Theory of Everything  

  
Go Back   Theory of Everything > Philosophy > General Philosophy
Reload this Page to e or not to e
Register Website Toe Club Your Blog Arcade

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#11 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is just really niceAntonioLao is just really nice
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,319
Thanks Given: 728
Thanked 124x in 122 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 74
   
Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 12:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
The way forward in the noble middle way
In the theory of geometric construction, it is equivalent to a perpendicular bisector or in transformation theory it is called an orthogonal projection into a higher dimensional plane but of course it can also transform into a lower dimensional plane just as easily.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#12 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,340
Thanks Given: 348
Thanked 703x in 655 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 94
   
Smile Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:00 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
In the theory of geometric construction, it is equivalent to a perpendicular bisector or in transformation theory it is called an orthogonal projection into a higher dimensional plane but of course it can also transform into a lower dimensional plane just as easily.

So then we have a candidate do we not?



regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mkirkpatrick For This Useful Post:
AntonioLao (02-07-2008)
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#13 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is just really niceAntonioLao is just really nice
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,319
Thanks Given: 728
Thanked 124x in 122 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 74
   
Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:14 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
So then we have a candidate do we not
But not on the real plane. Mathematicians already constructed the imaginary axis on the complex plane which really serve the purpose of orthogonal transformations with bonuses of rotational transformations as clockwise or counterclockwise spin rotation giving rise to parity of left and right symmetry and electric charge conjugation and restrictive time inversion at the infinitesimal region of space-time.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#14 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,340
Thanks Given: 348
Thanked 703x in 655 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 94
   
Smile Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:20 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
But not on the real plane. Mathematicians already constructed the imaginary axis on the complex plane which really serve the purpose of orthogonal transformations with bonuses of rotational transformations as clockwise or counterclockwise spin rotation giving rise to parity of left and right symmetry and electric charge conjugation and restrictive time inversion at the infinitesimal region of space-time.

We seem to be encountering numerous problems as we try to make progress,we need
to find a way to permit a more simple straightforward way of approach.



regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mkirkpatrick For This Useful Post:
AntonioLao (02-07-2008)
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#15 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is just really niceAntonioLao is just really nice
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,319
Thanks Given: 728
Thanked 124x in 122 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 74
   
Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:27 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
we need to find a way to permit a more simple straightforward way of approach
The working model seems to be a zero volume space-time continuum.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#16 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,340
Thanks Given: 348
Thanked 703x in 655 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 94
   
Smile Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:31 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
The working model seems to be a zero volume space-time continuum.

What are the problems thrown up by this approach?



regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#17 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is just really niceAntonioLao is just really nice
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,319
Thanks Given: 728
Thanked 124x in 122 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 74
   
Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:35 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
What are the problems thrown up by this approach
The loss of substantial or material existence to an existence in permanent spiritual plasma or infinite consciousness.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#18 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,340
Thanks Given: 348
Thanked 703x in 655 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 94
   
Smile Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:38 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
The loss of substantial or material existence to an existence in permanent spiritual plasma or infinite consciousness.

Well then what are we waiting for?


regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#19 (permalink))
Raider of the lost time
AntonioLao is just really niceAntonioLao is just really nice
 
AntonioLao's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 5,319
Thanks Given: 728
Thanked 124x in 122 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rep Power: 74
   
Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:45 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick
Well then what are we waiting for
Current technology only allows a one-way passage. I am waiting for the time when someone invented a time machine such that we can travel backward and forward in time as we please. This machine will definitely enhance our understanding of the TOE.


Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
Re: to e or not to e
Old
  (#20 (permalink))
Moderator
mkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to beholdmkirkpatrick is a splendid one to behold
 
mkirkpatrick's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 7,340
Thanks Given: 348
Thanked 703x in 655 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rep Power: 94
   
Smile Re: to e or not to e - 02-07-2008, 01:48 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
Current technology only allows a one-way passage. I am waiting for the time when someone invented a time machine such that we can travel backward and forward in time as we please. This machine will definitely enhance our understanding of the TOE.

We can do this now,by leaving our physical bodies and astral traveling,this way you can
go either forward or backwards in time.



regards michael.


Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself?
  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mkirkpatrick For This Useful Post:
AntonioLao (02-07-2008)
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com