Philosophysics of a fundamental substance

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Lloyd,

I pm'd Dave several days ago to stop by if he logged in....haven't heard from him. I've done this before and he's always done so. Just curious of what dynamic he would add to the conversation as I know he could add much insight to it. He would have probably done given me one of those "that's classified top secret meaining either I don't know or I couldn't tell you if I did" remarks or something like that he said to me once when I went of on one of my longwinded mental escapades.....lmao. The forum just isn't the same without ole Dave setting everyone straight, though I do enjoy your own unique version of hardassedness to some.....lmao. I actually came across many of your older posts while you were on walkabout from the forum, and had hoped you might join us again someday so we could confuse the hell out of each other....lmao. I'm actually excited to see that we are sharing so many of the same views and visions, as either that's a sign that we're correct in our ponders, or perhaps equally insane....oh well, we'll keep each other company.

Yeah, I was kinda wondering if something had happened to him. Hope he's alright. But, if he does come back, then we can really watch the sparks fly, as he usually doesn't like my use of language, though he did get it really wrong about 'ergodicity' thinking it was an economic and statistics term, when in fact it's a term invented by Boltzmann the physicist, to figure his thermodynamics with just such statistics__he created...

Anyway, last time he posted he was a bit more civil than he used to be, over the slightest infractions of his terminologies, and unfully grounded ideas... That always got him going, but maybe now with more unification of our ideas we could join more of our thinking and creative energies__I would hope anyway...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi Tim. Maybe I can simplify a few points up front here. Some points about the Universe aren't for Science or anyone to know, and c other than absolute c just happens to be one of them. No matter what speed c is, all we can ever know about it is c, due to the fact that were it any other velocity, we'd only witness it as the c we now know, due to every constituted element in the entire Universe varying with c, if c changed__Our instruments, our measurements, our planets, suns, moons, stars and galaxies. Absolute c is scientifically off limits to logic, as far as it's linear velocity in vacuum, or any other factor, as to being impossible to establish, except to its triadic necessities of Va = Vu « Vr__these we can measure and logically deduce. But, as to Va being a variable linear velocity in vacuum, it's beyond our detection, even if it did vary__thus all dogmatic science in this area is just that__Dogma...

Also, it'd be much easier to understand both our models if we used a new word; 'Conspansion'. 'Conspansion' means both a volume shrinking as it expands, and expanding as it shrinks... 'Conspansion' more easily explains the Hawking Decay process over it's entire life-time, because finity's internal volume first shrinks, as its external volume expands, then it's external volume shrinks as its internal volume expands__That may take a while to sink in, but it works... The dynamics of larger volumes decaying from outside in, then internal volumes decaying from inside out... The decay process speeds up tremendously, in the end, as its entering a much thinned density light/dark light cone FS-field... You may be able to employ 'Conspansion' other places as well__such as the 'Conspansion' of the Universal volume's condensation return trip__maybe not... It's a suggestion, anyway... It's easier for me to see it this way...

...explain my hypothesis within your own paradigm.

To set this up, lets acknowledge an absolute space and absolute time 4d manifold in which your universal volume is positioned. Now, due to our inference that motion is absolute, what would have to happen for this volume to maintain a spatial position whereby remaining at that exact spatial coordinate through time whereby we might find it absolutely spatially there from temporal interval to temporal interval? Absolute motion would demand the volume expand changing the ratio of Vr to Vu proportionally.

To me here, the Universal volume would be 'Conspanding' in either direction of time measured... If coming forward from the time re-cycle state, and if it be a bounded volume only, as per Dave's Va, then the macro volume would shrink, as the internal volumes expanded__thus, 'Conspansion...' If coming forward from the time re-cycle state, and if it be an unbounded volume, as per my model, only being bounded by a hydrodynamic mechanics of wave symmetry/super-symmetry, then the macro volume remains the same outside the bounded hydrodynamic mechanics, due to infinity, yet inside the hydrodynamic finite volume, shrinks the same as in Dave's model, as the internal volumes expand__thus, 'Conspansion...' The difference of the models is Dave's is bounded by the CMBR, which I see no way for that particular mechanics to function, as it's too hot(unless it is the finite light cone's edge, headed for the final decay recycle_but it will expand far beyond its present measure), and my model being background independently unbounded_infinitely_yet bounded by the internal wave dynamics of at limit hydrodynamics__between a finite maximally decayed/expanded light/dark-light cone field, and an infinite unbounded absolute Va most linear field possibility... This allows the infinite absolute field to feed into the finite field mechanics, for it's entire life cycles__It's the eternal finite field__always existing in the infinite eternal field__With its Va = Vu « Vr mechanics being controlled by heat upon condensations, and cold upon decay, or the same as saying Vu « Vr, as motion is equivalent to heat and cold, Vu being the cold state, and Vr being the hot state... The laws of conservation are controlled by the finite mechanics__inside the hydrodynamic boundary state space S2__always over-coming the more infinitesimal field's infinite Va linear motions of the infinite state space S1, except at recycle state change space and time__The Middle Way 'Conspansion' Model__Hydrodynamically over-comes the now weak finite decay velocities, into recycle state...

Now, currently your universal volume is viewed as having only two ranges of motion with no apparent absolute frame of reference, so we can just imagine it as expanding outward to the point of recycle at the implied limit of Hawking decay years upon which it would recycle through your hydrodynamic mechanics causing an inward condensation of the whole. However, lets assume that there is an absolute frame of reference supplied by absolute space and time, which we seemingly have no way of detecting as it would forever remain outside of the light cone beyond our capabilities of investigation, or is it?

Yeah, that's why I usually avoid it, but have offered my thinking about it above... Maybe that'll help...
　

Let’s assume that your volume has a third range of motion through this absolute spatial and temporal manifold, whereby though appearing to be static and creating its own room for growth and internal interaction through the process of expansion, thus losing such real-estate upon condensation after reaching the Hawking decay limit, it actually is expanding and condensing relative to this absolute manifold. Thus, the entire volume would have a world line connecting the spatial axis (horizontal) to the temporal axis (vertical) if graphed, establishing a triadic relationship such as that of the Pythagorean theorem with the world line being the hypotenuse thus proportional to the values established by the spatial and temporal axis in some ratio. We could theoretically establish the value of the hypotenuse as the hawking decay years, which at the velocity of c establishes the degree of expansion.

Maybe we could, but there's one problem__All we have is a fairly good scientific guesstimate of the real decay years for protons, so we're still working in general arithmetic of the entire Universe's real measurement values... But it's something to think about for the overall model...
　

Now, despite the fact that I know your model requires mechanics for bonding thus disallowing Va=Vu,

I don't understand this. You'd have to clarify... My model uses hydrodynamic and inertial forces of condensation instead of the term bonding. Bonding is a chemistry term, I never understood why Dave wanted to use__The same with his term affinity. I never saw what was wrong with gravity, compression or such other terms as could be used__As it's all motion that forces everything together... I just started to write; "I see no pulling forces, only pushing forces", but after what's been stated today about Black Hole Motions and Mechanics, I'm going to have to re-think this... 'News Flash To Me__Angular Motion Can Pull__Gravity...' Possibly Vortical Singularities...? (Another word Dave hates...)
(continued...)

[Lloyd Gillespie]

(continued...)

I want to swap to Dave’s framework of bonding as a property momentarily and consider Va=absolute linear Vu (one degree of freedom) to define the maximum degree of condensation of the volume to a finite spatial dimension thus imagining all internal constituents as having absolute forward motion along the spatial axis with no internal contrast or diversity, thus having no motion along the temporal axis as if frozen at the same absolute temporal coordinate (note that this is the third range of motion and is different than your use of the linear motion of expansion, by which I now understand how you imply the model increasing in Vu as it nears the Hawking decay years/limit). The other extreme we could establish as Va=Vr, whereby the volume would be frozen at the same absolute spatial coordinate and have absolute forward motion along the temporal axis (which would be your expansion definition of linear motion) at which stage either extreme would collapse the system as there would be no means of defining the triadic absolute relationship of existence whereby the velocity of both forms of linear motion (Dave’s linear at Va=Vu and your linear at expansion Va=Vr) would possibly be considered an infinite value due to each losing the other axis of reference , thus the model would possibly and theoretically have an internal mechanism of absolute resistance or backpressure (which we could theoretically relate to your hydrodynamic mechanics) when nearing either extreme to maintain the absolutes of existence itself in the sense of requiring the relationship of space and time, to establish the motions of matter to give a value to each in the form of the three measurable dimensions of space (length, width and height), and an established interval of time, due to the material fabric which binds the two and translates between them by way of a less than infinite velocity. This could theoretically account for an absolute grounded recycle mechanism, whereby the volume is eternally in between both axis with a Va=near absolute Vu decreasing to a higher Vr ratio world line trajectory to the hawking decay limit to being mechanically diverted from a Va=near absolute Vr decreasing to a higher Vu ratio world line trajectory as could be represented with a 4d graph of a straight diagonal line (if in uniform 4d motion with no acceleration or deceleration which would be a curved line) going from axis to axis and back down.

I would mention here, we actually have two states of Vu__one of linear motion, and one of angular motion, and we mustn't confuse the two. We also have a fast changing state of Vr, where a wave enters an atom, runs into interference/collision, and is immediately ejected and reverts back to Vr + Vu scalar wave... I think you may be confusing some of the motions of my Hawking Decay mechanics, or I confused you unknowingly, because at the Decay limit, most of the Vr has dissipated into weak Vu scalar waves__such waves become tired light at the outer limits of the dark-light cone, due to not having the Vr spin or vibrations of those existing within structured matter rads__such as stars, which will have long before blown our and decayed__no more higher voltage cosmic rays__gamma rays... There's a lot to thinking about the motion dynamics of decay mechanics, to get it right__or within the possible logical and scientific limits...
　

Every position along the world line path would correspond to an absolute ratio of Vu to Vr along with an absolute/defined distribution of the internal volumes which accomplish such due to the internal motion entropy established by all internal volumes obeying their own scaled down mechanics of 4d motion as the absolute position of absolute space and absolute time is worked out to the smallest internal degree. The volume would always be found to have a degree of Vr to maintain the defining parameters of the temporal dimension even at the far spatial end of the motion spectrum, and also maintaining a degree of Vu in the form of third range linear motion though the 4d manifold to maintain the defining parameters of the spatial dimension even at the far temporal end of the motion spectrum.

Agreed here...
　

The 4d manifold of absolute space and absolute time would be viewed as systematically objectively distorting matter four dimensionally along its world line trajectory to whereby the relationship of these two becomes increasingly hard to establish as from our internal perspective, as established by the c velocity subjective mechanics of Relativity, with the varying internal distributions of Vu to Vr (which establish the mass of internal structured matter) scattered throughout the whole and distorting relative space and relative time within their domains proportionally. I see it as an inverted effect of one reflecting the other as with altering a mirror whereby the reflected image is distorted from the original, but still has a definable relationship due to the understanding of the shape of the mirror itself. We’re basically looking into a physically altered mirror of fundamental matter at the distorted reflection of absolute time and absolute space and trying to determine absolutely where, when, why and how we are. Basically absolute space and time distort absolute matter as it moves along its world line and translates their language by way of motion, whereby internally this is reflectively inverted as absolute matter distorts absolute space and time into the fractal pieces that are the space time warpages established by using c as a constant to draw the 4d topology of relativity.

I think I follow most of this...

I haven’t thought this through completely but I’m toying with ideas of how to give a value of c relative to this framework, rather than it being merely implied. It may theoretically attain its current value due to the value of the volume moving uniformly along the spatial and temporal axis along its world line trajectory as this would be the value by which the volume is currently slowing through the spatial dimension and accelerating through the temporal dimension, and as long as this stays uniform (diagonal) then c will remain constant, whereby if maintaining uniformity but theoretically having been moving faster or slower along the world line trajectory c would be found as having a different value, and if changing world line velocity as with a curved trajectory then c would not be constant but would vary, but this is highly theoretical along with this entire post, but if found to have any mathematical relationship within our current science, we could absolutely say what was outside that damn lightcone, also absolutely answering the determinism vs. uncertainty question, along with all the other questions that Austin likes to ask like: How did we get the proper volume? Why is it so workable? Where did it come from? How long has it been here?…. etc. etc….as all of these answers would be defined within the necessity of absolute existence.

I answered the absolute c already in the first paragraph__There's no logically valid question to ask, beyond the absolute and variables we are presently using...! Imo also, the determinism vs. uncertainty question is a logically invalid question, as it's always both at each end of the extreme limits__large and small. As to Austin, he's changing a quite a bit, but to his proper volume__no science knows at such limits. It works because it's grounded in any number of solid laws, facts and actually proven experiments__plus its most major fact of logical necessity. It came from the existing Universe and Earth, plus Nature's Natural Laws__The Beginning of No Beginning__The Absolute Universe Has No Yesterday__Only Today... Is time really that important after 10^137 years...? I'd hate to have to do all that math long-hand in seconds to light years...!!!

Lloyd, this is as deep as my philosophical science will take me my friend as it may sound more like philosophy than science to you, but it sure has been exciting getting a glimpse of it. I hope I have explained it well enough that you can see it like I do, even if wrong it was worth the view.

Later,
　
Your new ole buddy,

Tim
　
P.S. I once told Dave in conversation an important story about my life and explained that all things being relative, that I joined this forum to establish my intelligence or insanity by conversing with intelligent people due to having no one around where I live being able to converse at this level, and I had always questioned such things but could be just as easily insane as I could have been intelligent, and I’ll always remember what he told me: “Make no mistake, you’re just as crazy as I am. Enjoy it though cause you’re in good company.” So, if anyone understands any of what I just posted, then you’re just as crazy as me I guess, but you too are in good company.

I'm with ya Tim, but I just happen to think it's the most sanity you can find__Eternal Ground In Nature's Mechanics, Herself...

Have fun,
Lloyd

P.s.
All mistakes in my posts are mine alone...

[labelwench]

I am following this exchange with interest, though the content is of limited comprehension to me, and some might ask why I would make the venture.

The process by which a concept that is in the mind of one may be conveyed to another to their mutual understanding is a valuable tool to my interests of psychology and communication.

The content is secondary to the medium(s) of exchange, for my purposes, as the process may be transposed to other venues of application.

Regards,

LW

[analog]

You'll have to be patient with me Lloyd considering the complexity of our exchanges and trying to maintain thus relate two similar but different models within my thoughts while also tunneling with them both to extract the logically physical relationships within the whole that may someday be represented by some mathematical expression, while also trying to relate the current theories to such, and I still haven't been to sleep because I'm trying to get my days back straight, but I'm hagging in here my friend.

Let me go through and further point to some possible slips that may cause confusion as relating to Dave's more familiar framework. I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong here, and I probably will be...lol..either way my attempts aren't to place one over the other but rather to further get a common language with you, as I don't mind applying concepts to your model if I can get it down properly:

Hi RP, and let me try to answer your query with reference to a clean slate model. Let's view the entire universe as a background independence of an infinite pure quantum space/field/substance, traveling at c, everywhere__no quantumized matter formation yet__just a bare quantum theoretical model. (I would assume this to be a EM Va=high Vr low Vu field, but ask due to your implications of Vu linear within the field while not in a structured state relative to spatial density, which I think Dave's model was simply Va=Vr total EM randomization spatial aether which I could see as having a leading light cone edge of implied linear but I usually just say expansion/outward and condensation/inward in reference to such.) Let structured matter be called quantumized matter, as this model evolves/forms into structured matter. c, in this model, has three possible ground internal motion states, and one total random motion state__this would be__Linear right chiral motion__Linear left chiral notion__Linear opposite chiral motion. (I think the common ground here would be as these motions relate to your knot tying as this would possibly be Dave's relationship to wave dynamics and their harmonics in the conversion of constructive interference of random motions becoming uniform to the point of gaining angular momentum [spin?] whereby condensing and confining a domain of spatial aether with its own internal wave mechanics and their harmonics contributing to further interactions. I admittingly have little knowledge of Dave's paradigm as it relates further at this stage into atomic structure, standard model mechanics, etc.) The model has three states of time__Linear__Angular__Spin, (I think I got the linear part, but for clarification I think spin would be what I would consider angular momentum of a volume as it rotated about its center of mass, and angular I would relate to the type of motion of such a volume orbiting a larger structure. It's not spin, nor linear but the mid range of the two, whereby I was using to compensate lesser degrees of angular momentum [spin] earlier to allow for orbiting mechanics? linear expansion would have to go through angular then to spin [angular momentum]?) and also__Past_Present_Future__all within the eternal Now Time__So the model's a 4D Universe of Einstein's conception (block universe? Which has its advantages in explaination when applied sometimes. Eternalism view in philosophy.). Now, total universal motion at c, can not form into structured matter, unless it transfers some of its linear motion to, first angular motion, then spin motion. The law of action/reaction requires the amount of stored energy in the field substance's linear velocity, to be a shared total velocity, as a volume of space/field/substance is condensed to a volume of structured matter__this simply means that linear, must first turn angular, then into spin motion__to form structured matter in one particular place in infinite space, while, all the while, sharing total energy/substance/mass velocity. In other words, as linear velocity decreases, angular velocity increases, thus increasing still further into localized spin velocity, created by the inter-meshing mechanics of the three ground states of motion__right, left and opposite chirals. The opposite would be the key in structured matter formation, by creating the tightest motion entanglements, due to its drastic asymmetries, of knot tying abilities, of the condensing motions of fields/substances/masses/energies present. (As pointed out before, this all falls within constructive interference, increasing uniform motion, angular momentum, bonding property mechanics in Dave's work. I'll have to get used to yours a bit as the only problem I see from my humble view is your mechanics excluding finite volume of the whole as with Va=Vu with always a Vr concentration, as the other model doesn't and bonding is a property thus needing no Vr membrane between high density structures) The trick is to see that we can never witness this directly, even in Lene Hau's experiment, because we can't directly measure light with our light speed limited tools__yet we can know its existence through modal logics necessities of physical actions. Since these motions only become measurable at far less than light speeds, we measure only part of the velocity spectrum, and must use modal probabilities for the full spectrum's measurements__though this is possible and known.

So, to answer your question, and I'm not sure the above model gives a clear enough picture, but anyway__If the structured matter were to be expanding at c, as I believe you suggest, it would be violating the laws of motion, which must share the total velocity of all motions present. By being required to share velocity, to form structured matter, and the fact c is always a constant, no matter how measured in vacuum, the only motion resevoir for structured matter's condensation formation to come from is the total unstructured fundamental substance field matter energy properties, of the fundamental random linear quantum velocity__which must be shared, not to violate the laws of motion. We have no logic available to us to state that there's always an excess of the infinite FS feeding into the 4D Universe we witness, as the fundamental mechanics and laws of, would still require the shared motion velocities mentioned. In order for FS matter/field/energy/mass to condense and form into initial structured matter__such transformation requires a geometric path of actual condensation, thus requiring the larger volume of FS space, to condense into the smaller, yet much tighter knotted and wound, standing wave-particle-object within space. The only path option open to scientific logic, is shared velocity of the total motion...

...going through the rest more thoroughly.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Let me go through and further point to some possible slips that may cause confusion as relating to Dave's more familiar framework. I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong here, and I probably will be...lol..either way my attempts aren't to place one over the other but rather to further get a common language with you, as I don't mind applying concepts to your model if I can get it down properly:

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie
Hi RP, and let me try to answer your query with reference to a clean slate model. Let's view the entire universe as a background independence of an infinite pure quantum space/field/substance, traveling at c, everywhere__no quantumized matter formation yet__just a bare quantum theoretical model. (I would assume this to be a EM Va=high[Va would always be the total motion of the entire Universal field, designated by an underlying field_aether field_we can not measure, the same as Dave's absolute velocity, but at c.] Vr low Vu[High] field, but ask due to your implications of Vu linear within the field while not in a structured state relative to spatial density[No, as Vu also exists in the structured states as uniform rotation, orbit, spin and angular momentum, but angular momentum must be the mechanism of Vu « Vr also.], which I think Dave's model was simply Va=Vr total EM randomization spatial aether[Dave and I differ here, as I also see the photon wave traveling linearly through the aether, thus having both Vr + Vu__elsewise how does a laser cut a diamond like a hot razor blade through warm butter? How do lasers oblate diamonds, when being scribed? Many physicists are still arguing both points of veiw. I see waves traveling through waves, as the fundamental aether. If it be only em pulses_What are they made of? See my point? Imo, the finest structured constituency of the FS must move through itself, in order to have physical definition, or we have a metaphysical ghost in the system. Just as any two beams of light can pass through each other, mostly unimpeded.] which I could see as having a leading light cone edge of implied linear but I usually just say expansion/outward in reference to such.) Let structured matter be called quantumized matter, as this model evolves/forms into structured matter. c, in this model, has three possible ground internal motion states, and one total random motion state__this would be__Linear right chiral motion__Linear left chiral notion__Linear opposite chiral motion. (I think the common ground here would be as these motions relate to your knot tying as this would possibly be Dave's relationship to wave dynamics and their harmonics in the conversion of constructive interference of random motions becoming uniform to the point of gaining angular momentum [spin?] whereby condensing and confining a domain of spatial aether with its own internal wave mechanics and their harmonics contributing to further interactions. I admittingly have little knowledge of Dave's paradigm as it relates further at this stage into atomic structure, standard model mechanics, etc.)[That's a most correct comparison of Dave's to my model, at the micro-fine-structure level.] The model has three states of time__Linear__Angular__Spin, (I think I got the linear part, but for clarification I think spin would be what I would consider angular momentum[Imo, angular momentum should be reserved for the conservation ratio change from Vu to Vr, as we need a clear mechanics in this area. This may differ from Dave's and others, but upon realizing there was no clear define of this transition motion, I'd prefer to reserve that term, in my model any way, for that clear ratio-mechanics. We can use orbit and rotation where needed, unless you feel your model requires it needs to use your definition, which it may_Then by all means, use it your way, as I can see the meaning no matter how stated, unless I'm having a blind moment, like we all do.] of a volume as it rotated about its center of mass, and angular I would relate to the type of motion of such a volume orbiting a larger structure. It's not spin[Spin I try to reserve for particle spin, and possibly Black-Hole spin(and micro-black-holes), where they actually spin so fast, at least toward the end of their life-cycle.], nor linear but the mid range of the two, whereby I was using to compensate lesser degrees of angular momentum [spin] earlier to allow for orbiting mechanics? linear expansion would have to go through angular then to spin[I'd just leave it at spin, unless you need it for the dynamic mechanics you were describing about Black-Holes earlier, and I can follow whether stated either way.] [angular momentum]?)[I know it's usually used the way you use it, but I've recently decided to limit my meaning of it the the transition ratio-mechanics conservation of angular momentum, though the law does apply larger.] and also__Past_Present_Future__all within the eternal Now Time__So the model's a 4D Universe of Einstein's conception (block universe?[I prefer to call it Background Independency, making my model less confusing of define.] Which is has its advantages in explaination when applied sometimes. Eternalism view in philosophy.)[I'm meaning it more defined to FS and Motion, plus math.]. Now, total universal motion at c, can not form into structured matter, unless it transfers some of its linear motion to, first angular motion, then spin motion. The law of action/reaction requires the amount of stored energy in the field substance's linear velocity, to be a shared total velocity, as a volume of space/field/substance is condensed to a volume of structured matter__this simply means that linear, must first turn angular, then into spin motion__to form structured matter in one particular place in infinite space, while, all the while, sharing total energy/substance/mass velocity. In other words, as linear velocity decreases, angular velocity increases, thus increasing still further into localized spin velocity, created by the inter-meshing mechanics of the three ground states of motion__right, left and opposite chirals. The opposite would be the key in structured matter formation, by creating the tightest motion entanglements, due to its drastic asymmetries, of knot tying abilities, of the condensing motions of fields/substances/masses/energies present. (As pointed out before, this all falls within constructive interference, increasing uniform motion, angular momentum, bonding property mechanics in Dave's work. I'll have to get used to yours a bit as the only problem I see from my humble view is your mechanics excluding finite volume of the whole[True.] with always a Vr concentration, as the other model doesn't and bonding is a property thus needing no Vr membrane between high density structures)[Then, how would they ever un-bond, radiate and decay__Do neutron star remnents last eternally? I may be mis-interpreting here again. Let's say that a massive Black-Hole formed and produced all the structure of our entire Universe__That center had absolute bonding, then how could such an object explode or spray its contents out it's poles, if not some Vr, even at the deepest levels? I'm really just thinking standing on my head again, here.] The trick is to see that we can never witness this directly, even in Lene Hau's experiment, because we can't directly measure light with our light speed limited tools__yet we can know its existence through modal logics necessities of physical actions. Since these motions only become measurable at far less than light speeds, we measure only part of the velocity spectrum, and must use modal probabilities for the full spectrum's measurements__though this is possible and known.

So, to answer your question, and I'm not sure the above model gives a clear enough picture, but anyway__If the structured matter were to be expanding at c, as I believe you suggest, it would be violating the laws of motion, which must share the total velocity of all motions present. By being required to share velocity, to form structured matter, and the fact c is always a constant, no matter how measured in vacuum, the only motion resevoir for structured matter's condensation formation to come from is the total unstructured fundamental substance field matter energy properties, of the fundamental random linear quantum velocity__which must be shared, not to violate the laws of motion. We have no logic available to us to state that there's always an excess of the infinite FS feeding into the 4D Universe we witness, as the fundamental mechanics and laws of, would still require the shared motion velocities mentioned. In order for FS matter/field/energy/mass to condense and form into initial structured matter__such transformation requires a geometric path of actual condensation, thus requiring the larger volume of FS space, to condense into the smaller, yet much tighter knotted and wound, standing wave-particle-object within space. The only path option open to scientific logic, is shared velocity of the total motion...


I don't know if that helps or hurts, you'll have to be the judge...

Definitions are so fun_not, but necessary,
Lloyd

[analog]

Hi Tim. Maybe I can simplify a few points up front here. Some points about the Universe aren't for Science or anyone to know, and c other than absolute c just happens to be one of them. No matter what speed c is, all we can ever know about it is c, due to the fact that were it any other velocity, we'd only witness it as the c we now know, due to every constituted element in the entire Universe varying with c, if c changed__Our instruments, our measurements, our planets, suns, moons, stars and galaxies. Absolute c is scientifically off limits to logic, as far as it's linear velocity in vacuum, or any other factor, as to being impossible to establish, except to its triadic necessities of Va = Vu « Vr__these we can measure and logically deduce. But, as to Va being a variable linear velocity in vacuum, it's beyond our detection, even if it did vary__thus all dogmatic science in this area is just that__Dogma...

I'll get back to this later when my thoughts are more clear, but I understand what you're saying, I just haven't satisfied my need to absolutely ground it in the graph mechanics as that's how I mostly learn, by many mistakes.....lol...and I'm still giving them some thought.

Also, it'd be much easier to understand both our models if we used a new word; 'Conspansion'. 'Conspansion' means both a volume shrinking as it expands, and expanding as it shrinks... 'Conspansion' more easily explains the Hawking Decay process over it's entire life-time, because finity's internal volume first shrinks, as its external volume expands, then it's external volume shrinks as its internal volume expands__That may take a while to sink in, but it works... The dynamics of larger volumes decaying from outside in, then internal volumes decaying from inside out... The decay process speeds up tremendously, in the end, as its entering a much thinned density light/dark light cone FS-field... You may be able to employ 'Conspansion' other places as well__such as the 'Conspansion' of the Universal volume's condensation return trip__maybe not... It's a suggestion, anyway... It's easier for me to see it this way...

Works for me in your model, except if I go back to Daves model for a reference to initial state Va=linear Vu of the whole (third range motion) not expansion, then there is no conspansion due to the finite volume whereby the only direction to go is outward with a proportional decrease in third range linear Vu, at which point we would have both of our terms of linear happening at the same time; third range linear with a proportional expansion linear outward as you see. See the confusion.....your hole system can be captured with the word conspansion as always proportionally fluctuating between external inward/internal outward in one recycle state and external outward/internal inward in the other. I like the concept but this is a major problem with why we are crossing up also. When in a high Va=Vu with minimal Vr upon expansion the structured component of Vu still has a lower volume state to revert to in your model, whereby my interpretation of Dave's (thus the one I've been using) is expanding from grounded volume center of mass outward in one cycle, and gravitationally condensing towards a universal barycenter of mass of the entire volume inward in the recycle version. At a certain stage spatial aether would have expanded outward as structural matter began to recondense FS through its uniform motion, which would give the illusion of conspansion, but would never have a definate proportional relationship of external out/internal in and vice versa as yours would. This would have caused much confusion in my earlier ramblings as it would relate to the third range motion aspect I've been discussing and its part in the conservation process. This should help in better understanding my ramblings now, but we can speak from either process now that I know your dynamics.

To me here, the Universal volume would be 'Conspanding' in either direction of time measured... If coming forward from the time re-cycle state, and if it be a bounded volume only, as per Dave's Va, then the macro volume would shrink, as the internal volumes expanded__thus, 'Conspansion...'

Not by my interpretations as stated above.

If coming forward from the time re-cycle state, and if it be an unbounded volume, as per my model, only being bounded by a hydrodynamic mechanics of wave symmetry/super-symmetry, then the macro volume remains the same outside the bounded hydrodynamic mechanics, due to infinity, yet inside the hydrodynamic finite volume, shrinks the same as in Dave's model, as the internal volumes expand__thus, 'Conspansion...' The difference of the models is Dave's is bounded by the CMBR, which I see no way for that particular mechanics to function, as it's too hot(unless it is the finite light cone's edge, headed for the final decay recycle_but it will expand far beyond its present measure), and my model being background independently unbounded_infinitely_yet bounded by the internal wave dynamics of at limit hydrodynamics__between a finite maximally decayed/expanded light/dark-light cone field, and an infinite unbounded absolute Va most linear field possibility... This allows the infinite absolute field to feed into the finite field mechanics, for it's entire life cycles__It's the eternal finite field__always existing in the infinite eternal field__With its Va = Vu « Vr mechanics being controlled by heat upon condensations, and cold upon decay, or the same as saying Vu « Vr, as motion is equivalent to heat and cold, Vu being the cold state, and Vr being the hot state... The laws of conservation are controlled by the finite mechanics__inside the hydrodynamic boundary state space S2__always over-coming the more infinitesimal field's infinite Va linear motions of the infinite state space S1, except at recycle state change space and time__The Middle Way 'Conspansion' Model__Hydrodynamically over-comes the now weak finite decay velocities, into recycle state...

I'll study this part some more later.

Maybe we could, but there's one problem__All we have is a fairly good scientific guesstimate of the real decay years for protons, so we're still working in general arithmetic of the entire Universe's real measurement values... But it's something to think about for the overall model...

My use of the hawking decay years was strictly to relate to your ideas, I have no opinion about the actual value of such, I'm not that advanced...lol.　

I don't understand this. You'd have to clarify... My model uses hydrodynamic and inertial forces of condensation instead of the term bonding. Bonding is a chemistry term, I never understood why Dave wanted to use__The same with his term affinity. I never saw what was wrong with gravity, compression or such other terms as could be used__As it's all motion that forces everything together... I just started to write; "I see no pulling forces, only pushing forces", but after what's been stated today about Black Hole Motions and Mechanics, I'm going to have to re-think this... 'News Flash To Me__Angular Motion Can Pull__Gravity...' Possibly Vortical Singularities...? (Another word Dave hates...)
(continued...)

I should have said applies mechanics in lieu of the bonding property, which is the first stage difference between the two models universal mechanics IMHO, which leads to further differences.

(continued...)
I would mention here, we actually have two states of Vu__one of linear motion, and one of angular motion, and we mustn't confuse the two. We also have a fast changing state of Vr, where a wave enters an atom, runs into interference/collision, and is immediately ejected and reverts back to Vr + Vu scalar wave... I think you may be confusing some of the motions of my Hawking Decay mechanics, or I confused you unknowingly, because at the Decay limit, most of the Vr has dissipated into weak Vu scalar waves__such waves become tired light at the outer limits of the dark-light cone, due to not having the Vr spin or vibrations of those existing within structured matter rads__such as stars, which will have long before blown our and decayed__no more higher voltage cosmic rays__gamma rays... There's a lot to thinking about the motion dynamics of decay mechanics, to get it right__or within the possible logical and scientific limits...

I left out angular momentum in my tired state initially, which is when I got into the later posts this morining of its unification attempts to relativity and establishing frequency mechanics and such due to maintaining absolute spatial through absolute temporal dimensions.
　

All mistakes in my posts are mine alone...

Yea....same here cause I know I can make a lot of em at this level of conversation.....lol.

later,

Tim

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi Tim, I just noticed we may both be using terms at counter-purposes to what I or you may mean. I'm going to take a break to sort the three model interpretations out__before I confuse you or/and myself any more... That's natural when we're dealing with this much material, and especially trying to sort three models' mechanics at once...

Don't worry, I will be back to tackle and tame this puppy...

You supplied some excellent new fodder for the mind-mill already today, with that Black-Hole ponder of angular momentum and such...

Later,
Lloyd

[analog]

Yea...a break sounds good. In closing for a bit....

[Then, how would they ever un-bond, radiate and decay__Do neutron star remnents last eternally? I may be mis-interpreting here again. Let's say that a massive Black-Hole formed and produced all the structure of our entire Universe__That center had absolute bonding, then how could such an object explode or spray its contents out it's poles, if not some Vr, even at the deepest levels? I'm really just thinking standing on my head again, here.]

Remember that in this explanation to not apply conspansion and think center mass point expansion outwards in this cycle of the universal system with black holes being innerconnected barycenter mass inward to the center of mass of the BH. I would imply a BH as a first stage formation due to such, cause you have to consider this model expanding differently than yours, whereby upon initial expansion from the near Va=Vu third range linear (one degree of motion) state, Aethereal spatial densities would have been very high allowing for massive interactions as a transference of the third range linear motion component was conserved into massive spatial areas of near absolute Va=Vu angular momentum (BH's) as a residual effect of the intitial state change. Thus, as the EM field continued to radiate outward, the process of recondensing had began back inward towards the initial state, this sets the stage for possibly high enough spatial density around these areas to have the constructive interference needed to form the first stage structural domains and perhaps some forms of hydrogen as random motion was reverted into angular momentum (rotation) thus going through some form of Dave's structural formation mechanics. After which, spatial densities continued to fall as the universal domain continued to radiate outward while galactic domains began to form due to the increased motion density provided by the black hole, as stars were born and further processed structured matter, etc..etc.. or some similar process.

I see the black hole as I described before, and it will either find itself in such low spatial densities through vast amounts of time that it radiates away changing its motion distribution to that of the high Vr spatial Aether whereby also expanding (long after the stars and such had taken the same route), thus all motion would be outward upon its evaporation, or there will be enough Vu within the system to condense enough spatial Aether into structured matter to eventually swallow up the entire galactic system as the barycenters of black hole to black hole would condense the system to a common center of mass as third range Vu increases whereby once again being in an initial state. Perhaps this recycles as with my inference to the universal volumes worldline trajectory.

Basically when the universal domain tried to hold its 4d spatial position while accelerating temporally, it exapanded proportionally as it became the larger shell housing the infinite spatial positions as it had no angular momentum to maintain it through the spatial dimension thus it dispersed through the temporal as it expanded, at which point any structure which achieved angular momentum would be condensed thus maintaining some degree of their spatial position with some degree of temporal propagation along with some degree of static volume as the smaller began to orbit the larger whereby they could all travel temporally in unison on their 4d world line trajectory with absolute spatial dimension propagation defining the rotational and orbital motions required to accomplish such by matching the Vu angular degree of the larger to = the total Vu angular degree of the constituents of the smaller ones + some degree of rotation and orbital motion. That's not a good explanation but I'm going to crash....

later,

Tim

P.S. the poles of a volume with angular momentum are always dynamic parts of the structure due to the rotational aspect interacting with the EM spatial aether allowing for magnetic moments and such phenomena within micro structures. I guess with macro black holes it's a structural radiation point?

[austintorn@aol.com]

Everything

I have come to some
Of the following conclusions,
Although I am not sure
Of all the mechanics behind.

1.
Space seems to have physical properties,
Although not those
That we might tend to call “material”,
Space thus being filled
With material mass-energy.
Or,
Perhaps there is only space
And curved space
(Gravity and the material mass-energy).

Perhaps it is that this wholeness
Is the simplest level of all, and thus,
It must be perfectly unstable,
In that it must ever give rise
To particle-antiparticle pairs,
A kind of balance of space or Nothing.

2.
All is necessarily infinite.
(An All must be unbounded)

3.
The scale of size seems to be absolute.
We can establish a definite ordering
To the sizes of entities.

4.
Perhaps the finite “here”
Can only exist
At the center of the
Largest and smallest Infinities,
And no where else,
Where we have come to reside.

5.
All is necessarily eternal.
(Or it wouldn’t be the All)
It’s hard to fathom
That a past eternity
Has already completed,
Or, it is that Time
Is somehow secondary?

Time seems to be a difference dimension,
Not a summative one adding to space,
In that it is a difference of space.
Noether’s noting of time symmetry
Is what led to energy conservation;
Thus, time may not be just
About motion, but also about
Energy and its polarity,
At least for particles.

The speed of light
Could be the actual dimensional ratio
Between the distance and time dimensions.

6.
Perhaps our present “now”
Can only be
At the center of the
Past and future Eternities.

7.
Our universe is not
At a special place or at a special time,
But, since there is a universe,
Here and now,
There must have always
Been a universe, plus,
There would be and ever was
Only one universe,
Thus leading us to believe
That there must be a method
For its recycling,
Perhaps accomplished
In the galactic cores.

A side note is that the universe
Is already at maximum entropy,
Having existed forever.

8.
The universe cannot be other
Than it is, thus, no fine tuning happened.
Fields, space, particles, and energy
Cannot just do whatever they want,
As they must obey conservation laws,
As well as their characteristic nature,
Which necessarily leads us to determinism;
However, since all events
Will eventually happen,
Or have already happened,
This determinism
Seems to be of unlimited range.

In bio-creatures,
The exact history and path
Of atoms has less bearing,
Since all atoms of a type
Are identical and any one will do,
Plus, they have open systems
And some of the higher organisms
Abstract information into symbols,
All of this leading
To a changeable determined will,
Via learning,
Although a will this is still fixed
At any given instant
To what and who we have become.

9.
It would seem that
There could be no
Bottommost Prime Mover
Made of material,
Since, there, that kind
Of cause and effect must end,
Due to no infinite regresses allowed.

This leaves, only, perhaps,
A balance of space, or Nothing,
As the candidate for the Prime Mover,
For it requires nothing before it.

10.
The material generated,
At all times,
Must be half matter
And half antimatter,
As well as half charged
Ad half oppositely charged,
For this serves to nullify
Existence back to non.

11.
The only stable particles
Are the electrons and the proton,
Curiously oppositely charged.
(Including their anti-states)

12.
A photon, being neutral,
Is actually positive and negative combined,
Being its own antiparticle.

13.
If a photon is actually
A transverse 2-D wave,
Its shape may be rectangular,
This asymmetric shape
Being not uniformly
Acted upon, thus,
It may decay into
Microwave quanta,
Which would continue to compose
The everpresent CMBR.

14.
Galactic halos may act
As microwave antennae
Which collect electric currents
From the CMBR that are drawn
To the galactic core,
(Explaining “mysterious” galactic banding)
Along with other galactic material,
That, via the expansion
Of compound nuclei
By the black hole there,
Along with the electric current,
Cause the compound nuclei
To degenerate back to hydrogen,
Which also releases new photons,
The all of which is ejected
And sprayed
Back into space,
Wherein stars again produce
New compound nuclei, etc.,
Via fusion,
Completing the main action of recycling.
(A smaller part could be due
To light creating matter
And vice-versa)

15.
Life, requiring many billions of years
To form and get going,
Would only be likely
In a calm region
At the outskirts of the galaxy—
Such as ours, on an outer spiral arm.

16.
As the All of the universe
Had no beginning,
There was no creation,
And thus no Creator,
Nor any particular meaning.
(This results in freedom,
Again, he only way it could be)

17.
Math.

Buy a fifth on the third
And drink it on the fourth.