The left 7 force

johnreed

Date: 4/22/00

We tend to complexify our physics whenever the descriptions start to fail. Using the mathematics enables us to describe the universe or any imaginary universe that we can invent. Consider classical mechanics. A few laws that combine local momentum and Kepler were enough to lift our technology from nowhere to the dawn of the 20th century. Many persons are not aware of Newton's views as he got older. He often stated that his sytem was a mathematical solution, with no physical counterparts in reality.

Take Bohr's initial Balmer series, black body radiation, hy brid union with classical mechanics. The idea of energy packets are born. The quantum jump and the idea that energy is no longer contiguous. The photon and Heisenberg. All the while we build on our object space view. Here we see a parallel with Ptolemy's rings. Complexification in the math leads to accurate solutions if you work it enough.

You mention statistics as a special case where efficiency has no bearing. But statistics obey the principle of least action almost to a tee, even moreso, than any classical orbit or quantum jump. When we speak of efficiency we can relate it to many different functions. Take two dice with six sides numbered from 1 to 6. We can predict with arbitrary accuracy, depending on the number of trials, the number of times any combination will occur. The dice always provide us the answer we seek. This is called the law of averages but it shows that the system we started with is efficient.

We could take the same two die without any numbers on them and never learn that given enough rolls of the die, all sides will come up the exact same number of times. This is the underlying basis for the law of averages. The physical law is efficient symmetry. To favor one side or the other requires a physical cause, otherwise such a bias is inefficient. The law of averages is a result of the number values we put on the die and the combinations that accrue as a result of the efficiency of the process. So the law of averages is a mathematical idea that is based on a physical event that could care less about the numbers and the law of averages. In the dice rolling frame, nature has no preference. This is a simple example that shows how a mathematical interpretation can be entirely operational and still not directly address the underlying law that causes it. The law of averages with respect to numbers does not speak to its physical cause.

So we have complexified nature by penetrating an atom according to a mathematical formalization of our pre-existing assumption that objects are fundamental. In the case of the die we assume number combinations are fundamental. Imagine that we treat the die as we treat the atom. We smash it to smithereens. Sometimes we get whole numbers. Sometimes we get partial numbers. Given enough trials, if our focus is on number alone, and not on efficiency, we will be able to reconstruct the die in terms of its numbers. The results would also give us its shape. In a two die collision we would interpret the collision in terms of the numbers. We would have to invent quantities if we wanted to attribute a cause to their adhesion. We could have the numbers 6 and 1 dependent on the left 7 force. We could have 5 and 2 dependent on the right center force. When we discover 3 and 4 we could abandon the left and right 7 forces and define the entire force field of the object as 7xyz forces.

We have not discussed light propagation and here I have another main distinction to make. The problem with my view of reality, if it is indeed a problem, is that I don't allow assumptions to go uninvestigated, and generally distrust any generalization until I see no flaws exist that could conceivably cause error.