THE METAPHYSICAL CRITIQUE (Hyper-Criticism)

AcademicRoom (unlike Academia.edu) is once again down for technical maintenance. So, here is another significant paper that may not be available on your favorite site.

THE METAPHYSICAL CRITIQUE


Analyzing specific details, it is possible to reach the idea that an entire context is compromised.

What if, for example, fourth-dimensional firefighters are the only intellectuals in that world?

Surprising though this assumption seems, it seems to follow from these further details:

*A wider variety of phenomena exist in the 4-d world.

*Many of these phenomena exist in isometric space (condensed information).

*The properties that are harmful for these objects and persons would be more various.

*The 'firefighters' would have to know about isometric space.

*The firefighters would be the only ones who would need to be experts in isometric space.

*The firefighters would also serve the role of therapists and whores, because of their expertise, and the wide array of phenomena they deal with.

Additionally, what might be said about the connection between the 3-d and 4-d is that the difference, the key difference in dimensions is not just time, but the presence or absence of isometric space.

This follows from the idea that more phenomena exist in the 4th dimension, which requires an isometric lattice to support condensed information.

Thus, in an advanced interpretation, the biggest critique of 3-d physics is that Einstein's relativity is in fact an idea of 4-d isometric space in which within the 3-d various forms of information are failing.

For example, string theory may be attempting to 'put out' the sun.

Black holes may represent Aristotle's anger, amounting to a lack of categorical representation in physics, i.e. the idea that nothing can be contained by matter, because matter does not contain categories.

Gravity waves, which were recently discovered, may be an attempt to develop a lattice between failed information (black holes) and relevant information (the life of the observer and the institution of physics, and by extension isometry).

It significantly happens that the new discipline of Omni-Science called categorical deduction is largely isometric.

I have hints of new physics principles

Cite Nathan Coppedge if you re-use any of these ideas. If you want a more official answer, you will have to wait for my controversial encyclopedia volume on physics, which won't be due out for perhaps ten years. Actually: REVISION, the 78 Binary Laws has been published as an Article HERE. See also a different related article, The Physics: 232 Laws.

I am printing this material with the knowledge that it is more difficult to buy a book than---for some prodigious individuals---to immediately and impromptu develop equations based on the merest hint.

So here is my greatest feat of physics genius so far, by conventional standards. The method is still further developed when a method of categorical deduction is applied, yielding (currently) seventy-eight 'binary laws'.

All statements refer to forms of matter or energy, as might be present in physics equations.

THE BASIS FOR THE BINARY LAWS OF PHYSICS

Interaction is relative and gradual
Size is quantum and neutral
Energy is rational and finite
Mass is always definite and infinite
Excess is exceptional and relative
Mergence is neutral and correlative
Newness is quantum and gradual
Projection is redundant and coherent
Surface is gradual and redundant
Source is quantum and coherent
Guidance is finite and definite
Association is infinite and rational


The 78 Binary Laws (not repeated here, but based on the above) were inspired by an article in the New York Times, raising questions about contemporary physics in the context of Einstein's Relativity and the growing uncertainty about the true nature of black holes, e.g. is there a firewall effect preventing us from knowing about other universes, is the universe genuinely matter-neutral, and what is the fate of quantum information, etc.