# m5

Ove Aigner Haukenes October 28, 2007
Abstract

1

The miss of the Century

In general, we say that: E = mc2 . One should think that it would be a problem for ’relativity’ to reckon Time as variable, but at the same time use c as a Constant, (since ’c’ contains the second as a unit (cyclic logic). But still, there seems to have been made a blunder of much larger proportions in the Spacedomain of ’relativity’.

1.1

To miss by two dimensions

When throwing a ball, most people would be able to hit the ground. Or at least, ones own dimension. But these seem both to have been far too small targets for ’science’, and the Miss of Dimensions has since been a root for problems in modern physics. Relativity uses the Terms ’kg’ and ’c’ as basic units for its domain. Now, if one tries to picture 1 kg of something, one will be forced to also assume the existence of 3 spatial dimensions to describe it in - a volume, ’m3 . There is an underlying, Metaphysical agreement between two scientists, that what we call ’mass’ (deﬁned through the method we currently are using to describe this ’mass’ with) is a product between the measured eﬀects of ’mass’, ’m’, and the three dimensions the measurements happened in. We measure ’mass’ through its constant relation to gravity-pull, which is what kg actually is. It is not a measurement of mass, only a measurement of a property of ’mass’ that is related to gravity. Nothing would have had ’weight’ if it was not for ’gravity’. There would only have been ’inertia’). More generaly, we describe the concept of mass as a certain force within 3 dimensions. So the term ’m’ is not a basic term, it is a complex term. It consists of more than one compontent. We have implicitly agreed to add 3 dimensions to the Meta-Physics of the term ’m’ when we base our deductions upon measurements in three dimensions. So the second term of E = m × c2 , ’m’, can be split up into its more basic concepts. We only use one of them in our equations (’m’), and because of the practically constant relation to 3 dimensional space through

1

’gravity’, we don’t have to consider both to get the right answers in practical use. The problems emerge when research is done within the conseptual parts of physics and mathematics. When more basic categories then ’m’ constitutes are changing in some way, ’m’ is blind for the diﬀerensiation, since it is a reduction of the eﬀect between several more basic causes. When we use terms not as number-input, but as the consept in it self (like ’m’is the value for matter in ’relativity’, but it is the idea of material substance in it self), such a complex term will cause confusion - short-sightedness. The conseptual, the metaphysical, construction of ’m’ is: m = (m3 × kg) (1) since a volume of something that is being aﬀected by ’gravity’ will have a certain ’weight’. And through that merge of principles, this ’something’ will qualify for being denoted with the Term ’mass’ - kg. Gravity-pull (parantes om at masse ikke mles som masse, men som gravitasjonspvirkning) We measure everything in terms of mass, therefore mass is the basic principle for our current Paradigm. As long as we always use mass as the basic Term, we will be restricted for measuring events outside (in lower dimensions) of our 3-dimensions. We let our tools this Paradigm.

1.2

Terms

Everything is bound together by terms. Science as an Establishment communicates solely through its paperwork. Ideas are thought up in the individual, shared through language between people and at last written down in scientiﬁc papers. Theese papers of measurements and conclusions are what holds it together, and is what the Establishment represents. Therefore, it is easy to do the mistake of relating events to the most basic element in the system of representation, in stead of the real World. All the papers measure things in kg. Therefore, that is one basic term of the System.

1.3

Divide by zero equals nothing

Since the concept of the mathematical point is “an area without extension”, a terrible Paradox which should have been laughed at, mathematics gets the problem of dividing something on this irrational consept. When taking varible Time into consieration, we have the situation of something without any time to do any processing. Therefore no calculations may take place, and the answer will be: nothing. Nothing, by my logic (this point is very open for dicussion) equals zero. So anything without the potential of existing will be the concept of ’zero’, nothing at all. The opposite of ’something’. And when you do nothing to something, something happens. So if you divide something on nothing, you still have something, but just does not have the Potential of doing anything, since it has been locked for processing by lack of Time. So it is in fact a Potential of something with the ability/potential of doing nothing.

2

We have to include the meta-physical categories of conseptual understanding to get into the conseptual idea of doing a division on zero. We have to separate between the consept of something alone, and the consept of something with the potential of something. These are two essentially diﬀerent ideas, but they will be represented the same way through the categorical denial of Metaphysics. Allthough, if it happens an essential change in the complex consept - if one of its more basic consepts behaves irregularly - there will be practical problems when using them. Time is the basic Potential of all things. Everything, as we perceive it, needs Time - for us to actually perceive it. Therefore Time is one of the basic Terms we will have to use in an attempt of describing the Universe. Not Time linked m to something else, like for example to space through the constitution s2 . Timespace. Likwise, we have a discrete, essential diﬀerence, relative to our perspective, between zero and all other positive numbers, through the realisation that if we have zero time, there is zero potential relative to us. Everything that exists in time also has potential (in some form). When time is used up (when time equals zero) there is no more potential left. It is a discrete, essential change. Something is diﬀerent about this situation from any other. It has transformed into its analogue in Physics, ’E’ - Energy. In eﬀect: The actual result we are hopin to calculate is not able to get any calculations done. Therefore, the whole term ’disappears’ - it is not apparent any more. All it used to represent is transformed into something. Here, when considering Mathematics for being an objective link to the system we are describing with it (relative to the System it self), it can be viewed as if this something is frozen in Time, it does nothing - no movement, no vibration. 0 degrees K (implied from readings of matter ). Ths is the Zeropoint of our Mathematics. Everything can be deduced from this, until we know everything around this point - then we’ll know the point it self from its consequences. Behind that, I know nothing...

1.4

Deﬁnition: 1 kg

The Metaphysics behind the construction of mathematical/physical terms suggests that there has to be taken account for the fact that mass is a concept less basic than space is. Therefore, it is not possible to describe basic laws in the Universe through formulas derived from matter. And for being able to use the concept of ’matter’, one has to accept the existence of three spatial dimensions for it to exist in. Therefore, the correct Meta-denotation (Md) for kg is: m3 × kg (2)

1.5

Meta-denotation

An Md looks at the concistency of a formula one transcendental level more basic. The material part of it is the matter, the Universal part of it are its Units. They denote the Transcendental Level that is being considered. And therefore (1). 3

1.5.1

Relativity Meta-Analyzed

We already know that (m2 × kg)M d = (kg)T M P , where M P is “The Material Paradigm”, a.k.a: “the Temporary Paradigm”1 . This Paradigm. Now, let’s look at the ’c’: c = (3 × 109 × Let’s look at the Metaquation: E = (m3 × kg)M d × ( m5 × kg m2 )M d = ( )M d s2 s2 (4) m m2 ) = ( )M d 2 T MP s s (3)

There’s two dimentions to many in the implicit basis for the Mathematics of Relativity.

2

Other thoughts

Describe Principia Naturalis as a consept. The fear for the threats that Authorities suggest can be turned against them selves by showing the reality outside of it: the illusion represented is a threat created by government. The same fear will be turned against the System, since their greatest fears have been created by the System, and it is therefore a scenario within the system. So the system will contain the biggest threats available, and thereby represent the threat it self -become the threat.

1 The present Paradigm will always also be known as “the Temporary Paradigm” since we always have to do adjustments to our view of Existence, until we know everything.

4