[Carey]

Stephen Hawking has proposed a patch to physics called "chronology protection," which weeds out solutions to General Relativity that admit of cyclic time. In other words, he stands by the postulate that time does not go backward. I have recently reconstructed physics using chronology protection as the lone premise. All physical structure is generated by a pair-wise temporal successor relation. Time diagrams specify the quantum structure of our 4-D time lattice, electron clouds, neutrinos, charge quanta, Bohr's formula, the fine structure constant, and the structure of quarks and nucleons. Frequency, wavelength, energy, and the quantum itself are unambiguously defined in terms of sheer time order.
There are no infinities in the theory, and thus no continuum and no calculus. I came to the theory by way of Russell and Whitehead's eventism. By confining their theory to finite time structure, the structural definition of energy and the quantum is obtained. This is the crucial insight that eluded Russell and Whitehead.
The concepts of time and energy suffer from a redundancy, as indicated by Planck's E=hf. Time appears in the form of its reciprocal-- frequency. Energy is the redundant notion. It is altogether inferior to explain these things in words, when the mathematical treatment set forth in my TOE booklet is perfectly concise and utterly simple. There we have a domain of pure time, with the universe characterized as a set of time-ordered moments, conveyed formally as a set of ordered pairs. In that domain of pure time sequence, we can define "frequency" and "wavelength" as ratios such that each is the inverse of the other, obviating the need for either particles or waves in the theory.
My theory is so simple that I came to it without knowing much physics at all. How can that be? Why didn't the physicists find it? There is a good reason for it. They trust the notion of space above all else, even above time. The notion of space stems from spatial features of phenomenological experience, such as a person's visual experience. It is lifted from the phenomenal realm and applied unhesitatingly to the theory of what lies beyond experience-- the unseen world of physics. It is a difficult subject to blog effectively. I've explained it carefully in my book on Russell and Whitehead called "The Mind-Body Problem and Its Solution."
My TOE is published as "A Theory of Everything for Physics." Simple arrow diagrams are the key to comprehension. If I could post the diagrams here, I would. My latest finding is the structure of the quarks, which is available as a 2-page PDF. I can email it to anyone interested. My two books can be ordered off the internet. -- Carey R. Carlson

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Carey Stephen Hawking has proposed a patch to physics called "chronology protection," which weeds out solutions to General Relativity that admit of cyclic time. In other words, he stands by the postulate that time does not go backward. I have recently reconstructed physics using chronology protection as the lone premise. All physical structure is generated by a pair-wise temporal successor relation. Time diagrams specify the quantum structure of our 4-D time lattice, electron clouds, neutrinos, charge quanta, Bohr's formula, the fine structure constant, and the structure of quarks and nucleons. Frequency, wavelength, energy, and the quantum itself are unambiguously defined in terms of sheer time order. There are no infinities in the theory, and thus no continuum and no calculus. I came to the theory by way of Russell and Whitehead's eventism. By confining their theory to finite time structure, the structural definition of energy and the quantum is obtained. This is the crucial insight that eluded Russell and Whitehead. The concepts of time and energy suffer from a redundancy, as indicated by Planck's E=hf. Time appears in the form of its reciprocal-- frequency. Energy is the redundant notion. It is altogether inferior to explain these things in words, when the mathematical treatment set forth in my TOE booklet is perfectly concise and utterly simple. There we have a domain of pure time, with the universe characterized as a set of time-ordered moments, conveyed formally as a set of ordered pairs. In that domain of pure time sequence, we can define "frequency" and "wavelength" as ratios such that each is the inverse of the other, obviating the need for either particles or waves in the theory. My theory is so simple that I came to it without knowing much physics at all. How can that be? Why didn't the physicists find it? There is a good reason for it. They trust the notion of space above all else, even above time. The notion of space stems from spatial features of phenomenological experience, such as a person's visual experience. It is lifted from the phenomenal realm and applied unhesitatingly to the theory of what lies beyond experience-- the unseen world of physics. It is a difficult subject to blog effectively. I've explained it carefully in my book on Russell and Whitehead called "The Mind-Body Problem and Its Solution." My TOE is published as "A Theory of Everything for Physics." Simple arrow diagrams are the key to comprehension. If I could post the diagrams here, I would. My latest finding is the structure of the quarks, which is available as a 2-page PDF. I can email it to anyone interested. My two books can be ordered off the internet. -- Carey R. Carlson

Hello and welcome Carey,looks very interesting,will read up in a mo,settle in,and post away.

warmest regards michael.

[Felix Schrodinger]

Originally Posted by Carey My latest finding is the structure of the quarks, which is available as a 2-page PDF. I can email it to anyone interested.

Hi Carey

Why don't you attach the PDF so we can have a look at it?

Felix

[Carey]

I tried to upload the PDF of the quark structure, which is only 200Kb, but my status of "in training" seems to cut down on my upload size, and it wouldn't go. I tried another PDF of 120Kb, but it wouldn't go either. It says the filesize is over the limit. I think I've made 3 posts now, so maybe when I reach 5, I'll be a "belt," and I'll be able to upload it.
I wonder if this is a "post" that counts toward my first belt level? If so, I'll be at 4 here in a second. -- Carey

[Carey]

I'm trying to reach a belt level so that I can upload my picture of quarks, and I'm trying to do it by making a sufficient number of posts without engaging in "spam." I got my entry printed in the latest issue of Philosophy Now magazine, to their "Question of the Month." The editor took liberties with what I wrote, so here is the original version:

How does the mind relate to the brain?
Recent findings strongly suggest that physics is reducible to the study of finite time sequence patterns. The brain, in that case, is a time-ordered sequence. A human mind is a time-ordered series of momentary experiences. Human moments transpire at a rate of ten-per-second, as determined by psycho-physical experiment. Such a human series is a substructure of the more elaborate time sequence of its host brain. Thus the relation of the human mind to its brain is one of part to whole.
The reduction of physics to time sequence patterns is obtained from Russell and Whitehead's eventism by restricting it to finite sets of events. This yields quantum theory and the definition of the quantum as a discrete temporal transition, or "step of time." A 4-D time lattice is constructed in place of a space-time continuum. Space-time is thus made of quanta, like everything in this theory. The crucial insight is this: frequency ratios are inherent in time sequence patterns, and these ratios serve as the measure of relative energy in accord with Planck's E=hf. Energy is frequency. Its reciprocal is wavelength, which measures the relative duration of quanta. Frequency and wavelength are thus obtained from time sequence patterns without reliance on either waves or particles. The quantum structure of neutrinos and electrons has been found and diagrammed, which yields the structural specification of "charge quanta." The theory is published in a 28-page booklet titled "A Theory of Everything for Physics."
Eventism was meant to solve the mind-body problem and provide a superior foundation for physics. In its simplest finite form, it does both. The elimination of spatial relations from physics means that "extension in space" does not refer to anything physical. Space is instead purely phenomenal, like color. Russell's focus on different meanings of "space" as the key to the solution of the mind-body problem is thus vindicated. Whitehead's view of nature as "temporal succession" is borne out. We are led abruptly, by this advance in physics, to a panpsychic view of the world. -- Carey R. Carlson

[Carey]

I've made a lower resolution PDF of the quark paper, and it seems the attachment is working. If so, feast your eyes on the structure of the nucleus. -- Carey

[Wick]

Carey, can you reiterate how your model describes mass, spin, chirality, etc. Also, can you describe how your four-dimensional structures are perceived by observers in three dimensions. I suspect you have some interesting solutions to the nature of the strong and weak forces. Can you expand on this. I'm very interested in your ideas as I see parallels to some ideas I've recently posted to this Forum. I look forward to your next post.

Wick

[Carey]

Hi Wick,
I'm attaching an article called "Eliminative Panpsychism." It has four parts. Part Two is "Physics Without Space," which reproduces the material in my published TOE booklet, slightly abridged and updated. The other parts address the epistemology and philosophy of science that led me to the theory. This is a "core dump" of everything I know in condensed form, so you won't need a copy of my published books. With luck, the article will be published later this year in a collection put together by David Skrbina.
The definition of mass-energy should be clear from the article. As to your other specific questions, let's see if the "ground plan" makes any advance on them. -- Carey

[Felix Schrodinger]

Originally Posted by Carey The resulting theory provides an answer to the question of what particles are and what mass is. Particles are repetitious time sequence patterns, and the mass-energy of a particle is the measure of its inherent relative frequencies, which is a function of the number and arrangement of its constituent quanta. A particle sequence as a whole must in turn have a frequency relative to other particles, since all frequency is relative. All quanta of this universe connect into one structure. That is causal connectivity. That presupposition is what rationates the frequencies, or energies, of this universe

Hi Carey

Thanks for attaching the paper and diagrams which I find very interesting but I can't see how they work. You refer to 'the resulting theory' but I don't see it in the paper so I can't form a view on the explanation for "what particles are and what mass is".

Can you produce a diagram to demonstrate what "particles are repetitious time sequence patterns" means?

"All quanta of this universe connect into one structure. That is causal connectivity. That presupposition is what rationates the frequencies, or energies, of this universe". This sounds like the fabric of spacetime and thus background dependency which you appear to deny elsewhere?

regards
Felix

PS - I can't find "rationate" in my dictionary, is it in Websters?

[Carey]

Felix, I just now posted an entry that includes the whole TOE, with diagrams, in an attachment called "Eliminative Panpsychism." Please let me know if this answers your questions, which are very much to the point. -- Carey