viXra log is our blog for the viXra.org e-print archive. It provides news for the site as well as articles and news about science in general. We plan to concentrate on reports of large scientific experiments plus articles on unusual episodes from the history of science and mathematics.
Articles on viXra blog are written by Philip Gibbs.
 | Orwin O'Dowd on Why I Still Like String T… |
 | Stephen Crowley on Why I Still Like String T… |
 | Hans van Leunen on Why I Still Like String T… |
 | Robert L. Oldershaw on Why I Still Like String T… |
 | L. Edgar Otto on Why I Still Like String T… |
| Stephen Crowley on Why I Still Like String T… |
| Robert L. Oldershaw on Why I Still Like String T… |
| Orwin O'Dowd on Why I Still Like String T… |
Thanks for posting the In the spirit of ‘Crackpots Who Were Right Series’. In the spirit of the closing lines “We are confident that one day the “crackpot” who was right will be someone whose contribution is recognised because they submitted their work to us” I refer you to my very very crackpot (but I think actually in the neighborhood of correct) theory of everything: http://s33light.org/SEEES
Not only do I think that there is almost no chance that my ideas will be considered viable here, but my TOE actually predicts that will be the case, owing to what I might call an Occidental-biased epistemology (not a bad thing, just a ‘You Are Here’ on the spectrum).
What will be found particularly offensive, I imagine, is that my hypothesis includes the possibility that photons (and maybe the whole subatomic microcosm for all I know) does not so much ‘exist’ as represent a lowest common denominator perception – a kind of quorum sensing for atoms, thus making sensorimotive exchange a cosmic primitive, and turning the entire Copernican revolution upside down at the Classical limit.
Energy and time are not, in my understanding, physical phenomena, but rather intersubjective phenomena which generate significance (negentropy) with set complimentary physical qualities ( Matter, electromagnetismrelativity, space, = entropy
Energy, sensorimotiveperception, time = Significance)
This view opens the door to the development of consciousness and awareness as a negentropic accumulation of experiential events rather than purely a machine function of matter or neurology. I think that it solves the mind/body problem, and frames cosmology, quantum mechanics, and many other disciplines in a new light which has more explanatory power than what we are working with currently.
By seeing our own naive perception not as a veil of illusion to be overcome in all cases by rigorous scientific debunking, but rather a fragile phenomenological presentation of the ‘interior’ if our inertial frame of the cosmos, we can see both sides of the coin in a more objective and scientific light. As long as we dismiss our subjective experience as metaphysical ‘emergent properties’, ‘illusions’, or ‘interpretations’, I think we will continue to miss the elephant in every room. An elephant that is not an mechanical object in space, nor a pseudo-substantial phenomenology like ‘soul’, aether, or phlogiston, but is in fact the sensorimotive correlate which *insists* within or through matter, and whose dynamics are the polar opposite of mechanism.
This view of energy as least common denominator subjectivity operates subtractively, (as hues of the visible spectrum are subtracted from white light), so that our physics knowledge of ‘energy’ the most literal possible view of this phenomenology. The phenomena, as it scales up through our microcosm and down from our astrophysical macrocosm, loses it’s white-light literalism and allows us to perceive the figurative (metaphorical, multivalent, cumulatively entangled, superimposed, multiplexed, etc) bands of our native experiential palette.
Existence is in the eye of the beholder, but beholding is a function of existence. The two not only complement each other but they represent two sides of the same coin, a coin which I am calling ‘Sense’. It’s an unusual coin in that the closer you pay attention, the more it reveals that it is a continuum from one side to the other, with graduated regions or quantum steps which mark the progress between subject and object. It appears to be an involuted continuum, with pronounced differentiation in the middle (mundane naive perception) and blending evanescence at the periphery (profound, theoretical esoterica).
Before you ignore this or freak out – please be advised that I am well aware of my lack of physics credentials, but again, my TOE explains why this kind of view is not likely to come from within physics or any academic discipline. I think that this is precisely my interdisciplinary impartiality which allows me to see this forest instead of tree DNA. I’m sure that’s what all the crackpots say.
sorry for the typos.. crackpot cred I guess?
I still think Lisi’s right
Are the apparently faster than light results due to quantum entanglement or quantum superposition in the experiments? I think nanosecond timing is a bit slow, ppicosecond or femtosecond timing would give a clearer indication of what is happening in the experiments.
Or perhaps quantum level selection that pretects chronology will at times select a vacuum condition that allows FTL travel as long as it is forward in time.
Atom like Universe
Any chance you could activate an RSS feed for this blog? It would be handy.
my head hurts
The Nobel could worthily be awarded to Lene Vestergaard Hau and team for their discoveries in ultra cold Bose-Einstein condensates, slowing light, stopping light, copying light to matter and transferring it back to light, creating the equivalent of a black hole in nano tubes, and research on wave control of atoms.