Quote:Arcades said: potential also prevents objects from being in two places at the same time
And yet the famous Double Slit Experiment seems to indicate that a photon CAN be in two places at the same time, or have scientists misinterpreted their observations?
@Arcades,
An excerpt from Section one -- "the arx" : the postulation of a universe. :.....The temporal collective includes all conscious beings , but humans are at the forefront of the explosion so to speak . An indication of this being our incomparable capacity for determining qualitative factors. The very complexity of this capacity defines us from other objects . It is what temporality is- qualitative determination of substantivity , and substantivity in an overarching state of unequivocal balance. Logical we could determine no such equilibrium if we were not correspondingly placed in the release of the big bang itself .
We determine the qualitative make up of reality, and react to discovery in the way of more finite material determinacy . Every act of the human object , regardless of how we colour it emotionally , sociologically, geologically , is effectively describable as material qualitative determination . This is sufficient for describing the overall act of human existence.
Possessing this high capacity is significant. It is a caption for our physical state, and the presiding physical state of the so-called universe, of the ongoing big bang release; what this capacity reflects is the most effective part of the blast. Materially speaking , the most dynamic qualitative determination comes from the human object, as is the epicentre of implosion, and is the epicentre of explosion, the only point from where a complete rational history of explosion can be possessed from , meaning that if we were somewhere random in the release we would not be able to possess such a symmetrical concept of construction and deconstruction mechanistically , and we would not be able to determine equilibrial expansion of space; and most poignantly, we would not be able to determine a logical history of matter if were not centrical, basal , in reference to the entailing cosmic release that we use to define reality.
The perception of inclusion is not ultimately random nor acrossboard
But is the reverberant conclusion axiality, meaning that if you are not axial you are not self-determinable, therefore you would have no concept of reality being , much less where in it you exactly stand: much like the objects of the universe that we observe as being more puristically causal than organic objects .
The perception of the Earth orbiting the sun is a retrograde perspective . Even though it would be merely analogic, we can logically say that all things move in " one direction", our analogic plane , and that the fact of dimensional shape and spatial relativity are natural cancellations of any curvature that we might determine in the pathing of objects, and the presentation of objects themselves..........
Continuing in this same line of reasoning , our ideas and thoughts are temporal interpretations of material relativity , and are absolutely causal ; that would mean that , beyond the fact of the interpretation , there is a real effect materially being imputed to the thinker, which would mean that for every thought there is a corresponding fact in the real universe, meaning that every thought you have is a picture of an occurrence somewhere else in another analog. There is no way we can ideate something that is not occuring in the nonium ; given the the "universe has no relative density , we can't actually "think outside the box ".
There is no way that you can think ,no possibility , no image , no thought , that is not physically represented in the nonium( the universe). For us to think that we can ideate something that does not occur is ludicrous, that is somehow hypothetical is ludicrous, there is no way that a probability can be afforded to us from outside. There is no outside . If you think the possibility, the potential of that possibility's factuality must be capable in the universe , absolutely capable , as is indicated by you thinking it.
........... It became apparent to me in the third week of May two thousand and four that the universe was, periodically viewed, inexplicably specific in terms of it's subset forms- real objects. I immediately bypassed traditional thinking, opting alternately for the gauging of my base philosophy at the time, which was : time itself shares a singular constructive sequence with the physicality of objects, thus time could never manifest the infinity it connotates,
because infinity would have to rationally involve the universe going through stages where objects were not involved, or so far evolved that objects would not be able to express time how we know it to be, therefore most of the scientific information about the universe was false, or all of it was false, and that the prevailing scientific view was, as I had suspected for exactly eight months, semi-empirical ............
......The specificity of objects must be attributed to a source that has more physical capacity than had the big-bag because of the corresponding state of matter to the non-spatial incrementality of the release. Factoring the element of an inautonomous universe in this consideration, such high intensity of potential at the very outset seemed rather incorrespondent to the concept of beginning that is generally held. Maintaining that the big-bang is a factual representation to a sufficient degree, and carefully mining scientific data on the universe's physical development, and expansion correlatively, a confident assumption of our big-bang being the most recent in a series of categorical events was now appopriate, a series whose context is constructionally innate with our analog (our universe) , meaning that there is a cycle at work, and the categorical event that marks its restart, and several trillions of the most previous restarts, now is a banging point of energy, but it had to build up to this type of real expression.....
An excerpt from "Modus" section three of the book "The Alchahest" by Arcades Cinza : ......Agreeing that thought can be define as physiological, geological, lets now put temporality in a cosmological context, asking the question : what is the structural correspondence of a subconscious portion of the cognitive condition , to the Make up of the cosmos as a temporal effect, and to the conduct of our analog as a more objective analysis of our state in reality. In describing non-central quanta we must first note the declension from the cosmic energetic base to sci (the name that I have given to the quanta that defines the previously postulated noncentralent sphere that most directly underscores our apparent cosmologic).
The segway to the sci platform is infinitely spectrumed, many sub-levels that move further away from spatial and nonspatial definitive, until we get to the noncentralent quanta, and this is why we can reach the sci.
We have reached an important point here in terms of how consciousness is set up materially, in a cosmological context .
As a determinably real effect, multiplicity is innate with causal effect. We have no account of causality until the breaking of symmetry that is said to have caused the release of a said singular point of infinite energetic density into "multiples". Causal effect is the objective imperative of multiplicity, there is no coherence of causality without the fact of relative density, and vice versa .
You cannot imagine a singular object without defining it with the grading of being " in universe", as if you automatically answer the question "where is this object" . When you imagine a singular object your intent categorically prevents you from cohering the singular object simultaneously as a containing context( a pretextive university). Therefore all thought is subject to a superimposition of a spatial contextive, which is why we say I am, or we are, or the opposite of these statements, or in languages that do not have a representation for am, nor I, the distinguishment of descriptivity and demonstration in all linguistic attempts.
You literally cannot perform the cognitive processing of imagining an object inherently overt in being outside of a universe system , why ? This is the door of the unconscious, corresponded cognitively as the superimposition of a pretextual spatial resonance; however, materially defined , it is the operations of the strong force , and the weak force in the atoms that comprise the human anatomy , which of course are comprised of carrier particles that are dominant over shorter distances than gravity and the electromagnetic force, the postulated explicators of temporality, the conscious mind.
The large percentage of the material sequence, the smaller percentage of which equals thought, temporality , therefore thought , temporality, though to us an autonomous effect in definition, is part of a bigger material sequence that we misdetermine to be split references in the nomers of voluntary and involuntary consciousnesses.
We being able to temporally determine multiplicity explicates the actual intent of human purpose, which can only be the empiricization of causal effect, which requires us to gain material control over all the causal operations taking place in the universe and ultimately beyond the universe , this might look like expansion of the race for some psych-social reasons , but ultimately there are no such things , only the maintenance of the structural pretexts of actual reality. What we determine for ourselves as being our psychological, our social , geographical communications throughout our history is objectively energetic preparation and sortation of collective human potential ........
When I express the existence of an ultimate symmetry, that is not the long classic dimensionalable context that gives premise to dimensionization as the only description of physical consistence that can be allowed for reality, one of the things that comes to mind is the differentiality that we see in the universe.
If no two objects in the universe can be exactly the same, then how can one speak of underlying grand uniformity? The answer begins with the fact of a rigidly uniform principle- Causality.
There is no causality particle, that when attached actuates the causal behaviour of objects. In a substantive analog(our universe), having no analogic physical representation means that causality's unanalogic representation(for if what appears like the prime principle governing our reality is insubstantiate within the parameters of our usual context there has to be more) pre-dates not just energy, but the entire existencive platform of substantivity, meaning that it indicates a different "visceral substantive Consistence".
There are no ghosts in the universe. Everything must be engagable. If we can judge the operation of causality here , without a true physical representation of it here , then what we are being shown is how exactly underlying symmetry is "proximally relative " to our overt three dimensional symmetry. This proximality escapes our present prepositonal standardization .
Let's turn to the structure of physical objects. We see invariability . The coherent presentation of any physical unit(object) in existence has to follow the format of layers and systematic synergy to maintain an objects coherence in reality. Layers go from innermost to outermost(I say this for we have no cognitive capacity to judge that largeness is a constructional starting point) and this comes with the interpretation of size and distance being factual.
Now centrality deals with the axiality of the layers, from where gravity, angular momentum, momentum, and the physical rudiments of the conservation laws are calculated. This centrality is obvious. It is the smallest point of the object from where equilateral proportion of density, and all physical proportionality emanates.
The fact of this type of objective outlay shows that centrality itself Is Consequent to energy, thus not a dimensional invariability.
At the smallest most central point of any object is not a fact of the idea that we think we really observe, but rather the sub-planck scale, seeming quite an uncausal place, a place of obfuscated representations of so-called matter and time, distance and size .
As causality represents "other substantive symmetry", and the material construction and behaviour of objects depend on centrality so definitively in expressing these effects of causality, our perceptions of size and distance lead us not to the smallest point, but to the edge of our symmetry. Underlying symmetry is thus not to be seen as being beyond the smallest point, nor the largest, but just beyond our prepositional frame of reference at the moment.
The Cinza Universe: a beginning view of the Arx.
The Basic layout of the Nonium( the universe)
Noncentralent quanta is what underscore the cosmos, lying just beyond Planck scale.
These quantas are simple inversions of our Ideal central cosmic particle in concept. The circumference is at the centre, and vice versa. We have inferred this from our observation of the material requirements for cosmic operations, which is epitomized in centrality.
This underlying sphere is operative. That can be deduced from the fact that the cosmos is based in motivity, even if noncentralent operancy is not exactly how the cosmos operates .
This entire medium as a whole is a singularity. Noncentralent quanta operating means that they are contributive to singularity. Now if they were not operative, then they would have achieved singularity individually. A single noncentral quanta , if it could exist by itself, would be intrinsically singular. But they do not. Inferring from the layout of the cosmos, specifically the capacity for there to be multiple examples of cause and effect taking place simultaneously , so far apart to be beyond each others event horizon it can be said that this medium(the consymmetric sphere I call it) indicates a capacity that inherently exceeds time, and space, and matter as we have come to know it.
When the sci(consymmetric quanta ) is operating it has to accomplish the motion. Between point A and point B of the motion has to be, though we cannot judge duration as time, accounted for, those degrees, or precision, have to represent themselves as composite effects in order to be true to the system,and to themselves. Each of these precisions, as they are being presented, becomes a perspective of reflection for the entire consymmetric medium, and thus the visceralization of an analog is created, therefore we are one precision determinative, one of the lowest degrees that there can be, and therefore relative precisions must be experiencing composite relatives of our universe of our cosmos, each only slightly dissimilar. The important thing to remember is the fact of a complete nonspatial interpretive on those
precisions. Of course we can't tell where on this remarkable sequence we are. It must represent sequencelikeness, this is the most basic partitioning of analogs. Focus on this operation of which I am speaking. It cannot be the ultimate state because there is no logical premise for an operating original state. We now come to the realization that the noncentralent medium is itself an analog, a prime analog , our analog is a subprime analog. We are the result of the reflection of one sci precision among an infinite number of scis , that are the result of an infinite number of precisions. All these precisions being just one sci, then all these scis being the scope of the medium: what we have here is an unimaginable amount of relative universes(analogs). All appearing dependent.
The underlying symmetry of consymmetry(the noncentralent medium) is what I call obsymmetry. Where consymmetry is the is a reduction of relativity due to there being no centrality . A finite separateness of quanta is illogical to assume . I do not mean particle to particle having no "space" between, but that a coherence of separateness does not begin even.
The entire medium is defined by a specific whole unity. As we go lower and lower to the ultimate medium you will find that logic becomes more and more physically explicit.
The entirety of all scis is singularity(which is why cosmic object's so-called seperateness is overarched by the cosmic totality). There is prime singularity, and subprime singularity. The singularity that is used to define cosmic units such as particles an objects is subprime singularity. It requires us to ignore the overarching totality concessionally.
There is not a logical premise for "a" singularity, but rather the absolute definition and necessity for all possible subprime singularities structurally, represented by the precision analogs. But understand this: their structural dependence subtracts their autonomy, for there is no logical premise for being or not being, therefore their analogicality maintains logic. The prime singularity, consymmetry, is the logically explicit structure. To say that "this is singularity" is a post hoc description. consymmetry is intrinsic beyond our cosmically laden descriptivity .
Where singularity is a well defined structive , we see where invariability indicates a vaster capacity as we are in the process of proving singularity's lack of ultimacy. While consymmetric quanta merely contributes to an overall inherent singularity, obsymmetric quanta achieves singularity because the medium is immediately something more capacitous, more invariable than singularity. Focus on the train of logic here: the obsymmetric quanta intrinsically achieving singularity proves that singularity is not ultimate, and is merely a necessary point in ultimate logicalization from our perspective, to be immediately judged as underscored once properly discovered.
Unlike the consymmetric quanta obsymmetric quanta is nonsequential. When one "motions" the following quanta in the "link" does not react consequently, nor subsequently. It is a nontransitional elementation because the whole medium denotes a lack of possibility, and probability, for invariability is prior to these concepts physically, and post aswell(look into that fact). In obsymmetry possibility and probability never actually occurs. What we are seeing here is the physical explication of logic.
Even though they are not consequent or subsequent there is still defineable operatIon here.
We come now to the ultimate state . What is the logical premise for invariability ? There is none .
Prior to invariability there is the negation of operation, a medium that is inherently prime logic.
Reality starting or not starting, ending or not ending, is based on our cosmic symmetry. We are now logically three parts removed from space, time, and matter.
To say that the prime logic state is negatory is again post hoc description. Therefore I assumed for it the name nonium.
What made it? It was not made . It inherently negates operance, therefore it was not made. Here is where we divert from the in and of itself nonsense.
There is no time for it to have been made in, no space for it to have been made in or as. We must avoid thinking of it as some sort of superimposition also.
There are quanta forms to this medium, whose form is inherently the "negation" of beingness and nonbeingness, as we can now begin to see, for we have extrapolated the visceral premises of these concepts down through the symmetries without illogical steps to find ourselves here at the prime logic state. Ultimacy has to include all possibility, all invariability, all nonpossibility, all variability represented as analogs; and the underscoring rationale is the negation of all things, and all nonthings being actual. Basically there is no logical basis for an existent reality construct.
The ultimate state remains prime-logically "negatory". So we see where analogs, prime and subprime, are perforce, but not resonant actually.
An example: two of these quantas put together create a discord( be careful here. Remember that we have removed positional relativity, and sequentiality therefore
Operation is gone)that is not operation, but it creates the first prime analog-obsymmetry.To be of course- the logical physical explication of invariability.
In me saying this you might ask when, but analogs never actually occur- so we can't say it had started, or will start, or is now. See how the factuality of this is logically supreme to nonspatial notions of an out of nowhere materialization
of energy, and thus the beginning of a reality that is now what we term as ongoing.
Only the nonium prime logic state 'is' per se . One thing here at the end. There is no premise for cosmic symmetry being the upper most level. There is an infinity of prime analogs above us.
The Universe is a vacuum.
This vacuum sucks and blows to and fro.
From form, to faculty.
As above, so below.
It's evolution on a non-human level is: Dark Matter > Form > Light Matter.
It's evolution on a human level is: Ignorance > Information > Intelligence.
The human experience consists of both "darkness" and "light", much like the Universe consisted of darkness and light. When we live in life, we call it on a metaphysical level of language "enlightenment". When we live in darkness, we call it on a metaphysical level of language "blind".
The Universe could not be, when it was in "darkness", as the Universe's early stages were blind to its creation's purpose. The Universe sat and did nothing with itself for billions of years, much like how an ignorant person sits and does nothing for a very long time, then finally both, the human being and the Universe become "enlightened" and "of light", as objects/concepts can be seen by the Universe, and objects/concepts can be seen by the human mind.
The human experience is us experiencing the Universe's evolution from beginning to end - we are all evolving and expanding like the Universe, just no in the same way; and not on the same scale.
The human body contains an electromagnetic wave much like the planets in the solar system. The human body is not limited to earthly circumstances - it is connected to unearthly structures. The brain we have can recognize data outside of our planet, which is to say that our brain is not earthly - it came from the Universe.
The chemicals that make us human; that create dreams and visions? Produced by no other than the amoeba.
The star is the male spirit of the Universe.
The black hole is the female spirit of the Universe.
The star/The male live life externally; giving life internally.
The black hole/The female live life internally; giving life externally.
There is also a scaled version of the star/male and black hole/female on a planet level: volcano/male and soil/female.
