|
Hi,
briefly:
"Theories are mathematical relationships used to predict the arrangements from initial and boundary conditions. "
Note the word: "predict".
EVERYTHING must include all the future, so no room there for predictions?
"I admit that the universe seems to be guided by theory."
But I never said this. It is guided by the law of non-contradiction (by definition, as to be is to be unique, non-contradicting).
The only "super-particle" static items are PERFECT DEFINITIONS? A definition that contains no internal contradictions, that has a clear beginning and ending. Actually all that is has it seems a kind of eternal IS-ness. To be is to be.
"But in a sense a super theory of everything could include the static arrangement of the super particles."
If such super particles static arrangement = perectly defined relationship (so "static") of perfect definitions (super-particles as perfect definitions) ; we seem to have the minimum tautological infrastructure that Dr. Stafford tried to obtain.
Re: 16 compactigied dimensions of 26-D; such ideas my guess can be reduced further to: "compare and match two patterns; make another comparison".
Consider: every thought anyone has must reduce to either direct contemplation of Existence, of existent phenomenon/phenomena; or comparing and matching patterns?
Dr. Stafford's whole system relies on direct contemplation of existence (law of non-contradiction) and the comparing and matching of patterns (via math).
"But the point is that mathematics is not reality. " Reality is what/ who is. Math is math.
"Theory is not a thing except in human minds and as arrangements of pencil markings on paper or electrons in computers which correspond to the equations of natural laws." Good point.
"A theory could be a thing only in the sense of super particles controlling the laws of nature. These super particles would be an aspect if what is commonly referred to as God."
Given God is Existence; if "super particles" is a name for "perfect definitions"; it's a case of the laws of nature being the law of non-contradiction being inherent in perfect definitions. Of course perfect, non-contradicting definitions are an aspect of the law of non-contradiction; of Existence, of being and letting be, of love, of God.
"The present quest for a theory of everything is just to get the equations corresponding to the laws of physical particles. We might then go on to a super theory of every thing to determine how the universe implements these equations."
One possibility is a negotiation approach.
So "proton" becomes analogouus to "promoted viewpoint"; "electron" becomes analogous to "modification to viewpoint".
I haven't typed it up yet; but I found particle physics seems to translate to amazing extent into a negotiation arrangement where the idea is that everything is created out of preservation of existent entities while making exchanges to create new common ground of the negotiaters. This fits well with everything being created by love.
When John Cramer gave us his transaction interpretation of quantum mechanics, his universe full of "handshakes", he seems to have been giving us a profound insight.
It looks like everything is created out of agreements.
-Alan
|
