nbj622

This video is a quick overview of 'models': (They are visualized by relationship diagrams.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1k1ERVbZEE I think your concept of mental 'RAM', should be defined by relationship models - because how does one define the existence and structure of RAM in the brain?

Graph from Wikipedia but maybe i made a mistake - 400,000 years (not light years) - I should edit that. Regardless, makes no difference to the overall conjecture of the essay.

Today, about 14 billion light years following the Big Bang, the energy composition of the Universe is approximately the following: 4.5% Matter: 4% Atoms + .5% mostly-massless particles 23.5% Dark Matter 72% Dark Energy However, just 400 thousand years after the Big Bang, the makeup of the Universe was approximately the following: 37% Matter: 12% Atoms + 25% mostly-massless particles 63% Dark Matter 0% Dark Energy Notice that the proportion of Dark Energy has increased substantially over time and the proportions of dark matter and matter decreased. There also seems to be a generally constant proportion of about 6:1 for dark matter to atoms (matter with mass). Also note that the amount of energy in the Universe has always remained a constant since the Big Bang. I believe that the following conceptual illustration explains the origin and progression of dark matter, dark energy, and regular matter. To understand how the makeup of the universe has evolved over time, one must start from the beginning and explain everything in terms of simplistic circles. Prior to the Big Bang, there was a singularity, explained by a single circle. This illustrates the Universe in a perfect state of order. As time goes on the universe has been 'expanding'. To describe expansion, one might normally draw an circle of increasing perimeter. However, I propose that it must be conceptualized differently. To describe expansion, I will draw circles within circles, because in this concept, if we drew the circle bigger, it would imply an increase in energy - and since the Universe is not increasing in energy, but simply getting larger - I will illustrate this by creating more circles within circles. The circles within circles concept explains a notion of increasing 'depth/scale' - which can be equated with an expansion in space. I'm also using a VERY SIMPLISTIC model. It is not drawn exactly, and is only meant to conceptualize 3 types of energy, however, an illustration showing their exact progression over time might be done using my approach, but it would require a much more precise measurement of areas, numbers of circles, configuration of circles, and so forth. What's basically happening is that new circles are being created and grouped by time, during the expansion of the universe. Each white circle represents matter, such as baryons and leptons, therefore time appears to be pushing the white circles deeper-in during universal expansion. Therefore, as new circles are drawn, only the inner-most circles are considered to be matter. The outer circles still exist, but they are no longer considered matter - though their outline is still necessary to visualize expansion. Over time, the total area of the white circles, compared to the area of the encompassing circle, shrinks, signifying a drop in the total matter to dark energy ratio. (since dark energy and regular matter are tied to area) Dark matter, on the other hand, is not represented by a single circle (or area), instead it is represented by the connection between circles. So over time, as more circles are added inside other circles, a 6:1 ratio of connections to circles still exists (as illustrated). Finally as for Dark Energy - well its pretty simple - its a result of the space between circles. Expansion forces the creation of empty space and these illustrations falls in line with its common interpretation as a vacuum energy of space (i.e. cosmological constant). It might also be said that the number of [mostly] massless particles (photons and neutrinos) are decreasing, as a function of the size of the circles and/or connections. Connections and/or circles decreasing in physical size = less photons and neutrinos. Over time, the expansion of the universe creates lots of circles within circles - which are not homogenous like in this diagram. So 13-14 billion years later, the universe finds itself somewhere within this circles within circles illustration, and we end up with the matter/energy makeup that is currently observed. And there you have it! A simple illustration for the origin of matter, dark matter, and dark energy. And if you think you can illustrate the progression better than I (i.e. you know how to calculate the number/size of inner-circles it would take to coincide with present day observations of energy) - please let me know Jason Shaw

I see that you're trying to relate dream/memory processes to computer/memory processes. I think you should organize your article into better defined segments, so that I can follow along with the concepts more easily. I tend to think that being tired and going to sleep is caused by the mess of mental models that are created in our heads during our waking hours. During the day, we absorb information and the brain haphazardly organizes the information into models, however by the end of the day, the models have become very messy. So we go to sleep, and as we dream, we are re-organizing the models in our head, by rebuilding the structures of hierarchies. (maybe like de-fragging a hard drive) We wake up refreshed, because the mental models in our brains have been re-organized. As for bad dream vs. good dreams - well maybe your ideas about the depth of memory/relationships (short vs. long), explains it. Also, memory = the ability to access these models. My two cents

Here's another quick essay: Time flows in one direction and it is associated with the concept of entropy because entropy also tends to flow in one direction. Entropy is a measure of disorder within a system - consider that at the beginning of the Universe, before the Big Bang, the Universe was in a state of perfect order. Therefore it had no entropy. Following the big bang however, the universe has been moving towards a state of disorder and increased entropy. The motion from order towards disorder implies the proliferation of randomness/equilibrium (i.e. the equal probability of finding a particle at any position within a system). In the end, the universe will reach a state of perfect disorder, equilibrium, and randomness. Therefore time flows into the future towards randomness. A good example of entropy/randomness is this: Imagine throwing an ordered stack of playing cards into the air - they will land in some random configuration - there is only one possibility that they land in the same order, and millions (billions) of possibilities that they land in different orders. When unforced by the minds of intelligent beings, things become randomized by time. For example, material objects break down and decompose; however when events are governed by intelligent minds, the opposite happens, things become ordered and sustain their arrangements for larger periods of time. Imagine that disorder, entropy, and time are part of a single stream that pushes against everything in the universe, like a river. This idea of keeping things ordered, is synonymous with fighting against a stream of disorder (time). The way to battle back against disorder and time, is to create relationships, communicate information, and produce acceleration. Lets examine a mass, that is not necessarily ordered by intelligent minds, like a planet. STREAM OF TIME ----------------------------> 0 - larger mass (planet) ----> o - smaller mass (rock) ------------> -----------------------------> A planet is a large mass, and like all masses, it is pushed by the stream of time. In my paradigm, its large mass is pushed by time, however it is pushed more slowly across it, than say a smaller mass like a rock. I.e. a river will push little objects downstream faster than larger objects. As time flows across the mass, a circular gravitational well around it is created. (meaning there is no spatial direction from which time flows - it flows from all directions) As a mass is moved downstream, it approaches the 'future' at a faster rate than the larger mass. So what is the future you might be asking? The future is a state of disorder and randomness, one where the object has been broken down and no longer exists as the object it once formed. Since acceleration is equivalent to a gravitational well (which leads to physical time dilation), it could be also said that acceleration, in any direction, is another means to fight against the flow of time. So mass and acceleration are the two ways to push back against the stream. Time dilation occurs between different systems moving at different speeds (and different masses). A footprint in time lessens as the footprint in space increases, causing time dilation. In the view of this stream of time, time dilation is the effect of fighting against the flow of time and a particle like the photon could be considered to stay still as time flows by it. All other masses are pushed by time to some degree, while the photon is not pushed. Note that when a photon travels slightly slower than the speed of light, as a result of scattering, it could be said that it was slightly nudged by time because of its connection to some mass. Now, to examine 'abstract time dilation', and masses that contain abstract mass as a function of their complex arrangement created by living minds: STREAM OF TIME ----------------------------> 0 - highly complex mass (human) ----> o - less complex mass (fly) ------------> -----------------------------> In abstraction, the flow of time is re-interpreted from a flow towards randomness, into a flow towards death. death = randomness Therefore moving into the future faster than something else, is equivalent to approaching death at a faster rate. Systems that move downstream will appear to 'die'. Systems that stay upstream appear to survive and be 'successful'. Living beings are constantly shifting their motion and speed between upstream and downstream. And the motion is correlated to their management of complex arrangements of relationships. Relationships = mass (abstract) Abstract mass has the same effect of normal mass - It makes it more difficult to push objects downstream by time. Therefore, a human will appear to live longer than a fly, simply because it has a combination of physical and abstract mass that keeps it from being pushed down river (of time). And the same analysis can be applied to any organization, including countries, governments, species, tech devices, etc. I also believe that abstract mass can be used to explain dark matter. Essay on this coming soon. See essay on abstract time dilation for more detailed information: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/73965-essay-on-motion-and-time-dilation/ See essay on complex arrangement for more info: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/73983-essay-on-complex-arrangement-and-energy/ Jason Shaw

Correct. Force is not the right word. I would consider it a flow, like a stream, and one can swim up against it. I am working on a short essay to better explain this - will be posted to speculations very soon. I don't think its a very hard concept to grasp, but physicists tend to be a difficult group Very good questions. Complex to calculate, but the starting point is in building a theory on relationships - since abstract mass is a measure of the 'configuration of atoms', rather than its simple weight. I wrote another essay in another post that can help explain a bit: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/73983-essay-on-complex-arrangement-and-energy/ This video may also help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbTNz3fZIKw My theory is both in agreement with mainstream science while allowing for an alternative perspective since it reveals an abstract space within spacetime. Thank you very much! I actually didn't consider your last post to be harsh. I've been on these forums a few times, and I've seen harsh, hah. I'm working towards a much bigger picture. You can find out more info about it here: http://www.theory-of-thought.com/book If you have more questions/concerns, keep them coming, I need to refine my arguments.

Its definitely tricky to explain - let's dissect it a bit. Information would appear to travel very fast. Lets look at a few of its perspectives: 1) In the brain itself, it travels quite rapidly between neurons. 2) In space, it travels at various speeds, perhaps the speed of sound when conveyed verbally, or even the speed of light, as when it is conveyed by photons (sight & computer networks). It is also known that photons do not age: a way of describing that would be to say, that they are unaffected by the forceful flow of time. As for people and things: they do appear to age - which would be to say that the force of time pushes up against them and pushes them towards disorder (death). As for time: Imagine it as a stream that pushes onto objects forcing them towards disorder (death). Massive objects (or fast moving objects) are less effected by its force. Massive objects (or fast moving ones) are like rocks that do not get pushed down river as fast as smaller rocks. Now to combine information (as fast moving structures) and conventional things (such as people) into one paradigm: conventional things such as people and other objects, could INCREASE some form of their lifespan, by employing fast moving information, to slow their motion within a stream of time. Harnessing information is like adding some form of mass. By employing information, people can become 'more massive' and become increasingly unaffected by the force of time (and appear to dilate their time, vis-a-vis others that do not employ it). Let me know if/where I can make this clearer. (its quite ad hoc at the moment)

I was being too simplistic with 'weight'. Mass is more accurate. Will take a look at mechanical energy vs. energy. Correct about its link to entropy. Since complex arrangement is a reference to a meaningful 'order' / non-randomness. thx

In physics, Energy is understood through Weight and Motion. If an object is heavy, it contains more energy. If that object is moving fast, it contains even more energy. Energy is an abstract concept that is a value for the amount of work a system can potentially force onto neighbouring systems. Its purpose is to explain the displacement of matter (systems). From a traditional physics perspective, a rock and a bottle of coke, of the same weight, moving at the same speed, contain roughly the same amount of energy. However, there is another perspective where a bottle of coke contains more energy than a rock of similar weight. This energy exists because a bottle of coke causes the displacement of more systems of energy (people) than the rock. People will distribute and move towards the bottle of coke, while the rock sits motionless on the ground. This 'abstract' energy that a bottle of coke contains, which causes the displacement of people around it, is stored within the arrangement of its matter (i.e. structures of information like its logo). Traditionally, physical energy is calculated by adding together all of the atoms - it does not take into account the 'arrangement' of these atoms. The arrangement of atoms, which produce 'designs' such as logos, words, pictures, etc, is not valued in traditional equations of physics. However, the abstract energy stored within an object, such as a bottle of coke, is calculated by adding together all of the distinct arrangements between its atoms (such as words, logos, etc). Physical energy = sum of atoms Abstract energy = sum of non-random arrangements between atoms Total energy (accessed across an abstract space) = physical + abstract The abstract value of the energy of an object is stored within an abstract space, which is inhabited by the minds of people. Minds obey similar rules of physics as do physical bodies, and as an effect, this abstract energy has pulling and pushing forces that are exerted on the minds of neighboring people (and other living things).

Your statement makes no sense... Information IS intelligence. A photon is a particle that we use to derive information. A photon is not information - it is embued with information. For instance, a page out of a book is a structure of intelligent information (that is composed of particles other than photons btw!). It can be represented with photons that can be converted into bits... 1010101011010. That is a basic structure of intelligent information. And yes it can be physically modeled as light, but it can also be abstractly modeled as the numbers 1 and 0 which are direct consequences of intelligence. Umm... If modern physics is so well adept at modeling information, why are its rules not being applied in the act of teaching - which is the principle study of information? (not physics) The concept of information in physics, and the concept of information in this essay are not on the same level. Oh I got it, you want everything in reference to light/photons, because I mentioned the word information. Well that's because you don't know much about intelligence. The mind is an abstract space that requires modelling it through abstraction. The structures of information that it processes, that are called symbols, are guided on the rules of this abstract space. This essay is about thinking of the motion of abstract structures. So if you want to think about bytes of information travelling at light speed across cables, you should be able to understand that those structures of bytes are in fact being time dilated - but since they don't exist because they constantly appear and disappear, as a physicist you ignore them. However in this essay, I am saying that they do exist, and the structures are being time dilated in an ABSTRACT space.

*What do you guys think? How can I improve this essay? Thanks. In physical space, motion can be observed when matter moves between positions in space. It is trivial to measure and it is ultimately ruled by two forces of nature: electromagnetism and gravitation. The concept of motion is at the center of Einstein's Theory of Relativity, and motion has been found to produce a universal phenomenon called Time Dilation. Time dilation is the effect of slowing time by moving relatively quickly thru space. It is widely accepted that Time Dilation plays a minuscule role in our daily lives, because as human beings, we move too slowly to generate enough time dilation; so we don't bother measuring the effects of the dilation of time between ourselves. But what if Time Dilation does in fact pervade human society - however in some abstract form that is caused by a entirely different type of motion? I propose another type of motion in the Universe exists that is governed by abstract versions of the physical forces. This form of motion is absolutely abstract and it measures the motion of intelligent communication between living beings. communication = motion Consider two people sitting still motionless, but speaking and coordinating information between themselves. In a physical sense, there is no motion being generated (other than the motion of particles between their mouths and ears). However, in an abstract sense, there is a transfer (motion) of information, and if information can be thought of as a structure in some abstract space, it might be describeable as a type of moving object (called a symbol). These structures of information move across this space using abstract laws of motion. Im hypothesizing that there is an abstract space containing structures of information, that are ruled by the same principles of physics regarding time, space, and vectors of motion. The main difference between the physical and abstract spaces however, is that the laws of physics must be reinterpreted between the two. So there are two forms of motion: (1) Physical (2) Abstract These are some of the conversion of concepts: (1) Gravitation = (2) Concentration (1) Electromagnetism = (2) Interaction (1) Time Dilation = (2) Abstract Time Dilation Concentration, Interaction, and Abstract Time Dilation are the physics within some abstract space (of the mind) that co-exists with the physical space. They are reinterpretations of the physical forces that operate on abstract structures of information. There are several more physics concepts that can be converted between the spaces, which is beyond the scope of this essay, however what I'm basically getting at, is that structures of information, modelled within an abstract space, can be regarded as obeying the [abstract forms] of gravity, and electromagnetism, while generating Time Dilation. You are probably asking, what is the abstract form of Time Dilation? Well, time dilation 'slows time'. So abstract time dilation does the same thing. Time Dilated organizations will appear to age slower, and so will structures of information. From there, I deduce that the time dilation of abstract information is the entire foundation for our notion of competition. You see, intelligent beings 'compete' to survive, by exchanging information. The exchange of information creates abstract Time Dilation, and organizations that harness Time Dilation will slow their aging process. They create time dilation by exchanging (moving) more information than surrounding systems. In abstraction, this means, that they are able to stay ahead of other minds. They will live longer and they will appear be 'successful'. They will out-compete the rest. Abstract time dilation becomes incredibly important within the networked age of the 21st century, as a result of the enormous amount of information being moved between nodes. At then end of the day, the reinterpretation of physics into an abstract space can explain death and extinction. When any organizations fails to produce enough motion across an abstract space (as a function of communication between relationships), they will age faster, and be pushed towards their death faster - because faster clocks equal earlier death. For example, when a species like the Dodo [a form of network] goes extinct vis-a-vis our civilization, it's because our civilization has produced a massive, Time Dilated bubble. From this bubble, outside organizations, such as the Dodo, that fail to generate enough motion to keep up with the speed of our information networks, appear to go extinct. Note: to prevent extinction, the outside organization (network) must be integrated within the faster moving organization.

I agree, there's a reason for the slight imperfection. I don't have the exact answer yet, but I believe it has something to do with scaling. The same triangle in half scale bridges pi\4 and sqrt(phi)= .785 and the error grows from there. You'll see the diagram on pg2.. . it's an error from truncating. If you give it a good read, you should see that the theory is real tight, and I ain't messing around like the other 999,999 people Thanks btw i added the link to the right youtube video here it is again http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md8VPiUWkA8 im going to make some adjustments, no worries, but you should get the gist of it, i think.

I'm adding video to the audio I'll send you a link to my YouTube, it's not perfect yet, but would help some people like yourself understand. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md8VPiUWkA8 And the diagram ain't wrong, no idea what your thinking, but do the math. Truncated constants , and measure the angles. Almost perfect connection to the 30-60-90 triangle Did u go thru both new pages? In order? Ya i do know what I'd thinking, it's off by .03 , it's reflected in the final angles, not a perfect connection but damn fckn close Real Scientists shouldn't diss other bodies of work, including mysticism btw

Hey Michel, I greatly improved my entire presentation; and I added an Audio introduction to the entire topic. Can you have a listen? And maybe check out the other pages on my site? It should be really fascinating! Start at www.theory-of-thought.com. amatfaal - if you have it in you, give it a look too! (i finally figured out that you were talking about michel's statement, not my 'nihilistic' theory) and anybody else for that matter. thanks

Hey thanks alot for actually taking a good look! I know its a little out there, but its a piece of a larger theory (on thought). Yeah perhaps i was a little harsh on amatfaal - im just looking for constructive criticism, not a gauntlet of criticism. i hope my customer returns I will remove the title asap. As for your cylinder comment - its just a circle, because all of my models are 100% 2-dimensional. I believe the way to use them is by layering them across depth (3rd dim.). Models over models. They connect points of depth thru 2-D symmetry, i suppose. They describe a slightly different environment than the standard SpaceTime, but within its scope. If you see any other particular issues - maybe something is too complex / wordy / fuzzy. I also think the theory is edible, and there's more to come, those are only a fraction of the models! lol thanks again

I simplified the model. I'll better explain the three parts. The text below, with links, is from wikipedia: 1) After its initial expansion from a singularity, the Universe cooled sufficiently to allow energy to be converted into various subatomic particles... I use a circle because that's basically the definition of a SINGULARITY. (single - one entity - a point). C'mon use some imagination. 2) The inflationary epoch comprises the first part of the electroweak epoch following the grand unification epoch. It lasted from 10−36 seconds after the Big Bang to sometime between 10−33 and 10−32 seconds. Following the inflationary period, the universe continues to expand... I don't know the exact time frames that my inflation model references, but I hypothesize that its describing the 'webbing' of time and space that evolved during one or a few of these initial epochs. Many of my physics models are describing the 'webbing' or the organization bridging space and time. 3) The third model is describing the quantization of time, as sub-atomic particles, during the expansion epoch. Einstein's famous equation of light energy is E = h x f. Within it, planck's constant represents a quanta. ħ = h/2π is the reduced Planck constant. The reduced planck constant is a radius, therefore h is a circumference. The circumference of a space. My model describes space releasing circular quanta across time. In my expansion model Time is also circular because this model illustrates time 'cyclicality' / 'periodicity'. The linear model below fails to illustrate the universal cycles of time. Time and Space are separate, hence the term 'Space''Time'. However, the theory of SpaceTime treats two separate entities as one, and I agree with you - however my model supports that, because space and time are touching - if the two circles were not touching my model of SpaceTime would be grossly innacurate as you attempted to point out. Furthermore, since time and space are intrinsincly joined, what provides a space, also provides a time (joules seconds). Here is a slightly different expansion model with a more recognizable linear timeline: in my models, time is any single measurement unit described in terms of energy of space (h). The Planck constant (denoted h), also called Planck's constant, is a physical constant reflecting the sizes of energy quanta in quantum mechanics. The Planck constant has dimensions of physical action (Joules seconds - Electron Volts seconds). Is that better michel? Imafatas, go troll elsewhere, you freethinker.

Thanks for being clear. You may be right, the title is heavy. In physics there are very few illustrations - and if there are, one illustration does not link to another. I'm trying to create one set of illustrations for a small boatload of topics in physics. I believe I have narrowed the topics to a fundamental set that can be linked together. Of course, its not everything, but I believe its the most important. Maybe you can take a little bit longer look, and go past the first few sentences. I would really appreciate the feedback. Just give me something a little deeper than the overall presentation is 'dishonest'. The topics are all standard model, I don't think its far left field (forget the multispace, the clouds, or 12-D stuff - i will remove it - its all part of an even bigger theory anyways). The graphics are trying to sort out physics in a more logical manner. Give it one good look, and I'll definetely listen to your criticism - maybe you'll have some constructive pointers too I would start the topic here, but im not sure how. Maybe you can explain to me how I should do that. thanks again

Yes, im french speaking. Is that a problem? Do you enjoy attacking people on the forum michael? What exactly is irratating about the presentation? The mixture of simplicity and physics? Please be specific otherwise don't even respond. Try being a gentleman, because I believe I have been. I will add the italicized text on my sentences, there are about 5 sentences not counting the text at the bottom of the images- thats my text as well. Its easy to distinguish between the two - the sentences with links are from wikipedia. That should be easy to understand for a smart guy like you.

The whole page is just temporary. Some of the starting text is not from wikipedia. however, if you read, you will quickly see that the majority of the text is all wikipedia, safe a few sentences here and there. Im more interested in what you think of the models (the images). Did you see the one on spin? On the relativistic fields?etc..

Hi, I've created a set of models that illustrate physics concepts such as spin, relativistic fields, dimensionless constants, quark models, and many others. Its a system for visualizing the standard model. I was hoping for some feedback. I would post them here, however there are so many images, i don't think it would work. Check it out. Thanks a lot.