measures of change

[AntonioLao]

In some standard physics textbooks, energy is best defined as the measure of change while force is the agent of change. The dot product of an agent and its displacement in space-time is defined as work. Its unit is the same as that of energy. Furthermore, there exists a cross product of an agent and its space-time displacement defined as torque, and again, its unit is the same as that of energy. Hence, both work and torque are equivalent to energy in measuring the magnitude of change. However, they differ only in measuring the direction of change. Work measures parallel and anti-parallel changes while torque measures orthogonal changes. Parallel changes are responsible for normal central agents while orthogonal changes could explain the mysterious non-central tangential agents of change.

Moreover, since there are eight degrees of freedom as resulted from eight directional properties in a 4-dimension space-time, the measured dispersion or absolute variance of change must be square integrable. This expression of integrability is similar in form to the statistical variance of mathematical sciences with a factor of 1/n and the variance is d²=(1/n)S(Ei-E0)², i=1,2,3, to n. In this context, a degree of freedom (absolute range) is defined as the absolute difference of two magnitudes neglecting their directional properties. The value of this 1/n factor differs in classical mechanics, statistical thermodynamics, and quantum mechanics. For 1-particle systems, the factor is unity, n=1. For 2-particle systems, the factor is ½, n=2. For 3-particle systems, the factor is 1/3, n=3, so on and so forth. For systems of infinite number of particles, the factor is zero. All these systems assumed identical particles: the same mass, the same volume, saying the same internal parameters. Nevertheless, for quantum vacuum, the factor becomes infinite, which implies a system of no particles and that variance with a measured value of infinity is the same as a system of total and complete randomness.

[mkirkpatrick]

Antonio,what a heavy duty thread starter this is! time I read through it,I was "Torqueing"
to myself!
The value of infinity,has it a real value,Antonio?I mean an absolutely real value!

Measures of change,within torquential eddies?Deflection of force,via an inversion of
infolding energy.

This is very heavy but very interesting stuff,hopefully I have lightened it alittle.


regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

hopefully I have lightened it alittle

I was hoping you could help me generalize this for Dirac's quantum mechanics, classical mechanics, as well as electrodynamics, both classical and quantized. Lastly maybe we could use it also to generalize quantum chromodynamics.

[mkirkpatrick]

I would be more than happy to do that Antonio,however some of my generalizations maybe a "tad" unorthodox!But before I do this,it must be always remembered that the
"bottom line" is that "all apparent manifestations are ONE of the same thing!

Quantum chromodynamics or QCD,is about the "deep structure" of elementary particles,
and the "trinity" of colour supposedly expressed of red,blue,and greem.

To me Antonio what is revealed in the "deep structure" of elementary particles is pure
and simply consciousness,expressed if you like in a "trinity" of colouration,each
representing a functional avenue,a directional spin,expressed like this:red=positive,
blue=neutral,and green=negitive,each aspect of the particle,reveals this trident of
force,and is more commonly known as YING,Neutral,YANG,or YNY for short!

The relative universe in which we live and move and have our being is basically as you
well know three dimensional,a trident of force,powered though by one energy,the three
are in reality just one!

regards michael.

[Guille]

energy is best defined as the measure of change while force is the agent of change.

So then what is time if it's neither the measure of change nor the agent in change?

[mkirkpatrick]

So then what is time if it's neither the measure of change nor the agent in change?

Prehaps if you can forgive this impertinent aside,suggest that time is basically an
illusion!


regards michael.

[Guille]

Prehaps if you can forgive this impertinent aside,suggest that time is basically an
illusion!

I have no problem with that being true, but do have a problem withit now because there is no indication that it is true. Time governs us, if you do something in a moment you've done it, and the important thing of an action, or, generalising, any event, is not that it happens, but that is has happened or will happen, that means, that it has a reference in time (forward-future or backward-past), and therefore exists in time and the important thing is it's temporal existence. The French revolution was something that happened in the moment it had to happen, nor later nor earlier. The important thing was the moment, not the act. Just as if Bismark hadn't been there, still Germany would have eventually united some point in the second half of the 19th century. The people, the feelings, the relationships, the acts... Everything is repeated over and over again. Thus, the world is a theater (Schopenhauer). The thing is that the repetition, the eternal recurrence (Nietzsche), is the illusion of progress, the end of progress (Fukuyama), not the end of time (a very different thing).

A thought for Antonio: Applying this to physics, we could say that even though if there is no change there is still time. So time is not the same as change, but more absolute than it, than it's agent (Force) and that it's measure (Energy/work/torque).

[mkirkpatrick]

Amigo,you made some excellent points there,maybe if we removed the word time,and
replaced it with say "change" or evolving,evolutional unfolding,expansion,then prehaps
we would lessen the confusion.

personally I think time is an illusion,but I go along with expansion,and unfoldment.



regards michael.

[Guille]

Amigo,you made some excellent points there,maybe if we removed the word time,and
replaced it with say "change" or evolving,evolutional unfolding,expansion,then prehaps
we would lessen the confusion.

personally I think time is an illusion,but I go along with expansion,and unfoldment.

I don't agree on the elimination of time because it is in fact the entity that leads to all the other related concepts (change, motion, expansion, progress, history...). I want to deconstruct it's meaning in this thread--and I started to do this in the post above--so that we understand the origin of all these conception, consciousception (the term I've created to refer to all the conception related to time, as I believe it is the root of consciousness/mind, if you see, animals aren't consciouss cause they don't have a historical context, a temporal understanding in their brains), and misconception.

By the way, so that you understand further what I mean by 'progress', it is the word I give to adding things up in a series, that is, history is a way of measuring progress, and so is expansion. But it's not the same as time nor as change. So I would reduce it to these three fundamental terms (time, change, and another word for my conept of progress which expresses better the idea of 'adding things up in a series').

[mkirkpatrick]

I don't agree on the elimination of time because it is in fact the entity that leads to all the other related concepts (change, motion, expansion, progress, history...). I want to deconstruct it's meaning in this thread--and I started to do this in the post above--so that we understand the origin of all these conception, consciousception (the term I've created to refer to all the conception related to time, as I believe it is the root of consciousness/mind, if you see, animals aren't consciouss cause they don't have a historical context, a temporal understanding in their brains), and misconception.

By the way, so that you understand further what I mean by 'progress', it is the word I give to adding things up in a series, that is, history is a way of measuring progress, and so is expansion. But it's not the same as time nor as change. So I would reduce it to these three fundamental terms (time, change, and another word for my conept of progress which expresses better the idea of 'adding things up in a series').

I like your idea my friend,are you going to start a new thread with all this sequenced
out in some kind of logical order?

regards michael