Dear Georgina,

apologies for my late reply...

"That comes from using Einstein's space-time continuum..." No! It comes from Parmenides! 'Mere happening' cannot be observed in principle. Assuming (just for probabilistic reasons) that you are not familiar with cricket, what you would observe in a cricket game is people moving in certain ways and doing things with bats and balls. Then, for you, every game-oriented 'move' by the players would be entirely unexpected, i.e. you wouldn't be able to observe the GAME. Likewise, what we see on an oscilloscope before synchronization is noise. The synchronization, however, is what WE bring to the measurement, namely, the a priori knowledge what it takes to make a signal of certain periodicity APPEAR to stand still. So, hypotheses, I think, are the most powerful scientific instruments there are, because -if they're good - they make things stand still, and they do this by finding the right way to think (speak) about the world (difficult job indeed). The solution of the equations of motion is always a body in space, e.g. an orbit or trajectory, which is why I said in a previous essay that in Newton's laws the apple does not even feature.

Time, on the other hand, is what we experience when we are 'unsynchronized', because time begins to flow when we are permanently forced to change our expectations.' Time' is the indicator of things-going-wrong, and since disorder is wrong, the direction of time is in the direction of increasing entropy.

I'll be back on evolution and species later.

Heinrich

Dear Georgina,

from my previous post it is clear that I think something is 'wrong' with evolution just for the reason of being set in grammatical-historical 'time'. When things begin to 'happen' - SOMETHING has happened! - we admit that we don't have the faintest idea what's going on. Then we don't know what it was, why or how. That's why Parmenides said that change (and hence time) are inexistent or illusions. So, it was important to me to first show that there is no time to be found in the equations of motion (for the reason that human experience concerning e.g. the moon as a phenomenon and its geometrical orbit (an ellipse) are timeless and share no common measure). Likewise doesn't H2O share any common measure with 'water' (he who claims that H2O is cool, self-cleaning and a precondition for life as we as we know it, simply claims too much; these qualities don't flow from H2O, but from water). That is, the 'hard' sciences have ADDED entities to natural language incommensurable with the phenomena and, therefore, not possibly contradicting them. The hard sciences, however, became soft the very moment when their entities were regarded as really existing, i.e. independent of the phenomena. Hence relations between their entities inevitably moved to the foreground with the effect that the past became the playground of 'theories', thus losing any foothold in the present.

Now let's look at evolution. What happened to the hard sciences only relatively recently (their historicisation), happened to biology already in the aftermath of Darwin. By reifying the extremely successful concept of the biological cell, the becoming of life on this planet had necessarily to disappear in the past.

However, if paper is patient - even more so is the past!

I'll be back with comments on the 'species' concept.

Heinrich

Attraction of the base medium to mass, and its distribution around it allows gravity to be an effect that is occurring locally between masses and the base medium, as a consequence of the mass, rather than force acting at a distance between masses (Newtonian gravity) or result of space-time curvature (Einstein's gravity).

For example: The mass of a planet will affect the concentration of the base medium around it.The interaction that another mass has with the medium is related to the mass of the planet, the concentration of the medium due to that planet's mass, and radius that is the second mass's distance from the centre of the planet. Which are the things that relate to the distribution of the medium.

A reason for tendency to orbit could be the difference in concentration of base medium above and below the object. The more concentrated providing greater inertia, producing a turning.This model makes gravity experienced at ground level a kind of compression from attraction of the medium to the planet, and that medium resisting change of motion through it, so there is inertia of objects on the ground. Energy required for elevation. This fits with the reading of a ground placed accelerometer being due to that compression.

The additional torque needed for more acceleration at lower orbit could be just that turning from different concentrations previously mentioned. That seems like something that could be calculated.

Maybe it just doesn't need saying here as it isn't directly about the essay. But it seems at first counter-intuitive that as concentration of the base medium increases there is no decrease in acceleration. Which is why understanding that the increase in concentration isn't increase in viscosity is important.A greater concentration is not hindering motion through it, as a greater viscosity would, but constraining the motion to that produced by the relation with surrounding medium and making change from that particular motion more difficult.

Georgina Woodward, you have a very interesting essay. I liked this:

A universe can not be constituted of nothing. Nothing can arise from nothing and that is very dull, as is the

mathematics of nothing.Something rather than nothing, existence rather than void is a foundational necessity. To be a universe that has physics, chemistry and biology is happening, the existent something must have the quality of being able to have different distributions. More here, less there, so that from unknown (as it shares no information about itself), base existence, other kinds of existence can be happening and identified. Then there can be quantities and

categories and geometry and mathematics is more interesting.

According to the principle of identity of space and matter Descartes, matter is space and space is matter that moves. Time is a synonym for universal movementniya. Thus, space is the Foundation for fundamental theories. Look at my page, FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich

Do not allow New Cartesian Physics go away into nothingness, which can to be the theory of everything OO.

Sincerely, Boris.

    Dear Georgina,

    whatever trait, function or behavior is taken as a definition of species is an abstraction in the original sense of the word (from L. abstrahere, to draw away from, to isolate from, etc.). As such the notion species is a logical-positive (Humean) a posteriori rule over plain observations (which we know never converges toward truth). Hence the term species means whatever we want it to mean and it fails to be efficacious because it is complex. On the other hand, the electron, the EM wave and the benzene ring have in common that they cannot be observed as such for the reason of not being abstractions but, rather, a priori complements.

    A priori concepts tell us something about the present, whereas a posteriori rules tell us something about the past or the future, but never about the present. This is why there is Darwinism (the -ism being an indicator of an ideology) but not Newtonism or Maxwellianism.

    Heinrich

    When length, breadth and thickness are attributed to an object an orientation has been selected for it. Orientation is not an independent property of objects. If an observer makes length, breadth and thickness measurements of an asymmetric object and then passes the object to someone else, that other may give different measurements for length, breadth and thickness because the relative orientation is different to the relation with the previous observer.

    The material object has relations with other objects in the surrounding environment including distance from them, which could be used to characterize the objects extension with position and orientation. This is a 'web' of relations rather than an artificially imposed co-ordinate reference frame.

      The consciousness of the people resists the recognition of the identity of space and matter of Descartes, because they used to think that I live in an empty space - it is convenient for them. While there was no reason to think otherwise. However, there will come a time when the level of education of the people will depend on their understanding of this identity. This requires the necessity to eliminate the difficulties in science. Fundamental should save our thinking, i.e. to be simple and straightforward. Physical space, which for Descartes is a matter that is the basis for fundamental theories in science.

      Everyone likes to look at the sky and it seems empty infinite space in which it moves large and small body. However, this impression is deceptive. According to the principle of identity of space and matter Descartes, space is matter that moves. When Copernicus asserted that the Earth revolves around the Sun, he had to add that along with the Earth revolves around the Sun, all the solar space. Space is what built the world.

      If the believer to ask, where is God? He will answer - in the sky. When you look into infinite space and I think that is the body of God, that needs to be asked, and how it works? The answer is simple, all the changes around and our weight is the result of his actions. In space there is a setting for changing the world. Time is a synonym of total movement.

      You are close to the ideas of Descartes on 10, if you leave a comment on my page and evaluation. Look at my essay, FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich Where I showed how radically the physics can change if it follows principle ofthe identity of space and matter of Descartes

      Sincerely, Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich.

      Descartes physical space is a matter, in which there are no voids. But if they are formed, then closes instantly. Taking into account modern concepts, the speed of light is the limit for any real movements, in the New Cartesian Physics the voids in the space closes to the speed of light. For intelligent people from this moment begins the real physics.

      It should be understood that there is a geometric space as empty and is physical space as matter and which is moving. In geometrical space there are no problems with measurements of length, width and height, they do not depend on the orientation in it. In the physical space is modified so that the speed not exceeded the speed of light.

      New Cartesian Physics needs your support to develop further. Visit my page and give there your assessment.FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich

      I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

      I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

      Dear Georgina , Time is a synonym for universal, total movement of space, which is matter. Universe soup forever bubbling and boiling. We do not see the space that is in a state of physical vacuum, it is transparent as glass, but we see particles that have merged in the body. Corpuscles also created from space, which is matter and which rotates in the corpuscle. The rotation creates a centrifugal acceleration. Flux of a vector of this acceleration is mass. Multiply any mass on the gravitational constant and you get the value of the flow vector of the centrifugal acceleration. Multiply the mass by the square of the speed of light, and you will get the energy that is accumulated in the corpuscle in the movement of space, which is matter.

      I was also against Einstein, but then I realized that all the paradoxes arise from the inertial reference systems with infinitely long numerical axes. If you take the inertial frame with an infinitely small numeric axes, it turns out all good. Nothing wrong with that in them time stops, no, because they are infinitely small.

      Thank you for the discussion, I give you 10. New Cartesian Physics нужна твоя высокая поддержка, чтобы развиваться дальше. Посети мою страницу и дай там свою оценку.FQXi Fundamental in New Cartesian Physics by Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich

      I wish you success! Sincerely, Boris Dizhechko

        Boris,

        Uni-temporal passage of time is change in configuration of the entire extant universe. Which can be likened to your total movement of 'space'. However a time is configuration of the universe, it is not a property possessed by individual particles or objects. The time inside an atom requires the context of the rest of the universe external to it. Also since the universe is uni-temporal there is no different time for things to be at. So time stopping inside an atom but not outside does not fit with my own explanatory framework. Though time apparently stopping (no information update) when movement is keeping pace with the speed of signal transmission does make sense, but does not apply inside atoms.

        The paradoxes are due to a category error, not differentiating between products of EM signal receipt and processing, and independently existing material things.

        I like the idea of filled space. I'm not convinced about the rotation you mention. I think there are different kinds of particle behaving differently, which gives them their recognizably different characteristics. Things with mass are differentiated from the base medium and have inertia, there is resistance to their movement through it. That seems different from flux of a vector of centrifugal acceleration due to rotation.

        Thank you for reading my essay and for your kind comments. Georgina

        Hello again G.

        While I ranked your essay generously on February 2nd., my comments regarding your essay were too trivial to be useful. so, I would like to make amends by offering you a few belated comments.

        Concerning your statement 'what is causal and what is consequence', the notion of a singular subject and a singular predicate only holds momentarily.

        More generally, all causes generate events that instigate effects, which effects in turn become the next generation of causes.

        I concur with your statement that 'Nothing can arise out of nothing'; however, not withstanding our general understanding that the predominant constituent in the universe is vacuum, there is a significant quantity of unevenly distributed matter, interchangeably masquerading as energy, that together are the cause of our concerns about causation; all of which may have led you to conclude that 'it is better to assume there is only one kind of base of existence'.

        Which leads me back to my own conclusion: that 'existence' is the single prerequisite fundamental to the whole shebang. itsinmybook.com

        Lots and lots,

        G too.

          Hi Gary, The place in the essay where I write about not mistaking consequences for causes is to do with the anthropic principle. Although the argument also applies to other areas such as evolution. Eg, Flight is a consequence not a cause of the evolution of flying birds. Birds do not have wings so that they can fly but having wings enabling flight has aided survival. Leading to predominance of best wings (and genetics for them) in the breeding population of birds able to fly.

          Georgina

          3 months later

          There can be true relative velocities and apparent relative velocities. A true velocity requires that there is a relation between two actualized things, parts, or phenomena, or parts thereof, that are co-existing. That is within the same and only existing entire universal configuration. If one reference object is actualized but the comparison is with a manifestation formed from received signals then the velocity calculated for the manifestation is attributed to the material object it appears to be but is not in essence the same as the true relative velocity which is the relation between the two actualized things or phenomena.

          It is said that Newtonian gravity is an approximation of Einsteinian gravity. However Newton is dealing with two actualized bodies in space, whereas Einstein is dealing with a space-time manifestation ( necessarily formed from received EM radiation or calculation of that ). Therefore the solution is an attribution which although it may be similar in numerical value is in essence something fundamentally different. The difference is between what is actually happening and what is seen to have happened,

          Re. Einsteins field equations "The equations must be wrong! Although the theory and the equations have passed every test, they are intrinsically incompatible with quantum theory (which has also passed every experimental test). The problem is that the equations require the energy and momentum to be defined precisely at every space time point, which contradicts the uncertainty principle for quantum states. This is not a just a problem at high energies or short distances, it is a conceptual incompatibility that applies in every lab." From"Einstein Field Equations (General Relativity)" via https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/physics/intranet/pendulum/generalrelativity/ Retrieved 7 jun 2018

          Quantum theory is dealing with what is (unitemporal material existence) that is prior to the making of a contextual observation, without context; that providing a singular value or state. Whereas space time represents a manifestation, the product of observation, and that product is of definite states and or values., Contextual manifestation, results, not externally real (actualized) source reality.

          The solutions to these equations are the components of the metric tensor g_{munu}, which specifies the space-time geometry. The inertial trajectories of particles can then be found using the geodesic equation. From"Einstein Field Equations (General Relativity)" via https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/physics/intranet/pendulum/generalrelativity/ Retrieved 7 jun 2018

          The inertial trajectories mentioned are trajectories of a manifestation of an object ( formed from EM processing ) and not a material object in unitemporal space being affected by the distribution of the existing content of space unobserved.

            I think I need to clarify what I meant by "Quantum theory is dealing with what is (unitemporal material existence) that is prior to the making of a contextual observation, without context; that providing a singular value or state." I am talking about what is happening in a quantum experiment - the evolving relations between an actualized entity or phenomenon and the actualized environment of the apparatus unseen prior to observation. That is what is occurring in the actual territory rather than a "map" representation. (It can be represented by evolution of a superposition of result states, eigenstates but that isn't precisely what is happening.)

            It still isn't made clear. Perhaps rather than saying " prior to the making of a contextual observation" I should have said prior to obtaining the result of having applied a context, meaning by that the environment provided by the experiment and the protocol used that only permits a singular fixed state outcome. Prior to considering the singular state obtained ( a measurable) the actualised, beable, entity or phenomenon and beable environment provided by the apparatus are in an evolving relationship.

            I wrote "Nothing can arise from nothing and that is very dull, as is the mathematics of nothing. " There can be no differences in distribution of nothing that would allow gradients and flux in it. It can not host a field. Rather than Newtonian action at a distance, Newtonian gravity can be written as a field theory as demonstrated by (November 26, 2012) Leonard Susskind General Relativity Lecture 9 Stanford university. This gives the effect of mass on something producing 'geometry' in space. It can not be the effect of mass on nothingness. The geometry obtained from Newtonian gravity can not then be substituted by the geometry of Relativity. Space time is generated from received EM. The space-time landscape is a product, not the source reality. Its generation requires simultaneous existence of the receiver and the carrying signal, IE same temporal location. It also requires interaction by coming together in space of signal and receiver. So it could be said that all space-time originates in a unitemporal (same and only time everywhere) spatial process.

            Newtonian type gravity but with unitemporal change in configuration of the universe as foundational passage of time rather than Newtonian time can be written so that there is gradient of distribution of the 'host of fields' around a mass. That gradient of the host will effect the paths of light, affecting receipt time, leading to a space-time distribution of the information obtained form the received EM.

            4 months later

            Correction. "Charm allowed trees to grow and bloody mindedness kept them up, and so on." Terry Pratchett. The Light Fantastic (1986).

            Write a Reply...