Truth ever only lies within a logic, never outside. Now - what if you have two logics? What if you have three? More?


And my thoughts about it.

This page echoes some of my insights into the physicality of things. They are mostly short, to the point. If a more in-depth discussion is available this is linked to at then of the insight.


What our (scientific) community determines to be facts are to me, by now, only fixed acts: f-acts.
Somewhen, somewhere science started, even it it was at the homey hearth, collected and collated observations and procedures, made it into an act and fixed it, tied it into a package. For the sole purpose of not having to teinvent the wheel each and every day.
We now grow up with them, acting as if these facts are givens, not questionable, believe them to be immutable. As much as it is pragmatic to do so for every day life it does bind the mind.
Having learnt and trained myself to see them as f-acts keeps present their origin, their developmental story, their logic-rule-set, their Ordering-Principle and their Ordering-Potential as well as a constantly present check on their iterational integrity.
It also keeps present that a f-act is merely a tool, a tool built to fulfill a purpose. Where it does not meet or fulfill the purpose it can be modified or replaced.
An example: A road is a useful fact of everyday life. Inventing air-travel did not change this fact, it added a tool for translocation.
A constant - that is like stumbling across a road, never having seen one. You can use it, you can copy it and it makes life easier. But not understanding is Ordering-Principle, how it came to be a f-act, hinders you developing better or better suited to your needs roads.

Start to look at facts as f-acts. It will take a lot of in-fighting, possibly even all of it, out of the scientific community.

1. Paradox 

A pradox always occurs there where two logic meet at the same place. Possible solutions are:
1. accept that both logic cannot meet, carry on pragmatically and find or develop a new logic that can contain both. Better still...
2. Use OP_L1 and OP_L2 to check the logic of each L2 and L1, test for coherence, i.e. iterational integrity, in each and find the branching off point on their ancestral logic tree.
3. Determine the Ordering-Potential of each logic. Sometimes two logic seem irreconcilable though they have the same kernel. This will more often than not be the result of a differing Ordering-Potential of the same logic.

2. The Tumbling Axis     

Any axis of a body revolving around this axis, can, by extension, itself be viewed as a rotating body with an (tumbling) axis and (tumbling) point along this(tumbling) axis.
Viewing this in this manner opens the way to develop dynamic balancing.
The Tumbling Axis and the Tumpling Point are a thought construct that predicts the spatial orientation of the axis in the next segment of time after having factored in all moments of force acting on the revolving body in the surrent segment of time.
Using this information a counter moment of force can be exerted to bring the resultant back to zero.
This can be practically done in real time, the technology is available.

Quite a number of observable behaviours in and of rotating bodies find a a) conclusive explanation with this model and b) a mode of correction.

3. Airlock - Why air in liquid (inter alia) brakes or stops flow      

This phenomenon, where an air-bubble produces a lock in a pipe wherein liquids are transported can also be viewed hydraulically.
Any homogenous grain-size collection forms "pockets". When mixed with a smaller grain-size collection these smaller grain sizes can squeeze through a gap into a pocket and there, by F1/A1 (slit) = F2/A2 (pocket) act hydraulically.
Leading to a moment where the pressure in the pocket exceeds the ambient pressure by magnitudes and "locks" the pocket (and thereby grain-size 1) to the sides of the pipe. Preventing flow.

This phenomenon can be observed at all scales.

4. Solid, Liquid, Gaseous can be viewed as behaviour.

What we have been taught to be aggregate states - solid, liquid, gaseous (see f-act) can also be viewed as behaviour.
In the most simple case the grain-size and mixing ratio of two homogenous substancesdetermines whether the resultant substance will behave as a solid, as a liquid or even as a gas. 2 simple examples may illustrate this point:
1. Ground coffee (grain-size 1) in a vacuum pack acts solid, until you punch a hole into the skin and allow air (grain-size 2) to enter. If you make a small hole you can observe how the behaviour changes slowly from solid to amorph to liquid, to the point where you can "pour" the coffee out of the package into some other container. If you extreme it and blow air into the package  as a result the coffee and air mixture will behave like a gas, everything flying around in the air.
2. A snow avalanche will behave as a liquid and flow for as long the air it takes in and expels meintain balance and the mixing ratio of grain sizes within the avalanche. If it expels more air than it ingests, it collapses to solid and stops flowing. If it takes in more air than it expels it will disperse as a gas and not flow.

Now, consider this: In any medium consisting of a mix of grain sizes this can have pockets with a mixing ratio that favours solid behaviour, liquid behaviour, gaseous behaviour. And these can dynamically change.

What about Plasma, you might ask. Well, have we resolved the grain size of that what we call electricity or charged particles?

Do not let scale confuse you. This can be applied at all scales. It is a question of possible resolution.

5. The Theory of Everything exists since the dawn of hydraulics.

Developing from denkern and through the above points (f-act, grain-size, mixing ratio) all observable and experienceable phenomena in this world can be placed under one hat, with all their theories, as opposing as they may seem.
Thus the Theory of everything would be F1/A1 = F2/A2.
All of our universe can be viewed as a hydraulic logic-gate and be represented as such. E.g. a lever is the integral of all resolveable pressure points. The (hydraulic) lever formula works fine across all scientific disciplines and across all scales.
So it is nothing new, just a way of looking at phenomena.
All scientific disciplines have a common logic-trunk from which they branched.

Thus, the hydraulic viewpoint makes available an elegant translation tool between the scientific disiplines.

6. Electricity

The state of electrical science is today at approximately the same point that hydraulic science was a few hundred years ago when farmers dug channels in sand, a "leaky" substrate for the transport of water.

Hydraulics and Electrics use the same terminology and formulae. Differences in observable results can easily be ascribed to the use of "leaky pipes" in the case of electricity. These can be easily explained by the use of leaky pipes. That is waht our conductors are - wicks. that is why electricity prefers flowing through metals.

And magnetism? The proper question here should be: What are the one-way gates in metal that force electric grain-sizes to pass in only one direction?

When we start resolving that we which we call electricity we shall most certainly find that is is a conglomerate of particle sizes, much like water and oil and other liquids in the hydraulic sciences.

With the subsequent differentiation of the different grain sizes the science of electricity it will advance at an even faster pace than the science of hydraulics did, because all the phenomena are known, have been researched, at a larger scale, that is. But they are available.

7. Movement

Movement can also be viewed in a different manner: Like a pea caught between two balloons, e.g. The content of each sphere has a certain "order". A change to any one of these "orders" changes the order-relationships and as a result the position the pea inhabits in space changes - it moves.
This abstraction can applied to any system. It contains a mapping for a differing model of what movement can be viewed as, and as such this becomes applicable to a much wider spectrum of scenarios than the purely mechanistic model. Afew that come to mind: Psychology, Information, Infrastructure

This page continues growing...