TaoRich

I like that. Expressing it in my own language for my own clarity: human to human communication is the goal rules should serve the goal I'll keep that in mind when I get hung up on language.

Thanks again for clear coherent comments and helpful discussion. That was my own initial opinion. ... supported by ajb ... and grounded rather nicely by DrRocket I am truly impressed by the level of interest and effort that people share here in trying to help me and others. Big up guys. Respect.

Hi Folks, Another language question. Which is generally preferred or considered more acceptable: "We consider a space alpha ..." or simply: "Consider a space alpha ..." Should I try to avoid the use of personal pronouns 'as a rule' or it really just a matter of 'use whatever language aids the communication process best' ? I find that using the personal pronouns sometimes comes more naturally as I write. I know that i've seen this style used often before in maths & science texts - but I'm a bit worried that I'm recalling it from my University "teaching/student books" and that it may not be as well accepted at a higher level. Comments & opinions welcome. Cheers Rich

Hi Folks, I'm Richard, currently in Durban, South Africa. I studied Chem Eng and Comp Sci way back when, and have a pretty good background in maths & science. I love to learn, love to solve problems, and am always thinking about how things work. Someone earlier in this thread used the word "sponge-brain" ... I think that also fits quite well with me. Loved maths & science at school - never had to apply myself much - things just seemed to make sense naturally and fit into a world-view framework. My thinking and learning is kind of network based - I lay down a few fundamental truths, and from there build a framework where I am happy playing and extrapolating between the bits of knowledge. I only add things that fit and are coherent - never was able to do the memory or parrot learning - and grow my understanding through linkages. Although I've got the logical brain, I'm also intuitive as well - which plays hell with my personality So I started off with a rational, well grounded education, but have since been devouring books on the metaphysical and philosophical side of the world view. - - - I've been musing over "the emergence of a fundamental space" for the past 15 to 20 years - occurring to me first as a kind of nagging vision or image that refuses to let me go. I've been trying to unravel the physics and maths behind the mental imagery ever since - which at times feels a bit like trying to wrestle an alligator and pin it down to the ground. Around a year ago, I managed to put together a Gambas animation simulation of my visual concept - after finally being able to identify and come to grips with the maths and geometry that was necessary to describe what I was envisaging. I can more or less explain my ideas to people who sit next to me at my computer, but it still requires them to sit patiently through a long discussion and demonstration, with a lot of wild hand-waving from my side. So that's why I'm here, to get my concept down into a paper that I can share with people who are not physically located next to me, in a form which allows for constructive critique and discussion. Thus far, folks have been pretty helpful and friendly. Happy to be here.

You've got it a nutshell right there. I never set out to try to prove anything, or assert anything. Sometimes it has pursued me even more than I have pursued it. A fundamental concept began bugging me from my days studying Chem Eng back in the 1980's - while soldiering through Maths, Physics, and Quantum Physics. Something did not sit right with me, and I've been digging and scratching at it for 15 or 20 years now. I'm trying to express how "I spotted a hole and set out to fill it". - - - I know that the approach I seem to be heading towards is not the conventional accepted norm - and I accept that I may very well change/revise how I'm going to express myself once I have managed to dump the concepts out of my head and down onto paper. Right now, I'm needing a tool (one could even say a crutch) to help me get a grip on a theory that is balanced evenly across 'hard physics' and 'soft metaphysics'. One that seems to have rather strange implications. Once I have wrestled with the beast, and pinned it down, I'll be sure to revise how I express myself - which I know I must do if I want to be taken seriously. My gut feel is that I'll end up with two different versions ( nope make that editions ) of my "paper": One, formal, for a physics audience. And an other, informal for a philosophical audience.The main thing is that I now have a starting point ... and every journey begins with that first step. Thanks to all for the input. I appreciate all the comments, for and against ... they all help shape my thinking. I need walls to bounce off - you've all helped.

Thanks ajb ... that helps. I've just been playing with the Thinkmap visual thesaurus and bouncing around between the words above: http://www.visualthesaurus.com/ It led me to the word meditation which I quite like. I'd been playing with the word contemplation for a while, but felt that it was a little too "navel gazing" - a self-absorbed proverbial examination of lint from one's own belly-button. meditation works well for me, because the "mind's eye imagery" for what I set out to explore made itself apparent firstly to the intuitive, visual side of my brain. I spent years trying to get a grip on the formal mathematical/physical conditions that would be necessary to describe and model the mental visual image. I finally managed to bed it down a few months ago, using a computer simulation/animation based on underlying standard fundamental physics. So, now I'm happy that I've got a starting point that feels stable enough for me to start walking forwards. I'm going to use this framework: meditationstate my speculative hypothesis[*]exploration explore my hypothesis and derive my mathematical model[*]discussion examine the physical consequences of the model[*]contemplation examine the meta-physical consequences and implications I know that that's not necessarily the formal, conventional approach, but I feel it's going to work best for me in my need to communicate my thinking. Besides which, I tend (pathologically) to swim against the flow. It's the same part of my nature which makes me think differently to the norm. - - - By way of pre-emptive apology, I'm not trying to deliberately be cryptic or withhold the gist or nature of my "theory" ... it's just that it is still too fragile to survive in the bare light of day. Hence my need to formally document what I have bouncing around in my head - so that it is clearly and well stated before I subject it to external examination or critique. When I have something solid enough to stand on and defend, I'll be sure to share it here in the forum. - - - Cheers & thanks again TaoRich

Hi Folks, Newbie here, sitting in sunny South Africa. As usual, whenever I try to write something, I get hung up on getting started. I have a tendency to bog myself down with unnecessary trivia, or "deeper and deeper research" - good old Procrastination 101. So, who can comment here to give me a kick-start to beak my deadlock. What's the correct or accepted scientific term or language to use when putting forward a What if ? question. My approach will be: What if : ( a speculation / hypothesis / conjecture ) I state or pose a fundamental question about space. ( One I have pondered, deliberated/teased and tortured myself with for over 15 years. ) Is the "what if hypothesis" possible : ( testing / formulation ) I set out to investigate if the "what if" can be modelled. Can it be described., Is it stable. Is it sound. What are the implications of the model : ( consequences / discussion ) I discuss the physical implications I discuss the metaphysical implications So back to my question, rephrased: What is the heading I use for the question in the box on my first page ? I don't really want to go with hypothesis because to me that is "too assertive". My "what-if" began as a question or pondering I set out to explore ... not a strong assertion that I wanted to put forth boldly as a fact a priori. I really want to get across the fact that we ( the reader and I ) are setting off on a journey together to explore a (almost metaphysical) assumption about the world, and that we ( the reader and I ) do not want to assume that the fact is there to be proven before we set out on the journey. - - - Well that's my cherry busted - my first post here. Hopefully it makes sense to someone who will comment. Cheers TaoRich "Imagine a world without hypothetical situations ..."