To understand the importance of the philospohy developement it is very important to understand its history. We can of course recognize where Bill Gates came into the picture, but I really do not think the inception began with him so I tend to think, and what I hope to demonstrate is that, the roads travelled has been more then one road of course.

There are many leaders, that we must recognize their contributions to a system that now exists and details a intelinking capabiltity that is now frought with, the attempts at the patent office for applications. Look at Google here and what is understood?

So in demonstating my own philosophical view on information gathered here, what is it I am trying to do?

The issue is a hot bed,and I am trying to learn the difference on the Title on top.

If you understand its importance, then I am saying that what is developed, in terms of communication framework, is free to help recognize a nurtuing enviroment, that is not underminded and influence by corporations and any business who might have a stake in those advertising dollars.

It is not attempt to diminsh their importance, but to make sure developement is, holding a higher principal, in regards to the develoment of the minds and frontal lobe, that arise a direct result of using this form of communication(forum). How so?

Well I have talked about this before in other places.

Sol

Posted by sol on June 21, 2003 at 10:02:22:

In Reply to: Re: What is the Difference between Algorithm and Theorem posted by sol on June 21, 2003 at 06:52:26:

I have been wondering what to call this free model of discusson forum( its code) that anyone can use, and give it some substance and meaning. So I thought I would throw out there a name and ask if any like it or not, or have a better name to apply to this principle.

The Fifth Element, seems appropiate in a numbers of ways.

It makes me think of the fifth postulate of Euclid, as well as the fifth dimension of Kaluza.

In a evolutionary sense and geometrical one, I hope to demonstrate the need for moving towards this principal and recognize, the value of first principles and all the pathways that can be established and have been.

Providing the fifth element, is a power full recognition of what began in the begning as well as what existances in our minds as ideas. Where do ideas come from?

It is much easier for me to provide the groundwork, for developing minds to engage these principals in a most wonderful and creative way, and in nurture, Mothers provide a most valuable frame work for its children:) Fathers hope to instill independance and thinking minds, that these same children, have come out of the home with nurture and growth and Fathers will help to move them beyond.

F theory and Vafa?:)

Sol

Posted by sol on June 25, 2003 at 10:57:06:

In Reply to: Re: What is the Difference between Algorithm and Theorem posted by sol on June 21, 2003 at 06:52:26:

Some issues about Light

I will be sifting through the many links create by Kx21 in association with might be develope as aroads forward in seeking the foundation that all must acknowledge, something beyond patent law can ever exist?

Probabilistic determinations can be immediated, in the clean slate, to which we have allowed the thinking brain a doorway to systems function and creation.

How would such thinking become immediate?

Spin orientations are viable mediums, to computer technologies, that we have moved our thinking to qubits, and how shall we devy up the reductionistic principals of such movements?

Strings speak to this and I have detailed a map. Think of the mandala and the gift, each one is given, when such a idea enters the mind?

Sol
In Reply to: Open Invitation( The Fifth Element) posted by sol on June 21, 2003 at 10:02:22:

'Copyfree & Copyright Free 2003 Open Invitation(The Fifth Element) Sol'

What is this for? Have we identified something? Is there soemthing that is tangible here to even consider viable?

The work is yet to come?:)

So what do we find, out of a principle, that what exists in the beginning, has now made its way to Kx21 and Sol. Kx21 has a position and Sol has a position, and what is trying to be done here?

I need kx21 because he counters everything that I do and he represents the society and all its rule. So what I have to demosntrate, that what is the ideal here, in open forum communication is really free. So up top, I have to post to satisfy Kx21's requirement of open and free copyright. Has this revealed anything yet?

So having provided the notice that Kx21 requires I now wait for the philosophical education that kx21 has, to provide the framework(xyz) What is that?

Sol is the white square and Kx21 is the black squares or vice versa. The probability of all the moves that happen within this board is 64 squares, what roads lead from such dualisms, that we could create a much more complicated world?

So the discussion forum must involve such squares?

Sol

In Reply to: Re: Open Invitation( The Fifth Element) posted by sol on June 21, 2003 at 19:52:07:

So what is the next move?:)How would the forum structure take in all that we have summarized, and find that dualism is created, but by the undertaanding of the light and dark?

By the understading of the photon and the graviton?

The moves and determinations are very dynamical once we realize that energy is very expressive and only by understanding the information at the time of the beginning can we ascertain( where time did not exist?)that moves can be made.

So freedom of patent law recognizes where time does not exist, and where all energy can be spoken from, and we have laid before us the probabilty determinations of all possible pathways? First principles recognizes this.

So the fifth element( this forum structure) is now a interesting scenario in the recognition of where ideas can manifest, and gives a direct result in discussion possibities.

The mama brane reocgnizes where its children as bubbles, will leave the brane home, for happier hunting grounds and wil take with them the dualites of all that has been nurtured and given in growth longitudal and tranverse in the very movement of growth, to become( its own bubble) a adult, that exists between the mother and Father.

The third possibilty of any union is? We are back to the beginning then, and a cycle?

Sol

Posted by sol on June 26, 2003 at 06:28:06:

In Reply to: The Fifth Element and its Archetecture posted by sol on June 22, 2003 at 06:58:42:

In Kaku's preface of Hyperspace, page ix, we find a innocent enough statement that helps us orientate a view that previous to all undertanding, is counched in the work of Kaluza.

In para 3, he writes,

Similarily, the laws of gravity and light seem totally dissimilar. They obey different physical assumptions and different mathematics. Attempts to splice these two forces have always failed. However, if we add one more dimension, a fifth dimension, to the previous four dimensions of space and time, then equations governing light and grvaity appear to merge together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Light, in fact, can be explained inthe fifth dimension. In this way, we see the laws of light and gravity become simpler in five dimensions.

Hope it helps the understanding of what the fifth element means, and all the time we are still speaking about the energy here, not as a understanding of the aether, but of what that missing mass means.

Sol

Posted by sol on June 27, 2003 at 20:36:39:

In Reply to: Re: The Fifth Element and its Architecture posted by sol on June 26, 2003 at 06:28:06:

Hyperspace, by Michio Kaku Page 84 and 85,

"To see higher dimensions simplify the laws of nature, we recall that any object has length, width and depth. Since we have the freedom to rotate an object by 90 degrees, we can turn its length into width, and its width into depth. By a simple rotation, we can interchange any of the three spatial dimensions. Now if time is the fourth dimension then it is possible to make "rotations" that convert space into time, and vice versa. These four-dimensional "rotations" are precisely the distortions of space and time demanded by special relativity. In other words, space and time have mixed in a essential way, governed by relativity. The meaning of time as being the fourth dimension is that time and space can rotate into each other in a mathematical precise way. From now on, they must be treated as two aspects of the same quantity: space-time. Thus adding a higher dimension helped to unify the laws of nature."

I hope it becomes clear here where the understanding of the first dimension, the string, is a point, and not a singularity, recognizes the expression from which all things must begin from. What is U(1)?

The fifth element is a expression directly of U(1)and as fifth dimensional understanding, the circle becomes complete?

What does spin one, mean for a photon and what does spin two mean for a graviton? Any corrections for sure.:)

Sol
Posted by sol on June 27, 2003 at 23:13:24:

In Reply to: Re: The Fifth Element and its Architecture posted by sol on June 27, 2003 at 20:36:39:

If you begin in U(1), you must end up in U(1):)

Kaluza takes us back to this point, and asks us to remember what energy means.

What is the 720 degree rotation and inside/outside of this movement,and we have the understanding of the Calabi Yau?

With this we have understood the computational value mathematics has supplied, in this marriage, to have demonstrated a real visualization for us, and what has this meant?

I have detailed the understanding of energy in movement and we have undertsood the graviton in expression?

Now the understanding comes close to interpretaion of what the Fifth Element means. It is a code for a forum commnuity, that supecedes all patent law, in the creation of a algorithm.

In that forum(the fifth element), it is recognize that energy exists for us all, that it is also expressed, in means and ways that is quite diverse. Admission to the code would have implied recognition of the source?

Based on this model of expression and the nature of strings(its evolution)one should understnd then how consciousness partakes of the expression of energy, and sends it into discussion.

That energy, U(1) is free to everyone, and the algorithm must speak to that.

I would appreciate any comments or questions regarding this. I am currently active in trying to find this means( the algorithm) that will follow the structure(architecture I have laid out).

I have demonstrated a philosophy, by showing the evolution of the internet. How might one see its evolution once it is understood that consciousness has immediate consequences?

Every action and thought has revealed itself to a dynamical brane( brain)? The forum will immediately detail the energy in expression:)

If nothing else, it all makes for a good story:)Is there a writer not busy? Kip Thorne and Sagan needed a good working device for the show, Contact and the time machine:)

What is the time machine mean, in the relation to space and back again?:)

Sol
Posted by sol on June 30, 2003 at 06:57:54:

In Reply to: Re: The Fifth Element and its Architecture posted by sol on June 27, 2003 at 23:13:24:

Recognize's the "source". How many in the physics of, recognize this?

Pelastrian referred to a few and so have I. David Deutch is not the least of these, but one of many who understand the spacetime fabric. Look for these inferences, and you will learn something of the views that are being expounded.

In the history of the internet and devlopement(lets look at Gromov here.)

How could two different roads have been developed, Microsoft and Linux OS and we all of a sudden recognize these two pathways?

One is based on Patent Law and Copyright and the other is based on Patent Law and Copyright, yet one is restrictive in terms of how the nergy is moved through it( Microsoft ownership?) and the other, how energy ismoved through it(Linux system), yet the kernel is past from one owner t the next.

What I am suggesting, is a base algorithm that precedes both, yet folows the Linux system of Openspace.

Thus I have initated the idea here in the spacetime fabric calculation as viable means of instantaneous expression of all matters, and the recognition of the source.

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

Sol
Posted by sol on June 30, 2003 at 06:43:19:

In Reply to: The Spacetime Builders in the Fifth Dimension posted by sol on June 30, 2003 at 06:02:47:

Like Pelastrian, and the views to which he has applied pelastrian movement, is the ability, in a fifth dimension exercise, that is paving the way, for us tominterpret movement of those grvaitational fields.

I have referred to a method, that I am calling the Fifth Element, as a computatinal method based on, the understanding of monopole spin orientations. As a method of describing the grvaitational field of the moon, as a example. As describing the dimensions of superstring theory.

What this does, is allow us to not only construct the view of the fifth dimension, but also helps us to construct the language that is necessary, for LIGO and LISA, as these gravitational waves are considered from their source.

In this way cosmologically, the energies needed to understand that fifth dimension(as detailed in this post) have become th eexpressions of the early universe. Allows us to reconstruct the geometrical expression, that begins from the "source", U(1), and moves outward, as Em and gravitational fields determined, in the oscillations.

Again, the source is a instantaneous feature that is being described here and follows the strict logic of geometry.

Like Pelastrian, I ave developed the perception of the spacetime fabric, that is very fluid(topologically) and dynamical(mooreglades word). Yet we have met with the issues of Quatum Mechanics.

If we are to understand Einstein's famous equation, we must understand, matter-energy->curvature of spacetime.

From this comes the understanding of the progression of the logic that has been used in superstring theory(dimensions 1 to 5) that we have understood in dynamical movement, of the string to brane and 10 dimenisonal theory that now is faced with M theory and 11 dimensions.

So having moved through these dynamical features and integrating the standard model in the following U(1)xSU(2)xSU(3) we get a glipse of the relation to dynamical movements of the energies, that we are describing rotations, contained within a sphere.(Any help here would be appreciated)

Here the understanding of the bubble as a viable model, now opens up, on the topic of bubble nucleation that we are now entetaining issues of the fifth dimension and perception.

Does this post qualify, as a thesis statement? I have not gone to any acreddited schools and did not make it past GR 10, and even in those years, I just did not listen:)I am hoping to make up for that now and was just wondering:)

Sol

Posted by sol on June 28, 2003 at 07:29:24:

In Reply to: Re: The Fifth Element and its Architecture posted by sol on June 27, 2003 at 23:13:24:

Thank goodness for DocN, and his views and speculations, about what could be? He provides fuel( energy) to move forward the probabiltiy of, and here on another plane, dimensionally(topological understanding)? Don't forget the function of the metric, and the mathematics(2d):)

There is symmetry in what I am saying.

Computationally, the code(fifth element) will be immediate.

The spin orientations will tell us this?:)

Sol
Posted by sol on June 25, 2003 at 20:09:16:

In Reply to: Re: Quantum Evolution(Spin wave Technologies) posted by DocN on June 25, 2003 at 14:34:20:

DocN,

Truly, you never cease to amaze me:)

This link is a simple exercise in understanding something, about the level to which dimension can be referred, and here in the views, I speak about Gauss and Faraday and Maxwell. Einstein included all three, for obvious reasons:)

The function of the metric is specific about distance.

How would we understand that difference had we not moved our considerations to area above two people talking? Has it become more complex in chaotic understanding, that we can now see and understanding the hyperdimensional relevances , as we are being shown in this site?

Okay, so what use on a computational level could we have ever discerned the capabiltity of the Friedmann equation?

Part of the language development of LIGO and LISA, will be the undertsanding of the uniquensss of the various stages(fields) you have demonstrated by bringing this link for consideration.

The last post I have in the gravitational field(engaging the field)speaks to this understandng of mapping the moon, its gravitatinal field, and how would this take place?

I'll stop for now Doc, but I hope the significance is understood when we engage that field articulation, as it has been in this website. I give highmarks to the developer.

Much to consider here and palette of experience although simple in the drawings is very good.

The monopole consideration, would have been specific in the spin rotation. How would they measure the gravity field?

Mooreglade will see its significance immediately:)

Sol

Posted by sol on June 25, 2003 at 11:38:57:

In Reply to: Re: Engaging the Field posted by sol on June 25, 2003 at 11:26:56:

These guys are keeping a watchful eye on the udertsanding of the physics of:)

Do a google search. What is Spin wave technology? There are links within this forum that requires me to go back and retrieve them.

Simultanety is a important question about two spheres and the relationship, about the information on one, revealing the position of the orientation of the other.

What does a spin orientated sheet look like? I have shown this as well, and these movements(spins) were defined?

I needed strict guidance, and Dickt was most instrumental in helping to orientate a proper view ,as well as Doc, in our conversations.

Sol

Posted by sol on June 24, 2003 at 14:17:09:

In Reply to: A Few Light Questions 2: The posted by OsherDoctorow on June 24, 2003 at 12:05:19:

Osher

There goes Osher and Sol strolling across a field, deep in conversation. The words indeed seem confined to the words and constructions they make, but just for a brief moment Sol and Osher move there considerations, above this conversation to look at it from a different perspective.

Life is like that sometimes:) We are so engrossed in life, that we forgot the bigger picture of what we are doing and affecting, all around us.

Imagine seeing the entire globe(earth) for the first time?

Up until that time we have been the people on the ball, working the issues of parallel lines, and only now, does it truly make sense from that global perspective?:)

Sol
Posted by sol on June 25, 2003 at 11:26:56:

In Reply to: Engaging the Field posted by sol on June 24, 2003 at 14:17:09:

Osher,

Consider this for a moment?

If we had moved our perception above the field of converstaion, what would you ave attributed the field too?

There are classical definitons of the word "field"? Might we have engaged Roman minds?

Well the perception is leading, in the sense that we might have discussed metric points here, and the distance between, that we might have also engaged gaussian interpetations of higher dimensional understanding?

So we must undertand where and how, such higher dimensional thoughts can engaged, that we have a road that has been lead through geometrically considered. A map.

Out of recognition of you and your wife, and the unique realtionship of the Logician and the psychologist, we have a strange marriage of thought here?:)I mean that in a most respectful way.:)

I place this link here for you, so you understand, that I have explored these issues as well, and have not disenfranchised the responsibility, as repsonsible human beings must, as we move throughout that information:)

Sol
Posted by sol on June 26, 2003 at 06:06:24:

In Reply to: Engaging the Field posted by sol on June 24, 2003 at 14:17:09:

So who were these simple farmers, who like to look at the field and begin to see how thngs could be drawn up and become the foundation of things of the future?

This is a legitmate question and in flat space, how would we have conisdered something like gaussian coordinates?

But there is a greater issue here now, when we look at the string and the strings length? We understand the energy value and what those windings mean in the KK tower. What they do to a string. How is this effect realized in the understanding of the function of the metric?

Well we have to look at how the strings length is determined.

Now I have given two distinct pictures when it had come to the question of the metric. If the string on that brane was flat, what was absent from the 2d brane? If no gravitational waves exist, what is the fundamental value of the string and the strings length? One must see this string on that plane.

Now if the string begins to have a energy value and the point we are thinking of here, now becomes a measure in the strings length, what do we see concerning the shape of the plane(brane) now that string has a energy value?

So we have moved our thinking above the field for obvious reasons. It is a three dimensinal move, that also includes the understanding of other thngs as well. Time becomes a relevant factor and is a value, in that brane that speaks to gravity as a real issue and the energy value becomes understood not only in the strong concentrations of energy, but presents itself to me as a means to measure energy at any scale.

So how would one validate this previous paragraph and I am truly at the mercy of better minds then mine. I have spoke to the fundamental use of spin orientations as valid measures of the gravity fields. Computationally I am seeing the use of LIGO and LIsa, at a level that speaks to monopole considerations, as a viable expression computaionally of the language that is needed to express in the fundamental nature of the information recieved from those gravity waves.

Gravitational waves, represent the information of the missing mass, and over the distance, of 10 billion years, and issues of Kip thorne, we understand the value here of light in this calculation?

That's it for now.

Sol
Posted by sol on June 27, 2003 at 20:13:05:

In Reply to: The Function of the Metric posted by sol on June 26, 2003 at 06:06:24:

What does extra dimensions mean? I hope these two examples although very blurry to read, help to elucidate what can issue from the brane. Both picture are direct links to their respective sites.

If we understood the missing mass distribution of gravitationl waves, from its source, how would we see the dynamical movemnt in the undertanding of hyperdimensional space?

Do we not see the topological variations from the sphere's perspective and Reinmann, and what is happening above all matters? Maping the moon's gravitation surface leaves us witha ugly looking sphere, and the matter has been removed from the picture just so we look only at what was distributed as the missing mass?

Link will follow in the fifth element thread, after it is revealled what Kaku describes here. The pendulum becomes a point of focus and zeropoint energy becomes a real signature in the understanding of the quantum harmonic oscillator.

Sol
Posted by sol on June 27, 2003 at 20:36:39:

In Reply to: Re: The Fifth Element and its Architecture posted by sol on June 26, 2003 at 06:28:06:

Hyperspace, by Michio Kaku Page 84 and 85,

"To see higher dimensions simplify the laws of nature, we recall that any object has length, width and depth. Since we have the freedom to rotate an object by 90 degrees, we can turn its length into width, and its width into depth. By a simple rotation, we can interchange any of the three spatial dimensions. Now if time is the fourth dimension then it is possible to make "rotations" that convert space into time, and vice versa. These four-dimensional "rotations" are precisely the distortions of space and time demanded by special relativity. In other words, space and time have mixed in a essential way, governed by relativity. The meaning of time as being the fourth dimension is that time and space can rotate into each other in a mathematical precise way. From now on, they must be treated as two aspects of the same quantity: space-time. Thus adding a higher dimension helped to unify the laws of nature."

I hope it becomes clear here where the understanding of the first dimension, the string, is a point, and not a singularity, recognizes the expression from which all things must begin from. What is U(1)?

The fifth element is a expression directly of U(1)and as fifth dimensional understanding, the circle becomes complete?

What does spin one, mean for a photon and what does spin two mean for a graviton? Any corrections for sure.:)

Sol
Posted by sol on June 28, 2003 at 11:47:21:

In Reply to: Re: The Function of the Metric posted by sol on June 27, 2003 at 20:56:14:

Osher

Expression from the source is immediate.

What is the potential here

I see a very wavy sheet and I am describing it in computer language, that I have not even considered how to write yet, yet I have detailed a map(Fifth element). Do you understand this?

Sol
Posted by sol on June 28, 2003 at 11:43:19:

In Reply to: Need input? posted by TonyC on June 26, 2003 at 11:22:39:

Tonyc,

As a viable model of consideration what do you see in the following picture. Thanks to Mooreglade's link for picture, and My post about DocN should spell it out.

As a fair exchange might you then have a look at what I hope to do, and I would try and answer any question you might have. I know of your capabiltity as a writer of computer language.

As you might know(?) the fifth element[U(1)] first dimension is based on the language of dimensional significance of Gr and the move through euclidean directions(2d to 4d) spacetime, and finally moves back to energy 5d considerations of Kaluza. This is a direct dimensional correlation of the superstring theory and the topic of "dimension."

Some don't like to believe it, but mathematically we have moved to the fifth, and there is not a whole lot of complaining that is going to change that:)

With this move, direct correlations in expression, that longitudal and transverse application is understood from first inception(principle) that like the pendulum, oscillation, now describes for us a probability distribution.

I probably confused the heck out of you. Anyway here is link I wanted you to look at. Any related post written by me, about the Fifth Element and the Architecture are all important features of the map that I am describing, as the understanding between algorithm and theorem, must be defined.

How do you see your work as a programmer? If I have been mistaken please correct me. Can any atempts be made to write the language(code) of the Fifth element.:)

Sol
Posted by sol on June 25, 2003 at 11:11:40:

In Reply to: Re: Quantum Evolution posted by DocN on June 23, 2003 at 13:52:03:

Doc,

You and I have engaged this conversation quite in depth before. Do you acknowledge this?:)

I place great value on our converations , not that we forget the positions we might have taken, and the responsiblty with which must engage, that you and I have understood some issues about psychological features, that not only Osher and his wife recognize.:)

You have been most kind to lead in this as well. I deeply appreciate this.

Now I have not forgoten the work that any mind must engage, that you too recognize the depth to which you can send the mind for the details about such mantraed equatins, as viable mediums of undertanding and interpretaion, that the mind might have came up with more information?

I place this link here for you as well, because what I am detailing is very specific, to those conversations.

Please acknowledge the understanding here, so that I can safely move forward with the developement of what Stephen Wolfram understood. The Fifth Element is a important exercise here in recognizing the potential that you yourself recognized in the self and the depth of exploration. I need your help, to demonstrate, not only the responsibility we have to sound principals and what Has Karl Popper shown us here? I am new to this field:)

Sol
Posted by sol on May 16, 2003 at 05:49:31:

In Reply to: First Principles, Recognizes I am posted by sol on May 15, 2003 at 08:52:34:

Here is a link to Lauglins lecture.

In the world of discrete functions it is obvious,that matter condensation exists.

The order at which this might have been of value, is a interesting correlation, to what have been understood of gravity. We know gravity is spacetime.

The move to higher dimensional understanding, had to be given consideration, when we think now of the gravity field, and the matter condensation that is presented in the earlier post, in relation to the moon.

The earth itself is not exempt from the very gravity field that is shown for us, that when matter condensation is removed from the picture, we are left with a lumpy image of a alternating gravity field that had to be based on something?

Now since the world has been changed in terms of the views here and in the understanding of the Bell curve, or even in probabilistic determinations, I am saying that the matter constitutions are different, not just in there physical makeup, in that process of condensation, but from any fluidity(strings as energy) and interpretation of elasticity, is understood as well.

The flunctuation of the membrane, and its resonance constitution, is a free expression, in consideration of the graviton, yet as a field , much to the recognition of the photon as a expression em field, we now understand this gravity field as it is seen in this post.

I would appreciate any corrections. Any assurances, that I am indeed speaking and generalizing correctly in terms of what this view has done in terms of that gravity field and the string relation?

Sol

Posted by sol on June 21, 2003 at 07:39:49:

In Reply to: Re: The dynamic Mother Brane has many faces posted by sol on June 20, 2003 at 22:25:43:

Pelastrian,

I am placing this link here for you and commending you on the excellent work you are doing.

I hope you will join me in this other thread and share your opinins and ideas. I am working to institue( a free code for discussion boards), for a most productive enviroment in image and dicussion capabilties that you are demonstrating.

I believe that in the developement of the superstrings and the energy undnerstood, from first inception, must be moved and reveal information as it moves outward. By recognizing first principles, as a inherent nature of expression( all pathways lead from and go out to?), which any mandala is.

I hope to generate a place where the freedom of the most suttle energies of(ideas and creativity) the universe can make there way and desimminate. It must have a free enviroment in which such expressions can be made. Why I am amazed at the ability you are demonstrating here.

You are adapting information to visiual means( what mathematicans need, in computer laguage management and has been demonstrated in the understadning of the Calabu Yau) that I had brought to this board almost two years ago in the issue of the human Torso. A televsion program demonstrated this for me.

I would have to find the links, but in this language developement I also made reference to the Cave. A quick search, I hope would bring this up for inspection.

To understand the language, is to understand the furthering evolution of this medium, we are involved in.

You are demonstrating a fundamental understanding of the evolution of the internet.

Osher in his fuzzy language is too:)

Thank you Von Neuman, and to the many fathers of the computer world:) Together with mother branes:), you are raising good bubble chldren:)

Sol

Posted by sol on June 21, 2003 at 07:17:31:

In Reply to: Re: We Have Understood Monkey Mind? posted by sol on June 20, 2003 at 22:15:46:

Jon,

I made a reference, and you made a reference to the lightcone( wanted more so I am giving you more) I had shown you in Hawkings book. The underlyng paragraph that is linked explains something about those peaks and valleys, and the light cone is very revealing here. Do you see what I mean?

Sol said:Gravity waves tell us something and in terms of the oscillating waves(quantum harmonic oscillator) we have released information(missing mass)

If I give you a indication of higher dimensional thought developement, what has Pelastrian understood here, that few have commented on?

Do you see what Pelastrian has done,, and in terms of the mandalic developement( the connection has been made) between Pelastrian, Particle understanding and mandalic demonstration?

He is seeing, what must be understood and is developing consistently.

The big bang is a issue here, that is being explored as well and why Pierre Ramond's chart is so very important.

Sol

Posted by sol on June 20, 2003 at 22:15:46:

In Reply to: Re: We Have Understood Monkey Mind? posted by jmgriffin on June 20, 2003 at 15:50:41:

Jon,

Particle Adventure

Particle accelerators' effectiveness is shown by the KENETIC energy and not their speed (which has been noted to reach approx. 8,000km/s=5,000m/s (3% the speed of light). The unit used is the electron volt which is obtained by a particle that has a charge of the same magnitude as the electron when it passes between electrodes tha differ in potentialliy by one volt and is equal to 1.602 x 10^-19J (J=joules). Of course there are larger units, such as keV, MeV, GeV, and TeV, which equal 1000eV, 10^6eV, 10^9eV, and 10^12eV, respectively.

See, you are helping me:)

What is missing mass?

Sol

Posted by sol on June 20, 2003 at 22:15:46:

In Reply to: Re: We Have Understood Monkey Mind? posted by jmgriffin on June 20, 2003 at 15:50:41:

Jon,

Particle Adventure

Particle accelerators' effectiveness is shown by the KENETIC energy and not their speed (which has been noted to reach approx. 8,000km/s=5,000m/s (3% the speed of light). The unit used is the electron volt which is obtained by a particle that has a charge of the same magnitude as the electron when it passes between electrodes tha differ in potentialliy by one volt and is equal to 1.602 x 10^-19J (J=joules). Of course there are larger units, such as keV, MeV, GeV, and TeV, which equal 1000eV, 10^6eV, 10^9eV, and 10^12eV, respectively.

See, you are helping me:)

What is missing mass?

Sol

Posted by sol on June 11, 2003 at 08:42:37:

If one is given a pendulum and a static world, this to is flat.

The oscillations recognize dualism must arrive out of any first principle. Think about those waves for a minute, and what is revealed. Einstein set it up for us and Kaluza further extends it?

Sol

Posted by sol on April 03, 2003 at 11:20:08:

In Reply to: Re: Gravitational waves? posted by doubter on April 03, 2003 at 07:51:27:

Doubter,

Are gravitational waves tranverse or longitudinal?

I looked for a direct reference and I could not find one. The link in previous post to Carpenter I had mentioned, showed this difference. Hopefully Dickt will give the one word:)

This is a good question. To understand this would allow us to understand the differences between the Em wave consideration and the gravitational.

We understand the speed of gravitational waves is based on the speed of light, yet it is not held to the difference any mass might have(photon travel throug space), and gravitational waves continue to move freely through the cosmos.

Where there are no gravitational waves, the spacetime is flat.

Sol

Posted by sol on April 04, 2003 at 18:10:31:

In Reply to: Re: Gravitational waves? posted by sol on April 03, 2003 at 11:20:08:

I am still focusing on this issue and wanted to develope it further for clarity. If anyone else has anything to add it would be much appreciated.

Sol
Posted by sol on April 04, 2003 at 20:42:49:

In Reply to: Re: Gravitational waves? posted by sol on April 04, 2003 at 18:10:31:

The understanding became clear to me, when I realize the sound created, reminded me of Einstein's Surpize( I will produce link in the Mystic Thread).

I wanted first to show, the historical significance, of this move to understand gravitational waves. It was a attempt to proves Einsteins Theory of Relativity. It is the ground work that has been laid out, to show us the road to understanding LIGO developement.

Kip Thorne, Wheeler have much to say about this process?

Sol
Posted by sol on May 02, 2003 at 07:58:16:

In Reply to: A Special Affinity:The Weber Bar posted by sol on April 04, 2003 at 20:42:49:

A article for consideration.
Posted by sol on May 02, 2003 at 08:14:49:

In Reply to: What the Aluminum Bars Did posted by sol on May 02, 2003 at 07:58:16:

Thorne Give it time to load.

Sol
Posted by sol on June 11, 2003 at 11:27:43:

In Reply to: Loop Quantum Gravity=Gravitational Loops? posted by moorglade on June 09, 2003 at 20:06:37:

Mooreglade,

This is a good question although I cannot answer it from the Loop quantum gravity side( I don't know it well enough to comment) but hopefully I will have set your mind to consider the field and tension of it.( It is not Quark confinement)Dickt and I had this conversation, link would have to be found)

1.What is the Tension of

2.The Function of the Metric

3.Approximate Pictures

If we see the tension at the surface(brane is weak) and the distance of the two point increase, the stronger grvaitational field in understood at it increases. This is the understanding of the string? It is automatically calculated, and is represented in the how far out that gravitational field extends?

The higher dimensions are revealled in the stronger gravity, and if so what does this imply of that string?

U(1) is very specific here in 1/r and is directly related to the energy and the tension?

Any corrections for sure.

Sol

Posted by sol on June 11, 2003 at 11:31:29:

In Reply to: Re: Loop Quantum Gravity=Gravitational Loops? posted by sol on June 11, 2003 at 11:27:43:

Mooreglade,

Think of any Liminocentric structure, and you will have witness the energy of a point-->U(1)?

What does U(1) represent in the continuing logic of the string?

Sol
>


I am trying to put something in its proper order and I believe you will understand when I reference Escher not only as the artist, but as a mind that could grasp the paradoxes of observation, that we soon learn to recognize the depth that artist can sometimes go.
To follow, is very posts that I have put together.
It takes ingeuity of mind for this observation to help further extend the ideas of the issue of dimension and its relevance in symmetry.
The link that I gave on the mirror you will now notice the correlation to Escher. Yet beside it I have placed a mouse over.
Now one would have to understand that the perceptions that I am giving, can immediately be open to another mind for inspection and the correlation that they may derive, could have laid out the framework for further ideas. This is important in exchange and where a mind might have engaged the intriguing aspect of the maths and dimension, what do we find but people like escher who has excelled in his work as a mathematician, or a Dali who has derived a deeper undertanding of the higher geometries from Charles Hinton.

It is a mind, that seeks to resolve troubling issues, that it finds itself faced with conflict? If one had not detected the anomalie, one is just impervious of life? Can walk a happy road, without ever questioning things? How would any mind know?
So what oddities present themselves to a wakeful eye, that in such a experimental process, nature has presented to you, something that is not understood. By what concensus of those we know, as the human population(laws), but has indeed caught your eye?
Science asks you to verify. If you cannot, it is a illsuion? Belief is a strange word, once you understand how such points of views are attained in life, but if you are faced with such a anomalie, what should you do?
No amount of convincing, rules and laws, will change you mind, because you know something that is not quite right?
A skeptic will have chastized you, and from a place of highest ethcial morality say to you, that what you saw, is not real?
We get subtle pictures all the time, and such ideas that well up inside, require work, and is no different when such a thng is presented to the mind. One must engage it, to a least try and comprehend it, even in face all the truth that society has given us in that consensus.
Strange I could even speak to this:)
If men/women could see to the very heart of the matters(laughlin, Einstein[slide of light]Feynman[integral paths]), what allowed them the greater vision, to pick out what exists in nature(patterns), to know with all that information at hand, they could have seen something else?

The Forest Has Eyes, by Bev Doolittle

---

Mathematical models, are the domain of theories.

Consider this post and understand what he is saying, and one can see what is upheld.

Mathman said,"As a mathematician I have to insist that mathematics is not a science. Specifically, mathematics does not require experimental verification - physics does. Irrational numbers, right angles, Euclidean geometry, calculus, etc. are all part of mathematics. How close these concepts, especially the geometric ones, approximate the universe is a physics question. It does not in any way invalidate the mathematics".

So should we say a mathematician is safe, having divorced himself from all the reasons why, to have said, "look, here is what I have mathematically, and this is what the math tells us. Now go and do your experiement Mr. Bob( the physicist) and try and stay away from telling us about Alice in Wonderland, while you experimentally set up the process?"

So to the grandest of Heights, we find such comparisons using A and B, and what has Alice to say? " That I am the experimental processes I now find myselves couched in, that I am used, to explain the diversity of all sayings of science?

Wild and Conventional, as a means of distinquishing the truth behind all theories, to have now understood, mathematically, relevance has been found, and all computer computations, having given the mathematical description, now in verification, says this model is true?

In superstring theory it needed more, and supersymmetry is a subject of validation, that seeks to understand this virtual world, to have assign its anti everything, and what has happened?

That such a duality could have now manifested, to have said it will go one way then another, and is supported in it, as a third cause, as a heteordyne solution. Line of shadow line of light?

Holographically, we have now ventured into a realm, that in virtual aspects, describes for us a world in a fairy tale, and regardless of what the mathematican has done, a story begins to unfold, and he has written the language?:)

We will just have to remember the paradoxes in nature, to have said, "the math is okay, and the world you live in is untouched?" So by such correspondance, such value is found, that we have given a basis to reality, that mathematically, we can all use to describe?

How will science take away the paradox? A mathematician does not care, while the physicist in experimentally proving finds, it is not supported?

He is safe too, and finds no correspondance to the math to have said, "now I can go home safely, and the world is stil in tact. The paradox does not exist, for Ihave shown it to be so?

In a wild state of expectation a world is happening that defies explanation. As a Skeptic(?) well versed in the mathematical proposition of its world, he tears apart such paradoexes and offers substitution and here we might say yes possibly your explanation is true, but can you now demonstrate the paradox?

So one listens, that we might have not removed ourselves from the reality, and waits until the day such a anomaly will have surface to say, look, science has not yet validated, and the math has not found correepsondance, so what shall we say about such a event?

---

The picture you might have entertained by Dali and Escher, are quite interesting reality. Strange that Dali, would have held a spiritual eye to the tresserack. In the higher geometries, and the work of Abbott and Charles Hinton ,these influences creeped into the arts, as well as the sciences? Artistic expression and the ideas generated around the time of such expressions(link provided) have found images transferred into reality. For Salvador Dali, here such writing from link helps one see the higher dimensions of a cube, known as a Tresserack. Could such writings have influenced Dali? What could Salvador Dali have been saying about Christ on the Cross? If we believe such a image to be a product of a Higher Dimension, what would we have found relayed in this picture, seen on my Web Page? If ideas are a product of a higher dimension, what could Christ have meant to him If Einstein was faced with such writings, and we find a host of Teachers, explaining the Concepts of geometry, how could he have come to recognize the world of space time, but understanding a fourth Dimension as a geometry that leaves Euclidian behind to move to those Triangles, whose measurements, is less then 180 degrees. Faced with moving to the Sphere, we find that such expression, takes us in to the curving nature of reality. The progression here lets us see the Elasticity of maleable forms of movement and we see this progression, to the fluid nature of Lorenz winds, and Thales emotional nature of water.: ) I have been looking for additional information so the generalizations can be understood.

From a artistic perspective, Dali and Esher create, pictures worth thnking about in terms of dimensions.

Charles Hinton and Abott(FlatLand) use creative logics that are interesting as well. Such consistancy, is important in what you are trying to do for us. The history of geometrical understanding is necessary in the move to understand what Einstein did for us.

Granted the historical personages of whose who, is the devolpements of the math's, is a grand picture of rules of order, is easier undertood, from such generalizations( because I do not have the maths as well)yet the basis of our thinking can be gauged on what is understood in current research, and of course in the helping hands, who care to help accelerate the proper points of view.

I appreciate your efforts to help in this regard:)

Dimensional interpretations

The tresserack is very interesting in the move to higher dimensions, and of course, I have alluded to the mystical connotation, Dali as a artist might have injected into his understanding of the higher spaces? About the beliefs of a God? But that belongs somemwhere else so I won't say anything more about this here.:)

Para 4, last line of paragraph listed below

Topology connects the study of space and the study of change by focusing on the concept of continuity.
The Universe of Frank Drake Posted by sol on August 27, 2003 at 10:29:00:

If we understood the diagrams and logic demonstrated here, what value could we have assigned A(child)B(adult)C(Parent)

If A is represented by O

If B is represented by O

If C is represented by O

How would you define the actions, when All three overlap, or two over lap and one remains by itself?

Probabilsitic detrminations under statistical analysis, can be detailed in Fuzzy logic to have recognized that three factors must be consider here, that under the heading of true or false, the the third result, is the adult?

The adult then in the calculation would have been detailed, under this heading.

                 .5
                  |
                  |
                  |
                Adult
               /     \
              /       \
             0         1

In cryptology the simultaneous function is realized in this interaction?

Sol
Posted by sol on August 28, 2003 at 06:56:39:

In Reply to: OOps: A = B = C? posted by kx21 on August 27, 2003 at 20:47:57:

OOps: A = B = C?

Hmmmmmmm......and we see a interesting comparison?

Sol
Posted by sol on August 28, 2003 at 14:17:33:

In Reply to: Re: OOps: A = B = C? posted by rtharbaugh on August 28, 2003 at 13:46:03:

Richard,

It's like taking one neighborhood and finding how the next neighborhood connects. On the surface, and symbolically we can use language, but on another level, the dynamics are really interesting.

How dynamical is, the relationships within self, that we could have spoken about our own child(emotive being)and the parent through who raised us( our own parent) to have recognized as a adult, we will endeavor to bring lots of information together, and distill the understanding and ideas, for what we choose to become.

We do not remain trappd in the parent, nor do we remain trapped in the child, yet these are real functions within ourselves that we have labelled in this converstaion(at least I have) to help explain something about the fine nature of thought, and its relevance between things.

So we do not allow ourselves to remain in the chid, yet there are extremely good features there for us to expand our minds, like the little professor, or how in the parent there are guiding of the forces(information) that helps us to recognize the safety, we must bring to bear on the child(the little professors in all of us), that we at the same time, recognize individual growth, as a must in the process of evolution.

If the mind is leading in this cause(any mind), then it trail blazes for what we can become. What do you think?:)

Sol

Posted by sol on August 30, 2003 at 21:36:11:

In Reply to: Re: OOps: A = B = C? posted by rtharbaugh on August 30, 2003 at 12:16:35:

Richard,

Mathematics is a language. How can one look at a new mathematics and know the symbols? One tries to build on what one knows.

VSL propositions

I seen your post after. These are goods clues for us to consider, you think?

I am trying to pin down Joao's commet in his book about the dream Einstein had coming down the mountain, and seeing cows in the field(Chapter One, entitled Einstein's Bovine dream).

What travels down the wire, and what the farmer see's versus what Einstein sees. I have looked all over and I cannot see where he got this information from.

Sol
Posted by sol on August 30, 2003 at 20:20:03:

Magueijo started reading Einstein when he was 11, but he wanted to comprehend the theory using mathematics rather than words. So he read a book by Max Born, which explains relativity in the language of mathematics. He quotes Galileo as having said, "The book of nature is written in the language of mathematics."

Is it because he is young, that he likes to take the heat? A little bold in his statements here maybe, to have categorize what we are capable of, at our peak seasons?:)

Sol

Posted by sol on August 31, 2003 at 08:49:23:

In Reply to: M Thanks for the VSL's Link- Scientist taking aim at theory of relativity posted by kx21 on August 31, 2003 at 01:15:22:

If he has confronted it legitmately, then there can be no oppostion?

One would have to know the math, I am not capable fully yet from a generalized perspective, so I will have to see what his propostion is, and why he would take the flack. Arrogance of youth, or just plain telling the truth?

There are better educated mind's here(Tachyon condensation comes to mind:)

Sol
Posted by sol on August 31, 2003 at 18:39:55:

In Reply to: Re: I assume He will show the mathematics posted by DickT on August 31, 2003 at 12:15:22:

Dickt,

Thanks I appreciate the perspective.

Putting Smolin aside, do you agree that the issue here in superstrings is in finding the appropriate maths( a logical discourse to have discern the basis of), in which to describe the process of dimension, in relation to gravitational consideration? The big and the small

How would tachyon be considered in this light?

Sol
Posted by sol on September 01, 2003 at 04:00:09:

In Reply to: Re: I assume He will show the mathematics posted by DickT on August 31, 2003 at 20:07:09:

Dickt,

If such unification is ever to be achieved, the perspective has been narrowed to the ideas in cosmology and the quantum world, yet we see simpicity in a comological perception and complexity in a small world.

So the debate for me becomes how realistc are we being if we do not recognize our particpation, is very simple in our every day experience, and very complex on a smaller level in thought manifestation. Here you might refer to the chemcial and biological, yet we have not consider the science of radiation on a complex level?

I feel I might have been disc on the fact that I see a importance and determinism in human conduct that extends itself to that region, yet the demands are of a systemic approach in neurological devlopement(I speak to that in Venn logic and Transactional, as well as the creative function within). Where does the spirit come in? It had to be accumulative? Does it not matter?

Sol
Posted by sol on September 02, 2003 at 06:22:45:

In Reply to: Re: In the Spirit of........... posted by DickT on September 01, 2003 at 07:27:13:

Truth Tables had been inadvertantly conisdered by me inthe progressin of developemental logic applications. Why, I let Tonyc know.:)

For a blind man( fugiratively speaking) intuition is leading me through some complex issues.

Sol
Posted by sol on August 27, 2003 at 12:04:57:

In Reply to: Re: Venn Logic and Tranactional Analysis posted by dr_syed_ameen2000 on August 27, 2003 at 11:43:18:

DR. Syed Ameen,

Do not forget GHZ entanglement;)

Check out Mike2's Homepage, and check out Fuzzy Logic of Osher's.

In the undertanding of soft computer language, the ideas behind the fifth element make sense, if we knew how to write it. I lay open the idea here for TonyC(since he wanted to know:)

If patience represents time, and time gravity, what have we understood of the potential in our own characters?

One does not loose the abiltiy to look at nature and see its simplicity, yet on a complex level computerization has dramatically used the technolgy to explain many points, and in supergrvaity, the dynamics allow for greater predictions.

Weather now is a example, and how many more bits of informtaion in a Q bit and our quantum computers generate much more probabilty functions, see?:)

Sol

Posted by sol on August 27, 2003 at 15:59:00:

In Reply to: Re: Venn Logic and Tranactional Analysis posted by dr_syed_ameen2000 on August 27, 2003 at 13:09:56:

Dr. Syed Ameen,

I respect your right to think the way you want and that is perhaps good for you as an individual.
I want to remain open for the believe that there are new forces yet to be revealed and Nature will not stop doing that in time.

Are you suggesting that I have somehow become closed? That is what that statement infers to me, although, you have offer respect for my own position. Might I have changed that statement around and said you are closed, and I am open?

I believe that a process must be followed, and that there are horizons in which we yet see as well. I am systematically loking at in a wide variety of languages:)and recognize the pathways that you have had to take, in order to suggest that your are much closer and have found something.

How could I do that without some knowledge as a basis? Is it all wrong? What would you suggest I do.

Sol

Posted by sol on August 28, 2003 at 14:24:01:

In Reply to: Re: Venn Logic and Tranactional Analysis posted by dr_syed_ameen2000 on August 28, 2003 at 11:56:43:

Dr. Syed Ameen,

Like John Nash, the inherent nature and ability to see patterns, and try and speak them, is a very difficult thing to do. Finding that "language" is very hard when we know there is a systemic way to go about these things. Would we, or should we read into them , as those that wish us not to excell by nature of confrontation(I mean in a question) that we might have our back up against the wall and say that one belongs to a whole class of?

That is not fair, because even yourself, had to travel the halls before you could say what you do.

Your post was honest and spoke deeply. I appreciate that honesty.

Sol
Posted by sol on August 28, 2003 at 16:10:54:

In Reply to: Re: Venn Logic and Tranactional Analysis posted by dr_syed_ameen2000 on August 28, 2003 at 15:21:57:

Dr. Syed Ameen,

Lets for one minute, consider the real sickness in individuals, that can indeed, become sick. These are real cases. Lets leave aside the world of what we might think it could all mean, and think, that if such a sickness had prevailed on any indibdual what would that reality look like?

If we are not privy to the views in such a case, how would we know? Is it easy to create a reality that fits our perceptions, and then say, that the clandestine operations of foreign govermnments are basis of all evils and then apply this world, to the simple story of how a mind can triumph over the evils and apparel that might have been the attachment of mind? Do you not think the mind capable of creating such individuals, as Nash did?

The mathematicians mind here was to sink into a world that was much distant from the reality of the proper world, and such fixations, as pattern identification, dragged him into his dillusion. This is what he had to watch out for, from what I have surmized. Through it all, he had a beauitful lady, who helped him through and was acknolwedged in the nobel prize speech( I'd have to check?). Were all prizes awarded subject to the script of clandestine operations?

I recognize the importance of political functions, in our conversation, when we delve into the construct of mathematical formulations, and in such first principles, the basis of organization, had been dealt with through my adventures in constitutional reform issues. Benjamin Franklin and reason:)

So my head is defintiely not in the ground as a ostrich but deals with these pattern constructs on many different levels.:)Art is a interesting subject and creativity is too, on the issues of what can issue from any mind. We only have to participate to know that these things can issue from our own mind, and what as invention, have you presented? What is a keen eye on things?

Sol
Posted by sol on August 29, 2003 at 14:42:47:

In Reply to: Re: Venn Logic and Tranactional Analysis posted by dr_syed_ameen2000 on August 29, 2003 at 12:36:26:

Dr. Syed Ameen,

As we know that Psychology is a not a Science

What did John Nash get the Nobel Prize for?

If we had considered the simple dynamics of a social gathering and a selective experiential choice, lets say a bar like he did, what value would any negotiation process have, if we did not recognize the basis of that experience?

Now being very simplestic on a social level, it required a detailed analysis of how those dynamics actually work, and required the basis mathematical dissertation, that cannot be refuted, unless it deals specifically with that formulation.

Now on another level, from a KK perspective, if you took your eye cover and slipped into this vision capabiltiy(just energy) what would you see all around if you, if you were only to use color as a differiental consideration of the reality we see?

Will you might see a lot of space with energy congregations and such, yet we had move the points considertaion from one of matter distinctions, to one of energy?

Language is like that and we have to distill. Anwar Sadat was the Father, and was soul beyond our times. A man who can spend his time in prison, and in a specific numbered cell, found, he had become someone different. A soul can change:)

People like Osama are insane, and so was Hitler. Change can be brought about in other ways, and any who justify the credibilty of those actions, is just as sick. Gandhi found peaceful ways to do it, but some, only know the way of the gun.

Resonance of purpose, and in First principle, men like Benjamin Franklin knew, as a inventor that religion was a dangerous precident in the constitutional right of expression and freedoms. It left it open too, to many interpretations and zealots, and in changing Jefferson's words, Benjamin Franklin brought civility to a dangerous world.

Sol
Posted by sol on August 07, 2003 at 05:25:58:

Dorothy.

Click on Picture

Looking for the anomalies in nature, and what do we find?

Who is John Nash and the patterns he looked for to discern their truth? The complexity of organizational inherencies took his view to natures patterns?

Where is the math in all this, and the source reveals that any pattern must issue from some place? I call that First Principles, and is "the point" from which all things issue from.

Does it say anythng about the energy? Only that it will find a way to materialize in the matter configurations(entangle)? The pyramid, but what is above it?

So the Ray of Creation is very interesting and so is this for all those who have delved into the patterns. What is science and Reason, and Benjamin Franklin was right to change what was was inherent in the constitution?

Sol
Posted by sol on July 29, 2003 at 17:45:37:

         \             /     
          \           /
           \         /
          ------------- subsconcious  
             \     /
              \   /
      Point --->o<---------Awareness 
                                     

-->

Raisin as Point source(o)and Bread(O)=

Posted by sol on July 29, 2003 at 18:30:22:

In Reply to: Mandalas Arise into Awareness( what lies deeper) posted by sol on July 29, 2003 at 17:45:37:

I am deeply indebt to Kx21 for his ideas(please do not respond). I have used them(expansive mode from nasa) to extend the understanding of Mandalas, and I would like to say the song he has supplied has significant factors in my own consideration, that I would consider relevant to what emotively can be stored in the human consiousness.

The diagram I have illustrated, holds at the top of that V, the place in which superconsciousness is connected.

If it so happens one dreams and in it, one finds personages of consideration, that have been elevated. Lets say, in that dream it is a person of spiritual significance, and you place the spiritual title upon him/her.

Now we recognize what the dream does in terms of what values could have been sent to you and this place is within you? Now lets consider the information imparted, and how deep and significant will this information place importance in your life?

Now for instance, if I were to describe the signficance of this how woudl any child know that it comes to them from a place of higher wisdom? What was the lesson learnt, and for me, the very patterns that will become discriptive in my own life might not be in others, is the idea, of what lies at the center, and how life tends to cover it.

This lesson was bestowed upon me, in the following form.

As I walked through this park, I noticed people gather under a tree and under that tree stood a man in white cloak and white beard. So simple a image that consciousness in this case recognizes that what was enshrined in higher principles would have been given to a child and he does not know the signifcance?

The teacher offer to me his hand, and in it he had a leaf. With other hand he placed it over the leaf. He saids life is like the hand, life is the leaf.

Sure enough throught the wanderings I have found this a central undertanding in my own conciousness. That I could speak about creativity and where it comes form, that I have detailed its expression and from this, the mandala makes it's appearance.

Now on a subconsious level the dream take splace, and it is like a drawing, and Doc here understands the meditative quality of walking lines, and imagine when you walk to any center, what do you find? For me it was a telling experience that the ancients ways could have found themself expressed in a dream, that in having moved to that center, certain thing took place.

I mentioned Melvin Konner for varous reasons and what could have manifested in those who danced the fired in Africa and called it, N/um. These African tribesman worked themselves into what Melvin Konners calls epileptic seizures.

What was important is recognizing that in order to arrive at that center certain thngs were needed. A map. To walk the map, and to becoem the map. What also must be understood is that, when the walk begins( I actually did a dance in my dream and danced on lines in the earth) but proceeded according to a entry point and this was from a eastern position. The dance actually took me around to the North, but when having reached the North, the dance was spiralled to the point(center).

Now on top of this was sound, and in the dream sound, propelled the consicousness to dance, and move according to the lines and arrive at the center. So you see, not only did I follow map but it was coordinated in consciousness that the dance, the lines, and the sound, would have had a beneficial result. That arose out of my subconsciousness.

From where did this information arise from before enterng my subconscious? The limitation that I have on my own self is the lives that I have detailed, to have surrounded my own self. In it is all the information of everything that I have ever been. The point of focus when it is moved, allows other information to enter.

If I have detail a pathway into conscious awareness, how was I able to draw such a detail map, unless, awareness was present through all phases? Who is that awareness?

When you recognize this, you soon learn to observe, and who then observes?

Sol Posted by sol on July 29, 2003 at 23:56:35:

In Reply to: M Physics 21: Point = Bread or Raisin ? posted by kx21 on July 29, 2003 at 21:44:06:

kx21,

Thank you for listing sources, and true, we have found some uses for them in the continuing course of expressionism.

I have been looking for a posting I made on the blank slate and all I find is Steven Pinker's evolutionary points of view.:)The blank slate I used back then, was derived from a philospohical question and person.

So in this context and around the same time this post was written. Eccles Gate, is more then what I would have listed as Dr. Syed Ameen proposes with Cats( you have to follow the discussion, you were not here yet:)

You have seen(?) the other half of this model:

         \             /     
          \           /
           \         /
          ------------- subsconcious  
             \     /
              \   /
      Point --->o<---------Awareness 

What is the Ray of Creation and what is pascal's triangle? I have explained the pyramidal model of three(energy[what is the trinity]) into four(triangle faces [Earth]) the base of this model is matter in its most distictive forms. You have to understand what happens to the virbation as they slow down:)

All systemic approaches arise out of what I am saying. Paul asks what is inherent in the design, and like a seed, there is spot, that dictates its growth and design.

All probabilitic determination once moved to oscillate, are sending information and energy from its source? Energy is information and once this is understood, what is seething throughout the universe and we have to ask, what was there in the beginning? We have talked about expansionary consideration in Guth determinations, but how does energy gather like it does, in a blackhole.

What is the mover(rotational consequences) of the universe and what is the mover in those galaxies? What is Omega? Critical density has to be significant in this determination, and how is it we should see such energies gather? A vacuum seething universe and swiss cheese?:)Holes?:)Casimere, explains how the movement from one state to another, always is filled, when there is a space:)

At below Planck scale how would we determine the energy of any distance if we did not consider the dimensional significance? At this scale, a string is, a string curves.

It is instantaneous? In order to say this, I had to understand something, and what was needed, was what Dickt has already said. Something is needed, and it could be as simple as the geometrical model I have offered through inspecting the example of Kaluza and Klein.

It requires a new generation in thought?:)

Sol

Posted by sol on July 29, 2003 at 19:22:38:

In Reply to: Re: Mandalas Arise into Awareness( what lies deeper) posted by sol on July 29, 2003 at 18:30:22:

First Principles Recognizes I Am

---

Nothing makes sense without McLaughlin

---

The Search for Truth

---

Basis of All Geometrical Undertandings

---

Posted by sol on May 19, 2003 at 04:15:28:

In Reply to: Lecture 6:The Search for Truth posted by sol on May 14, 2003 at 19:18:54:

Guth's Geometrical recognition and the developement of the essence of geometry from understanding relativity? Developement of the fifth Postulate.

In the case of the universe as a whole, once we assume that the universe is homogeneous and isotropic, then this issue of flatness becomes directly related to the relationship between the mass density and the expansion rate of the universe Page 3, Para 2, Line 6

---

Sol said:From this point, such movement wil have considered isomorphisms and self similarities in the cosmos, as relevant issues in the world of the very small. Orbital consideration are being defined now in shape, and as this energy concentration is considered, we now find it being described in a whole library of movements. Para 7

Sol
Posted by sol on July 31, 2003 at 06:59:31:

In Reply to: Who is it that OBSERVES? posted by sol on July 29, 2003 at 19:18:35:

From a euclidean perspective, integration, would have indeed been considered from a color coordination, and must not be miscontrued from the understanding of gluon consideration( for now lets think it is separated), but away from this, a resulting color coordination of [red green blue]and one must consider the brane intersection.

Euclidean perspective is removed. Now what lies above the brane? This is where, the understanding of GHZ entanglement must be considered.

Long ago the understanding of, point line plane, evolved into the picture I drew of three brane intersections( I never considered them as branes becuase I did not know then), revealled the point any frame work.

When seen aside from the geometrical expression, as the condensation of any position, is thus revealed? Integrated with brane understanding and developemental GR the effect leads to gravitatinal considerations(rotation). Nodal point, reveals the world of suppostional brain wave developement, as well as, the understanding of what manifests through any point, in the brain as the place in which the top of the V will immerse it self in each of us, and thus is sent outward as the Ray of Creation.

How much of the universe will we each allow into ourselves?

Natural emergence would have been a interesting title as Dickt has said, and I would not limit it by its natural reference. I have no other agenda, but to reveal the design is more evolutinary, and how would such determinisms have reveal the ability of the function soul to have used spirit to detail the pathways of expression?

There always had to be some design, and what leads? I have always believe spirit, yet the energy of expression would have been so unique, that life on this planet is indeed the mystery in itself and what probabilistic determination will have arisen out of any system developement?

What is first principles. It had to begin somewhere and arose out of something?:)Al systemic approaches have to be considered ad in this the euclidean perspective is the developeing pathway of GR, and helps clarify the understanding of non-euclidean geometries. When you reach that point, you have opened up the undertanding of what lies above that point, and the open V.

I am formulating here.

Sol

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws