2
   

The New Mathematic Extended

 
 
Arcades
 
Reply Sun 8 Jun, 2014 12:50 pm

We perceive time, regardless of how we choose to scientiically or philosophically characterize the perceived effect itself- we perceive, and the perceiving is a physical process therfore causal in all cases if we allow the separation of logic that is the acceptance of the character of causal acts defining the effect of the state of continuous presence, meaning that notions of past and future are not experienceable,but only perceived in states that can only be described as presences, therefore , in time, only material relative, rather than possible or probable or ever stative. I put it forward to you the future and the past are not mere linear descernments of point along the causal sequence line as we characterize with the socalled descriptivity of causal acts ,but, to the most definite temporal comprehense- presence,relative noncentralent spatiality that is always there "materially ,but reachable. Only when the "organics" think of it so to speak,meaning that the material elements of thought-elementary particles systemize dynamicer than neurochemistry can relay pro-effect , which I can ratio-intend to the magnetudinal divide between the force strength between the strong force and the electromagnetic force, keeping in mind that photons are the most overt conveyors of the neural systematic (the strong force "is" stronger than the electromagnetic force per se ,but how, and this how is the comparative fixations of material presentation in spacetime of the carrier particles,also the manifest physical form of the particles are dictated by fixation). I could detail how isospin cuts through the notion of centralent physical points being nothing more than an effect of the aforementioned ratioa-intent , but save that for now I take it to the direction of mathematics instead. The measurement of physical space and the the temporal increase or decrease of numericable factors are both processes contexted within the parameters of the causal sequence,performed per se by the neural systemic . Mathematics then,given foundation of the aforementioned ratio-intent,must assume the augmentation of inherent spatial factotum, described in an alternate slate of symbolism that is not merely analog representations of numeric valuation and capacity. With this will come a complexer manipulation capacity for the strong force and the strong force range.but it must be understood that mathematics is causal, along linearly the casual sequency of the universe,perceived classically,therefore lacking complete, unhindered, physical(neural ) systematics to take us any further into the universe as organics.
Our our material organization within reality shows us three dimensions, so its not a matter of three being real or a number of dimensions being true, but to begin to understand our analogical presentation not as a compromised view but as an accurate view, even though you might think that i pointed out a flaw, I actually pointed out an accuracy.
We had been seeing three dimensions because we were supposed to , and now we are seeing an analog university because it is as unavoidable as the principle of the flat causality we once perceived.
length, width , density , and time are not different factors except in our analog.
The axis of our analog , the one necessity that holds every premise together, is centrality. I can cite two types: coordinate centrality - the centrality of any object from where angular momentum, momentum, gravitational proportion is adjudge; the centrality of a given distance- for point A to make sense point b must provide a central point for both and does so invariably.These might seem different but it is merely how the analog presents substance in time as directed above. Time does not have a real centrality, we once held that the presence was the central point for the past- present- future construct, but in absolute physics this is not so. Time is the only facet of the analog-humana that holds no centrality ,we can' t cognitively construct the centre of a moment. The material valuation for a moment of time in the real universe inherently dissolves the centrality premise, physicalizing time, via the understanding of the operation of the nueral systematic within the context of causality lying within the new mathematical foundation. The uncertainty principle ,and our inability to observe the planck scale "directly" is physical evidence of this. We measure in time , not energetic negation ,because the new mathematic is new and an official first equation has not yet been created to subvert the congnitive that is time.
Materially we must noncentralize centralent expectation about three dimensionality. the physical complex that equals time as a neural interpretation is what new math must overcome. With this we can re-interpret motional direction and intent, for the so-called presentation in and the traversal of space by any given object;and for the socalled construction and deconstruction of objects which is totally dependent on the state and motional intent of objects,which in turn equals state. we perceive this as occurring in time,and that is like the brick wall around our potential as organics.
It begins with point particles which are said to be of no dimension,and their isobaric spin- the lowest three dimensional elementation of the neural systematic, my postulation is that there is no such thing as direction, for it is tied to notions of centrality to begin with, and that the analog is underlied by a single subenergetic intent that sees the entirety of the analog humana "one linearity",meaning that , if we are to use three dimensional terminology , all the universe is set to one direction, and that physical facts such as construction and deconstruction, the spatial relativity of objects in space, denote a singularity of energetic intent that accurately escapes three dimensional interpretation
Think of two cars on two parallel lanes travelling , they will continue forever without collision,put in our new context, the capacity of the real universe to have objects collide therefore construct or deconstruct into smaller or larger objects shows a singular pathing ,or planing.a sub energetic plane where size and distance are not logical aspects,for points lose their comunicativity- they are incapable of being of size , or cohering distance,which are former-universe aspects that depended on centrality primarily. these sub energetic points that make up space time fabric is called sci.with there centres being their perimeters and their perimeters being their centres.that is the basic premise.what is their shape? what are they made of? where are they in relation to the analog humana? what is there energy ? first they cant be categorized in shape? they dont have shape per se,(this is not an elusion to calabi space which requires there to be dimensions)the innate introversion of centre and perimeter leaves them unable to achieve three dimensional actually, therefore they are introverts of three dimensional functionality- the construction and maintainance of length width and density,time ,which would make them----faster than time, how so? Simple. The foundations of our perceptions , elementary particles, are absolutely categorized in reality through isospin, which is impinged upon energetic state, therefore to be faster than time you must find the relative adjunctions to energetic propogation(I don't like saying faster than time because it is merely three dimensional terminology trying to present a new scope);what is the main function of energy? Motivity, and the possibility to construction and deconstruction,to do this each elementary particles must be able to communicate, and what is the matter of elementary communication, the nature of units of energy, unity as a logic requires units , then logically a unit per se is founded on that units inherent capacity for unity, but what about a notive of inherent energetic singularity, what about a "unit " that is incapable of unity, for there is no need nor the plane to do it- introverted centrality equals inherently achieved energetic singularity: the unity that parts of energy require to do more, or less, is precluded, and the doing of more or less is also precluded from.
We can reach it. The logic of the unit details it for three dimensional inclusion perfectly - all that we know of units shows us unitence subject to causality ,or we could just say that a particle is a particle and its physical inherencies in reality is of autonomous definition, meaning that a particle is not a unit of reality subjected to extrotemporal definition, which is describing the category that lies above the category of idiosyncratic characteristics of specific particles, such as the neutron will do this under this condition, while a quark will do that under the same condition based on physical characteristics. To have these any characteristics a particle must be causative, included in reality, therefore factually a unit of reality, therefore a real unit is defined by an inherent capacity for cohesion with the rest of reality.
And we have to see that energy underpins the very construct of not just all particles ,but what is presently termed as spacetime aswell . Can energy be broken down to units? Yes because it displays proportion and gradation qualitatives meaning that this amount of energy equals this amount of force, and more , or less equals a higher, or lower amount for specific objects, therefore energy can be broken down to units , real units that are particulate.
The reason why we cant find an energy particle is because it is the base substance of our own make up, thus our interpretation of a reality-energy is inherent in all particles and we might ask how then can we find particles such as the ones on the standard model- these particles are results, meaning that if we can determine that energy is the motivity ,then our acts to the effect of interpretation and observation cannot show us a physicalization of said motivity, but motivity as an unseen inherency of the result ,because our cognition involves the initiation of many particles rather than a single particle, (this is the coherence of time in the first place, the cohering of nonspatial sequency as a real effect is based on this process of eventual resultation) therefore we will not find an energy particle, but we will find the anti particle of it. Why? Because it is not directly included in the effect of natural interpretation.how?, a motivated , energetic act has a finishing point , where the act becomes cause( this of course impossible to perceive in time , with linear material expectations.It is not to stare at the object and find a point in time of the act ,but to find relative angles to our analog humana in every act) therefore a specific sequence of acts can swing a negation of the three dimensional fixity that occurs in interpreted time which is merely a physical complexification-if we could design to anticlockwise the isobaric spin of particles , instead of simianly smashing them together in a hadron collider,we can, using the mathematic capacity we have now, and a vastly smaller amount of energy than is now required to gorilla smash them together , simply and literally unlock the particle with control and finesse, find the anti-energy particle, and learn the undimensional space the unlocking particle will reveal, and then augment old math to the new mathematic sybolism, and thereafter - fear nothing in the universe.


Arcades Cinza



  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 1,075 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Jun, 2014 01:49 pm
@Arcades,
Arc I wonder if you might condense that into language suitable for the Average Clod (me)
Arcades
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Jun, 2014 01:57 pm
This thread Is the last for me . I have a final draft of the book to write ,and its becoming irksome to offer these out of context abridgments to readers . Thanks to the people who have read anything that I have written with interest . You can't just talk as a scientist-acting upon intuition is most beneficial ,and research requires money and support, and so is the main focus now. Ofcourse this is a forum so replies and questions will be sought to as promptly as can be. Arcades. Cinza
0 Replies
 
Arcades
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2014 06:08 pm
@dalehileman,
Yes. I will try. I will layout the important points in a series of didactic sentences.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2014 06:25 pm
There are a lot of new decaffeinated brands of coffee that give full bodied flavor without that debilitating side effect of manic typing.
Arcades
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2014 07:01 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
I drink energy drinks
0 Replies
 
Arcades
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2014 11:08 pm
@Arcades,
After waiting almost two days for a category I've been placed in the math category . This comes earlier than I thought it would.that's brave.Great.
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2014 11:13 am
@Arcades,
Quote:
a series of didactic sentences
Thanks Arc but will it be done in an annoying way

http://onelook.com/?w=didactic&ls=a
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2014 11:15 am
I actually read all the way through the original post. It is mislabelled and mistitled. There is no mathematics in it. Also, it is complete nonsense from start to finish.
Arcades
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2014 10:20 pm
@contrex,
I remember you from another forum contrex. how are you?
0 Replies
 
Arcades
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Jun, 2014 10:23 pm
@dalehileman,
I promise to not intend annoyance, but to intend clear demonstration.
0 Replies
 
Arcades
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jun, 2014 01:10 am
@Arcades,
I answer questions
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Amount of Time - Question by Randy Dandy
logical number sequence riddle - Question by feather
Calc help needed - Question by mjborowsky
HELP! The Product and Quotient Rules - Question by charsha
STRAIGHT LINES - Question by iqrasarguru
Possible Proof of the ABC Conjecture - Discussion by oralloy
Help with a simple math problem? - Question by Anonymous1234567890
How do I do this on a ti 84 calculator? - Question by Anonymous1234567890
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The New Mathematic Extended
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/24/2022 at 01:10:37