Hello everyone!
This thread is reserved for the co-moderators (RealityCheck & Tor) to provide directions to participants (as below). That is all. Thanks.
.
GUIDE TO TOPIC THREADS, PROCEDURE & PARTICIPATION
.
THREADS:-
(1) SIGNPOST/INFO for SPECIAL PROJECT (Self-explanatory).
(2) SUGGESTIONS/CRITICISMS/COMPLAINTS (For participants to submit any ideas and/or complaints etc for improvement/management of this COMPLETE COSMOLOGY THEORY special project).
(3) LINKS/ABSTRACTS for PARTICIPANTS/THEORIES
(4) PROGRESSIVE THEORY SUMMARY (Streamlined progressive theory summary description/recording thread).
(5) THEORY OF EVERYTHING BEGUN FROM ABSOLUTE CONCEPT. (Q & A Stage-Finalisations thread).
(6) COMPARISONS between OUR TOE and OTHER THEORIES (General Comparisons between participants’ theories and Project TOE stages).
(7) MATHEMATIC/NUMBER-THEORY INSIGHTS from TOE project (General Discussion of such insights/principles/theorems).
(8) ENERGY/MATTER/MASS (Discussions about the nature of energy, matter and mass for T.O.E.)
(9) ELECTRICITY/MAGNETISM/PARTICLES/WAVES (Discussions about what these ‘mean’ as per T.O.E. results).
(10) GRAVITY/INERTIA/TRANSLATION/PROPAGATION (Discussions as to Mechanism(s) for Gravity/Inertia & Movement/Translation/Propagation etc. as per T.O.E results).
(11) PHILOSOPHICAL IMPLICATIONS of TOE project (Discussion of any philosophical insights flowing from T.O.E. stage by stage).
(12) SUNDRY/GENERAL ITEMS (Whatever seems important/appropriate that is not covered by a dedicated thread).
.
PROCEDURE FOR THREAD NUMBER:-
(1) Self-explanatory.
(2) Anyone, even non-participants, may post their suggestions/ideas/criticisms etc. here (but keep it clean, folks!...as this is history-in-the-making; and the world will be watching! hehehe).
(3) Because we want to keep the threads to a mimimum WITHIN THE "SPECIAL PROJECT" SUB-FORUM, here is the LINKS/ABSTRACT ONLY thread which participants may use to briefly abstract and, VIA A LINK, point to their own theory(s) IN THEIR OWN THREAD UNDER THEIR OWN USERNAMES which they may start in the MAIN "Relativity etc..." FORUM for that purpose. In their own threads, participants can outline and discuss their theories in greater detail; and generally 'test out their ideas' in 'wider' discussions before their more 'narrowed' discussions in the relevant 'Special Project' threads. All of this being of course aimed at 'refining' their respective answers for each stage of the T.O.E. Q.& A. thread.
(4) - CO-MODERATORS [RealityCheck & Tor] will have EXCLUSIVE access to this thread ....all unauthorised postings here will be immediately DELETED/MOVED as appropriate.
(5) RealityCheck will put the STAGE Questions to this thread [together with hints/guidance and LEAD TIME for Answers]....participants will post here their BRIEF Answers ONLY after having first ‘refined’ same via discussion in other appropriate threads (or directly, without any such prior discussions, if participant so chooses). CO-MODERATORS will then subject all Stage ANSWERS to COMMENTS/COMPARISONS so a ‘final judgement’ on THAT STAGE’S ANSWERS can be made and put to participants for final “OK” (if necessary, this process will be a REPEAT LOOP until an “OK” is obtained....or until co-moderators break any ‘impasse’).
(6) This thread is specifically for comparisons of the appropriate STAGES of any PARTICIPANT’S PERSONAL THEORY with OUR T.O.E’s COMPARATIVE the-theory-so-far STAGE. Participants who want to compare their WHOLE theory IN FULL to our TOE in-progress, must limit those IN-WHOLE discussions to their own threads until OUR TOE is COMPLETE.
(7) The name of this thread is self-explanatory, and will be used to introduce/refine insights/answers to TOE stage questions dealing with such matters.
(8) The name of this thread is self-explanatory, and will be used to introduce/refine insights/answers to TOE stage questions dealing with such matters.
(9) The name of this thread is self-explanatory, and will be used to introduce/refine insights/answers to TOE stage questions dealing with such matters.
(10) The name of this thread is self-explanatory, and will be used to introduce/refine insights/answers to TOE stage questions dealing with such matters.
(11) The name of this thread is self-explanatory, and will be used to introduce/refine insights/answers to TOE stage questions dealing with such matters.
(12) This thread is for discussing anything of a ‘general’ or unusual nature that does not fall into any of the above categories/threads (and any item put here may, if found to be of an ‘ongoing/integral’ nature, be later given its own thread as and if deemed appropriate).
.
PARTICIPATION:
All Ladies and Gentlemen of all ages and backgrounds are welcome to participate according to the above arrangements/procedures. Anyone ‘trolling’ or otherwise disrupting proceedings will be excluded from further participation. Fairness and Impartiality will be our ‘watchwords’ [but ‘Free-for-all’ will NOT, hehehe]. As this SPECIAL PROJECT was started by RealityCheck (and now ably assisted by Tor), these CO-MODERATORS will have the FINAL SAY on any matter that cannot be resolved via a ‘show of hands’ by participants. All CRITICISMS will be duly noted and acted upon as appropriate asap. Do your best and YOUR INPUT will be taken NO LESS seriously than anyone else’s. The ultimate judge will be THE ONGOING LOGIC-FLOW OF THE T.O.E.-IN-THE-MAKING itself!
PLEASE NOTE: INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANTS who have a complete/partial PHYSICAL THEORY of their own are welcome to start a Topic thread UNDER THEIR OWN USERNAME and UNDER THE GENERAL “Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, New Theories” FORUM (and NOT THIS dedicated T.O.E sub-forum!) so that they can 'pre-discuss’ with other participants any aspect of their theory which may be the basis for the thread-owner’s ANSWER(S) (if any) to current/later T.O.E.-stage QUESTIONS put by RealityCheck in topic thread number (5) above.
So GOOD LUCK & GOOD THINKING, everyone!
RealityCheck/Tor.
Do me a favor RealityCheck,Could you get me a free pass to make a comment.
Some that has not been here long, think I am just pooping in/not so. I think you are doing one heck of a job. But they have no history of how we began on this site with different threads, this is your project and you know my time is always limited.
So I read what is said.
Your out of the box/that is a compliment by the way, mate, also that does not mean that I want to interfere or intrude. Thanks you RealityCheck.
ciao_
yquantum
QUOTE (yquantum+Dec 23 2005, 02:44 AM)
Do me a favor RealityCheck,Could you get me a free pass to make a comment.
Some that has not been here long, think I am just pooping in/not so. I think you are doing one heck of a job. But they have no history of how we began on this site with different threads, this is your project and you know my time is always limited.
So I read what is said.
Your out of the box/that is a compliment by the way, mate, also that does not mean that I want to interfere or intrude. Thanks you RealityCheck.
ciao_
yquantum
.
Again, thanks. Praise from you is praise indeed! Please see my reply to your post in the "SUGGESTIONS/etc..." thread. Ciao YQ!
RC.
.
Title:Code F2F
Reality-Check, thanks for your twelve gates to the city, hallelujah.
Is this something like mathematical "group theory" (variables) with "procedures" (operators)?
Suggestion: place your comments on each enumerated Thread immediately below each one as given, thus the reader can get a closer notion of what you are doing without switching page lengths.
Or, my favorite counting scheme, the sociogram circle, for your ideas, twelve, the Threads, which somehow seem to be connections, or links between the twelve, thus the sum of two way links L(n)=n(n-1)/2, for n=12, 12x11/2=66 two way links.
Then a joke of poor taste on my part, you have chosen two disciples, not a bad idea, but does show some new testament biblical bias, which doesn't necessarily mean it is a poor choice of group leadership, just a possible cultural trance-form-nation out of several thousand years of experiments, with an unfortunate history of violence whatever was initially intended.
Actually this kind of minimal guidance group development via the Internet and other Networking tools appears to be in progress, posting again here a link:
"Ten Ways Online Education Matches, or Surpasses, Face-to-face Learning" by Mark Kassop, http://technologysource.org/article/ten_wa...ation_matches... (have to check full link of this University of North Carolina, "The technology Sources Archives"... be back):
http://technologysource.org/article/ten_wa...oface_learning/
[comments: actually the link through ".../article/" gives a long list of many of the articles other than the one above, the ABSTRACT to the article is pasted below]:
{{Commentary
Ten Ways Online Education Matches, or Surpasses, Face-to-Face Learning
by Mark Kassop
Note: This article was originally published in The Technology Source (http://ts.mivu.org/) as: Mark Kassop "Ten Ways Online Education Matches, or Surpasses, Face-to-Face Learning" The Technology Source, May/June 2003. Available online at http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=1034. The article is reprinted here with permission of the publisher.}}
[commentary by rm: as you might guess, this above article gives ten (10) points, and may show another bias, but I'll pass on this, since I am a member of our Michigan American Civil Liberties Union, a MW Michigan Chapter or Branch, and the Federal USA Constitution's Ten Amendments (originally submitted as twelve, suggests the question of ten or twelve enumerated statements was important to the all male Continental Congress circa late 1700's.)
So I'll stick with L(n)=n(n-1)/2 Two way links, in the immediate article above, given the code phrase "face-to-face (F2F)".
Yes, I'd be glad to work on this kind of improvement on using our times of interaction. This was the subject of Douglass C. North circa 1993 Noblel prize along with Fogel (on health care), wherein North addressed that a group, say F2F has open access and open interactions, and then, I suppose, when that gets so many links, L(n), then another group is formed.
I have to commend physorg.com for being very progressive on this kind of communication advance, I am still learning about it, changing faster than I can experience, maybe a good feature.
We do have a good year ahead of us all, with any luck in the uncertainty.
Best, rmuldavin.
Reality-Check, thanks for your twelve gates to the city, hallelujah.
Is this something like mathematical "group theory" (variables) with "procedures" (operators)?
Suggestion: place your comments on each enumerated Thread immediately below each one as given, thus the reader can get a closer notion of what you are doing without switching page lengths.
Or, my favorite counting scheme, the sociogram circle, for your ideas, twelve, the Threads, which somehow seem to be connections, or links between the twelve, thus the sum of two way links L(n)=n(n-1)/2, for n=12, 12x11/2=66 two way links.
Then a joke of poor taste on my part, you have chosen two disciples, not a bad idea, but does show some new testament biblical bias, which doesn't necessarily mean it is a poor choice of group leadership, just a possible cultural trance-form-nation out of several thousand years of experiments, with an unfortunate history of violence whatever was initially intended.
Actually this kind of minimal guidance group development via the Internet and other Networking tools appears to be in progress, posting again here a link:
"Ten Ways Online Education Matches, or Surpasses, Face-to-face Learning" by Mark Kassop, http://technologysource.org/article/ten_wa...ation_matches... (have to check full link of this University of North Carolina, "The technology Sources Archives"... be back):
http://technologysource.org/article/ten_wa...oface_learning/
[comments: actually the link through ".../article/" gives a long list of many of the articles other than the one above, the ABSTRACT to the article is pasted below]:
{{Commentary
Ten Ways Online Education Matches, or Surpasses, Face-to-Face Learning
by Mark Kassop
Note: This article was originally published in The Technology Source (http://ts.mivu.org/) as: Mark Kassop "Ten Ways Online Education Matches, or Surpasses, Face-to-Face Learning" The Technology Source, May/June 2003. Available online at http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=1034. The article is reprinted here with permission of the publisher.}}
[commentary by rm: as you might guess, this above article gives ten (10) points, and may show another bias, but I'll pass on this, since I am a member of our Michigan American Civil Liberties Union, a MW Michigan Chapter or Branch, and the Federal USA Constitution's Ten Amendments (originally submitted as twelve, suggests the question of ten or twelve enumerated statements was important to the all male Continental Congress circa late 1700's.)
So I'll stick with L(n)=n(n-1)/2 Two way links, in the immediate article above, given the code phrase "face-to-face (F2F)".
Yes, I'd be glad to work on this kind of improvement on using our times of interaction. This was the subject of Douglass C. North circa 1993 Noblel prize along with Fogel (on health care), wherein North addressed that a group, say F2F has open access and open interactions, and then, I suppose, when that gets so many links, L(n), then another group is formed.
I have to commend physorg.com for being very progressive on this kind of communication advance, I am still learning about it, changing faster than I can experience, maybe a good feature.
We do have a good year ahead of us all, with any luck in the uncertainty.
Best, rmuldavin.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.