Universe and Time

For discussing anything related to physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, and their practical applications.

Moderator: Flannel Jesus

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:21 pm

zinnat13 wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:Zinnat, what you call consciousness is what I call valuing.


I have talked about Will only yet in this thread, not consciousness. That would be entirely different than will.
Please look for my next post to James regarding my defenition of consciousness.

Yes, self-valuing is entirely different from valuing too.
And yet they depend on each other.

Fixed Cross wrote:By the way, Nietzsche's will to power means the will to power to will to power to will to power to will, etc.


I am aware of that too but that is your interpretation of N, not mine.

It's Nietzsche's interpretation of will.

To me, he was not generalizing Will but emphasizing at a particular subjective use.
If that was not the case, there was no need for him to present his premise of will to power as an alternate or amendment of S's premise of will to exist.

You misunderstood. The WtP is not an amendment. It is meant to replace the whole idea of will to exist, will to survive, etcetera. These aren't actually existent forces. The potential that is existence (WtP, PtA, etc) is always aimed at accomplishing something, not at existing.

"Existence is an act, not a fact."

N chose his words very carefully to underline his intent.

I can see that through his words, tone and chosen subjects. He wanted to counter nihilism and pessimism, spreaded in that era.

He made great care to be correct, is all.

Fixed Cross wrote:His concept seems to include yours.


Well, that is again your interpretation.

And Nietzsche's.

N was not interested in metaphysics at all and his will to power was merely psycological premise for him.

You could not be more wrong. It is all about metaphysics, but psychology is the only honest means for a psyche to address that.
Nietzsche's honesty goes a long way.

I advise you to read the Birth of Tragedy, his first work. It will completely alter your perspective on him.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image -
Before the Light Forum - Subterranean Cultus - The Magickal Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10819
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Sun Jun 01, 2014 11:30 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:Yes, self-valuing is entirely different from valuing too.

"Entirely" different?

I think of self-valuing as valuing applied to oneself, thus not entirely different, merely valuing applied in a specific direction.

zinnat13 wrote: James S Saint wrote:
    I can challenge it. The Potential-to-Affect, PtA, can exist without the will (or action) for it to exist. In fact, PtA doesn't have to do anything in order to exist. It is something that cannot be avoided.

James, here you are talking about the scenario before the existence. According to me, that is the stage where consciousness and will are one, not separated. Willingness (potential to will or affect) was hidden in the joint entity as a possibility, but not manifested yet.

No, you are again conflating "potential" with "possibility". Those are two different concepts, but often confused or conflated.

When I say "potential", I am referring to the cause or ability already being present. Nothing has any potential to do anything unless it is already beginning to do it. The concept of "possible" means that something might happen or might not, we don't know. So when I refer to "Potential-to-Affect", I am not speaking of "Possibility-to-Affect", but more "Cause-to-Affect" or "Ability-to-Affect".

An apple hanging on a tree has zero potential for falling, until the stem is cut. Once the stem is cut, the apple has the potential to fall. But an apple hanging on a tree has the possibility of of falling at any time, because I don't know when the stem might get cut.

"Potential" is in reference to the actual immediate situation. "Possibility" is in reference to how much I know of the situation concerning the future (similar to "chance").

And remember, RM requires every relevant element to be uniquely and precisely defined. There is no ambiguity allowed. So "consciousness", in your ontology isn't allowed until it is precisely defined. And "time" can only have one definition.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby zinnat » Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:22 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:I advise you to read the Birth of Tragedy, his first work. It will completely alter your perspective on him.


I wil try and come back to you in a couple of days.

Till then, we have to agree to disagree on N.

with love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:16 pm

phyllo wrote:What you are proposing is contrary to one of the principles of physics - which is :
We do not occupy a privileged position in the universe.

No. What I am proposing is not contrary to one of the principles of physics. And I do not occupy a privileged position in the universe rather the contrary because I am proposing a part of the universe to be - perhaps (!) - in a privileged position far away from the planet Earth. That is a Gedankenexperiment (thougt experiment).
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:24 pm

What do you think about the theorem: "The photon is an everlasting phenomenon"?
Last edited by Arminius on Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:31 pm

Arminius wrote:What do you think about the theorem: "The photon is a everlasting phenomenon"?

Depends on what you mean by that. Expound a bit?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:02 pm

Sometime between 10^18 and 10^27 years, the galaxies will have lost about 99 percent of their mass and therefore effectively be dissolved. The respective residual will then be collapsed into a single super-massive black hole. If the theories of the elementary particle physicists are right, then the matter will dissolve altogether. After about 10^32 yeras even the protons, the basic building blocks of matter, will disintegrate in positrons and photons. Will the positrons meet an electron, the particles annihilate each other, and there remain only photons.

Then there will be only gigantic black holes, "swimming" in a sea of ​​photons and neutrinos all-encompassing. Sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years, with the utmost probability after 10^130 years, there will be nothing left except neutrinos and photons in the form of extremely long wavelength electromagnetic radiation in an extremely cold, empty universe.

Merely the energy is forever, everlasting, eternal.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:12 pm

Arminius wrote:Sometime between 10^18 and 10^27 years, the galaxies will have lost about 99 percent of their mass and therefore effectively be dissolved. The respective residual will then be collapsed into a single super-massive black hole. If the theories of the elementary particle physicists are right, then the matter will dissolve altogether. After about 10^32 yeras even the protons, the basic building blocks of matter, will disintegrate in positrons and photons. Will the positrons meet an electron, the particles annihilate each other, and there remain only photons.

Then there will be only gigantic black holes, "swimming" in a sea of ​​photons and neutrinos all-encompassing. Sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years there will be nothing left except neutrinos and photons in the form of extremely long wavelength electromagnetic radiation in an extremely cold, empty universe.

Merely the energy is forever, everlasting, eternal.

Well, a photon isn't an object, but rather an amount. Normal photons get produced by a specific means (electron orbital decay) that always yields specific amounts. But in the case of extreme disintegration, you could not expect all photons to be of such quantum amounts.

And what that theory seems to be missing is the concept of "dark matter/energy". High concentrations of affectance (EMR, including photons of every size) aggregate into dense clouds. If the cloud becomes dense enough, it forms a new black hole. Between all of the black holes, the affectance field keeps gravity functioning such as to draw the black holes together. As they collide, they stand a chance of reproducing our more commonly observed "universe" of stars and planets. Because the universe is actually infinite, there can never be a time when a black hole isn't headed toward another. Once two extremely large black-holes collide, a new "local universe" is born.

So there cannot really be any time when there are no photons and even the loss of matter is only temporary.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Mon Jun 02, 2014 11:51 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:Sometime between 10^18 and 10^27 years, the galaxies will have lost about 99 percent of their mass and therefore effectively be dissolved. The respective residual will then be collapsed into a single super-massive black hole. If the theories of the elementary particle physicists are right, then the matter will dissolve altogether. After about 10^32 yeras even the protons, the basic building blocks of matter, will disintegrate in positrons and photons. Will the positrons meet an electron, the particles annihilate each other, and there remain only photons.

Then there will be only gigantic black holes, "swimming" in a sea of ​​photons and neutrinos all-encompassing. Sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years there will be nothing left except neutrinos and photons in the form of extremely long wavelength electromagnetic radiation in an extremely cold, empty universe.

Merely the energy is forever, everlasting, eternal.

Well, a photon isn't an object, but rather an amount. Normal photons get produced by a specific means (electron orbital decay) that always yields specific amounts. But in the case of extreme disintegration, you could not expect all photons to be of such quantum amounts.

And what that theory seems to be missing is the concept of "dark matter/energy". High concentrations of affectance (EMR, including photons of every size) aggregate into dense clouds. If the cloud becomes dense enough, it forms a new black hole. Between all of the black holes, the affectance field keeps gravity functioning such as to draw the black holes together. As they collide, they stand a chance of reproducing our more commonly observed "universe" of stars and planets. Because the universe is actually infinite, there can never be a time when a black hole isn't headed toward another. Once two extremely large black-holes collide, a new "local universe" is born.

So there cannot really be any time when there are no photons and even the loss of matter is only temporary.

James, you should send on or add „to you“ or „for you“, because the current „mainstream“ physicists have a different theory. According to their theory a photon is a particle, a exchange particle for the electromagnetic force. According to your theory a photon „isn't an object, but rather an amount“.

Do you agree with someone saying that even the black holes will disappear „sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years, with the utmost probability after 10^130 years“?
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:22 am

Arminius wrote:James, you should send on or add „to you“ or „for you“, because the current „mainstream“ physicists have a different theory. According to their theory a photon is a particle, a exchange particle for the electromagnetic force. According to your theory a photon „isn't an object, but rather an amount“.

Well, it isn't an issue of "theory" but of ontology. Some people might refer to other people as "objects" (the materialist's perspective). Others would claim that they are not objects, but rather living beings. The language and associated concepts are the only difference.

Current religious physics requires that "particles" be involved in all exchanges of anything (monetizing or quantizing all exchanges). So no matter what is really happening, seemingly out of a fear of "infinity", they refer to all exchanges of gravity, momentum, energy, or whatever as being "carried by particles", as though there were discreet objects involved, which is actually silly. But that is their ontology and easy to prove it to be untrue unless you just define a "particle" as "any small amount".

I am not afraid of infinity, so I have no problem with accepting that exchanges occur in indiscreet amounts that I refer to as "afflates" (Affectance Oblates). And with that ontology, I can explain everything they explain as well as things they cannot explain.

Arminius wrote:Do you agree with someone saying that even the black holes will disappear „sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years, with the utmost probability after 10^130 years“?

No.

It would be extremely, extremely, extremely difficult to cause a black hole to dissipate into space before anything else re-fed it or it ran into another black hole. And even if a black hole actually did manage to totally disintegrate down to a single particle, nearly impossible to get rid of, at that same moment, other black holes would be forming.

But for a black hole to actually dissipate would require an unimaginable amount of space void of anything else whatsoever (including any gravity not of its own). Each galaxy has its own black hole (so they say). There is a HUGE amount of space between those galaxies, yet the stars and planets are all falling INTO the black holes, not radiating out into the extreme open space. If you were to disintegrate ALL of the stars and planets in a galaxy, an extreme "dark matter" cloud would be the result. And as they already have decided, such "dark energy/matter" acts as gravity, thus drawing and holding energy in, resisting the open expanse.

If the open expanse around a black hole was extreme enough that the black hole began dissipating (probably requiring the entirety of the known universe for each black hole), as it lost mass, it would accelerate even faster toward another black hole far away. And the closer it got to another black hole, the slower it could dissipate.

The universe just can't get rid of the buggers.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:11 am

James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:James, you should send on or add „to you“ or „for you“, because the current „mainstream“ physicists have a different theory. According to their theory a photon is a particle, a exchange particle for the electromagnetic force. According to your theory a photon „isn't an object, but rather an amount“.

Well, it isn't an issue of "theory" but of ontology. Some people might refer to other people as "objects" (the materialist's perspective). Others would claim that they are not objects, but rather living beings. The language and associated concepts are the only difference.

You mean photons as living beings? .... :-k

James S Saint wrote:Current religious physics requires that "particles" be involved in all exchanges of anything (monetizing or quantizing all exchanges). So no matter what is really happening, seemingly out of a fear of "infinity", they refer to all exchanges of gravity, momentum, energy, or whatever as being "carried by particles", as though there were discreet objects involved, which is actually silly. But that is their ontology and easy to prove it to be untrue unless you just define a "particle" as "any small amount".

It is true that the modern, especially the current physicists are religious or ideological, that they are "crazy" about particles, especially exchange particles because they are „materialists“. I would prefer if they were more "crazy" about energy ( :) ).

James S Saint wrote:I am not afraid of infinity, so I have no problem with accepting that exchanges occur in indiscreet amounts that I refer to as "afflates" (Affectance Oblates). And with that ontology, I can explain everything they explain as well as things they cannot explain.

Arminius wrote:Do you agree with someone saying that even the black holes will disappear „sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years, with the utmost probability after 10^130 years“?

No.

It would be extremely, extremely, extremely difficult to cause a black hole to dissipate into space before anything else re-fed it or it ran into another black hole.

You know that I mean „dissapear for ever“, do you?

James S Saint wrote:And even if a black hole actually did manage to totally disintegrate down to a single particle, nearly impossible to get rid of, at that same moment, other black holes would be forming.

According to your theory.

James S Saint wrote:But for a black hole to actually dissipate would require an unimaginable amount of space void of anything else whatsoever. Each glaxay has its own black hole (so they say). There is a HUGE amount of space between those galaxies, yet the stars and planets are all falling INTO the black holes, not radiating out into the extreme open space. If you were to disintegrate ALL of the stars and planets in a galaxy, an extreme "dark matter" cloud would be the result. And as they already have decided, such "dark energy/matter" acts as gravity, thus drawing and holding energy in, resisting the open expanse.

„Dark energy“ doesn't act as gravity, but as its contrary.

James S Saint wrote:If the open expanse around a black hole was extreme enough that the black hole began dissipating (probably requiring the entirety of the known universe for each black hole), as it lost mass, it would accelerate even faster toward another black hole far away. And the closer it got to another black hole, the slower it could dissipate.

The universe just can't get rid of the buggers.

It seems so. :)
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:53 am

Arminius wrote:You know that I mean „disappear for ever“, do you?

Then "Hell no".
My theory is that if a single photon is given an unlimited amount of space to travel through, it will eventually spread and, in effect, dissipate into obscure affectance, undetectable. But all photons can never disappear.

Arminius wrote:
James S Saint wrote:And even if a black hole actually did manage to totally disintegrate down to a single particle, nearly impossible to get rid of, at that same moment, other black holes would be forming.

According to your theory.

Logic dictates it.

Arminius wrote:„Dark energy“ doesn't act as gravity, but as its contrary.

If they are calling something "dark matter/energy" and proposing that it has negative mass (thus anti-gravity), they simply have no idea what they are talking about. Why call it "dark-matter" if they really mean "anti-mass"? Someone is confused. Anti-mass is a logical impossibility (anti-matter is a different thing).
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby zinnat » Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:13 pm

James S Saint wrote:No, you are again conflating "potential" with "possibility". Those are two different concepts, but often confused or conflated.

When I say "potential", I am referring to the cause or ability already being present. Nothing has any potential to do anything unless it is already beginning to do it. The concept of "possible" means that something might happen or might not, we don't know. So when I refer to "Potential-to-Affect", I am not speaking of "Possibility-to-Affect", but more "Cause-to-Affect" or "Ability-to-Affect".

An apple hanging on a tree has zero potential for falling, until the stem is cut. Once the stem is cut, the apple has the potential to fall. But an apple hanging on a tree has the possibility of of falling at any time, because I don't know when the stem might get cut.

"Potential" is in reference to the actual immediate situation. "Possibility" is in reference to how much I know of the situation concerning the future (similar to "chance").


James,

It is true that we tend to use possibility and potential almost in the same way and i do not think that even English language sees them much differently.
Having said that, i very well understand and also accept your interpretation of both terms. That is not a issue.
Aristotle also addressed the same issue and gave the same judgement.

James S Saint wrote:So "consciousness", in your ontology isn't allowed until it is precisely defined. And "time" can only have one definition.


I do not have two definitions of time either.

At metaphysical level, it is will and at physical level, firstly, it is time and then matter.
According to me, will, time and non-live mattter are the same things in different densities.

For more clarification, there is no time in the real world. Will transforms itself into physcial matter and one matter into anothe rmatter and time is merely our mental construct to guage that process or delay.
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby zinnat » Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:13 pm

duplicate
Last edited by zinnat on Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby zinnat » Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:13 pm

duplicate
Last edited by zinnat on Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:12 pm

zinnat13 wrote:At metaphysical level, it is will and at physical level, firstly, it is time and then matter.
According to me, will, time and non-live mattter are the same things in different densities.

For more clarification, there is no time in the real world. Will transforms itself into physcial matter and one matter into anothe rmatter and time is merely our mental construct to guage that process or delay.

I don't know what you mean by "the metaphysical level". Metaphysics means "the logic or reasoning beyond the actual existence". Metaphysics is about "why" things occur (logic and/or mathematics and concepts), not "what" is occurring (entities that physically exist).

Time is the difference in change rates. Certainly there is difference in change rates anytime there are changes.

How does will transform itself into physical substance? Why does it?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby zinnat » Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:08 pm

James S Saint wrote:
zinnat13 wrote:At metaphysical level, it is will and at physical level, firstly, it is time and then matter.
According to me, will, time and non-live mattter are the same things in different densities.

For more clarification, there is no time in the real world. Will transforms itself into physcial matter and one matter into anothe rmatter and time is merely our mental construct to guage that process or delay.

I don't know what you mean by "the metaphysical level". Metaphysics means "the logic or reasoning beyond the actual existence". Metaphysics is about "why" things occur (logic and/or mathematics and concepts), not "what" is occurring (entities that physically exist).

Time is the difference in change rates. Certainly there is difference in change rates anytime there are changes.

How does will transform itself into physical substance? Why does it?


My understanding of Metaphysica is exactly the same as you put it -
At the level of concept/logic and beyond being physical.

James, as i see it, there is not much difference between physics and metaphysics. Metaphysics is nothing but subtle physics.
The difference is only in quantity, not quality. It is merely our comprehending capability that distinguish the two, otherwise, they are still the same.

The same is the relation of will and matter. Will is eternal, a perpetual energy. So, after once saperated from consciusness and coming into action, it cannot be stopped ever, but can controlled and guided only.

Thus, it keeps running, manifesting more and more of itself and creating its spread. Then, after some time, as the density of will increases in this spread, it has no option but to interact itself and create more and more complex and differnt wills other than just to exist. This leads to will to change. Then this will to change becomes even more complex and the process goes on, untill this complexity becomes a density and enters in the zone, which we call physical.

As far as the consciousness is concern, in simple words, it is the beholder of the willingness. It is also eternal (no starting, no end). At one time, willingness was inherited in the consciousnes as a potential. But, from the moment of Let there be light, the potential of expressing itself (will to exist) materialized and consciousness started willing.

Till the moment, the consciousness had only will to exist, it was fine. It was the stage of almost unentropy, with a very small about of negativity, just enough to get the things going. But, fortunately or unfortunately, it could have not remain so and the negativity increased continuously, in the form of will of change, instead of stopping at will to exist only.

So, at last, being too negative to remain with the big positive particle, some portion of the consciousness broke away from the mother particle and the total willingness of that isolated consciousness spread in the ambient. The willingness saperated itself from consciousness, leaving the particles of consciousness completely pure, void of any willing. The remaining big Mother particle is the Ultimate God, as Vedanta and Sufism and other schools describe it.

My guess is that this consciousness cannot be deducted further. Though, i am not sure and it is also possible that the quality of sensing or feeling may be at its roots, in the same way the quality of doingness is behind the will.

Thus, we have the cosmos made of two different qualities, feeling and doing, acting/affecting and witnessing.
That is precisely the point where i differ from AO as it relies only on affectance, not its witness.

Now, those particles of pure consciusness tend to roam in the ocean of will, till they found some form of matter that is consciousness-ready. Then they interact with it and create life. These life forms can be formed in different will densitiy zones and that creates humans like us, Deities and other Devine entities.

Consciousness, at its purest form, does not do anything but just witness what happens around it. It can feel, which is its default nature, and due to that that nature, it always gets attracted towards the most intensified will, which any particular live-form use to have at any given moment.

Time is merely a measurement of change/delay, which we tend to conceptulize for our conveneience and has no real existence in this creation. It is the same relevence as the kilogram use to have for weight.

with love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:05 pm

zinnat13 wrote:As far as the consciousness is concern, in simple words, it is the beholder of the willingness. It is also eternal (no starting, no end). At one time, willingness was inherited in the consciousnes as a potential. But, from the moment of Let there be light, the potential of expressing itself (will to exist) materialized and consciousness started willing.

That won't really cut it as a definition. It would be like defining an apple as "that which holds apple juice", making even glass jars into apples.

What is it that distinguishes consciousness from every other kind of thing? If I see or think of something, how do I know if what I am thinking of is "consciousness" rather than something else?

My own definition is;
Consciousness ≡ Remote recognition


But what is yours?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:01 pm

James S Saint wrote:But all photons can never disappear.

James, I did not say that photons will disappear, but that black holes will disappear:

Arminius wrote:Sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years, with the utmost probability after 10^130 years, there will be nothing left except neutrinos and photons in the form of extremely long wavelength electromagnetic radiation in an extremely cold, empty universe.

=> #
Arminius wrote:Do you agree with someone saying that even the black holes will disappear „sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years, with the utmost probability after 10^130 years“?

=> #
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Thu Jun 05, 2014 4:33 am

Arminius wrote:
James S Saint wrote:But all photons can never disappear.

James, I did not say that photons will disappear, but that black holes will disappear

    Arminius wrote:What do you think about the theorem: "The photon is an everlasting phenomenon"?
    James S Saint wrote:So there cannot really be any time when there are no photons and even the loss of matter is only temporary.

    Arminius wrote:Do you agree with someone saying that even the black holes will disappear „sometime between 10^80 and 10^130 years, with the utmost probability after 10^130 years“?
    James S Saint wrote:No.

    It would be extremely, extremely, extremely difficult to cause a black hole to dissipate into space before anything else re-fed it or it ran into another black hole.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Thu Jun 05, 2014 4:07 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:
James S Saint wrote:But all photons can never disappear.

James, I did not say that photons will disappear, but that black holes will disappear ....

Arminius wrote:What do you think about the theorem: "The photon is an everlasting phenomenon"?

So: I did not say that photons will disappear. I think the photons will not disappear. Contrariwise: Photons are an everlasting phenomenon.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Universe and Time

Postby zinnat » Fri Jun 06, 2014 6:28 pm

James S Saint wrote:
zinnat13 wrote:As far as the consciousness is concern, in simple words, it is the beholder of the willingness. It is also eternal (no starting, no end). At one time, willingness was inherited in the consciousnes as a potential. But, from the moment of Let there be light, the potential of expressing itself (will to exist) materialized and consciousness started willing.

That won't really cut it as a definition. It would be like defining an apple as "that which holds apple juice", making even glass jars into apples.

What is it that distinguishes consciousness from every other kind of thing? If I see or think of something, how do I know if what I am thinking of is "consciousness" rather than something else?

My own definition is;
Consciousness ≡ Remote recognition


But what is yours?


James,

A glass of jar may have apple juice in it but that jar does not inherit apple juice by default, but may be filled of million other things.
But, that is not in the case of consciousness and will as they are default allies. It is the question of inheritness.
A will cannot attach to anything else and so the consciousness is.

Consciousness = being witness, sensing and feeling all that what is happening around it.

with love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Fri Jun 06, 2014 6:57 pm

Are you saying that an electron or atom has consciousness?
If not, what is the difference?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Sat Jun 07, 2014 8:43 pm

James, I am refering to your thread called "RM: Affectance Ontology Fundamentals":

JSS wrote:Although a great deal more detail can be explained, the Affectance Ontology fundamentals translated into common physics terms are as follows;

1.) By declared definition, Existence is that which has affect.
a) Detectable Empiricism - We decide that something exists only when we detect that something is having affect. All of our senses function based on the affect that something else has upon them. We use equipment to increase our sensory ability, but still if nothing affects the equipment in any way, we declare that nothing was there.
b) Common Usage - In reality, people are already using the word "exist" to mean this definition. They often never think about it, but in every case, the person really means that something having existence means that it has the potential to affect something; be seen, touched, smelled, or detected in some way even if not already detected.
c) Support from Science - Science concluded long ago that in reality all existing things have at least some minuscule affect on all other things through chains of events.
d) Rational Relevance - If something has truly no affect on anything whatsoever, we really don't care if it exists in any other sense. We can propose trillions of things that might exist but don't have affect. What would be the point? It would be a waste of mind time. 2.) An affect can only derive from the potential-to-affect (to alter or to change), PtA, of another separate or distinguished affect.
3.) Absolute zero difference, infinite homogeneity, in any qualia cannot exist.
a) Absolute infinity cannot exist simply because by definition more can always be added.
b) Absolute zero is merely one divided by absolute infinity and thus cannot exist either.
4.) Due to the above, in all adjacent locations, the potential for affect cannot be infinitely identical.
5.) Because the potential to affect is not identical anywhere, actualization of affect takes place everywhere.
6.) As affect occurs between adjacent potentials, waves of affect propagate randomly in both direction and magnitude.
7.) When propagating waves of affect act upon the same point, their affects are added.
8.) The time required for affects to add to each other cannot be absolute zero.
9.) Due to that limited rate of adding affects, when affects merge in such a way as to require more than an infinite change rate, the affects continue to attempt adding at the same location while any additional propagating affect must wait for time to pass. - "Inertia".
10.) A clump of affectance noise forms around a point of inertia due to extended delays and is supported only by affectance leaving the volume at an equal rate as entering it forming a stable "Particle" – a “standing wave” of noise.
11.) When the ambient affectance density of a particle increases, the particle cannot disseminate at the same rate as it is accumulating, so the particle grows.
12.) If the ambient affectance noise is denser on one side of a particle than the opposite, the center of the clump of noise shifts toward the more dense affectance field. The "particle" moves or relocates – "Particle Motion".
13.) When the center of the noise shifts, the affects that were headed in the direction of motion remain within the particle of noise longer than others.
14.) Because the affectance within the clump of noise has more affectance heading in the direction of the particle, the particle continues heading in that direction even if the ambient affectance is returned to an even ambiance – “Momentum”.
15.) Because each particle is concentrating affectance and thus creating a higher density field of noise surrounding it, particles migrate toward each other while gaining momentum – “Gravity”.
16.) When particles approach each other, they share their noise causing the smaller to become slightly larger.
17.) When the clumps of noise get too close, they unite such as to form a volume that will sustain the maximum amount of noise containing more than one center of congested noise – the "Strong Force".
18.) When the waves of affectance noise that form a particle happen to be more substantially waves of increasing potential rather than decreasing, a "Positive Particle" is formed, a "particle with positive Electric Potential".
19.) Positive noise delays additional positive noise, adding to the positive noise in the area while local negative noise cancels the positive delays resulting in negative waves speeding through the area rather than being delayed – "Particle Charge Stability".
20.) When a charged particle is in the field of noise that is creating a close opposite charge particle, the waves within the particle that happen to be headed toward the opposing particle are partially relieved of their inertial constraint and thus move more freely toward the opposing particle.
21.) As the inner waves of a charged particle move more freely in one direction, they inherently shift the center of the noise toward the opposing particle while also establishing momentum in that same direction – "Charged Particle Attraction".
22.) When a strongly negative wave encounters a strongly positive wave, their merging requires that each wave change at a greater than infinite rate creating a point of inertia, a delay in propagation.
23.) During the delay caused by the merging of opposite polarity the particles associated with the strong waves continue to absorb waves of their own polarity and thus remain stable charged particles that continue to deliver strong waves.
24.) When a small negative particle approaches a larger positive particle, the smaller particle grows asymmetrically with it greater increasing waves closer to the larger positive particle.
25.) The stronger negative waves encountering the larger particle's large positive waves create many incidences of points of inertia that delay the entire smaller negative particle to the point of not allowing it to get closer to the positive before veering off to a side, orbiting the larger positive particle – "Electroweak Force".
26.) As a wave of affect enters a region of greater noise, getting delayed more, the trailing edge of the wave begins to catch up to the leading edge compressing the entire wave.
27.) A compressed wave stores its energy potential within a smaller volume yielding a greater affect within the same propagating time frame as a non-compressed wave.
28.) Compressed waves passing into a charged particle have greater affect upon a particle causing the particle to shift more greatly into the oncoming wave – "Magnetic Induction".
29.) A circling charged particle creates a spiraling compressed ("magnetic") wave extending outward from the center of the circle.
30.) The spiraling compression wave has a clockwise spiral above the flat plane of circulation and a counterclockwise spiral below.
31.) If two circling charged particles are close by, parallel, and circling in the same direction, the spirals from each causes the other to veer its orbit closer to the other – "Magnetic Attraction".
32.) If two circling charged particles are close by, parallel, and circling in opposite directions, they each cause the other to veer its orbit away from the other – "Magnetic Repulsion".
33.) Because the spirals extending from the circling charges have the opposite direction of spiral above from below, another circling charged particle will experience magnetic attraction on one side or magnetic repulsion on the other side – "North and South Magnetic Polarity".

Each of those fundamentals have an equivalent within each and every field of study.

Have you get this 33 "fundamentals" from (a) your computer experiments, or (b) other experiments, or (c) no experiments?
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Universe and Time

Postby James S Saint » Sun Jun 08, 2014 12:17 am

Arminius wrote:Have you get this 33 "fundamentals" from (a) your computer experiments, or (b) other experiments, or (c) no experiments?

The first 8 are issues of definitional logic. From those, I created a program in a small PC from which I could witness the rest of them as consequences, although the PC was too small to have flows of electrons circling such as to get a clear picture of the magnetics effects toward the end of that list.

My first display mechanism was merely the numerical readout from an Excel program showing a single plane slice through a cubic metaspace and looked something like this;
Image

Then I cleaned it up a bit so that I could more clearly see the "clumps" that were forming and added a tracker program (the circles) to follow the formed particles;
Image

Then cleaned it up more where I could watch interaction between particles yielding a series of frames. I only took snapshots of the following three frames out of about 35. The upper blue curve is a graph of the distance between the identical changed-particles as the one on the right was thrown toward the other (center), in a 3D space.
ImageImageImage


The motion within the metaspace was actually 3D, so all you see in those snapshots is the degree of affectance associated with the one plane cutting through the center of the space. The center particle ended up moving slightly forward and down while the upper right particle (thrown at the center particle) swerved across the top of the center particle and veered upward and back. Those shots weren't supposed to be proof of anything in themselves. I had watched very many sequences. I wasn't concerned at that time about public display, but rather seeing if the original logic actually lead to our known physical laws, which they did.


Later I got inspired to create a program for people to play with the whole thing and prove it all for themselves, but the display turned out to be an issue. I started to develop a program showing the affectance, not as numbers but as small colored specs, "afflates" (usually 100,000 or so "Affectance Oblates", "afflates" for short).

I built the following program as a platform (showing over 1,000,000 "afflates") and was thinking that I could build onto it in order to get a public tool where people could play with the variable, see the programming, and prove it all as well as many other things for themselves (rather than everyone having to take someone else's word).

Image

But that turned out to be just too much for a small PC unless you are a serious expert programmer with the right support files (which I didn't have). So I tried for a while to see if there was a way to get the program to make video files where you could see the actual video motion, but without the video support files, the whole thing became just way, way to convoluted and slow to be of any realistic good.

The following are a few shots as I was playing with different video methods (displaying the cloud of affectance within the chamber);

Image
Image
Image
Image

Image

Image
Image
Image


And I made this little clip just as a morphed series of snapshots (not having the video support files necessary) showing a particle forming from a cloud by itself. It forms and stabilizing pretty quickly;
Image


But I finally gave up on that effort simply because it was getting way to impractical to serve its purpose. And more recently finally figured out a way to make that same program better, but it is still a monumental task and I still don't have the proper computer support. So I have just been making short animation clips for sake of explanation a few things online. They are strictly for explanation purposes. None of them show the reality of it as it could be seen.

The fundamental program isn't that complicated. It just takes a whole lot of memory and processing time and then seriously needs a good video display mechanism so that the relevant results can be easily identified and seen without having to analyze data.

I feel like Einstein having to invent and prove the oscilloscope merely to explain his relativity theory.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Science, Technology, and Math



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users