Hi all!

This thread is reserved for the co-moderators (RealityCheck & Tor) to keep a streamlined progressive record of our developing cosmology theory. That is all. Thanks.

RealityCheck.
.

INDEX....coming soon.

Hi all!

I'm just about to make a summary of the ramifications of STAGE ONE results and post it here so that those working on their STAGE TWO answers for the T.O.E. thread will have a more 'fixed' idea as to where the stage two QUESTIONS are 'coming from' (and also where they're 'going to', hehehe).

Thanks for your patience, folks. Won't be long now!

RealityCheck.
.

Hi everyone!

Tomorrow I will be posting the project summary so far, under this PROGRESSIVE THEORY SUMMARY thread.

It will be in POINT/CONCEPT format for EACH 'finalised stage'----so far only stage ONE, of course!

AT THE END OF EACH stage-summary POST, there will be a LIST or GLOSSARY OF TERMS that were used in describing/defining the concepts introduced IN/FOR that stage PLUS any other 'general/associated/helpful terms/definitions which may relate especially to THAT stage of the progressive theory content.

MOREOVER, there will SOON be begun a 'progressively updated' INDEX to various selected/important items/topics/matters occurring in these special project (and possibly certain 'external') threads. The INDEX will appear in THIS thread also, VIA A STAGE-BY-STAGE 'EDIT FUNCTION' ADDITION to my original post in this thread.

After the first SUMMARY post tomorrow, I expect to continue immediately with our work on stage TWO in our THEORY OF EVERYTHING BEGUN FROM ABSOLUTE CONCEPT thread.

[[[BTW, I shall soon post that Photonic Wave/Particle "Form/Propagation" explanation I promised Good Elf and others. Sorry about the delay, GE et al; but Patent Searches, patent specs/application compilation (and NECESSARY inputs to the Creation/Evolution and 9/11 Conspiracy threads here) has left me little time to properly follow that up...but those loose ends/duties have now been essentially tied up/discharged, so I can now concentrate once more on that 'explanation' as well as our important special project.]]]

Of course, these arrangements may be 'fine-tuned' as we go, but the above will be the operational arrangements for the time being. Speak to you all TOMORROW!

RealityCheck.
.

Hello everyone!

I am sorry to see that it seems like this thread is dying, very few initiatives and responses have been posted lately. As interesting as this topic should be, we seem to have lost the overall goal, to find a TOE. Unfortunately I have been away for a three months experiment and have not had the opportunity to participate. Over the last week or so I have tried to recap what has been posted and cannot see significant progress.

Let’s again take a grand look at what we are trying to achieve: An explanation to all aspects of our universe. This implies that we have to find the origin of mass and energy and their properties in order to explain what we experience around us.

Currently we are only discussing and trying to describe behaviours of what we observe (and what we do not observe) like all physicist and mathematicians have done over centuries. But we only have bits and pieces of the physical universe and we know that no one has been spot on, there are too many uncertainties in most theories. To try and extrapolate uncertain data back to an origin, well you know the chances of hitting the true origin.

In order to start this thread over again, I will publish an extract from a close to 1600 page document on what happened (?) (which has not yet been published) but will reduce it to layman terms without the maths but (if I can get it to work) some illustrations.

Regard this as a discussion document at this time, and it will cover:

Document title: “THE TWIST THAT BECAME US”

1. The forces, spheres and energies.
2. The twist and collision
3. The mass, energy and polarization
4. The mass and gravity
5. The Contraction
6. The expansion (Big Bang)
7. The EMR and its speed
8. The forming of particles
9. The masses’ journey through space
10. Black holes and other extreme mass concentrations and their expansions.

Point 8 is a very large document and only the very start of the particles are covered but will be set up as a separated document, if the interest is there.

This document does not contradict what is mainstream physics but gives explanation to many of the questions on the table today.

Please comment if this is interesting or if you feel it is not the appropriate way.

I will do the extraction in 2-4 days and hopefully I can include some of the graphics without exceeding posting limits.

Tor,


Welcome back !

Thanks for picking up again, we all know this project takes up a lot of time (or we would have continued ourselves).

No objections to your idea, lets get going again.


T.Roc

Hello all!
I apologize for underestimating the task of reducing the TOE document to a reasonable size for the forum. It has taken longer than expected and had to establish a homepage for displaying the graphics. Give me a couple of days more and it will be posted.

.
The ‘TOE’ Cosmology Special Porject so far:

PREAMBLE

CURRENT AD-HOC PHYSICAL COSMOLOGY THEORISING PROCESSES

It has become increasingly apparent that only a radically new ‘theorising’ process can ever hope to, as it were, ‘ arrive’ at a truly ‘self-determining’ so-called ‘theory of everything’ that is as ‘complete’ as is objectively possible.

By ‘self -determining theory’ is meant a theory that may truly be said to be the most self consistent objective foundation for the construction of a cosmological model representive of the objective/absolute reality; as opposed to the subjective/relative realities represented by the current collection of ‘partial’ theories; which are doomed to forever remain both ‘partial’ and ‘relative’ by definition, and by the THEORISING PROCESSES that produced them..

Not only do present theories lack truly objective/absolute ‘starting’ concepts, but they also lack rigorously consistent and unbroken ‘self-directing’ logic trails from whatever ‘relative’ starting concepts they DO employ. Thus inevitably producing conclusions and models that are invariably heavily dependent on ‘ad hoc’ postulates, assumptions and boundary conditions. All the things in fact, which necessarily doom their consequential conclusions to be forever ‘partial/relative-----’ irrespective of how much effort may subsequently be put into trying to ‘amalgamate’ them into a would-be ‘complete’ model; which likewise will be doomed to ‘objective/absolute’ failure owing to the purely ‘relative/partial’ and ad-hoc-postulate-infested nature of the ‘amalgamated’ component theories.

Essentially, conventional cosmological physics theorising predicated on a plethora of non-independent ‘starting’ assumptions and subjective/arbitrary boundary conditions that human theorists invariably inject ‘on demand’ into their conventionally arrived at ‘special’ theories. Such an approach, as is self-evident in this field today, does not allow for ‘seamless joining’ of these ‘top down’ theories into one consistent whole.

The reason for this, already stated above but emphasised once more, is that all conventional physical cosmology theorising is NOT based on any ‘self-directing’ logic flowing from a purely human-independent, objective, absolute starting concept self-determined to exist “a priori” even in the ABSENCE of human observers.

Instead, conventional physical cosmology theorising IS based on human-dependent, subjective, relative, concepts from its very inception; and permeated thereafter by further ‘postulates’ and ‘fixes’ having more to do with ‘special need’ to arbitrality cover ‘gaps’ in the ‘relative’ logic ‘trail’ than with following a ‘seamless’ objectively established ‘absolute’ logic trail commenced from a truly independent starting point.

Hence our inescapable conclusion: conventional cosmology theorising processes and their products haven’t a hope of ever objectively and consistently describing/explaining from ‘go’ to ‘whoa’ and back again, the larger phenomenological system comprising THE ‘complete’ UNIVERSAL TOTALITY-----no matter HOW often the various partial theories are ‘fixed’ and ‘amalgamated’ within a framework built solely on relative and human-dependent ‘beginnings’.


NOVEL SELF-DETERMINING PHYSICAL COSMOLOGY THEORISING PROCESS

In order to avoid the very same age-old shortcuts and pitfalls leading to the current state of affairs, our ‘complete/absolute’ Cosmology Special Project will utilise a radically new theorising process that from its very FIRST STEP requires participants to purposely eschew, resist and otherwise ‘unlearn’ (as much as is humanly possible to do so) all those ‘relative’ habits and seductive but misleading ‘understandings’, arbitrary assumptions and other ad hoc shortcuts with which we have all been ‘inculcated’ over the years via the modern ‘relativity’ ethos. All these things have become (almost!) irretrievably ingrained into the very fabric of the way science is done and the very language and conventions of scientists’ attitudes, literature and discourses.

A drastic break with tradition is crucial if humanity is ever to divest itself of the burdensome personality/orthodoxy ‘baggage’ which has accumulated in this field over time. The conventional doomed-to-endless-relative-conjecture theorising processes have resulted in the observed ‘stagnation’ plateau in the field, which has produced 'by default' a ‘free-for-all’ speculative frenzy in scientific circles. Of course, there are no objections to ‘helpful’ and ideas-stimulating speculative science FICTION, but there is no excuse for the overwhelming preponderance of profferings, by so-called scientists, of futile speculative science FANTASY in lieu of REAL ‘concrete’ explanations; that is, explanations that are not bogged down and made absolutely meaningless by purely ‘relative’ speculations that can NEVER be made into a consistent and 'complete' physical cosmology model.

If participants in this novel physical cosmology theorising project can INITIALLY achieve this TEMPORARY ‘unlearning’ of conventional physical cosmology ‘knowledge/practices’, they will have effectively left behind them all those current/historical misunderstandings and confusions brought about by the disjointed relative treatments of the Universal Phenomena that has characterised cosmological theorising in modern times.

Good luck and good thinking to us all!


PROCESS PROPER


IDENTIFY ABSOLUTELY INDEPENDENT STARTING CONCEPT

All concerned in this special project will be required to allow the, as it were, ‘incipient’ Theory Of Everything to ‘construct itself’ from go to whoa from the bottom up.

To this end, we must provide our incipient TOE with an independently-arrived-at ‘absolute’ starting premise. Only thus can that T.O.E. tell us what it will be; rather than the other way round!

So, instead of us telling our T.O.E. what it should be according to whatever ad hoc starting assumptions and boundary-conditions we may choose to arbitrarily put on it, we shall begin by theoretically/logically ‘identifying’ at least ONE independent absolute physical concept, and thereafter allow our incipient T.O.E., via its OWN logic flowing therefrom, to be our guide towards theoretically/logically further identifying the NEXT physical concept(s) arrived at via that self-determined logic-trail. And so on and so forth until the T.O.E. logic trail should arrive at some ‘final’ necessary physical concept for its ‘completion’ (if possible) to be self-evident.

Let us hope, therefore, that we can at least succeed in nullifying the ever-looming ‘human dictates’ effect from what some have called an impossibly ambitious endeavour. We shall see what we shall see according to whatever logic-flow has been set in train by our ‘beginning’ efforts-----the results SO FAR of which are summarised as follows.

STAGE-I RESULT(S):

Note: For detailed information on the various participants’ inputs and discussions which led to the following results of STAGE-I Q & A session/deliberations, please go-to and peruse the relevant ‘pages/posts’ in the main “THEORY OF EVERYTHING BEGUN FROM ABSOLUTE CONCEPT” thread. Thankyou.

In STAGE-I, we identified OMNI-DIRECTION as our ‘starting’ independent physical concept, as it was successfully argued and agreed that Direction is associated ‘a priori’ with any and all possible physical frames of reference.

IMPLICATIONS

1.

The fact that OMNI-DIRECTION was identified as the FIRST INDEPENDENT PHYSICAL CONCEPT, implies that ‘NOTHINGNESS’ was NEVER a physical entity/concept in its own right, because “nothing” would then have to have come AFTER “omni-direction”; and since omni-direction was, and ALWAYS IS, “there”, then “nothingness” itself as a PHYSICAL quantity/concept can NEVER have been “before”, or EVER be “afterwards”, a purely PHYSICAL entity/concept within the context of the ‘SELF-DETERMINED’ LOGIC TRAIL thus established by the omni-direction INDEPENDENT ‘STARTING’ CONCEPT beginning that PHYSICAL ONLY logic trail.

2.

”NOTHINGNESS” is therefore ONLY a PHILOSOPHICAL/ARITHMETICAL CONCEPT Therefore, this philosophical/mathematical ‘nothingness’ concept ‘result’ will be henceforth ELIMINATED from further PHYSICAL THEORISING in this project; and will consequently be input to our TOE project’s relevant associate threads for further discussion as warranted/desired for the purposes/furtherance of knowledge in those ‘fields’.


3.

An OMNI-INFINITY of DIRECTIONAL-DIMENSION DUALITIES implies an ABSOLUTE SCALAR ‘a priori’ infinite totality of infinite number of infinitesimally thin ‘Direction-Dimension DUALITY LINES’ which, through their ‘criss-crossing’ through COINCIDENT LOCATIONS, thus form a sort of FIXED INFINITE VOLUMETRIC FABRIC of ‘point-locations’ where DIRECTIONAL DUALITY LINES are ‘balanced’ as to IN-OUT dualities in any properties/tendencies ALSO INHERENTLY associated ‘a priori’ with DIRECTIONAL DUALITY per se.

4.

This a priori independent SCALAR ‘Omni’ Direction INFINITE TOTALITY (see 3. above) is naturally differentiable into an INFINITE TOTALITY of VECTOR ‘Duality’ Direction LINES because every ‘coincident point’ location has an infinite SPHERICAL SPREAD of direction-duality lines from itself to every other possible ‘coincidence’ location generated by the infinite number of criss-crossings in the infinite PASSIVE (ie, BALANCED IN-OUT direction-duality-vectors) matrix/fabric.

5.

The a-priori BALANCED (PASSIVE) LINES RELATIVITIES (or INTERCONNECTIVITIES) between any one and all other locations in the infinite locations-point-matrix in the a-priori infinite independent direction dimension scalar totality, INHERENTLY represents a FLAT (or EUCLIDIAN) GEOMETRY by default. That is, NON-DIFFERENTIATION between any one such point and another, EFFECTIVELY SPEAKING produces a PHYSICAL MATRIX which is to all intents and purposes ‘VOID’ of ‘PERCEPTIBLE’ PHYSICAL EFFECTS because of that NON-diffferentiation between any point and all other points IN THEIR BALANCED or ‘GROUND’ STATES.

6.

However, this GROUND STATE also presents a PHILOSOPHICAL aspect as well as the a-priori PHYSICAL GEOMETRY aspect; simply because we HUMANS, considering a 'BEGINNING' STATE for that SCALAR 'VOID’ MATRIX of point-locations, will inevitably consider some sort of ‘beginning state’ to be FIRST balanced/passive and undifferentiated. But of course, there need NOT EVER HAVE BEEN an ACTUAL ‘beginning’ state for the WHOLE INFINITE ‘VOID’ TOTALITY per se. For it is UNLIKELY that the whole infinite totality ever WAS 'all' PASSIVE at 'all' point-locations/moments. In other words, the default or GROUND state applies ONLY for EACH omni-directional coincidence locations ONLY whenever/wherever all duality lines FOR THAT POINT-LOCATION at a particular moment ARE ACTUALLY balanced for SOME duration and not necessarily ‘forever’. And of course, there will also be COLLECTIONS/NUMBERS of such passive points in that ‘VOID’....which THEN leads us to the NEXT question(s) for STAGE-II (see 11. below). [This aspect of ‘passive/beginnings’ etc will be input to the PHILOSOPHY/MATHEMATICS thread for further discussion.]

7.

When considering the inherent properties and characteristics of the SUBSTANCE and ENERGY aspects of Vector direction duality lines, one must consider that in any CHOSEN PHYSICAL FRAME/SYSTEM there must be ORIENTATION based on the LOCAL parameters, relativities and interconnections of the PASSIVE (PHYSICAL EFFECTS ‘VOID’) ground state matrix UNDERLYING that chosen frame; and also that any CHANGES to that PHYSICAL PASSIVENESS (or EFFECTS-‘VOIDNESS’) will imply an IMBALANCE or ACTIVATION of one or more formerly passive/balanced coincidence point-locations; such that the ground state and 'default' geometry are BOTH affected, so as to manifest as CHANGE/FLOW in inherent point-location POTENTIAL PHYSICAL properties and characteristics that produce their OWN 'higher' or NON-EUCLIDIAN geometry OVERLAY on the underlying Euclidian geometry of the ground state matrix/fabric.

Note: Because of a-priori OMNI-DIRECTION-DIMENSIONALITY of the INFINITE UNIVERSAL TOTALITY, the CONVENTIONAL 3-Direction-Dimensional IMPULSE-ENERGY-LINES ‘Cartesian’ Co-Ordinates System appears to be merely a 'shorthand' representation of the aforementioned matrix volumetric; which in reality constitutes an infinite matrix of point-locations having an infinite SPHERICAL-SPREAD of INFINITESIMALLY-THIN direction-dimension energy/impetus lines whose INFINITE TOTALITY OF COINCIDENCE-CENTRES forms the fundamental INFINITE UNIVERSAL TOTALITY coincident-points/locations 'TRUE-BULK’. This will be input for further discussion under the appropriate thread(s).

8.

Any ONE direction-duality line represents a TWO-WAY POTENTIAL FOR ORIENTATION from any one coincident-point location to any other adjacent/distant such point in the chosen frame ‘void’ matrix. The only obvious change must be imbalance in at least ONE direction-duality line to produce an active point-location having consequently a PREFERRED ORIENTATION TENDENCY for the duration of that imbalance state. This imbalance state in a line-duality AXIS would be akin to producing the physical effect of DIPOLE ACTIVATION of the affected point-location along the axis of the particular duality line temporarily ORIENTATIONALLY UNBALANCED in one direction along the line in question.

9.

Now as to that ORIENTATIONAL TENDENCY itself, the implication is that ENERGY is the TENDENCY to FLOW, MOVE or otherwise ORIENT the PHYSICAL EFFECTS of the INHERENT a-priori directional SUBSTANCE, PROPERTIES AND CHARACTERISTICS of a line. In a balanced line, that tendency is TWO-WAY and hence essentially ‘ineffective’ or inactive/passive 'physically'. But once the balance/passivity of two-way orientational-tendency (or ENERGY) SYMMETRY is broken, THEN and ONLY then can there be said to be EFFECTIVELY ORIENTED ENERGY (or IMPETUS) to one or other of the preferred ORIENTATION along the afffected direction-duality-line.

10.

All the above, implies that ACTIVE ENERGY VECTORS arise at formerly PASSIVE point-locations previously balanced as to SPHERICAL SPREAD TWO-WAY ENERGY tendencies associated with that balanced coincidence location of in-out energy-vectors. When such vector-duality lines are balanced, there is NO effective ENERGY vector, only POTENTIAL energy vectors ONE WAY OR THE OTHER along that duality-line of INHERENT potential PHYSICAL effects from DIRECTION-SUBSTANCE’S INHERENT properties and characteristics.

[Note: the implications for the NATURE/ORIGIN of the DIRECTION per se ‘UNIVERSAL SUBSTANCE’ and its INHERENT/POTENTIAL/KINETIC PROPERTIES, CHARACTERISTICS; plus the infinitesimal/infinite ‘value/quanta’ of ENERGY VECTOR, IMPETUS associated with coincidence-point passivity/activity etc, will be input for further discussion in the appropriate associate threads.]


11.

The next implication involves our project’s NEXT self-determined question. Logically, this must address the REASON(S) and MECHANISM(S) for ACTIVATION of the PASSIVE or PHYSICAL-EFFECTS-‘VOID’ backgound arena of two-way, potential-energy/impetus, vector-duality-line and point-locations matrix; such that PHYSICAL EFFECTS ARE MANIFEST via any one or more point-locations at any one or more moments.

The question(s) for STAGE-II have already been posed in the STAGE-II Q & A session of the TOE BEGUN FROM ABSOLUTE CONCEPT thread. The progressing of which was awaiting this long-delayed summary for STAGE-I! MIA CULPA...and apologies to all concerned! The ‘human condition’ makes scant allowance for science, no matter HOW important! hehehe]


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

The STAGE-II question(s) and hints/comments follow. These TWO QUESTIONS (and the accompanying hints/comments) were originally TWICE RE-PHRASED and REITERATED in the main “TOE BEGUN FROM ABSOLUTE CONCEPT” thread for the benefit of those who needed further clarification/direction (hehehe) before proceeding. The same is done here for sake of convenience to newcomers.


***FIRST ITERATION OF STAGE-II QUESTIONS AND HINTS/COMMENTS***

(#1).....WHAT ARE THE NATURAL ‘UNSETTLED’ CORRESPONDENCES WITHIN THE ABSOLUTE-MATH/-GEOM. RELATIVITIES OF AN OTHERWISE PASSIVE/BALANCED UNBOUNDED PRIMARY VACUUM ‘BULK’ VOLUME....SUCH THAT WOULD PROVIDE FOR THE ‘ONGOING GENERATION’ OF THE NECESSARY ‘QUANTUM BITS’ OF UNBALANCED/UNSTABLE ‘ACTIVE’ ENERGY BUILDING/INTERACTION ‘BLOCKS’ NECESSARY FOR CHANGE/PHENOMENA TO ARISE/SUBSIDE IN THAT SPATIAL BULK POINTS/LOCATIONS-FABRIC?

(#2).....WHAT FORM/PROPERTIES MUST SUCH ‘QUANTUM BITS’ OF ACTIVE ENERGY TAKE/HAVE IN ORDER TO PRODUCE THE INTERACTION/AGGREGATION/DE-AGGREGATION PHENOMENA WE OBSERVE EVERYWHERE.

Hints/Comments: Our logic flow has got only as far as the INFINITE ENERGY ‘POINT-BULK’ OF PRIMARY-VACUUM ABSOLUTE-SPACE VOLUME. So please don’t input ‘prematurely' such pre-conceived constructs as ‘time’ (as in SPACE-TIME ‘pseudo-bulk), temperature/heat etc. Just go where the logic and questions take you, without imposing ‘current/conventional’ assumptions/orthodoxies etc. BUT of course, ALWAYS BE AS DIFFERENT/ORIGINAL as you want; no-one yet ‘knows’ what is ‘right/wrong’...all that this project asks of you is that you be cogent/relevant for each stage with whatever you DO come up with.


Everyone please feel free to ‘PRE’-discuss any and all maths/geom, physics, philosophy etc implications from the above IN THE APPROPRIATE ASSOCIATE THREADS started expressly for such ‘general discussions. Please remember, for these and all other present/upcoming PHYSICAL TOE aspects, it will be most helpful if you post in the appropriate stage of “THEORY OF EVERYTHING STARTED FROM ABSOLUTE CONCEPT” thread ONLY AFTER your thoughts on those aspects have ‘GELLED’ in those OTHER threads; and ONLY if you have a directly brief/relevant contribution to make to that STAGE’s process. Otherwise, for general discussion and further discussion of strictly NON-PHYSICAL aspects, please contain your discussion/input to the relevant threads...unless and until we reach a stage in the Physical TOE where PHILOSOPHICAL etc input is REQUESTED/REQUIRED by the TOE process itself. Thanks.

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

***SECOND (PARAPHRASED) ITERATION OF STAGE-II QUESTIONS AND HINTS/COMMENTS***

(#1).....HOW OR WHY CAN THERE BE RANDOM/ONGOING IMBALANCES OCCURRING IN OTHERWISE PASSIVE, SPHERICALLY/RADIAL-ENERGY-LINE BALANCED, INFINITE-SPACE, ABSOLUTE-LOCATION POINTS MATRIX?

[Hint: Since this space-locations-matrix is essentially an absolutely unbounded energy volumetrication system; and since this space-energy true-bulk has an absolutely ‘flat’ (EUCLIDEAN) geometry, what inherent ‘flaws’ or ‘unsettled correspondences’ are there in the ‘spherical/radial spread’ of energy-lines from each SPACE LOCATION ‘point’ to every other such ‘point’ in the absolute-frame context of space(ONLY) geometry.

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

(#2).....WHAT GEOMETRICAL FORM, AND OTHER PHYSICAL PROPERTIES, MUST THE ‘CONSEQUENCES’ OF SUCH ‘IMBALANCES’ HAVE/DISPLAY IN ORDER THAT AFFECTED SPACE LOCATIONS ARE ‘TRANSIENTLY’ *NOT* PASSIVE AND ABSOLUTE IN EFFECT?

[Hint: The answer has to be something that provides the function/properties of a ‘minimal unit’ of ‘activated DUALITY’ energy which, when joined by innumerable other such ‘units’, will give a ‘fluid dynamics’ FALSE-BULK (space+quantum-ocean) medium wherein these ‘quantum units’ associated with affected space-location points can interact, aggregate, de-aggregate, and eventually (individually or in pairs) ‘de-activate’ each other back to the passive absolute matrix context (only to be replaced by other, further on-going, imbalance replacement units of such physical effectiveness form/properties)...and do so in such a way that these RELATIVE frame of reference ‘SPACE+QUANTUM-OCEAN’ SECONDARY-VACUUM FALSE-BULK dynamical processes can explain at least some of the observed "RELATIVE" NON-EUCLIDEAN 'FALSE-BULK' GEOMETRY 'phenomena' occurring within the "ABSOLUTE" EUCLIDEAN 'TRUE-BULK' GEOMETRY SPACE(ONLY) ‘arena’.]

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

***THIRD (PARAPHRASED) ITERATION OF STAGE-II QUESTIONS AND HINTS/COMMENTS***


(#1).....Identify the cause/quantum of ACTIVATION of those point-locations in the otherwise eternally-passive matrix; such that there arises a PSEUDO-BULK comprised of ACTIVE INFINITESIMAL QUANTA of directional IMPETUS-ENERGY lines.

(#2).....Identify what 'physical' form, distribution, properties, and dynamics such ENERGY-LINE QUANTA must possess/exhibit in order to produce the 'pseudo-bulk' system DYNAMICS we observe.

HINT: Since the fundamental condition is SPHERICAL-SPREAD OF INFINITESIMAL ENERGY LINES FROM COINCIDENCE-POINT-LOCATION to all other such point-locations throughout the infinite universal totality omni-D-D Matrix 'true-bulk'; and, since the 'NATURAL-MATHEMATIC/GEOMETRIC RELATIVITIES' BETWEEN SPHERICAL-POINTS/REGIONS in any such infinite VOLUMETRIC cannot EVER 'settle' PERMANENTLY AND LOCALLY to a STABLE ARRANGEMENT of CUBIC/SPERICAL POINTS/REGIONS without 'excluding' SOME INFINITESIMAL VOLUMETRIC 'SEGMENT/REGION/LINE' OF ENERGY (think of 'trying to 'square the circle' or to 'cubify' the 'sphere' etc), then it follows that one/many 'relativity-accommodation' must at least TRANSIENTLY result in some 'minimal LEFTOVER' 'off-cuts' excluded from some point-locations OTHERWISE-BALANCED spherical spread of in/out directional-energy lines complement from ONE MOMENT TO THE NEXT. Our job is to identify what are the relevant mathematic/geometric/volumetric RELATIVITIES that will give rise to such 'active' forms' of leftover 'bits' of energy-lines that will then produce an ACTIVE 'pseudo-bulk' dynamical context of their own, before subsiding back into passive context once the affected UNBALANCED('activated') point-location is 'balanced' once more (until the next (random?) unbalancing (and hence activation) ‘event’.


Note: these PSEUDO-BULK DYNAMICS and the number/nature/mechanisms of the so-called PHYSICAL 'FORCES' involved, will be the subject of STAGE THREE Q & A session. And FOR YOUR FURTHER INFORMATION: When stage three is underway, ZEPHIR’S THREAD/GRAPHICS/INSIGHTS will be INVALUABLE in understanding that ‘activated-energy-quanta’ pseudo-bulk DYNAMICS/MECHANISMS/PHENOMENA in a ‘classical/intuitive/visual’ way! Zephir’s EXCHANGES WITH GOOD ELF and others are especially informative/relevant insofar as the ‘comprehension interface’ of various ‘perspectives’ of the same reality is concerned.

Note: The CONVENTIONAL 3-D-D IMPULSE-ENERGY-LINES co-ordinate system is in fact merely a 'shorthand' representation of the aforementioned matrix volumetric; which in reality constitutes an infinite matrix of point-locations having an infinite SPHERICAL-SPREAD of INFINITESIMALLY-THIN direction-dimension energy-lines whose TOTALITY OF COINCIDENCE-CENTRES forms the fundamental INFINITE UNIVERSAL TOTALITY 'TRUE-BULK.

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

END STAGE-I SUMMARY & IMPLICATIONS

EVERYONE: I’ll be working on the ‘implications’ posts for input to the other threads over the next couple of days. Meantime, please peruse the above and get to ‘fine tuning’ your responses to the two stage-II questions! I’ll be ‘seeing’ you all in two or three days in the other threads...so, everyone take care, good luck and good thinking until we speak again. (I’ll also come back then to ‘clean up’ any typos, field any questions re suggestions for improving this summary etc.). Oh, and once we finish stage-II, we should have sufficient RAW MATERIAL for a proper GLOSSARY OF TERMS which we can include as appropriate. Cheers!

RealityCheck.
.

.
Hi maths/physics continuum!

Sorry, mate, but the SUMMARY page is for the moderator-guide RealityCheck (me!) to give an ongoing summary of the TOE Q & A stage results to date....and hence is reserved for RC's posts only.

Don't worry....I have now QUOTED and moved your post from the SUMMARY page and put it in the TOE Q & A page!.

I have also briefly tried to answer your very concerns therein (to your satisfaction, I hope! hehehe).

Things are a bit quiet in this TOE sub-forum for now.

I have been ill and this has delayed stage-II somewhat.

But things should resume in earnest in a few weeks and you are most welcome to contribute/participate to/in our TOE project activities as and how you feel able to!

All constructive intellects/inputs welcome!

Cheers and see ya round, mate!

RC.
.