Parallel Dimension and Ideal Future

[rocket art]

Hi, I'm new here and I would like to share my new philosophical view that I initially call as "Rocket's Theory". Hopefully people here will be accomodating to new ideas.

 

I perceive that to define our existing Present universe (E=mc^2), there is the need to incorporate 3 more dimensional 'realities.' But these must be perceived from the observer's viewpoint within the Singularity, where past, present and future gets blurred. We will follow 4 perceived realities that interlink one with another, and to perceive these other three parts are necessary to define one part (our Present existing physical universe).

 

The first is what I would term as Ideal Past, wherein it incorporated our classics, myths, legends, glories that we put into our memory. This reality is implosive, centripetal, that’s why I will have it in squareroot. The pattern of Ideal Past will be:

 

E=mass times square root of c^2

 

The Ideal Past will constitute the rest mass of the Present E=mc^2 which is expansive, centrifugal by nature. The patterns of the Ideal Past is necessary to create our Present. Our Present is the E=mc^2, where:

 

E = mass times c(rest mass) times c(observer-relative)

 

Then the third reality, in which we are about to enter, will be the Ideal Future, which, like the Ideal Past, is implosive, centripetal in nature. Here I will assign a third powerful unit, c alpha=Awareness and the observer now becomes aware. The “c” in E=mc^2 relative to the observer is now differentiated. There is an observer who is “unaware”, and an observer who is “aware”. Such makes a big difference and should be considered. The Awareness is acquired after the knowledge from the Ideal Past is revealed, extracted from Present, then transported as quantified knowledge for the Ideal Future. Being implosive, centripetal, the pattern of Ideal Future will be:

 

E = mass times cuberoot of c(rest mass) times c alpha(Awareness) times c (observer-relative-Aware).

 

Then, we will proceed to what I term as the Parallel Present, which is the parallel dimension to our Present, and it is also centrifugal, expansive in nature. The equation for Parallel Present will also be E=mc^2, but this time incorporating with it the powerful 3rd force of Awareness and the Ideal Future becoming its rest mass (cuberoot of c^3), and eventually integrated as new data for the Parallel Present:

 

E=mass times c(rest mass from Ideal Future cuberoot c^3) times c alpha(observer-relative-Aware)

 

The Parallel Present, similarly as the Present, both being centrifugal, expansive dimensions, are like catalysts for the expansion of our Universe.

 

 

The new c alpha(Awareness) is powerful enough to transform the Future we are about to enter, into an Ideal one. And when such time comes, the Aware Ones (as we choose to be 'Aware') would be highly able to propel such energy into technologies as interstellar and interdimensional, or time travel, free energy, ESP with our highly Evolved Consciousness by then.

 

The 'blueprint' for Ideal Future would by then be E=mc^3. This profound addition c alpha=Awareness would most likely manifest physically with one's evolution like additional strand DNA, extra sensory perception, highly advanced technology, etc. This is the era of Ideal Future, in which we are about to enter for our actual Future when we choose to.

 

Actually, it first started as my painting, until eventually I prodded myself to translate it tangibly through this. You may see my visual presentation of the theory at my 360.yahoo homepage when clicking my username.

 

This is also consistent with my 'rocket's philosophy' that 'Consciousness is the source of gravity', in which I also posted in another forum 3 years ago (I conceptualized last 2000 in a chatroom). This is also posted in my homepage blog.

 

Also I did not contradict Einstein's formula, but rather enhanced it.

[rocket art]

When I said c (rest mass) what I meant was the lightspeed from rest mass. Hope to hear from individuals here regarding my Theory. I purposely put it on the philosophy section because it's a new idea that I eventually conceptualized, and so I present it for open minded discussions.

[rocket art]

We must choose for a better future. Either the probability of humanity manipulated into a future as microchipped slaves to Supercapitalism and totalitarianism by secret fascists, the few who knew the 'secret knowledge' and had succeeded at keeping the rest 'unaware', or we chose to 'envision' and create an Ideal Future where we will be Free, highly evolved, highly advanced because we choose to be 'Aware'.

 

The latter is the Parallel option.

[rocket art]

The views I have been presenting in this thread and on other threads is consistent with what I term as my 'rocket philosophies'* because such are yet found in conventional science books, and to keep my views from stagnating with mainstream scientific views. Although eventually time will finally come when it will lead them to such positions as they probe deeper:

 

* "Consciousness is the source of gravity" -rocket. The insistence on the fictitious graviton will just render the science community stagnant. It is in this position that enabled my theory in peeking through the Singularity as Conscious Energy.

 

* "Since matter cannot exceed lightspeed, it duplicates instead when subjected beyond it" -rocket. That should be the basis of the Everette-Wheeler-Graham Theory, MWI.

 

* My "Rocket Theory" is more sensible than the solipsism of Omega Point Theory (which sounded more like another new religion that worships the self), for I am not referring to the "I" but to Consciousness. It will be sensible even when the era finally occurs as Earth Humanity advances and discovers sentient life forms beyond our planet.

[CraigD]

While I suspect that rocket art’s intentions in this thread to be the development of a useful body of philosophical work combining elements of modern physics, the many worlds interpretation, and the common humanities concept of consciousness, I’m taken aback by the manner in which he appears to just remove various text from their contexts and combine them into his posts. I can only make sense of these posts by interpreting it using many ad-hock, best-guess assumptions of my own, an approach likely to result in miscommunication.

 

I could criticize the assertions of specific quotations, eg:

I perceive that to define our existing Present universe (E=mc^2) …

The equation [math]E=mc^2[/math] describes the relationship between observed mass and energy (potential mechanical work). It does not completely describe the “existing universe” at any point in subjective time.

but don’t think this would be useful. Instead, I’ll join several other members in suggesting that rocket art pursue studies to gain a better understanding of Math and Science, and comment on a few main scientific and philosophical threads I perceive as leading him into what I believe are dead ends to scientific, philosophical, and artistic progress.

• Awareness
  IMHO, used outside of practical context (eg: “Alice is unconscious. She has no awareness of her surroundings, so cannot respond to instructions”), the term awareness is rarely defined sufficiently for us to be confident that it describes an objectively real thing. Although archaic science hypothesized a model of reality in which visible, “gross matter” is animated by “subtle matter”, of which “awareness” may be considered one of many attributes, increased understanding of physical reality has, I believe, led to the most reasonable conclusion that such models are incorrect. Awareness is not a fundamental quality of reality, but a convenient description of the behavior of interacting systems such as biological organisms and, potentially, “artificially intelligent” algorithmic processes.
   
  Although both the Copenhagen and the many worlds interpretation of quantum physics commonly lead people to conclude that the act of observation is of fundamental significance to reality, I believe that progress in physics is leading to a growing rejection of this conclusion in favor of the view that observation is itself the result of the interaction of particles, and that the act observation is not a physically significant event, but related to the amount of information available to the specific ensemble of particles termed “the observer”.
   
  

• "Since matter cannot exceed lightspeed, it duplicates instead when subjected beyond it"

  I believe this statement indicates an inappropriate application of real-world intuition to the realm of fermions traveling near the speed of light. In the real world, we often encounter situation in which objects are briefly subjected to “forbidden condition” and undergo dramatic transformations, such as compressed objects breaking, objects exceeding the speed of sound, and light of a particular frequency being emitted by atoms of material of a higher refractive index than their surrounding when charged passes throught it (Cherenkov radiation). There is not to my knowledge any testable theoretical prediction that any particle can exceed the speed of light in vacuum ©, even one in which the particle is duplicated in a parallel world.
   
  
• Stagnation of scientific thought
  Though not directly stated, I’m of the impression that rocket art considers the scientific community to be intellectually stagnant. While there are certainly science professionals, academics, and enthusiasts who fit this description, I don’t think it accurately describes the whole scientific community.
   
  The scientific literature is vast, and requires significant study to read. Speculation beyond that which can currently be experimentally falsified, and thus outside of the strict boundaries of scientific literature, is larger still. Until one is well acquainted with this literature – either through direct study, or through discussion, in-person or via forums such as hypography, I think conclusions about the state of scientific thought are premature.
  

[rocket art]

Awareness is not a fundamental quality of reality, but a convenient description of the behavior of interacting systems such as biological organisms and, potentially, “artificially intelligent” algorithmic processes.

 

Consciousness is the fundamental quality in our sentient perspective of reality. Even an inanimate stone may be 'conscious' by itself by behaving just as it is, a hard, heavy object. A photon is 'conscious' to behave both as particle and wave. It is Awareness that's the apex that our comprehension must strive forward to. a state of Awareness is to achieve knowledge beyond the existing 'quality of reality.' It is in the pursuit of Awareness that would enable us to evolve beyond our present state, i.e. Evolution of Consciousness. Hence such powerful aspect I assigned with the highest unit one could achive in this physical dimension, a new unit c alpha =Awareness.

 

I believe that progress in physics is leading to a growing rejection of this conclusion in favor of the view that observation is itself the result of the interaction of particles, and that the act observation is not a physically significant event, but related to the amount of information available to the specific ensemble of particles termed “the observer”.

 

Beyond the phenomenon of observation, the role of 'consequences' should have been considered. Such 'consequences' are what you referred to as " related to the amount of information available to the specific ensemble of particles", but not the intangible Consciousness of the 'observer' himself/herself. The most one could tangibly offer for an experiment demanding 'objectivity' to the endeavor even to the observer, is the observer's intent of keeping it objective, which in itself is a bias to objectivity.

 

I believe this statement indicates an inappropriate application of real-world intuition to the realm of fermions traveling near the speed of light.

 

My Rocket Theory is not referring to particles traveling near the speed of light, but to the state of Conscious Energy beyond the speed of light. It has exceeded beyond the limits of physicialities and towards the Higher Realm of state of Energy. Relying with the realm of fermions only may be inappropriate.

 

There is not to my knowledge any testable theoretical prediction that any particle can exceed the speed of light in vacuum ©, even one in which the particle is duplicated in a parallel world.

Then, just as Science had done over and again, the tools may need uplifiting. The reliance that I could attest will be my consistency in dealing with my theory. In fact, I had not contradicted Einstein's E=mc^2, but rather enhanced it.

 

 

Stagnation of scientific thought

Though not directly stated, I’m of the impression that rocket art considers the scientific community to be intellectually stagnant.

 

I'm not referring to the scientific community being intellectually stagnant, but rather to the tools, formulas, reliant only to existing paradigms that my Rocket Theory prefers to soar beyond the limits it imposes. It is not the carpenter, but rather the the carpentry tools. But the Conscious carpenter need not rely on the paradigm that only his tangible tools matter to such endeavor, and needs to be reminded that the main endeavor of such construction is the interpretation of a plan made tangible by blueprints from the otherwise intangible realms that a Conscious designer had plucked from and interpreted into a tangible aesthetic design for the building.

 

The equation describes the relationship between observed mass and energy (potential mechanical work). It does not completely describe the “existing universe” at any point in subjective time.

 

Yes, I did agree that it does not completely define, which is why I said 'to define', and I even propose a new formula for incorporating Awareness to the Parallel Present from the 'existing Present, because the equation E=mc^2 does not 'completely describe.'

[rocket art]

I'm posting the image painting of my "Rocket Theory". It started as my painting from a series of poems and small paintings inside a box I entitled "Contents in a Box of Patterns", until I decided to translate it as equation based on Einstein's E=mc^2. Generally the Essence of my view is incorporated here, however I would want to discuss more detailed aspects because I believe the implications of my hypothesis can actually be made practical and tangible, and could enter into areas we have yet to dwell, such as ESP, highly advanced technologies, etc . I wanted to discuss (based on E=mc^2) with members of scienceforums.com like the consequences to mass, the variability of c other than the constant unit based in a vacuum, the role of gravity, etc...

 

 

[InfiniteNow]

That's nice. Did your parents hang it on the refridgerator?

[rocket art]

It's a small acrylic painting, about 6" x 6" tied inside a box of other equally small paintings (my visual arts training was informal, I just attended a painting workshop that lasted a few day sessions and maybe that's why you commented at my small work that way, but at least a 20 x22" landscape oil painting I had was printed on a calendar, and another included in an annual art book). An inventor friend of mine understood it and was able to complete his formula with it (I shared it to him years before I attempted to put the proposed equations).

[CraigD]

It's a small acrylic painting, about 6" x 6" tied inside a box of other equally small paintings

I like the small painting. Even reproduced as a small jpeg, I get a sense of swirly depth from it. I’d like to see the whole work it’s a part of, rocket art :).

 

I assume the text isn’t part of the physical piece, but added to the digitized image. You might consider adding it by printing on transparent stock (eg: 3M CG6000). Equations look more beautiful, to me, using traditional nomenclature, eg:[math]E = m\sqrt[3]{c^3} \cdot c[/math]. Any latex renderer – hypography’s (see 6457), or one of my favorites, the “practice box” of mimetextutorial.html – can do it, though hand lettering is prettiest and most nuanced.

 

That said, I still can’t make any sense out of “Rocket Theory” – that is, I can’t make use of any of its equations, other than [math]E = mc^2[/math], to make an experimental prediction or a useful calculation. [math]E = mc[/math] or [math]E = mc^3[/math] makes no sense – the units aren’t even correct. The phrase “parallel dimension” (while commonly used as a synonym of the more precise, but still inprecise “parallel world”), is a mathematical absurdity – by definition, dimensions are orthogonal, not parallel. The terms “centrifugal” and “centripetal” imply circular motion, so are meaningless in a space-time of less than 2 spatial dimensions – I can’t see how the adjectives can be meaningfully applied to a single dimension, as in “… the parallel dimension to our Present, and it is also centrifugal …”.

 

Simply writing [math]c_{\mathrm{alpha}} = \mathrm{awareness}[/math], then multiplying it by mass or another fundamental physical quantity in some equation, isn’t, in a way any physics user in my experience could recognize, meaningful. It’s not, in any sensible mathematical formalism, the same thing as saying “Alice is aware of a mass” or “Bob is aware of the speed of light”. You can’t use it, as far as I’ve seen, to make a single physical prediction.

 

This is only a partial list of the language I’m unable to make sense of in your posts.

 

You say

Also I did not contradict Einstein's formula, but rather enhanced it.

but to enhance a theory such as Einstein's, which predicts and describes physical reality, the added formalism must also predict and describe physical reality. I’ve seen no evidence that “Rocket Theory” does so.

[rocket art]

Thank you for the comments and advice, including the valuable use of latex, in which I'm in the process of learning.

 

The painting is part of a series of about 15 small paintings with corresponding poems tied and interlinked with each other in which I entitled "Contents in a Box of Patterns." They were inspired by the intricate geometric patterns woven by indigenous peoples in our place (I'm in Davao City, south of Phils.). In stricter sense, the women that create these geometric designed woven garments (made from abaca fibers) are also called dreamweavers because they dream about the patterns first before weaving it into a tangible piece.

 

My artwork is now kept with me, many people over here are not that interested about such efforts anyway. Although it would be interesting to have other possibilities at presenting it to others and making it known. I probed beyond the complexities in the country and it seemed through span of time the country I'm in had been dominated complexly by questionable interests that infilitrate the institutions, especially on education, that we're not really taught how to build a nation, with our own culture, or dealing with real issues of individuals, but just honed to be useful commodities for the economic machinery, which I find contemptous. These issues may be part of the greater aspects involved with my philosophies regarding the artwork.

 

Now back to the main topic.

 

That said, I still can’t make any sense out of “Rocket Theory” – that is, I can’t make use of any of its equations, other than [math]E = mc^2[/math], to make an experimental prediction or a useful calculation. [math]E = mc[/math] or [math]E = mc^3[/math] makes no sense – the units aren’t even correct.

 

Energy may as well be perceived as Infinetisimal, rather than dependent on equations. Previously people once taught Energy to be just 'potential' or kinetic' but those were obviously not enough to define it. With the advent of zero point technology the measurement on Energy had become truly vast, and that's not even enough because the Energy that makes sentient beings alive are even beyond present comprehension.

 

 

The phrase “parallel dimension” (while commonly used as a synonym of the more precise, but still inprecise “parallel world”), is a mathematical absurdity – by definition, dimensions are orthogonal, not parallel. The terms “centrifugal” and “centripetal” imply circular motion, so are meaningless in a space-time of less than 2 spatial dimensions – I can’t see how the adjectives can be meaningfully applied to a single dimension, as in “… the parallel dimension to our Present, and it is also centrifugal …”.

 

The parallel 'dimension' I had referred to may be referred to as extending beyond, yet similarly patterned to another orthogonal dimension, it's more like two similar orthogonal patterns of dimensions existing parallel with each other, except that the observer of these patterns react in different ways, where one reacts as an 'aware' observer, and the other as 'unaware'. Perhaps we could state that there is a dimension where one opened a cookie jar, and another dimension where one didn't open it. I also perceive that tracing the illustrative silver line that traveled from "Ideal Past-to-Ideal Present-to-Ideal Future-to-Parallel Present" may be perceived like a mobius strip.

 

The 'centrifugal' and 'centripetal' is the attempt I refer on differentiating between the known (i.e. Past, memories, knowledge) being centripetal, implosive; and the yet known (visions, mysteries, decisions) as centrifugal, expansive.

 

Do these somehow made progress on our communication?

 

Simply writing [math]c_{\mathrm{alpha}} = \mathrm{awareness}[/math], then multiplying it by mass or another fundamental physical quantity in some equation, isn’t, in a way any physics user in my experience could recognize, meaningful. It’s not, in any sensible mathematical formalism, the same thing as saying “Alice is aware of a mass” or “Bob is aware of the speed of light”. You can’t use it, as far as I’ve seen, to make a single physical prediction.

 

But the consequences that affect the environment when Alice and Bob are aware, over when they weren't would be very distinct, and will be translated to the physical outcome . If in the Present time a strip of land exists, there's isn't a laboratory standing there if Alice and Bob don't know anything about mass or speed. This may be different to a 'Parallel' Present with the 'pattern' of strip of land still existing, but with a laboratory built atop it because Alice and Bob knew about mass and lightspeed.

 

You say but to enhance a theory such as Einstein's, which predicts and describes physical reality, the added formalism must also predict and describe physical reality. I’ve seen no evidence that “Rocket Theory” does so.

 

I guess my 'Theory' had perceived beyond the predictable E=mc^2, then based on its predictable formulas, attempts to predict the other yet known dimensions (Ideal Future, Parallel Present) based on the given units from the Present E=mc^2, and the profound patterns (i.e. sacred geometry, fibonacci series, implosive technology, classical philosphies, stuffs that we hadn't tackled, or vast knowledge once thriving but eventually supressed, until recently) from Ideal Past in which the Present is yet aware of. And being 'Aware' of it would free us from the predicted patterns of a predicted future manipulated by those who were 'aware' (but maliciously selfish) that await to imprison us if we remain unaware of these knowledge that otherwise will free us. I think we also start to incoporate holistic views in dealing with such issues, and I guess dealing it with the fusion of science and art may be one endeavor we are yet to be 'aware' of, and may be necessary because of the great challenge of the future unfolding before us.

[rocket art]

Ideal Past

 

May as well discuss about my idea detail by detail. We may begin with my concept on the Ideal Past:

 

Based on Einstein's formula, I assigned it as:

[math]E = m\sqrt[]{c^2}[/math]

 

I used the squareroot because I perceived of the Ideal Past as implosive, contained within our memory. Encoded within such dimension are the profound datas that acquired itsef with the term "Ideal." such profound datas may be in synchronicity with the implosive nature of the Ideal Past, which may be perceived as intuitive, inner knowledge that created such profoundness but was eventually regarded by the expansive nature of the Present as 'myth, legends, fantasies'. Such inner knowledge of Ideal Past, being implosive in nature, eventually succumbed to the expansive, reason and logic based nature as our space-time existence approaches the Present. Hence, with the advent of the victor being the ones rewriting history, such implosive knowledge were eventually forgotten, supressed, or waiting to be revealed.

 

But then, I assigned [math]\sqrt{c^2}[/math] as the unit for rest mass of the Present instead, which became the basis for the unit of c in E=mc^2. Such unit had incorporated the data (Awareness) embedded within rest mass, from within nature's secrets waiting to be unlocked.

 

This data embedded within nature may be made tangible with evolution and mutation that one observes, just as primeval flora that used to be fern-like varieties had evolved with more complex and intricate vegetations. These data may be manifestations of more complex geometric patterns, but these patterns primarily follow basic structures, and ultimately follow the grand composition of the Universe itself. In the Ideal Past, such knowledge were then known, and it may be oftentimes referred to as 'sacred geometry'.

 

Such inner, implosive knowledge that had blossomed in the Ideal Past but dismissed by the Present as mere myths, legends or fantasies, may be revealed again as Humanity inevitably must gain knowledge. Despite obstacles and ignorance, such Awareness must then be known for all Humanity to collectively achieve a new vision of Ideal Future, otherwise such would only succumb to a Future that our state of 'unawareness' may deserve.

 

After the topic of Ideal Past will be thouroughly discussed and eventually resolved, we may proceed with the discussion on the Present, and so on.

[InfiniteNow]

Remember, my friend... it's always right now. It's never not now. That's the ideal.

 

 

Just thought surfing with you. :Waldo:

[rocket art]

When I mentioned the "Ideal", I was referring to the 'patterns', memories, imprints that make up everything and up to the synchronicity of the Universe. The 'Ideal" may be different from the actual, but rather it acts like basic tools that we could use for our own benefit rather than as means to bound or control. The "Ideal" that I'm referring to is far more profound than materialistic perspectives that bug social perspectives, or more truthful than religions that cause divisiveness or strife. Freedom is also an Ideal, so does Justice, etc.

 

Such profoundness from the Ideal Past had been achieved such that it was perceived as myths or legends, by the expansive nature of the Present. I am being consistent with my views, and as I mentioned in the other thread that the concept of Consciousness may extend beyond our sentient selves. My mentioning of the imploding Ideal Past and expanding of Present may be understood with the inhaling and exhaling of our Conscious Universe.

 

Therefore this view of Conscious Universe may agree with your mentioning that that the "ideal" is 'right now' and not the 'not now.' It is simply, yet profoundly, an actual process of breathing Life.

[InfiniteNow]

You know, I really hope that it's your method of presentation, because frankly, I've had some "far out" thoughts and I have no idea what you're talking about. Have you considered that your experience is just that? Yours...

 

What would be the top three points you would hope a novice would take away from a dialogue with you? Can you limit each point to a single sentence?

[rocket art]

What would be the top three points you would hope a novice would take away from a dialogue with you?

 

Will you pls state more in detail what this means?

[InfiniteNow]

Will you pls state more in detail what this means?

 

When you are discussing your ideas, the parallel dimension and ideal future, the rocket theory, etc... with someone who has never encountered your ideas previously, what would you hope that individual would take away from the conversation? What top three points, preferably limited to single sentences, should they walk away from that dialogue with you in order for you to classify them with the descriptor "understanding?"