A lingual theory of everything

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Not really.

 

I don't see that you've added anything. Reasons for things occurring or not occurring are not part of the theory; it relies on some other framework to explain whether things can occur. That really can't be said to be a theory of everything. There are no specifics to any prediction you might make, which is one of the hallmarks of a decent theory. So it's not a theory, and it doesn't cover everything. It's also not testable in any meaningful way, which is the connection I was making.

 

I do understand the direction you are coming from. But I am not coming particularly from that direction ( only from a restriction point of view which I cover in part, with the ( path of least resistance ) clause.

3. " If there are reasons for anything not to occur , left to their own devices, the path of least energy and /or resistance will be followed. "

 

This aspect is more describing aspects that you speak about. Cause and effect restrained and boosted by the well documented laws of physics.

 

The observations that I concentrated on in the late 1980's , were not these, although familiar to me , having been both an engineer and electronic engineer through my working life. No I made a large series of observations across a wide range of disciplines , looking at the things which appeared to occur for no obvious apparent reason . This was more as an engineers hobby , than for any other reason. Possibly, being a keen under water swimmer, a walking and thinking country wander, a sky diver once and an amateur radio and astronomer fed my mind during well relaxed moments with the fuel for a wonderful OBSERVATION. I think also at the time I was undertaking my second spell in University in my 50's, and boy do I love the non commercial pressure of academic thinking in the university campus.( Particularly as a mature student - more like a shrunken apple).

 

BUT out of this cauldron of observation and thought the germ of an idea grew . That the things that were NOT forced and NOT determined seemed on occasions to DO BETTER. The more I homed in on this observed phenominon , the more I became convinced there WAS SOMETHING THERE.

 

I fumbled around with simple experiments , not necessarily of a highly technical nature, though some were. I was not trying to capture some new law which could convert into equation form. I was trying to home in on this unrestricted condition. BINGO

 

Out it popped this " things , many things, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN if there is nothing to prevent it happening " BINGO ! BINGO ! BINGO !

 

It does not need to be called a theory, if that offends you, Call it a fundamental observation if you like. I had heard loosely at that time scientists were looking for a theory of everything at the time. ( I did not really understand at the time what they were looking for. I thought it was my sort of concept. So I thought well I will have a go at a concept. I actually read a Cambridge University Press THE NEW PHYSICS about the ideas of string theory at that time dealing with topologies sitting on surfaces of something located half way down minute strings Amusing , but not followed..

 

By following the OBSERVATIONS operating across wide areas of activity in this PARTICULAR AREA of Zero or LOW or Minimal RESTRICTION very interesting things happen . Although pure unrestricted Space can only be obtained by thought experiment or going on a very long and expensive journey into outer space , half way to Alfa Centura . Another way to get to these regions is either in balanced systems or between dimensions ( eg at the surface of a still pond , gravity working along the normal to the surface of water 90 degrees to the surface. I can describe an observation of incredible support of my ..........( whatever you want to call it ) but for the moment Lingual OBSERVATIONAL THEORY (of everything) .

 

I can describe the experiment and observation at the junction of the x,y, surface to the z direction experiment as follows :-

 

Quite by chance I was feeding my gold fish in a garden pond. The pond was very still this day like glass. As I knelt near to the surface I pondered the levelness of the water and thought how wonderfully in balance that surface was , as it sat there still and dark. I mused about a certain individual line of gravitational force descending like an imaginary line from the blue sky above and puncturing the surface of the water at a perfect right angle. Having been thinking about these balanced states being the venue for no resriction , I mused about that point where all three dimensions met at the surface X,Y,Z. There it was just 6 inches from my eyes.

 

I had brought the fish food out to feed the small fish that were nowhere to be seen so the water was perfectly smooth. I had some of those wafer thin food flakes. ( really thin and brittle) when they crumble in your fingers they fall like flat little flakes of snow. they hit the point I was looking at ( my x,y,z junction ) I could not believe my eyes, I was staggered. The flakes on impact with the water settled onto the surface tension skin of the water , and immediately separated in all directions of the compass very quickly. I knew pretty well what was happening, but what was staggering I had found and witnessed a live observation of the theory. There was NO REASON FOR THOSE FLAKES WITH THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM OF 'INITATIVE' To TRAVEL AT 90 degrees in all directions , having been perfectly balanced by water maintained by a strong gravitational force, BUT by being at exactly 90 degrees to the water surface was in another dimension thus influenced the flakes by ZERO AMOUNT .

 

BINGO There it was , a scientific observation of an example of finding a

 

2. " Anything or everything can occur, if there is no reason for it not to occur, if there is some form of initiative for it to occur. "

 

Just one of many such observations to prove the Lingual OBSERVATIONAL THEORY (of everything) . QED ( or at lease Line 2 )

 

 

 

PS The initiative as I have been lead to believe, is the dissolved concentration of fish food although being very small , having no resistance on the flat surface exactly at 90 degrees to gravity had :-

 

.............................. no reason for it not to occur, if there is some form of initiative for it to occur. " Line 2

 

I only need to prove Line 1 and 2 as line 3 is mainly covered by the current established laws of physics. or at least the second half of the line.

 

3. " If there are reasons for anything not to occur , left to their own devices, the path of least energy and /or resistance will be followed. "

Edited February 25, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

It does not need to be called a theory, if that offends you, Call it a fundamental observation if you like.

 

It's so vague as to be useless. The first two parts are a tautology: Things happen because they can. Things don't happen because they can't.

 

Don't call it a scientific observation. Your "fundamental observation" didn't predict the tea leaf behavior. If some other result were observed, it still would have been consistent with it. That's why I likened it to "God did it" — because you can always claim that the explanation is there. Thus, it's not falsifiable.

 

Put another way: is there any physically achievable result (not violating other physical law) that would be inconsistent with part 1 or 2?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Put another way: is there any physically achievable result (not violating other physical law) that would be inconsistent with part 1 or 2?

 

Can you un zip this sentence . And spell it out in Queens English please.

[swansont]

Can you un zip this sentence . And spell it out in Queens English please.

 

Is it possible for something to happen that would violate part 1 or 2 of your proposal?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Is it possible for something to happen that would violate part 1 or 2 of your proposal?

 

 

 

Only if it has already happened , say the universe has happened with the big bang onwards , so it can't happen again , as the universe is already occupying that space.

 

If you call that a violation , I am not sure.

 

However if there are spaces in our universe where things can happen and occur , then that is fine. In fact that is the essence of my observations. That things happen best in the spaces , rather than where all the restrictions are. This is where most people say " You are stating the B........y obvious.. Which might well be the case. However it has directed my attention towards the SPACES. And these can be very local. Thus this makes up the nature of our reality. Lots of Stuff and lots of spaces . But where exactly are The Spaces.

 

EG I really think that one such interesting space is inside or about the atomic structure. In other words at the time of recombination Approx 300,000 years after Big bang when temperature had fallen to approx 6000 degrees k and electrons where attracted and able to approach hydrogen nucleus or protons Such a space could be found around each proton, and only that space specified by todays understanding of orbitals / energy levels and only those spaces. if there were not those spaces electrons would use up energy and degrade somehow. But they don't , they go on for ever. I can't see how they could do that, without this

." if there is no reason for it not to occur, . " So I am led to think, that the universe is peppered with such spaces, all over the place.

 

EG . the example I quoted with the water surface (x,y) and the gravitational notional field line (z) . Namely the junction between the 2 dimensional space plane and the third spacial dimension . The small Flakes of fish food ( not tea leaves ,if you don't mind ) found themselves in a free space and could thus respond via very tiny forces to immediate lateral movement in this Special unrestricted Space . " if there is no reason for it not to occur, if there is some form of initiative ( small directed force ) for it to occur. "

 

So all this hypothesis or observation is about is " Where these spaces are ? " , the rest of the universe carries on doing all the things that the laws of physics dictates. But it is these spaces that I find interesting. And they are all over the place .

 

Now what is a Violation , and what is Not. I am not sure at this juncture .

 

Edited February 26, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

Only if it has already happened , say the universe has happened with the big bang onwards , so it can't happen again , as the universe is already occupying that space.

 

So the statements are not falsifiable and have no predictive value.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

So the statements are not falsifiable and have no predictive value.

 

 

I am not sure that I can agree to that statement at this stage. I believe the hypothesis has a great deal of predictive value. By searching for these possible countless regions of balance at nodes. Tests may be made a predictions of value produced.

 

In fact this is already done , for satellites in orbit, say geosynchronous orbits, or low earth orbits to a certain degree .

centripetal force = mg centrifugal force = mvsquared/r in balance, in orbit at approx 17,700 mph orbit approx 90 mins. only the thin atmosphere to degrade orbit. . geo syncat 22,000 miles radius orbit duration 24 hours

 

All courtesy of equal balance of forces at this node . and will continue for ever ( well perhaps not ever , but a long time )

 

. WHATS WRONG WITH THIS ?

 

 

 

" A Lingual / NON-Mathematical THEORY OF EVERYTHING ".

 

1. " Anything

ELECTRONS IN ORBITALS /ENERGY BANDS

or everything can occur, if there is no reason( ONLY IN PERMITTED ENERGY BANDS for it not to occur "

 

2. " Anything ( GEO SYNC ORBIT ) or everything can occur, if there is no reason ( OUTER SPACE 22,000miles radius Orbit ) for it not to occur, if there is some form of initiative ( NASA LAUNCH INTO ORBIT ) for it to occur. "

 

3. " If there are reasons for anything not to occur SLIGHT ATMOSPHERE DRAG IN LOW EARTH ORBIT SATELLITE , left to their own devices, the path of least energy and /or resistance will be followed. ( FALL OUT OF ORBIT LATER ) "

QED

In older text books the calculations were done for Electrons in orbitals.

Edited February 26, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

I am not sure that I can agree to that statement at this stage. I believe the hypothesis has a great deal of predictive value. By searching for these possible countless regions of balance at nodes. Tests may be made a predictions of value produced.

 

In fact this is already done , for satellites in orbit, say geosynchronous orbits, or low earth orbits to a certain degree .

centripetal force = mg centrifugal force = mvsquared/r in balance, in orbit at approx 17,700 mph orbit approx 90 mins. only the thin atmosphere to degrade orbit. . geo syncat 22,000 miles radius orbit duration 24 hours

 

All courtesy of equal balance of forces at this node . and will continue for ever ( well perhaps not ever , but a long time )

 

. WHATS WRONG WITH THIS ?

 

 

QED

 

Orbits and centripetal force, etc. are not part of your theory.

[Popcorn Sutton]

So what your saying is that if we find a 2 dimensional surface at any point in space, and we use the gravitational axis, we can penetrate the surface and follow the path of least resistance? How would we determine the parameter of the surface. Where do these surfaces exist?

 

How would we penetrate it? With what form of initiative?

 

 

This has got me thinking that maybe if we can concentrate an explosive force in the direction we want to travel, maybe we can penetrate the substance and create a path of least resistance which would suck the unit through. Maybe rocket propulsion is inefficient and concentrated explosions are the way to go.

[michel123456]

(...)

 

How would we penetrate it? With what form of initiative?

(...)

Sexual

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Sexual

 

You will get yourself struck off, making comments like that !! You are just getting up to mischief ! Joking !

Edited February 26, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Orbits and centripetal force, etc. are not part of your theory.

 

I believe the theory can act as a vehicle for investigating Balanced and Free spaces. That is how I have used it so far. This is no different than say Euclidian geometry where the geometry does not itself bear any physical laws like say orbits or centripetal force but none the less the geometry is useful for nearly ANYTHING to enact out an experiment that could provide some test results. Of course the geometry itself can be tested as of course on curved surfaces like the surface of the Earth where 3 angles do not equal 180 degrees . Perhaps there is an equivalent ,anomaly in my theory.

 

However the Frank Knopler " falsifiable" , is not the final word on proof. True it acts as a progressive iteration towards improvement but falls down when getting near to an ideal solution.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Another solution to the Theory is where a Photon of radiation is able to move away from a Transmitting source,

 

 

1. " Anything or everything can occur, if there is no reason for it not to occur "

 

Provided there is nothing in the way , " there is no reason for it not to occur " it propagates across space . (For ever ?)

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited February 27, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[ACG52]

" Anything or everything can occur, if there is no reason for it not to occur "

"Anything which is not forbidden is compulsory."

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

"Anything which is not forbidden is compulsory."

 

Which is possibly why the universe is expanding and accelerating into the nothingness !

 

 

That is : Except for the gravitational restraining current something, ( namely the current, [? what is current and against who's , time ] existing universe. !)

 

What is " existing " ? from who's perspective does it exist , ( the stuff, us , * , ) ?

 

 

 

, " A Lingual / NON-Mathematical THEORY OF EVERYTHING ".

 

1. " Anything or everything can occur, if there is no reason for it not to occur "

 

2. " Anything or everything can occur, if there is no reason for it not to occur, if there is some form of initiative for it to occur. "

 

3. " If there are reasons for anything not to occur , left to their own devices, the path of least energy and /or resistance will be followed. "

Edited February 27, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

So what your saying is that if we find a 2 dimensional surface at any point in space, and we use the gravitational axis.

 

What I am saying in the example I described with the fish food, was a particular location for having little or no prevention for things happening in the two dimensional plane of the still water. By the way gravity acts it self levels the water so it is perfectly flat. and then the up and down line of action for gravity is exactly at 90 degrees to the surface. A Force can not act at 90 degrees to its direction ,( at least with out using complex numbers, which is a sort of other dimension ), so the fish food would be perfectly free of gravitational force or resultant movement ( balanced out ). All that was left was dissolved concentration forces which like similar charges repel the broken flakes to shoot out sideways. Try it.

 

Now you can find these boundaries in balanced modes in various places. I will tell you another a bit more rough and ready but fun .

A water fountain ,hose or drinking forcet that you point vertically up right.If you get it just right the water reaches the top and can go anyway if you get it balanced. I have not done an experiment on this one but I am sure you will be fun and popular if you are observed. Tell me how you got on ( " anything can happen " ) possibly even getting wet.

 

Another one is totally different " Finding the Zone "

 

Another one is totally different " Finding the Zone "

 

 

This one is not at 90 degrees , But is a good place to be , if you want to achieve. Athletes use it , and many people I have spoken to have at some time or another been " in the Zone "

 

There appears to exist a probable wavy line of least resistance, available through space and time , ahead of the initiative you are about to act on .

 

If you hit the start point of that "wavy line of least resistance" , perfectly as you start to enact your initiative you will enter "THE ZONE " .

 

Athletes do it regularly, you will remember if you have done it in the past , or will do it in the future. That perfect golf potting shot, that perfect double top at Darts. That perfect surfing run . Enter the Zone .

Edited February 28, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

 

Another one is totally different " Finding the Zone "

 

This is a good place to be , if you want to achieve. Athletes use it , and many people I have spoken to have at some time or another been " in the Zone "

 

There appears to exist a probable ( as in Probability ) wavy line of least resistance, available through space and time , ahead of the initiative you are about to act on .

 

If you hit the start point of that "wavy line of least resistance" , perfectly as you start to enact your initiative you will enter "THE ZONE " .

 

Athletes do it regularly, you will remember if you have done it in the past , or will do it in the future. That perfect golf potting shot or 'hole in one' , that perfect double top at Darts. That perfect surfing run . We join them to some extent with excitement when we observe them during their Zone experience or ROLL ( they are on a roll ! man,).

.

. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF CROSS DISCIPLINE OBSERVATION AND APPLICATION OF THE THEORY :-

 

~~~~~~~~~ Enter the Zone .~~~~~~~~~

 

.

I think the movers and shakers of this world , find or develop the skill. of entering " the Zone " in their own particular field.

 

. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From above :-

There appears to exist a probable ( as in Probability ) wavy line of least resistance, available through space and time , ahead of the initiative you are about to act on . Called THE ZONE

.

THEORY

 

, " A Lingual / NON-Mathematical THEORY OF EVERYTHING ".

 

1. " Anything or everything can occur, if there is no reason for it not to occur "

 

2. " Anything or everything can occur, if there is no reason for it not to occur, if there is some form of initiative for it to occur. "

 

3. " If there are reasons for anything not to occur , left to their own devices, the path of least energy and /or resistance will be followed. "

Edited February 28, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Popcorn Sutton]

When you refer to "the zone", I usually call something similar the point of interest (poi). A lot of cognitive scientists call it stuff like "The Focus Phrase (FP)," "The Focus of Attention (FOA)." The context you're using it in is interesting because I don't think outside of my own computational research very often, but it would seem that, yes, you do need to precise direction to get to the exact point that you want to get to with the inital force. It makes me wonder that if you use the proper form of initiative, would you still feel inertia. I dont think you would. If you initialized an empty path in front of you, probably the path of least resistance would be followed, but if the force was strong enough to clear everything (even the stuff we are unaware of) from that path, the object that started the void would get sucked through to the point at which the void doesnt exist anymore (and this could possibly be free of inertia).

 

I see athletes do it all the time, but they dont do it on such a scale that you have prompted me to think about. This could be a new method of transportation, but it could also be very destructive. In any case, what I call the point of interest (from a lingual perspective) is that point of the linguistic occurrence that matches with a bit of knowledge you have (and hence, following the path of the knowledge). Say, if I say "John read the book trionomeri ascerteria", you will hone in on "John read the book" as the point of interest, use that to prompt some knowledge, and then continue on to the next point of interested (which, for me, would probably be 'tri'). But if in the case that the poi is empty, and the maximal unit is empty, then I could see the poi being the initializer, and the initializer being sucked through the unit until the length of the sequence is not equal to zero. Interesting thoughts to ponder.

Edited February 28, 2013 by Popcorn Sutton

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

When you refer to "the zone", I think I origincally called it the point of interest (poi). A lot of cognitive scientists call it stuff like "The Focus Phrase (FP)," "The Focus of Attention (FOA)." The context you're using it in is interesting because I don't think outside of my own computational research very often, but it would seem that, yes, you do need to precise direction to get to the exact point that you want to get to with the inital force. It makes me wonder that if you use the proper form of initiative, would you still feel inertia. I dont think you would. If you initialized an empty path in front of you, probably the path of least resistance would be followed, but if the force was strong enough to clear everything (even the stuff we are unaware of) from that path, the object that started the void would get sucked through to the point at which the void doesnt exist anymore (and this could possibly be free of inertia).

 

Here is a layout and example of a Real Life Zone. Not the personal ones that I was talking to you about, but illustrates that non personal "Zones" exist .

The universe uses these to make the whole thing work . So why should we not use them in our own realms of endevour.

 

Example of Zone Track in real life

Edited February 28, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Popcorn Sutton]

I dont quite understand what exactly it is that the thumbnail is showing, is that a picture of the path of least resistance? It looks like lightning. Which makes me think that maybe lightning is something that uses these zones to travel

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

I dont quite understand what exactly it is that the thumbnail is showing, is that a picture of the path of least resistance? It looks like lightning. Which makes me think that maybe lightning is something that uses these zones to travel

 

Popcorn Sutton, I am enjoying having a conversation around this subject with you. Could you fill in a bit more detail on your Personal Profile as I find it difficult conversing into the void while not knowing quite who I am talking with. You have a fairly complete description of me in my profile , apart from my address and telephone number, but I have little on yourself, Age, Sex, Nationality , Roughly where in the world you are, Interests, thinking style, Employment, or Studies etc etc. If possible it would help me , when I am conversing. As I said I am quite enjoying exchanging ideas with you . Thanks Mike

 

Lightning , is a very perceptive, insight on your part, and would and does indeed follow the sort of tracks I have described. Repetetive lightning ( bang,bang ) often does follow the same path ( one following immediately another strike). Not always, but I have noticed on film shots of intense , repetitive strikes ,it does.

 

But no, the one I have drawn is not lightning and is more permanent and repeatable.!

Edited February 28, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Popcorn Sutton]

What do you mean permanent and repeatable? If I was to create one of these zones to get me from here to china, how would I do that? Can you make it absolutely consistent and does it not cause damage to the environment?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

I dont quite understand what exactly it is that the thumbnail is showing, is that a picture of the path of least resistance? It looks like lightning. Which makes me think that maybe lightning is something that uses these zones to travel

 

 

That is a picture of a path of least resistance. Tomorrow I will show you the reality .

 

That is a picture of a path of least resistance. Tomorrow I will show you the reality .

 

What do you mean permanent and repeatable? If I was to create one of these zones to get me from here to china, how would I do that? Can you make it absolutely consistent and does it not cause damage to the environment?

 

As I said the zone that Athletes and other people enjoy from time to time , is a sort of short term. It can last for Hours ( say in an amazing orchestral music performance, rock concert, theatrical performance ) , all this is of human achievement , which appears to work very fluently and expertly, , using the laws of nature very efficiently (using paths of least resistance)..

 

Inanimate things within the natural environment seem to do this naturally all the time. They, or the environment seems to be 'hard wired ' to do this quite normally. We are the ones that need to , create the initiative, find the right (SPACE) place to enter the zone and take the step. By observing how the natural environment does this automatically it is possible to find the key to entering the zone. Observe very carefully how they use the paths of least resistance. Speak to you ( whoever you are ? ) Tomorrow . ( its 11:25 pm here ) You will then see how it is permanent (reasonably) and repeatable.

Edited February 28, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

What do you mean permanent and repeatable? If I was to create one of these zones to get me from here to china, how would I do that? Can you make it absolutely consistent and does it not cause damage to the environment?

 

 

You are not going to get to China on the track of least resistance on the one I have shown , namely ,

The single track is a Total water course from the source spring on Exmoor to the Sea at EXMOUTH Devon England (See Map Below ) .. Its fairly permanent ,though a whole lot got washed away in the recent floods, and until we have a major earthquake its repeatable , and the Water follows ,all the time the path of least resistance.

 

 

 

Don't be dissapointed if you were expecting a worm hole to China. But in reality, it is the whole length of the River. It is an absolute miracle of water following the line of least resistance, and with it bringing grit from source to Sea. It might well take the Grit from rock on Exmoor to Sea at Exmouth ( Fifty miles away ) 100's of years or Thousands of years. but its all there you can go and pick it up.

. ~~~~~~~~

 

. OO

 

 

. ~~~~~~~~~

The next Picture is of a quantum jump at the ANGSTROM level ( a hundred millionth of a centimetre) a bit more exciting if you prefer Atomic Physics to grit going down to the sea to become sand on the sea shore

 

. See if you can guess this path of least resistance, the Space, and the initiative .

 

 

.~~~~~~~~~~~~

Edited March 1, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Popcorn Sutton]

So the blue wavy thing is where the initiative occurs, and the space above it is carried downward because of the initiative, and because of that effect, the path of least resistance is downward?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

So the blue wavy thing is where the initiative occurs, and the space above it is carried downward because of the initiative, and because of that effect, the path of least resistance is downward?

 

This is an artists impression of an electron in a higher energy band or orbital falling( because there is no reason why it should not) falling with/to a lower energy band because it is free so to do. The difference in energy is given out as a photon of light whose frequency is defined by a strict mathematical formula including planks constant. The bit shooting out is the light beam, the top colour energy band/orbital is white/mauve, the lower energy band is red. ( these are only illustrative colours of higher and lower energy. The particle with the wavy line in it is the photon of light energy shooting out at the speed of light ( 186,000 miles/second). The electron can not exist in an intermediate energy (but either upper mauve or lower red is permissable), but in its transfer it turns into a photon, that is the instantaneous star , which shows the generation of the photon.

Edited March 1, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos