Reality is...

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Spellbound, Aug 24, 2015.

  1. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,208
    Well yes, I left the door a bit ajar, as there are some magnetic aspects to chemical bonding too, and also some effects from Pauli's Exclusion Principle and so on, are there not?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,574
    I have asked if this thread could be combined with your other fascinating 'reality is posts'.
     
    Daecon likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    I stand corrected. Thanks.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Process physics

    Can anyone confirm if it related to process physics? The CTMU was created in the mid-1980s and published in 1989/1990; it therefore predates process physics, which grew from a 1996 paper by Reginald Cahill and Christopher Klinger. There are similarities: both theories view time as an iterative process rather than as an ordinary linear dimension; both seek to model reality without assuming pre-existing objects or laws; both employ concepts of self-organization; both distribute over reality a form of self-awareness. A major difference, though, is that whereas the CTMU reduces reality to infocognition and ultimately to telesis, process physics is not a reductionistic theory at all. Cahill writes, regarding the basic iterator by which his bootstrap model evolves:

    It is important to note that process physics is a non-reductionist modelling of reality; the basic iterator (2) is premised on the general assumption that reality is sufficiently complex that self-referencing occurs, and that this has limitations. ["Process Physics: From Information Theory to Quantum Space and Matter", page 17]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cognitive-Theoretic_Model_of_the_Universe

    My insight: Teleology requires local distribution and localized expansion in the name of space.
     
  8. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Albert Fils-Aime

    2 hrs · Edited .

    A word on spacetime formulation:

    The CTMU says that we live in a dually self-contained universe for the reason that composition must be simultaneously self-cancelling and self-creating, because reality possesses nothing but itself to be formulated with. Okay. The most general of dualities is the duality between emotion and outward logic.

    Emotion is the subject's desire to do, or love, i.e. the subject's reason, as subjective causation. Objective causation is the object's reason to do, as outward reasoning. Subjects and objects are dually related as time is related to space. Inwardly, the ETS derives self-consistency with regards to dually self-contained formulation as subjective self-determinism.

    That is a loop of recursive syntactic operators capable of subjective self-determinism, with the highest level operator acting as a cohesive force and enforcer of consistency for the inherited self-determinative capacities of agent-level subsystems. This operator also possesses self-determinative capacity.

    As self-determinism itself, these operators fulfill self-creation (self-determinism) for the entire system as a generalized quantity known as utility. The objective counterpart of this self-creative process is objective self-determinism. Syntax in the system is hologically dispersed, made of itself, permitting the self-definition of reality's composition with nothing but itself.

    The basic-level expressions of SCSPL are equivalent to the system in that dual self-containment relations require formulation as an informational differentiation of topological distributor absolute spatiotemporal syntax, i.e. truth in the most general sense. This formulates reality like a piece of paper that has been folded over itself to create informational distinctions through possible spacetime formulations.

    The choice of one formulation of spacetime over another has been self-creatively selected by self-determinism. When there becomes a lack of physical law to embed a syntactic operator in its course of state-transition, the global syntactic operator self-creatively selects the infinitely optimal future states of the operator.

    This has the effect of artificially mirroring global processes as the minimal events of spacetime through the process called telic augmentation. And without the differentiability of extended spacetime formulations, reality would be as an infinitely symmetrical shape of possibilities, which has composition categorically related as time is related to space, through informational opposition and sameness.

    With general spacetime as syntactic covering (self-determinative syntax), this has the effect of formulating everything possible in hological unification. Reality optimally binds this infocognitive potential, or telesis, as a specification of possibility to the maximization of utility with regard to the entire system.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2016
  9. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Informational opposition and sameness refers to perceptual information as well as language (which includes a set of expressions within reality).
     
  10. sweetpea Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,329
    It seems to make the same sense backwards.
    (reality within expressions of set a includes which) language as well as information perceptual to refers sameness and opposition Informational
     
  11. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,072
    Reality is nature, and all things?
     
  12. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    OH MY GOD! I need to revise everything I've ever written to find more clever palindromes. Idiot.
     
  13. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Yes. Including itself (tautology).
     
  14. sweetpea Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,329
    Or, you could just read what I said...My bold below.

    I said makes the ''same sense backwards''. i.e. Bullshit.
    Just in case you still don't get it ...I did not say it's spelt the same backwards.

    http://www.fun-with-words.com/palin_explain.html
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2016
  15. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    I would agree except ; why divide Nature and all things ?
     
  16. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    The CTMU concept of syndiffeonesis - where two things are different because they have at least one similarity in common, namely that they are both real - has its foundations in reality or the common medium that relates all thing(s). And since equations are real (as they govern all things), the mathematical terms within the equation ω = 2πf, and T = 1/f where T is the time period, are syndiffeonically related by their compliance with reality, otherwise limitations to their existence would prevent them from being real. Just as frequency literally becomes angular frequency when multiplied by the dimensionless quantity of radians, Force and frequency become interchangeable through

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .

    I hope now my genius is recognized by even the 4 morons here. No names mentioned so as to not invoke tension and hostility between myself and others. But they tend to feel big when they belittle and deny my "Reality" threads.
     
  17. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,130
    What use is that concept, in practice?

    Did you cut and paste this nonsense from somewhere else, or make it up on your own?

    And another thing: you know the 'f' in that equation is not force, right?

    Parroting senseless nonsense is not usually regarded as a sign of genius.
     
  18. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,608
    'Real' in what sense? Non-existent things can be different from one another. Sherlock Holmes is different from Watson and certainly from Moriarty. But all three are fictional characters. I suppose Langan or somebody might reply that they are all ideas, and have reality as ideas. But if we expand 'reality' to include imagined or hallucinated entities, we seem to be doing violence to at least part of what 'real' means.

    I know that you use the word 'reality' to mean 'God', but I don't think that I want to follow you in saying that 'reality' names a particular sort of primordial stuff, an ancient Greek 'arche', out of which everything else manifests.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arche

    There you go.

    If somebody wants me to acknowledge their genius, they will need to begin by saying something that I can comprehend. That's not sufficient, but it's necessary, at least if they want recognition from me. All of this oracular "reality is" stuff mixed with pseudo-technical "CTMU" jargon isn't succeeding in persuading me.
     
  19. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Equations are real .

    BUT THEY DO NOT GOVERN ALL THINGS .
     
  20. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Hallucinations, ideas, imaginative entities all have their source in reality, particularly the brain. What causes their actualization is their possibility to be manifested, not merely duplicated and re-enacted on a stage in a theater, let's say. UBT is pure potential that is actualized, becoming reality in its most basic and general form, the MU (Multiplex Unity) form. When you have two things that are opposites, they are related by at least one similarity, namely their existence (which includes their non-existence) within reality.

    I have never once defined reality in my entire history on sciforums. I simply state what is real and what is unreal by gaining awareness into their difference and then separating them. I have however stated that God is the ultimate reality, and I define God as a non-objective cognition that holds reality together at its seams, which is not apparent in the matter we perceive on a Classical, blind nature, or superficial (non-Quantum) level. The ultimate reality is global sentience.
     
  21. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    One has to literally become "in touch" (for lack of a better word) with spiritual reality to get what I'm saying (i.e. see the evidence for God). In such an event one would inevitably grab the Bible and start shouting its praises. (Even to the point of being possessed).

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    This is not a counter-argument to my proposal.
     
  23. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    All of my consistent and coherent insights have lead to the conclusion that not only is God real, but the after-life too is real. Even though I personally doubted it for the longest time.
     

Share This Page