Is the modeler the Model?

In Erik Andrulis’ (a life-scientist) article “The Modeler is the Model”, I made the following comments (http://erikandrulis.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/the-modeler-is-the-model-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-508 ).

 

If I were 15 years old, my understanding of the life theory (including yours) is as follow:

 

1. Life is the highest expression (manifestation, via self-similarity transformations) of the Nature laws.

 

2. The Nature laws are eternal, life (species) is immortal. The immortality of life is sustained with a music-chair games (having three chairs, parent, kids and species).  This music-chair game forms a spectrum of a continuous cyclical, gyrating system. As life needs three music-chairs, the rock bottom elementary particles “must” also need 3 “generations”.

 

3. Intelligence is the highest expression of life-force.  “So, the theory models the reality that you/I know: you/I cycle ions, water, oxides, and organic, phosphoric matter, nitrogenous, sulfury, genomic, cellular matter through your/my body to read/write this line of text. And so, with the theory, I am modeling me.  I am modeling you.”  Indeed, all these were known zillion years ago by life (species). The “Sexevolution — The Grand Design (rise of Intelligence), Species Intelligence” at (http://sexevolution.wikia.com/wiki/Sexevolution_Wiki ) discussed them all.

 

Life is more than (DNA/protein) and (reproduction/metabolism). Life is about eternal and immortality, about consciousness and intelligence.

 

Consciousness is about knowing the self from the other. Immortality is about the music-chairs among “individuals”. That is, consciousness/immortality is the two sides of the same coin, all about “individuality”. Even identical twins are distinguishable two individuals. The whole business of “life” is to identify “individuals”.

 

There is a four color theorem  —- with “4 and only 4” colors, we can produce zillion (infinite) distinguishable balls. Every “individual” life has 4 colors (A, G, T, C).

 

Yet, a “single” life is not the best (or easiest) way to reach the immortality. The “cloning” needs a fifth color to identify the new individual.

 

There is a “seven” color theorem —- with “7 and only 7” colors, we can produce zillion (infinite) distinguishable torus (donuts).  “Cloning” needs to punch a “hole” on the “ball”. Most high level lives have a structure as a topological donut (with digesting track and sex tracks).  Gyre is a dynamic representation of a topological torus, and it can sweep out a topological sphere.

 

Identifying zillion “individuals” is the task of linguistics, and the article “Metaphysics of Linguistics (http://www.chinese-word-roots.org/cwr018.htm )” has a detailed description on this.

 

Erik Andrulis replied, “I, the center of the universe. I is you. I is all. I is the universe. “

 

These are not only the center of philosophy but must be the foundation of physics laws. And, indeed, they are the base of the final physics laws. For a life-scientist, your insight on such a deep philosophical thought is truly extraordinary. I would definitely like to discuss this great issue with you more in the future.

 

But, your saying, “Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of being and the world…. Metaphysics attempts to answer two basic questions in the broadest possible terms: ‘What is there?’ and‘What is it like?’” is wrong.

 

 “‘What is there?’ and ‘What is it like?’” are the tasks for physics. Metaphysics deals the issue of “why” the physics laws are there.

 

Many things in Wikipedia are wrong. While many of those issues are debatable, one is simply arithmetic, decidable by any 8th grader with a piece of paper and a pencil.  In Wikipedia, it says that the fine-structure constant [(α, Alpha = 1/137.03599…), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant ] cannot be derived with any physics equation.

 

Please get your pencil and a piece of paper to calculate the following equation.

 

Beta = 1/alpha = 64 ( 1 + first order sharing + sum of the higher order sharing)

        = 64 (1 + 1/Cos A(2) + .00065737 + …) = 137.03599…

 

A(2) = 28.743 “degrees” is the Weinberg angle (θW ), the most important quantum parameter in the Standard Model.

 

The sum of the higher order sharing = 2(1/48)[(1/64) + (1/2)(1/64)^2 + …+(1/n)(1/64)^n +…] = .00065737 + …

 

Erik Andrulis  replied, “Myself to one of those thing is possible in practice but impossible in theory.”

 

Wrong, absolutely wrong.  The “indivisibility (http://www.prequark.org/Create.htm )” is the rock bottom “theoretical” base for both mathematics and physics (that is, “I is all”). Although the totality is indivisible, there are still right and wrong. 

 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Is the modeler the Model?

  1. Pingback: Nature’s master-key cuts out SUSY the undead | The Great Vindications

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s