James
I am going to come back over this suffice to say that this is the type of response I was hoping for. I for one am glad we are not going to be confining GUT to only Quantum Physics models. I am still contemplating your previous couple of responses. I will have something further very soon.
I’ll just make a couple comments on quanta:
Even if we assume light is forever constant, which I don’t accept, I’ll use an analogy…
Nobody really knows yet how birds, bats and schools of fish etc… organize so elegantly and precisely… which is to say that you don’t need to go very far or need expensive equipment to ponder quanta …
Also, you cannot bend space time and expect the particle to not be sucked in by the singularity it creates at the point where the folds meet. What happens here is that such a singularity causes faster than light travel, in a transformation I don’t know.
Most likely a tear in space time … once you tear it… well, the imagination can run very wild …
Practically speaking, there’s no reason we aren’t still in the singularity, with the added irony of trying to find or create one … all the particles super positioned, whereas observation differentiates …
Its like being possessed by other beings, or merging spirits, they get “tighter” as they expand.
And again, I point to the issue discussed about how strange it seems that something expands as it gets tighter, a matter of perspective perhaps, but, two sides of the same coin. You could choose to step back even further and question the expansion and/or contraction as illusions.
Some thoughts …
I didn’t clarify, it’s obvious, but on retrospect, I should clarify …
The analogy that you bend space requires force to collect in between the bending (now parallel) “sheets”, this extra force doesn’t go anywhere, which means that light will bend as it attempts to take the theoretical shortcut… which is to say, it must pass through the same “surface area” of gravity, whether you bend space or not.
When the sheets actually touch … the gravity is so high that it creates a singularity of gravitation that won’t allow traversing to the other sheet (the short cut)… the light should bend so fast that it actually tears a hole in space time.
Hopefully that was clear
Politics wise… as a heads up, I’m considered mentally retarded by almost everyone on ILP.
A short list…
Iambiguous
James
Uccisore
Carleas
Turd
And everyone from the KT boards
That’s why they don’t respond.
I can pull up multiple posts on each one where they called me retarded.
It’s just us encode shrug
James will respond directly to you though.
James actually laughs at me after calling me retarded when I respond to posts because he sees me as a reactionary trying to prove myself - an stupid idiot who’s just a puppet to his vast great mind, james claims to know everything I think, why I think it, and why it’s all wrong, and that I’ll never understand how stupid I am, perhaps barring a miracle …
I’m not worried about it…
Men are allowed to do internal life viewings of heterosexual men, women and gay men are not allowed to do this in this world system type…
What vexes them will be known by them
Well you have over 20,000 to choose from. Can you find even one post to support that allegation.
And what of those who make false allegations, lies. What do we call and do with them?
Give me time to remember the posts…
I already know the one where you said you understood every reason why I have every thought I have and how you understand how it’s all wrong.
The “retard” one was about 6 months ago…
That’s when I started posting negatively towards you.
I’ll find it.
I don’t know why it concerns you so much… doesn’t seem to bother anyone else, didn’t seem to bother you.
By post history, to almost everyone on this board…
I am the joke who hasn’t yet been banned…
Like that math guy… they let him post for years.
Weird James, I actually didn’t know this thread existed… this was not the one that made your idea of me apparent
I’ll wait.
And from that thread, my post in response to zinnat:
In your case, you insulted me the same way that math guy used to insult people, the mods couldn’t warn him for it because it was an encrypted insult, even though flannel Jesus agreed with me that his insult was actually WORSE than calling someone a moron… the thing that finally got him the boot, was him making up quotes with my name on them and arguing them!! That was some crazy shit…
Problem is… with the thing that pissed me off, the usual keywords aren’t working, it was an encrypted insult like that math guy used to use.
I know it’s there, because I don’t get pissed at people for no reason, and on several occasions you helped me in support… I don’t flip switches like that for no reason…
I might be able to find it by searching my own posts for when I consistently started always say “James said x and here’s why he’s wrong”. I started doing that after the fact…
Oh, I see. Your excuse for not finding any actual evidence to support your accusation is that my comments were “encrypted”. Can you provide some kind of evidence for that?
The search function won’t let me find the part where you dismissed my argument without argument and said “I know why you are doing this (made this thread) without even explaining it… I know it’s in science, but search won’t let me use “I know why you” because the words are too common *so I’m combing science threads”. Although, it might also be when I challenged everyone on the board combined to debate me… memory doesn’t serve well.
I literally flipped a switch on you James…
You basically pulled a uccisore on me once, I was very hurt by it, and I immediately started making threads calling you out …
It makes no sense from our prior sorta amiable interactions that I’d flip a switch like that…
I’ll find these posts
While you are fumbling around, see if you can find that time when you said that I called you “stupid” and I replied that I certainly did not. You didn’t find any evidence that time either … which is why I am asking now.
And yes, you do actually get angry at people without valid reasons. You find yourself angry and then attempt to think up an excuse for it. Many here do that same thing (FC for example).
Actually, you know what James…
Damn I’m fucking nuts…
Even if I could find what insulted me so much, I’ve said a lot of stupid shit on these boards
I still have kinks…
Absurdities…
Grudges…
sigh
I cracked mentally…
Thinking about how much pressure I have to step out of my own shadow…
Which isn’t your fault
Shit happens dude. Don’t worry about it.
My thoughts:
I like this - it is true - shit does happen. Sometimes it is very difficult to not worry about it.
We must be courageous and strong if we are to find the truth. I have much faith in James’ words.
I did not get very far into reading about RM:AO before I realized I had discovered something special.
I don’t think you are fucking nuts Ecmandu.
This would be right up there with my favorite things I have read on this forum.
Now I am going to babble on a little:
I do not know “nothing” and I do not know “everything”. All I understand is somewhere in between.
I find that the following does not always work out quite the way I expect:
“Treat others how you wish to be treated”
But with courage I press on because the truth is more important to me than my own self esteem at the moment.
For me: dealing with my limits is a measure of my maturity.
I have been known to be wrong on many occasions - I have written and said some things that equate to nonsense - but I try to remain courageous and strong.
Following is an example of a few things that I have been inspired to write and yet I can see some error in them.
Some inchoate thoughts:
I am not even certain where this one came from: 1 → 1 V 0
RM:AO has even put my mind to: Condensed matter physics
For some reason my mind drifted over: Zero Point Space - some sort of construct that entered my mind.
Let us assume that our Metaspace is actually Zero Point Space
Now lets define the Zero Point Space
The Zero Point Space is a hypothetical space devoid of indivisible points - complete - each point is infinitely divisible.
Contemplation being considered for entrance into my own philosophy:
Our mind is able to direct our next step. Each step we take is changing the dimension of mind. When deciding on the next step we employ our logic and emotion based on the reality that we are experiencing at the given time. Mind is an ever changing dimension that is bound to reality, logic and emotion.
Our confinive reality is bound to space, scope and time. Where we are at contains our horizon limited by the time we have been aware of such knowledge. Each location presents an opportunity to lessen our confinement - making the most of our time at any given location enables us to broaden our wisdom to be more fitting to any situation.
Each subjective philosophy is relative to its confines and is able to find harmony outside of its limits. The individual wisdom is affected by each other individual wisdom and is only ever relative to the absolute. The desire of absolute knowledge is the mind’s drive to be free of imperfection and distraction; this desire is volumetric and contained within each subjective lifespan.
Socializing is the function of the less limited individual who seeks to know because absolute reality encompasses objective reality which is constituted of the various approximations from subjective reality. Respect then should be driven by a great interest in socializing - to find harmony outside of oneself.
I am also considering what the “Limitations of free will” might be.
Currently I believe:
► Everything known was once unknown.
I also believe there is much more to discover about ourselves and our collective reality.
The implications of interaction is that observation changes intersubjective reality for everyone and not just a single individuals perspective.
James
It is likely that I will come back over parts of this again - but for now I want to make a few comments on what I have read and reignite the conversation.
After this we can come back to the language substrata as I think it is a valuable tool for leaping into the depths of RM:AO - we can further the concept of affectance density fields as this seems like the more counter intuitive thing for me - I will say however I recognize where we have touched on this already - I appreciate that RM:AO is actually pretty simple but it is always good to have plenty of philosophical substance underlying the physical principles - that way the physics can be honed when the time comes.
GToE - I like it. I appreciate that the GUT and ToE are used merely for Physics models - but it certainly helps me to have some sort of reference point to work from. What I see at the heart of Physics, is that we are working with two interchangeable factors - energy and matter - so I see the benefit to taking a further leap into one factor id est “affectance” and an arrangement of it, “PtA”. For me it even becomes somewhat spiritual in nature.
Yes - arguing other peoples theories in favor of the person they are interacting with seems pretty typical to me. Open eyes allow for falsehoods and falsehoods allow for refined truths. Where there are good results the proverbial “finger” is pointing at the truth but that does not mean it is pointing at the actual truth - it could be the truth with a missing factor or perhaps one too many factors. I like RM:AO because it narrows things down quite considerably and gives a fresh starting point to analyze from the bottom up any argument but even from the top down things can be analyzed with RM:AO in mind to sift out inaccuracies.
This is actually where I am coming from - amazingly enough - and being taught from an early age these things become ingrained so it is hard to see things any other way. The current paradigm to me is more about approximations rather than absolute truth. Just the same I am sure the mathematics if used in a more pure sense is able to quantify RM:AO. Reality is what it is all about though so if we seek to understand it properly then we can not afford to live the previously mentioned falsehoods forever - flaws are flaws, no matter how negligible. I can see what you mean by many potential ontologies and RM:AO being a different mindset.
Military Science aside, I think that RM:AO is able to help the philosopher come to more accurate conclusions about what he/she is thinking.
Could you elaborate on Sociological “Impedance Matching” for me? Given how significant a concern it is in AO . . .
The brain has been kick started again . . .