Dear Fis,
The recent postings are highly charged. We are cooking up something in this
community. James has again taken the dialectic role of the advocatus diaboli
as he says:
"First hole -- no one has a glimmer of a notion to -explain- gravity ... not
'describe it' .._explain it/account for it_."
So then, here is the challenge to debate a logical picture of gravity.
-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es] Im
Auftrag von James N Rose
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 22. Juni 2006 08:27
An: fis@listas.unizar.es
Betreff: Re: [Fis] Limited info
Stan,
-Part- of what you wrote makes absolute sense,
but what you rattled off is the accepted mantra,
which has so many un-accounted for holes and
segued jumps, that in the long run, it's nonsense.
First hole -- no one has a glimmer of a notion
to -explain- gravity ... not 'describe it' ..
_explain it/account for it_.
Trick little notion "matter invokes gravitation".
Which translates to : matter induces INCREASED
force-gradiency.
That is -not- "nature abhors gradients" by -any-
interpretation of words/models I've ever heard of.
And if I get the drift of your words correctly,
the more matter, mass, form there is, the further
extancy is -away- from ... 'equilibrium'. (?!?!?)
So ... 'equilibrium' would be "complete immateriality
and non-existential form presence". (?!?!?)
Which ... you must think that the universe wants to
(actions to) re-attain state-of. (?!?!)
Plus, matter accretion/accumulation ... an aspect of
'precipitating out' from hyper-enervation into a
'condensate' of sorts .. in no way directly accounts
for systemic islands of increased complexity.
Aggregation does not equal complexification...
where complexification IS the direct production
or comparitive information increase/densification
(increased information gradiencing).
"Nature" giddily and enthusiastically produces
information gradients all the time. If nature abhored
information production, nothing in its structure would
generate it. But it does. "Naturally"
Nature by default IS .. gradients .. and in essence
is totally and ONLY ... gradients ... ie: "relations".
Patterned relations educing other patterned relations.
Our mathematics, by another default, is a mirror of
relations, and, I submit, it gets some of the
current mirror-notions -wrong-. So wrong, that
we'll never quantum leap out of the errors-hole
until there is a wholesale re-vamping of math
and concepts interpretations.
Why, for example, don't we see rampant spontaneous
generation of more energy and materia out of the
hypothesized 'quantum foam' ?!?!?
The big-bang is a big-bust .. because it has an
unwritten "law" .. precipitate once only once ..
unless manipulatedly re-induced in some limited way.
(!)
Current math doesn't allow for anything -but-
such gibberish .. "reality". (unfortunately)
Why, are the regions exterior to event horizons of
black-holes uniformly smooth and bland? If they are
made of intense flooded compactions of quantum
gravity "particles" -- which particles MUST 'see' one
another and therefore ought to be interacting in
seething roiling tempestuous energetic events ..
we don't see ANY of that at all in those spaces.
"clue"
gravity ain't what old current ideas infer it to be.
We need to toss it all out and start over fresh
to explain what gravity is ... because it can't
be anything suppined to this point.
And, such re-thinking demands we START with
ideas that REQUIRE quantum-continuum decription
depiction similarities/compatibility.
Existing math is self-hobbled by innacurate premises.
It needs re-organization of its basic principles.
Just like 'heat' and 'light' and 'sound' are all
local realities of the _one_ singular EM spectrum,
quantum and continuum are similarly: alternative
informational enactions of another Singular Spectrum.
Which Singular Spectrum .. are Gradients .. with
special laws/properties of coding and transduction.
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle .. is in fact
a manifested _Information Theory_ rule of how to code and
recode information in adjacent exponentially coupled spaces.
And non-quantum (rather: classical) spaces at that.
But, we'll never generally get to that level of appreciating
the organization of the universe until we're willing to
revamp how we see things.
To insist that thermodynamics is THE base frame-of-reference,
is to stay mired in 'incorrectness'.
:-)
Sorry Stan, we still sit on opposite sides of the table.
Friendly opponents in 2000, and still today. :-)
Jamie
"Stanley N. Salthe" wrote:
>
> Jamie -- My response is:
> The Big Bang is an expansive cooling
> This cooling resulted/results in a 'precipitation' of matter
> Matter invokes gravitation, making clumps
> Continued acceleration of Universal expansion affords furtherlocal
> developents into forms and organizations
> But Matter, mass, form and organization are rough measures of increasing
> distance from Universal energy equilibrium
> Distance from Universal equilibrum (created by magnitude of Universal
> expansion) increases the Universe's 'equal and opposite' tendency to
> destroy these materal gradients.
>
> STAN
>
> >I have to pose the question .. if 'nature abhors a
> >gradient', then why are gradients pandemic and exhaustively
> >pervasive everywhere? (!)
> >
> >I respectfully suggest that there is qualia or class
> >conflation involved with that premise.
> >
> >I submit that Nature -flourishes- through/with gradients.
> >
> >And in fact, uses special states of gradients, to induce
> >the instantiation of more and more gradients.
> >
> >James Rose
> >
> >
> >
> >Pedro Marijuan wrote:
> >>
> >> >STAN
> >> >
> >>
> >> A metaphor of [the above] could be put if we go around a very
dear
statement
> >> of yours: "nature abhors a gradient" (which I share,
though not quite
> >> globally). Under the above informational vision it could be:
"nature
abhors
> >> a distinction".
> >>
> >>Pedro
> >
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
____________
Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirusKit
Version: AVK 16.8051 from 22.06.2006
Virus news: www.antiviruslab.com
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Thu Jun 22 15:21:23 2006
