Philosophysics of a fundamental substance

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Also, mass doesn't exactly attract mass IMHO.

Yeah Tim I agree, and when I wrote that above, I was only speaking figuratively, as standard physics has done forever. I've always stated gravity/attraction was actually a pushing force, and not an attraction__although I do say mass of all objects has much to do with gravity, since many of the interacting waves are radiating out from all bodies carrying mass, which they all do... Mass to mass interactions always must be figured into any final actions of Va = Vu + Vr__which is our fundamental conservation formula...

Remember that in my views Vr fields transfer motion by way of structred transverse waves and Vu thus mass containing systems are transfered through the field by the transverse motions with acceleration relative to the amplitude of the transverse wave and the mass value of the structured system with an inertial property of the ratio of Vu in relation to maintain acceleration if the wave forces were to stop instantly.

Yes, but I don't see where we're saying anything different here. All systems are always dependent on all systems, as all the structured systems' waves are interacting with all the unstructured waves__Always...!!! Imo, there exist no independent systems, or conservation laws and formulas would fail...

Remember that no massive system has any means to attain linear velocity by way of it's internal mechanics as all linear motion through the field is imposed and thus furthers the internal Vu ratio of the structured system.

Yeah, and that's why I keep mentioning, your system requires a hydrodynamic prime mover__or nothing moves...

However, the initial cause of the transverse waves are due to the transference of massive structured systems through the unstructured field perpendicular to the force of the transverse waves pushing the structured matter with an amplitude relative to the displacement value of the moving mass.

Here again, you are simply using a circular logic, to act as a pseudo-prime mover__and that can't be done, without violating the laws of the conservation of motion... What's activating the first law of motion...??? Same question everyone wants to know...!!!

The transference of mass through the field by one wave sets up perpendicular secondary waves. The interactions of these waves between the orbited and the orbiting is how gravity works in both directions by our observation of a barycenter of center of mass with a often slight wabble of the larger mass. The key is in these wave dynamics as light bends around massive objects due to the transverse waves establishing lights path. Basically the transverse gravitational waves carrying a photon from one star has interference with the transverse waves coming from the star of which the photon is bent around.

That may be all well and good, but I don't see the need for the exercize in re-explaining what you've elsewhere explained. What really needs explaining is how any motion possible exists, and forms into any masses at all... I don't see where explaining interactions that are circular logic dependent, explains anything further... Let's try not to end up where I ended up with Dave__at the no fundamental explanation for motion problem...

This ties into refractive index and as Dave just made me realize after all this time also attaining the same measure for the velocity of light within various relatively moving frames of reference despite the relative motions of the massive system through the unstructured medium. Thus, if all motion through the medium is innerconnected by way of the transverse waves and it takes the motions of mass to impose motion upon mass then what would it take to accelerate a massive object to the speed of light? This is kind of a play of the immovable object and the unstoppable force teaser.

Yeah, that's kinda what I've been pointing to all along... Ya gotta have a system of motion, that works within another system of motion, without destroying the laws of physics, and that's where Dave's ideas come in handy, yet lacking a fundamental prime mover...

I'll have to proofread this later. In a hurry right now.

Later,

Tim

P.S. A photon is a mass system also with no internal mechanism for linear motion. I've pulled away from Dave's mechanics here if this is causing confusion.

Agreed, and all the more need for that all important fundamental hydrodynamic prime mover__based entirely on wave super-symmetry, at that rarely existing state change moment, as concerns the finite Universe, yet is eternally existing as concerns the infinite Universe... But, it's that force of least action, which can only act on the finite Universe__At the total state changing decay limit__where the finite Universe, becomes a more unified force of least action... Least action meets least action, and recycles the entire Universal System...

P.s.

Take the bending of spacetime model and apply it to density and transverse wave dynamics and their interactions and relativity unfolds naturally as a result within a matter motion model of mass/transverse wave interactions.

Yes, I completely agree, but still lacking the prime mover, except for the circular logic, which won't move the waves__and I keep saying that knowing the prime mover mechanics is possible with enough thought about the total decay process, to its finest density mass field state, meeting the fundamental infinite finest density mass field state...

A Prime Mass Mover Mechanics Is Absolutely Required__Or No Motion Mechanics Is Possible__At All...

Maybe looking at hight and low Vr, high and low Vu will clear up some of the theorizing of the path of finiteness' decay mechanics... Or high and low amplitudes, wave lengths and frequencies at the different stages of decay... It's really just finding the proper definitional explanations, to understand each's models...

[analog]

Any ideas about a possible physical experimental proof...??? Does Einstein's bending of light experimental proof, offer enough proof, to prove what we are stating...??? Why would a photon be attracted by mass, unless it also had a minimal amount of mass...??? I don't think the bending of spacetime offers what we are looking for... I think we must explore deeper into Einstein's, actually Minkowski's, spacetime mechanics, to uncover its actual dynamics, being within mass to mass ratios itself, as is much of what your model represents__but how to extrapolate the proof, from a faulty spacetime mechanics, seems the direction to go, but how exactly is slipping my mind__at the moment... I do think it's got a lot to do with that older post of yours, about amplitude, frequencies and wave lengths, etc.__as related to mass to mass interactions and orbits... It seems to be the Higgs Mechanism, in the Std. Model is in the right direction, as it postulates a minimal mass for all photons and related Bosons, through the mass to mass interactions of wave-particles and fields...

So, put this one together for us, in your own words, as logically and theoretically mathematically as possible, and see what we have, with that older idea of your's, about the amplitudes, frequencies, wave lengths, and masses interacting with other masses, in conjunction with your falling orbits mechanism... Somewhere in here is the fully connected physical proof from actual fundamental experiments, already performed by others, and possibly even Lorentz and Einstein, backed up by Eddington... Most of my grounding surrounds these three names, then of course we'd have to through in Peter Higgs, as the final mechanism__that must be proven by such unification of all QM's, SR's and GR's experiments__already done, in concert with any new realizations added in...

Let me think on this one for a bit and I'll get back to you on it.

As for the prime mover, if we've got all the overview universal workings down to such a recursive state to even allow for a circular logic, then I'd have to consider that a victory in itself....lol. Most people don't even realise that the system will reduce to such due to it's supersymmetry being masked by all the asymmetry. Lol. I call that progress.

As I've stated, your point of circular logic is valid which brings us to two seperate paths whereby searching for a prime mover. Any system of cause and effect will in effect recursively search for a cause, but perhaps as with a common scaled example of a motor running a generator which runs the motor which runs the generator, which will fail and not acheive perpetual motion as we can't get back what we put in due to the electical to mechanical losses in other forms of energy such as heat due to mechanical friction and internal electrical resistance, etc as with the conservation laws of energy, it perhaps is impossible to structure a self sufficient closed system of perpetual motion even if we imply state changes and symmetry breaks and such and even get creative and store potential forms of motion energy in a larger infinite field . I agree that it's a much more logically satisfying thought of closed system recycle models, but they thus rely on exterior infinite fields to accomplish such as we both implement. For all we know the correct logic could be when we've lined all the recursiveness up to actually see infinity and eternity throughout all recursive infintesimal scales of cause and effect. Though interesting when accomplished with supersymmetry of all the forces, it's not satisfactory to our prime mover logic demands of the requirements for an eternal infinite system.

Best I can say right now from my views is that IMO, the cycle process is due to the finite system transversing through the infinite cosmic system at a varying linear rate per physical Lorentz contraction whereby expansion is catastrophic at the high linear velocity to catastrophic low linear velocity start of a cycle whereby all of the motion energy of forward inertia was quickly conserved to kinetic expansion with the following contraction state being the slower moving overall process relative to a steady increasing linear motion value of the whole. It's at the start of such a cycle that catastrophic interactions establish the internal broken up first stage mass systems through constructive and destructive interference which forever excludes any further internal less massive system of finding the "energy" through the motions of fractile peices to accomplish being accelerated to the linear value which is conserved by the whole system throughout it's varying states of motion. It's perhaps the broken up states of motion which reciprocally lower the value by which any internal mass can impose linear motion on another massive system. This always leaves open the need for transverse motions in the cosmic field to accomplish the linear velocity requirements of the finite universal volume, unless we were to just consider our finite system a short lived virtual photon created from random motion interactions of the cosmic field whereby the same system doesn't perpetually remain but there's a perpetual probability of such a system being formed. This is not appealing to me though. I'm just thinkin out loud. My mind isn't workin all that well today. It was extremely hot all day and I had the misfortune of being out there in it.

I'll try to do better tomorrow.

Later,

Tim

[Lloyd Gillespie]

As for the prime mover, if we've got all the overview universal workings down to such a recursive state to even allow for a circular logic, then I'd have to consider that a victory in itself....lol. Most people don't even realise that the system will reduce to such due to it's supersymmetry being masked by all the asymmetry. Lol. I call that progress. Later, Tim

Oh I agree with you completely Tim__We've already accomplished a tremendous amount, along our journey to solving for the big mysteries of Universal motions and systems... I don't mean to deflate the progress we've already made__It's just my nature to be a bit too deflationary in my theorizing, as I've already tried so many models, that have failed in the past__if you know what I mean. You have added a great deal, imo, to what everyone on TQ has contributed over the many years, and I thank you immensely__Please don't get me wrong, in thinking you haven't been successful in your endeavors, as you've been extremely successful in relaying novel ideas of new ways of looking at the entire Universal system, with probably more details of intracacies than Dave, I and others put together, although David still deserves the credit for the motion conservation formula, and his wave dynamics, for us all to work from, to continue our different paths of model theorizings...

So, chin-up__we're still on track...

Here's a new thought I had this morning, to simplify my decay model__All fermions must eventually decay to bosons. As fermions, which are most all low linear velocity bound, and as they decay__they are re-accelerated by the Universal field waves to c again... I've elsewhere called this process of both incoming and outgoing waves__A Universal Cycloidic Chiralities Process, and The Inverse of The Same Process...

Also:
E = MC^2 is a variable Universal formula...
All Universal formulas and laws are of the Universal variable states...
Variables will follow fixed variables, but not fixed constants...
Fixed math equals the product of the sum of the Universal variables...
Logic is about anyone's mind allowed to think properly, to its rational limits...
Utopia is a state where all variables balance most...
Natural Universal Laws Are All Universal Variables__I Think...
The problem__Logic is a Universal variable concept state, and much of Math works toward fixed constants...
The Universe and Life__All Universal Variables__I Think...
The Eternal Number of Universal Re-Cycles__Possibility...???
Fixed Math Only Proves Universal Variables__I Think...
Information " Knowledge " Intelligence " Wisdom, and The Qualification and Quantification of...
The Concepts of Necessity " Beyond Metaphysics...
Modal Conceptual Quantification...
Where Thinking Can't Go...
The Modal Possibility of The Finite...
The Hydrodynamic Super-Symmetry of Infinity__Possibility...???
All Truth Is A Variable Generality__Best Seen As...
Graph Quantification Logic and Math__Most Sound Methodology...
The Mind Can Only Use Generality On Universal Variable Functions " ∞...
Logic only properly functions, when guided by the normative sciences...
Variable psychology most often follows the soundest fundamentals...

Just some ideas I'm working with, Tim...

Get er' done,
Lloyd

[analog]

Hi Lloyd,

I wasn't getting down my friend, was just recovering from the southern heat. Lol. As for the prime mover, have you ever taken a test and gotten to a question that you didn't know the answer, so you applied test taking logic and just left it laying in your mind as you continued forward whereby possibly narrowing the possible answers with later answers or finding the answer contained within later questions? That's my logic to satisfying the prime mover question. I'll hold it in the background of my thoughts whereby future realizations may point me to a satisfactory answer.

Perhaps you can help me with ideas of what relationships we could resolve with our theorizing. For example, might we find the relationship between the quantity of substance thus also motion value of the universal volume relative to a photon at a set frequency/wavelength value. Would we have a need for perhaps a new unit of measure? Motion and quantity are a constant value within a system per the observed parameters (frequency, wavelength and amplitude) of the system, but other dimensions such as volume vary relative to the distribution of motion within a system. Thus, would we have a need for concepts such as a volume over time value or something whereby we might imply changes in volume over time as with a conserved amplitude throughout a cycle. (This would be an energy value, but how exactly would values of energy relate?) Perhaps even implying a lower Planck value to such. I'm just trying to consider the total relationships we would want to accomplish by way of measure which would ultimately reduce to a comparison value of a parameter from system to system, such as parameters of a photon to the universal volume whereby perhaps saying the universe is x photon volumes at y frequency of the photon, thus establishing the scaled up frequency, wavelength and amplitude of the universal cycle. Thinking out loud again.

I'll post some more important content in a bit that I've been thinking on. By the way, though mine and Dave's mechanics have seperated a bit, I fully acknowledge his and your great value to our efforts. This wouldn't be any fun without you two to throw ideas at and also gain ideas from.

Later,

Tim

[analog]

Mass would be a comparison of the uniform
motion value from system to system, but what I think we want to know is quantity values of the FS within systems, thus establishing their characteristics of conserving mass and such.

[G_burnett]

just to say hi you all ... circular logic does move the wave as it is a creation of wave with the declination from first creation of the structure Lloyd for the first is symmetrical and the next degrade is only on the inverted inward function of the structure not the outer effect able and thus asymmetrical pulse .. it is cyclic in nature thoughout the system .. but i am posting quick and will review as i can your reply.
kind regards graham

[analog]

Hmmm....would an absolute volume change over absolute time reduce directly to Planck energy or E=M.....

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Yeah Tim, the measurement problem was one of the first problems I thought needed re-calibrating, even as far back as the early eighties__as I saw the math taking such complex, and I thought quite unnecessary paths, even then. Though I thought and theorized this problem to no short ends, I really made little headway there, except to apply some physics math simplifications to economics, such as E = MC^2 to E = 1/5X in economics__then it's only a generalization of global markets and trade flows, but did make my economic understanding much easier. The only advance I made as to physics was my statement; "The supreme ultimate, divided and multiplyed by quantum motion, equals the quantum state", of which I also wrote the formula in symbol logic, but I'll skip hunting up my formula. The point is, that though I did make advances elsewhere than where I was looking to, I never made any advances in the fundamental physics measurement area__and to do so is almost impossible, due to the fact the maths designed must be compatible with the existing maths, to be scientifically acceptable. Though I do think extending the amplitudes, frequencies and wavelengths from present standards to the models we are working in has great value__at the same time I'd have no idea how to give a representational ratio between a single photon and the finite universal volume, or any other universal volume__as no one knows exactly what a single photon even looks like__we only know about quanta made up of photons... All is still theory, when we venture below Planck scales, which the single photon may be, imo__The weird thing is, it may even be orgainized similar to strings, as it travels through space, but at present__we just can't measure single photons, or know much about their individual actions__and that's why I stay away from string theory. I've always theorized that photonic waves(micro ram-jets) may even be taking in and exhausting even finer structured photons, or that these smallest FS entities, may just be the smallest non-measurable substances that eternally exist__but, there again, just theory... All of science is bumping its head up against 'What we can, and can't measure...' This is why there's been so much theory generated over the last 40 years or so__and the string theories also, but there's no proof, when we venture below or beyond the measurable c... You also always have to keep in the back of your mind, the fact, there may be no measurable answer, to the absolute measure problem__not to be too dissappointed, in the end... I think it's going to end in generalized variables, and that's why I concentrate so much on C.S. Peirce's logic of the bio and cosmic fields of knowledge... He long ago created the logical philosophy of variable generalizations over fixed functions, which just happens to be the natural state of mind, we all use to process what we yet, do not know__just as you mentioned about taking tests...

I do think we'll need new measurement techniques to represent future ideas, but the only way I can think these possible, is by doing the correspondence logic and maths between the greater universal volumes, actions and states, in comparrison to the hyper-fine structure measurement states__and that is where I see the value of what you already mentioned about amplitudes, frequencies and wavelengths. I've recently been exploring the GRB's, or 'gamma ray bursts' at great distances, and how they lose amplitude over these great distances, because if they didn't, we'd have long ago been blown off the face of the Earth, or at least all of bio-life processes would have been damaged so badly, there'd have been a huge die-off... So imo, we do have an observational fact of change in amplitude of these wave frequencies over vast scales of space, em-interferrence and other galaxy field densities robbing some of the energies of the blasts, as they travel and scale out... I don't know enough about it yet, as most of the studies concentrate on short distances, at the atomic scale, and much of the larger Universe's collected data is still being analyzed__but it looks like a promising area to investigate...

I've attempted a lot of different measurement ideas, but the GRB amplitudes and universe-wide scalar functions most interest me right now, as to a possible discovery of new measurement possibilities, and also the relationship to all the different em-spectrum waves__cosmic to radio...

Maybe you have some ideas about your own ideas in this same area...???

Later,
Lloyd

[Bogie]

Please describe the phrase "prime mover" and explain why there has to be one. I thought that motion could have always existed without cause or beginning.

[analog]

Hi bogie,

acknowledging eternal absolute motion and fundamental substance is only a temporary fix to a prime mover, once you realize that you've merely moved the problem outward to motion entropy death or a static symmetrical end state of motion which can't account for all the asymmetrical structures and density variations we now observe and are a part of. A motion model will become static to form if no prime mover is accounted for thus eternally recycling the process. It's like trying to explain perpetual asymmetry as a reduction to symmetry in this case is the more easily understood.