GEOMETRICALLY ACTUATING MATH FOR 3-D SPIN-ORBIT-ROLLS IN CONTINUOUS SPACE-TIME:

.

All of, and within, our space-time may be conceptualized as consisting of iterative out-foldings of a single POINT of resonance between potential of mind-imagination versus math leveraging, for which a single algorithm may govern our shared point-cone of perceptive experience. Such resonance is thus capacitated to represent a self-actualizing FIELD of mathematical relations, in which relations among geometrical spins, orbits, and rolls, tracing along geometrical strings of axis, consist of nothing more than capacities of such RESONANCE. Inside each iteration of spin-orbit-roll, there is nothing, that is, no thing that can reasonably be thought or demonstrated to be purely physical or substantively-measurable-in-itself. Ultimately, the cosmos is not well modeled after any one physically apparent "thing," because there ultimately is no thing that is in itself physical with which to model or map the cosmos.

.

JUNG AND WHITEHEAD AND PERPETUAL PLAYER PIANO: Prosaically, the cosmos can be analogized as being like an unfolding memory of a prehistory of a collective unconscious. QuaNtitative cosmos is like discrete keys on an infinite series of pianos. QuaLitative cosmos is like a piano that continuously images itself, writes music, plays itself, writes more music in response, continuously tunes strings for keys that go out of tune, and proceeds therafter in an endless loop that feeds The Continuous back to The Discrete. The accumulated tightening of each string keeps a record of how its key has been played, while the sum of such records preserves the accumulated context. Each key and each associated string is of the same identical function: as an iteration of an Actualizing Memory of an image --- an imagined reminder of a memory of separate illusions and possibilities. Appreciation of each note depends not on the reality or relative locus of each key and string, but on the relative flux of the multi-focusing capacity of the cosmos. The keys are quantitatively accumulated and apprehended Before they are played, whereAfter, appreciation of their notes is accumulated for continued qualitative factoring. Thus, the cosmos is not in its particular keys; rather, the particular keys are in the actively-projecting collective unconscious of the cosmos. The significative aspect of the geometry is quaNtitative; the important aspect of the music is quaLitative.

.

All of, and within, our space-time may be conceptualized as consisting of iterative out-foldings of a single POINT of resonance between potential of mind-imagination versus math leveraging, for which a single algorithm may govern our shared point-cone of perceptive experience. Such resonance is thus capacitated to represent a self-actualizing FIELD of mathematical relations, in which relations among geometrical spins, orbits, and rolls, tracing along geometrical strings of axis, consist of nothing more than capacities of such RESONANCE. Inside each iteration of spin-orbit-roll, there is nothing, that is, no thing that can reasonably be thought or demonstrated to be purely physical or substantively-measurable-in-itself. Ultimately, the cosmos is not well modeled after any one physically apparent "thing," because there ultimately is no thing that is in itself physical with which to model or map the cosmos.

.

JUNG AND WHITEHEAD AND PERPETUAL PLAYER PIANO: Prosaically, the cosmos can be analogized as being like an unfolding memory of a prehistory of a collective unconscious. QuaNtitative cosmos is like discrete keys on an infinite series of pianos. QuaLitative cosmos is like a piano that continuously images itself, writes music, plays itself, writes more music in response, continuously tunes strings for keys that go out of tune, and proceeds therafter in an endless loop that feeds The Continuous back to The Discrete. The accumulated tightening of each string keeps a record of how its key has been played, while the sum of such records preserves the accumulated context. Each key and each associated string is of the same identical function: as an iteration of an Actualizing Memory of an image --- an imagined reminder of a memory of separate illusions and possibilities. Appreciation of each note depends not on the reality or relative locus of each key and string, but on the relative flux of the multi-focusing capacity of the cosmos. The keys are quantitatively accumulated and apprehended Before they are played, whereAfter, appreciation of their notes is accumulated for continued qualitative factoring. Thus, the cosmos is not in its particular keys; rather, the particular keys are in the actively-projecting collective unconscious of the cosmos. The significative aspect of the geometry is quaNtitative; the important aspect of the music is quaLitative.

.

AUTHORING COSMOS: Each conscious decision, each conscious thought, is appreciated by “self” an instant or so after something of the Cosmos decided to measurably signify and express such decision and thought. This applies even to self awareness of the thought of the thought of the thought, and so on. Something of the Cosmos qualitatively fluxes to appreciate and factor the regress, both as to its quantitative price and as to its qualitative value. Something of the Cosmos conserves and reconciles all such appreciations to present accumulation and representation. That which is measurably signified only as general background is accumulated only mathematically (stored in geometric imagery). That which is consciously appreciated and factored is accumulated qualitatively, among iterative of perspectives, via an ineffable relationship of feedback between the Source of the Cosmos and its means of availing mathematically obedient “physical” significations.

AUTHORING COSMOS: Each conscious decision, each conscious thought, is appreciated by “self” an instant or so after something of the Cosmos decided to measurably signify and express such decision and thought. This applies even to self awareness of the thought of the thought of the thought, and so on. Something of the Cosmos qualitatively fluxes to appreciate and factor the regress, both as to its quantitative price and as to its qualitative value. Something of the Cosmos conserves and reconciles all such appreciations to present accumulation and representation. That which is measurably signified only as general background is accumulated only mathematically (stored in geometric imagery). That which is consciously appreciated and factored is accumulated qualitatively, among iterative of perspectives, via an ineffable relationship of feedback between the Source of the Cosmos and its means of availing mathematically obedient “physical” significations.

.

CORRELATING MATHEMATICAL VECTORS: Assuming (or being given) a meta source or quality of substance that can be imaged to be spun, rotated, and pushed, through 3-D space, along a width, depth, and length, in severable 4-D sequences, angular speeds, and angles of address, experienced or measured as continuous, then: Spin-orbit-pushes can meaningfully, geometrically, and mathematically be conceptualized as obeying mathematical vectors, considering some spins to proceed along width, counterclockwise (or clockwise) to a direction of orbit along depth, rolling forward (or backward) to a direction along length. Positive-negative-neutral and forward-backward-stationary permutations are conceptually possible among such 3-D measures of vectors proceeding in 4-D space-time sequences. Moreover, along axis of width, depth, and length, vectors can express variations in relational frequency of spin, orbit, and rolling, as well as variations in relational diameter, foci, multiple foci, amplitude, wavelength, intensity, angular speed, angle of relation, wobble, vibration, alternation, reinforcement, interference, drag, superposition, exclusion, destruction, annihilation, iterative relative proximity-number-pairing-entanglement-dispersal-vector; etc. Thus, it appears that all constraints that follow the same mathematical rules within a shared cone of resonant experience may be represented and expressed in geometry of space-time. All of substantive signification that is quantifiable or measurable may be representable in geometrical forms.

.

PARTICULARS: A "particle" would be an interpretation (or suppression), as focused for measurement, of either a specific trace of a 1-D location or a 2-D direction, or a statistical analysis of a likely combination of both location and direction. (To perceive a particle, a recorder must take a resonating space-time point of view of the particle's loci, because the particle does not in itself exist, except in respect of how it is made to represent to affect a resonant observer. The notion of a cone of shared light or experience needs also to take into account shared resonance.) A "wave" length or wave frequency may be a 2-D interpretation (or suppression) of a 3-D spin-orbit-roll. Digital measuring would be an on-off, switch-like, discrete-measure or counting of a relational revolution of a spin, orbit, or roll. At limits of measure, such measures may be interpreted as “leaping” (in that no spin remains stationary in respect of a mappable 4-D grid of orbits or rolls).

.

SENSING PARTICULARS: To respond to a particle, the particle must first be expressed by some Source or field that has taken a position for signifying it (or even pre-deciding it, or predeciding a function for randomly later deciding it), in order to take further interest in measuring (suppressing, collapsing, or interpreting) it, in order to feed back further interest in evaluating it, and so on. Thus, a point-particle is a signification that is derivative of a "field" that is availing a point of experiential representation.

.

SENSING PARTICULARS: To respond to a particle, the particle must first be expressed by some Source or field that has taken a position for signifying it (or even pre-deciding it, or predeciding a function for randomly later deciding it), in order to take further interest in measuring (suppressing, collapsing, or interpreting) it, in order to feed back further interest in evaluating it, and so on. Thus, a point-particle is a signification that is derivative of a "field" that is availing a point of experiential representation.

.

WEB --- MATHEMATICALLY CONSTRAINED, YET UNLIMITED IN POTENTIAL FOR EXPRESSING PERMUTATIONS: All such positional and relational significations of spin-orbit-roll, in all possible permutations, are conserved, constrained, and expressed consistent with mathematical formalizations. Moreover, math defines constraints by which each local expression of spin-orbit-roll is conservationally affected by every other expression of spin-orbit-roll that arises in association with its cone of influence. For spins at limits of measure, a unifying formalization would define constraints for possible expression within a web of spin-orbit-roll. Even though such spins would be subject to mathematical constraint, the potential variety of spins that could obey such constraint may be infinite.

.

CONTINUOSITIES BEYOND THE DIGITAL: Beyond digitally countable spins, there abide orbits and rolls that occur within broader parameters of measure, which are not limited to digital counting, but which can be experienced and measured relatively. These "fields" of orbits and rolls are subject to continuous relativistic re-normalization, to fit the contextual field-frame of reference for the point of view of the experiencing and measuring observer or recorder. Such re-normalization entails a more continuous, less discretely restricted, concept for the physics of measurable significations.

.

FIELD OVERLAPS: A field interprets trace expressions of particles and applies such interpretations to measure itself. A field or wave cannot measure itself without reference to sub-particulars that comprise it. Ultimately, precise measurement requires reference to tracing of particles to a level of discreteness beyond which further precision is not possible. Those who wish to “unify” the math for measuring spins (particles) with the math for measuring orbits and rolls (fields) are confronted with a dilemma for how to unify what is measurable only discretely with what is measurable continuously (i.e., what seems to be absolutely quantifiable with what seems to be relatively quantifiable). They must imagine a coherent and consistent way to conceptualize spins and particles as being relative, or orbits and rolls and fields as being discrete. Either the atom must be de-grid-ed, or space-time must be re-grid-ed. So far, such a feat has not seemed mathematically available to mortals. (No one has mapped an end to the universe, and no one has extended an atom to the end of the universe.)

.

PARADOX OF THE CLASS OF ITSELF: Given spin-orbit-rolls, suppose there were a unifying mathematical constraint or construct for their expression (even if knowable only to God). How would such a formulazation account for relative experiences of time and local experiences of gravitational constancy? How would it account for how mass is consistently experienced, transferred, and re-normalized to local experience? May space-time carry some kind of aether-field-property, so that certain mathematical varieties of local spin-orbit-roll are assigned to express certain measurable quantities of substantive mass? Is a mathematical formula available to mere mortals that would prescribe the local mass value that must be associated with each prescribed relation of spin-orbit- roll? (What if our Universe itself spins, orbits, and rolls, relative to other universes within the Cosmos?)

.

************************

.

************************

.

THINGS MEASURED: The only measurable "thing" inside a spin, orbit, or roll consists of other spins, orbits, and/or rolls, meet to the rational experience of their shared cone of experiential observation. The establishment and sustenance of a form of observer (mankind) may coordinate to limit or stretch parameters for what can unfold to such observers' measuring. It's not a spin in itself that exists, but a capacity for taking a resonant position whereby the spin may be relationally measured AS IF it were a thing. Apart from relational resonance with a cone-of-shared-experience observer-recorder, there is No "Thing-In-Itself " that exists inside" any part or particle.

.

SHARED AXES: The sharing of one axis of orbit, as opposed to other axes, is what defines and identifies severability among parts. The smallest possible axis of orbit may be as unlimited as the math that leverages imagination. There may not be a smallest particle, even though there may be a mathematical algorithm that, within a shared cone of experience, must be obeyed in all measurements of orbits.

.

CONSERVING DISCRETE CIRCULATIONS: Spin, orbit, and roll can be conceptualized and experienced as relatively "stationary," when measured about a single shared point-line-axis, like for an atom. A set of orbits defining an atom can also be about a point-line-curve (plane-field) axis, even as the atom itself is rolling beyond a point, expanding forward or contracting back, along a line , a curve, or a series of curves or wobbles. (In a way, if space-time itself is curved, then in that respect no purely 1-D or 2-D roll-along would seem possible, even though, in respect of the limiting speed of light (EMR), there may seem to be a linearly straight roll along.)

.

CONSERVING DIRECTIONAL CIRCULATIONS: Roll, as it proceeds beyond a point axis, along a line or a 3-D wobble in a field of space-time, will not thereby define a particle discretely measurable in respect of a single-point-line axis. Rather, it will trace along a 4-D path of space-time that must be measured and re-normalized in relation to other particles and observer points of reference. Such roll push-pulls and attract-follows proceed along re-normalizing space-time geometry. While circulations about point-line axes bring measurably discrete particles into play, it is the proceeding beyond such point-line axes that brings continuous re-normalization into play.

.

MANAGING RANDOM BILLIARD BALLS: Vast numbers of particles defined in respect of shared point-axes may cluster together, as in the shape of a billiard ball. The billiard ball itself, as a shared mass, may be made, in statistically averaging terms, to be said to spin, orbit, and/or roll, and it may be directed to bounce off other similarly directed billiard balls, each tracing out varying patterns. Results of their smashs up are amenable of statistical prediction. Random opposing spins may produce a variety of unfolding reflections, which, when received by a preserving-perspective of forms, may be interpreted to show forms and shapes. The defining perception of a shape may be considered as part of a series of waves.

.

MASS: A measure of a single spin about a single point-line-axis is a measure of a massless part. As a spin is measured to proceed along a 2-D wave plane or 3-D curve field, a measurable property of "mass" may correlate with attributes of spin that are in some manner of measurable opposition(repulsing, attracting, annihilating, interfering, redefining, reinforcing, intensifying, superpositioning) in respect of a balancing and conserving algorithm.

.

MIND: To the extent pure mind may measure the cosmos, it may be because the cosmos is measurably comprised only of imaginings put to geometric constructs of "mind." However, mind itself may not have capacity to explicate mind itself.

.
## 1 comment:

Many among us search for philosophical rigor, so that communication can be less ambiguous. There is much ambiguity in such notions as God, decent civilization, morality, free will, liberty, body-mind, avatars, and determination.

- Is God meant as savior of souls, or as source for rationalizing empathetic relations?

- Is decent civilization dependent on reducing brains to complete central control, or should it entail empathetic respect for one another's freedom and dignity?

- Is meaningful morality objective and unchanging, or does it depend on subjective, evolving, and reconciling points of view?

- If free will is not a measurable force or energy, then how is the cosmos made to respond to its observations, interpretations, and apprehensions?

- If there is no such a quality or property as free will, then what consistent or meaningful sense can be communicated by speaking of liberty?

- Is moral responsibility measurably confined to a body-brain, or does it function beyond perimeters of the body (does the cosmos effect decisions an instant before the brain even becomes conscious of them)?

- If our bodies are only avatars for expressing fluxes determined beyond our bodies, then of what moral meaningfulness are the lives and significations of our bodies?

- Are determinations of events preset, random, chaotic, chosen, reconciled in respect of participatory feedback, or some mix?

As we increase in rigor and understanding, I suspect more among us will come to apprehend that there is real worth in concepts that can be more consistently represented in terms such as God, decent civilization, morality, free will, liberty, body-mind, avatars, and determination. Pending that, I am not sure I would consider many avowed atheists as atheists.

Post a Comment