Abstract: Life, as a parasite, evolved a mind/brain over 3,000 million years by creating a new space using multicellular organisms and a Mathematics of the Mind that is an improvement on the measurement/entanglement of a probability space to enhance its survival/success rate. Three fundamental quests of the dimensions of a probability space define our universe, the conservation of energy, the creation of space creates energy and the speed of all photons is constant in vacuo and these explain the strange effects of the theory of relativity. General mathematics is open-ended and supplies answers of context as well as concept to all disciplines of knowledge by expanding the existing mathematics that is based on a counting space and the four axioms of the mind/brain. Given that all mathematics are ‘hand-maidens’, general mathematics extends the range to include all disciplines and examples are given of solutions of long-standing enigmas. In particular, Plato’s political system is used as an example of context to show how general mathematics can solve the world’s problems, if we so desire, and further, allows us to move Survival of the Fittest into a higher level of Survival of the Best using the concept of the ‘Second Coming’.
Preamble: a great deal of this theory will appear simple because we are already using it in a top-down fashion, but I will present it bottom-up and new interpretations of concepts of science that have been used for centuries will appear, as will logical solutions to enigmas that have eluded science. The extent and ease with which a theory integrates with us is a measure of the soundness of the theory with respect to us as well as predictions based on that theory. Also, the expansion/questing of a class/organization of derivations that we know as mathematics from the counting space (a+b) has been expanded and developed over thousands of years, but the recent additions of the Mandelbrot set z2+c, the Julia set and the Fatou set have produced unusual patterns, but taken together, they suggest a new branch of mathematics/organization that uses four axioms (forward-planning, questing, relevance and elegance) to link the mind/brain into the mathematics/organization. In particular, this sequence culminates in questing a measuring space (a+b)=1 and space-time that, I believe, generates a universe in a probability space. and is the way that our universe naturally evolved and as Life evolved, forward planning, for the predator/prey relationship and sexual attraction formed the basis of evolution through Survival of the Fittest.
What, to my mind, is general mathematics? It is the method of solving every possible problem that can ever exist, now or in the future, and it does this by using the dimensions of a probability space and that ties it into the thinking of Life that has evolved as a parasite within the universe. Simply put, general mathematics is the mathematics of concepts and the four axioms of Life that we, as parasites, have built on the measurement/entanglement of our probability universe. Mathematics is woefully deficient because it neglects context and concentrates on concepts, which is not surprising because we invented mathematics to do what we wanted/needed, and that was count sheep etc. Mathematics is a special case of general mathematics and need not change, but the addition of context and entanglement means that social problems can be addressed and the methods given, should/could solve the world’s problems as well as to redefine our evolution.
For completeness, general mathematics is necessarily simple and is composed of two parts, the mathematics of concepts that presents the concepts and the contexts between them because the fifth dimension says that concept and context are orthogonal/independent and so, both parts must be considered, as in Cartesian coordinates. The four axioms I will now call ‘search axioms’ because there must be forward-planning to initiate the search, questing is (total) searching, relevance is comparing the search elements and elegance is the selection.
The elegance of this derivation is obvious in its simplicity, but, I do wish to point out that it took me years to derive the mathematics of concepts, only to find it obvious within the fifth dimension and it took months to derive the four search axioms through Life, the space and the fifth dimension, only to find that they are obvious from common sense, when you know what to look for. This, I believe, shows that common sense is derived from the ‘shards’/pieces of the fundamental organization behind the universe.
Firstly, does mathematics exist? Secondly, there is the ‘mathematics’ of the physical space that we call the universe, and thirdly there is the mathematics of ourselves and the other members of Life that are parasitic. There can be no doubt that Life is a parasite because it evolved to use the host (universe) for its own ends, and further, we contain numerous parasites within us, some symbiotic, for example, mitochondria, and some not, and ‘your body contains about 23,000 human genes, in contrast to over 1 million bacterial genes.’ (Super Genes, Deepak Chopra and Rudolph E. Tanzi, p 76). Fourthly, there is the mathematics that we have not yet discovered.
I believe that our universe is a probability of existence space and a probability space has the dimensions of x, y, z, time passing and (a+b+c …)=1 for measurement of energy/probability at points a, b, c … and further, in chapter 84, Godel’s Incompleteness theorems were discussed in the context of the constant speed of light and that the usual definition of mathematics makes mathematics necessarily incomplete. Hence, firstly, I suggest that the general mathematics should have no separate existence, apart from convenience, and should be incorporated into each and every discipline because, it will be shown that mathematics is a special case of the mathematics of concepts that is applicable and appropriate to everything because it is written in the fifth dimension, (a+b)=1, for simplicity, where a and b are measurement/observers.
Secondly, mathematics has taken a counting space (a+b) that grew from the need to count livestock etc. and the four axioms that link the mind/brain to the counting space to make a (not very good) approximation to the measuring space (a+b)=1 that is the fifth dimension of a probability space. The reality of the universe is an all-encompassing entanglement that goes with the necessity of continual measurement of energy, but the biocomputer of evolution over 3,000 million years has built on the physical ‘bones’ of entanglement, and this innovation, I call the Mathematics of the Mind.
Concerning the four axioms, quoted above, from chapter 81: ‘The Math Book, (by Clifford A. Pickover, p 284) gives the five Peano Axioms as a basis of arithmetic, and certain things appeared to be missing, such as the mind/brain to determine elegance of content, forward planning (dimension 6), the measurement of each numeral (questing) and the relationship between numerals (relevance)’.
Further, ‘If we unfold (a+b)=1 in a probability space, as above, including Life, we get:
If we unfold (a+b)=1 in a probability space, as above, excluding Life, we get:
Notice that forward-planning is a dimension specific to Life and necessary for the predator/prey basis of iteration and the four axioms are immediately obvious in the above.
It took me years to derive the Mathematics of the Mind because it was so subtle in its effect, so much so that I often wondered if there was a discernable effect. I say this because it is the questing that is important and that produces a universe and more quests evolve as the search widens or contracts within (a +/and b)=1. Notice that questing is an all-encompassing term that includes the effects of quantum mechanics, business, relationships, mathematics etc. This notion of questing and relevance is fundamental to a probability space and underlies the mathematics of concepts where everything is related/entangled. Contracting to (a+b) leads to the Golden ratio and concepts of beauty/elegance.
Thirdly, in a probability space, (a+b)=1 is not a mathematics, it is measurement/entanglement that quests every point so that the total sum is unity and always remains unity and it is also not a logic, though it is similar, and it will be seen below that it is an organization. This state of affairs requires that every point be quested continually and all the points be adjusted so that the total remains unity, and in the case of our universe, this is the law of conservation of energy (when set to zero). The energy of the Big-Bang/Big-Whoosh is zero, but splits/quests into a positive (all energy except gravity) and a negative (gravity) portion to create the expanding universe that makes a place in which Life can live.
Contrast this simple organization of energy to the common notion that the Big Bang creates all the energy instantly and the momentum creates the expanding universe and it is obvious that there are no organizational constraints limiting it, and so the current theory is logically wrong when we ask the question ‘how big?’. The Big Whoosh is organizationally sensible/accountable and contains the current concept of inflation, not as some mysterious happening, but as the basic property of the expansion-of-space/creation-of-energy. It will be shown below that energy to space ratio is constant for all time, so, increased space creates energy in two forms, energy (positive) and potential (negative) that we call gravity. This is an important point that seems to have been missed, that gravity is a potential energy wanting/enabling us to fall to the centre of the earth. Presumably the acceleration due to gravity, as a concept, was more useful than the energy context, but, I believe that some of Newton’s work is overly simplistic and is due for a revamp.
The complete picture is given, if we, from chapter 81, ‘unfold (a+b)=1, where unfolding is following the questing [of quantum mechanics, evolution, business etc.]. The fifth dimension (a+b)=1, in this simple form produces four absolutes/solutions (ignoring, for the moment, the fact that the speed of light is an absolute and must be constant):
(a) measurement/entanglement that are local physical and independent/orthogonal (a+b)=1 [classical local action and reaction of matter that provides expansion of the universe, reflection, diffraction of light and water waves],
(b) measurement/entanglement that are universe-wide logical and independent/orthogonal (a and b)=1 [conservation of (zero) energy across the universe, gravity, creation of space/mass/energy/time through the Lorentz contraction],
(c) measurement/entanglement that are local physical and independent/orthogonal, (a+b) [local/personal appreciation], and
(d) measurement/entanglement that are universe-wide logical and independent/orthogonal (a and b) [universal/reality-wide appreciation]’
‘Note that (a) and (b) are the physical structure of the universe [described in many earlier chapters] and (c) and (d) were derived in chapter 78 resulting from the ratio of an interval [Golden ratio] that has been reported to produce a feeling that is used, I believe, by Life to compare contentment/elegance/beauty in both a personal and a reality-wide comparison that is behind the important sexual selection as a major driver in evolution.’
‘For completeness, I want to foreshadow another quest that is the “orderliness” of (a+b)=1 that embodies a general mathematic/organization that lies behind logic/mathematics. In a similar way that proverbs are a higher level of thought, everyday logic is, I believe, the reverse, and is our view of, or the mental “breakdown” of organization.’
Concepts are distinct, but context requires different viewpoints, so, the above, to put it simply, I believe, shows that (a+b)=1 is a mathematic leading to an organization that we see as part of our reality as ‘shards’/parts of the organization that we need to live within and we call that ‘everyday’ logic. However, (a+b)=1 contains measurement/entanglement that quests to produce a universe naturally, that expands through inflation (continually, but at different rates) and there are two steps missing, part A, questing the dimensions and part B, Life’s parasitization of the universe, as was discussed above. The concept of the universe occurring ‘naturally’ brings to mind a conservative field, which it is, and all processes work in reverse if time passing is made negative and the universe shrinks and disappears because inflation works backward. Contrast the simplicity of the Big Whoosh with the current theory of the Big Bang and the sudden appearance of huge amounts of energy/momentum.
Part A, from chapter 84, ‘”the Lorentz contraction is a means of preventing chaos occurring, in a physical and logical sense, because, as the speed of a non-zero mass particle approaches the speed of light, the dimensions change proportionately so that it never reaches that speed. The dimensions are fundamental to the space that they describe and from chapter 83, ‘if we quest the dimensions, we find three constant relationships: energy to time for all space, energy to space for all time and space to time for all energies because all of the dimensions change by the Lorentz contraction. The first appears to suggest conservation of energy over time, the second that space has a set energy and that the creation of space creates energy, as is commonly thought, and could be the mechanism that forces matter/galaxies with its negative potential energy to move outwards as space is created. The third relationship shows that all (free) energy, in the form of photons must have a constant speed, relative to the measurer, and this is the Michelson-Morley result (for all motions).’ These relationships are necessary quests in a measurement space and the second relationship, that space has a set energy and that the creation of space creates energy suggests a reason for dark energy to exist.” ‘Dark energy is everywhere – a property of space itself – whereas dark matter occurs in blobs in the vicinity of galaxies.’ (Star – Craving Mad, Fred Watson, p 256)
Part B, Life is important because we are telling the story and in a measuring space, we evolved an ability to tune into the physical world as a parasite must do and use the properties of the space for our own end, for example, a sense of smell was probably one of the first senses and provides a direction to hunt/eat, and the two hemispheres of the brain attest to this. Later, the Cambrian enabled, I believe, multicellular organisms to evolve larger brains coupled with the efficient lensed eyes and planning for predator and prey situations to create a new type of space using concept/context. Given that 3,000 million years of evolution (iterations) based on a multitude of attempts, the resultant evolution of the brain should be based on the best possible method of operation. This is indeed the case and the best possible method is general mathematics that is composed of the mathematics of concepts and the four axioms.
Now, I originally called the questing of (a+b)=1 to be the Mathematics of the Mind that uses concepts and context to answer the (heritable) question of ‘is that a lion?’ as well as the equally important ‘is it far enough away to ignore?’. The physical (a+b)=1 is measurement/entanglement locally and (a and b)=1 is universe wide, but Life has changed a and b to be concept/context in a local reality. In other words, Life has taken the physical (a+b)=1 and changed it into something completely different! It appears that the organization/relation (a+b)=1 is the important part, not so much a and b, and that is as we would expect in a probability space, and this leads to the mathematics of concepts/context, including concepts and contexts that we cannot (at present) comprehend.
Fourthly, this answers the question of the future of a general mathematics, in that anything that is evolved/invented can be handled because general mathematics is written in the dimensions and Life can quest the relationship (a+b)=1 in all its permutations as is mentioned above. Concepts that are alien to us are common in nature, such as echo-location in bats, electromagnetic senses in sharks and platypuses, ultraviolet sight in bees and probably a lot more if we looked for them.
Specific examples for ourselves are (a+b) gives the Golden ratio (chapter 78), (a and b)=1 gives gravity (discussed above), (a+b)=1 gives diffraction (chapter 77), Plato’s political system (chapter 67) etc. The enigma of the Michelson-Morley experiment, where the measurement of the speed of light is the same for all observers indicates that a probability space is appropriate and it was this particular enigma that prompted this search/endeavour.
Another example, from chapter 84 is the reason ‘that particles, light etc. unfailingly travel in a straight line, given no entanglement, is that, if they did not, they would cause a logical singularity in the conservation of energy equation (a and b)=1 because it would have multiple solutions. In other words, a particle does not travel in a straight line because of momentum, but because momentum/energy is accountable in a measuring space, and it can be restated, again, that travel in a straight line is not only a physical property, but also a logical property.’
It would be nice to simplify motion to fit Newton’s laws of motion, but there is an entanglement across the universe that is an intimate part of a probability space and cannot be ‘glossed’ over, and only a universe-wide function, such as the conservation of energy should be used to show that realistically, a particle is acted-upon/entangled with every energy source in the universe. This is the elegant simplicity of the context of the complex and by all means use the simple (concept) but you must also satisfy the complex (context).
I would like to offer a further example that simplicity is the over-riding criterion, but sometimes a decision complicates simplicity. From above, ‘the Lorentz contraction is a means of preventing chaos occurring, in a physical and logical sense, because, as the speed of a non-zero mass particle approaches the speed of light, the dimensions change proportionately so that it never reaches that speed.’ I have often wondered why all of the effects, energy/mass, length and time passing, change by the same amount? Following the line of thought, above, it seems logical to me that it is simpler to change all of the dimensions by the same amount and it is more complicated to decide on one particular dimension to change. It would then seem that Occam’s razor is a fundamental/over-riding criteria that is a quest of the requirement of zero energy and it means that the postulate of the law of conservation of energy is simply a realization of the splitting of nothing into positive and negative energy and it is accountable only in a lowest state.
Whilst on this subject, the dimensions can be written as energy, x, y, z and time passing, or as (a+b)=1, x, y, z and time passing, because everything is energy from the Big-Bang/Big-Whoosh and only ‘exists’ if it is measured by an observer/iteration. Thus the dimensions are:
energy is equivalent to (a+b)=1, x, y, z and time passing
and each of these is related through the Lorentz contraction and this explains why energy, length, time and the relationship of measurement/observer all vary together to keep the total energy at zero. This answers another enigma, why length, time and mass change as the speed of light is approached by a particle with rest-mass. Everything is energy and all states of energy are equivalent, including mass, so E=mc2 is an equivalence relationship not an equation and all types of energy are states of energy. A small digression that contributes to understanding this might be appropriate.
‘Bookkeeping now has the potential to make or break the planet. Because accounting reduces everything to its monetary value, it has allowed us to value least that apparently free source of life itself: the planet…. “But there may be one last hope for life on earth: accountants.”’ (Double Entry: How the Merchants of Venice Created Modern Finance, Jane Gleeson-White) The four axioms include double entry bookkeeping because they were derived from the dimensions and show the accounting of energy, and a system must be used that accounts for the positive and the negative that must be the same because of (a+b+c …)=0, where a, b, c, … are energies, and hence the principle of least action for the total of energy must always be the same and that requires a minimum.
In other words, everything is energy and every portion of energy has the same attraction of gravity because of the book-keeping. This is not an observation that should be treated lightly because, it is not logic, as we tend to call it, it is the basic organization behind the questing of the universe. This ‘book-keeping’ is the ‘power’, I believe, behind the natural formation of universes in probability spaces and is a double entry of gravity/energy and energy/energy and that accounting is the reason why the principle of least action appears to be a physical law.
From chapter 84, ‘the principle of least action … says, essentially, that things happen in a way that requires least effort. So, a beam of light will travel in a straight line because that is the shortest path between two points…. Quantum theory, which describes how things work on a subatomic scale, seems to be the one area where the principle of least action does not apply. Quantum objects can be in two states at once, and can take multiple paths when travelling from one place to another. Richard Feynman went so far as to suggest that a quantum particle will simultaneously take every possible path when making a journey.’ (30 Second Theories, editor Paul Parsons, p16).
‘The above paragraph describes the development of physics from Newton’s first law of motion to quantum mechanics, and by implication, everything in between is also flawed, based on postulates that are unprovable. How do you prove that a particle travels in a straight line when entanglement is universe-wide and simplifications need to be treated through the mathematics of concepts? However, this is a simplification that follows from Newton’s simple laws of motion, and diffraction proves that light does not travel in a straight line, but is acted upon by the short-range entanglement (a+b)=1,see chapter 77.’
Similarly, from chapter 84 ‘”quantum mechanics may be an exception to the principle of least action” cannot be true because the questing in a measurement space leads to the universe going about its measurement business of assessing every possibility, as it has to in a measuring space, so that the law of conservation of energy remains at zero. Feynman’s approach is just this, a statement of the property of a measurement space and Feynman’s approach works because that is how a probability space works.’
‘”There is a delightful story of Eddington being congratulated by a colleague for being one of only three people in the world who understood relativity. When Eddington paused, and his colleague commented that there was really no need to be so modest about it, the Cambridge astronomer replied that, no, he was just trying to think who the third person might be.” (Star – Craving Mad, Fred Watson, p 202) As one that has suffered under the paradoxes of modern-day physics, I hope that I have erased them and made physics more understandable.’ I have included this story because it shows that looking top-down, using a mathematics based on counting sheep can lead to difficulties. The universe is simple, where six dimensions quest Life and a universe and every explanation is simple from the bottom-up.
It has been said that ‘mathematics is the hand-maiden to the sciences’, but, it could be that mathematics is hampering the sciences, and even worse, mathematics has done little for the social sciences. This general mathematics brings context onto an equal footing with concept and fits with the mathematics of concepts that is needed to manipulate the concepts found in the social sciences. The basic problem that the world is facing is entanglement/context between parties/population/groups from around the world and the sharing of common resources.
General mathematics will provide an answer, but we have to set out the problem and a quick and easy description of the use of the mathematics of concepts from chapter 75 is ‘if we take the Cartesian system of the X-Y plane, we can say that some point is composed of two independent variables (x, y), and the mathematics of concepts can be handled similarly, bearing in mind that an iteration or mind/brain initiates a measurement and we are dealing with world O and world P. A little foreshadowing will make it easier to understand, that world P is a probability space and only has iteration, whereas Life has made world O into a “determinate”/non-entanglement world because of the necessity of creating a reality as part of questing/Survival-of-the-Fittest.’
Further, ‘taking the easy case of world P, questing is: X-Y axes with the concepts to be examined spread equally spaced along the X axis, and a curve/^ is drawn between each concept and every other concept with a height ^ equal to its probability and the sum of all the “heights” is 1. This comes straight from the entanglement/measurement of the probabilities in a probability space. To move it into world O in order to automate or use a mind/brain, move the concepts and the ^ to make a “normal” curve and read off the best concepts and their context. If this looks simple, ask yourself “why should it be complicated?”, when the universe requires only 5 dimensions and life six dimensions.’
Notice that this use of the mathematics of concepts assumes/needs, just as mathematics does, the use of the four axioms: elegance, forward-planning, questing and relevance as the basis of context/organization that is used by the mind in assigning the ‘numbers’/importance to the context. Notice also, that the context has to be numericalized and that shows that context is crucial to decisions and yet, that is precisely the part that we tend to ignore/under-use in day-to-day decisions.
I want to repeat the previous paragraph because it is crucial to the uptake and use of a mathematics of concept/context because we can all list the world’s problems, such as over-population, over-fishing, mass extinction, pollution and so on for any number of concepts. The solution lies in the context because the context shows/points-out those people that have their own agenda and how that agenda is often not in the general interest. This is the Problem of the Commons (concept) where every person extracts as much as possible/practical from the (free) common without safeguarding/husbanding its resources. The solution (context) is in the knowledge of who is misusing the common and doing something about it.
Even worse are the political parties that try to manipulate the (so called) democratic vote to their own ends and a quick description of Plato’s political system (chapter 67) shows that there are three orthogonalities/independent groups that move the motivation/setting-of-policy from the politicians to the universities and leave the politicians to ‘strut the stage’. The universities are the repositories of knowledge/expertise and the voters make the choices with the media transmitting the choices whilst the politicians have the important job of ‘oiling’/contexting/bringing-together everyone. Notice that the democracy of Plato’s time was not a compulsory vote and only interested parties voted. This is important because a compulsory vote skews the result unless everyone is an informed voter. This very important point of every voter being informed dictates that universities provide a set of unbiased informed choices for voters to choose from, and they are noticeably absent from current elections. This is a case-in-point of universities using a formal general mathematics, that all agree on, to provide guidance to voters.
From chapter 67, ‘because this is so new/different/important, I thought that I would put in an example to show how effective this method can be in guiding/controlling governments through the reporting of government policies by the universities through the media to the voters with virtue as the aim. Most of the countries use the capitalist system with some degree of democracy because it is (probably) considered the most “efficient”, but using Plato’s idea of involving the universities as “policy generators”, turns a two-way into a three-way organization, and the “flip” might happen (virtually) “over-night”. Countries could easily incorporate Plato’s idea because it is simple to install, (practically) costless and much more efficient and “steals a march” on any country not using it.’ In a ‘nutshell’, these are three concepts (voters, politicians and universities) with the media providing/transmitting the context between the three groups and politicians’ careers are not wasted/curtailed pursuing necessary, but unpopular views.
I would like to offer a final example from the book, Super Genes, Deepak Chopra and Rudolph E. Tanzi, that presents the Super Genes that consist of a combination of genome, epigenetics and the microbiome that is the bacterial flora living on, and in the body. ‘Human beings could be the first creatures in the history of life on Earth to self-direct where their evolution is going. If so, the super genome becomes the key to everyone’s future …. To get there, however, three major changes would need to be established in our understanding of evolution, and each of them would topple a pillar of Darwinian theory.’
‘First, evolution must be driven by more than random chance.
Second, evolution has to drastically speed up, able to bring changes not in hundreds of thousands and millions of years, but in a single generation.
Third, evolution must be self-organizing and thus mindful, allowing for the influence of choice making, learning, and experience. These are serious challenges to the status quo. Ordinarily the argument would take place within the small circle of professional evolutionists. But the goal is so important to everyone’s life that we want to bring you into the privileged circle.’ (p 253) Notice the author’s use of the italic for ‘mindful’ and self-organizing suggests that a plan must be in the collective minds of the population and where does that plan come from? I suggest general mathematics and in particular, the organization that is Plato’s politics.
This quotation is the concept of what is needed for the future, viewed from the point of view of genetics. Genome, epigenetics and microbiome could contribute, but the concept calls for a context, and genome, epigenetics and microbiome are basically physical and not logical. The means of effecting these three conditions is to abandon iteration (Survival of the Fittest) and use general mathematics to supply context and use, what I call, the Survival of the Best that is a means of using context to change society to fit into the mould that is required by the experts/universities to make the changes to society. This requires general mathematics, and more specifically, the mathematics of concepts and the four axioms of the mind/brain. As with Plato’s politics above, context can only be applied by the informed, but, unlike Plato’s ideas of philosopher’s governing the state, the voting public would still make the choices.
Controlling our evolution is now possible with general mathematics because it is an organizational ‘overlay’ that will produce answers to social problems and even more than that, it is necessary if we are to become symbiotic with our environment. There are many ways to influence our evolution, but there is only one unique organizational bottom-up method that guarantees a result if it is put in place and forms a rallying call of ‘virtue as the aim’ that everyone can get behind, according to Plato, with the added advantage that transgressors become quickly apparent.
The major religions through the ages have resulted from the life and times of individuals, Buddha, Confucius, Jesus etc., but here is a unique opportunity, using the unique general mathematics to democratically determine in which direction our evolution should proceed, address the problems of over-production, over-population etc. and even form one religion (chapter 37). As mathematics is to general mathematics, as iteration is to the mind/brain, as Survival of the Fittest is to Survival of the Best so a number of religions are to a democratically designed religion. There is a ‘quantum leap’ from one to the other and we are now able to take advantage of it, if we choose.
From chapter 37, “The first surprise, and it was a surprise to me when I realized it, that having said that we need a single religion by amalgamating the common bits of the existing religions, it appears that we already have a global religion, and it is already functioning and in place. Furthermore, this religion uses the operator of reality in the required form of ‘get on with your neighbour’ with the added bonus of ‘otherwise we will make it our business to see that you do’”. The answer is, of course the government/judiciary/police system that all countries use.
The proverbs say, ‘if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck’, and this sounds like the Second Coming! After all, can we expect someone to fix our population problems, fix our over-consumption problems etc? Surely it is more logical that we be given the opportunity to fix them ourselves, as in the accounts of Sodom and Gomorrah. ‘In Abrahamic religions, Sodom and Gomorrah have become synonymous with impenitent sin, and their fall with a proverbial manifestation of divine retribution.’ (Wikipedia) We have a choice, through general mathematics, so, do we take it? One is tempted to say ‘Hail, the child is born!’ because general mathematics is the bottom-up gateway to allowing us to democratically determine our planet’s evolution. ‘Heady Stuff!’, are we ready for it? Can we wait much longer with global warming in the ‘wings’?
People understand that burning fossil fuels leads to the concept of global warming, but ‘there is a far greater disaster facing the West than the worst possible scenarios for climate change. Western civilization is in a decline which has been in motion since the late nineteenth century, and has accelerated greatly since the 1960s. This is the same decline as occurred in countless other civilizations, from Sumer to ancient China and from India to Rome, the end point of which is complete social and economic collapse.’ (Biohistory, Decline and Fall of the West, Jim Penman, p 232) Can we afford mistakes that might possibly arise without the universities’ know-how and participation? Universities contain ‘god-like’ wisdom if we can tap the special/specific talents of the academic specialists through the actions of generalists. That is, only generalist academics can data-mine the universities that Plato’s politics needs to present to the voters and politicians as a set of options and explanations.
Conclusion: How important is general mathematics? We can gain some idea by comparing that firstly, both mathematics (counting space (a+b)) and general mathematics (measuring space (a+b)=1) need the mind/brain and the four axioms, and secondly, a quest to an individual’s feelings (Golden ratio (a+b)) that Life uses to denote beauty/elegance (mathematics) can be contrasted to the importance of the formation of the universe through (a+b)=1 (general mathematics). Clearly, there is hugely more scope opened up using general mathematics compared to mathematics.
Another example of estimating the importance of general mathematics is through communication. ‘In or around 1450, Johannes Gutenberg, a goldsmith, discovered after years of experiment how to make movable type to be used in a printing press. A single press could now produce 3,600 pages a day compared with just a few by hand copying…. The World Wide Web was first used in a sceptical CERN in Switzerland to organize the internal telephone directory although its founder, Tim Berners-Lee, the modern Gutenberg, always had far grander ambitions for it’. (The Second Curve, Charles Handy, p 34) The relation between books and the readers, and website and browser is concept/context and general mathematics provides the formal recognition/comparison in assessing their value to the reader. We use this process naturally, but nonetheless it is general mathematics, written in the dimensions, needing the four axioms and often the concept and the context (especially) is miss-used, leading to a lack of balance.
Further, a normal mathematical proof is that you prove a concept, but general mathematics is different because it contains context and this paper, mathematically speaking, is different because it move into disparate areas, but connected because everything is connected/entangled, literally. Perhaps it reads like a story, because stories contain concepts and context, and that being so, mathematics, as it stands, is obviously incomplete (Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems).
I believe that general mathematics is the organization that naturally quests the dimensions and includes Life and is the iteration of measurement/entanglement space plus the mathematics of concepts that evolved with the mind/brain plus the creation of a higher level of entanglement. Also, I have always considered that the mathematics of concepts must provide a prediction (relevance) and I predict that there are no enigmas that cannot be solved using this general mathematics. I have answered a number of enigmas, above, to my satisfaction, but there is the problem of global warming, population control etc. These problems come under the heading that we should be better parasites and not kill our host and ourselves by our actions and our ultimate aim, I believe, is to become symbionts, and that can be done, I believe, by using Plato’s politics and Survival of the Best. These problems have been with us for a very long time and have been itemised as a wish that God would fix them eventually.
For 2,000 years there has been the hope that a ‘Second Coming’ will make the Earth a paradise. ‘The world to come, age to come, or heaven on Earth are eschatological phrases reflecting the belief that the current world or current age is flawed or cursed and will be replaced in the future by a better world or age or paradise.’ (Wikipedia, World to come) I cannot help wondering whether any god will/would give everyone paradise, or make them earn it?
This is a reasoned/scientific paper that offers a means of attaining Survival of the Best and achieving an unflawed earthly existence that could be taken to mean a symbiotic relationship with our environment. Should we wait for divine intervention or organize ourselves using basic scientific principles?
There is only one open-ended general mathematics in a probability space and using this, it is likely to be an opportunity to ‘put everything right’ for ourselves and for our environment. Plato’s politics provides the expertise and the social organizational structure to allow us to change society with society’s blessing and full understanding and participation. A call-to-arms with ‘virtue’ as the aim, might be appropriate and ‘carry the day’!
Finally, this paper presents a unique usable solution that handles concept and context between groups of people, animals, food sources etc. and presents the idea of working together to become symbiotic, a ‘Second Coming’, academic knowledge of history and Survival of the Best as an aim for the future. These are aims that bring us together, and to contrast, ‘modelling how humans behave is tricky. Revealing patterns is possible, but crisply modelling behaviour at an individual level is mind-bogglingly difficult. As for forecasting chains of events, this is almost impossible.’ (Digital vs Human, Richard Watson, p 234) This shows that we have ‘lost’ our (common) way and if we can state desirable/necessary aims, that are achievable, as above, I believe, through Plato’s political system, we do not need to forecast important chains of events, because that is the universities’ decision/recommendation/consensus for the voters.
References: all quotations are fully referenced in the body and earlier chapters can be found on darrylpenney.com if required.
Chapter 84: Occam’s Razor, Principle of Least Action, Why a Particle Travels in a Straight Line, Why Science is Flawed, a Mathematical Giggle and the Derivation of Everything. .
Chapter 83: The Big Whoosh, Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems, Perpetual Motion Machines, the Axioms that Define the Mind, Bell’s Inequality, Limitations on Quantum Computing.
Chapter 81: Parasites in Probability Space, General Mathematics, Logic, Measurement, Organization, the Four Axioms of Measurement that Link the Mind/brain to Mathematics and the Dimensions of a Probability Space, Life as a Possible Sixth Dimension, the Why of Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems and the Goal of Explaining Everything by a Single, Elegant, Unified Equation is Attained.
Chapter 78: Love, Beauty, Ecstasy, the Golden Ratio and the Reason that Sexual Selection Works.
Chapter 77: Diffraction, Why Matter is Solid and Bounces, Unfolding the Two Types of Entanglement and an Upgrade to Newton’s Laws of Motion.
Chapter 75: The Nature of Life and Logic, Newton Laws of Motion, Reflection and Diffraction.
Chapter 67: Unfolding Democracy, the Fifth Dimension and Waking Plato to Save our World.
Chapter 37: ‘Hark, the Herald Angels Sing’.