The movements by the physical is based on physical properties , by physical objects , ordering themselves . That's The Cause , Of Any Pattern .
Yes, but what causes them to order themselves? Relational values, no? Equations. Input (value) --> Function (mathematical) --> Output (value) That is the ordering agency.
Yes I can read it , but it doesn't tell me how. What are the mechanics. Affinity? Chirality? What is causing the ordering process . To say physics is not an explanation. There is a reason why the specific patterns keep forming.
imho, equations best describe the laws that this universe is endowed with. In this thread, The odd numbers associated with our planet, are the outworkings, tip of the icebergs so to speak, of these laws and energy levels. the equations, like Kepler's second triangle area law equation (perhaps the first of such abstract concept) is our, human way to come to grasp with nature's workings.
Laws are about consistantcy . Equations , are general equations , most of the time this happens . ( Exceptions , are what happens at other times ) . Could very well be nebel . Equations ( what is Keplers's second triangle area law equation ? ) highlighted , Agreed . Laws of Exception . Equations of exception . Could also enhance our understanding of Nature's Workings . I wonder what they would look like . Combining both , consistantcy and exceptions will certainly make equations much more complex .
well, as an example, the Bode sequence is not a "law", but it's exceptions, the Venus to Mercury emptiness , Neptune's non-doubling orbit spacing MAKE POSSIBLE INSIGHT INTO THE TRUE NATURE OF THE GEOMETRIC SERIES THAT Bode/Titius IS. and The earth with 10 is the message here.
Just get more data on what is in this space . Hence what is going that we can't see , but can detect . Given the access to the technology needed to detect . I assume this technology exists . There is no such thing as empty space .
here is another ten from a "quora" answer to an earth science history question: height of Everest ~ 9000 meters. according to scripture covered with water after 40 days of rain. 9600 hours. give 7% for ground water soaking and evaporation, 10 meters of rain per hour in Noah's day. and you thought 10 cm is a lot. only on planet No.1
Where did all this rain come from in the first place? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The young Earth's mantle harboured two magma oceans which were layered like a pudding cake, scientists say. Reuters File Photo. Read more at: https://www.deccanherald.com/content/368135/early-earth-harboured-lava-oceans.html That much condensation may have been caused by lava floods in Noah's day. And you thought 120 F is hot. Occurring on many planets.
I had posted the biblical reference of 10 meter water per hour with tongue firmly in cheek, fit for the humour section. I see no more 10s pointed out by the linked lava oceans. Scripture does mention raining fire though. my ten cents worth.
LOL, ok. As far as the abundance of water appearing on earth, it is suspected that Theia was responsible for most of it. Formation of the moon brought water to Earth New research explains how Earth became a habitable planet Date: May 21, 2019 Source: University of Münster https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190521101505.htm
interesting details, and: "Harvard University in the US, found that fully 35% appear to contain up to half their mass as water.Aug 28, 2018" from Wiki to maintain the OP proposition: 10 in the Bode sequence. aka 1 AU 10 digits, toes. 10 m /sec^&2 surface gravity. 10 meter H2O atmospheric surface pressure. 10 meter H2O per hour flooding "recorded" 10 decim/sec pendulum frequency. 1000 light second orbit diameter. 1/10 000 of c orbital velocity. 30/ 300 000. 1/100 natural ratio between Earth Vr and Moon rotation velocity Golden ratios in orbits : Mercury (4) to Earth, 6/10; G.R. from Earth to Mars, you have more No.s?
You do realize that those are all human symbols, based on the decimal system which is based on the human 10 digits, fingers , toes. You can just as well use the binary system to find equivalent magnitudes in almost all natural values and functions. Roger Antonsen has an entertaining lecture on the use of mathematics in varied settings.
A pattern is a regularity. What is the observable difference between the elements of the Table? Their count and arrangement of electrons , protons , and neutrons around the nuclei, no? IOW their individual patterns. An atom is a collection of elementary particles arranged in a specific pattern that gives each different atom it's inherent potentials, no? If not, when is an atom not a pattern? Where is the mistake? Do you care to explain your curious disapproval? Molecules are atoms arranged in specific patterns, no? How do crystals grow in specific patterns How do snowflakes form specific patterns. Why are snowflakes symmetrical? How can ice crystallizing on one arm 'know' the shape of the other arms on the flake? https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-are-snowflakes-symmet/ There is nothing in the universe that is not a pattern. Even chaos has a chaotic pattern.
It is humans that perceive patterns by preferentially selecting what is included and what is not. There is a pile of stuff on the beach that includes silicon sand, seaweed, two crushed shells, a large piece of driftwood, some oxygen, nitrogen and a whiff of methane. A human may decide that the sand forms a pattern, but in doing so, excludes everything else that does not fit their idea of the pattern. In reality, the totality of the sample described is repeated nowhere else in the universe - it is unique - thus is not a regularity. And thus, by definition, not a pattern. The universe does not distinguish between what is important and what is not - those are human judgements.
Ok, can you show me an example of something that is not identifiable as a pattern? I have looked and cannot find one. To avoid confusion, I use the term pattern in its most generic form and definition. Patterns in nature ......more https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterns_in_nature It seems to me a well supported assumption.
