Subject: Re: Pulsor Theory - Rigours of Epistemology Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 20:10:47 -0500 From: vead@uconect.net To: vead@uconect.net this is the dejanews "emailable" version. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was forwarded to you from Deja News by vead@uconect.net. Deja News, the discussion network, offers free web-based access to more than 50,000 high-quality discussion forums. Come and visit us on the web at http://www.dejanews.com/=zzz_maf/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (beginning of original message) Subject: Pulsor Theory - Rigours of Epistemology From: Vead@q.continuum.net (D. Manchester) Date: 1996/02/22 Newsgroups: sci.fractals ..........I don't mean to clog-up the bandwidth with my craven ..........scribbling, but in view of the apology I posted the other day ..........to members of sci.physics or sci.math...Please, just this once, ..........don't bombard me with copies of it,(as per my request), okay? ..........Just this once?.....Thanks in Advance - Dave * ) >Hi Guys...this is rev 2. > > I plan to make books and inventions out of this language and > these Ideas, so I have included a copyright notice right here: > > > (C) Copyright 1996 By David C. Manchester > ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WORLDWIDE. > Authors Notice: Permission is granted to USENET to repost > this document, or an edited version, when, if, and as they > feel appropriate, to serve their members requests. > Notwithstanding the above permission, the Author reserves and retains > All rights to reproduction, transmission, distribution and all other > Rights Worldwide. > > -Dave 2-21-96 *) ] > >To: Vead@q.continuum.net >From: Vead@q.continuum.net (D.Manchester (dcm)) >Subject: Pulsor Rigor of Epistemology > > >Hey Chris, Glenn, Laurin! How's it going? Wanted to sort-out >my thoughts on the "metamathematical" rules of what I seem to >be trying to do with Pulsors and so forth. I hope Y'All don't >mind if I bounced-em off You by way of thinking out loud (is it >"out loud" if it's on paper? What about the back of an envelope?) > >So, without further ado, as Bernie Taupin and Elton John said, > > "If We're all going somewhere, let's get there soon... > for this song has no title, just words and a tune..." > --This Song Has No Title > (Yellowbrick Road) > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Pulsor Rigor of Epistemology > Apologia and Guidelines > By > Vead@Q.Continuum.net > > (C)1996 David C. Manchester > ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WORLDWIDE > > "If it can't be expressed in figures, it is not science; > it is opinion." - Robert Anson Heinlein > > > Since I have lately begun to post the more essential elements > of my Pulsor theory, out of a decent respect for the opinions > of Every One Who agree's with the above quotation ( and I am > one of Them), I feel it would be appropriate to give some > accounting of the principles which have guided me towards > this Pulsor-discontinuous-fractal-eulerian-strange-boundary- > region conception of the world. > > It may seem paradoxical, but these ideas...No, _This_ idea > which has begun to be described - Pulsors - is an idea which > came to me in 1974. It was a very Powerful vision. One might > say it transformed my life, because starting from then I began > searching for a way to communicate it. But enough about me... > > You Guys know all this...the point of this is to list the guidelines > that took me from there, awe-smitten and dumb-struck in 1974, to > here, in my current kind-of-okay, casually elegant, occasionally > wordy, pschometamathematically-mutated simpleton I am today. > ( this is a joke, of course :) . well..., kind of...) > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Robert A. Heinlein's characters have had a great influence on me, > particularly the tough-mindedness. Like when he had Jubal Harshaw > declare that (paraphrase) > > Obscurity is the Refuge of the Incompetent > > and when he had Lazarus Long ruminate (it is worth quoting :) ) > > "What are the facts? Again and again and again - what are the > _facts_? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, > forget what 'the stars fortell', avoid opinion, care not what > the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable 'verdict of > history' - What are the facts, and to how many decimal places? > You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single > clue. Get the facts!" (Notebooks of Lazarus Long, Time Enough for Love) > > [I guess I flubbed up on using the above quote as a guideline, > because I did not ignore what I felt was divine revelation... > ...it was the motive power which drove me forward in my quest > for ways to communicate this singular idea, or set of > relationships. -dcm] > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > There are a few points to clear up regarding equations and > communication which I would like to address: > > - The emergence of QED/QCD (quantum theory) made it > necessary to hold that a complete description of > nature was not possible, in nature. The proximate-cause > of this was Heisenberg and Schroedinger. (K.Goedel's > Incompleteness Theorem came later, didn't it : | ? ) > > - The Heiserberg Uncertainty Principle disturbed people > used to newtonian "common sense", and not yet used to > Special and General Relativity. > > - The discovery and quantum value of Plank's Constant > forced this issue throughout development of the Copenhagen > Interpretation, much to the consternation of Albert > Einstein. He would only entertain these seemingly > ridiculous assumptions of quantum behaviours in the > particle model with the Provision that Quantum Theory > is Incomplete, and only a stepping stone to a larger, > more inclusive explanation, a truly Unified Field Theory. > > I believe that this Pulsor model can meet this requirement. >Confirmation is just a matter of time. I think so because, > to old crazy Dave, the Math fits together nicely. It is simply > too Beautiful not to be right, and GOD has been known to use > Beautiful Mathematics in creating the world. > > Chris, You always used to tell me that if I could get > Plank's constant to pop-out of this thing somewhere it > might could fly...an be damned if it ain't so, the more > I look at it. > > - Some Physicists wielding the new mathematical constructs > and techniques necessary to model quantum interaction >became unaccustomed from force of habit from being > able to talk about it, in words. Not a heartening trend. > > Many Physicists will simply condescendingly laugh at You > for having the Temerity to suggest that they should even > waste their time on vocalised attempts to describe what they > do when performing transformations with their systems > of equations, Galois and Lie groups, etc. > > Now some are just more mathematical in their approach to > things, so the math comes easier and the words don't, and, > hey, Path of least resistance and all that. Perfectly > understandable. > > Then there are those who genuinely don't even believe anymore > that it is even possible to lucidly discuss the mathematics of > what they do in words, with People. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Without putting too fine a point on it, I would like to state > right now and for the record, this attitude is Nonsense. > > Not "Special Nonsense", Not "General Nonsense" (apologies to > the fine authors of the zen-koan-quantum-reality books which > I Love! :) ) , but just Nonsense, plain and simple. > > The World is understandable. To the average person. In > plainspoken language. > > If One can't express it in figures, it is opinion: True. > > But once One has it expressed in figures, and it works: > Then You damn sure ought to be able to talk about it in words. > (Information Theory guarantees that You can.) > > And if one does, and it works, yet One can't (or won't) > try to talk about it in words, then it causes me to wonder > about talents, inclinations, motives. And this is a distraction. > > _Even though_ this is a private prejudice of mine; being able to > communicate verbally regarding mathematically and logically consistent > systems, in developing this Plank-Fractal Broken Symmetry Pulsor Idea, > I made it a requirement at the start: > > ONE MUST BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT IN WORDS, AS WELL. > > If what You have to say is True (with a capital "T"), then it will > hold whether expressed in a single, pristine, elegant, glowing, holy > grail of an equation, or expressed in the cogent, lucid, concise > precision of elegant prose. Either way, A=A. > > So it makes no difference. However, given just the words: > > List of Epistemological Prerequisites To Communicate the Message: > > > Among other things, The Math Required _MUST_ be: > > - Elegant. As stated above, Aesthetics is of > Prime import. (Otherwise, the rest of all > mathematics found in Nature is all cockeyed > and incongrous in a most dischordant way.) > > - Consistent. Otherwise it disqualifies as > a "System" in the terms of General Systems > Theory, Information Theory, and Communication > theory. And at the start, I required that > they must hold in whatever model I wound-up > with when I got it ready to be presented. > > - Must preserve Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem > (otherwise it is a lot of hot air) > > - Must show a relation between the Number System > (eg. Eulers Identity) and Plank's Constant > > - Must interrelate Chaos, Information, > Number, and Quantum Theories as they exist, > (that is, preserving those parts which work > inasmuch as possible) > > - Extend QED/QCD in a reasonable way which both > resolves existing problems, and gives insight > into why those problems arose. > > - Extend QED/QCD in a reasonable way that > includes and illuminates the role of > consciousness, be it Ours, or the Cosmos. > > > > To those who maintain that it is not possible to communicate > about processes of quantum reality to other People using words, > I say: "Au Contraire". Obscurity is too often an excuse for being > up the creek without a paddle, and not knowing where to go from > here. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > opinion-SoapBox > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Pulsor Theory gives us a fresh start, without many of the > difficulties we have had before. I Pray We have the Grace to > use it for Good and not evil. I think We will. I believe in > the Survival of the Human Species, and in our fundamental ability > to treat each other well despite our treachery, greed, and > malponderances, which are always there should One care to look. > > That's not important. What's important is the Good: In our Selves, > in our Systems, in our Institutions, and in our Life. This is > what we need to look at and focus on. > > For it is these we need to retool, redesign, revamp, and generally > tune-up so we can adapt to the blinding speed of the accelleration of > History that microelectronic data processing has brought to us. > > But in our rushed transformation to World Culture on the Internet, > We should keep in mind that is is People that are Important, and that > (in a manner of speaking) everything else is not. There are good > and bad People everywhere, but it would be an error to blame any > one bureaucratic functionary for all the ills of this government, > society, industry, or that. > > Chances are that sure, while "just doing my job, nothing personal" > situations abound, I find that most of the time that particular > clerk/whatever _really_ doesn't have the kind of power to commit > the injustices about which an irate... > > (You pick -citizen -driver -customer -voter -etc.) > > ...wants to > protest-seek-remedy-re-grievances about. The poor guy behind > the counter, too often, can't help. Let us not be too harsh in > blaming one another for what are, after all, systemic dysfunctions, > bound to accompany any system when excited to a jump to a higher > energy level, or any learning (step) curve as it jumps to a > greater skill level. For that is what's happening in our Species > in a quite McLuhan-esque way. > > Neither should we forget that the Nazi's, the Savak, and the > People who undertook the CIA's project MK-ULTRA research were, > also, "just doing" their "job". We must exercise a little > discretion, a little judgement, and a little sense of perspective > in our rush to condemn one another for the crimes against each > other our outmoded Institutions have been unable to prevent in > this 20th century. > > Our Institutions are good, and ancient, and venerable, and would > not exist today were they no good at all. We need to honor them > where they are honorable, and humane, and reform or abolish them > where they are not, in their activities, goals, traditions, and values. > (History has sped up, but so have we...and as a Human and Scientist > I believe one should avoid filling one's head with the myopic goo > of fanaticism of any stripe, religious or secular. One's religion > is what You do. One's artifice is how one goes about it. I am > wary of some of these pitfalls. Be that as it may...) > > Anyway, familiarity and structure can be more important, sometimes, than > super-duper-post-industrial-automatically-executed-totally-cybernated, > high-tech ways of doing things that are now becoming available. > > So I guess I'm a superannuated 40-year old technohippie with delusions > of Faith, and Grandeur. Still, problem solving works. I used it to > encode my experience so I could share it with others. I think Pulsor > theory hangs together. I'm finally satisfied. (Mostly.) > > All I have to do now is keep writing out the pieces. Beyond that, > I'm not sure what I'm going to do. I know I want to lecture some, > and expostulate further about Pulsors and stuff. Whether there'll > be a demand for it remains to be seen, and that depends on what > form confirmation of it's essential correctness takes should I be > so fortunate as to Live to see it. The important thing for me is > that I am satisfied that I generally did the best I could with what > GOD gave me to work with in trying to put this together. I hope it > comes out all right. It seems to be. > > > Beyond that, I don't know. There are still bills to pay, debts to > repay, and I have to make a living. I intend to keep producing > Mandlebrot fractal artwork. That's enjoyable, and related to my > interests, I suppose. One thing is for sure...after this I'll be > ...oh I don't know just yet. Maybe 40's not too old to start a > new career. We do what we must. > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > There are periods of stability, in Nature, in Life. I personally > feel that I have made it to one, with the ability to Publish this > work. And I hope it's appearance helps get Us, all of Us, Individually > and as a Species, to the next long stable period as We enter a new > Millenia. I think we could all use one about now. > > Well, Hey folks; I guess I've pretty much done all > the damage I can do to this justification and description of > the requirements of Pulsor Epistemology as it happened to > develop in my thinking. I hope it is of use. To paraphrase > Obe-Wan Kenobe in Star Wars, (talking about "The FORCE"), > > Use it Wisely. Use it Well. > > Best Regards, > > > David C. Manchester > Vead@q.continuum.net > >========================================================================= >"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or >prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, >or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to >petition the Government for a redress of grievances."- Amendment I to the >Constitution of the United States. > D.Manchester Vead@q.continuum.net >========================================================================== (end of original message) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ You can view the original message at http://www.dejanews.com/=zzz_maf/getdoc.xp?AN=140537594 or search http://www.dejanews.com/=zzz_maf/ for related messages. We hope to see you soon at Deja News, the discussion network.