Re: The Grand Unified Theory! C and C Please!

It's what I recognise as "the interface pheonomenon", or it could be
called a scale problem - the scale at which certain laws of
cause-and-effect cease to operate and another set of rules takes over.
For example (getting geological in a simple sort of way) does the crust
*sit on* the mantle, or *float in*  it?  And then what do we do,
really, with the ideas of isostacy when uplift creates erosion, but
erosion creates uplift?

In trying to understand this business of 'floatation' of the crust I
think along simple lines like, "How big does an iron meteorite (say)
have to be before it sinks through the crust instead of just sitting on
top of it?"    We're talking density after all, are we not?  Under such
circumstances the fall-back position, that "it's just a working
hypothesis" is worse than no position, because it obstructs
investigation and promotes fear in those with the intellectual capacity
to address the question(s).  Why should they go out on a risky limb
when there are no credits for doing so, and there are benefits in being
a clever sheep in a dumb flock?

(And the biggie - mass and electricity.)

Questions of hierarchy of scale of cause and effect.  They never seem
to be properly addressed.  In trying to understand geological history
for example, and recognising first-order deformation of the Earth is
the deviation from the spherical (thus implicating rotation - which is
with us every day) how is it there is no attempt from geologists or
geophysicists to recognise this for the second and third-order scale
structures?  And even when the supporting evidence for it is crudely
suggested, ...well, we'd get more response from a lump of wet putty
(over geological time).

Even this simple question of mountains and what makes them, and how so
many people (particularly those in charge of the physics and the
numbers) can go along with the nonsense that they are caused by
orogenesis, when the simplest of observations of landforms militates
against it.  How is it those with their fingers on the numbers buttons
can have such a deficit in the department of sense of proportion and
scale?  And how is it there is such a reluctance to hold consensus to
account, when it promotes obvious nonsense?

That's what I find weird.   But I would like to think that we're at
"the critical point between the static and the chaotic" in addressing
it. There seems to be a very definite dearth of voice here in support
of plate tectonics, compared, say, to a year or so ago.  Stuart's
dropped his moniker and George is just "excuse me" cutting-and-pasting.

Uniting the quantum, classical and living realms.

A phase transition is when a system resides at
the critical point between it's static and chaotic
attractors. Such as a cloud residing at the critical
point between water and air.

To create a Grand Unified Theory we must
find a way to unite all the realms of the universe
into one model of understanding. Uniting the four forces
is not the answer if for no other reason that life, emotions
or ideas would not be explained.

We must unite the realms of quantum motion, classical
motion and Darwinian evolution into one seamless view
explainable within one frame of reference and mathematics.

We must unite Heisenberg, Darwin.and Einstein!

This can be done by replacing a model that examines
the specific details of objects such as matter, light
and life, with a model that uses the ...behavior of
these realms at their phase transitions.
As matter, light and life all experience this behavior.
Which is when they stand poised at the boundary
between it's static and chaotic tendencies or forms.

For example. In a system comprising matter, light
and energy;  matter would reside in the static
attractor basin, while energy defines the opposite extreme
in possibility, the chaotic attractor. When those two are at the
boundary or critical point between each other, when one
can't tell if it's matter or energy....particle or wave...then
light is generated. Light would fill the dynamic attractor
that results from the critical interaction between static and
chaotic states. Much as a cloud is the dynamic attractor that
results from the critical interaction of water and air.

Another example. In a system comprising gravity, classical
motion and cosmic expansion; gravity would reside in the
static attractor basin, while cosmic expansion would
defines the chaotic attractor. When those two are at the
boundary between each other, when one can't tell
if it's contracting or expanding...matter or energy....then
the dynamic attractor of classical motion or inertia
is generated.

These two examples provide the smallest and largest
scale phase transition states in the universe.

They dynamic attractors formed from these two endpoints are
light and motion.

If light and motion form the basis of a new system, where
they respectively fill static and chaotic attractors, what dynamic
attractor would form out of a phase transition between them?

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

Darwinian evolution!

One model can explain the quantum and classical endpoints
in possible motion, while also defining the cause of Darwinian
evolution.  Nothing in the universe is left out.

Heisenberg, Darwin and Einstein merged!

Does observation support this theory?
Does the earth stand poised at the transition point, or
the ideal balance, between light and motion?
This balance is confirmed by the conditions on Venus
and Mars, each testing the limits of this balance.

Does earth define an ideal living potential, and provide the
best examples of Darwinian evolution?

Of course it does.

A direct mathematical relationship between quantum
mechanics, biological evolution and classical motion
now exists.

Jonathan

"An altered look about the hills;
A Tyrian light the village fills;
A wider sunrise in the dawn;
A deeper twilight on the lawn;
A print of a vermilion foot;
A purple finger on the slope;
A flippant fly upon the pane;
A spider at his trade again;
An added strut in chanticleer;
A flower expected everywhere;
An axe shrill singing in the woods;
Fern-odors on untravelled roads,
All this, and more I cannot tell,
A furtive look you know as well,
And Nicodemus' mystery
Receives its annual reply."

By E Dickinson

s

s