SCIENCE AND KHTK

science1

The basic character of science is mindfulness – seeing things as they are without assumptions.

Science looks at inconsistencies and makes discoveries. This requires realization of what one has been assuming all along. That brings about a better understanding of what is there.

The physical universe exists because awareness of the physical universe exists simultaneously. Awareness seems to be an integral part of the universe.

The KHTK Model of The Universe adds the dimension of abstraction to the physical dimensions of this universe. Awareness seems to lie in this dimension of abstraction. This is a more comprehensive view of the universe.

Science would be more complete if it looks at inconsistencies in this comprehensive view of the universe, which includes awareness as an integral component.

.

References:

The Premise of KHTK

What is KHTK?

.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comments

  • vinaire  On September 2, 2013 at 9:18 AM

    Up until now, space has been represented by an absence of energy and matter. It is regarded as zero (0) in quantitative terms.

    Space then serves as the background for all energy and matter. It is then regarded as infinite (∞) in qualitative terms.

    All spirituality, God, heaven, etc., are identified with this qualitative infinity of space.

    It is time to look at the background of “all that is” more closely, because the hidden factor is TIME.

    .

  • vinaire  On September 4, 2013 at 12:45 PM

    Do we really know what space is?

    Our idea of point come from location of objects. Our ideas about lines, surfaces and volumes come from shapes, appearance and sizes of objects.

    This is geometry. Geometry is not space. Geometry is an abstraction of locations, shapes, appearance and sizes of objects. We have no clue of what separates one object from another, or what is beyond the boundary of an electron.

    We are clueless about space.

    .

    • Chris Thompson  On September 4, 2013 at 7:43 PM

      Vin: We are clueless about space. Same thing can be said about time.

      Chris: We are a long way off from that or are we? We seem to be coming very close to a face to face and tactile experience of both Gödel’s Incompleteness and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty. This is oddly rewarding to me, to feel near and kindred with these mental giants including you.

      I am becoming interested in a tangential research which would be to look at some of the nonsense that some of the intellectual giants believed compared to their blindingly brilliant breakthroughs! I got this idea reading Godel’s 14 points of belief as follows for your perusal: Gödel left in his papers a fourteen-point outline of his philosophical beliefs, that are dated around 1960. They show his deep belief in the rational structure of the world. Here are his 14 points:

      The world is rational. Human reason can, in principle, be developed more highly (through certain techniques). There are systematic methods for the solution of all problems (also art, etc.). There are other worlds and rational beings of a different and higher kind. The world in which we live is not the only one in which we shall live or have lived. There is incomparably more knowable a priori than is currently known. The development of human thought since the Renaissance is thoroughly intelligible (durchaus einsichtige). Reason in mankind will be developed in every direction. Formal rights comprise a real science. Materialism is false. The higher beings are connected to the others by analogy, not by composition. Concepts have an objective existence. There is a scientific (exact) philosophy and theology, which deals with concepts of the highest abstractness; and this is also most highly fruitful for science. Religions are, for the most part, bad– but religion is not.

      • vinaire  On September 4, 2013 at 8:25 PM

        It is quite overwhelming to jump into all the knowledge out there. All I am doing is investigating the fundamental premises of the various subjects. Anybody can do that.

        The scope of my investigation is to find the interface between physics and metaphysics. What is most helpful to me is Internet and Wikipedia. Without this resource I am totally helpless.

        Glad to see you being so optimistic. And your tangential research really sounds very interesting. The brilliance that we find out there, seems to be so different and separate from normal human endeavors. I would very much like to know the philosophy that is associated with these brilliant minds.

        The more I practice mindfulness the more fascinating and wonderful I find it to be. Intelligence seems to be a by-product of mindfulness.

        .

  • vinaire  On September 4, 2013 at 7:31 PM

    Our idea of space is purely mathematical. There is no physics in it.

    Physics enters the picture with the idea of motion.

    Physics starts with mechanics.

    .

    • Chris Thompson  On September 4, 2013 at 7:57 PM

      . . . “motion.” Which is to say “time.” Which if time and space are bound is to say “space-time.” This train of thought gets very disorderly very quickly.

      • vinaire  On September 4, 2013 at 8:40 PM

        Uniform motion seems to impart no feeling of either space or time. There is a sort of emotionless feeling of relativity only. It is only when acceleration is introduced that we feel that something is happeneing.

        .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 12:02 AM

          Yes, this “what is in motion” a good example of conditioning, relativity, and the impermanence of the world.

  • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 5:44 AM

    Under uniform motion, the sense of TIME appears simply as “duration”.

    .

    • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 5:56 AM

      Anything enduring seems to be in uniform motion. Thus, there seems to be a direct correlation between time and space as different way of looking at the same thing.

      .

    • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 5:58 AM

      Uniform motion = duration at rest

      Acceleration = Gravity = Force = mass at rest

      Mass = relative change in duration (?)

      .

    • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 6:55 AM

      Time = Sequence

      Time = Duration

      Time = Differentiation

      .

    • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 7:04 AM

      Yes duration, but I am not understanding your point.

      You know, if we think about constant motion with regards to understanding, we get similar sensations such as the “no motion” of tautology .

      New understandings similar to “change of motion” seem to have their own “inertia.” Thus the great sensation that accompanies epiphany. Fixed ideas seem like mass to be solidified thought.

      You see how close your writing is bringing us?

      • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 7:30 AM

        Uniform motion = same level of understanding = persistence of assumptions

        Acceleration = Bliss of epiphany = shifting of assumptions = new understanding in place

        New understanding = relative change of assumptions or fixed ideas

        .

      • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 7:37 AM

        One may perceive how one’s knowledge is different from that of other’s around him. One may feel that one is moving along in one’s understanding, but it may be just be the difference in understanding being felt.

        People may go in and out of Scientology without any change in their level of understanding. They are stuck with the same assumptions. Those assumptions are persisting.

        .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 7:50 AM

          Vin: One may perceive how one’s knowledge is different from that of other’s around him.

          Chris: Not where I was going with that thought. I was referring to the physics of one’s own thoughts within one’s own framework without respect to that of those around him. Like floating down a river, one does not feel the current until he moves to change his position.

        • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 12:40 PM

          One knows the movement of oneself relative to the bank without moving to change his position. One does not know one’s movement due to the current only in the middle of the sea.

          .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 1:40 PM

          feels the current is the only example I was using, not trying to cover all perception.

          “The earth spins on an axis while wobbling while streaking through its orbit around the sun while swinging around the massive black hole at the center of the milky way while travelling with some type of respect to the big bang while . . . _ _ _ _ ” All the while, none of this motion creates any sensation of motion within humans. It is a lot to think about.

        • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 4:31 PM

          I was commenting on uniform motion and not on acceleration.

          .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 6:02 PM

          So was I.

        • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 7:56 PM

          Spinning is angular acceleration. It is felt as a sensation.

          .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 11:12 PM

          We are accustomed to the sensation of existing within a “flowing river” of gravity that pins us to the earth. Its space is accelerating right through us.

        • vinaire  On September 6, 2013 at 4:00 PM

          We don’t know about space to say it is accelerating. I have no idea what space is.

          .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 6, 2013 at 11:48 PM

          Nor whether it is in motion or presenting us with a more elementary structure of the universe. Or none of that. What a wonderful concept to ponder!

        • Chris Thompson  On September 6, 2013 at 11:53 PM

          My question is whether there is any evidence of “heat death” at all under any circumstance?

    • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 7:06 AM

      I think I get your point now. Duration as the”no change.”

      • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 7:22 AM

        Motion is felt only when relative to something else. When there is nothing to compare to, the idea of motion is not there, but an idea of persistence is there.

        Uniform motion (sense of relativity) = Duration (sense of persistence)

        Zero motion does not exist. Either there is motion, or there is nothing. Similarly, either there is duration, or there is nothing. Same with existence, either something is, or it isn’t.

        Existence = uniform motion = duration.

        Distance covered = time endured

        .

      • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 7:44 AM

        One’s ideas may persist spurred only by how others around them think differently.

        Where does the intuition that changes those ideas come from?

        .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 7:56 AM

          Vin: Where does the intuition that changes those ideas come from?

          Chris: Where does the impetus for the photon to seek escape from the sun come from? The disorder is there. It is “seeking to calm down.” We see “peace” as something desirable, and that is our abstraction of those processes going on around and within us. “Intuition” may be an abstraction only. Peace may be our abstraction of entropy only.

  • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 12:56 PM

    I am wondering what the equation of motion for this universe might be like!

    .

    • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 5:59 PM

      That is an excellent question to pose!

      I can visualize arriving at such a formula wrapped up in Planck’s constant resulting in a deeper understanding of Godel’s incompleteness as well as Heisenberg’s uncertainty. This seems totally possible.

      What seems out of reach is an answer to the question of, “What is causing the disorder?” unless that answer is nothing. Maybe beginning and ending is a dichotomy which is only a relevant abstraction to mankind. The universe is so very old and seems to be so durable that no particular answer to that question seems relevant in human terms.

      • vinaire  On September 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM

        Durable Universe = Universe has been moving uniformly for ever.

        .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 5, 2013 at 11:09 PM

          What an excellent topic to consider where energy comes from and where it goes to . . .

          Is there a good reason to believe in the heat death of the universe? This postulates that ultimate entropy, not just a momentary equilibrium can be possible. And by good, I mean is there extant evidence that energy is ultimately dissipated out of existence and not simply dispersed?

        • vinaire  On September 6, 2013 at 3:58 PM

          We don’t know much here. It is mostly speculation.

          .

        • Chris Thompson  On September 6, 2013 at 11:46 PM

          Vin: We don’t know much here.

          Chris: Thus providing a fertile backdrop for exploiting inconsistencies.

  • vinaire  On September 6, 2013 at 10:08 PM

    A complete model will describe not only the system but also changes in that system as it evolves. This is the spacetime model. This is best represented, in mathematics, by a differential equation.

    From Wikipedia:
    “Differential equations arise in many areas of science and technology, specifically whenever a deterministic relation involving some continuously varying quantities (modeled by functions) and their rates of change in space and/or time (expressed as derivatives) is known or postulated.”

    .

    • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 6:49 AM

      Repetition is the key to continuation and to evolution. It is the repetition of successful actions that ensures continuation. Repetition occurs in a wave. Repetition occurs in a fractal. Repetition occurs in nature.

      It is the repetition of the cycle of action that we see all around us. There is no absolute start or end.

      At the botttom of it all seems to be repetition.

      Repetition seems to be the primary essence of a wave function.

  • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 8:31 AM

    Vector – a quantity with magnitude and direction. Vectors interact in terms of both magnitude and direction. A vector has scalar components along different coordinates.

    Tensor – a directed quantity that has components. These components are represented by subscripts, such as, Ax, Ay, and Az depending on the coordinate system. Vector components are represented by single subscripts. Thus, vectors are tensors of rank one.

    Stresses on a surface are represented by two subscripts – one for the direction of surface, and the other for the component of stress on that surface. This stress on a surface is a tensor of rank two, and so on.

    .

  • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 8:33 AM

    Ordinary differential equation (ODE) – an equation containing a function of one independent variable and its derivatives

    1. The unknown is a function.
    2. The function is a dependent variable.
    3. This function is dependent on a single independent variable.
    4. This function could be real-valued, complex-valued, vector-valued, or matrix (tensor)-valued.
    5. There are derivatives of the function that are part of the equation.
    6. These derivatives can be of different orders.
    7. Then there are also degrees or powers of derivatives involved.
    8. Degree of 1 = linear differential equation.
    9. When the degree is greater than 1 = non-linear differential equation.

    .

    Partial differential equation (PDE) – a differential equation in which the unknown function is a function of multiple independent variables and the equation involves its partial derivatives.

    1. The function is dependent on multiple independent variables.
    2. Equation involves its partial derivative.

    .

  • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 9:07 AM

    Can Differential equations or Wave Functions be used to model the evolution of SELF?

    Ha, ha… maybe. 🙂

    It seems to parallel the development of mass as being investigated in quantum mechanics.

    .

    • Chris Thompson  On September 8, 2013 at 12:06 AM

      I think so too dude. I see no reason to pretend that there are important distinctive different kinds of space time — anywhere! haha

  • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 10:31 AM

    Mathematical space is not the physical space. Mathematical space is more of a product of the mind. We may play with mathematical space, any way we want. It has its own consistency. But it is a filter through which we are looking.

    Even when we know nothing about mathematics, we are imposing a sort of mathematical space on what is out there. Shapes of things are produced in our mind because of this mathematical space filter.

    This is quite a revelation for me. This is big.

    .

    • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 10:38 AM

      When we are studying geometry, we are actually studying the space filter in our mind.

      Actual space out there is something entirely different.

      .

      • Chris Thompson  On September 8, 2013 at 12:16 AM

        Mathematics is language, precise language for abstractions. Yes, seeing this is big.

    • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 10:42 AM

      Come to think of it, all mathematics is the study of this filter that we use to make sense out of this physical universe.

      .

    • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 10:47 AM

      Drugs seem to affect this ‘math filter’, and so they are looked upon as affecting our mind. Maybe there is a ‘physics filter’ too.

      .

  • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 10:54 AM

    From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_equation

    There are very few methods of solving nonlinear differential equations exactly; those that are known typically depend on the equation having particular symmetries. Nonlinear differential equations can exhibit very complicated behavior over extended time intervals, characteristic of chaos. Even the fundamental questions of existence, uniqueness, and extendability of solutions for nonlinear differential equations, and well-posedness of initial and boundary value problems for nonlinear PDEs are hard problems and their resolution in special cases is considered to be a significant advance in the mathematical theory (cf. Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness). However, if the differential equation is a correctly formulated representation of a meaningful physical process, then one expects it to have a solution.

    .

  • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 11:45 AM

    From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_equation

    Many fundamental laws of physics and chemistry can be formulated as differential equations. In biology and economics, differential equations are used to model the behavior of complex systems. The mathematical theory of differential equations first developed together with the sciences where the equations had originated and where the results found application. However, diverse problems, sometimes originating in quite distinct scientific fields, may give rise to identical differential equations. Whenever this happens, mathematical theory behind the equations can be viewed as a unifying principle behind diverse phenomena. As an example, consider propagation of light and sound in the atmosphere, and of waves on the surface of a pond. All of them may be described by the same second-order partial differential equation, the wave equation, which allows us to think of light and sound as forms of waves, much like familiar waves in the water. Conduction of heat, the theory of which was developed by Joseph Fourier, is governed by another second-order partial differential equation, the heat equation. It turns out that many diffusion processes, while seemingly different, are described by the same equation; the Black–Scholes equation in finance is, for instance, related to the heat equation.

    .

  • vinaire  On September 7, 2013 at 12:18 PM

    An oscillation transfers energy back and forth between two states. A wave is a travelling oscillation that is capable of transferring energy (capacity to do work). In an oscillation, deformation takes place, which then reverses itself owing to restoring forces resulting from its deformation.

    Do electrical and magnetic fields represent some kind of deformation? What cause variations in the wavelength of electromagnetic radiations?

    .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: