I recently had a debate with someone I would label as a "follower of scientism" regarding the nature of the symbols we use. To be clear, I think most people who know me would label me a scientist, but I am not a "follower of scientism," meaning I don't take science to an almost religious point. The debate centered around the idea of realism and symbology. My basic position was that these symbols don't really point to anything "real" in an objective sense but rather to yet more symbols. Symbols have immense power, but their causal power is conditional-conditional based on interpretation. As a simple example to illustrate the point: the base data structure for a float32 and a typical pixel in an image are the same, meaning just a padded list of 32 1s and 0s. In theory, I could have the same values for both, but they represent completely different things-one as a floating-point number and the other as a pixel in an image. Furthermore, I think that the shadows on the cave wall that Plato talked about are the shadows on the wall of the mind, formed by the symbols we use to describe our world. There is actually some empirical evidence to support the idea of a "Platonic realm" when it comes to symbols. What I mean is that recent research, "The Platonic Representation Hypothesis," has shown that different machine learning algorithms with different modalities, e.g., image and text, can converge to the same internal representation. Some work I've been doing will take that idea to an extreme and likely show that these convergences happen regardless of the symbol set or what they mean to the observer. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the "Platonic realm" is a real thing in an objective sense, but rather that it could be said to exist for the symbols we use to describe our world. Our symbols have a sort of self-describing fractal symmetry to them that I think leads to that platonic-like realm of "symbol forms."
Smart move, man. I wouldn't have given much credit to numeral systems, but it IS a huge development in mathematics. It's not just notation -it's the epistemological development that comes with unit reduction. Cheers!
3D super fluid, no small scale atomic boundary, however velocity direction differentials (Planck units are differential in size therefore a equal proportional difference in (c) transfer speed to other Planck units, If you want to know the difference in (h) between one part of the vacuum and another part of the vacuum, wavelength of a photon will decrease, and it's momentum will increase, signatory of smaller planck mass as the photon moves into the gravity field (it has larger effect and slightly slower speed), and the opposite when it moves out (lesser momentum, faster transfer speed)). Black hole = power vacuum (they are porous and can merge, they have viscosity as well), Planck unit = power radiator (viscosity break down, they are not porous in the same way and mergers depend on their internal motion flux feed and output relative to each other [G differential throws planck units in a loop, viscosity break down]) (Planck units, and black holes are mirrors of each other) (toroid flow = planck unit, anti-toroidal flow = black hole) they can transition between each other. Planck units get smaller as you get closer to the black hole, therefore (c = transfer speed of forces to other Planck units, and h = circumference) become smaller progressively (planck density increases over the same super fluid volume as you move towards the center of the black hole). Planck units are toroids in superfluid state, they have a jet, they orientate their jets to equal out (2 pointed inwards 2 pointed outwards) (the jet = G) (planck units collide = photon transfer). 1/PlanckVelocityCurvature = smaller h value, and smaller c transfer speed to other Planck units. Each planck unit will have their own G value and it's proportional to there circumference length (h = circumference length, (c) = chained collision transfer speed of collision or jet pressure), ((G2-G1)/distance) * mass) by (new_h*new_c)^5/previous_planckEnergy^2 - (previous_h*previous_c)^5/new_planckEnergy^2/Distance between planck units, that is the force acting times the mass. When a black hole gets SUPER big, the G differential between Planck units gets very large, because the planck units become differential in size, causing curvature in their alignments, the smaller planck units recede to smaller scales (pushed by the larger G of larger planck units, Planck units nest near others closer to their size), and the black holes viscosity breaks down when they get large, turning into a power radiator (a very large planck unit) (spinning up black holes at the poles) then viscosity takes hold again as a result of radiating power (magnetic flux loops [particles] emerge out of the planck flux coming out the poles, collision with the planck field generates photons [collisions between Planck units]). The black holes can't maintain power radiator state, because they need other power radiators of the same scale to contain them. Dark energy and dark matter is just larger planck units progressively as you go towards the voids, while a black hole is made of very small planck units. While there is more G power for a Planck toroid in the dark energy portion of the planck field, they are very uniform in size relative to each other, therefore smaller amount of (G - G) differential between them, however, since these zones are so large, that slight bit of curvature (G differential) adds up. Whenever you have differential sized planck units, it curves their alignments relative to each other, therefore the larger the curvature there will be a larger G differential between them (G differential is gravity, rather than G of a single planck unit). Think of a Planck unit as pure magnetic flux (the concerted movement of many Planck units, when the viscosity of a black hole breaks down, do to planck units that make up it's body become to small relative to the larger ones, the power differential over powers the viscosity of the smaller ones, and throws the smaller Planck units into a loop [magnetic flux]) charge is just different flow directions in the magnetic flux because e^2/2pi*hbar*VacPerm*c they are inversely proportional to each other (extra charge = wobble in the system = extra magnetic flux on one side of the flow structure), I hope this helps!
@@ScienceReDiscovered Hahaha You are exactly right, I need to explain those scale factors in a way where the processes of their mind take hold hahaha. I'll work on that, good points. I have to get on your level with these equations though, I'm gonna hit the special relativity and general relativity equations till they are imprinted in my brain, add the mods. Curve for the different speeds, then set of curves for different speed + different acceleration rates. I got to educate the ape brain.
Have you heard Dr Gregg Henriques? He is a theoretical psychologist and has developed a tree of knowledge and unified theory of knowledge framework for achieving consilient scientific humanistic philosophy. He knows about Dr Gena Gorlin’s work and her work is very consistent with his own work. I found him on the rational egoist video titled “The Hard Problem of Consciousness and an Integrated Theory of Psychology with Gregg Henriques.” His own work might have some value to your work.
He also founded TOK(Theory of knowledge society that brings interested parties together to discuss philosophy, psychology and the state of the world, and to engage each other in meaningful conversation to explore best practices and sense-making systems for the 21st Century. It has approximately 150 scholars, students, and informed citizens who are concerned with the current state of the academic knowledge, the state of our society and the globe, and are interested in Professor Henriques' Unified Theory Of Knowledge.
Check this, at some point you don't even need to know the quantities any more either, if you have the operators and order between the variables in the right spots, you don't need to know the specific variable values, because any quantity will be relative measures of how they (together) change through (operational order) with other variables proportionally. This is where language comes in when building a system of equations, you can observe the end point without knowing specific quantity values, because every quantity is a relative measure with respect to another measure (through operational order). For instance, big toe prints * steps = number of big toe prints. It frees up the mind to find relational proportional significance, which is what the brain evolved to do (relational context transformation). Because ultimately, I'm not a very smart person, this helps me keep track of systems of equations when the code base gets large.
One of our strongest forms of memory is relational, actually called associative memory, and another is spatial memory. These are ancient forms of memory that many forms of life share to some extent. Using them together is almost like a superpower. If you're a coder and often need to retain a large amount of information, I'd highly recommend two specific "metacognitive tools"-the method of loci for memory and Tony Buzan-style mind maps for organization/chunking. They are both simple, so simple children can easily learn to use them, and immensely useful. I don't know why those two concepts are not taught to all of us as children and around the same time we learn to read and write.
@@ScienceReDiscovered Hahaha I'm a nobody, go ahead though. We found something "special" together lol.... I hope that sentence doesn't look bad to a outside general relativistic observer 🤠 We broke the back of this thing.
![เจ็บที่ยังฮัก - ม่อน วรวิทย์ [ Official Mv ] จอนนี่มิวสิค](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KALIGSRSjFs/mqdefault.jpg)
I recently had a debate with someone I would label as a "follower of scientism" regarding the nature of the symbols we use. To be clear, I think most people who know me would label me a scientist, but I am not a "follower of scientism," meaning I don't take science to an almost religious point. The debate centered around the idea of realism and symbology. My basic position was that these symbols don't really point to anything "real" in an objective sense but rather to yet more symbols. Symbols have immense power, but their causal power is conditional-conditional based on interpretation.
As a simple example to illustrate the point: the base data structure for a float32 and a typical pixel in an image are the same, meaning just a padded list of 32 1s and 0s. In theory, I could have the same values for both, but they represent completely different things-one as a floating-point number and the other as a pixel in an image. Furthermore, I think that the shadows on the cave wall that Plato talked about are the shadows on the wall of the mind, formed by the symbols we use to describe our world.
There is actually some empirical evidence to support the idea of a "Platonic realm" when it comes to symbols. What I mean is that recent research, "The Platonic Representation Hypothesis," has shown that different machine learning algorithms with different modalities, e.g., image and text, can converge to the same internal representation. Some work I've been doing will take that idea to an extreme and likely show that these convergences happen regardless of the symbol set or what they mean to the observer. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the "Platonic realm" is a real thing in an objective sense, but rather that it could be said to exist for the symbols we use to describe our world. Our symbols have a sort of self-describing fractal symmetry to them that I think leads to that platonic-like realm of "symbol forms."
Smart move, man. I wouldn't have given much credit to numeral systems, but it IS a huge development in mathematics. It's not just notation -it's the epistemological development that comes with unit reduction. Cheers!
Good identifications. Thanks!
3D super fluid, no small scale atomic boundary, however velocity direction differentials (Planck units are differential in size therefore a equal proportional difference in (c) transfer speed to other Planck units, If you want to know the difference in (h) between one part of the vacuum and another part of the vacuum, wavelength of a photon will decrease, and it's momentum will increase, signatory of smaller planck mass as the photon moves into the gravity field (it has larger effect and slightly slower speed), and the opposite when it moves out (lesser momentum, faster transfer speed)). Black hole = power vacuum (they are porous and can merge, they have viscosity as well), Planck unit = power radiator (viscosity break down, they are not porous in the same way and mergers depend on their internal motion flux feed and output relative to each other [G differential throws planck units in a loop, viscosity break down]) (Planck units, and black holes are mirrors of each other) (toroid flow = planck unit, anti-toroidal flow = black hole) they can transition between each other. Planck units get smaller as you get closer to the black hole, therefore (c = transfer speed of forces to other Planck units, and h = circumference) become smaller progressively (planck density increases over the same super fluid volume as you move towards the center of the black hole). Planck units are toroids in superfluid state, they have a jet, they orientate their jets to equal out (2 pointed inwards 2 pointed outwards) (the jet = G) (planck units collide = photon transfer). 1/PlanckVelocityCurvature = smaller h value, and smaller c transfer speed to other Planck units. Each planck unit will have their own G value and it's proportional to there circumference length (h = circumference length, (c) = chained collision transfer speed of collision or jet pressure), ((G2-G1)/distance) * mass) by (new_h*new_c)^5/previous_planckEnergy^2 - (previous_h*previous_c)^5/new_planckEnergy^2/Distance between planck units, that is the force acting times the mass. When a black hole gets SUPER big, the G differential between Planck units gets very large, because the planck units become differential in size, causing curvature in their alignments, the smaller planck units recede to smaller scales (pushed by the larger G of larger planck units, Planck units nest near others closer to their size), and the black holes viscosity breaks down when they get large, turning into a power radiator (a very large planck unit) (spinning up black holes at the poles) then viscosity takes hold again as a result of radiating power (magnetic flux loops [particles] emerge out of the planck flux coming out the poles, collision with the planck field generates photons [collisions between Planck units]). The black holes can't maintain power radiator state, because they need other power radiators of the same scale to contain them. Dark energy and dark matter is just larger planck units progressively as you go towards the voids, while a black hole is made of very small planck units. While there is more G power for a Planck toroid in the dark energy portion of the planck field, they are very uniform in size relative to each other, therefore smaller amount of (G - G) differential between them, however, since these zones are so large, that slight bit of curvature (G differential) adds up. Whenever you have differential sized planck units, it curves their alignments relative to each other, therefore the larger the curvature there will be a larger G differential between them (G differential is gravity, rather than G of a single planck unit). Think of a Planck unit as pure magnetic flux (the concerted movement of many Planck units, when the viscosity of a black hole breaks down, do to planck units that make up it's body become to small relative to the larger ones, the power differential over powers the viscosity of the smaller ones, and throws the smaller Planck units into a loop [magnetic flux]) charge is just different flow directions in the magnetic flux because e^2/2pi*hbar*VacPerm*c they are inversely proportional to each other (extra charge = wobble in the system = extra magnetic flux on one side of the flow structure), I hope this helps!
@@ScienceReDiscovered Hahaha You are exactly right, I need to explain those scale factors in a way where the processes of their mind take hold hahaha. I'll work on that, good points. I have to get on your level with these equations though, I'm gonna hit the special relativity and general relativity equations till they are imprinted in my brain, add the mods. Curve for the different speeds, then set of curves for different speed + different acceleration rates. I got to educate the ape brain.
Have you heard Dr Gregg Henriques? He is a theoretical psychologist and has developed a tree of knowledge and unified theory of knowledge framework for achieving consilient scientific humanistic philosophy. He knows about Dr Gena Gorlin’s work and her work is very consistent with his own work. I found him on the rational egoist video titled “The Hard Problem of Consciousness and an Integrated Theory of Psychology with Gregg Henriques.” His own work might have some value to your work.
He also founded TOK(Theory of knowledge society that brings interested parties together to discuss philosophy, psychology and the state of the world, and to engage each other in meaningful conversation to explore best practices and sense-making systems for the 21st Century. It has approximately 150 scholars, students, and informed citizens who are concerned with the current state of the academic knowledge, the state of our society and the globe, and are interested in Professor Henriques' Unified Theory Of Knowledge.
Check this, at some point you don't even need to know the quantities any more either, if you have the operators and order between the variables in the right spots, you don't need to know the specific variable values, because any quantity will be relative measures of how they (together) change through (operational order) with other variables proportionally. This is where language comes in when building a system of equations, you can observe the end point without knowing specific quantity values, because every quantity is a relative measure with respect to another measure (through operational order). For instance, big toe prints * steps = number of big toe prints. It frees up the mind to find relational proportional significance, which is what the brain evolved to do (relational context transformation). Because ultimately, I'm not a very smart person, this helps me keep track of systems of equations when the code base gets large.
One of our strongest forms of memory is relational, actually called associative memory, and another is spatial memory. These are ancient forms of memory that many forms of life share to some extent. Using them together is almost like a superpower. If you're a coder and often need to retain a large amount of information, I'd highly recommend two specific "metacognitive tools"-the method of loci for memory and Tony Buzan-style mind maps for organization/chunking. They are both simple, so simple children can easily learn to use them, and immensely useful. I don't know why those two concepts are not taught to all of us as children and around the same time we learn to read and write.
@@crypticnomad Thats a good point, you hit the nail on the head.
This is solid content, good work.
@@NicholasWilliams-uk9xu thanks!
@@ScienceReDiscovered Hahaha I'm a nobody, go ahead though. We found something "special" together lol.... I hope that sentence doesn't look bad to a outside general relativistic observer 🤠 We broke the back of this thing.
What can the ether tells us about black holes or perhaps the relationship between the two?
People should be talking about you instead of Terence Howard
@@CptChandler hahah, give it time.