|
Originally Posted by analog
I would presume you have found your other (microcosmic) forces in the building of your fundamental objects (your idea). Perhaps gravity and electromagnatism (light) elude you because they are related to the entire structure, or the point where your ideas build the entire framework.
I believe the correct arrangement of the fundamental builders, whatever they may be, into a correct framework will inevitably reveal the true nature of gravity and light (macrocosmic forces), as they are similar because they are what defines the entire structure. They are more of the mechanism by which the whole comes together or goes apart, as the microcosmic unites to build the macrocosmic. Thus, they must be deeply embedded within the way you take your idea and build a universal system.
You have taken your fundamentals and entwined them to explain the forces that work on short distances, as they form your "idea". Now, you must take the "idea" before you, which arose from the fundamentals, and entwine them to account for the long distance interactions.
This is not an easy task, as I'm sure you know, and is the current problem with the standard model, as it tries to relate the individual forces that are apparently only relevant at their effective distances.
It is for this reason that people like Dave and I have used absolute motion to build a framework, because it is the one thing that can be conveyed at any range of distance. It alone, in my opinion, has the ability to affect our universe on the microcosmic scale equally as well as it does on the macrocosmic scale. It is the tie that binds all things, thus giving the potential for a dynamic universal system of change, which is all that energy and force are trying to explain. The standard model goes out of its way to try to explain a dynamic universal system of motion by means of force and energy. Perhaps, it is putting the cart ahead of the horse, which is causing the confusion. Perhaps, things are more easily understood when we accept motion as the fundamental rather than energy or force. Rather than trying to explain how a fundamental can move, which brings confusion, we merely must accept that it can and absolutely does, which allows us to perhaps see more clearly, whereby the forces that once were only relevant at their effective distance is now viewed as the true dynamic (motion), which is relevant at any and all distances.
I'm not trying to convert or hinder your thinking, and I appologize if I have. I am merely trying to present you with alternative ways of thinking, whereby hopefully stirring thoughts. Perhaps, by disproving things I say, you will find the truth for us all.
|
04-30-2008 10:15 PM 
