But that isn't the problem here.
The conceptual problem with AuT isn't its inherent accuracy. You, especially you who have read the second edition (not out yet, but in limited circulation) of the first book and the second book understand that observations match the theory. That's the reason to discuss the findings in other articles, because those observations should be reconciled with AuT.
What's good about this process is that in most cases, the inconsistencies in prior art are actually suggested by AuT. Where that isn't the case, the observations are wrong, of course, but the theory is not yet perfect.
The biggest problem that you and the other scientists have is that the big leap (which is also present in traditional physics) is that you have to accept that given the initial formula, after x reaches a very large number, you end up...here! That's not an easy pill to swallow. The size of x in the present case defines at quantum instances the entire universe. Harder still, if you began all over, you woudl end up with the exact same universe. Identical in every respect.
But as absurd as it seems, think about this. In an organized universe, where true logic reigned, would you have the juxtaposition of Elizabeth Warren and Mitch McConnel? I don't believe so. If we were truely ruled by absolute intellect instead of reflected intellect, then you would have some amalgam. The only explanation for the lack of cohesion in a presumably evolved intelligence is that behind it there is something that forces stupidity into the system. You don't have to pick sides to see this, you just look at the polarization of both sides. If either one doesn't work for you, or if the combination doesn't make sense, there you have it. I'm not wrong, unfortunately, but if I was wrong it would just mean that we're an ignorant, primitive lot that can't fix even our simple problems because we're too stupid.
Need more examples? You could look at just about anything, living or dead, but politics is sort of fun. How about the idea that we're sitting here looking at single payer health insurance working in every major country but the USA. Now, putting aside the fact that they politicians (who are constantly needing to raise money) are bought and paid for by the insurance companies; how can we go in the opposite direction and why would we? Don't get me wrong, the economic disruption of closing these insurance companies down would be enormous, but intelligent life could work through these things and would.
We are "intelligent," otherwise you would not be reading this. But we are reflective intelligent. We don't have actual self determination, but the compression of information is so deep that we appear to have it. You don't have to look this deeply to see the difficulty. Ignoring what I thought or felt, I made breakfast for dinner last night, went to sleep at 9 and woke up at 4:30 am and drank coffee I'd put in a glass jar the day before for that purpose. Now I'm sitting here typing this (6am) with a cat sitting on my lap. What are the odds? The answer has to be that the odds are 100%. While a bit incredulous, even for me, we don't hesitate to accept those odds for the orbit of the earth, but to think that exactly these things must happen in exactly this way according to what appears to be a fairly simple algorithm based on self generating spiral solutions is difficult to accept conceptually, but it is there none the less. Accept it, reject it, doesn't matter. I am here, because for whatever reason, the solution requires that I present it to you at this point in time. Why? Perhaps it's equally valid to ask "why not?"
So these articles don't give the technical specifications so the responses are not technical. I'm going to accept that when you walk outside and feel the wind on your face and look up into the sky through tree leaves, you can't accept it as a specific mathematical result originating from a single formula with one variable solving for everything that happens to be. Just like, if you're in the united states, you can't accept that when one payer health care works for the rest of the world, it just can't work here or that the best of the best are the choices for president, senator, house member are just too hard to find so you need the collection of clowns that currently run the country and that we are, as a result, that much better than the rest of the world. You can't accept predestination, I can't accept that logic dictates this result.
https://futurism.com/ripples-
Pre AuT math says there shoudl not be bursts of light between black hole interactions. AuT suggests just the opposite. Now you don't have "black holes combining" per say (although book 2 suggests in the presence of ct6 you'll get that result at some sort of super heavy nucleus) but the degredation of the surrounding material yielding light is what the theory is all about. You have the unwinding spirals of ct4, you get ct3 in massive quantities, and if these unwind you get light or ct2. Why shouldn't there be bursts of light around black hole interactions?
http://trendintech.com/2017/05/10/scientists-may-have-just-revealed-evidence-of-the-multiverse/
This is a cold spot article. It is used by pre-AuT math to ask, does this show there is a multiverse complete with time travel and the other nonsense of pre-AuT math? Are there "vibrating strings" (something that sounds like it comes from a seance and not physics). Well the strings are for the next article, but in AuT aberrations of emptiness are not unexpected. The whole idea of stack more or less requires that there be enormous densities of nothing since if you stack two empties together you necessarily end up with lots more emptiness than you started with. (n=N-1+n-2). It also requires you get lots of density stacking and if there's a place where the theory needs some answers it's why we don't keep getting more and more dense instead of merely moving. It's a puzzle, but it's there in the math somewhere. Perhaps the answer is that you have to move to make room for the density in history, I don't know. I will soon enough.
The entire idea behind reconciling this universe is that enormous aberrations must come to exist as a result of the massive compression of information and the ongoing decompression that accompanies it because otherwise apparent randomness, entropy, and thought would not exist.
http://bigthink.com/philip-
This theory shows everything that AuT disproved, vibrating strings. Yes, I looked at that, vibration, but then where the quantum states. It was so obviously a dead end, I have to ask myself...10 years? How did you not see AuT in all that time?
Of course, the dual time people are about in the pantheon of gods group. There is no time, per se. There is a single variable governing the uninverse in quantum steps which is sort of a time, but time is nothing more than the relative change of one spiral to another resulting from the single variable changes. It's space too.
Dimension? The biggest illusion of all. I can't go over all of this since it's a 100 plus page book, but the idea of dimensions is totally accepting reality as a given in which case you might as well say god made it all, we'll just accept it. Dimensions don't even work out. How? Why? There are not answers to those questions. Dimensions are too fluid, other than time. AuT shows how dimensions are merely changes and all of those in a single direction. Yes you can move backward or stop, but only relative to things that are moving at the speed of light. Absolution stop? Absolute moving backwards, can't be done and AuT explains precisely why. Otherwise, we could do all the nonsense in these articles (travel in time, etc).
The gazillion (well 13) dimesnion universe actually does exist, but not the way set out in this article. It's 1,11,111,1111 to infinity. It is 1200 AD mathematics, not something fancy that has strings, dimensional strings vibrating way (vibrating away in what? 3 dimensional space? The whole concept reeks of snakes eating themselves).
If these are the best math models available today then I"m 10 years ahead of everyone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment