Thursday, December 31, 2009

Happy New Year!

Goodbye 2009! Will 2010 be the year of lattice propulsion? Probably.

Happy new year to everybody. I wish you all the best of everything that life has to offer.

6 comments:

Bill said...

It's the year 2010, but where are the flying cars?

Happy New Year, Louis.

James said...

What are your thoughts on light: is it a wave in lattice particles, or rays of a type of particle? Can you explain polarization?

The other thing I wanted was clarification of the fundamental idea. At first I was under the impression that the particles and their principles were physical in a zen sort of way and not contrived. It's now fairly clear that your theory holds they are virtual, which raises the question what contrives them? Does a mechanical or supernatural god check every particle against every other? If mechanical is it a 1st order Turing machine, which takes a gazillion years to calculate each iteration of our lives, or is it a 4D grid of nano-processors, each responsible for a specific particle position? In any case, to state the obvious, a mechanical god wouldn't avoid physicality and/or an infinite regress. So I guess you leave it at the set or grid being supramundane?

Louis Savain said...

James wrote:

What are your thoughts on light: is it a wave in lattice particles, or rays of a type of particle?

In my opinion, light consists of a huge number of lattice particles travelling in unison in a given direction. Their energies and "spin" orientations (faces) are such that they appear as a wave at the macroscopic level. This is not unlike grains of sand forming wavy sand dunes in the desert. The important thing to note is that only the grains exist. The waves are abstract macroscopic phenomena. Particle/wave duality is, of course, rubbish.

Can you explain polarization?

I believe that there are four types of lattice particles, each with a unique face. This means that each type of particle can have two unique orientations. Light polarization is the result of orientation restrictions imposed on the lattice particles that comprise the light. Lattice particles with a given orientation can be filtered out by certain types of matter.

The other thing I wanted was clarification of the fundamental idea. At first I was under the impression that the particles and their principles were physical in a zen sort of way and not contrived. It's now fairly clear that your theory holds they are virtual, which raises the question what contrives them?

I am not sure what you mean by 'virtual'. Virtual means non-existent to me. So the particles in my lattice hypothesis are certainly not virtual even if they are made of nothing. An ex-nihilo universe automatically enforces the conservation of nothing. However, I came to the conclusion that the meaning (e.g., face, wing body, etc.) of a property is not something that can be conjured up out of nothing. I now believe that meaning is imparted by something else. 'Meaning' is somewhat analogous to 'category' or 'type' and I think that everything is imbued with a universal spirit whose job it is to give meaning to or categorize things into different types. A property is a piece of this universal spirit or force, if you will.

In a sense, some north American indigenous tribes may not be too far off when they claim that everything, even an inanimate object, has a spirit. As a Christian, I believe that this is what is known as the Holy Spirit. It is in everything and nothing would make any sense without it. There are other types of spirits, of course, but even the yin-yang dual Gods (the Father and the Son) of Christianity pay homage to the Holy Spirit. They rely on it and trust it to keep things functioning properly.

I am a Christian but few Christians believe as I do, of course. As you know, I am a rebel and I rebel against almost everything, even the traditional doctrines of Christianity.

Does a mechanical or supernatural god check every particle against every other? If mechanical is it a 1st order Turing machine, which takes a gazillion years to calculate each iteration of our lives, or is it a 4D grid of nano-processors, each responsible for a specific particle position? In any case, to state the obvious, a mechanical god wouldn't avoid physicality and/or an infinite regress. So I guess you leave it at the set or grid being supramundane?

Well, I don't make a distinction between natural and supernatural. I believe that each and every particle (including its meaning) is self-contained and acts like a cell in a cellular automaton. No need for a God (mechanical or otherwise) to keep them behaving properly.

But then again, I could be wrong. LOL.

Bill said...

James wrote:

If mechanical is it a 1st order Turing machine, which takes a gazillion years to calculate each iteration of our lives

This statement makes no sense. Whether the universe takes a trillion years or one nanosecond to update its grid, we will perceive it the same way because we can only perceive the changes. This might seem confusing, but there is a difference between in-universe time and time outside the universe.

James said...

Bill,

Yes by years I meant god-years. I wasn't being to serious about this example, it was just to illustrate the point.

Louis,

By virtual I meant existing as data in a "real" universe, which was the impression I got from recent posts. Again, obviously if real == spatial, there's a regress.

So I guess what I was trying to ask was how are the particles connected if not spatially, or how does a particle know when it occupies the same location as another particle? Though to be honest, since human logic is founded on the concept of space, I don't expect that anyone is able to answer these questions.

Your reply was interesting however. Do you think color in light rays is a quality that we are capable of perceiving, or a wavelength that's converted to a quality during perception?

Also, are location violations the only way that lattice particles interact with and influence one another?

damasterwc said...

hope you're doing well, happy new year, louis.