relativity verses reality

[univeral theory]

Absolutely; everything “IS”. But due to the reference frame of different procedural step of its quantum being; “EVERYTHING WAS AND IT WILL BE”. And this “IS” relativity from univaso science point of view of res extensa verses res cogitan. For example; thunder and lightening are caused at the same time, but the difference in the procedural quantum steps of accessing there being as a function of the reference frame of the consciousness, subjects them to different times of effect, and this is E=MQ2.
Let me re-use the ordinary example illustrated from my previous work that can establish the equilibrium frame work between relativism, absolutism and E=MQ2 as a function of their reciprocal unity through oppositely conflicting variables (symmetry breaking) of univaso science.
From your life experience, you have been encountering a plenty of physical objects; say people, buildings, trees, rocks, water bodies etc. suppose you are asked to identify what you have seen say a tree, the fact is that you would have seen a mass of living plant called a tree, in luganda we call it omuti and in Arabic it is called shajarat, in Chinese prof. A pibernick can help or else I will tell you soon. But regardless of the name you would all have called what you saw, the fact is that you have all seen the same thing absolutely which is a mass of a living plant. That is true.
But suppose an expert in physics, chemistry or biology was the one to identify what he saw concerning the very same tree and he says that, I see energy as a function of different recurring square fields call them gravitational fields, velocity fields, magnetic fields, kinetic fields, bra…bra…..bra…..conserved smoothly and recursively into different quantum units of organs and then cells and then molecules and then atoms and then particles and then and then. ..! Would he be wrong? No, he would be true, especially depending on the accuracy of his presentation.
But what makes these two people of seemingly different answers to be both true, here is the core of the quantum steps of consciousness as a function of reference frame (relativity). The first person sees a mass of a living plant even with out recognizing how many procedural quantum steps by steps through which his consciousness or mind has undergone to establish an equilibrium framework between different forms of conserved energies (colors, light, substances, dimensions etc) at less than a blink of an eye up on which there reciprocal unity is the recognition of a mass of a living plant. The reference frame of this person is deductive and its consciousness speed is equivalent to the reciprocal equilibrium unity of E=MQ2. Further still, the approach of the second person does not mean that the speed of his consciousness is not equivalent to the reciprocal equilibrium framework of E=MQ2, but it is rather an inductive reference frame capable of identifying the quantum step by step procedures followed by his consciousness when it was establishing the reciprocal equilibrium unity of the framework that he perceived as a mass of a living plant.
The effect of the reciprocal unity and its equilibrium framework as a function of opposite(symmetrical) reference frames is at the centre of Einstein’s simultaneity hypothesis from the relativity theory point of view provided that time is just a numerical measure of change as a function of material existence through its units of procedural quantum steps.
Relativity is just a victim of time and symmetry breaking ignorance as a function of natural phenomenology through its procedural quantum steps of establishing the reciprocal framework of the oppositely conflicting variables of natural unity (simultaneity). This is established smoothly and recursively by univaso science as formulated by zaid sserubogo. After all, even the commutability of E=MC2 lies at the blessing of equilibrium unity framework of symmetry breaking from the oppositely two reference frames.
Think of a Turing machine as a model of predicting the reaction of consciousness based on procedural steps. A Turing machine is a model of predicting the reaction of a given machine (call it a computer) based on predetermined steps (call them programs) of data manipulation (call it data accessibility, data regulation, and data coordination). Binary system is a form of data that can be represented and manipulated by a Turing machine and in computer programming it is conventionally known as machine codes or raw data system or the basic language system.
Although the reaction of a Turing machine is based on manipulation of data through binary system, but the prediction of this reaction is based on the predetermined step by step procedures of the algorithm used to program it. So, while predicting the reaction of a Turing machine is the central point in its programming, but the algorithm used in such a program is the central requirement of determining the predictability of a Turing machine.
There are two requirements of determining the predictability of a Turing machine;
Resource requirements
Procedural requirements.

There are only two known resources that are required to complete a given pre - programmed prediction of Turing machine.

1a- Time resource
1b- Space resource
Procedural requirements are the central point in computer complexity. And it is a measure of the complexity degree of completing the processing cycles required to solve a given problem by a Turing machine and it is measured in time.
There are two types of such complexities;
The one which when given the algorithmic step by step procedures of a given program; the Turing machine reaches a certain point and automatically halts. The algorithm used in such a program is called decidable (by decidability we mean proving the answer by true/yes or false/no).
And the other one which when given the algorithm step by step procedures of a given program, the machine will never halt automatically. The algorithm used in such a program is called un decidable.

In computer complexity; the requirements of deciding a given problem falls into two categories of procedural complexity; one is call polynomial time procedure or specifically polynomial time, and another one is called exponential time time procedure or specifically polynomial time(but this is not so strict because though there is a strong argument to believe that sub exponential time is just the extra mile of polynomial time, but researchers have not concluded on this, so it still stands as another time dimension In computer complexity).

In the context of the opposite reference frame, we are dealing with solving as well as proving our solution in a given polynomial time procedure (hoping that you know the advantages of polynomial time procedures and why it is of such great importance to the complexity of existence or computer science community. We need to reconcile the process of our solution to the process of our verification such that there equilibrium framework is based on a polynomial reciprocal unity of 1/yes/true or 0/no/false.
The mechanism of establishing this is through commutative parametrization and combinatorial optimality of opposite pairs. Such that;

If; (s/1/+ .-(√s) )=1,

Then; ∂(s/1/+ .-(√s) )=1,

Else; add 1

Or; subtract 1

End if



As we can see from the above illustration it only takes a procedural polynomial time of 1+ or -1 to administer the changes and reactions of texts made to and from our S variable framework, If this framework has been optimized with in an equilibrium framework of oppositely conflicting pairs (symmetry breaking) with in a reciprocal unity of 1. Such that 1, +or-1 = ∂(1, 0).

As a Turing machine, the mechanism of physical data manipulation by a given consciousness or mind and the predictability of physical data reaction by the mind is regulated and coordinated in the same way as that of a Turing machine, though the methods of accessing this data differs.

.'' The cause of every thing is smoothly and recursively reciprocal and opposite (symmetrical) in nature, this symmetry breaking is circulated through conflicting patterns that are directly proportional to their regulation and inversely proportional to their coordination; and when the equilibrium framework of the conflicting symmetry pairs is established, reciprocal prevails and unity is realized.''

[Bignose]

http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/ relativity and reality agree pretty well. If you want to replace the theory of relativity, you should be able to demonstrate, exactly, how your idea makes predictions that are at least as good as the ones outlined in the review article there. Also, as I mentioned in another thread you posted in, http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/68748-the-millenium-prize-problems/?p=719572, your use of the symbols in your mathematics looks like they were tossed together at random, at best. To communicate your idea better, you probably need to be a lot clearer about what your math equations are actually saying.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

One thread per topic, please.

 

Please defer discussion to the existing thread:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/70242-universal-theory