Space Forum / Shuttle / August 2005

Here you go!  what are the exact contents of einstein oil?

Can anybody answer that question correctly?

After your finished contemplating the answers to those two
questions this ponder on this for a while and reply.

Electromagnetic flux is what the extraterrestrial UFOs use for
navigation, armor, propagation and stealth. The strength of
electromagnetic field used is so high that scientists wondered what was
the technology behind such endless and high intensity electromagnetic
force fields in these space modules.

Now scientists are getting early indication of what is behind these
advanced alien ships in obtaining the electromagnetic force fields. The
Physical Universe is connected with the underlying Hyperspace by some
sparsely distributed particle size small windows called Fermions. These
Fermions literally connect our universe with the 5-D Hyperspace.

The suction from the Hyperspace through the Fermions create the gravity
and the electromagnetic force fields. The Fermions exist in 5-D and
hence are virtual in 3-D space of our physical Universe. These Fermions
are the opening to the Hyperspace from the 3-D space of our Physical
Universe. The extraterrestrial UFOs can easily detect these Fermions
since the alien space ships are also real in 5-D Hyperspace and virtual
in 3-D space. They use the Fermions to tap the suction from the
Hyperspace and divert the electromagnetic force fields towards its
propagation, navigation, stealth and armor engines.

This really provides the extraterrestrial UFOs the endless source of
electromagnetic force fields of immense intensity. Some space agencies
have tried using super-cooled superconductors to create the
electromagnetic force fields but got baffled at the result. Now it is
clear to the scientists that the main source of electromagnetic energy
is not the superconductor but the Fermions that overlap the Physical
Universe and Hyperspace and connect the two through billions and
billions of microscopic openings.

The extraterrestrial flight patterns show that the UFOs maintain steady
flight navigation and propagation. They can accelerate and decelerate
in a manner as if an endless electric motor with source energy supply
is connected to them. What really happens is that the Fermions are
distributed all over the Universe in trillions and the UFOs can connect
to them all the time.

The mechanism works like cell phone or mobile phone technologies. One
set of Fermions hand over the control to next set of Fermions as the
UFO propagate and navigate forward in a 3-D space of the physical
universe. In remote areas, cell phone companies install something
called micro cells that act as relay mechanism. The extraterrestrial
UFOs install artificial Fermions in areas where natural Fermions are
not available. This provides the UFOs the propagation and navigation in
remote areas like under earths crust and so on.

I'm falling in love with Fermions.

And two typos in there too. I'm getting sloppy.

Ya know, most won't even consider an idea unless it has
attached to it a well-titled name, and lots of charts, graphs
and incomprehensible strings of equations.

Then it's 'science'. Their faith in scientific authority is
so deep that the notion of thinking for yourself is
considered kookish.

I've 'ciphered this out. The only way to convince others
is through demonstrations.   I've decided the real world system
I'll use as a demonstration will be the stock market. Why?
Because it's the very easiest discipline for this as all the
data is already collected nice and neat on 2d charts.
Plus, the internet has created very natural behavior in the
markets, and it's easy to post predictions in advance
that anyone can easily verify. Even play along with once
they learn to trust the predictions.

And because I'll make lots of dough in the process~

A couple of months or so I'll be ready to quit my job
and give full time trading a go. I expect to be able
to do 20% a week, every week, like clockwork.

The trading system already has tested out that well. Even
And while trading when busy at work with only an internet
cell phone and tiny little bitty charts to work with.

I know I can do it, and I'll brag no end. Then, and only
then, well anyone take a serious look.

Jonathan

s

Your question seems to be "what causes a mountain" and
"what methods or sciences should be applied to finding
the answer".  Since this is part of a thread where I
claim any question can be answered by one theory
let's see if I can answer these questions using this unified
theory. While barely knowing a thing about geology aside
from how it's spelled.

You seem to want to answer that question in classical
reductionist terms, which would be what variables
are involved in mountain creation.

Complexity science does the opposite. It looks
at the output first in order to understand the
components.

The first thing I would do is ask the following question.
What are the two opposite extremes in possibility
for a typical mountain?   What are the static and chaotic
realms?  Which takes the form of convergent and divergent
paths in mountain building. Analogous to a cloud returning to
either its liquid or gaseous forms. In this case I suppose the two
opposite extremes are respectively motion/plate movement,
and light/heat.

If a mountain has the tendency to quickly /converge/
to a static or simple state, to simple motion, then the science
one would apply would be that suitable for
static realms.  Particle physics, or the methods
of geology that deal in simple large scale mechanics.

If a mountain tends to quickly /diverge/ to a chaotic
form, to randomly fill the available space, then the science
needed would be that which is appropriate to
the chaotic realm. Quantum or statistical mechanics, or
appropriate geological methods for random diffusive systems.

However, even a complete novice like me, knows that
many mountains have a strong tendency to be /persistent/.
Persistently between it's own extremes in possibility.
Armed with only that very limited observation, I can
deduce that neither of the above types of geological methods
will be able to provide a complete or satisfactory answer
to every type of mountain, only the simplest types.

Because a system that is persistently poised at the
threshold between subcritcal and supercritical
behavior, diverging or converging paths, is modeled by a
power law distribution of events. Like an earthquake, a
few very large ones followed by countless little ones.
See here please.
http://www.calresco.org/sos/sosfaq.htm#3.6

Which also, and this is no small point, is the behavior that
extinction and speciation follow....life!

So you're not going to find the answer through standard
geological methods if the object of study follows a power
law distribution of events. The reason is simple, such
a self organized system is comprised of components
that are at the edge. That are intractably entangled with
each other. In short, the /components/ of a system displaying
power law behavior act chaotically. So looking at them in detail
does not help much!  It's like trying to decipher exactly when a
water molecule transitions to air and back again when
part of a cloud.  You'll go nuts~

Since some mountain building follows a power law, you cannot
understand that type by moving /down/ in scale to its parts. You have
to move ....up....in scale to understand self organized
systems.  You have to scale up to the next emergent
level When dealing with edge systems.

To decide which methods to use, the question
becomes what is the next emergent level of
organization above geology?

It is life.

So the science needed to understand complex mountains would
be derived from biology not geology. Sounds crazy eh?

In brief here is the mathematics, in abstract
form, for living systems.
http://www.calresco.org/sos/sosfaq.htm

Let's see if this approach helps define the way mountains are formed.
Since I've concluded that life explains the most complex mountains, then
my claim in the unified theory that......

       "The dynamic attractor of self-organization or evolution occurs
              at the phase transition between light and motion."

...holds for such complex mountains.

Let's see if I can reconstruct the basics, in a very abstract
form, of mountain building from this universal  law of organization.

            "As a phase transition between light and motion."

So, converting the abstract forms of light and motion
to this specific problem would.take the form of
light/energy and motion/momentum. Or between
heat and plate movement.

You tell me if this works.

There should be three broad categories of mountains.

The first two should reflect when either heat or motion dominates.
When the system is not at the transition between the two.

The third type should be when at the edge.

When the static attractor of motion dominates and heat is not a primary
factor, the results should reflect convergent or static, simple behavior.
Slow to form, predictable, long lived, and uniform.. Each component
of such a mountain would be strongly connected  to adjacent components.
It should behave as a solid as the component connectivity is very high.
The correspondence of its form to that of the earth would be
related to its level of motion. Low enough it would take the
form of the earth.

When the chaotic attractor of heat dominates, and motion is not
a primary variable, the results should reflect divergent or chaotic behavior.
Sudden formation, unpredictable and short lived.
It should behave as a gas, where the components have very low
connectivity to each other. The correspondence of its form to
that of the atmosphere would be related to its level of heat.
High enough it would take the form of a gas.

An edge state is when both heat and motion are at simultaneous maximums
without either dominating. This would be the most dynamic, volatile and
locally unpredictable.  But would have the unique property of being
predictable at large scales and follow power law or earthquake like
dynamics.  So such mountains should be the most common, the
youngest, largest and most rugged. With intermediate connectivity, where
each creation is unique and highly complex, yet self similar across scale.
Its correspondence in form would not be relative to either extreme of
earth or atmosphere. But to other power law systems. It's shape would
resemble, for instance, a lightning bolt. Jagged and energetic.

Let me know if these three broad and abstract categories
corresponds somewhat to your knowledge of mountain building.
If not /you/ should adjust accordingly until it does <g>

Nope, we're talking connectivity. To quote the above page
on self-organizing or evolving systems.....

5.7 How does connectivity affect landscape shape?

"In general the higher the connectivity the more rugged the landscape becomes.
Simply connected landscapes have a single peak, a change to one parameter
has little effect on the others."
http://www.calresco.org/sos/sosfaq.htm#5.7

They're talking about fitness landscapes, but it's much
the same thing, only at a higher level of complexity.
Which only means easier to see and understand.

Or in other words....
Low connectivity landscapes would be like resting
your meteor on a fluid, doesn't matter much how
dense it is. So the importance of the density
of the meteor decreases as the density of the
landscape goes towards very small or very large.

Right?

So you would have to brush up on thermodynamics
to derive a useful mathematical relationship to
answer your question. Not geology.

You now have the proper first step in answering
that question. And it is life/nature that shows the
way. As with all things.

In summary, the first question to ask for any given
question is whether that system displays convergent
divergent or persistent behavior./relative/ its own opposite
extremes in possibilities. This tells you whether your asking
about chaotic or static part behavior, or emergent system behavior.
Then apply the appropriate methods.  And /re-ask/ and
/re-apply/ each time the scale or perspective changes.
Each time you move up, down or across the causation ladder.

Static, dynamic or chaotic
Physics, thermodynamics or statistics

Einstein, Darwin or Heisenberg

For any given object, you may be applying
any one, or all of the three, of those realms of
science depending on the context. Whether you're
treating that given object as a part or a whole.

        Depending on the observer.

If the question were, how do planets form, then the very
same mountain would be a part, not an emergent feature.
So now the mountain is dealt with as chaotic or static, and the
planet as emergent. Which science is applied for any given
object depends on .....the observer....on the question.
NOT the object.

In any event, you continue scaling /up/ to understand
for an emergent feature, which are the most interesting kinds.
Finally to life and intelligence.  Where these universal
properties are most abundant and easiest to see.
For this paradigm holds for your own thoughts, so
mountain building can be deduced from the way in
which an idea forms.

As a phase transition between knowledge and dreams.

The static and chaotic. When in an unstable equilibrium
with each other, when both are at simultaneous maximums
without either dominating, the best ideas are formed.

And finally you'll conclude that the entire universe is understood
from searching within. Not 'counting' the world outside.

By emergent creations formed by a persistent and unstable
equilibrium between static and chaotic forms.

Nothing in the universe is left out by expanding to
understand, resulting in simplicity and the universal.
Reducing to understand leaves out all that is truly
meaningful, emergent creation, and results in confusion
and countless local explanations.

Jonathan

s

Under such

I like Heiswinstein better . . . or Heisensteinwin . . .  of Einwinberg
. . .  or . . . never mind.

Or we could assign to the unified theory a single value.
Such as;  more than two, but just less than three.