Posts

Integrated Information Theory (Between Exclusive Points)

Image
Opposite directions: 50% of general contrasting points (between additional observations) remain disprovable when identifying the first law of general thermodynamics: (→ at least one point will avoid all other points ←) being created (+) at some point in the past and destroyed (-) at some point in the futureObserving additional temperatures amounts to empathy, disproving generic nihilism, as amount to the feelings of life itself (as observed between exclusive predictions): (→ A < AB < ABCD < ABCDEFGH ... ←)That is: predicting the future as integrated amounts to two kinds of generic information at unique locations: fiction and non-fiction:will be(including point A)created (+) at some point in the past and destroyed (-) at some point in the futurewill be(including point B)(neither point A)created (+) at some point in the past(nor point A)destroyed (-) at some point in the futureIn summary: zombie thought experiments (solipsisms prioritizingmindlessness using minus itself) remai…

Has everything we observe (including hope) been annihilated by negative integers amounting to zero?

Image
The general consensus (in predictions and observations) seems to be that "everything we observe hasn't been completely annihilated by negative integers amounting to zero". In terms of "scientific journalism": have Alexa repeat "the first law of thermodynamics, disproving generic nihilism" (using these linked photos as the measurement captchas, appealing to "the generic reason and feeling of life itself") Now (according to the myth) "do nothing" and/or freely tell us (in the comments prompt, aka "empty space") a true story, predicting the future while excludingzero and negative one outcomes ...: (→ A < AB < ABCD ←) ... "One may also observe in one's travels to distant countries the feelings of recognition and affiliation that link every human being to every other human being." — Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics 1135a Likewise (to be continued): let's debate one another's copies of The Feeling of Life…

The ethical interpretation of quantum mechanics (aka "additional, inverse squaring")

Image
Additional logic in science (review previous posts) remains provable by "dividing additional tomatoes" (aka): "interpreting predictive square root symbols (Schrödinger's equation) according to the first law of thermodynamics". In other words: math symbols don't create (+) and destroy (-) total potential (+); total potential (what is conserved) disproves mythological math "rules" like 1 apple - 1 planet = the complete annihilation of one apple and one planet amounting to zero apple and zero planet (as predicted and destroyed by The Lord of the Flies, on Netflix!!!) In terms of #stand4humanrights: "doing nothing" (aka generic nihilism) remains disprovable (as observed in "physics" as "scientific journalism"): doctors without borders Please direct an existing amount of monthly financial support in that direction; likewise, identifying what remains true (as Gödel proved) = "believing in everything we observeas ha…

How popular physics does and doesn't work

Image
What I'm referring to as "popular physics" seems to happen like this: elite thinkers write articles and books using more words than they would need, technically, which is to say: popular physics authors appeal to more people by using more combinations of more words when interpreting what Schrödinger suggests in his equation (and in What Is Life?):"The particularly exigent demand is the square root." For example (differentiating between fiction and non-fiction): a common strategy (when popularizing how physicists use square root symbols) is to leverage Richard Feynman's opinion of himself and quantum physics in 1964 (as found on YouTube and in Sean Carroll's recent book Something Deeply Hidden): "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics." In contrast: a scientific introduction would discount solipsism in terms of predictions and observations; for example: refer to a mythical sample size of zero ("predictingnobo…

Identifying and solving a basic problem in physics

Image
In her New Scientist article Studying the universe's origins hints that its beginning has no end (27 Nov 2019) physicist and feminist Chanda Prescod-Weinstein identifies a basic problem in physics:The old story from 1980 or so goes that in the beginning of space and time, space-time exploded out of nothing and then rapidly expanded." "We still don’t have an exact equation to describe the energy that governs inflation. What we have learned, however, is that ... it may be eternal." "Not everyone loves this idea. In the meantime, the search for the right energy equation continues ..." As suggested in this blog's previous posts, solving problems in terms of general, contrasting predictions (identifying the first law of thermodynamics) amounts to a deeper understanding of equations we're already familiar with; namely: Einstein's and Schrödinger's (differentiating between generic priority as singular and directional quantities in alternating, p…

Where to begin (when using scientific notation)

Image
In the previous post (identifying the mathematical physics of energetic things) we differentiated between beginning with potential and beginning with complete annihilation as would amount to nothing, disprovingzero-centric rules (likesquaring negatives as would prioritize zero and negative points. In other words (byanyconsistent definition of "scientific notation" when observing "additional, inverse multiplication, divided by division, like cutting one tomato"): we differentiated between exactly two kinds of opposites amounting to additional, inverse information differentiating between general and directional opposites): differentiating between science and nothingwhat doesn't existwhat existsphysical leftphysical rightcomplete annihilation (-)what is conserved (+)point Apoint Bnothing (-)everything (+)points ABpoints CDnever (-)constant (+)points ABCDpoints EFGHimpossible (-)possible (+)points ABCDEFGHpoints IJKLMNOPthe END of time (-)before (+)points ABCDEFG…