What exactly is a circle which nets to nothing? What are its properties? How is it defined? What mathematical equation describes it? In this video we explained the base properties of existence, and for the first time in the history of humanity, define exactly what energy is and why it exists!
Categories
-
Join 496 other subscribers
- Follow Climate of Sophistry on WordPress.com
Recent Comments
- Philip Mulholland on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- CD Marshall on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- Joseph E Postma on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- CD Marshall on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- Joseph E Postma on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- CD Marshall on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- Joseph E Postma on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- boomie789 on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- boomie789 on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- Joseph E Postma on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- boomie789 on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- Joseph E Postma on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- boomie789 on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- boomie789 on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
- boomie789 on Livestream Q & A / Hang Out (today) Fri. Feb 17 6pm MST
Climate of Sophistry 
It finally started coming together on this one.
This is an epic discussion and this information should be prolific, but alas, it seems Joe sees what others do not. We must clone Joe. Stranger Things on Netflix also has an upside-down world where people get trapped and a beast feeds on them. Because we are known as “points” do you think the circling could also be interpreted as each of us? Each of us is a circle with a unique frequency. All circles represent all the frequencies of the Great Monad. Each circle is mental/mind, which is all we are.
From the video:
“A circling is immaterial: made of thought
Each basis circling is a basis thought
Thought is immaterial – unextended substance”
Before there were biological beings to conduct the activity known as ‘thought’, what was the state of the universe, and how did that state change to permit ‘thought’ to occur? If you claim the universe itself performed this ‘thought’, this, I believe, is a form of personification or anthropomorphism of the universe as a whole.
‘Thought’ is defined as the shuffling of bits of data to arrive at a conclusion, especially in biological terms… but even computation of data (ie: the shuffling of data bits, whether that computation is biological, mechanical, electrical or otherwise in nature) is subject to the fundamental physical laws.
https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1411728112
https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1411728112
Click to access pnas.1411728112.sapp.pdf
Now, a ‘smooth’ nothing would have no extractable information, it is maximally entropied. So Landauer’s Principle (which holds that any logically irreversible information manipulation (ie: ‘thought’) must be accompanied by a corresponding increase in entropy in non-information-bearing DOF of the apparatus (whether biological, mechanical, electrical or otherwise) manipulating the data, or its environment.
So we’ve shifted the problem to infinite recursion, and that’s a step backward, IMHO… in order for there to exist the ability to process information (‘thought’), information must exist as a precondition to an apparatus existing to manipulate that information. In order for an apparatus to manipulate information requires a corresponding increase in entropy of the apparatus doing the information processing (which could not exist in a ‘smooth’ nothing universe) or of the universe itself (which is already maximally entropied in this case).
So the universe could not have started as a maximally-entropied ‘smooth’ nothing. It had to start as a low-entropy something, and is ‘winding down’ as entropy continually increases.
So I’m confused as to how this explains the genesis of the universe.
Joe Postma said:
“It is ENERGY: for the first time in scientific history, we have now defined energy!!!!!”
Energy is defined as the capacity to do work. Work is defined as the application of a force over a distance. So energy is defined as the capacity to apply a force over a distance… and only the capacity, remember that potential energy can exist without work being done. Perhaps the primordial universe began as a giant potential.
“But what about all that energy that maximally entropies and thus becomes a part of the quantum vacuum? It can do no work! So it cannot be defined as energy!”, you may ask.
It can do no work upon any system which has equal or higher energy density (and hence equal or lower entropy)… but it still has the capability of doing work upon an artificially-lowered energy density (and hence higher entropy) environment, as is found, for instance, in a Casimir cavity (as I’ve been discussing in other posts). So yes, it can still be defined as energy.
In fact, it is the non-zero expectation value of the quantum vacuum, operating upon the lower (presumably zero) energy density of the void at the edge of the universe, which is posited to be causing universal expansion. It is the high-frequency components of the quantum vacuum, above the plasma frequency of the quantum vacuum, which is posited to be causing the expansion of the universe at > c (plane-waves above the plasma frequency can have a phase velocity greater than the speed of light without violating the principles of relativity nor causality because the dielectric constant of the plasma is less than unity, hence the refractive index is also less than unity).
No, we cannot then pulse the plane-wave to transmit information > c…. the group velocity in vacuum travels at ≤ c.
Conversely, for plane-wave wavemodes less than the plasma frequency, the dielectric constant is negative, thus the refractive index is imaginary: n = √e, thus both the phase and group velocities are imaginary. That’s why electromagnetic waves of frequency less than the plasma frequency will be totally reflected (which is the phenomenon which causes ionospheric skip).
It is my contention that this is the genesis of the universe… the bifurcation event which initiated the universe as we know it. A great ‘ball’ of energy bifurcated due to the differing phase velocities of the frequencies of that energy, then some of that energy ‘curved back in on itself’ via photon-photon interaction to form persistent excitations in the field which we sense as invariant-mass meta-stable matter.
Something like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photonic_molecule
Now, where that great ‘ball’ of energy came from is anybody’s guess. Alas, we’re still stuck with infinite regression… and we always will be because we cannot see far enough back in time by looking out into space-time to determine the actual conditions at the start of the universe.
“Before there were biological beings to conduct the activity known as ‘thought’, what was the state of the universe, and how did that state change to permit ‘thought’ to occur? ”
This is the most common mistake in materialist thinking. Thought does not originate in the brain, it is does not originate with biological beings. Thought is pre-existent to the universe…thought is base-existence, the singularity, unextended substance, mathematical, etc.
This will also be covered in a future video, already ready to go, but a couple of episodes out yet.
“If you claim the universe itself performed this ‘thought’, this, I believe, is a form of personification or anthropomorphism of the universe as a whole.”
No one claimed that it is human thought. It is base-thought, singularity-thought, thought in numbers circling about. Remember, net-nothing base-existence is movement, but not movement in space, rather movement in the singularity, which is identified as thought via Descartes and the definition of unextended substance, which is mind.
Call it mind, rather than thought, then. It is movement in mind. Not human mind. But singularity, “abstract” mind.
“‘Thought’ is defined as…”
You must open the definition of mind to beyond that of the limited materialist perspective. There is thought in this universe, yes, but then there is mind-as-base-existence, of the singularity.
“So I’m confused as to how this explains the genesis of the universe.”
I haven’t actually talked at all about the genesis of the universe yet. I will soon in a future episode. What I have been covering only so far is why existence exists at all, rather than “nothing”. The answer being that something can exist within (net) nothing.
Do not make the materialist mistake of associating this universe with existence, and especially not the mistake of identifying the beginning of existence with the beginning of this universe. This universe is temporary, and is a construct of pre-existent existence, which is itself permanent, for the reasons discussed.
“Energy is defined as the capacity to do work.”
This does not define energy in and of itself. It simply describes what it can do. This is a common error of materialist thinking…is to identifying what something does with how it came to exist in the first place…what something does, does not actually explain why it exists in the first place. I have defined what energy is in and of itself in the first place. Work is something that it can do. It also transmits information…in fact is synonymous information, because it is mathematics…information is part and parcel of its fundamental nature, given that it is a number, or frequency, etc.
“It is my contention that this is the genesis of the universe… the bifurcation event which initiated the universe as we know it. A great ‘ball’ of energy bifurcated due to the differing phase velocities of the frequencies of that energy, then some of that energy ‘curved back in on itself’ via photon-photon interaction to form persistent excitations in the field which we sense as invariant-mass meta-stable matter.”
Something sounding like that, for sure.
“Now, where that great ‘ball’ of energy came from is anybody’s guess.”
From the singularity, which has existed forever. You will need to overcome the psychological-sensing-type’s association of existence with this universe and matter.
Sensing types make the best engineers! They can tell you exactly how something works and make it do new things, as we see frequently from you. Very impressive.
But they lack intuition, the ability to imagine a state pre-existent to this universe and its space and matter.
“Alas, we’re still stuck with infinite regression… and we always will be because we cannot see far enough back in time by looking out into space-time to determine the actual conditions at the start of the universe.”
Infinite regression was halted, as discussed in the first videos. The problem here is the continued association of this universe with the beginning of existence. You need to get over that sensing-bias. Existence in and of itself is the singularity, made of mind, made of movement in mind which is mind which is numbers.
All of these things become totally synonymous: mind, math, movement, information, energy. They are base-existence of the singularity. (Not human mind.)
The universe we live in is a temporary construct, like a hologram, etc.
And yes that is correct, we cannot “look out into space-time” far enough. Hence we we must go beyond the senses, and to reason. Escaping from the cave of the senses with liberating reason, like Plato explained us to do.
In a future video I will explain precisely how to go from a permanent singularity of mind to a temporary universe of extension and matter. You will love it. I hope it will help make things more clear. A couple of episodes out. There is actually a lot of engineering it will open up too…there are tons of applications which we can develop out of this…I know you’ll see it and will click once I get to showing the actual mechanism. You’ll get it instantly at that point…because I know that you already know the requisite math and how it works…it just hasn’t been explained in the ontological context yet. I can’t wait to show it to you. But a few bits to get through first.
I dunno… seems a tad too metaphysical for my brain to grasp, this internalistic epistemologically ontological conceptualism.
I’m more of a ontological factualist.
Yes it is indeed metaphysical…in the proper definition of the term, as that which is beyond and in fact makes the foundation for physics as know it.
Rational facts, logical facts, are facts too. Material facts aren’t the only facts…as Plato explained.
It may be that the universe is cyclical… that great ‘ball’ of energy may have been nothing more than a gigantic black hole, the remnant of a prior universe.
It is known that if a black hole contained all energy and matter currently in the universe, we would experience the same matter and energy density as we experience in the universe… as a black hole grows in size, the event horizon ‘cliff’ becomes less steep.
So imagine long into the distant future… all the stars are burned out, the energy density of the quantum vacuum is thus no longer being replenished via nuclear fusion, universal expansion slows and halts. Meta-stable invariant-mass matter begins dehadronizing back into energy, which sustains the quantum vacuum energy density for awhile, but eventually that matter is gone, too. Meanwhile the existing black holes continue pulling in matter and energy, roaming throughout the universe and colliding with other black holes, growing all the while until only one remains.
What contains the black hole? The curvature of space-time… gravity. In fact, it may be that a black hole is indeed a single point of ever-increasing density, that point excluding space-time increasingly as its density increases (so the size of the black hole is really just a region of excluded space-time)… just as stellar objects exclude space-time around them (which slows down time locally, the reason that light bends around large celestial objects… light follows the path of least time, not a straight line).
Now imagine there is a single photon billions of light years away from the black hole, and nothing else. Gravity will eventually curve its path until it is orbiting the black hole, with a descending orbital radius as the black hole continues pulling the fabric of space-time into itself.
The gradient between that photon and the black hole is the only thing warping space-time, creating gravity, a thread-thin connection of space-time between the photon and the black hole.
What happens when the last photon breeches the event horizon? There is now no gradient in space-time, no curvature of space, no gravity, nothing holding the black hole together… it explodes in a new Big Bang and the universe begins anew.
That still doesn’t explain, though, where the energy in that black hole originally came from.
Joe, do you happen to know what is the percentage of population of INTJ’s and other intuitive personality types categorized by the Myers Briggs Scale?
UNTJs a couple of percent. Likely can just search it.
That low. Wow. That’s a really small subset. Thanks. No, I was just thinking about how the decision makers of this world are personality typed. Maybe they need more intuitives lol.
You can normally tell an intuitive by the way they talk. Very idealistic.
I would say you are an intuitive? I am INTJ.
That’s the philosophical idealism that I’m talking about, and not the unrealistic pursuit of perfection as in psychology.
I wonder how many of our top politicians are materialists?
They’re all Zetas.
“That still doesn’t explain, though, where the energy in that black hole originally came from.”
Yes, it is definitely synonymous with existing as the singularity inside a blackhole.
The energy is base-existence…it has always existed, and comes from the singularity to create the extended universe. Energy presumably returns to the singularity via blackholes.
Is there a compelling reason for time to claim the i axis?
Yes. The sinusoid, which i multiplies into, is antisymmetric. Cosine, which is real, is symmetric. The result is that in spatial numbers you can move back and forth, due to the underlying symmetry of its numbers, but with time, you can only move forwards, because the underlying antisymmetry of its numbers don’t allow backwards movement, and all movement becomes unidirectional for time…the antisymmetry doesn’t allow symmetry of movement.
Wow. An arrow of time explanation! I might have to read this book. Are the monads jiggling back and forward in time though?
The monads are tracing out the circling, in the singularity…the movement is in thought, and it is space-less and time-less. This transforms through a mathematical operation into space-time, and this is where the symmetric vs. anti-symmetric nature of the cos and sin wave comes in, making space traversable in any direction (symmetric), and time traversable in only one direction (antisymmetric).
Yes, it is the only arrow-of-time explanation one can derive in purely logical mathematical terms, which naturally comes out of the circling of net nothing. Pretty nifty. It is the true explanation or origin of time.