth. At that time, even though the earth was already created in the past tense, it says that it was void and without form. This means that the earth had the function of containing things that have forms or shapes, but it was empty. This describes an empty spatial system. He then says that darkness was upon the face of the deep. This means that the earth contained something called the deep, which has a face or surface. Next God says that his Spirit moved upon the face of the waters. This makes it clear that the deep is composed of what God calls waters and that his Spirit moved upon its surface. This signifies his first addition of motion into the earth. This motion would generate sub-energy particles in the universe, which God refers to here as the earth. Next God says let there be light and there was light. This tells us that the first motion that was inputted into the world was not in the form of light because that still needed to be done later here. Most who read this part only look at the surface and are amazed that God could bring light into existence by just speaking the words, but if we look a little deeper we can see that he is giving us scientific information that would not have been understandable to those who first heard it over two thousand years ago, but should be clear to us now. When you speak, you output motion that is in the form of waves of air called sound waves. This is a perfect way to say that God added motion to some of the sub-energy particles, that he had previously created when he moved upon the face of the waters, to make them go faster than the speed of light so it would be transferred to their fourth dimensional motions to create the wave functions that made those sub-energy particles turn into light photons. Next God divided the light from the darkness. This is a good description of adding more motion to some of the light photons with the proper angular motion component to cause motion to be transferred to their fifth dimensional motion and change them into matter particles which become dark because their light photons are trapped in the cyclically closed curved paths of the matter particles. Much more information is given in both the Old and New Testaments, which all leads me to conclude that the universe was not created by chance, but by God. Notice that it was God the Father (The Spirit of God) who inputted the motion into the world that created the sub-energy field particles that are an image of him. It was God's word who inputted the motions that created the light (energy photons) that created the image of him. Then it says that God (all three parts of him) inputted the motion that created the matter particles that are an image of his body. This would signify the condition of his body members when they are filled with the Holy Ghost and have God the Son and God the Father living in them and are, therefore, complete members of his body. That is all that I had room to put into my paper, but it continues in the scriptures from there. God separates that first input of motions from the next part by the end of the first day. Next God (his Word) said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament, and it was so. And God called the firmament heaven. At this point the waters that he is talking about are the same ones that the motions for the basic particles had been inputted into. These waters are a hidden part of the earth's creation that we cannot see or observe. The motions that are put into these waters generate the basic particles as their outputs into the spatial system that we exist in. They make up us and everything else that exists in that spatial system. God divided those waters into two parts by placing the firmament in the middle so that there are waters beneath the firmament and other waters that are above it. The firmament is a part of the earth that God later in the fourth day places the sun, the moon the stars, etc. in and he calls it heaven. It is the earth's heaven. This is not the heaven that God mentioned that he created at the beginning of the chapter. It is a part of the earth, so all that we can see as the universe is actually just the earth. That is then the end of the second day. In the third time division or day God gathered the waters under the firmament together and made the solid land and the liquid seas. This looks like the time that the planets, such as the earth were made. He then made the plants. God does not tell us what he did with the waters above the firmament. I think I know, but I am not sure and if I am right it is something that it is not yet time for man to know about, so I won't go into that any more now. In the fourth day God puts the things in the firmament as I mentioned earlier. In the fifth day he made the water creatures and the birds. In the sixth day he made the other land creatures and then made man in his image. There are other places where God tells us about the behind the scenes structures that we cannot observe that generate the world that we live in as its output. One book that contains quite a lot of detail is the book of Ezekiel and another one is the book of The Revelation of Jesus Christ. There are many other places also that give some additional information. God made the world, so he knows how everything will happen in it. He tells us many things that will happen in the future in the scriptures. Since it was written about two thousand years ago some of those things have already happened now, but some still will happen in the future. God did not make this world to be endless because it is made as a place for him to use to make a body for him to live in. We can become parts of his body. Once he has made all of the parts of his body, he will take all of the motion that he originally took out of himself to use to make this world back into himself, which will destroy this world. He will then make a new larger and better permanent world without entropy, so it can exist without end for him and his body members to live in together without end. I think that will be much better than living in this world where things keep breaking down including our present bodies over time.

Mathematical formulas are another form of words. Everything that can be expressed in a formula can also be expressed in other words and vice versa. Both are parts of man's abstract language structure. I can write 1+1=2 or one plus one equals two and they both mean the same thing. God used his Word to create the whole universe. Anything that we put out of ourselves to interact with the world outside of us is a form of a word. If you are outside of your house and you see the mail man coming up to your house and you put out your open hand for him to place your mail into it, you are telling him to give you your mail directly instead of putting it in your mail box just as surely as if you spoke the words to tell him to do that. When the mail man approaches your house with your mail in his hand, he is telling you that he has your mail without even saying a spoken word. All actions are forms of words. It used to be that if you told a computer to print something for you it would come out in the form of words on paper, but now it could be in the form of some object printed on a 3D printer, which is just another form of a word or output from the computer. I read your essay and it is good that you see that motion is the basis of all things. You still believe that a motion must exist in something else, which is why you want to make space be a substance that motion can move in. The next step is to understand that motions can exist by themselves in empty space. They do not need to move in some other object. All of the other objects are themselves made up of motions. God took part of his motions to use to make this universe. God exists without end, so the motions that he is made of also exist without end or to say it in more scientific terms motions are always conserved. They are the only things in the universe that are truly conserved. All you need to make a universe is the empty spatial system with positions in it for the motions to be in and to continuously move from one position to the next in the direction that they are traveling in at the speed that they are going in and the actual motions that do those things. Space does not need to be a substance. It just needs to have a lot of empty positions in it to hold a lot of motions. The motions are the substance. It is good that you see that cyclical motions are needed to make things like matter particles and energy photons, etc. The problem is to figure out how to make them because basic motions always travel in straight lines. A cyclical motion generally requires periodic reversal of the direction of motion in all of the dimensions that participate in the cyclical motion. Motions can't change their direction of travel themselves, however. Their direction can only be changed by an interaction. This means that the key to generating the directional changes that are needed to generate the cyclical motions required by energy photons and matter particles, etc. is to find a way to generate periodic motion directional changes. I give examples of how this can be done in my contest papers on this site. The structural points of motions are not infinitely small, but they are very small. Each motion contains a certain strength or amount of motion that I call its motion amplitude. It is what causes one motion to move faster than another one. This motion amplitude can vary from zero to an amount that generates the amount of motion that is called the speed of light. The motion amplitude contained in a motion can be changed, but only during an interaction. I notice that you use a spatial pressure to cause the curved motion that produces the static mass effect of matter particles. It would seem to me that if that pressure is the same throughout space like air pressure is on earth, it would not cause the curved motion because it would be pressing equally on all sides of the motion, which would result a in net pressure of zero because the pressure on one side of the motion would be offset by the equal pressure on the opposite side. I may not be understanding how that pressure is applied, etc., however. What would cause that pressure and how would it work? If space is some kind of substance that transmits motions, then the next question would be what is that substance? That could add another undefined existent entity into the structure of the universe. In my theory, space is just space and motions are just motions. I only add a small fourth dimension to generate cyclical motion that generates the frequency, wavelength, and dynamic mass effects of energy photons and matter particles and a fifth dimension to generates the cyclical motion that generates the three dimensional curved motion of the matter particles. Note, the curved motion that generates the static mass effect of matter particles must be three dimensional instead of just a rotation, which is two dimensional, in order to produce a mass effect that is the same in all three dimensions. Both of those dimensions just provide spatial positions for motions to move and interact in. Everything can be defined in terms that are familiar and commonly understood. I may have just missed it, but I did not see much about how energy photons work in your theory. Please explain to me how they work in your theory in terms of the motions that they are composed of.

Sincerely,

Paul

Boris. Thanks for your comment of My paper. If space and matter become each other when motion is present , Then as a geometrical construct the planes of influence immerse into each other. I do appreciate your representations.Thanks again Francis Duane Moore

Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich's comment on my paper's page;

Paul

Sometimes I start to believe that space is the body of God, which contains the beginning of everything that is happening in the world. I agree with you that the person imagines that he is the smartest. In fact, he received from God through the Word only a little part from the fact that it is available. A man not given to understand all the words of God. Therefore, the description of creation in the Bible was written to trigger in his mind are images of the world that he was capable of then. Only now we understand that it was a child's view of the world peculiar to us in early life. Man did not invent himself, all thoughts he takes from nature by analogy. In the course of his life in his mind many images of the world and he begins to think about his creation differently than is written in the Bible.

The space, like God, exists in the movement. The movement makes him infinite, without boundary or end. The emptiness in space like a God, no, because it heals his education circular or oscillatory motion. The photon energy is locked inside the corpuscle in which it is moving in three dimensions the wave of Compton.

In New Cartesian Physic all defined in terms that are familiar and understandable.

Your essay I have already praised as excellent.

I wish you success!

Dizhechko Boris

My comment to Dizhechko;

Dear Dizhechko,

God says: No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, (Jesus Christ, the Word) which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. Just before Jesus died on the cross he told his disciples that he would not leave them alone, but would send them another comforter (the Holy Ghost) and he said to them: At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. After God made Adam in his image, he took a rib out of him and made Eve who is the image of man. If doing this is part of the image of God making the universe and man in it, it looks like he may have taken his motions out of a place in his bosom and placed his son (the Word) in that place that he had evacuated his motions out of and then used the Word to make the universe in him including us, using some of those motions that he had taken out of that area to add back in to make the sub-energy, energy photons, and matter particles, etc. in our universe. I have not seen enough evidence in the scriptures yet to say that I am sure things happened that way, but what I have seen so far agrees with that possibility. If that is the case then that space is in God and the universe including us are in him and in his Word and we are made of motions that were part of him, but since he evacuated himself from that space in him and then used motions that were part of him, but had been removed from himself to make these things we cannot say that we are joined to him as parts of him at this time. That joining is to take place between him and his body members in the new world that comes after this one ends. God may be infinite, but if the universe was made in a fixed area within him, this universe would have to be finite. I have not seen anything one way or the other about how that will be in the world to come. I have come to the conclusion over a long period of time that all knowledge, wisdom, and understanding come from God, not from man or from nature. I have had too many times that I desired to know some specific thing or how something in the world actually works and have worked for many long hours trying to figure it out and not being able to do so and then have the answer just come into me when I am not even thinking about it. This tells me that it was not my work, but was given to me. Since God is the source of all knowledge, wisdom, and understanding, I believe that it is all given to me or to anyone else by God. God says that he gives gifts to men that differ according to his grace or favour. He will give one gift to one and a different gift to another according to his will. Even Jesus (the Word of God) said the Son can do nothing of himself. If he can't, then the rest of us who are much less than him certainly can't either. Beliefs, such as, that one man is smarter than another is just a device invented by men to make people believe that they are either better or worse than others, so that they can take advantage of others in some way and are of no real importance. You are right that we see in part. I don't claim to know everything. I mentioned one thing above that I don't have enough information about to say that I can consider it to be the way that it looks to be for sure. I do try to give people the answers that they need to the best of my knowledge, because God tells us that as we receive, we are expected to give, so I do as much as I can. It is true that when you read the scriptures the first time, you will only be able to understand that which your earthly mind can understand, but Jesus said: If you continue in my word, you are my disciples indeed and you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free. Each time you read it the knowledge that you have received in past readings allows you to understand more, so the key to getting understanding is to continue in the Word. You are right that God has placed information about him and the world that he made, in that world or nature to help us to come to and understand him and his works. God tells us that his Word is more sure and that anything that man might think or say that is contrary to his Word is not true. Yes that is a problem that man can have, which is to look at the world and see something and then misapply it to something that it does not actually apply to or to apply it in the wrong way because of lack of knowledge. A lot depends on a person's individual experiences or lack of them. As an example, I see many people who believe that the static mass effect of a matter particle is caused by rotation like the rotation of the earth on its axis. If that person had taken a bicycle wheel and mounted it on a shaft, so that he could hold onto the shaft on one side of the wheel with one hand and hold onto the shaft on the other side of the wheel with the other hand and then did that and had someone spin the wheel, he would experience that he could move the shaft and wheel up, down, forward, backward, left, or right and it would feel the same whether the wheel was spinning or not. If he tried to move it in any way that would change the direction of its axis of rotation, however, he would feel a greater resistance to that change when the wheel was spinning than when it was not spinning. After that experience he would not likely come to the conclusion that rotation would produce a static mass effect in matter particles that would be the same in interactions from all directions. He would come to understand that the motion would have to be three dimensional so that no matter what direction that the interaction came from it would try to change the three dimensional complex motion axis structure, thus giving the same static mass effect in all interactions. This is something that can be observed in nature, but not all people experience it directly. Of course, there is another way to get that understanding, which is to get that information from someone else who has done that, which is why we need to give to others those things that God has given us to see and understand.

To let me get a better understanding of your theory let me ask some questions. It seems to me that you equate space and matter as being the same thing. Is that true? If yes, is matter/space composed or made of motion in a vortex pattern like in a tornado, etc.? In addition to that does matter/space also consist of other motion that in some way exerts pressure on the vortex motion of the matter to cause it to continue to travel in that curved path rather than to just travel in a straight line like a motion would usually travel in? If it does, is that other motion that exerts the pressure also considered to be a part of that piece of matter/space or is it something else? What is the source of the power that continually causes that motion to continue to exert that pressure on the vortex motion? It would seem to me that if space does not exist except as matter, each matter particle would be of some size and if another particle also existed it would either have to be directly connected to the first particle or it would be completely separate from it with no space in between it and the other particle. As an example, If a large number of matter vortex particles were connected together to form a man and another group of particles were connected to form another man, if the two men had no direct contact with each other, they would be completely isolated from each other with no possible contact with each other because there would be no space between them to travel through to reach each other. Each one's space would be completely filled by the one man and would not extend beyond him. Is that true or is there some way around that? How can a man look around him and see what looks like empty space between him and some other object made of matter/space? The answers to some of these questions may be obvious depending on the answers to others, but I include them in case the answer is different than I expect it to be. What is the corpuscle that you mention made of and how does it work? I will stop there for now because I will need answers to those questions to understand what I should ask next.

Sincerely,

Paul

Boris,

Good essay, with an interesting and perfectly reasonable hypothesis with which I happen to mostly agree, (my 'Much Ado about Nothing' essay a few years ago agreed the stupidity of space as 'nothing'!)

Now we have so much dark energy, and the fermion pairs of 'condensed matter' are understood to condense by the extra spin state of the Higgs mechanism, most doctrine STILL can't rationlise space as anything but empty.

I agree if it condenses as 'matter' then it must be of the same stuff, just with smaller spin states so matter would be a 'phase transition'. And yes of course there must then be relative states of motion However as we don't suggest water vapour is 'the same' as water surely we must be able to utilise language to distinguish. Do you agree? i.e. One difference I've found is that EM energy couples with condensed matter but not with the smaller states.

One day of course we may far better understand, and some researcher will look back 200yrs and say Wow! some back then knew what was going on!

On levitation; even when the much respected electrical engineering professor Eric Laithewaite in a Royal Institution Christmas lecture showed us effective levitation from gyroscopes and pointed out physics has 'missed something', the response it got was physicists demanding his university (Imperial) got rid of him! They were slapped back for a change!

Well done, and keep building the evidence.

Peter

Boris very interesting the New Cartesian Physic, that fits very well in my Scale Landscape Framework.

Please, hev a look to these formulas evolution, and I hope you understand the concept:

The Dynamic Laws of Physics (and Universal Gravitation) have varied over time, and even Einstein had already proposed that they still has to evolve:

ARISTOTLE: F = m.v

NEWTON: F = m.a

EINSTEIN. E = m.c2 (*)

MOND: F = m.a.(A/A0)

FRACTAL RAINBOW: F = f (scale) = m.a.(scale factor)

Or better G (Gravity Constant) vary with the scale/distance due to fractal space-time: G = f ( Scale/distance factor)

(*) This equation does not correspond to the same dynamic concept but has many similarities.

Dear Dizhechko,

I am also an independent researcher. The general subject of my research is how the world began and how it works, so God does enter into my area of research along with many other areas. I can understand that most people tend to work in more narrow research areas. The advantage of doing so is that one can gain more in depth understanding about that one smaller area. The disadvantage is that one loses the view of the overall picture that can allow more overall understanding of the whole system. It takes both types to gain the full in depth understandings in all of the local areas of research and to then join all of them together to make a complete in depth understanding of the whole structure. I tend to see patterns in things around me that most others miss and can then follow those patterns to new understandings of the systems that generate them. That ability works best when working on the larger structural scale of things instead of a narrow area because the patterns are richer there and often flow through and connect many of the narrow areas when fully understood. I mainly tried to answer your comments about God. I try to help others who express thoughts or questions about an area that I have worked in and understanding God is the most important area in existence, but I don't have to cover that area if you are not interested.

If space has a boundary(s), it cannot be infinite. This is the case whether it is a boundary that exists at the limit of its current expansion into the void or if it is just small bubbles of the void that exist somehow in or around matter particles, etc. To be completely infinite it would have to completely fill the void and the void would have to be infinite. If the universe is not truly infinite, it would not be likely that an infinite circle could be constructed except as a bounded infinity, which is different than an absolute infinity. If it is infinite, it would likely just extend out in all directions infinitely and have no geometric form or shape to it. This would mean that a motion could just continue on in a straight line without end and never need to have its motion curve. That is what motions do by themselves. They only curve as the result of interactions with something. The same thing applies to oscillatory motions. They need to have periodic interactions to change their direction of travel to generate the cycle. Most motions that man works with are not over long enough distances that any spatial curvature would exist. Especially the extremely small distances associated with the structure of matter particles. So far, all of man's observations that I have seen indicate a flat non curved space even at very large scales.

If emptiness equals movement, what is the form or pattern of the movement of empty space compared to the vortex motion of matter that exists within its space? The angular motion of the vortex would generate a static mass effect in an interaction between it and any other vortex that was rotating in the same direction, but if the top end of one vortex interacted with the bottom end of another one they would both be traveling in the same direction at the same speed and would, therefore, not experience the same angular motion against angular motion mass effect that a side to side interaction would produce. If the interaction was between the side of one vortex with the side of the other vortex, but one vortex was rotated one hundred and eighty degrees from the other one, so that what was the bottom of it was now at its top, when their surfaces met they would both be traveling in the same direction and that would also produce a different mass effect during the interaction. In interaction observations these variations are not observed, however. This is what led me to conclude that a matter particle's motion had to be in a three dimensional motion pattern in order to produce a three dimensional balanced static mass effect. If I look up into the sky and see a star that is four light years away, how much of that empty space is related to me and how much of it is related to the star?

Sorry it took so long for me to give a return comment, but I have now started on another project, so, much of my time is now applied to that. I will do my best to respond, however.

Sincerely,

Paul

Boris,

I've just posted the below to you on my string and returned to see your response here, than read; "Assume that geometrical space and physical space are two different concepts." I absolutely agree. And Bubbles within bubbles. Read the below. We think alike. I'll now apply your score to deservedly lift your placing.

reply..

Thank you. I admire all who write science in a foreign language and make it valuable and comprehensible. I imagine what nonsense mine would be if I tried to write in Russian!

One question, (I'll post on both strings); I suggest that in reality Cartesian 'frame' systems are unreal so help confound much of science, and we need solid 'material', forming 3D geometrical shapes to then make proper sense of nature.

Thoughts?

Very best.

Peter

Dear Dizhechko

Thank you for your comments on my page - I will re-read them and comment there.

Your essay is rich with many interesting ideas. I will respond to only two because the analytical formulae of your model new physics seem important and need more study.

You start by a reference to Christian belief, the Logo and Bible quotes. I fully respect that and am myself a Christian, but I have long considered that religion and science do not mix - better for both to be kept strictly separate! Of course we want a single truth, but in my life I have struggled long with this and feel that while we need prayer, the comforts of religious community and so forth, the mind, freed from the dictates of faith, will not accept many of the staples of religion like miracles, the creation story, an unseen power that is all-powerful yet allows evil to exist, etc.

My second point is to thank you for reminding Descartes' concept of space and matter - he also described how the vortices of space transmit light. All that is fundamental to my Beautiful Universe Model and in face include an illustration of Descarte's vortices as figure 22 - (figure also attached here). Just brilliant to have thought of that hundreds of years before.

I wish you all the best in your work.

VladimirAttachment #1: BU-FIG-22.jpg

Dear Dizhechko Boris,

As I told you in my Essay page, I have read your Essay. I find it interesting and pleasant. Despite I do not agree with all your claims, I think that your ideas should deserve a better attention from the scientific community. Thus, in order to help you to better spread such ideas, I decide to give you the highest score. Congrats and good luck in the Contest. I hope that you will have the chance to read, comment and rate our Essay.

Cheers, Ch.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2862

Dear Boris Dizhechko,

Thank you for pointing out your essay on my forum page. I have in the meantime taken a look and would like to commend you on an intriguing title. My analysis has been somewhat curtailed by the artefacts of the online translator you have chosen to use and find the great wealth of nuances that you would have placed in your essay's details, to be most likely lost in translation. Indeed, translation is a very interesting subject in an of itself, with some overlap within the scope of this essay contest - taking the view that a language is a higher level emergent structure that is dependent on brain wiring architecture. However I am digressing. Perhaps you may have a succinct summary as regards your conclusions, trying in the genesis of volition with relation expressions.

Regards,

Robert

Dear Dizhechko,

We see many things in somewhat similar ways. You see space as God's body. After looking at the universe and seeing that it is made to be a temporary structure that contains entropy which will cause it to ultimately end, it does not make sense to me that God would not make it to exist without end if he intended it to be his body, so that he could live in it endlessly. It does make sense to me, however, that he could have made this universe as a place in which to make the parts of his body that he will save as the output of this world to be assembled and used by him to live in within a new better and permanent endless universe that he will make after this one is gone. When I looked in scriptures that are purported to be the words of God, I found that the Jewish Old Testament and the Christian New Testament actually tell us that this is the case and that he intends that we be the parts or members of his endless body. I could not accept those scriptures as true, however, until I compared what they say about the universe with actual observations of the universe to see if what they say agrees with the actual observed universe. I looked for information that I had come to understand that was beyond man's current level of understanding and found that it not only contained that information, but also contained information about things that I had not yet come to understand, but some of which I now understand. This has convinced me that it is truly God's communication to us, telling us about himself, the world that he made and his reason for creating us or our part in his creation. According to the scriptures, this world is not just composed of the world that we see, which has four parts to it, (one is not a time dimension). It also contains three heavens that are controlled by other living creatures called powers for the first heaven, principalities for the second heaven and angels for the third heaven. This is another image of God because he says the angels are ministering spirits, which is an image of God the Spirit, the principalities are the mediators between the angles and the powers or an image of the Word and the powers directly control things in the earth or body of the world. He also says that there is a part of the creation that is high above the highest heaven that is reserved for only God the Father and his Son (the Word of God) to dwell in. This makes a total of eight parts or dimensions in this creation, most of which we cannot observe. Jesus said that in the world to come we will be as the angels are. Since the angels are likely seven dimensional creatures this would mean that we would be seven dimensional creatures in the world to come. The descriptions given about the world to come suggest that it will be a twelve dimensional creation. We will live on the new earth, but it could receive three of those four extra dimensions that could then support us as seven dimensional beings. As you can see the whole spatial dimensional structure that exists in this world will be replaced by a new bigger, better, and permanent spatial dimensional structure where we will live as members or parts of God's body without end. Of course, God existed before the creation of the universe, so he can and mostly does exist and live outside of the present universe. He does have the eighth part of the creation to use to observe and control all things in the universe as he desires, however. He also has a throne in the third heaven where he interacts with the angels and tells them what to do, etc. This universe including all of the matter and space that is in it is just a temporary manufacturing plant that God built and is using to build a permanent body for him to live in endlessly. When all of his body members have been made, he will not have any further need for this universe and it will be ended and replaced by the new universe as mentioned above.

The void is just the empty space that existed in God's creation before God added motions to it to generate the forms or shapes of sub-energy, energy photon, and matter particles and the various combinations of them that he made when he made the world to make all of the things that it contains. It is not so much that nature abhors a vacuum as it is that it abhors a concentration. If you take a large container and divide it into two sections and make the best vacuum that you can in one side and place a large number of gas molecules in the other side and then remove the divider between the two sections, you will see that gas molecules will disperse themselves evenly everywhere in the container over a period of time. This does not happen because of anything that the vacuum does. It happens because molecules that travel toward the center of the concentration will likely interact with other molecules near the center and have their directions changed by the interactions, so that they travel away from the center of concentration. Molecules that travel away from the center of concentration will more likely be able to continue their travel in that direction because there are fewer molecules out there to interact with. Over time this results in an equal distribution of molecules throughout the container. It is the motions of the matter and not the vacuum or void that generates the result. I am not sure what you mean when you say "The wall closes instantly, if we will allow God, says Descartes, somewhere in an extraordinary way to form the void." What wall and how does it close if God created the void? Of course, there is nothing that you or any of us can do to not allow God to create it. An energy photon travels at the speed of light, so according to your theory it would seem that it must be part of the void. It would seem that the void could not interact with anything since it is just emptiness. How then can an energy photon interact with other entities in many ways as has been observed by man?

You are right that a vortex is an unstable structure in that it requires continual input of motion to continue to exist. A tornado is actually weakened when its bottom is on the surface of the earth. When the earth's surface is heated by sun light, it heats the air just above it. The heated air expands and becomes less dense than the cooler air above it. This causes it to be lighter than the air above it, so it rises and the cooler air flows down around it. This flow of hot air up and cool air down continues as long as the ground under it receives heat from the sun. Due to the rotation of the earth and other factors this motion can begin to rotate and eventually cause a tornado. Once the bottom end is on the ground it begins to weaken because some or all of the warm air that provides the upward flow of air becomes blocked by the surface of the earth. The complete surface is not usually always on the ground, so most of the time it can continue on or near the surface for some time before it weakens enough that it goes up from the surface of the earth. Once it is up it can regain its speed and power and go back down again if the ground temperature conditions still exist to continue to feed its motion. Like the calm winds at the center of a hurricane the winds at the center of a tornado can be very low in rotational speed. The angular speed at the outside of the vortex is the greatest as is generally true of any vortex or rotating structure. This is necessary because if the air molecules are locked into revolving around the center axis of the vortex by the other molecules around them, those at the outside of the vortex must travel a larger distance during a revolution than those that are very near the axis. To give an example by using the rotation of the earth, a point on the surface of the earth at the equator travels about one thousand miles an hour in its angular motion around the axis of the earth, while a point that is one inch from the center of the axis near the north axis pole will only travel a little over three inches in a day. Pushing in on the sides of a vortex would not keep it going. The pressure on the rotating sides of the vortex would act as a brake to slow its angular motion down and eventually stop it. Although a vortex is a three dimensional object, its rotation is basically two dimensional. If you pick any point on or in the vortex, it rotates around the axis in a two dimensional plain. If in addition to its normal rotation you also rotate it from top to bottom and from bottom to top, it would then be a form of a three dimensional rotation. The problem that you would then have is that the two rotations would be continually changing each other's axis of rotation, which would tend to cause its angular motions to slow down due to the internal mass effects that would be generated against each rotation by the other rotation(s). In my theory, I use an inter-dimensional motion flow along with a servo of the speed of light to alter the direction of travel of an energy photon into an enclosed three dimensional path that generates the balanced angular motion mass effect and at the same time changes the energy photon into a matter particle, which is the cyclical curved enclosed path that the photon travels in. More details about that are given in my contest papers on this site. In my theory there is only one motion that is continually changing its direction of travel in a three dimensional motion pattern instead of the three dimensional rotation's two or three motions, so there are no internal opposing mass effects generated. It is much simpler to make workable solutions when you are only working with basic motions that move and empty space for them to move in than when you have a space that is not empty, but must be composed of some substance that can be shaped into structures like a vortex shape and where some parts of space can exert pressure on other parts of space, etc. We both see that the static mass effect of matter particles is created by motion and that motions must have space to move in. The main difference between our theories is that I have come to understand that motions are existent entities in themselves and are the only entities that have the power built into them to act and because of that they are also the only entities that have the power to interact. Since all other entities can be constructed using them, motions and an empty space for them to move in is all that is needed to make the universe. You appear to believe that a motion is not an entity of itself, but needs a medium to travel in and is only a property of that medium, so you envision space as an entity in itself that is composed of some material medium that motions can travel in. One problem with this concept is that the question that is automatically raised is: What is that medium composed of? It can't just be empty space, so what is it made of that gives it all of the properties that you give it? Another problem is how to get the three dimensional motion that is required to get a balanced static mass effect in matter particles. I have seen other similar theories and they all come short of being able to fully explain such things.

Sincerely,

Paul

Boris,

I found your essay very interesting, enough so, that I did some browsing on Cartesian philosophy. I was introduced to something I did not know existed. So, thank you for introducing me to a new world. I cannot say that I am a full fledged "new Cartesian" but I certainly use cartesian coordinates excessively.

Your essay was (as you acknowledge) a little difficult to read, but it was worth the struggle. And I learned something new: A logic from a first person perspective that can be applied to the essay question, thus it gets a high rating from me. I think, therefore I am!

Thanks,

Don Limuti