[protheory]

Originally Posted by Tony Stanton

Protheory

Thanks for reply.

For the first time I see where you are coming from because when I relate it to True Relativity it is amazing how the logic of pro theory slots in with what I have discovered when studying this concept of space and time.

Pro theory is a literal theory if I have it right and if this is so then I certainly agree that any true theory of TOE will have pro theory at its heart because although philosophical it has to be literal.

Hi Tony, I'm delighted to hear that you can see where I'm coming from with Pro theory now, it's great to think that somebody else understands what I've been thinking for so long.

Pro theory is definitely a literal theory, in fact I often say that it cannot be taken literally enough to be fully understood.

The whole reason that so far on this board I have mentioned only the paradoxical argument of Pro theory is to show just how literally it can and must be taken to be fully utilised and understood.

The same idea of three formations works the same on millions of different levels but I thought that if I mentioned these higher interpretations at first we might become bogged down in the relative details.

Thanks for saying that any true TOE will have Pro theory at its heart, that means to me that you understand my idea perfectly, I didn't originally write Pro theory as a TOE, it was actually just me thinking literally about atomic potentials and eventually I turned it into a proposal for a true TOE.

If you are willing to learn I will show you the opposite and neutral of my theory because both are natural consequences of True Relativity.

It has a ‘mirror image’ and a null, in fact without these the theory falls down. That may sound confusing but if you learn TR all will become clear.

First I will relate pro theory to the discussion about the flow of time as I understand it.

• We all have a past and I will equate as the positive or potential 3
• We all have a future (hopefully!) and I will equate this as negative or potential 1
• And the present is the neutral or potential 2

Potential 2 is point between potential 3 & 1or you can describe it as; the present is the point between the future and the past.

We have already agreed there is a flow of time from the future into the past which we can now relate as a flow from potential 1, through potential 2 and into potential 3 from negative through neutral and into positive.

I am certainly willing to learn about the opposite and neutral potentials of your TR theory as in turn this helps me to understand your work from my own perspective as well as your own.

What you say about the three potentials past, present and future I agree with totally, I think that no matter how we choose to change the words of description around (npn, or 123 etc) the pattern remains in the same three potentials.

And when you mentioned the flow of time through the three potentials and forwards I finally understand your viewpoint on this I think, you're saying that as humans we experience the forward movement of time and that this can be viewed as the past, present and future, thsat's interesting to me as it does indeed account for the three possible potentials that Pro theory proposes.

According to TR.

The past has an estimated age of 13.75 billion years and the future, although uncertain, may carry on for another 1 x 10^200 years according to my first model of the big bang using TR.
The ‘present’, according to TR and because we use seconds and meters to measure time and space is about 8.86 x 10^-27 s.

The main point here is time has a flow, do we agree on this so far?

TS

I admire your work on the measurement of the universe but when it comes to the TOE I don't usually use measurement as I tend to view it as being relative to human existence and consciousness to "observe" and "create" the observations in the first place.

I only think this when we talk about the true TOE though as I feel that the true TOE must account for and explain everything, regardless of whether or not there may be any kind of consciousness in "existence" or not.

I'm not trying to dispute your calculations, merely trying to explain why I can't really comment on them when it comes to my idea of a TOE, and the debate about consciousness and things.

Back to the main point "time has a flow" I agree as a human yes, definitely, as I think I previously stated we all experience time as a forward progression in daily life.

I hope I'm not seeming too confusing here, I tend to take Pro theory a bit too literally sometimes and it causes me to write nonsensical posts quite a lot I'm afraid.

Thanks for your reply.

PRO

[protheory]

I think that perhaps there was a big bang, some massive explosion of enormous size, it's certainly possible and maybe even quantifiable too.

Even if there was such an event, I don't believe the idea that somehow before this event there was nothing, absolutely nothing anywhere (singular).

I think that everything changes, it just changes with no definite beginning or end, it just flows and changes no matter what we think or do or say, life moves on as they say.

I think that a common misconception is the idea of non-stop change, a universe that just flows all the time like water or something similar.

Just because we think everything changes it doesn't necessarily mean that your home wil change because it can, it just means that there's a chance, however small, that it might change, just to be as possibly and literally accurate.

At first it seems strange and messy doesn't it but in the end all you have to do is look deep inside yourself and ask yourself "is this the perfect pattern?"

Thinking like this doesn't have to change life, or even change accepted paradigms, it just explains the universe and everything in pure pedantic principle.

It leaves the interpretation open to the individual, any person can take this three concept and adapt it to their own situation.

The words negative, positive and neutral are just my way of trying to show what I see, the words are only the start, they are the gateway to visualisation and understanding of the perfect pattern.

The symmetry of three.

[Tony Stanton]

Protheory, thanks for the reply

I admire your work on the measurement of the universe but when it comes to the TOE I don't usually use measurement as I tend to view it as being relative to human existence and consciousness to "observe" and "create" the observations in the first place.


The values are unimportant at this stage but the important point is that it can be measured
Unfortunately any TOE must have the ability to make predictions and measurements so mathematics is a part of this whether we like it or not. I have not reached TOE but TR can match Newtonian gravity within the confines of the Solar system.


I only think this when we talk about the true TOE though as I feel that the true TOE must account for and explain everything, regardless of whether or not there may be any kind of consciousness in "existence" or not.


I agree

I'm not trying to dispute your calculations, merely trying to explain why I can't really comment on them when it comes to my idea of a TOE, and the debate about consciousness and things.


Back to the main point "time has a flow" I agree as a human yes, definitely, as I think I previously stated we all experience time as a forward progression in daily life.


I hope I'm not seeming too confusing here, I tend to take Pro theory a bit too literally sometimes and it causes me to write nonsensical posts quite a lot I'm afraid.

Posts only seem nonsensical when they are not understood by the reader, from the writers point of view they make sense.

We agree that time flows. If this is the case and we consider space and time to be the same entity then logically space must also be flowing. Do you agree?

TS

[protheory]

Originally Posted by Tony Stanton

Protheory, thanks for the reply

The values are unimportant at this stage but the important point is that it can be measured
Unfortunately any TOE must have the ability to make predictions and measurements so mathematics is a part of this whether we like it or not. I have not reached TOE but TR can match Newtonian gravity within the confines of the Solar system.

I think I see what you mean Tony, I wondered myself if the TOE should be able to make measurements but to be honest I'm still not sure where I stand on this.

It niggles me that if we remove consciousness we have no measurements and therefore no TOE but seeing as to all intents and purposes I am obviously alive to type this I will fight the pedant within me and assume the existence of humans when applied to the TOE.

By this logic I am now also free to assume that measurements are possible using the TOE, albeit relatively, to observe the universe.

I feel quite relieved now I've said this as I tend to take this idea of threes too literally and it cuts down on my powers of communication quite a bit, I get a log jam in my mind and everything loops but now I've assumed human existence I can talk to you relatively

Posts only seem nonsensical when they are not understood by the reader, from the writers point of view they make sense.

I thank you for that, I'm constantly worried that my answers seem nonsensical at best but you've put my mind at rest a bit now.

You're exactly right too, my posts make perfect sense to me, when I write the words I read them back and see the videos in my mind of the concept but when another reads the same words perhaps they see different things.

We agree that time flows. If this is the case and we consider space and time to be the same entity then logically space must also be flowing. Do you agree?

I do agree.

Relatively speaking this seems perfectly logical to me that both space and time (space-time) flow, and also I think we seem to experience things in a forward sense.

[Tony Stanton]

I think that perhaps there was a big bang, some massive explosion of enormous size, it's certainly possible and maybe even quantifiable too.

I agree the event did take place and TR has measured the event of the big bang and the events leading up to the big bang itself and pro theory sits in with TR in this respect.

Even if there was such an event, I don't believe the idea that somehow before this event there was nothing, absolutely nothing anywhere (singular).


Again I agree. There was a cause and TR suggests it was the collapse of a negative universe.

I think that everything changes, it just changes with no definite beginning or end, it just flows and changes no matter what we think or do or say, life moves on as they say.


I believe the beginning of this Universe happened as a result of the big bang and the cause of the big bang was the collapse of an opposite universe, this ‘change’ continues today and results in the flow of time and therefore, because time and space are the same entity, we also have a flow of space.


I think that a common misconception is the idea of non-stop change, a universe that just flows all the time like water or something similar.


Everything changes but there must be a source to the flow. Flowing water has a source so the time and space must also have a source.

Just because we think everything changes it doesn't necessarily mean that your home wil change because it can, it just means that there's a chance, however small, that it might change, just to be as possibly and literally accurate.


When you apply change to the macro world we can only notice how things evolve or change over time. Our life span is tiny compared to the Universe so all we can do it try to figure out why the changes as it does. Without a true understanding of the flow of time there can never be an understanding of space.

At first it seems strange and messy doesn't it but in the end all you have to do is look deep inside yourself and ask yourself "is this the perfect pattern?"

I have looked at the ‘pattern’ in the mathematics of the quantum gravity field but it seems non-repeating due to the inclusion of pi. I believe the simple math of geometry is the key to finding a solution of TOE and with TR the math never break down. The Universe seems to have a pattern yet somehow remains non-repeating. The true pattern is elusive and will probably remain that way.

Thinking like this doesn't have to change life, or even change accepted paradigms, it just explains the universe and everything in pure pedantic principle.


I would describe pro theory as more of a set of the principles of TOE whereas TR is the path that will eventually lead to TOE.

It leaves the interpretation open to the individual, any person can take this three concept and adapt it to their own situation.


Yes, but that is what makes pro theory a guide to finding TOE.

The words negative, positive and neutral are just my way of trying to show what I see, the words are only the start, they are the gateway to visualisation and understanding of the perfect pattern.

The symmetry of three.

We both agree that TOE will include the symmetry of three but the journey must start with the understanding that time and space flow. Time flows because we experience it flowing. Space and time are the same entity so space must also be flowing.
I hope we agree so far.

TS

[Tony Stanton]

Hi Protheory

If we are in agreement that space and time are flowing which we are then the next thing is to find out where this ‘flow’ is coming from.

I wish to put forward a little scenario.

Imagine a hundred small spheres 5cm in diameter in free Space and all are moving in uniform motion in different directions with differing velocities so each of these spheres will have there own inertial frame and their flow of Time would be unique to each sphere. If this is the case then Space must also be unique to each sphere because Space and Time are the same entity. Time is flowing in each inertial frame therefore Space must also be flowing in each inertial frame because, as stated earlier, they are the same entity.

So how can the flow of Space-Time be unique to each inertial frame?

The only thing in each inertial frame is the sphere itself so where is this flow of Space-Time coming from?


TS

[protheory]

I agree the event did take place and TR has measured the event of the big bang and the events leading up to the big bang itself and pro theory sits in with TR in this respect.

I see what you mean here I think, I don't dispute that perhaps there was a big bang in the distant past, in some indefinable area of the universe, but the thing that goes against the grain with me is when people say that this bang literally created the whole universe.

I'm not trying to suggest that this is your own view on this, I'm just saying that this is the part of the big bang theory in general that I disagree with as it implies something non-perennial and unchanging.

Again I agree. There was a cause and TR suggests it was the collapse of a negative universe.

Hmmmm, I sort of agree about the causation argument but I actually think that we've no real need to look for a cause and effect here, I think that when taken literally all measurements are relative and subject to change.

Though I say this, which might seem dismissive, my only goal is accuracy so if we wanted to use your TR theory to measure things that's fine with me, as long as when we discuss these results we remember that ultimately our measurements are relative and theoretically subject to change, a bit like a TOE disclaimer for the sake of pedantic accuracy.

I believe the beginning of this Universe happened as a result of the big bang and the cause of the big bang was the collapse of an opposite universe, this ‘change’ continues today and results in the flow of time and therefore, because time and space are the same entity, we also have a flow of space.

I don't really hold to the universe having a beginning, perhaps a fundamental and relative change, but personally I think that everything just changes, energy is not created or destroyed it just changes.

For this reason I don't believe that the universe began or will end either, it may change in three possible ways at all singular and relative times and that pretty much sums my view up with regards to the TOE.

Everything changes but there must be a source to the flow. Flowing water has a source so the time and space must also have a source.

I see what you mean here and as a human I too think there must be a source somehow, I also automatically look for a start too, but ultimately I still think that any "source" is ultimately relative to human existence.
Even though, I still find it an interesting concept to feed my imagination, the idea of time and space flowing beautifully somehow creating the universe, it's a great idea but when it comes to my own TOE perspective it's still three possibilities with no definite and unchanging beginning or end, just change with three potentials.

When you apply change to the macro world we can only notice how things evolve or change over time. Our life span is tiny compared to the Universe so all we can do it try to figure out why the changes as it does. Without a true understanding of the flow of time there can never be an understanding of space.

Again, I understand you I think, if we assume the existence of time and space then we can indeed measure things, and realise that change changes in certain ways, but when we try to figure out why it changes as it does I refer back to my threes principle.

I think that time and space are useful to the imagination certainly but that the ultimate and accurate TOE should not need to assume anything further than the relative (to humans) existence of its own self.

What I'm saying is that if we choose the relative (non-TOE) path, we can measure things like the big bang, we can use time and space as concepts to understand and explore our universe, this is fine as long as we realise that this is non-TOE.

The TOE method is even more accurate as it has no need to assume the relative existence of human consciousness to exist as the non-TOE has with its measurements and such.
I think that as long as we keep it simple and realise the difference between the TOE and non-TOE perspectives we're doing pretty well.

I have looked at the ‘pattern’ in the mathematics of the quantum gravity field but it seems non-repeating due to the inclusion of pi. I believe the simple math of geometry is the key to finding a solution of TOE and with TR the math never break down. The Universe seems to have a pattern yet somehow remains non-repeating. The true pattern is elusive and will probably remain that way.

I have seen a pattern within everything that repeats constantly, and I agree with you that geometry might hold the key to explaining the true TOE for all to see.

When you said that with TR the math never breaks down I thought this was good but I don't think that the true TOE will have need of math as it implies an assumption of the existence of math.

Having said that, if math has historically broken down within the majority of theories and with TR this doesn't happen, then you're definitely onto something different it seems, I don't really hold math as the key perhaps in the same way that you do but even so I'm interested in this.

I would describe pro theory as more of a set of the principles of TOE whereas TR is the path that will eventually lead to TOE.

Yes, but that is what makes pro theory a guide to finding TOE.

You've just given me a wonderful idea there, I can see it now in my mind, three theories, three ideas, three methods and levels of TOE.

Of course, three TOEs, I've just realised this and I'll get back to you with some more information, I have to think about how to communicate what I'm currently seeing here, it's perfect

We both agree that TOE will include the symmetry of three but the journey must start with the understanding that time and space flow. Time flows because we experience it flowing. Space and time are the same entity so space must also be flowing.
I hope we agree so far.

I have found a new way to agree with you but it'll take me a while to type it out until I'm happy with my communication level, I'm trying to describe full sound and colour videos in my mind in words so it takes time to convert the ideas I'm having.

I've got loads more to say now about how both Pro theory and TR fit in with each other, I'll think about it and write more soon, and sorry the text is different sizes, the editpor seems to be a bit buggy at times.

Thanks for your reply.

Regards.

Pro

[protheory]

I recently posted this on the Russell's Paradox thread and it sort of shows the general lines of what I was thinking when I posted above here about the three TOEs.

I know this post is about paradoxes but I view everything with the same TOE (threes) viewpoint so I see it as applicable to this thread.

It just shows a little of my idea about different views and levels of accuracy and when we might use each one in context.

Like I say, I'll try to explain better but I just need time for this new way to think to sink in


The TOE versus non-TOE view

I'll try to sum up more clearly my point about the different views on Russell's Paradox and the others.


View one (non-TOE)

When for example we look at a paradox like "Is this a question?" and say "the answer is obviously yes" I see this as the non-TOE view as it is singular.

It's akin to my everyday life view of things, for example I don't meet new people and say "hello, I'm Pro, not Pro plus neutral" I just say "hello I'm Pro" because in that specific (non-TOE) context I don't need to use that level of accuracy.


View two (TOE)

The TOE view is different to the previous and obvious singular interpretation as it proposes the potential for three possibilities not just one.

When we look at the paradoxes this way we notice that if we wanted to be totally accurate beyond all possible doubt of a TOE, we must use three simultaneous answers to account for the three potential answers, we literally leave nothing unanswered.

To ignore the other two potentials and say "yes, it definitely is a question" would have been ok in the non-TOE example because we didn't need this kind of pedantic accuracy, but when we look for the TOE we need to be absolutely accurate and truthful.

To follow the example further, if I were meeting someone and I was thinking with TOE accuracy, I would say "hello, my name is Pro, not Pro plus neutral" as this is the most possibly accurate answer I could give according to the TOE.

Please forgive me for saying this but if anybody doubts the accuracy of my three answers then you can try to prove me wrong, right, or neutral.

Whatever you say I'll simultaneously oppose, agree with and neutralise your argument which further reinforces my three potentials argument plus the opposite plus neutral ad infinitum.

I'm just saying that this is ultimate literal and TOE accuracy, literally everything answered.


The Difference

The difference between the two views is only that one says one thing, and another says three things, in other words it just depends how accurate you want to be depending on what you happen to be answering.

The whole reason that I view Russell's Paradox and the others I mentioned through the TOE (three potentials) argument is because before I wrote my theory I didn't understand them at all.

I was scared of paradoxes as they made no sense, and I hadn't a hope of answering them accurately either, but when I realised my idea I started to answer them through the threes view and so I've always approached them all in three ways.

I didn't realise before that they could be seen as non-paradoxical, as in "yes, obviously the word 'word' is a word."

I only studied Russell's Paradox after the fact of Pro theory and so I've always imagined it as a paradox rather than a simple yes or no answer.

It's like how I come across as a person on this board for example, I seem to make no sense and talk rubbish but on other boards online that I visit, I'm a normal member of the community, I don't talk in threes as it's not needed when I'm chatting to someone.

The only time I use three arguments is when I'm talking about the TOE, such as when I'm on Toequest, this context forces me to use total accuracy because if I didn't use it and somebody spotted a chink in my intellectual armour, my theory of everything fails.

EDIT - This post is meant to show a little of what I mean about the difference between Pro theory and TR, the path to a TOE and an actual TOE that can measure things (TR) albeit relative to human existence.

Regards.

Pro