God & Science Forum Message Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
 Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...The Space and Astronomy Agora Pattern Matching Rules Math! Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response ToPosted by Alan on October 20, 2001 08:28:47 UTC

May I demonstrate this:

Object exists.

(By the way, thanks for e-mailed paper; Dick. I know a mathematician- may see what he thinks).

O.K. An object exists.

Thus it is different. Because if object 'A' wasn't different, at least different from 'Existence'; you wouldn't have object 'A' You would have just Existence.

If A wasn't different from B; A would just be another name for B.

Basic phenomenon: a dot against a background.
Thus a boundary.

Jump from dot to background, or from background to dot. Jump the boundary.

A dot on a background involves two differences: a CHANGE in position (space-jump)
and a change in appearance- say colour- but there must be some SECOND difference or you would only be talking about a space-bit of the background; not something so different as a dot.

With One difference: have a change of position
but no change of appearance (say colour)

thus no object: as have one continuous background
(If you wanted to talk about a particular space-position of the background you would have to MAKE another difference to demarcate it: thus the observer creates an ingredient of that phenomenon- physicists take note)

To have the basic phenomenon requires a 3-way jump:

Draw three circles that overlap so as to create one overlap of each circle and a sector in the middle where all three circles overlap.

In one circle write: position.

In the circle to the right, write "color",

in their overlap write "blue".

In a third circle below these two circles write "background".

In the overlap between this circle and "color" circle write: "white".

In the overlap of the "background" circle and in the "position" circle write "dot".

In the central sector, where "position" circle intersects with "color" circle and "background" circle write "blue dot".

Thus you have a Venn diagram or set-theory diagram showing the phenomenon: blue dot on white background.

The phenomenon involves three pairs of options:

POSITION (SPACE): dot, background
POSITION (SPACE)-COLOR: blue dot, white background
COLOR: blue, white

Triplets: PS, d, b
PS, bl/d, w/b
C, bl, w

You can regard each option pair as the most basic 'musical chairs'; but one of them is 'at right angles' to the other two; that is it 'joins the dots' between the other two option-pairs.

You require a color (or whatever) difference to know a dot.

You require a space-position difference to know a dot.

You require a color-difference to know a background from a dot.

You require a space-position difference to know a background from a dot.

Note: space-position is the DIFFERENCE between space-position -color and dot.

Color is the DIFFERENCE between space-position -color and space-position.

This is already looking much like Alexander's demonstration of the mathematical inevitability of physics phenomena.

One can juggle the labels of the diagram so for example the pair: position, color is in the center.

One can convert it all to more abstract algebraic notation; and derive equations.

Much modern physics derives from simple harmonic motion, the simple harmonic oscillator, via Hamiltonian mechanics.

I propose derive it more basically from the 'simple jump oscillator', so to speak.

This means thinking in terms outside space, time and so on. If you like, call it O-space (Option-space). The key is making distinctions.

To have number 1; requires already having number 3. To know the boundary of 1, requires a three-way jump, a comparison between at least two paterns.

Note: you can draw one of these over-lapping three set diagrams with: "reference distance" in one set, "distance" in another; and "1" in a third. And you get rd between 1 and d; "1" between d and rd; and "d" between rd and 1.

Inside, you get all three, d, rd, 1. This suggests that this may have something to do with Dick's double-model ideas; because here two unknown data (distance, reference distance) were given a unit comparison (1); and they produced as a phenomenon (3-way intersection) a 'reflection' of themselves! I haven't worked this out fully.

Anyway, you can map any physics phenomeon as intersecting fields of intersecting fields of intersecting fields of etc. musical chairs ultimately made up of the basic three-way jump.

Anyone get any of this?