Re: Physics of Psychology
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 8:36 am
Mithus wrote:Continuing with your ontology, you wrote – before it comes to the subject of Magnetism - , that strong negatives waves, which encounter the strong positive waves of a larger particle, create many points of inertia, which prevent the smaller negative particle from getting too close to the positive particle, instead it veers off to a side, orbiting the positive particle.
Why is it that the negative particle doesn't crash into the positive particle, or, in association to psychology, why don't negative and positive influences mix and neutralize each other?
This gets into more detail concerning my prior post:
James S Saint wrote:Mithus wrote: But then, the next point is: „When a small negative particle approaches a larger positive particle, the smaller particle grows asymmetrically with its greater increasing noise closer to the larger positive particle.“
When the mind filters out those negative influences to keep it's (positive) emotional charge, what does it mean that those influences still increase and grow „asymmetrically“?
That is an issue of extreme impedance mismatching. The term "asymmetrical" was referring merely to the physical shape of the particle. In a uniform space, a particle will maintain a spherical form. But within a gradient, it becomes less spherical and when in the situation of being a small charge getting very close to a large mass with the opposite charge (an electron approaching a nucleus), the small particle becomes relatively flattened, such as in the pict below:
This behavior is due to the gradient between the two objects becoming too steep, forming an impenetrable wall between them. Such is what causes the tiny negative electrons to merely float around and orbit much larger positive nuclei of atoms to which they are otherwise drawn strongly toward. Analogous things happen concerning psychology and sociology.
For a wave of anything to propagate past a point along its path, that point must raise or lower to the instantaneous value that the wave represents moment by moment as it is passing. As a wave of water passes a certain point, the level of water at that point must increase or decrease to match the wave pattern. It is by that action that the wave propagates from point to point. Each point along the path must reach the value of the prior point in order for the wave pattern to continue. And how quickly those values can change determines the speed of the propagation:
James S Saint wrote:The concept of MCR is still valid but in physics it occurs due to maximum affect rate that is logically possible whereas in psychology it occurs due to maximum perception rate physically possible.
Speed of Propagation
Light propagates at the speed that it does because it is logically impossible for anything to affect anything else at a faster rate than what we refer to as "the speed of light". The speed of PHT is a little different because its propagation rate depends upon how quickly the physical substratum can be affected, how quickly neurons respond. Faster neurons (electric wires or optic fiber) would allow for any associated perception to change faster.
In the physical universe there is a Maximum Change Rate of affect, MCR, directly responsible for the "speed of light in an [absolute] vacuum". As an electromagnetic wave propagates through space, the electric potential, the "voltage" at each point must raise and lower such as to reflect the value of the passing wave, just as the water level must for a passing water wave. And there is a maximum change rate possible referred to as the MCR. Voltage cannot change faster than the MCR. The MCR is an issue of the voltage having to change at faster than infinite rate in order for the wave to propagate any faster. Because nothing can change faster than infinitely fast, there is a maximum possible propagation rate - "the speed of light in an [absolute] vacuum" - a natural impedance.
Since space is filled with propagating waves crossing each other, the voltage values at each point raise and lower such as to reflect not merely one wave passing by, but many waves simultaneously crossing each point. The voltage value at each point is merely the sum of all of the intersecting waves at that point.
Statistically, that means that often the addition of all of the waves will reach the MCR. When that happens, the waves must take longer to continue their travel, thus delays arise in the form of extremely brief "traffic jams". Those single point traffic jams are "MCR points". And the number of them occurring within any given region of space is what gives space its "density" (the "permittivity of free space"). The higher the density of space (the "Affectance density"), the slower light will travel through it because it is not an "absolute vacuum" and delays must occur. When the density reaches extremely high levels, we refer to it as "mass" or "dark matter". Light can still very slowly pass through the dark matter, but gets completely blocked and dispersed by mass. When the change rate gets too high, the waves simply cannot pass until sufficient time has elapsed, "delays". Particles of impenetrable mass are formed when too much delay has caused traffic jams that cannot ever disperse ("subatomic particles").
The Impenetrable Wall - An Exclusion Barrier
The point is that delays occur due to the extreme change rate required at each point in order to have many waves crossing. And that means that if a point in space is at a very high positive value due to a positive wave or pulse traveling by and a very negative pulse happens immediately afterward, the rate of voltage change at that point can become nearly infinite. And that means that a MCR point has occurred and any waves involved must delay their travel. They are impeded.
The very same traffic jam effect that causes limited propagation speed and a mass's inertia also delays strongly positive and negative waves as they interact. And since the electron subatomic particle and the nucleus of an atom are made of such strongly negative and positive waves or pulses, as they approach each other, the constant stream of pulses associated with each particle form a steady impenetrable wall of MCR points between the two particles.
The question becomes, "Why don't they just gradually cancel and disperse into neutral, random radiant energy?" And if the two particles were of equally yet opposite charge and also the same size, that is exactly what would happen. If one of the two particles is not of significantly greater mass, the two particles, although delayed a bit, would annihilate each other into merely a puff of EMR noise of sufficient magnitude to express the amount of energy involved - a "photon". If one is of much greater mass (thus greater energy), it cannot be dispersed at the same rate as the other even if they were otherwise annihilating each other. And that means that the dispersing does not take place.
As particles are releasing tiny portions of their traffic jam, they are constantly absorbing more and reforming themselves from that same surrounding EMR noise that they help create, the ambient space - mass field - "gravity field". For a total annihilation to occur, there must be equally opposite potential and also equal mass. If the annihilation is not total, the particles merely reform as perhaps smaller particles. And if one particle was much more massive than the other, each tiny little pulse interaction between the two particles is not of equal opposing potential because the one with the larger mass will be more spread out. If each tiny portion is not annihilating, the whole cannot annihilate either.
And that is why an electron will never merely rush into a nucleus even through strongly "attracted" toward it. There is an impedance barrier between them. The theory concerning orbiting centrifugal force as the cause, is bogus. If an electron didn't fall into a nucleus merely due to an orbiting centrifugal force, a great, great many electrons would never establish an orbit to begin with as they immediately plunged directly into the nucleus causing serious radioactivity disintegrating all materials (so don't be misled).
Now Back to Psychology
Psycho-Impedance Exclusion Barrier
Sociologically speaking, that same impenetrable wall is formed by the prospect that Israel become Catholic. The two entities are actually drawn toward each other, yet they can never converge. The change would be too great for the high priests to mentally handle. All progress would halt as they argued among themselves as to which is to be more sacred than what. Yet they would hang around each other and feed off of each other's opposing behaviors - the negative not being able to fall into the positive. The same is true for many conceptually defined groups that maintain a sacred order and priority.
The social groups cannot converge because of the totally unacceptable mental and emotional changes required of the persons involved. It is not merely an issue of "those are the bad guys and we are the good guys". It is far more an issue of which idea is believed to be of higher priority, true, or serves a greater purpose. How easy would it be for you to accept that 2+2 is really 5 .. and truly accept the belief? Could you merely accept the irrationality? Most people certainly could not and thus would not. So if any proposed theory ends up requiring that one believe that 2+2=5, the theory will not be accepted by anyone who accepts logical mathematics. The theory might seem plausible and be strongly associated with logical mathematics, but despite such close association, logical mathematics and the theory could never converge. There are many mind puzzles proposed throughout the history of philosophy that demonstrate how two perceived truths can not converge. They are called "paradoxes" - both A and B seem to be true, yet if A is true, B cannot be true and vsvrsa.
If contrary theories had an equal amount of application (aka equal "mass" - instances of usefulness), a person is likely to dismiss both into a neutrality of favor and indifference of belief - "annihilation" of acceptance. And if the two theories were equally opposite in perceived hope and threat, no passion toward either direction would be generated - neutral PHT. But given that mathematics requires 2+2=4 in millions of applications and it is merely a newly postulated theory demands that 2+2=5, annihilation into non-belief of both will not occur. The new theory will be rejected, kept separate and isolated (hovering around mathematics, yet never converging with it). Why? Because the field of mathematics is far more spread out into millions of applications and not so easily dismissed.
Socio-Impedance Exclusion Barrier
And socially, given Catholicism is spread so much more widely than Judaism, the two could never annihilate each other even if they had otherwise equally opposing potential .