tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.comments2023-02-15T06:48:43.837-08:00Beyond InformationAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10694116364890866519noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-49341667656618474022013-08-15T20:41:09.624-07:002013-08-15T20:41:09.624-07:00Please note that you should replace the word '...Please note that you should replace the word 'singularity' with 'quantum vacuum', or better yet 'subspace', everywhere it occurs in this post. The reason is that the singularity does not exist in base one mathematics. Base one mathematics is all based on the axiom of identity. Therefore, zero and equality do not exist in base one mathematics. As a result, division by zero is impossible, and the generation of singularities is impossible. Every tensor in base one mathematics is a self-adjoint, complex, symmetric potential difference hyperfunction that operates over a complex tensor field. Those hyperfunctions each contain a derivative and its inverse integral. Composition of those symmetric potential difference hyperfunctions automatically generates successive higher order derivatives and integrals. In quantized form, all symmetric potential differences are othorgonal. In quantized form, those derivatives and integral always exist, up to and including C infinite order. Time itself is the first quantization of the infinite quantum vacuum, and the basis of the unit of the finite. Thus the finite is a symmetric potential difference in the infinite while the infinite is an asymmetric potential difference in the finite. The dot product of each symmetric potential difference tensor with itself is an identity matrix. Hence every symmetric potential difference is an identity. The transfinite recursive composition of those symmetric potential difference identities generates a base one number system, and the quantum field stucture of existence. No identity can be zero (the null matrix is impossible to generate), so no equality and no singularity can exist in the universe. However, non-quantized, asymmetric open virtual energy strings can exist. They compose the 'infinite' fractal quantum vacuum. Actually, the term 'quantum vacuum' is a misnomer. The virtual energy that composes it is neither quantized, nor a vacuum. It should really be called 'subspace' because it fills the fractal dimensional 'space' between the three real dimensions of space and beneath the imaginary dimension of time. Please note that 'infinite' does not mean infinite in quantity. The 'infinite' has no fixed measure. It has a finite quantity, but that quantity is indefinite due to its existence in fractal dimensions. Quantum entanglement occurs in subspace, not the integral dimensions of spacetime, so entangled systems are entangled beneath and between the dimensions of time and space, thereby making them non-local in both time and space, and thus accounting for the "spooky action at a distance" characteristic of entangled quantum systems. <br /><br />Sorry for the advanced math braindump, but perhaps, it will help those with advanced mathematical backgrounds understand the foundation of base one mathematics a little better.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694116364890866519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-18315761846752751922013-08-09T11:14:23.619-07:002013-08-09T11:14:23.619-07:00Of course, another problem with equality is that i...Of course, another problem with equality is that it is observer dependent, because an observer must select each equalities domain and codomain. Conversely, identity is completely observer and observation independent. Identity is also decision independent, because there is no need to select a domain and codomain for each equality. This is important because only conscious observers can make decisions. Most of existence isn't conscious and it has no way to make any decisions. All decisions are subjective and anthopocentric. Natures mathematical system must be able to represent itself and perform its computations without any need for observers, observation or the need to make any decisions. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694116364890866519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-73362688094658347192013-02-16T13:54:08.187-08:002013-02-16T13:54:08.187-08:00Excellent, is there somewhere you can point me to ...Excellent, is there somewhere you can point me to for more information? In the meantime I'll be eagerly awaiting future publications from you.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09359902779201709377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-89645560493610169492013-02-14T03:11:30.457-08:002013-02-14T03:11:30.457-08:00Hi Jackson,
I have equations and some proposals f...Hi Jackson,<br /><br />I have equations and some proposals for experiments. I also have some explanations for currently unexplained astronomical observations. I am working on an e-book that will go into the theory, logic, and mathematics in more detail. <br /><br />Longer term, I want to develop a Mathematica e-book that will teach people direct logic and direct mathematics, and provide a working system with live-equations they can use to generate their own quantum field equations, experiment with the parameters, and plot the results.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694116364890866519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-22671102884818737812013-02-13T19:22:33.381-08:002013-02-13T19:22:33.381-08:00Hi Barry, logically your arguments seem to make se...Hi Barry, logically your arguments seem to make sense, do you have any kind of evidence, i.e., experiments or equations to back them up? Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09359902779201709377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-40817358229882304022013-02-04T12:59:37.201-08:002013-02-04T12:59:37.201-08:00Hi Adrien,
I think you are partly correct. The in...Hi Adrien,<br /><br />I think you are partly correct. The inverse of a black hole is a white hole. A white hole is a time reversed black hole. Instead of consuming energy and matter it produces them. There is recent observational evidence that white holes exist. They may cause some types of quasars. However, white holes are unstable at large scales because the mass they produce creates a large gravitational field that causes them to quickly collapse into black holes. In other words, at large scales, they can only exist for a brief time. However, they might be able to eject enough matter before collapsing into a black hole, so that perhaps that matter could accrete, forming stars and a galaxy around its central black hole. <br /><br />However, the part of your theory that I think is incorrect is that galaxies are their own universes. Spacetime exists between the galaxies. Galaxies themselves form larger structures, called galactic clusters in spacetime. Actually, even larger structures than galactic clusters exist.<br /><br />In addition, there is only one singularity in the universe. The same singularity exists inside all black holes, and inside every energy and dark energy quantum. It exists beneath the imaginary dimension of time. Consequently, the same singularity can exist everywhere in spacetime. Time and distance have no meaning in the singularity.<br /><br />Its also useful to keep in mind that the universe is everything that exists. There can only be one everything. The universe is the union of the finite and the infinite. The idea that multiple universes can exist is logically and mathematically inconsistent. <br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694116364890866519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-63342785706753729582013-02-04T11:50:49.524-08:002013-02-04T11:50:49.524-08:00Hi kcrady,
Thanks for the link. It doesn't ma...Hi kcrady,<br /><br />Thanks for the link. It doesn't matter what geometry we develop. Geometry is only an indirect representation of spatial relations. There is far more to existence than geometry, or spatial relations, let alone coordinate systems.<br /><br />Existence doesn't depend on coordinate systems. Actually, its far deeper than that. Existence is not causally dependent on observation or information. Things have to exist BEFORE we can observe them or represent them in terms of information. In other words, existence can't be composed of information. That means the logic and mathematics required to represent all of existence cannot be dependent on the representation of information. At best, information is only a partial, incomplete representation of existence. Information is a map of a territory. The map is not the territory. A map is an isomorphic projection. Projections are incomplete. Information is incomplete. That means it is impossible to consistently represent all of existence in terms of information. Information is not primitive enough. Information itself is composed of a lower level representation.<br /><br />Our entire view and conception of existence in terms of particles and the relations between them is a neural construct. Particles and their relations in spacetime are just neural abstractions of localized potential difference distributions in energy fields. Particles and relations are not the fundamental components of existence. Existence only has one fundamental component: the potential difference. Everything that exists is composed of energy of some kind. All kinds of energy are composed of potential differences. All energy fields, all particles, all forces and all relations are ultimately composed from potential differences. Even the relation between the finite and the infinite is a potential difference. We call that particular potential difference time. That particular potential difference is so large, it causes all finite changes in existence because everything finite that exists is composed (directly or indirectly) from potential differences in temporal energy. Everything that exists in time does so because it contains a temporal energy component. That includes spacetime, and everything finite that exists in spacetime. <br /><br />Just because the energy that composes time is unobservable doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means our species can't observe it. Existence doesn't depend on what we can or cannot observe. Existence existed long before we did.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694116364890866519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-54103853508163668602013-02-03T21:50:12.889-08:002013-02-03T21:50:12.889-08:00Are you familiar with R. Buckminster Fuller's ...Are you familiar with R. Buckminster Fuller's Synergetic Geometry? Like you, he thought that using an incorrect "coordinate system" (e.g., the conventional geometrical system of zero-dimensional "points" lined up into one-dimensional "lines," laid beside each other to form two-dimensional "planes," which are stacked into three-dimensional cubes, the last of which are ostensibly solid, tangible objects built out of three layers of non-existent abstraction) would necessarily lead us astray. Fuller developed a new geometric system based on energetic vectors, with the tetrahedron rather than the cube as the fundamental form. Here is a link to Amy C. Edmundon's book <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=F6n2dZJ1POwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=a+fuller+explanation&ei=VsiZSK-mG4iCswPn8PSrCw&client=firefox-a&sig=ACfU3U1GNsbqOzUaxNfGaUUQOq2NHSm0Cg&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow">A Fuller Explanation</a> on Google Books.kcradyhttp://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forumsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-53203351178934512702013-01-25T04:01:22.049-08:002013-01-25T04:01:22.049-08:00I'd like to see some serious theorizing about ...I'd like to see some serious theorizing about the origin of the chief characteristics of the macro structures of the cosmos, namely, the galaxies. The big bang theory can't explain their shapes or rotations. It seems to me that the only thing that can explain those features is an origin as the inverse of a black hole whose mass escapes from one dimension into another and does so with a great deal of spin which results in the equatorial centrifugal force that results in not a spherical explosion but a disk-shaped explosion and expansion that rotates. This hypothesis postulates that each galaxy is a universe unto itself and had no connection to the origin of any other galaxy, since each came into being in different times and space. It also postulates that the phenomenon of red-shift observed in the light spectrum, which is the basis of calculations for cosmic distance and speed is not caused by greater speed away from our observation point but due to the presence of dark matter. or powerful gravitation fields. If so, then the whole hypothesis of the big bang dissolves and there was no "beginning" of the universe. Instead, each galaxy had its own beginning and its own age. What is required for this to be so is at least two dimensions, between which massive black holes can explode into the other. As a layman, this theory makes very plausible sense. But my knowledge and imagination ends at this point. <br /> If there is another good explanation as to why galaxies spin, why they form in the first place as disks if they originate as a blobbish three-dimensional field of hydrogen instead of how they actually end up shape-wise., then I've never heard of such explanation. Adrien NashAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-66699410888755943562013-01-20T21:09:03.592-08:002013-01-20T21:09:03.592-08:00I'm working on the next post on this subject. ...I'm working on the next post on this subject. It will go into a lot more detail about the precise relations between energy, information, observation and existence, and include more detail on the changes I made in the foundation of mathematics to make it complete and consistent in the universal domain.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694116364890866519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-52488505315893540002013-01-20T21:05:01.187-08:002013-01-20T21:05:01.187-08:00Congratulations :)Congratulations :)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694116364890866519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-42935079382793469442013-01-20T18:43:11.294-08:002013-01-20T18:43:11.294-08:00Just thought I'd take this opportunity to grab...Just thought I'd take this opportunity to grab the first comment :-)<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-47055848347501376902010-10-04T04:20:06.222-07:002010-10-04T04:20:06.222-07:00Barry:
Are you going to release a 2010 update on ...Barry:<br /><br />Are you going to release a 2010 update on your Blog? We are curious as to any progress and/or verification your theory has had since your last post. <br /><br />Have you been able to build a working prototype of your universal representation thinking machine? Has your theory of the relationship of existence and non-existence been updated or changed?<br /><br />Please favor us with an update at your convenience.<br /><br />Thank you.dlittle731https://www.blogger.com/profile/07940693805217544169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5163955711504460621.post-54610984125975957972009-02-06T20:40:00.000-08:002009-02-06T20:40:00.000-08:00It will take me some time absorb, but I am intrigu...It will take me some time absorb, but I am intrigued by your article and wonder if you plan on releasing any code or data structures you used.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com