Reality explained

Abstract- This paper is intended to give a definite structure or shape to reality, in a primary respect to science process and to create a primary rule or principle on which something is based as opposed to presenting present naive set theories, by using a systematic dialectic approach and presenting a Modus Poden of arguments that opposes the present information by using a logical form consisting of a function which takes premises, analyzes their information and returns a conclusion (or conclusions) by showing construction of deductive proof’s and falsifiable statement, a reality that looks at the true values of reality that humanity has quantified, showing by logical axioms, use of Armstrong axioms and relativistic thought, that these uses have no other discipline other than the literal content created by the practitioner.
Introduction.
I accidentally fell into science with little prior knowledge and poor literate ability, but quickly became fasinated by the thought content and the volume of science there was to self learn, an education that was to be aided by various science interent forums.
The fasination soon became a passion and within time I was learning and understanding the knowledge.
However in certain aspects of Physics and process the information I was learning did not seem to make logical sense to myself and often resulted in forum bans by being stubborn in not accepting the discipline and by reason of myself poorly explaining my ideas, and I was at the time effectively still unclear of my own ideas and unable to put the ideas into a context that anyone else could understand.
I feel I have now acheived a better standard of literacy and I am able to express my ideas with clear intent.
Content
Part 1 – A theorist space Paradox opposing space time .

Part 2 – Light is a state Paradox.

Part 3 – Conclusion

Part 1- A Theorist space Paradox

Present information suggests -In physics, spacetime (also space–time, space time or space–time continuum) is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single interwoven continuum. The spacetime of our universe is usually interpreted from a Euclidean space perspective, which regards space as consisting of three dimensions, and time as consisting of one dimension, the “fourth dimension”.
I postulate that combining matter and time into a single manifold called ”Matter time in space”, that time is treated as moving with an object and time being dependent of the state of motion of an observer or an object and relatively dependent to gravitational fields as opposed to an object or observers motion in space time and a said space time dilation and space time curvature.
Time is not based on the movement of the Earth through a space time, the origin of time is the recorded rotation cycle of the Earth relative to the Sun’s motion . Time exists with or with out the Earth in space but has no value that is measurable as a time period value unless that space is occupied by matter. We used the regular motion of the Earth to define an increment of time that matter occupies a space. The regular movement of the Earth was essentially our first ‘ruler’ to measure the passage of time. We now have much more accurate clocks to measure the passage of time that matter occupies a space, a device that uses an electronic transition frequency and the corresponding beats that are equal to one second of the original motion of a surface point on Earth that was taken, and made has close as possible to the original second based on motion..
Time is based by humanity on rotation of the planet, , based on movement of matter through space and occupying space and only when matter occupies a space does time accumulate in the occupied space, and once the space is then unoccupied, the value of the now unoccupied space resets back to a zero value.
Time in 3 dimensional space does not change and does not have direction or a value, it is infinite like space with no beginning or end unless occupied by matter creating a time accumilation in every dimension of space the matter occupies within the none moving time, we are the cause of time and time does not exist without our presence or the presence of matter but exists at the same time in a none value state.
Anology 1- Point A and Point B , 100 miles distance between them. Point A has a velocity of 100 mph travelling towards Point B that has a 0 velocity. When Point A reaches Point B the journey took exactly 1 hour relative to the observer.
Throughout the entire journey relative to you , you observe the object and not the space, you observe time moving with the object, your focus is not of the space but on the object relative to you and relative to your time and reference frame.
Anology 2- Observe any object in a stationary reference frame relative to you , the object you are observing occupies a space, the object you are observing occupies a dimension of space equal to the objects dimensions for the same accumilated time as you occupy your own dimensions in space observing the object.
Move the object you are observing to a different place a different dimension of space.
You will observe that the now unocupied space from where you displaced the object that time now has no value, the value of time of the object is now displaced to another dimension of space you are observing.

Part 2.- Information processing by EM radiation-Paradox

Present information -Light usually refers to visible light, which is electromagnetic radiation that is visible to the human eye and is responsible for the sense of sight.

I postulate that light is a state and we see by EM radiation being a communications protocol by low voltage differential signalling of matter , which is formed by matters resistance force to the opposing force of light thus giving propagation and pressure magnitude to spectral content, each of which content is capable of transmitting messages modulated onto light waves in their perceived spectral content that travel through the constant equilibrium of light to sight, a carrier signal to the brain, a communications protocol that is a system of digital rules for data exchange between light interactions with matter and within itself to the brain. Communicating systems use well-defined formats (protocol) for exchanging messages.
The information exchanged through a constant, the main means of mass communication—that is governed by rules and conventions that can be set out in technical specifications called communication protocol standards. The nature of a communication, the actual data exchanged and any state-dependent behaviours, is defined by its specification and the brains ability to interpret this information.
The basic difference between a parallel and a serial communication channel is the number of electrical conductors used at the physical layer to convey bits, this effect can be attributed to the transfer of energy from the light to an electron in the matter. From this perspective, an alteration in either the amplitude or wavelength of light would induce changes in the rate of emission of electrons from the matter.
A parallel communication is a method of conveying multiple binary digits (bits) simultaneously. It contrasts with serial communication, which conveys only a single bit at a time; this distinction is one way of characterizing a communications link to the brain that also becomes a duplicate transfer by mirrored properties, a period of changing from one state or condition to another by receivership.
A communication channel or channel, that refers to a physical transmission medium such as the constant of light in passive dark space, or to a logical connection over a multiplexed medium such as light. A Synchronization of the coordination of events to operate a system in unison to sight. The familiar conductor of an orchestra that serves to keep the orchestra in ”time”.

Part 3- Conclusion.
I conclude by the discourse of actions of present knowledge that the above part 1 and part 2 are a Paradox to present information and with use of Armstrongs axioms and Armstrong’s axioms been a set of axioms (or, more precisely, inference rules) used to infer all the functional dependencies on a relational database, that the dependency of the present maths applies to both part 1 and part 2 to of my paper.

Advertisements

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