Do we have a solid grasp of nature or is it possible that all of our perceptions are influenced by an event that we do not have witness to? Could the present or past impulse of a slight bend in distance spaces that have effective proximity to the earth cause collectively an impulsive response in our problems with nature
and in the way the world is perceived?
A reinterpretation of the theory of relativity makes this
idea plausible. Though some might claim that men are too indulgent they maybe too frugal, lost in dedication to objectivity, to both unkind to themselves and nature as well.
The Bend
Marvin E. Kirsh 1
kirsh2152000@yahoo.com
Los Angeles California USA 9003
1 California State University os Angeles department
of Anthropology
Abstract
The age of human civilization is given the
name “the bend” based on a re-examination of the emergence of science, science
theory content, and history.
Introduction
Civilization, existing over its course, in darkness
to the nature of its partnership with
the elements, oscillates in a romance that alternates between logical explanation,
the rational, and illogical as they are presented to him from the external. Its’ course, set on the logical sorting of
the worlds elements, life experience, necessarily
reflects those conditions, and thus emerges to parallel perceptions in a similar manner. If in reflections alternate conditions do not exist that do not exceed his perceptions and
physically applied cognitions a potentially blinded, self defining course exists. Both civilization and separate nature are, in
this circumstance, though mutually equal as entities of perspective dependant logic
and illogic, potentially pursuing parallel though unequal courses (Maxwell,
2001). It is necessarily the case that actual path differentials,
composed of logical and illogic are the real enumerator of life kinds footing. Prominent scholarly works , judged to be exemplary of historical behavior and that focus on the emergence of path will be critically
examined in order to argue that civilization
and its’ external spaces are modulated differentially- one, (civilization), by
its’ own will as a construct of the experienced logical and illogical, the
other (nature) by its’ empathy for the future, the open, a repulsion of the
past but not the contiguity of its’ path.
The era of human civilization will be named the “bend” to reflect both an
innate property of nature and an
evolved division between the course of nature and that of mankind.
Euclid, Newton and Einstein
It appears that in the geometrical renditions
of Euclid the universe, earth is more qualified in description to the sensual character of physical
connection, i.e. the ability to touch, a quality of ‘possessing’ that defines
the world and today is propagated as a reflexively acquired concept from
perception “ what is open is open for
grabs”, whether or not seen as possessing the intersections and mechanical
connections that confined conceptually
the world of the Greeks, Euclids’ unproven Parallel Postulate demarcates a tangible
divide between the presented world and what lay beyond in the realms of the
infinite and eternal. Modern mathematics applied to free floating figures, electrons, atoms, etc, though
not considered so conceptually in theory are attached to gravity possessing witness frames from which the mathematics is
conceptualized. Included definition of perspective, rather than made from a
valid established grounding focus,
a universal point of perspective of
entities is constructed from within
perspectives that are defined historically and reflect struggle with concepts
of the infinite, the eternal, potential
infinite regressions and extrapolated theorizations of change conceived to
involve points of inceptions, postulated
births and death. Alternately parameters
of birth and death can be transposed to exist physically and become
absent from theory. In this case, regardless
of the absence or presence of perceptions of attachments in theory they are conjectured to
apriorily exist within the conceptionalizations
that are emerged from transverse elements. Arising from current scientific
investigations are a multitude of methods with which to rearrange the elements
of nature. Mind matter paradox,
assuming many forms is set aside in a manner in which mind and matter are given
absolute separate quarters, in which a sparing contest ensues with the
description “mind over matter”, though matter gaining the material (excuse the
pun) hand; the problems of civilization have become overwhelmed with
propagating practical material concerns
in which a blindness exists with respect to connections of these activities to
problems; unexceeded is the adherence of connection, conceptually, in
definition to the point of gravity bound history molded human witness. It is potentially possible, less all of the
acquired wisdoms of civilization have no application, that the topic of mind
over matter is applicable in a more specific manner to a single unnamed,
undetected, material problem, and has grown from civilization experience to the perception of necessary
struggles with nature as a generalized
status quo situation resulting from otherwise than a universally abnormally behaving nature. This course of behavior acquires , from cognitive conceptualizations, a boa constrictor like
facet from the test/push and apply approaches of science and technology, has a
tangible nature in which both the form and the material substance of the
problem, the figurative and literal, find an equalness in form consumed as a naturally existing free floating bend, and
in substance as a physical bend with which a whole perspective is attainable.
This is arrived at from an inspection of the works of Euclid, Newton and
Einstein. The later will be considered
first as it arises in modern times, is at the tail end of a partly describable
path of history leading from ancient times in Earth history and contains itself
renditions of physical path in nature.
The Theory of Relativity
Einsteins’ theory of relativity (Einstein,
1986) renders a mathematical description of simultaneity between events that
relate the conceptual parameters of energy, time, mass to velocity in a manner such that parameters
are dependant on position of reference. This may be conceptualized as a mathematical rather than
physical lever (either with fixed attachments) to describe relative effects of motion with
respect to position; a change at one end
of the lever given the property E=mC^2 (E=energy, m=mass, C=constant speed of
light) produces a change at a distal point described by the lever property. The
formula E=mc^2 is derived from a
triangulation made from the path of light as it is reflected from a moving body
and back to an observer. The parameter of energy with respect to mass and
velocity is extracted from the area of triangulation calculated using the
methods of calculus to derive the area under a curve. The speed of light is
given a fixed value from philosophical
consideration that ultimately reflect
from the position of witness from which the equation is evolved. Subsequent paradox plagued Einstein in his attempts to write a unified
theory in which inertia, an inertial frame of reference, could be accounted for. He arrived at the
conclusion that the universe was either
expanding or contracting, and that the path of light was bent in the vicinity
of gravity. The expansion or contraction
of the universe is relatively (excuse the pun) untestable; the bending of light
in a gravitational field has been confirmed and lead to the acceptance of
Einstein’s theory.
The lever description contained in the theory
of relativity (see Kirsh, 2009a) might be given alternate description as the
association of contemporary observation in relation to a past event in history. In this case simultaneity
refers not to the association of generally designated witness entities, but of
all entities to an initial event. It is
always the case that geometrical progressions (i.e: mc^2) refer to an origin,;
in the case of observation and test applied to nature it refers to a reverse
path to an origin in which the forwards path is beyond witness and is not predictable
from either the past or present. The theory of relativity might be construed to
represent either the description of the
reverse path of light Einstein described,
(i.e. a net consolidation of the process of its transmission and reflection),
or a net consolidated view of the effect
of an unknown cause with an origin that can be elucidated from a regression, present to past of the
human population. . In the latter case, if the speed of light is
assumed to be variable, unattached to the entities and objects that Einstein referred to describe point of
reference, the energy he related might be construed as a potential energy attached
to a specific mass with a long term effect originating from the past. In either
view physical attachment is made in theory to gravity possessing entities.
To balance his equations, as light can be
reflected or refracted by mass in
gravitational fields, by matter, Einstein gave light a value of mass and
predicted that it interacted with mass; its’ path would assume a bend when it passed near by other masses. The prediction was confirmed by the
observation of bending of the path of light traveling vast distances through
space. The general theory of relativity was
created to account for an observation
suggesting the existence of a gravitation-less property possible to regions of
space in which light was transmitted undisturbed in its’ path.
A curvature property to space arises from the
described ‘mathematical lever”, light in addition alters it course when it
passes the vicinity of masses. Reviewing
the alternate proposal for a physical conception, historical meaning in the Special Theory of Relativity and the phenomenons of bending of both light
and space it seems reasonable to construe again a physical origin as a special
case for the whole topic of relativity in
which the described and measured bending bears a separate attachment
over a vast period of cosmological history; not that light cannot
bend or that space is not curved but
that these concepts acquire a more familiar and commonly apprehended logic if potential additional elements
responsible for interpretation are assumed. The theoretical and measured bending of light,
the curvature of space, the lingual verses mathematical relativity of
time, attain meaning if an abnormal
physical bend, and a temporal conception is ascribed to a structure(s) that is
pertinent to the earths’ and civilizations’ history, a new interpretation involving a single event,
a scientific looking back expressed as a mathematical regression that is
simultaneous to all earthly witness
.
Euclid
and the Parallel Postulate
In order to rationally accommodate the
suggested irregular path of human
history, false scientific interpretation of natural elements, a proposed
(subtle) physical bend that totally encompasses the emergences of civilization
and its’ renditions of nature, a return to the ancient mathematics of Euclid (Heath,1908)
will be attempted to enhance the plausible meaning of new interpretation.
Finally a different model will be proposed.
The reinterpretation of relativity says
what space is not, it is not a set of lines and made to correspond from
tabulations ensuing from the set of lines on writing materials (Kirsh,2009b).
Science study may not rest very easily with a description of what nature is
not.
In order to surmount problems of attachment,
and intersections of lines on drawing paper the mobius strip, an inverted
looped surface in which the inside is contiguous with the outside maybe introduced.
The mobius strip can be conceived to exist in abstraction as exceeding
the plane of drawing materials and in abstracted forms which exceed spatial hinderances
imposed by a demand that matter, rather than volumes defined by points and
conceived from lines and planes,
occupies space, does not overlap with itself, cannot occupy two spaces
in the same instant. The free floating form of the mobuis has only
the demand of a twist to describe its form.
A cut longitudinally along the center line yields a looped structure of
two untwisted loops. Resulting loops from
a longitudinal cut can be described to be parallel to one another in Euclidean
terms as they come from the same center
line. With respect to parallelness they
are also mechanically constrained by necessity of being linked to one another, though all longitudinal lines that are
parallel to the original cut loop a can
be considered parallel in the plane of the
original free floating strip they are necessarily not parallel in observed spaces. An intuitive connection may be made to
Euclids’ Parallel Postulate in which it is found impossible to prove that
parallel lines do not intersect-in this case parallel lines can be witnessed to
intersect. Intuitively one may conceive to employ this situation to prove the
parallel postulate, but it is more important to conceive the meaning of the
parallel postulate in a different light in which the ordinary applications of geometry
are ubiquitously restricted to physical attachments and not the infinite and
eternal aspects of the open void of space which are put , by the ancient
Greeks, not to mathematical enumeration, but philosophical discussion; the
geometries of physical and sensory experience with nature, the world, appear to
be maintained distinct by the Greeks
with the suitable assumption rather than proof that parallel lines did not
intersect. This divide in the conceptual, between the philosophical and
mathematical though not stated, seems to evolve into a discussion of contiguity
and divisibility in which it is construed that space is contiguous and
indivisible, but filled with kinds that possess distinct physical measurements. The question of contiguity from the plane
geometry Euclid elucidated to open,
infinite, and eternal space is nebulous and
unproven. From an alternate perspective
though, the physical hindrance of both loops from center cuts and the potential
possible spatial arrangements of uncut loops
occurring when linear renditions of the mobius strip are transposed to
open spaces, the set of volumes of space, kinds, assumes a smaller number than those
construable from plane geometry. Assuming
that the world is encompassed by nothing but kinds, the world becomes, wih this
proposal, smaller in number than if made from combinations confined to plane
geometry on drawing paper. If the twist in mobius strips, an alternate arrangement of mirrored loops across
a straight line or curve is
conceptualized to embody a potential energy that is the consequence of the
investment of, mainly abstracted, linear
and plain volume as the motive for an elastic conformation, real space becomes
smaller in volume that abstracted values.
When thermodynamics is considered, modern science arrives at paradox
from a perspective of construction involving
inert materials. In current applications, in order to render real space,
other than lending a possible validity to the subtraction of an abstracted space,
space normally construed from the squares of plane geometry, intuitively
applied in description, requires added
impetus in order to account for the world.
A void of explanation from ensuing paradox has become ridden with notions centered on skewed
statistical arrangements in the form of entanglements as additions to a
conceived inert beginning. This approach, lending an element of variable
proximity to account for observation seems to be on the right track but still
maintains the same associated paradoxes
resulting from attempts at explanation from combined statistical considerations
and observation applied to expound potential properties of systems assembled and analyzed from a
perspective of component materials. More
likely inherited, transmitted
proximities within a framework of space that takes no difference to
start between the inert and the living
is the case. A subtraction from theory of abstracted idea about conceptions and
death is required. All misinterpretation is buried similarly in confusions of mind matter, the self and the
external nature-energized emerging spaces, actual volumes of space, possess
potential in terms of force that is not apparent in the plane of materials etched on paper. A misunderstood, uncontemplated concept exists with respect to the
relationship of the creator of written works to his creation-they possess both
parameters of location and identity, ensue as a path from the life path of the
creator, to the life paths of witness to it and are
related to the actual only with respect to the possession of a transmittable force. The
linear areas occupied on drawing materials consume time and fill space
similarly as do their creators originate from and yield volume over the course
of time. Communications consume and
yield volume both on the micro unwitnessible level with respect to
physiological function as well as on the macro level when they effect change
upon the environment. Internal spaces
and functioning by the same means
postulated for whole spaces are a factor in totals. In aggressive actions one might assume
consciously a position to ignore them and consider wholes that are more
appropriately valid in analogy to
Euclids’ planar renditions. Such approaches result in the realization of
subtractions to conceived spaces that are not realized in initial
analysis. In the struggles with nature, it is only the forces of emerging space(s),
that are the topics of Einstein , Newton, etc. There obviously does not exist a
mathematical relationship from the
physical form and geometry of communications to the actual spaces and changes
in spaces they affect in nature, they
are subject to the whim of their creators. The works of Newton, especially Einstein
etc, in which basic physical/mathematical
rules are applied to define witness details, when examined, seem to have the world misinterpreted philosophically, are
inductions (Kirsh,2008) from the ( civilization) circumstance of an extraneous
element . Their creations, as postulated
secondary loci to a primary disturbance may be expected to only bear features common
to properties innate universally to space, rather than encompass them. If space possesses a conceptual twist from which physical form
extends, all processes in order for
conjecture require a witness pair, the existence of malleability and mechanical
hindrance is required for tangible existence,
simultaneity is reduced to be a lingual descriptive property of participants, time is not a logically valid component in
discussions, then the emergences and associated proximities of space and
volumes emanating from a conceptual malleable structure become especially fluid
with respect to existing theory; ordinary reflexive application of the senses in the construction of theory has not only alternately
emerged as the expression of common
psychological impulse, leads to
aggression on natural elements, but is expected to mirror impulse generated by
the proposed instigating bend alternately extracted from the Theory of
relativity , which itself must ultimately reflect a nature of space. The scientific application of force to
rudimentary natural elements from planar mechanical abstraction as a willed
propagation of impulse is suggested to create a first order rate of change to
the initial impulse such that the paths of propagation of civilization and
natural order diverge from one another, from a natural course, to a course that is projected to evolve in the direction
of disturbance origins, as they are absent in theoretical elucidations.
A concept of the world as heterogeneous, possessing a
congruence to heterogeneous internal
physiology and nature of thought, concepts as processes of proximity, paths themselves, dictates the elevation of the heterogeneous to its’ unit feature .
In this case, wished conceptual divisions for study, becoming more valid
to reality, diverse, complex can be
especially cryptic to decipher. The undeletable middle meaning when variables
are substituted in expressions and phrases, enumerated by Bertrand Russell (Russell,1962) seems to make an appropriate analogy.
The Bend
It seems fitting, in light of the discussed philosophically incomplete notions and
falsehoods to conjecture that almost any grand facet of the world can become
elusive over longtime intervals. Throughout the micro heterogeneities embodied
by cells, macro heterogeneities embodied by organisms, the cosmos, structures of space that might conceivably
affect human civilization, and within the conceptually developed from
observation to the created laws meant to
describe the natural world, it seems appropriate to postulate that a randomly,
if not predictably emerging bend exists
in all aspects. Chromosomes may have abnormally induced bends and rearranged information
sequences , space structures and their
relative positions may be suffered of bends. Natural abnormalities not only are masked
within the efforts of sorting, but the real and the conceptual have come to
exist together as a man made synergy as a civilization guide. This hypothesis suggests that one might hardly distinguish one from the other
considering the vast magnitudes of time and distance in relation to the
individual.
References
Einstein,
Albert (1986)Physics and Reality Journal of the Franklin Institute 221:3
359-382 March 1986
Heath,
Thomas, L. (1908) The Thirteen Books of
Euclid’s Elements, Cambridge University Press
Kirsh,
Marvin, E. (2008) Induction, Space, and Positive Ethics Ludus Vitalis,
vol. XVI, num. 30, pp. 225-228.
Kirsh, Marvin E., (2009a) Einstein and Mythology : The Lengthier
the Relations in a Myth the Greater Its’ Mass. (in review) : http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1422742)
Kirsh,
Marvin E. (2009b)A Plane Economy of Space
Surfaces From the Mathematics of Einstein and Euclid (in review): (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1411912)
Maxwell,
Nichalos (2001) Weinert's Review of ‘The
Comprehensibility of the Universe’
Philosophy (2001), 76:2:297-303 Cambridge University Press
Russell, Bertrand, (1962) Whitehead, Alfred North, Principia Mathematica , second edition Cambridge University Press