Interesting website, mailgate.org found science discussion, found relativity, found www.physicsmyths.org.uk

Thanks too, Dick. What do people make of the content at www.physicsmyths.org.uk ?

Aurino; it seems that Dick agrees with my contention that 'randomness' is a myth; or just a statement about our lack of knowledge; that is, randomness is a label for what is really 'uniqueness', 'novelty', 'creation'.

If it takes three complementary phenomena to make one full phenomenon; the future is not so much 'not known' as 'not matched' or optional till experienced.

The follwing seems to describe what happens when one listens to music, and also how reality works: "Present" is the perception of "past" and "future"; "future" is the perception of "present" and "past"; "past" is the perception of "present" and "future".

And Dick's notion of quantumn mechanics as "a system for handling a presumption of randomness in lack of knowledge" seems fair enough. But that sort of 'randomness' is not fully random, but restricted to certain pattern distributions based on overall pattern conservations. If you conserve an overall pattern; internal patterns within will restrict each other in mathematically generaliseable ways so that overall pattern is conserved.

(So Hamiltonian mechanics, approximate sums, partial differential equations, three-way patterns; quantum mechanics, relativity; all flow easily from that it seems) (have to learn more to test that).

With math and logic: I think there is a more basic logic than math, that delivers more understanding.

The idea of life is that we get to play the game itself; not have to get worn out figuring out the rules (that we once knew as newborn infants). But it is a good idea to access the rules. Know the rules and one can play more freely.

Here's some ideas:

Acceleration is a rate of change of a rate of change.
Acceleration is a kind of self-reference, like consciousness or awareness. Two different speeds are differentiated (made aware of) each other by acceleration, one might say.

The option pair: "distance, reference distance" (it is optional as to which is which)
and the option pair: "distance, reference distance"
can be distinguished by the option pair: "then, now" effectively another pair of "distance, reference distance".

Thus acceleration is represented by three pairs; each of which may optionally be regarded as the acceleration (perception) of the other two option-pairs.

Thus one might say we have six dimensions; the whole being a seventh dimension. God "Existence" rests in the seventh dimension.

One might suppose that all math and physics can now be derived. One may say that Wheeler thought that it would be binary; John Cramer thought it would be understandable as transactional; Niels Bohr thought it involved quantum jumps; Heisenberg thought it would be uncertain to predict but certain when observed/ perceived; Richard Stafford thought it looked circular?; Einstein thought it was relativistic; maybe these ideas now flow from the above?

Witten's 10-D superstring might require some more dimensions (consciousness) to complete that puzzle. Out of my depth now; have to read more.

-dolphin