[Physics] Physics Digest, Vol 19, Issue 5

Sun Dec 9 02:05:43 CET 2018

 Tufail, 

Thank you for your generous remarks and follow-up idea threads.

Regarding "dimensions" .. I have come to ask the question .. not "what do we sentient minds recognize about 3 directions (+/-) of physical space, and the 'direction' (+/- ; negative not yet clearly defined) of time .. based on our physical experiences and descriptions."   BUT , what to me seem the more important consideration:   "how does mathematics define and manipulate and navigate computationally .."dimensions"???"  

I see that sometimes we refer to certain whole positive number exponents as representing 'dimensions'.   Most times, "exponents" are just computation~calculation  makers and have nothing to do with 'dimensions'.  Why is that?   Are exponents 'dimensions' (no matter the form or complcation), or not?   Mandelbrot identified fractal numbers~values .. fractional exponents.   Aren't these "dimensions" .. fractional dimensions ... as well?  ...IF we are to be CONSISTENT with our mathematical definitions for exponents ?!?!?!?
And what can that mean? ... non small-value positive whole number exponents being 'dimensional' as well?   And what about negative exponents?  Shouldn't we have a 'dimensional' meaning associated there too?  AND, helpfully important for addressing these considerations .. how about "exponent zero"?      IF .. as is one of my hypotheses .. that a number value -anywhere- in a formula or calculation,is a representative of a complete transcendental whole number line of 'numbers'.  Such that mathematics - whether we appreciate it or not - is our way of navigating and identifying relations among multiple numberline domains.  Numberline domains, which, when we apply them for concept conveniences .. represent multiple 'dimensional domains'.   And I take the concept position that there is no such thing as scalar non-dimensional numbers.  EVERYTHING .. mathematically and existentially .. are or have "dimensional qualities'.     I take that position because my first priority is to expect that 1) the universe and our mathematics HAS to been consistent and coherent EVERYWHERE; the 2) when we appreciate that all numbers are part of connected related qualities .. and must be resident along unbroken mathematical continuumS -- with relations and cybernetic translations, as we conceptually navigate the entire Cantorian transfinities of mathematical spaces, such a viewpoint is the only framework on which we can begin to synchronize and coordinate all the math that we currently hold as inconsistent or incompatible or not related (under the conventional mindset of math).
Think about it.  Physics touts the 'original singularity' as where the universe came from.   All that observedly exists came from a fundamental NON_DIMENSIONAL locus.    To my way of thinking, part of the issue gets resolved by recognizing that (in old 4-dimensional terms), the universe actually arose from a FULLY DIMENSIONAL (0,0,0,0) locus.  :-)   Continuum at the beginning; interacting continuumS as the ongoing products of existence.
Statistics manipulations are dimensional information codings and de-codings .. even though no scientists or mathematicians acknowledge that that is what they are doing and dealing with, and the information spaces they are navigating.

****
Regarding your last remarks where you deride 'fictitious forces'.    Why is it preposterous?  There is nothing 'moving' in a magnetic field, yet  action and action-at-a distance, comes from the FIELDS differential strengths .. aka 'densities difference'.  :-)
My analysis says .. "Oh, yes. look.  differential density gradients  are there in the -fields-.   And what are the changes in Vol/Temp/pressure .. that we bundle into the concept of 'entropy' gradients of value changes .. but exactly the fundamental location where action potential formatively exists .. BEFORE the 'forces' arise.  In the notion that dimensional density differences of immaterial dimension-space is where 'gradient relations' exist BEFORE material energy and matter condense into existence.
It is a natural continuum progression of creation.  Dimensions first, then products of dimensional -relations-.   :-)
Hope I got some of you to start getting itches in your brains .. oh, wow!  a whole fresh perspective .. But one consistent with everything we -already- believe.   :-)
James

====

    On Friday, December 7, 2018, 6:37:56 PM PST, Tufail Abbas <tufail.abbas at gmail.com> wrote:  

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 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!!!!
JamesDec 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.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.
JamesDec 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 LoeffenPaardestraat326131HC Sittardhttp://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/20181209/2600a4ea/attachment.html>