Cosmology/Source Of In-Waves: The Wind Is Blowing My Mind

[robertkernodle]

Cosmology/Source Of In-Waves: The Wind Is Blowing My Mind

The initial place of ideas is the physical world that we experience, and being a person who values insights from the physical world, I will mention here that lately I have been enjoying watching trees blowing in the wind. As I watch, I wonder how the universe can keep up with each point of the leaf and with each point of the point of a leaf with the center of the leaf, and each of the aforementioned configuration's relationship with the higher-order configurations that assemble into the ensemble that is the whole swaying limb of the tree.

How can this complex ensemble of visual, physical world experience arise from the coordinated actions of spherical waves? How does the end of the universe "know" where all these relative positions are locally to maintain the influx of outwaves properly configured to enable me to keep seeing a tree blowing in the wind?

It would seem that the edge of the universe would have to react instantaneously with the local universe to enable such a feat of form, or else the local would "outrun" the edge of the universe, and all things would loose their all-connectedness.

So you see what I mean, when I say "The Wind Is Blowing My Mind".

[haselhurst]

How do In-Waves know where to meet?

Hi Robert,
Few comments below;
Geoff

Robert - The initial place of ideas is the physical world that we experience, and being a person who values insights from the physical world, I will mention here that lately I have been enjoying watching trees blowing in the wind.

Geoff - I live in the bush - outside this morning there is a light breeze and the peppermint trees are swaying - very pretty. Yes, all truth of reality ultimately comes from our senses.

Robert - How can this complex ensemble of visual, physical world experience arise from the coordinated actions of spherical waves? How does the end of the universe "know" where all these relative positions are locally to maintain the influx of outwaves properly configured to enable me to keep seeing a tree blowing in the wind?

Geoff - What do you mean by the end of the Universe? As WSM requires, the Spherical In-Waves are formed from the Out-Waves of all other matter in a finite sphere of Space (Universe) within an Infinite Space. This is explained in Cosmology page.

Robert - It would seem that the edge of the universe would have to react instantaneously with the local universe to enable such a feat of form, or else the local would "outrun" the edge of the universe, and all things would loose their all-connectedness.

Geoff - Do not understand why this is true. Most of the In-Wave velocity changes occur where the waves have a high wave amplitude, so they adjust position most when interacting with other matter that is close to them (a billionth of a meter). I don't see any problems with this. I think you are assuming linear waves, that do not change their velocity, thus where they meet would be determined only by the positions / motions of all other matter in Universe. But with non-linear waves that change velocity with wave amplitude (charge) and wave density (gravitational mass) this is not the case. Close matter has the main influence on how spherical in-waves adjust velocities and thus ultimate location of the Wave-Center 'particle'.
Hope this helps,
Geoff

[robertkernodle]

How Does The Edge Of The Universe Stay Connected ?

Hi Geoff,

Yes, I understand that, as you say, "Spherical In-Waves are formed from the Out-waves of all other matter in a finite sphere of space."

My challenge, however, is to understand how (even in a finite sphere) In-Waves at the perimeter can "keep track" of the local movement changes of the wave center. Even in a finite sphere, there is a requirement for a duration of connection from the outermost radius to the innermost wave center, so it seems to me. But at the limit of the universe, it seems that this duration would be too long to allow for a continuous connection between all other matter and the local wave centers. Local changes seem to outrun the requirement that the outer perimeter is connected to and determines the inner center.

If a wave center HERE is a consequence of a multitude of Out-waves THERE, then it further seems that all matter THERE has to have some sort of simultaneous instantaneous connection to the process of the formation and movement of the wave center HERE.

Forgive my terms, if I haven't yet discovered how to clearly state my points, but I'm working on it. And forgive my gaps in kowledge. This can be a good exercise in clearing up my sticking points and clarifying your convictioins, if I can stick with it.

Best regards,

Robert K.

[haselhurst]

In-Waves, Motion of Wave Center 'Particle'

Hi Robert,
Few comments below.
Geoff

Robert - Yes, I understand that, as you say, "Spherical In-Waves are formed from the Out-waves of all other matter in a finite sphere of space."

Geoff - Good. We agree on this as a starting point.

Robert - My challenge, however, is to understand how (even in a finite sphere) In-Waves at the perimeter can "keep track" of the local movement changes of the wave center. Even in a finite sphere, there is a requirement for a duration of connection from the outermost radius to the innermost wave center, so it seems to me. But at the limit of the universe, it seems that this duration would be too long to allow for a continuous connection between all other matter and the local wave centers. Local changes seem to outrun the requirement that the outer perimeter is connected to and determines the inner center.

Geoff - Perhaps a simple example might help. Imagine a flat surface of water, and that we have a series of sources of circular waves that are distributed around the circumference of a circle (lets assume that there are 12 of them, on circumference of a circle with diameter of 10 meters - this is arbitrary, just an example).
See diagrams for example "Cosmology, Source of Spherical In-Waves, Huygens Principle" at;
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/science-physics-wsm-wave-diagrams.htm

Then these circular Out Waves will flow into center of circle and form a circular In-Wave (Huygens Principle).
So if you do not change velocity of waves they will continue to flow in out out through central point, the wave center that is formed will not move.

However, if the water was shallower on one side of this created Wave-Center, which caused water waves to travel more slowly, then this would change where these wave met at the wave center (which we would see as the motion of a 'particle in WSM - the wave center would 'move' slightly in direction of slower In-Waves, which I believe is the cause of Gravity, as I think waves in Space travel more slowly in space of higher wave density where there is more matter. This also explains why light would curve past Sun for example).
Even if this change only occurred right near the wave-center, it would still change location of wave-center, though the source of these In-Waves has not changed at all. The system would still stay interconnected.
I wish I had a diagram to show this (picture is worth a thousand words).

Robert - If a wave center HERE is a consequence of a multitude of Out-waves THERE, then it further seems that all matter THERE has to have some sort of simultaneous instantaneous connection to the process of the formation and movement of the wave center HERE.

Geoff - No, as long as source of In-waves HERE (from Out waves THERE) is maintained then matter stays interconnected (no instant connections - still limited by velocity of waves in Space).

Robert - Forgive my terms, if I haven't yet discovered how to clearly state my points, but I'm working on it. And forgive my gaps in knowledge. This can be a good exercise in clearing up my sticking points and clarifying your convictions, if I can stick with it.
Best regards,
Robert K.

Geoff - Forgive my lack of diagrams to enable better explanation (there are a few people working on this at moment!). And your question is both highly relevant and shows good understanding of WSM. I am impressed.
I hope my answer helps a bit - but I realise that just because I can picture this, it does not mean that my explanation is that easy to follow.
Best regards,
Geoff

[robertkernodle]

Motion Of Wave Center 'Particle': Continuing Dialogue

Geoff,

It's a priviledge to have your level of knowledge take time to focus on my particular incongruities in thinking, even more when my "incongruities" lean slightly towards foundation-shaking of the WSM theory. Thanks and that's what this section of the forum is for. I'm taking a double risk by being the first respondent here (besides Karene) and not the most experienced in this field (big understatement ) at that.

So, to continue:

You, Geoff, said: ". . . as long as the source of In-waves HERE (from out waves THERE) is maintained, then matter stays interconnected (no instant connections - still limited by velocity of waves in Space)"

Now I, Robert K., respond:

The requirement then seems to be that the SOURCE of outwaves is maintained. If movement of space were the only movement of concern, then I could see this. But, as I am picturing it, even the source of outwaves is not maintained, because matter (i.e., condensed space wave ensembles) everywhere also is in motion with respect to other matter (condensed space wave ensembles).

I guess you could say that I am having difficulty reconciling the motion of space with the motion of the visible world. As I am understanding things, it's as if every bit of matter already "knows"/"keeps track of" every other bit of matter, which seems to challenge the concept of local causality.

If only space were the moving entity, then space alone seemingly would control where wave centers form. Space motion would be the only consideration. Here's an idea that hit me: suppose this is true--- that space alone is the only motion of importance. Then space alone (via its motion) creates every possible configuration before we (human observers) actually are conscious of any of these configurations. In other words, I'm saying something like Julian Barbor says (but not quite). Motion of space determines all possible states/configurations/forms, then something else carves these into our conscious experience.

So, I have two major thoughts here:

Either

(1) Every bit of matter is somehow tracking every other bit of matter in some sort of super-ensemblic harmony

OR

(2) Macro-world motion, as we experience it, is not what we think it is--- it is a selective assemblage by consciousness of all possible configurations determined soley by space and its motion.

This is a big dose of brainstorming for me, and I don't mean to put demands on your time by forcing you to wade through it, but (as always) I'm curious what you might think of it.


Robert K

[haselhurst]

Hi Robert,
A few comments below to above post.
Geoff

You, Geoff, said: ". . . as long as the source of In-waves HERE (from out waves THERE) is maintained, then matter stays interconnected (no instant connections - still limited by velocity of waves in Space)"

Robert K., responds: The requirement then seems to be that the SOURCE of out-waves is maintained. If movement of space were the only movement of concern, then I could see this. But, as I am picturing it, even the source of out-waves is not maintained, because matter (i.e., condensed space wave ensembles) everywhere also is in motion with respect to other matter (condensed space wave ensembles).

Geoff - True, this other matter all around us in 'Hubble Sphere / Finite Spherical Universe' (within infinite space) is in motion (its wave-centers are moving about). But it is still producing Out Wave continuously, the waves never stop moving. And due to non-linear properties of space, these slight changes in source of In-Waves (which you are suggesting would cause our In-Waves to move out of phase) are adjusted for by changes in Wave velocity near our Wave-Centers where wave amplitude is very high. This ensures waves stay in phase at Wave-Center (as i see things).


I guess you could say that I am having difficulty reconciling the motion of space with the motion of the visible world. As I am understanding things, it's as if every bit of matter already "knows"/"keeps track of" every other bit of matter, which seems to challenge the concept of local causality.

Geoff - When you say 'motion of space' I assume you mean 'wave motion of nearly rigid wave medium (space)'.
Well there is still a local causality, wave centers only moved based upon where In-Waves come in and meet at Wave-Center, which is determined by Out-Waves of all other matter in Universe limited by the velocity of these waves in Space (ve4locity of light c).

If only space were the moving entity, then space alone seemingly would control where wave centers form. Space motion would be the only consideration. Here's an idea that hit me: suppose this is true--- that space alone is the only motion of importance. Then space alone (via its motion) creates every possible configuration before we (human observers) actually are conscious of any of these configurations. In other words, I'm saying something like Julian Barbor says (but not quite). Motion of space determines all possible states/configurations/forms, then something else carves these into our conscious experience.

So, I have two major thoughts here:

Either

(1) Every bit of matter is somehow tracking every other bit of matter in some sort of super-ensemblic harmony

Geoff - true, due to Interconnection of Spherical In and Out Waves.

OR

(2) Macro-world motion, as we experience it, is not what we think it is--- it is a selective assemblage by consciousness of all possible configurations determined solely by space and its motion.

Geoff - It is true that the motion of matter as discrete objects (like a bullet) is an illusion, so the world we see is different than the real world that causes it. I did not understand your 'possible configurations' comment so hard to reply more.

This is a big dose of brainstorming for me, and I don't mean to put demands on your time by forcing you to wade through it, but (as always) I'm curious what you might think of it.
Robert K.

Geoff - Robert, in some ways your understanding of WSM is quite brilliant (e.g. your comments on Time) in other ways I find it kinda abstract and hard to follow. This is not a criticism, but rather me expressing hope that one day you will be brilliant in your complete understanding of WSM and you will be able to answer the above much more clearly than I (and thus help others on this journey of discovery).
Cheers,
Geoff

PS - It is a pleasure to have you here at forum. You are polite and kind, show creative thought and genuine curiosity to understand, and this is greatly appreciated by Karene and I.

[robertkernodle]

More On Determinism

Geoff,

I did a point-by-point outline of how I would answer your last response, but I thnk I'll scrap it here for now, because I immediately have a more overriding thought, which is this:

Each local wave center in WSM is determined by the outwaves of all other matter in this finite universe. Also, each distant wave center near the boundary of this finite universe is determined partly by the outwaves of matter in our locality.

Now I wonder how does this make sense--- that THERE determines HERE, while HERE determines THERE. I cannot grasp it. How can I logically say, "THIS determines THAT, and THAT determines THIS"? Determinism seems nullified by Mach's principle, in a sense (as WSM seems to embrace it).

I know you're busy and have to spread your attention around, so I understand if it takes a bit of time for you to reply to this, if at all. I won't make further comments here for a few days, until you might get to this, and if it's a few weeks, then still I'll not make further comments here, so as not to unbalance things with too heavy a dose of doubt.

My intent is not to defeat a good theory but to understand how it might or might not be the best one. I have no preferred theory at this time. I question the string people, the quantum people, etc. in the same way.

Yours truly,

Robert K.

[haselhurst]

Hi Robert,
I enjoyed your stupid humour / dumb blond posts this morning. Thanks.

A brief reply to your questions (by candlelight as my solar charged battery system is low - it has been cloudy for past week!).

Robert - Each local wave center in WSM is determined by the outwaves of all other matter in this finite universe.

Geoff - Correct, but to be precise "Each local wave center in WSM is determined by the outwaves of all other matter in ITS finite spherical universe."
Each wave-center is at the center of its own finite spherical universe within an infinite space. Thus a Wave-Center on the edge of our finite spherical universe is still at the center of its own finite spherical universe. As I see it this is the cause of redshift with distance, because distant matter shares less of our finite spherical universe, thus less wave interactions, thus less energy exchange (imagine decreasing overlap of two spheres as they are moved apart from one another).

Robert - Also, each distant wave center near the boundary of this finite spherical universe is determined partly by the outwaves of matter in our locality.

Geoff - Spot on!

Robert - Now I wonder how does this make sense--- that THERE determines HERE, while HERE determines THERE. I cannot grasp it. How can I logically say, "THIS determines THAT, and THAT determines THIS"? Determinism seems nullified by Mach's principle, in a sense (as WSM seems to embrace it).

Geoff - Well that distant matter does not determine us, but it does have some tiny effect. And most importantly, this effect is limited by the velocity of waves in Space (it is not instant / magic). This is similar to Einstein's view of how the universe works (what they call deterministic 'local' actions, limited by the velocity of light c).
For example, if there was a supernova explosion on far side of our finite spherical universe (say 12 billion light years away) then our Wave-Centers would not be affected for 12 billion years while these changes in their Out-Waves (which contribute to our In-waves) travelled across our universe.
So the end result is Mach's Principle is correct, that the mass of our matter is determined by all other matter in universe, and Einstein is correct, all matter interactions are limited by the velocity of light c (velocity of waves in space).
Does this help at all?

And while I respect your open mind, I think if you apply either Occam's Razor, or rules of metaphysics (dynamic unity of reality) then String Theory and modern interpretations of Quantum Theory do not really make sense (they are mathematical theories, not physically real).
But that is up to you to decide.
Cheers,
Geoff

PS - Karene is also working by candlelight - making me a Pizza and chocolate pudding, as my reward for installing gas oven in our little cottage today. Yum! To think that different patterns of vibrating space (many trillions of wave centers) can be so tasty! Kind of amazing when you really think about 'life the universe and everything'.

PPS - While i like the Title to this thread of posts 'The wind is blowing in my mind' it is not very helpful for others to know what this is all about. And I think your questions about the source of In-waves and how matter is interconnected across the universe is very important. Any chance of changing title to include 'Cosmology / Source of In-Waves'. That would greatly help (bearing in mind that these posts are here for years to come, and will in time be read by many thousands of people).

[haselhurst]

Hi Robert,
Thanks for changing Title of this thread, and for starting a new related thread at;
Physics - Formation Of Wave Centers
It is good to keep pages fairly short, to create more pages with related subject headings (Google will love you!).
And I am off to reply to your new post!
Thanks,
Geoff

PS (To all users) - Building a good keyword relevant link structure is very important, both for helping people navigate the Forum, and for Google to have links with keywords in them pointing at other pages on site. Please remember that links should be made to STATIC URLs (i.e. when not logged in, not dynamic URLs when logged in). The code for the above link is;

_a href="http://www.physics-philosophy-metaphysics.com/forum/about213.html">Physics - Formation Of Wave Centers</a_
(I have replaced first and last < , > with _ , _ so code displays)

The dynamic URL ends with: forum/viewtopic.php?t=213
which is changed to static URL: forum/about213.html

(I just remember this, but you can also log out then go to page to find static URL. Over time this correct use of links will have very significant benefits in how pages come up in Google.)