Philosophysics of a fundamental substance

[MJA]

Philosophysics: Nature's truth is measureless.

=
MJA

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Just so's you know what I been up to, Tim...

A Triadic Mass Theory__The Complex Simplicity of Classical, Quantum, Special/General and The Triple-Relative Thermodynamics/Electrodynamics of Mass…

I think I may have figured out how to word the Meta-Physical definitional transitions of mass into the Physical definitions of mass'es three opposing states__Classical Mechanics, Quantum Mechanics and Relative Mechanics... After watching all those videos yesterday, I realized all science is missing the most important state of mass transitions of all its state changes__The Quantum to Relative to Classical, or The Triple Relativity of Mass...

The Increasing Quantum Mass of The Inverse Velocity of The FS-Higgs-EM-Fields has not been dealt with anywhere in the present physics literature__that I know of… This is what I intend to address, but first let’s look at the confusing and conflating metaphysical definitions of mass, or matter, atom or whatever it was first called in ancient India and Greece, just to choose two countries, merely for simplicity… We know from the historical records that many peoples of both India and Greece defined the smallest fundamental as an atom, a purely physical structure, but there was great debate between the metaphysicalists, which was the larger camp, and the physicalists, which was the smaller camp. I think it fair to state both India and Greece were quite metaphysical in their definitions at these early times, because both societies wrote extensively about metaphysics, as their first philosophy. The debates centered around whether the atom was metaphycical or physical, whether it was universally united in a continuum, or whether it was a Universe of discrete parts__and herein is where all the arguments come from__and still abound…

Let’s take this same atom and just simply refer to it as Mass__FS in Motion, since it matches everyone’s definitions, by way of mass-energy equivalency, in this form... Next, we have to see what the modern world of relative mechanics, particle physics and quantum mechanics has to say about the atom’s mass. Of course we know they’ve used powerful mathematics, accelerators and cyclotrons to study and break the atom’s masses apart, to the point where science is at a stage of finding such fine structured, and hyper-fine structured particles__that only mathematical models called guage theories are being used to understand this level of complexity. But, in all this study of classical, quantum and relative mechanics__I’ve never seen anything about how any Fundamental Mass is formed from the most fundamental Higgs’ Field or fields, these most deep theories and models are founded on. Yes, it’s true we have rest and relative masses, and even double special relativity__but there’s a third relative mass that’s not even been mentioned__and, that’s how the em-field slows total c-velocity to increase mass, to form initial particles__just the opposite of what relative mass has been all about for a century+ now… This would certainly be a new inverse relativity of mass mechanics to discuss, especially since the entire structured finite Universe had to be formed by just such a method…

We have Newtonian classical understandings of mass increasing with the volicity of say, a fired bullet. We have Einstein’s relative and rest masses according to observer frames of reference, whether outside the experiment or as passenger observer for rest and relative masses, then others’ interpretations of rest mass, just being at classical rest, and all these ideas of mass are about increasing velocities__increasing mass. We also have quantum relativity, which simply tries to include these increasing velocity mass numbers into their models__But not one branch of any of the classical, quantum or relative mechanics has ever discussed the obvious__The Increasing Quantum Mass of The Inverse Linear Velocity of The FS-Higgs-EM-Fields__or the fact that mass increases with the decrease of velocity__when we are talking about fundamental particle formations from fields, whether in quantum, standard or relative mechanics__it matters not… This is the Missing Triadic Mass Theory__The Complex Simplicity of Classical, Quantum, Special/General, Triple-Relative Thermodynamics/Electrodynamics of Mass...

I don’t know for sure if this fits here correctly, but I’m working on it__EMG(electro-magnetic-gravity) = MC^2 to the inverse square law of gravity__from all sovereign, independent, individual space-time centers of masses__throughout the entire Universe... If that is true, then the scalar waves of super-nova gamma blasts' intensity, decreases with and to the inverse square law of gravity__and is in direct correspondence with a new Triple Relativity Theory__Where The Increasing Quantum Mass of The Inverse Linear Velocity of The FS-Higgs-EM-Fields, holds true__simply put__The finite structured Universe grows/builds from FS-Fields, by decreasing linear velocity, into chirally knotted and more uniform spin velocities... To me, the only way to understand this new theory is to allow three types of observers__1. Classical direct observation, say for bullets increasing mass with velocity. 2. Rest and relative motion observation, say as rods increase in mass with velocity. 3. An absolute observation perspective, say for our most fundamental particle formations, where particle structures increase in mass, as linear velocity is decreased… The absolute is a total motion observation position/perspective, so’s all three relative mass actions’ mechanics may be viewed without confusion and conflation, which has been science’s problem__so far…

Is this not a new idea of relative mass and its inverse linear velocity mechanics, or am I out to lunch here…???

This third model view of relative mass also finishes the Einstein-Lorentz problem of an object sped to the speed of light, such as a rod or a titanium baseball__arriving as, what is assumed, zero mass photons__That is, the mass increases with velocity classically, then relatively and finally as inverse quantum relative mass__or put another way__its mass must be radiated away as photons, as it nears c__velocity reduces mass in this special opposite ended case of Triple Relativity Theory…

[analog]

Hi my friend,

I'll be back in a bit to try to absorb where we are.

Later,

Tim

[analog]

Hi Lloyd,

I'm sure you already know that I'm with you on what you're addressing here. I would pose the larger question to you though of what unifying symmetry is being maintained universally throughout every moment of elapsed motion of the asymmetrical distribution of structured and unstructured matter at all scales and resolutions. A GUT can be accomplished by acknowledging an FS and it's motions as we here do, but a ToE would require the acknowledment of the unifying singular dynamic which is being maintained through an expression of all structured matter rotating, orbiting and propagating through distances of unstructured space. What are all the motions telling us as a whole? What motion law is being symmetrically maintained at all cost to material symmetry? Matter is expressing the essence of motion, we merely must translate the language it's speaking to us in. IMHO.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi Tim,

Just for kicks, and off the top of my head, I'd say it's hydrodynamic mass/gravity__in two directions__in toward a center, and out toward the hydrodynamic non-stationary unbounded boundary... To me, at this level, it's the absolute conservation of mass and gravity__but I got no idea yet, if that's formulizable or not... I do think the 'conservation of mass' throughout all states is most important, though...

I'll think on it, and get back with a more extended reply later...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass Not well understood, due to definitions of what matter is and is not...

[labelwench]

Which came first, matter......or motion?

I'm still trying to comprehend the notion that there may be no 'first', where these things are concerned.

Strange, as in the case of 'personal awareness', I have no recollections prior to being aware.

From that perspective, then, I should be able to contemplate that, it has always been thus.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Which came first, matter......or motion?

This is the central tenet of the whole thinking process, Lorrina. Nietszche stated it as, "If one stares into the abyss long enough, the abyss stares back at you." I've sorta mentioned it as, "If you break the cosmic egg into to fine a structure and entity exists, your logic ceases to function, because such thinking, ceases the Universe from functioning..." To me, delving below the triad of matter/mass_energy_motion__is impossible if we want to maintain the integrity of Universal mechanics and our own logic__Though, at the same time, if we realize this physical and mental limit, we can use our imagination to theoretically stare into this lesser abyss, and still recover some yet undiscovered information__as it may allow us to see into the very mechanics of this most fundamental of triads... But, it's a very slippery slope of keeping necessary logic and imagination in their necessary perspectives...

I'm still trying to comprehend the notion that there may be no 'first', where these things are concerned.

And yes, that's more or less what I've really tried to state, as an eternal system can have no 'first'__but, it does have an eternally existing mechanics, and that's what the scientist tries to probe. Sometimes the concepts involved become confusing, because so many use the loose language of 'First'__when in fact is meant__The Mechanics...

Strange, as in the case of 'personal awareness', I have no recollections prior to being aware.

A good analogy of the self to the Universe__But, I think we can look into the giant mass gaps in our knowledge systems, all the way from the deepest personal understandings and mis-understandings, to these real mass gaps in science and Universal mechanics(particulars and universals), all the way to the largest mass gap of all between first philosophies, the metaphysical or the noumenal, and the second philosophy or the physical__Where most all the unknowns and dis-informations still exist... And, some would argue that the physical was first, and the metaphysical was second__Which when looked at Universally, is true, as the geo-cosmos of physical entities and actions certainly preceded the bio-metaphysical era__if we use the present history of definitions and realities__But, this area is very controversial and contentious when the noumenologists and phenomenologists get at each others' throats...

From that perspective, then, I should be able to contemplate that, it has always been thus.

Though it may be abduction(logically thought our guessing), I agree... The necessity of existence formula of Ruth Barcan's logic seems to verify this... She's the only woman to have a logic formula named after her, and from the 1940's, no less... That's really quite a feat, in this complex field...

Thanks for the contribution...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi Tim, let me post a few posts of mine you may have missed, to set the ground to the complexities I see, at formulating what I do see...


Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie
The Incompatible Thermo-Hydro-Dynamic Mechanics of Atomic Wave-Particle Hydrodynamics & EM-Wave-Hydrodynamics…



Originally Posted by Nobody Nowhere
Lloyd, I understand your position, but I said "if we focus" on what you said we can then realize that the one is vacant of all possible motion[thermodynamics]. Similar to when smacking your hand against water, it stops due to the immense pressure.[hydrodynamics] The pressure is proportional to mass/energy density[hydrodynamics], so "chocked full" is equal to fully choked - the cessation of all possible motion[thermodynamics nor hydrodynamics never ceases__they oppose each's cessation = gravity].

You can't put anything into a room that is absolutely full[a room chocked full of waves without pressure__thermodynamics__has plenty of room for more wave pressure__hydrodynamics], just like you can't put anything into a room that isn't there.[There exists no isn't there...]


Nobody, let's look at this as a theoretical model in the making, as it's the same problem I've always had with Dave's Wave Mechanics Model, and Greg's Thermodynamic and NS Models... To me it seems more a problem with how the mind itself processes Time/Distance Occurrences and Time/Distance Progressions than anything else. The Universe works fine, and we see this from all our evidence__But, the mind doesn't process complex Time/Distance Occurrence Events well, with the more longer term Progression of Time/Distance Events. It's like the Uncertainty Principle is always present and interferring with our mind's properly uniting these two opposite ended velocity mechanics of reality, into a one perception/view of the actual mechanics. It seems we do not recognize this mechanical short-coming in our mind's processing mechanics__But, it is the major controller blocking us from properly processing all the laws, logics, occurences, and progressions of the Time/Distance events of science__We are so hard trying to do so. What I'm talking about, is the fact the mind is required to process these two major mechanics by two separate velocities of light processing, at the same time__and the mind seems only capable of clear processing one velocity at a time__So, we are always blind-sided to our own Logic's Perception of doing exactly what we need to do, to see this complex and general mechanics at the same Time/Distance of its happenings...

I don't know if that makes sense or not, but if you're willing to wade through this process, I think we may be able to make sense of it__or at the least, get a bit of a glimse of the mind's short-comings of processing two different Velocity of Light's Time/Distance Events/Progressions__At the same exact perception view's moments. To me, perception can only process Short High Velocities of Occurences in one concentrated mode, and perception can only process the Long Slowed Look at High Long Distance Velocities of Progression in its second mode of concentrated use__It seems most impossible to do both at once, but the brain tricks itself into thinking it is... Just guessing, but I'd say its a short-coming of perception's brain muscle's contraction and expansion mechanics, required to do this unified processing, and only able to be in one state or the other__Contracted or Expanded, as any other muscle of the body__Thus limiting the Unified Processing required to see the exact mechanics of two disparate Time/Distance Processes...

Nobody, you can't look at a progressional process as an event/occurence... You can't look at an occurence/event as a progressional processs, when in fact these two__event and progression processes__are entirely separate mechanics of the Universe, and it seems the mind.... I think we always mistake our perception's views of thinking it's seeing the whole picture of the mechanics involved, when in fact, we are only seeing one or the other of these two Mechanics at once. The more we concentrate on the small, the more we lose track of the large, and vice versa. Of course, this is that same old 'One and The Many' problem__But, it may be able to be solved by looking into my Decay Model, as this model is a slower progression view of all Universal Mechanics__at the large progression of Time/Distance, slowed down, or at least able to seem more slowed, so's the mind can get a handle on its total, and The Incompatible Thermo-Hydro-Dynamic Mechanics of Atomic Wave-Particle Hydrodynamics & EM-Wave-Hydrodynamics…

I think if we just keep paddling around in the existing models and ideas, we'll always be confronted by perception's short-comings...


Nobody, you know I always do see where you're trying to come from, but the fact is, the Universe is behaving with its motion, waves and particle structures, just as I've described. It's just the mind is a bit shy of a whole dollar's processing abilities__and that's mine as well as yours' and everybody elses... We just need to figure how to word the mechanics, and to me it's the Mechanics of the Bolded above__But, very complex to wrap one's mind around all the progressions and occurrences, of complex state changes__At Once...

If one looks back in history to the intellectual battles between Germany, France, the rest of Europe and England, verses, American intellectualism, one may just find the root of all these problems of interpretations. They in Europe, etc., processed from a mind built by history from a far more subjective base of transcendental abstract existentialism and nominalism, and America processed from a mind built by it's history, from a far more hustler's objective base of realism__and these two major differences created two disparate meaning systems within all the world's interpretation systems__so's different schools have different systems of interpreting even how to use the basic mathematical, logic and science systems... Tiny Tree's recent posts and links address this very issue, especially at his web site... Link... Link... Link... Link... Link... Link...

One must think about this, to get to the bottom of what one reads, and how one processes what one reads and hears...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

And...

After All The Stars Go To Sleep__The Universe Awakes__A Final Theory...

After all the stars burn our, and all the black-holes, planets and moons, etc., radiate away to the fundamental substance em-field__Thermodynamics is necessarily required by all the laws of physics, logic and math__to change wave phase-state aether space Hydrodynamic__Through the cyclic mechanics of the Universal nearest absolute zero k cold__Shrinking the fs-em-aether back to re-structured matter...

The Cosmological Complexity Logic of The Prime Mover__Solved...!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_decade...

QTHD__Quantum Thermo-Hydro-Dynamics' Necessity...

The proof is: Any simple ideal gas, such as liquid natural gas, shrinks when the heat is removed__and the aether being such a hyper-fine-structured ideal non-viscous fluidic gas__is also necessarily required to shrink, when all the heat goes out of the Universe__Thus turning the expansion to contraction... But, it's a trillions of trillions of years out to the re-cycle mechanics era and back, and the sheer velocities and magnitudes of time/distance volume involved__Should be enough hydrodynamic force, to produce the four fundamental forces to construct another Big-Bang__as Newton's laws come into play on the return trip__Expecially Inertia__Then of course, all the Quantum and Relative Mechanics Laws...

Btw, if a LNG tanker's gas were at room temperature, a ship to carry it, would be 600 thousand feet long__as it's a 600 to 1 gas shrinkage, just by removing the heat from the gas... The largest LNG tankers are 1000 feet long, appx...

Plus this link... http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-toe-theory/5464-the-toe-the-logical-science-all-thought-possible-12.html#post132118

And this is a link to some other things, I'm looking at... http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-toe-theory/3463-nothing-nobody-nowhere-no-where-now-here-142.html#post134506

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Here's one of your's you may have forgot about, along the lines of the complexity...

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie
Imo, the question that's got to be answered is: 'How does the mind/brain process its million concepts into the one__we attempt to relay to others...?'

I actually see perhaps a deeper question of how a system of interactions such as conscious thought processing can define itself in terms of those same processes by which it is using to merely function for that moment. I don't know how to correctly relate what I'm seeing and you've perhaps studied such philosophical and logical concepts as it may have been addressed, but how does a system use it's own operational mechanics to define it's operational mechanics. I see this as perhaps the unbreachable wall to understanding our thoughts due to our thoughts being the only tool for investigating them. Relating to the methodology of science this would be similar to trying to observe the instrument by which your making the observation with. In an overly simple analogy a microscope can tell us a lot about micro resolutions being observed of which it is focused upon but it can never be used to magnify itself for observation. You perhaps can't use the instrument to make observations of the instrument. Our mind works well focused upon the external world but try to turn it upon itself and it fails.

You and I could perhaps theoretically reduce thought to a physical process, but the thoughts it would take us to do so in detail are a much more complex process of interactions whereby similar to the conservation laws of energy you never get out more than you put in and changes of state reduces the output of a given state whereby you more often recieve less relative to one form of energy due to conservation to varying forms as with the motor generator analogy and the conversions of mechanical, electrical and thermal energy states. If thought has such state transitions and similar conservation aspects within it's base processes and imagination and understanding represent one aspect of a conserved form with varying other conserved forms dividing the base energy of the system between themselves then such imagination and understanding could never produce the same initial value which went in without violating a conservation law. If thinking isn't 100% effecient then any attempt to model thought will have a lesser value which in this case would amount to lesser understanding or internal event horizon of which we can never observe beyond leaving the question of how detailed can we reconstruct our own thought processes in terms of interactions which will forever remain analgous but not exact. I don't even know if this makes sense, but currently I can't think of a better way to describe how I see it. I guess what I'm saying is perhaps the gap within our understanding of our own thoughts isn't due to the models we use or their ability to explain phenomena, but is perhaps more intrinsically related at a deeper level of physical impossibilties as our ignorance in this area perhaps doesn't represent something which still needs to be understood, but rather something which will never be totally understood. Ignorance in such a case isn't giving direction to learning it's representing the threshold of the limits to learning. This also similarly reminds me of our conversation the other day of measuring the changes of the energy states and frequencies of internal constituents of atomic structures ie electrons, with the larger scale atomic frequencies perhaps dependent upon those internal states.

Just my quick thoughts on the subject.

Later