[MD] The Anti-entropic Miopic(murdering MOQ?)

[Squonkriff at aol.com]

[Mark]
"Biological systems are so far above these in scope,  sophistication and  
value they may be regarded in new descriptions and  awarded a category of their 
own.
For if you don't, one possible consequence  is that all inorganic and 
biological patterns are one dissipate system: You have  no more value than a piece of 
shit (atoms are dissipative systems too and shit  is made of atoms,  which is 
no shit).
Now, i know there may be some  people who actually believe this to be true 
regardless of the moq, but i will  defend you against this vile and demeaning 
charge with great  vigour"

[x]
Sounds like a theist/atheist debate Moq says the universe  is a pattern of 
values thus a morally ordered toward higher value,  universe.
(Us yanks) say not necessarely, the universe works in a sort of  
thermodynamic way, but still MOQ. Interestingly enough,
a paper was recently  Written by Nassim Harame in which will defends this 
view without being vile nor  demeaning. 
Caution It may mean the end The MOQ as you see it. Here is the  theory:
 
Mark 02-02-07: Hi X
The bottom line may be one of the degree of resistance to entropy?
Those configurations of mass and energy which centre on Carbon based  
chemistry display such a degree of resistance to entropy that complexity begins  to 
evolve at a significantly accelerated rate.
I don't think Case has thought enough about entropy and  complexity?

All rights reserved

What is the Origin of  Spin?

By 
Nassim Haramein




Ask the question, "What  is the origin of the rotation or spin of all objects 
from galaxies, suns and  planets to atoms and subatomic particles?" and you  
may  get  the  answer that it originates at the big bag as an initial impulse 
(moment) 
and  that it has been spinning since then in a frictionless environment.From 
this  response, now you may
have two additional questions:is a frictionless  environment a good 
representation of our observation, and 
where did the  energy come from initially?  To the first one, our universe is 
comprised of  not only 
space, but matter/energyÏall of which is interacting in plasma  dynamics of 
galaxies, solar systems 
(solar winds), and so on. Even in the  intergalactic vacuum, which is 
centimeters
apart. All of this stuff  interacting does not make for an ideal frictionless 
environment.  In fact,  this 
idealization further standardizes the spinning object as a solid with  no 
viscosity difference of spin. 
A good experiment that you can perform is  to boil an egg and after the egg 
is completely cooled, try 
to spin it on  your desk.  It will spin in a uniform manner and you can 
imagine that if it  was in a frictionless 
environment it could spin forever.  Now perform  the same experiment with a 
non-boiled egg; you will observe that the egg will  slow down rapidly due to 
its viscous core.  Now envision the viscous magma  inside our planet it  
certainly  is  not  spinning   in  a  frictionless  environment.  In fact earths 
center is  thought to act as a dynamo to generate our magnetic field; however, it 
takes  torque to spin the dynamo! Currently there are elaborate thermal and 
magnetic  models that attempt to explain the inner spin of the core of our 
planet;  
however, none explain where the impulse moment initially comes from.   Where 
is the force coming from? 
The same dilemma applies for the spin of all  objects  our sun, galaxies, 
atoms, subatomic particles,  and   
so  on,  which  brings  us  back  to   the  second  part of our question 
above concerning the origin of the  energy of 
spin. The origin of the energy is unknown, and at the quantum  level of 
subatomic particles causation is not addressed! 
Yet, without  spin/rotation none of reality can come to exist. All things 
spin! Even things  that appear not to! You may say,
"a tree doesent spin"  but in fact  every atom in that tree spins, and that 
tree is on a planet that is spinning,  
and this planet is in a solar system that is spinning inside a galactic disk  
and so on.  So we could say that spin is fundamental  to   creation, and 
objects  that appear to be  inanimate  exist  solely  because spinning atoms 
within allow the objects to radiate, and  hence, appear in our reality. So an 
important endeavor of physics would be to  find the fundamental  forces  necessary  
to generate spin  
since, if those were known, we would ultimately know the foundations of  
reality.  That is a valuable thing to know Î never
mind the fact that it  could provide very important clues about energy and 
gravity, which can have huge  impacts on our current 
state of technology and ecology.  Yet, in all of  the intricacies of both 
quantum theory and relativistic  equations  
(and  I  assure  you  that  these   complexities  are  not  trivial),  no 
equations, no  concepts, no fundemental theories
Have to date been postulated to describem  the origin of spin.

This deficiency in our understanding of the dynamics  of spin/rotation is 
what lead prominent  Nobel-prize  laureate   C.N.  Yang  (of  the  famous  
Yang-Mills   equation)  to comment that,"Einsteins general realtivity theory, though 
 profoundly
Beautifal, is likely to be ammended.." and that ammendment,  "somehow 
entangles spin and rotation." Although Dr. Raucher
And I were  unaware of Dr. Yangs most accurate statement, we believe that our 
recently  completed paper entitled
" The Origin of Spin: A Consideration of Torque and  Coriolis Forces in 
Einsteins Field Equations and Grand Unification
Theory "  Addresses this very issue. As you can deduce from the title, we  
imbued  Einsteinian spacetime with a torq
ue and Coriolis term that becomes the cause  and origin of all spins. 
We then solved the equation and related the  solution to a modified GUT 
Theory (Grand Unification Theory) for the  electromagnetic and subatomic particle 
scale of reality.  In doing so we  have arrived at a true Unification view, for 
we have bridged the macro 
and  the micro.  Sure, there is much more math to be worked out; however, 
this  ammendment to Einsteins Field Equations, we believe, becomes a landmark  
foundation from  which  a  new  level of physics can be  written that generates 
a more accurate and complete picture of not only galactic  formations and 
solar system structures, but as well as planetary plasma  mechanics, and atomic 
and subatomic dynamics.  
Although the math  involved  may  seem  quite  complex,  the   concepts  are  
quite  simple.    Einstein,   with  his 
beautiful field  equations,  showed   that  gravity  is  not  a  force  
resulting   from  objects themselves  (as  in  Newtonian   views),  but  that  
gravity  is  a  force   resulting  from  the curvature of spacetime in the 
presence of  matter/energy.  Imagine a ball placed in the center of a 
flexible surface  such as a trampoline.  The ball would curve the surface of the 
trampoline  (spacetime) around it so that any other ball on the surface of that 
trampoline  would be attracted to it.
That is the standard simlified view of "Einsteins  Field  Equations 
describing gravity.  Those field   equations  have  their  basis  in  earlier equations 
 that are known as the LaPlace-Poisson Equations, which describe gradients 
(in  this  case,  gradient densities), making spacetime curve more or less  
depending on the density/mass of the object. 
Now what we have done is that  we have added a term to Einsteins quations 
which  accounts  for   a  fundamental  force  in
spacetime generating torque, which  is forcing the spacetime manifold to spin 
Î just as the engine of your car must  apply the force of torque to the 
wheels of your car in order for them to  rotate.  One may ask, "But where is the 
spacetimetorque coming  from?
Ie., "Where is the engine?'
The answer is, just as we think of the  spacetime curvature generating 
gravity as a density increase  in   the  presence  of  matter  energy,  we  can   
think  of  the  torque  force  of  the  curvature  of  space  as  increasingas 
density increases.  
Thus,  the torque  comes from a change in density (or gradient) in  the 
geometry of spacetime. 
To  give  you   a  mental  picture,  replace  the  surface   of  the  
trampoline  we  were discussing earlier with  
the surface tension of water as it goes down the drain of your bathtub.  
The change of density between the air in the drain of your tub and the water  
makes  the  water  surface  curve  towards   the  drain,  but  significantly, 
the surface  is no longer a  smooth curve (as in the trampoline example), but 
now it curls as the water goes  down and as th
e air spins out. Another way to look at this is to analyze the  dynamics of
weather patterns on Earth (note that in this example the same  could be said  
for water currents).  Take, for example, a  hurricane.  As a result of a 
relatively small difference in  density/temperature in the atmosphere, immense 
currents gather large quantities  (tons and 
tons) of water orbiting in a highly defined structure  sometimeshundreds of 
kilometers resulting in huge energy events that 
include  enormous electromagnetic discharges, high velocity winds, and 
sometimes funnel  tornadoes. Now compare those 
dynamics to the ones  of   spiral  arm  galaxies  with  their  spiraling   
galactic  discs.    The  similarities  are obvious,  however in our equation the 
change in density is not in the air of a planet, but  in the plasma gases of 
our universe. 
For  instance,  recall   that the density of the relative vacuum between 
galaxies although being the  largest vacuum observed and millions of 
times more vacuum than that of our  solar system has its atoms o
nly a few centimeters apart.    Yet  the vacuum density inside our galaxy is 
much greater. 
The difference   in densities  in  this  case,  just  as   with  the  
differences  in  densities  in   air  currents  of  our atmosphere creating 
hurricanes, is what  generates spacetime torquing matter/energy, and spinning  it into  
the  observed topology  of  a  galactic  disc
with its  galactic halos and galactic polar jets.  Further, as in the case 
for a  hurricane, Coriolis forces dictate very specific 
structures that are related  to a torus (donut structure) or more 
specifically to a dual torus bubble,  because the Coriolis forces manifest in two 
opposite rotational patterns  (   go   to  
www.theresonanceproject.org/research/torus.htm to view the dual torus  
animation).    We named this amendment to Einsteins Field
Eqautions  the Haramein-Rauscher solution. 
We believe that it will more accurately  predict the observed dynamics of our 
universe,   including    its   galactic   clusters,   galactic    structures  
 and   planetary   plasma  dynamics.  This solution may as well be able to 
describe galactic  structures and universal 
behavior without the need for exotic inclusions  such as dark matter and dark 
energy.
Another   interesting  result   from this amendment is that we have found a 
topological  (geometric) relationship between the dual 
torus spacetime manifold of our  solution and the structure of subatomic 
particles described by group theoretical  models, 
typically used to describe subatomic particle  interactions.  The 
relationship  involves  a very  specific   geometric  structure  called  a  
cubeoctahedron,   or  in  other  cases  a  vector equilibrium, which  can   be   
constructed from   eight (8)  edge-bounded   tetrahedrons 
generating twelve (12) radiating  vectors and twenty-four (24) edge vectors.  
This group theoretical model  relationship then allows us to unify the atomic 
scale forces to the macro  cosmological scale objects, and thus generate a 
Unified Field Theory.  Furthermore, the 
twelve radiating topological cubeoctahedral vectors  generating a dual torus 
field are the base vectors of a 3D fractal structure I  had discovered many 
years ago and concluded to be the foundation geometry of  creation at all scales 
(to view this unique fractal model at its 64   tetrahedron  iteration, go to  
www.theresonanceproject.org/graphics/3d.htm). You could  imagine  the  same 
dual torus bubble and cubeoctahedron occurring at all 
scales,  driven by the torque forces of spacetime as the density increases 
towards the  microscopic scale of the atom, and
along the way, spinning everything into  existence.  

In a work-in-progress, we are writing a balance  equation between the 
gravitational torque forces of spacetime and the  electromagnetic 
repulsive forces.  In this view, then,  the  Universe seems to be spinning in 
perpetual motion in a frictionless environment  only due to the exchange 
between the torque of spacetime and the electromagnetic  entropy, where  the  
torque  overcomes  the   shearing  friction. 
the Universe seems to be spinning in perpetual  motion in a frictionless 
environment only due to the exchange between the torque  
of spacetime and the electromagnetic entropy, where  the   torque  overcomes  
the  shearing  friction viscosity of  the
Universes plasma dynamics to generate billions of years of rotation in a  
seemingly frictionless manner at all 
scales.This brings us to a deeper view  of black hole dynamics where the 
black holes are no longer only absorbing  
material/information, but radiating this information back out in the form of  
electromagnetic radiation, and 
the feedback between the two generates the  topology  of  the dual torus 
structure of the Haramein-Rauscher  solution 
driven by spacetime. Now the black hole is no longer   black  since  its  
exterior  event  horizon  radiates
,  which  is  what  I  have   been  calling  the  white  hole  portion.     
Here  the  black hole/white hole are concentric
to each other,  where the black hole is inside and the white hole is 
concentrically structured  outside and 
activates the plasma dynamics and Coriolis forces of the  ergosphere of the 
black hole, which I coined the black
-white whole. Dr.  Stephen Hawking, who for nearly thirty years insisted that 
black holes could not  radiate information, 
in a recent announcement has now made a complete 180  degree turn in his 
views (much to his credit), predicting that black 
holes  may be able to radiate information.  This has been a fundamental  
contingency of this unification view for almost 
twenty  years,   and  I  am  excited  to  see  these   views  now  being  
embraced  by  others.Interestingly,  
I arrived to these conclusions long before confirming these relationships  
with standard mathematics. 
I did so by using pure logic, a keen observation  of nature and geometric 
extrapolations,some resulting  from   in
-depth studies of ancient symbols and esoteric  schools  of  thought, such  
as  the  Pythagorian  schools and   ancient  Hebraic  and 
Egyptian texts. In many respects, I  unknowingly followed a similar path of 
investigation as Sir Isaac Newton
,  who had spent a significant part of his adult life deeply immersed in the 
study  of ancient texts and monuments before 
arriving at his fundamental laws of  nature.  But I am getting ahead of 
myself this is all for a future article,  on the
seemingly ancient profound understandings of the geometry of nature to  what 
that  means  in our technological modern era.

"No more  value than a piece of shit" seems we're all former shit molecules..
It's all  how you value the shit and that's why MOQ still works but it's
Idea of an  evolution of "ultimate betterness" is not so absolute it seems.
-X
 
Mark 02-02-07: This is interesting.
But at the risk of appearing to dismiss the paper i feel it may be  suggested 
that, however the cosmos behaves, it has a limited 'peak' of  evolutionary 
value; A sort of, 'sweet spot' if you like, where Dynamic evolution  becomes 
maximal and from which Dynamism trails off.
That point is the Carbon atom.
>From this point of maximal Dynamism springs a much accelerated fresh epoch  
of evolution we call Biology.
The difference between epochs results in a moral hierarchy from which it is  
clear life is far better than inorganic matter. (this view relies on  simple 
dharmic ethical principles as the basis for inorganic  patterns).
This is not to say that Carbon chemistry does not dissipate it's  structures, 
but these structures soon increase their immunity, to use a  biological 
analogue, to entropy itself.
Case may be right when he insists that entropy is always at work; the  
information of intellectual patterns may be entropic behaving configurations of  
energy at this level, but technologicaly generated electromagnetic waves of  
information are shinning from our Planet so intensly that anyone observing from  a 
near by star would view the Earth as a radio wave emitting companion star to  
our Sun! That's quite an impressive resistance to entropy don't you feel? To  
think that patterns of intellectual quality will be radiating through space 
for  millions of years after the Earth is dead.
Love,
Mark