D. Levi Wing Introduction

[dleviwing]

Many people have different views as to what the "TOE" should reveal. My endeavors into this concept has lead me to doubt the sincerity of the scientist charged with finding the solutions. I can offer some of the observations and conclusions I've come to over the last 40 years that may provide the answers some of you are looking for. The following comments will give an idea as to where I stand in the debates.
D. Levi Wing

Theoretical physics has advanced to a phase that seems to indicate a truly unbelievable universe. Can it be that the right side of our brain is unable to comprehend the complexities of nature and form a logical perception of reality? Does the ability to understand existence lie only in the few with the remarkable ability to jump beyond the confines of reality and into multiple dimensions. Is this leading to what some believe, that science is becoming another religion with its authorities of the word.

The mainstream media and even several reputable science journals expend time and text to the oddities of our most comprehensive gauge theories and very little to the true functionality of these theories. More time is exhausted promoting concepts of “Time Travel”, “Multiple Universes”, and several other improbable realities extracted from “Relativity” and “Quantum Physics” rather than emphasizing the applications and successes of these theories. The general population usually obtains their information from mainstream media and of course, TV. This results in some people being awed by the science and others who believe scientist must be absolute intellectual morons.

Modern theories are not so much perceptual concepts today as they are mathematical gauge theories. Thus, mathematically, science has combined the four forces of nature using these gauge theories. However, each of these theories has encountered phenomena that irritate the right side of the brain – They challenge logic. Some scientist sooth this irritation by dismissing the phenomena and becoming content that “if the mathematics work, it does not make a difference what is real” – inappropriately referred to as “Positivism”. Is reality as complex and abstract as the mathematics seem to indicate? Are there physical dimensions that exist beyond the known three dimensions of our universe? Science requires a perceptual paradigm of reality that explains the universe in absolute fundamental concepts that do not border the realms of metaphysics and religion.

[yogi]

Is reality as complex and abstract as the mathematics seem to indicate? Are there physical dimensions that exist beyond the known three dimensions of our universe? Science requires a perceptual paradigm of reality that explains the universe in absolute fundamental concepts that do not border the realms of metaphysics and religion.

Hello D. Levi Wing,
Welcome to the forum, i have some comments about your intro commentory. Reality should be simple, so simple infact that TOE should be able to explain it to everybody with a few simple sentences ( commentories on these can be very long and eternal) . this is going to challange everybody's logic. i shall make a comment on logic later. quantum physics and string theory predict more than 3 dimensions (n dimensions). some of us cannot accept this because it does not fit our logic. my opinion about this is- logic is a product of threedimensional organ (brain, we are still not sure about physical nature of this symptom of consciousness). how can a threedimensional object perceive about multidimensional cosmos ?

thanks,
sincerely, yogi

[Omni]

"Are there physical dimensions that exist beyond the known three dimensions of our universe?" No. Can't solve it the way it is so let's make up some things ...neverending story that way... "Reality should be simple, so simple infact that TOE should be able to explain it to everybody with a few simple sentences" Very true.

[dleviwing]

Omni;
1..There is only one physical substance of the Universe.
2..This substance has only 2 fundamental properties:
"Self-affinity"(bonding) and "Absolute Motion".
3..Only 3 dimensions and "Time" is a perceptual absolute.
(clocks are made of the same matter as everything else and will be
affected by uniform motion; like everything else.)
(Clue 1) The value of "MASS" is actually a measure of the quantity
of uniform motion of an object, not the quantity of matter.
The "TOE" concept is simple, its overcoming the academic brainwashing
we have all been through that is the most difficult.
A perceptual "TOE" cannot be defined in just a few words or sentences;
It requires at least 2 pages.
What do you believe? – "Relativity", "Quantum Physics", or "String Theory"
D. Levi Wing

[dleviwing]

yogi;
You should trust the right side of your brain when it tries to tell you something is wrong
with the logic. The 19 dimensions of string theory are mathematical, not real existing
dimensions. Even when we know reality, we will still need the math. Only the terms
will change.
D. Levi Wing

[Omni]

@dleviwing: A perceptual TOE is I hope a TOE that can be verified by observation? In that case : 1 sentence is enough. I'm not an expert on the three theories you name there ,but from what I know i should say they are all trying to explain observation and try to predict future observations. The extra dimensions nessecary to make stringtheory stick makes it a nono to me. Relativity and quantum I don't know much about. What I read of it (mostly relativity) sometimes corresponds with my Toe and sometimes doesn't and therefor some things I believe to be right and some things I believe to be wrong.

[jeffprice]

The value of "MASS" is actually a measure of the quantity
of uniform motion of an object, not the quantity of matter.
D. Levi Wing

Levi,

This is an interesting concept. Am I understanding your theory correctly when I say that “More Velocity = More Mass”, and conversely “Less Velocity = Less Mass” as this would seem to agree with the predictions of relativity that an object gains mass with an increase in velocity. If this is correct, what is this velocity/motion measured in relation too. If I am correct, modern physics doesn’t believe in absolute motion because this would require a universal reference frame that all motion is to be measured against such as the much maligned and never disproved ether.

Additionally, if all this is true, does this mean if an object has zero absolute motion it would have zero mass?

And how do we account for the differing masses of the various elements. The gold in my ring has more “mass” than my finger but they have the same absolute motion, don’t they?

Please understand that I do not doubt your hypothesis. In fact, I am very intrigued by it and just want to understand it better. Thanks for sharing your insights.

Jeff

[yogi]

yogi;
You should trust the right side of your brain when it tries to tell you something is wrong
with the logic. The 19 dimensions of string theory are mathematical, not real existing
dimensions. Even when we know reality, we will still need the math. Only the terms
will change.
D. Levi Wing

i dont understand the contradiction- you said the 19 dimensions are mathematical, not real then you say we need math to know reality. you are trying to expalin reality in terms of mathematics. I would suggest two good books by a mathematician- Dr Richrd Thompson- 1. Maya The world As Virtual Reality. 2. Mechanistic and Non mechanistic science, vedic cosmography and Astronomy. here is alink for intro to one of the book
http://www.simulatedworlds.com/main.html .
another good article about logic and other brain functions at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...r=emailarticle

sincerely,
yogi

[dleviwing]

Jeff;

“More Velocity = More Mass” and “Less Velocity = Less Mass” - You should replace the word "Velocity" with "UNIFORM MOTION". Velocity or linear motion is only one type of uniform motion. Mass is based on the inertia property of matter or the resistance to changes in motion. As the random motion part of "Absolute Motion" converts to uniform motion of an object, the object will have greater resistance to the changing of its motions; hence, the value of mass will increase.

Mass is used as a comparison value for quantity of matter only at "Rest Mass"; however, at "REST" a proton has greater uniform motion than the electron at "REST". This would indicate that the real quantity of the fundamental substance of the universe (MATTER) cannot be truly defined in terms of "Rest MASS".

I hope to put this concept (Toronics) onto a web site. Though it is a simple TOE concept, it requires a great deal of explanation and comparison to mainstream physics terminology.

David

[dleviwing]

yogi;

Relativity, Quantum Physics, and String Theory, are mathematical gauge theories. Mathematics is an abstract subject with rules that are not bonded by reality. Once a philosophical concept of reality and physics is imparted onto the mathematics, the terminology of the mathematics will not be so complex and ambiguous. At present this perceptual concept dose not exist in mainstream science philosophy. This site refers to it as the "TOE Theory".

Some people such as those you suggested are looking for a scientific explanation to justify their religious beliefs. If this is what you are looking for, then accept quantum physics and string theory at their face value with their multi-universes and all the other bogus explanations of why they work.

Thanks;
David