The materialist paradigm as TOE

[Stephen]

The materialist paradigm is the specification of the construction and functioning and evolution of everything and is, therefore, TOE.

See http://members.westnet.com.au/paradigm/essay1.pdf

Stephen

[yogi]

stephen,

you may like this article about paradigm shift at

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~sai/goswam1.htm


sincerely,

yogi

[mkirkpatrick]

Yogi,briefly,i have visited this site,found it excellent and an eye opener!

regards michael.

[Stephen]

If you had understood my essay you would be aware that I'm a materialist and that the materialist paradigm of physics specifies the construction and functioning and evolution of everything, and that includes that thing called consciousness.

The materialist paradigm of physics overthrows many of the theories of the abstractionist paradigm of physics, and constitutes the ultimate paradigm shift of science.

Stephen

[dleviwing]

Hi Stephen;
I read your paper. It is good that you have a materialist point of view. It would be even better if your comments of physical phenomena were more accurately presented. One thing about red-shifted wavelengths is that it is not just Doppler effect – it is also assumed to be a stretching of the wavelength due to the expansion of the universe. This is completely different than Doppler red-shift and it is this that is used for distances. There are other statements that are also not quite technically true in you paper. For someone with a non-science background, you have done very well. I can’t however, agree with your premise that it is a definitive solution to the TOE.

There are many materialist here on ToeQuest that you can relate to; I see you have already met 2 of the opposing factions. In this case, opposites repel.

[Stephen]

The shift in the wavelength of the light from galaxies is a result of the light travelling towards us and not an expanding Universe.
You appear to have ignored the fact that the materialist paradigm predicts everything which can be discovered by the science. It must, therefore, be the TOE.
By the way, nuclear fusion does not entail heat (the thermonuclear fusion theory is wrong). It involves pressure. Stars do not fuse the heay elements. In fact, stars involve hydrogen and helium. The heavy elements are fused with the formatiom of planets, and only planets.
Did you like the my name for the fourth isotope of hydrogen - quadritium?
Cleary, you are unaware of the issues within the abstractionist paradigm (establishment physics).

Stephen

[dleviwing]

Well Stephen, I suppose if I were just another emotional stupid scientist, I would feel offended by you. However I can only find amazement in how many uneducated, armchair Discovery Channel scientist have solved all the science issues that us poor dumb scientist have missed for over a century. Congratulations; where would you like your Nobel Prize sent?

[Stephen]

David, does your response mean that I have a little of your attention. Afterall, that was the purpose of my posting.

Nuclear fusion. The abstractionist paradigm (AP) sees the nuclear fusion of the heavy elements as involving heat. The materialist paradigm (MP), on the other hand, sees the nuclear fusion of the heavy elements as involving pressure and not heat. Which one is wrong and which is right?

You might like to keep in mind that AP physics is not a truly fundamental perspective of the process that is the Universe.

Stephen

[dleviwing]

Hi Stephen;
Your arguments are those of a layman. The pigeonhole categories you are referring to are “Theoretical Physics (AP) and Experimental Physics (MP)”. The experimental physicist is the one that tells the theoretical physicist to get their head out of their math. I have worked very closely with both types. When you become involved with the science of nuclear phenomena, it is wise to have a thorough comprehension of thermodynamics to understand the temperature scales used by scientist. Both pressure and temperature have limited applications and meaning at this level of analysis. Wave mechanics is another very important field of mathematics and science that is highly valuable to understanding the interaction phenomena of nuclear reaction. Learn the Kelvin temperature scale in terms of thermodynamics and you may not be so confused as to what scientist really know.

[Stephen]

Once again you demonstrate that you have failed to understand the basis of the materialist paradigm that I’ve developed. The paradigm, as presented on my web page, specifies the mechanism that underpins the measurements of physics. It is logically prior to the measurements of physics. To state that I should “Learn the Kelvin temperature scale” is clear evidence of your lack of understanding.
To claim that I’m a layman with regard to physics is yet another demonstration that you fail to grasp the importance of categorizing establishment physics as an abstractionist paradigm. The Universe as a process exists prior to, and independent of, all the mathematics and measurements of physics. Abstractionist paradigm physics, with all of its technology and mathematics and measurements could not discover what I have discovered while developing the paradigm. And what is it that I’ve discovered? The specification of how everything is constructed and functions and evolves. Let me give you a few highlights. Gravity increases over time. The length of a day and a year decrease over time. The rate of atomic decay increases over time. The only place in the Universe that can be considered as unchanging is the groundstate as specified by the paradigm. All is change, and that includes physics.

When you seen the paradigm on my web page, what did you think all those numbers represented? Did you think it was some abstract art work? The numbers, the quantities, represent the things which the Universe can create. What else would you expect from the ultimate paradigm of science.

Stephen