[analog]

It's not my intentions to compete with Dave. I will be the first to admit that he could definately pull more conclusions from his system than perhaps I ever will be able to. He is definately more educated and knowledgable. I just feel as though he went out of his way to portray me as an uneducated "neophyte".

My intentions aren't to say that I'm right and he is wrong. After fully reading his blog, I like his theory and I think it does much to further everyones knowledge. We could all possibly stand to learn something from it. I just feel as though, even if I may have stumbled on some of my interpretations within my framework, I still present an interpretable system comparable to his. I feel we took opposite approaches to reach the same goal. That being said, his is probably the right one, but that doesn't mean that exploring mine will produce no benifits what so ever.

[N0B0DY]

It would be my intention to say that Dave’s model is based on partial knowledge acquired from empirical and theoretical science, disallowing any philosophical extensions of which can lead to interpreting the evidence differently.

Is Newton right? Einstein or Bohr? Is the Earth really flat, but optically-illusive? It depends on how we each interpret the evidence uncovered over the years...proving to ourselves what reality is and isn’t, since no one has the monopoly on this knowledge. So we share our ideas, and draw our own conclusions.

As far as I’m concerned, the references to absolute rest can lead to inferences of a single absolute quantity (all quantities sum to zero) with two relative qualities (expansive and contractive). The latter qualities form the basis for relative functioning through the universal binary language that result from the default division of the absolute state - 0/0 – which can never literally change the absolute state because its fullness is the equivalent of the fullness of empty space, and not some unknown matter that is there “just because.”

Like your name, Analog, the interference caused by the infinite number of velocities from the above qualitative process is likened to subconsciousness (analog) system that serves as the basis for conscious (digital) conversion according to detectable frequencies.

So we then have the absolute state correlated to unconsciousness; the infinite division of that state correlated to subconsciousness; and the finite observable reality, based on the capacity to absorb information, correlated to consciousness.

[dleviwing]

Actually gentlemen, my model was originally intended for my children; it helped them comprehend the scientific jargon of Relativity and QM without the need to be mathematicians and also to know when that jargon is being misused.

Unfortunately in the world of science and physics, the understanding of how things work are in pure mathematical form. These theories are gauge theories that require a very strong knowledge of mathematics and its terminology. These theories provide the solution to the “Grand Unified Field Theory”. Most members of ToeQuest believe this is what TOE is referring to; it’s not. This part of the TOE is completed even though the interpretation of the numbers have a lot to be desired. My model, Tim’s model, Nobody’s model and most other members are interpretations of these gauge theory numbers; not new theories. The part of science that is an attempt to complete the TOE is called “EMERGENCE”. It is intended to explain the emergence of life and consciousness. Some believe that spirituality should also be a part of TOE but I do not; it would be nice if I were wrong.

BTW: Nobody; all quantities sum to their absolute; not all absolutes are zero.

[r.p.bibra]

Originally Posted by dleviwing "Some believe that spirituality should also be a part of TOE but I do not; it would be nice if I were wrong".

Yes' the spiritualists have no business to meddle in physical sciences, they will only make a fool of themselves! with love & regards.ls

[dipayankar]

No you are correct and please be proud of this fact. Spirituality is a vague concept that has / will be modified to suit the requirements of each individual and never needs to be proved...

Originally Posted by dleviwing Actually gentlemen, my model was originally intended for my children; it helped them comprehend the scientific jargon of Relativity and QM without the need to be mathematicians and also to know when that jargon is being misused. Unfortunately in the world of science and physics, the understanding of how things work are in pure mathematical form. These theories are gauge theories that require a very strong knowledge of mathematics and its terminology. These theories provide the solution to the “Grand Unified Field Theory”. Most members of ToeQuest believe this is what TOE is referring to; it’s not. This part of the TOE is completed even though the interpretation of the numbers have a lot to be desired. My model, Tim’s model, Nobody’s model and most other members are interpretations of these gauge theory numbers; not new theories. The part of science that is an attempt to complete the TOE is called “EMERGENCE”. It is intended to explain the emergence of life and consciousness. Some believe that spirituality should also be a part of TOE but I do not; it would be nice if I were wrong. BTW: Nobody; all quantities sum to their absolute; not all absolutes are zero.

[N0B0DY]

Hello again, Dave.

I know many scientists, and none would venture to this site in the name of science. All would admit the relativistic nature of science.

What absolutes are you referring to?

[dleviwing]

Originally Posted by N0B0DY Hello again, Dave. I know many scientists, and none would venture to this site in the name of science. All would admit the relativistic nature of science. What absolutes are you referring to?

Nobody;
What summations are you referring to; motion, matter, or spatial infinity? Though we do not know a numeric value of the absolutes, we do know that they must exist. Science is NOT relativistic; SR and GR are mathematical methods to predict the subjective observations that are influence by the limits of EM velocity to convey information; our perceptions of motions are relative to the frame of reference we chose.

Scientist and physicist seldom join forums like this due to the insulting nature of the many high school physics majors that demand explanations why their version of the wheel won’t roll; they get enough of that from students and engineers just out of college; also from other peer members.

There seems to be a contest to see who can invent the most bazaar interpretations of empirical data. This impairs our technical advancement just as efficiently as the dogma of religion did in the 17th century.

Sorry for the soapbox; you got me onto a roll of things that annoy me.

[N0B0DY]

Originally Posted by dleviwing Science is NOT relativistic; SR and GR are mathematical methods to predict the subjective observations that are influence by the limits of EM velocity to convey information; our perceptions of motions are relative to the frame of reference we chose.

Believe or not, Dave, I’m not interested in fancy interpretations – not that they’re incorrect – but in simplifying the implications proposed to us here (http://ganymede.nmsu.edu/tharriso/ast110/class27.html) by continuing to ask why until there is nothing ethereal left to question.

You say above that science is not relativistic, but as you explain above there are relative circumstances that must be adhered to in order for any observation to take place. Without such conditions, claiming there exists some unknown substance “just because” isn’t science in my opinion. Science is about observability, testability, falsifiability, etc., and the supportability of theoretical limitations that make the universe make sense. The absolute doesn’t make sense in science because all of the laws science is based on are relative.

We are ultimately interpreting absolute in different ways. My interpretation is similar to Einstein’s aether, of which “motion cannot be applied to it.” Like physical quantities being relative to the velocity constant of light, the light constant is relative to the aether. Then the aether is the only independent (absolute) constant, and its correlating absolute velocity must be zero. Not “just because,” but because velocity need not apply to the absolute medium, only to relative carriers of information.

I think Alan Guth correctly stated that the sum total of matter and gravity equals zero, and the toe having as its goal the unification of opposing forces renders the same result. Gravity is a pseudo force, proportionate to mass, because mass is proportionate to acceleration. The absolute universe must already be absolutely expanded and accelerated, and the observable velocities then must be the result of conscious observations which are based on differentiable media.

Whether we like it or not, the purely scientific – observable – universe can only exist within the mind governed by time-dependent “C” and “G”; the absolute medium that allows for absolute motion can’t exist. It would be a truly religious miracle if it did, imo.

[r.p.bibra]

Originally Posted by dipayankar No you are correct and please be proud of this fact. Spirituality is a vague concept that has / will be modified to suit the requirements of each individual and never needs to be proved...

Dear Dip, you got it wrong. The intent was that the religiosity usually meddles in subjects which don’t remotely concern/relate to them. That’s why religions have become the butt of the elite. Similarly students of physical sciences waste their time in the discussion of spiritual matters, about which they are least equipped. Many among them don’t even know the difference between spiritually and religion! Late Dr. Kalaam, Noble awardees in physics, once observed, on being questioned about the illusory predicaments of those scientists who believed in religions, “ science is outside world while religion is the inner one, so where is the conflict ?” Science forums are not anathema for the former; rather they have a lot to learn from these.
Nearer your home lived two saints Maharishi Raman and Arvindo, who had many devotees from foreign countries too (Indian mind-set). They were the real spiritual i.e. realized souls. Now you would ask who the realized souls are. Realized are those who are ‘aware’ of their being ‘divine’. Now don’t ask who are ‘divine’! For all this one has to go through a much disciplined life.
For both aspects of life it is very essential to have their basic knowledge, as the aim of these steams is quite contrast. As one is after the knowledge of the creation and the other is in the quest of its fundamentals. Don’t ever underestimate the bona fides of the genuine spiritualists, as they are far ahead of in their field, for they have transcended the boundaries of matter and energy. It is not a figment of imagination, just try and know yourself, as the field (laboratory) of spiritual realization is the human body itself! Be glad & happy. Life is one, why waste in being a master; a learner knows his/her limitations but a master has blocked the very gates of wisdom. Love & regards.ls.

[melanie]

=NOBODY: Whether we like it or not, the purely scientific – observable – universe can only exist within the mind governed by time-dependent “C” and “G”; the absolute medium that allows for absolute motion can’t exist. It would be a truly religious miracle if it did, imo.

Absolutely agree with you nobody,

I would like to add my take on this, and it is purely my opinion too.


The absolute rest is correct.
The speed of light is at absolute rest.
The speed of light is zero.
Light is energy, energy vibrates within the absolute
Every observable thing is moving through time and space.[Relative]

The only thing that can exist is this ''now moment'' [Absolute]
[ constant zero ]
At the speed of light there can be no time.
So nothing moves in this absolute NOW it is zero and timelessness.
We are moving through time and space WITH the speed of light,movement and time is the illusion.

Or something like that
I can't prove this obviously, but it just makes sense to me.

melanie.