[Physics] Physics Digest, Vol 19, Issue 5

Sat Dec 8 03:37:38 CET 2018

James,

I appreciate that you have a vide array of perspectives from different
subjects of knowledge and I must also compliment you for the rich use of
language and words. Indeed that is something special. I am sure that such a
quality cannot be developed , unless we are ready to read and listen to and
give respectful consideration to ideas of others.

>From my point of view, the Physics has a simple goal:

“To Explain Action At A Distance”

Once this is done, Theory Of Everything is reached.

Unfortunately, Physics is now lost in abstraction, whether we are talking
of Forces, Fields, Space-time Continuum or Probability Waves.

I am not saying that abstract properties (i.e. Love, Justice, Courage,
Beauty  etc.) are of no significance for our existence. However :

Love cannot exist by itself, unless a living being exist to possess this
 quality.

Courts cannot deliver Justice unless a plaintiff exist.

Hence courts, book of law, living being and plaintiff are more fundamental
that Love and Justice.

Similarly,  physical cause that generates or effect the forces, hence
movements,  must be more fundamental than the four fundamental forces.

Information (in system theory I guess?) also be an abstract concept unless
we are referring to some kind of pattern encoded on a physical existing
object/entity. For example: information stored on my computer hard disk is
real.

You said that: dynamic architecture relations of "dimensions", are more
primitive than the 'fundamental forces'. I am not sure what is your
definition/understanding about dimensions…… Is it only related to length ,
area and volumes of a physical structure (like my house). Or do you
consider time also as dimension along which my house is travelling, while
being still at the earth's surface…. Or something else....

And your main point: .causal 'forces' reside both 'inside' -and- come from
'outside' as well…….That reminds me about action and reaction, and Newton's
third Law of motion that “every action has an equal and opposite reaction”,
Action Potential originates from inside and Reaction constraints the actual
outcome from outside. Inside and outside are merely the terms to
distinguish between two sides, and motion is caused as perfect equilibrium
of action and reaction, an outcome which should satisfy the principle of
least action.

It also  prompts to initiate a discussion about so called  fictitious force
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_force> that is usually
explained as NOT ARISING FROM ANY PHYSICAL INTERACTION but from
acceleration of non-inertial frame. How preposterous is that suggestion and
what a smart way to hide our ignorance about the real physical causes and
interactions. We are humans and that is how we behave !!

Regards,

Tufail Abbas

On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, 19:16 James Rose <integrity at prodigy.net wrote:

> Listfolk,
>
> As I indicated in my last post, by career investigations focus has been
> "general systems".  I started from the vast subjects that are umbrellaed
> under biology.  By which I mean that I had to familiarize myself with the
> spectrum of all biological related topics .. from DNA, to organic
> chemistry, to metabolic mechanism, to simple organisms, to complicated
> multi-cellular organisms, to collective environments - plant and animal
> kingdoms, to Darwinian evolution, to anthropology, to sociology, to
> psychology, to economics, to ecology(ies), to human relations, to animal
> behaviors, to linguistics~languages, to philosophies, to neurology, to
> perception~deduction~reasoning~logic, to cultural beliefs, to emotions, to
> biological intricacies, to conceptionalizations (both irrational and
> rational), to mathematics and scientific reasoning, complexity, emergence.
>
> And in parallel requirement - fundamental physics, cosmology, inorganic
> chemistry, thermodynamics, gravity, electromagnetics, quantum mechanics,
> information theory, symbology, cybernetics, manufacturing, materials
> science, time theory, fluid mechanics, entropy.  ( I will admit to a few
> weak spots in my knowledge~comfort zones:  quantum electrodynamics and
> quantum chromodynamics, the strong force, the weak force, magnetic
> bipolarity behaviors explanation~justification, math above partial
> differential equations. maybe one or two other topics that don't jump to
> mind at the moment).
>
> Anyway - I've always taken it as a given, that a grand "theory of
> everything" in truth had to be -more- than the Physics goal of a
> grand-unification of physics phenomena (forces) .. only.
>
> Not many people try to visit learn and understand the relations and
> properties contained totally and holistically in the human body of
> knowledge .. it is immense and intimidating and beyond our typical comfort
> zone of expertise anyone could, would - or even attempt to - claim
> familiarity and comfort with.  And then analyze differences and
> similarities of behaviors, performances, correlations: interpretations and
> translations .. even when terminologies don't yet match or readily
> correspond.  Even when qualia seem unrelated (eg 'color' experienced -
> versus scientific-clinical measurements as electromagnetic waves) ; the
> physics forces as effective real 'phenomena' - in counterpoint to our
> mathematics (languages) that (hopefully) map and match the existential
> phenomena ... correctly and accurately.
>
> I have always taken the position that -all- the above (and more, only
> unintentionally omitted by my casual-among-friends flow of thoughts and
> writings here to the list) .. are the domain of what we are required to
> keep in mind and consider at all times, in our searches, analyses and
> conversations.    Not just present our own personal deductions and
> reasonings, but -really- read and listen to and give respectful
> consideration to ideas -not- our own.   Because we have to recognize none
> of us are total-minds, totally mindful of all details and knowledge of all
> systems; and that whether correct in the overall or not, that someone else
> will have had an insight of recognition of some important relation or true
> phenomena that we personally hadn't considered, or made the mental
> connection to recognize .. but -need to- to include in the grand
> consideration we intuitively strive to accomplish.    Whether for personal
> ego and hopes for fame, or altruistic hopes to add new knowledge for the
> human progeny and lives who will come after us .. and make their lives in
> the universe safer, or more fun, or more exciting and accomplished and
> efficient .. or simply with more enlightened appreciation for this vast
> mystery:   "existence".
>
>
> The reason I'm writing this post and sharing my conceptual frame of
> reference .. really ties in with the recent topic:   action~motivation.
>
> My personal main work has been to gut and dissect conventional
> thermodynamic entropy concepts .. and to rebuild it as a General Theory
> of Entroepic Relations ...  -not restricted-  to thermodynamics.   I won't
> go into my rationale (which hypothesizes that 'entropic relations' are
> originally found in the dynamic architecture relations of "dimensions", and
> so are more primitive than the 'fundamental forces' (which in reality enact
> and display what can be properly called 'entroepic gradients of action
> potential')).
>
> As the universe enacts all its interaction potentials, and builds emergent
> tiers and levels of complexity .. something interesting happens.
>
> First, what is retained in all the levels of complexity and systems, are
> the action activity performance instantiators of essential subatomic and
> atomic construction fields and forces.   So, some of the 'least action'
> derives from -inside- the energy~matter the universe is made of.
>
> But, something gets added along the way .. starting at the tier of
> chemistry and independent co-present atoms and molecules interacting in
> their shared-spaces.  Influences of action and behaviors start to
> additionally come from -outside-.   Simultaneously and connectedly.
>
> So, when we discuss the topic of action, motivation, enervation,
> instantiation ... I hope everyone will remember that dynamics and behaviors
> are a combination.  Cause and effect  are sourced from the inside of our
> physical structure, but, concurrently, from many external -outside-
> phenomena and circumstances .. companion systems .. with interaction
> potential .. as well.
>
> Our universe is complicated and convoluted; direct and concurrently
> indirect.  Humans behave on reliable confirmed data and information; but
> systems react to inferences, to unconfirmed potential data; to hopes ..
> and even to false data (presented or expected as .. 'truth'.)
>
> This is an important flexible adaptive mental frame of reference .. that
> I've always felt it useful to keep in mind as I've explored the world and
> knowledge and experience.  Opportunity spaces for variable actions is just
> as important as noise-free exactness.  A 'perfect theory' has to account
> for and justify 'imperfection' as a part of real existence also.     ;-)
>
> Anyway .. my main point .... causal 'forces' reside both 'inside' -and-
> come from 'outside' as well.
>
> Happy thought-trails, everyone!!!!
>
> James
> Dec 7, 2018
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ======
>
> On Friday, December 7, 2018, 1:23:58 AM PST, Ruud Loeffen <
> rmmloeffen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello James, Tufail, Doug  et al.
>
> Interesting ideas about the cause of motions. These ideas relate lately
> mostly to fluid dynamics and the characteristics of a "field". In
> collaboration we will find the truth. I see around me a big change in how a
> group of physicists and scholars now is working together by commenting and
> trying really to understand somebodies ideas. It is very nice to be a part
> of this development. I feel that there is something important going on.
> Indeed:  Interesting to read:
> http://alternativephysics.org/book/ElectricFields.htm
> Bernard Burchell A free on-line book containing classical alternatives to
> modern physics theory. <http://alternativephysics.org/book/index.htm>
> Let's continue.
>
> Best regards.
>
> Ruud Loeffen.
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 2:45 PM James Rose <integrity at prodigy.net> wrote:
>
> Tufail, Doug, et al,
>
> I've been involved with General Systems Theory since the early 1970s. In
> the late 1990's after presenting a paper on re-defining entropy as a
> general primal property .. gradient .. that is primally present in all
> fields phenomena (versus being a mysterious secondary product of the
> interactions of the conventionally defined '4 fundamental forces'),  one of
> the then-elder statesman of the systems organization putting on the
> conference at Asilomar CA, came up to me afterwards and made the simple
> statement to me ...  "You are on the right track of investigation, Jamie,
> but the key is something you didn't discuss in your paper :   'least
> action'.   You have to identify, discuss, and justify the differential
> pressure that accounts for motion and action .. what CONDITIONS or
> RELATIONS .. that are essentially present in the dimensional architecture
> of physical~phenomenal existence."
>
> Sage remarks.   He and I never spoke again, and he passed away in the
> years since then.  But he was right.
>
> Even in the Standard model, even in susy (supersymetry), even in QM ...
> there is no directed conversation that justifies, explains, or accounts for
> motion and action PRIOR to the so-called 'fundamental forces'.
>
> A massive re-modelling of physics is required in order to see deeper into
> the "*dynamic* architecture" of physical existence .. on ALL SCALES
> together.
>
> James
> Dec 6, 2018
>
>
>
>
> ===========
>
> On Thursday, December 6, 2018, 11:08:25 PM PST, Tufail Abbas <
> tufail.abbas at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Tom, Actually bernard following proposal is exactly in accordance with my
> ideas cause of all motion....
>
> "This substance is continuously and perpetually generated within charged
> particles and moves away......."
>
> This is the first instant that I saw a  proposal similar to my ideas about
> cause of motion,  being made by somebody else other than me.
> So I meant  to ask : How to experimentally prove this? Tufail
>
>
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, 02:47 carmam at tiscali.co.uk <carmam at tiscali.co.uk
> wrote:
>
> Tufail, Bernard is speculating here as shown by the opening statement "Could
> an electric field be a similar phenomenon?  Could what we describe as an
> electric field be in fact, not just be an abstract mathematical entity, but
> an actual flow of material that moves outward from a charge and imparts a
> force on other charges when it hits them?"
> He also uses the word hypothesis.
> He has some excellent ideas, and most of his work is based on fact. When
> he does diverge from fact he lets the reader know.
>
> Tom.
>
>
> ----Original Message----
> From: tufail.abbas at gmail.com
> Date: 06/12/2018 17:05
> To: <carmam at tiscali.co.uk>, "General Physics and Natural Philosophy
> discussion list"<physics at tuks.nl>
> Subj: Re: [Physics] Physics Digest, Vol 19, Issue 5
>
> Tom,
>
> I was just going through the book of Alternative Physics through your
> provided link , and I came across the chapter of Electric Field and this
> hypothesis.
>
> The Electric Field Hypotheses:
>
> Each charged particle generates something called ‘field substance’ which
> makes up what we call an electric field.  This substance is continuously
> and perpetually generated within charged particles and moves away
> ..................... This substance is a not a mathematical abstraction,
> but an actual physical substance that travels through space.  When it
> strikes another charged particle it exerts a force............
>
> Who will believe this? And why?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tufail
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Physics mailing list
> Physics at tuks.nl
> http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
> _______________________________________________
> Physics mailing list
> Physics at tuks.nl
> http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
>
>
>
> --
> *Ruud Loeffen*
> Paardestraat32
> 6131HC Sittard
> http://www.human-DNA.org
> _______________________________________________
> Physics mailing list
> Physics at tuks.nl
> http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
> _______________________________________________
> Physics mailing list
> Physics at tuks.nl
> http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20181208/3fac7d45/attachment.html>