Abstract: the name Unified Field Theory promises a theory that is wide-reaching and includes all fields including the local football field. This derivation does just that, because the theory uses the mathematics of concepts that allows all desired fields with any desired priority to be set for the speciality of fields to be considered.  In other words, the theory presented here ticks all the boxes and is infinitely adaptable to the users’ wants, answers the  ‘why?’ in a deeper way by widening the definitions of the ‘particles of action’, ‘show-cases’ the mathematics of concepts and truly becomes the Unified Field Theory that does away with all assumptions and rests only on the dimensions of a probability space and the associated measurement/entanglement/ecstasy of the physical universe and the concept/context/beauty of Life.

I believe that I have given sufficient proof that our universe is a probability space and literally everything (until now), apart from space-time, has been taken (top-down) from the fifth dimension and so, I will use a bottom-up approach from the dimensions to show how wide-sweeping the fifth dimension is and it will allow me to build on the Unified Field Theory that appears to have caused trouble over many years. Perhaps the problem is, as shown in the two paragraphs below, that Newton’s ideas have been slavishly followed and a new direction is needed, and especially a new type of mathematics.

 

‘Let me raise a few points which seem not to have been made the subject of scholarly investigation. I have always been puzzled by the strange wording of the definitions of mass, momentum, and force, at the beginning of the Principia. For example, Definition I states “the quantity of matter is the measure of the same, arising from its density and its bulk conjointly”. Why does Newton again and again identify a physical property or quantity with its measure? There is surely more to a physical quantity than a statement of how it is measured? The answer is possibly to be found in Newton’s early Scholium on absolute space and time. Since, according to Newton, we can only measure relative space and time, and not absolute space and time, all we can know about physical quantities are not the absolute quantities themselves but merely their relative substitutes – that is, their measures. This argument is not well worked out by Newton.’ (Let Newton be!, John Henry, p 59, edited by John Fauvel)

 

‘It is not always appreciated that, 60 years ago, the makers of modern quantum theory were totally steeped, immersed, educated, brainwashed, if you like – in the mathematical methods of Lagrange and Hamilton; these ideas had grown out of, and were the natural evolution of, Newton’s dynamical ideas.’ (p 244) Further, ‘as we now know, his faith in forces was justified to such an extent that it is widely regarded as Newton’s most important scientific innovation.’ (p 128) ‘A slightly naughty thought can come to one’s mind here. Is it due to the nature of physics that the mathematical tools started by Newton are so essential for many parts of physics through the centuries? Or is our selection of worked-on parts of physics still largely Newtonian? (p 244)

 

This last quotation is what I call a chaotic statement [both correct and not correct at the same time] and it will take the whole chapter to make it clear, and that will be done, but it is at the moment a prediction and as the sixth dimension shows, a forward-plan makes things easier/possible. Newton missed/assumed the logic half of physics and also used mathematics, which is a special case of the mathematics of concepts, and mathematicians and physicists etc. have built on his vision and, as a consequence, we face a world-catastrophe/Extinction-event. The basic-problem/error that science has pursued may well be ‘simplification’ that [perhaps] came about from the simple inverse square law relationship of gravity, in world O units, and that aim [of science in general] is at odds with the indeterminacy of quantum mechanics, Life, social sciences etc. Everything is related, so we can start anywhere and I have chosen the Unified Field Theory to illustrate the failings of ‘following the herd’.

‘According to the current understanding of physics, forces are not transmitted directly between interacting objects, but instead are described by intermediary entities called fields. All four of the known fundamental forces are mediated by fields, which in the Standard Model of particle physics result from exchange of gauge bosons. Specifically the four fundamental interactions to be unified are:

• Strong interaction: the interaction responsible for holding quarks together to form hadrons, and holding neutrons and also protons together to form atomic nuclei. The exchange particle that mediates this force is the gluon.
• Electromagnetic interaction: the familiar interaction that acts on electrically charged particles. The photon is the exchange particle for this force.
• Weak interaction: a short-range interaction responsible for some forms of radioactivity, that acts on electrons, neutrinos, and quarks. It is mediated by the W and Z bosons.
• Gravitational interaction: a long-range attractive interaction that acts on all particles. The postulated exchange particle has been named the graviton.

Modern unified field theory attempts to bring these four interactions together into a single framework.’ (Wikipedia, Unified field theory)

Firstly, I have to say that I know little about this subject, and wish to comment on existing theory even less and that is the problem for the generalist and (possibly) why most people are content with a speciality, but, there is a need for a new approach, and that, is written in the dimensions. The missing word is ‘context’ and that, I believe, underlies the Extinction event that we have caused, our modern diseases and even the approaching Armageddon of our planet.

‘As the only nonanimal source of vitamin D, mushrooms are undoubtly important for many animals, especially species that are nocturnal and/or burrowing. All fungi contain ergosterol in quantity; it’s transformed into vitamin D by irridation with sunlight, often to an astonishing degree.’ (Trees, Truffles, and Beasts: How Forests Function, Maser, Claridge and Trappe, p 96) This quotation is apt for a number of reasons but is a little misleading in one context, and that is that we and all animals evolved from fungi and still retain the ability to form vitamin D from sunlight.

So important are these contextual ramifications to modern living, ‘”the implications are that vitamin D could be regulated by the controlled exposure of dried mushrooms to sunlight.” Therefore, squirrels that hang mushrooms or truffles in trees to dry in the sun ….  are producing vitamin D supplements in their diets’ (p 96) that this suggests that neglecting context is (possibly) the reason that modern diseases are so prevalent. These quotations are illustrating where we have gone wrong and in simple terms: context is a duality/orthogonality that we have not realized is attached to each and every concept. Throughout the ages, people have ‘reached’ into the fifth dimension and used logic, concepts and context without realizing where they come from, or how to use them properly.

 

Secondly, I believe that the Big-Bang/Big-Whoosh created a probability of existence universe composed of matter/energy [always totalling zero] that are states of energy in various forms with varying lifetimes and the universe has the dimensions space-time and (a+b)=1 as an illustration of measurement/entanglement of a probability space (a+b+c…)=1 where a and b are measurement/observers. This is the universe/basic-space of what we call energy and encompasses everything that allows us to investigate and make [mathematical/logical] sense of the parts with a measurement/entanglement duality [concept/context duality] using the mathematics of concepts.

 

Thirdly, (a+b)=1 can, as the questing of quantum mechanics [being necessarily indeterminate until measured] be written as (a +/and b)=1 to show the logic of entanglement and this leads to the quantum/evolution-logic/gravity description of the universe and this logic [as part of all energy] relativises the dimensions [mass/energy, space and time passing] so that the conservation of energy remains zero (see chapter 72). Hence, I offer an alternative to the postulate of ’gravitons’ and believe that gravity is both a logic and an energy and believe that I can offer better understanding by using a bottom-up approach through the dimensions.

 

Fourthly, whilst not an objection, the relationship of radioactivity to the ‘weak interaction’ seems to be a probability/half-life function that suggests/aligns with the idea that our universe is a probability space. In other words, as it stands, it requires half-life/probability additional to existence whilst a probability space contains that probability [is less complicated logically and so, more likely].

 

Fifthly, the quotation about Newton’s lead/guidance as being the ‘guiding light’ of physicists ‘cries out’ for radically different ideas of space/fields and what I am proposing fits perfectly with his perception of force. If he had asked the additional question of why the apple kept repeating the same motion, he would have (perhaps) seen the logic side of the space/field, or perhaps not, because force is a world O creation and already contains the logic. A world O [our] measurement requires a mind/brain to apply the question [containing logic], whereas a world P [physical] does not. This concept of consciousness [of the apple] is continuous and seamless over evolution and thus forms a reality that is the Theory of Everything. In other words, the Unified Field Theory and the Theory of Everything are similar/linked.

 

I would like to offer a quotation from chapter 73, ‘there may be no a priori reason why the correct description of nature has to be a unified field theory. However, this goal has led to a great deal of progress in modern theoretical physics and continues to motivate research.’ (Wikipedia, Unified field theory) However, there is a description of the universe that I have called ‘quantum/evolution-logic/gravity’ and it is derived from the five dimensions, above, and they are the a priori and all that is needed to create the universe.

 

From chapter 72: ‘concept/measurement: 0 = kinetic (energy) + gravity (energy) + mass + dark matter + dark energy + photon energy + chemical etc. acting at the speed of photons in vacuo as a maximum.

 

Context/logic: 0 = kinetic + gravity (logic) + mass + dark matter + dark energy + photon energy + chemical etc. acting at an infinite speed where gravity is always negative and all the other energies are positive.’

 

This shows the separation of gravity (energy) and gravity (logic) and is the start of the logic side of the fields becoming apparent.

 

From chapter 73: deriving organization, ‘given that relativisation (1), the mathematics of concepts (2) and setting out the concepts/attractors and setting the context (3), the use of an [assigned] absolute (4) [forward-planning] chosen by the universities (5) [the ‘best’ absolute] are derived above. Further, (6) is experimentation/trials/measurement etc., as suggested by Francis Bacon to bring about a ‘scientific method’ that has proved spectacularly successful in science/technology and this could be considered a ‘break-through’ because most ‘science’ was derived by ‘thought’ for thousands of years. However, the duality of concept/context and measurement/logic means that theorists (7) should be included and it is apparent that a mathematics of concepts has been set up [(1) to (7) in total] where more factors produce a better organization, but what is the purpose of an organization? An organization is set up for a number of reasons, but basically it is to satisfy a need and/or to evolve (8), and I should stress that these eight points are (possibly) the most important of many more that may need to be considered.’

 

I should mention that (4) [forward-planning] is a sixth dimension and point (8) shows the gradation of evolution from iteration [Survival of the Fittest] to Survival of the Best when we decide what evolution should become and this concept drastically changes most life on earth and so we must be careful to use the correct tools for the job. Another crucial point is that relativisation is on-going and a decision/measurement must have the concepts and contexts (that were used) recorded so that they are seen to remain relevant over time.

 

Further, from chapter 73: ‘the comparison of the above with the below shows that the success of science was organizationally lucky/fortuitous, because, from above, many of our organizations are inadequate, such as the process of law, the making of laws by public servants, the food offered by shops, the fishing industry [a commons] etc. are deficient, but science was a ‘stroke’ of luck because acceptance (1) of a theory is required by scientists in general and that theory requires the mathematics of concepts (2) [to compare theories] and invites additions and checking (3) of the result (4) by those with a long-time career (5) in the subject and this often requires experimentation (6) and theorists (7) to fit it all together, and finally, the overall idea of science is to ‘push’ the boundaries (8) of what we know. It is hard to resist a giggle that science has been using the fifth dimension, top-down without acknowledging its existence.’

 

Keeping these thoughts in mind, from above, firstly, the splitting of gravity into a physical and logical duality, and secondly, a logical field of organization that embraces literally everything because everything is part of everything else [organization, entanglement, mathematics of concepts] have rendered the existence of ‘particles of action’ of the existing theory too restrictive. The application of the current use of the methods of science shows that science/universities are based/aligned with the theory, above, and the success of science/technology offers a ‘proof’ [by exception] of its power. Notice that as we moved down the list of the Unified Field Theory above, we moved from the physical to the physical/logic of gravity to the logic of organization.

 

The next step is to move to other fields, bearing in mind that I have relaxed the requirement that there must be a particle to transmit the ‘action’ because the instantaneous speed of logic is a property of the space, not the energy in the space. It is delving top-down into the fifth dimension to say that there must be a ‘something’ to cause ‘scary action at a distance’ and, of course there is, but it is a property of the probability space and relativisation was not recognised. Of course there must be something to ‘affect’ the ‘something’ at a distance, but it can take many forms, such as trust [monetary fields], logic [gravitation], measurement, relativisation, love etc. [The word ‘logic’ is used as a ‘rag’/mixed bag and will be considered/derived properly at a later date]

 

Another aspect, that emerges from the name Unified Field Theory, that was considered to be a theory of physics, becomes part of a much larger theory because it promises a theory that is wide-reaching and include all fields including the local football field. This comes about as part of the bottom-up requirement of the all-encompassing name and this derivation does just that, and more, because the theory uses the mathematics of concepts that allows all desired fields with any desired priority to be set for the speciality of fields to be considered.  In other words, the unified field theory presented here ticks all the boxes and is infinitely adaptable to the users’ wants as the area of interest can be prioritised by selection, whilst bringing other concepts into consideration as needed. To simplify further, a general mathematics of concepts must involve ALL concepts and contexts and that is why it has to be used, and why the ‘exact’ Newtonian thinking cannot adequately describe fields of all types.

 

The next to be considered is the ‘quantum’ field which could be defined as a ‘questing’ field because a probability field must consider all options [questing] and to do that it must be indeterminate at each point until measured, and it is the measurement, not a particle, that causes the wave/particle to become determinant. This, in the light of the above, could be resolved by saying that questing is a property of the space, but that might be ‘splitting hairs’ as the space is a field, so, we could say that a and b [as measurement/observers], as (a+b)=1, also shows that measurement and entanglement are a duality and comprise two independent fields.

 

Another field that must be considered is the singularity field and the associated relativity relativisation, because the dimensions require that the speed of all photons be a constant and this (logical) maximum allows the possibility of a singularity occurring. This possibility is handled in the simplest logical way [Occam’s razor] by relativisation of all the dimensions [energy/mass, space and time vary by the Lorentz transformation] as a frame of reference approaches the speed of light with respect to a [stationary] frame. This is a logical necessity because the measuring ‘stick’ is the speed of light and if it is exceeded, chaos occurs and cannot be eliminated/reversed because entropy cannot be simply returned/reversed. We are here because it has not happened in any of 400 billion galaxies over 14 billion years and nor is it likely to occur because relativisation works well, and that is why it is a field [‘it works’ field, multiverse selection logic].

 

Another field has been discovered by Life and is unique to Life and that is consciousness, and its major attribute is forward-planning that derives the sixth dimension [world O] and that has been formulated by organisms, including ourselves, as a necessary defence against predation by the mind/brain using distance and speed to judge a safe distance. Likewise, the predator has to judge speed and distance to control the level of success of an attack because each failed bid reduces the available resources [this is the source of world O versus world P]. The sixth dimension, I believe, is different to the other dimensions because it introduces future time and that requires a space/field of the mind/brain.

 

It is important to note that [world P] probability space is measurement/entanglement and a simple mathematical space, but the mind/brain has built on this [world O] with the sixth dimension [forward-planning] and reality has changed the space/field. Entanglement changes every point in the universe, but because of measurement, we are constrained by what we know and live in a world that is determinant because every organism must be able to live with every other for at least one breeding cycle. This is probably easier to understand if we consider that each of us has had an unbroken chain of ancestors that had offspring [for 3,000 million years], else we would not be here. In other words, the necessity of survival means that we can live with predators for a ‘reasonable’ time and recognise danger and avoid it, and if we cannot sense it, such as for bacteria, our immune system can, and does.

 

The space/field produced by the mind/brain is so important/overwhelming that it has instigated a mass extinction at the current time, every bit as ‘bad’ as the mass extinction caused by, I believe, the evolution of lensed eyes and the predator/prey forward-planned attack/avoidance evolved in the Cambrian. Now (a+b)=1 shows context for the concepts a and b, and I have said that concept/context [world O] is a duality [measurement/entanglement duality in world P] and the phrase ‘space/field produced by the mind/brain’ could be classed as a chaotic statement [both correct and incorrect at the same time], so I will explain with a digression.

 

Some time ago, I used the mathematics of concepts [or, as it was then, the Mathematics of the Mind] to derive three Laws of Life: (1) creation [iteration, componentization (like an atom, evolution etc.), time passing etc., (2) state of mind, nutrition and exercise etc. and (3) family life and teaching the young etc. These are expressed in the terms of the mathematics of concepts [hence the etc.] and, given that mathematics is a recent invention, it is not surprising that these Laws mirror the Trinity of the Bible and suggest that the Holy Spirit, that has been ‘lost’ for 2,000 years is the second Law (2) (see chapter 1). The first Law is the Creation [God the Father] and the third Law is God the Son. It is well known that the Church has always believed that the environment was for man’s use, but that idea must change in view of the current extinction event.

 

From above, every concept has an associated context, and the concept of the mind/brain has the second and third Laws as context because we must relate ourselves to the environment [Law (2)] and prepare offspring for the environment on their own [Law (3)]. Thus, the mind/brain field/space has two contexts whereby we keep ourselves healthy [considering that 60% of adults are overweight or obese] and prepare our children to enter the community. The mind is a ‘higher’ use of a brain that is composed of a multitude of cells and by coming together, produce an organization that has new properties that tie into the surrounding universe through improved measurement [lensed eyes leading to forward-planning etc.].

 

The above is, as in the mathematics of concepts, laying out the most pertinent concepts ready to apply the context to derive a version of the Unified Field Theory and it may pay to ‘lay to rest’ a couple of ‘urban myths’ considering quantum mechanics and relativity. They are simple concepts and will allow us to appreciate the concept and context of fields. Relativity is a logical requirement because the ratio of space to time dimensions demands a constant speed of light [for all/different energies] that becomes indeterminate and produces logical chaos if a particle exceeds the speed of our measuring rod. Quantum mechanics arises because we live in a probability universe and a probability space ‘quests’ over every alternative and the result must be indeterminate unless a measurement forces it to become determinate. That has disposed of those two problems easily because we used concept/logic in both cases and that is the fifth dimension (a+b)=1.

 

Now, we find that fields have to belong in a space that holds them [much like the zeroth law was appended to this oversight of the three laws of thermodynamics] and that is the probability space of existence that over-arches everything, supports the Big-Bang/Big-Whoosh and holds energy in different states that ‘meshes’ with the two [strong and weak force], above. However, electromagnetic quanta, I believe, are constrained [by the dimensions] to a relatively slow speed and, I also believe, they are ‘free’ energy, however, quanta are essential to Life-fields in transferring energy [and balancing energy].

 

The total energy in the universe appears to be zero [not least for logical reasons] and that means that literally everything is the result of ‘splitting’ into matter/anti-matter, positive/negative electric charges, positive and negative energies and north/south magnetic poles and I believe that their effects are linked by the basic properties of measurement/entanglement in our probability universe. Notice that a different effect occurs when energy is created, because creation of energy [splitting] increases time and space].

 

 

Finally, I believe that there is another secondary absolute from the fifth dimension (a+b)=1 that makes an over-arching description of our physical universe be measurement/entanglement/ecstasy and this is carried into world O through the evolution of Life. Ecstasy, or a feeling of resonance through measurement/entanglement is ‘available’/we-have-made-use-of the questing of the solution of (a+b), and that is the Golden ratio that has intrigued scholars for hundreds, perhaps thousands of years as a source of beauty/contentment, and that concept will/has been dealt with more fully in the future. This concept/field entwines/involves a huge proportion of our lives as in the search for personal beauty including jewellery, high heels etc., the enjoyment of music, drugs, food etc.

The fundamental interactions to be unified are:

1. a probability of existence space over-arches the fields that are defined by the dimensions: space-time and (a+b)=1, for simplicity and for measurement/observers a and b and remembering that energy, as the sole occupier of the space is effectively a dimension.
2. Strong interaction: the interaction responsible for holding quarks together to form hadrons, and holding neutrons and also protons together to form atomic nuclei. The exchange particle that mediates this force is the gluon.
3. Electromagnetic interaction: the familiar interaction that acts on electrically charged particles. The photon is the exchange particle for this energy [I have changed energy for force because force requires a measurement].
4. Weak interaction: a short-range interaction responsible for some forms of radioactivity, that acts on electrons, neutrinos, and quarks. It is mediated by the W and Z bosons [and invokes/requires probability].
5. Gravitational interaction: a long-range attractive interaction that acts on all energies (having a energy component and a logic component) [measurement/entanglement/logic]. The logic component is instantaneous and the energy component has a constant speed of light because the dimensions change by the same amount [Lorentz factor].
6. Measurement/entanglement duality from the equation/illustration (a+b)=1 that a and b have no absolute solution (except for the speed of light).
7. Measurement/entanglement duality from the equation/illustration (a and b)=1. Notice that F and G produce Plato’s problem of no absolute [of justice etc.] because the equation has a solution/absolute [speed of light].
8. Organization affects every relationship and through the fifth dimension (a +/and b)=1 can be derived concepts/attractors in the form of a mathematics of concepts that describes in a transparent way the concepts used in the prediction. This allows specialization  but still keeps the basic over-arching attractors.
9. Questing field can be derived from a probability space and is the requirement that measurements remain indeterminant until a measurement is made by an iteration or mind/brain. This is the basis of quantum mechanics, evolution, business growth etc.
10. Singularity field is the ability of a field to prevent a singularity occurring that would effect a logic or measurement chaotic effect universe-wide or within an attractor [necessitating a boundary]. Our universe relativises the dimensions of energy/mass, space and time-passing by the Lorentz factor as the relative speed of two frames of reference approach the speed of light in vacuo [logic limit]. Our universe has been successful in 400 billion galaxies over 14 billion years, otherwise we would not be here [logic of selection].
11. Mind/brain field is the building/evolving of a new type of field on top of the measurement/entanglement field that is the probability space [world P] turning it into a concept/context/determinate field of the mind/brain complete with special units of distance and speed to guage predator/prey behavior. This is the world O of mathematics and physics [limited context] that (probably) is causing an Extinction event on the planet.
12. Mathematics of the Mind is the correct/optimal [derivable from the dimensions] way of using the mind/brain and the bio-computer/evolution ‘proves’ that the Mathematics of the Mind and the mathematics of concepts are the same. In other words, the countless iterations of evolution have produced a mathematically optimal system (in the mind/brain).
13. Environmental field (second Law of Life) is the reality that allows organisms to co-exist and reproduce and contains a mathematical/logic ‘machine’ [componentization, atom, evolution etc.] that is the basis of Survival of the Fittest, where the fittest produce more offspring. The individual relies on state of mind, exercise and nutrition within the environment to increase the number of viable offspring.
14. Family field (third Law of Life) is the practice of protecting and teaching the young offspring to enhance their chances of survival on their own. Longer lived species tend to do this, presumably to increase the success rate per energy expended. This introduces sub-fields because continued breeding success requires that the old members should die before the younger inexperienced members [death orgene, illogical requirement that the more expeienced should die before the less experienced] and old long-lived females should stop breeding because birth defects increase with age.
15. Money field is a social convenience that everyone accepts by donating their time and energy at work in exchange for promises of future purchasing power and trusting that it will remain ‘stable’.
16. University field is a unique repository of knowledge and so forth through all the fields/orgainizations that are determinate to us. The Mathematics of concepts can hanle this multitude, but there are simple steps that must be followed as discussed in chapter 73.
17. Beauty/contentment/enjoyment field that, I believe, we have evolved from the absolute of the solution of the fifth dimension that we call the Golden ratio. [Notice that this is conceptually different to Plato’s problem, that is a lack of an absolute]
18. And so on.

It is readily apparent that these fields/organizations are concepts that are on-going and need the mathematics of concepts to use context to derive predictions by a mind/brain or iteration. At the same time it is apparent that the ‘array’ of concepts are a mathematics of concepts and can be ‘ranked’, or more fields that are of importance to a speciality/field-of-expertise can be added. Further, generalists are unwelcome within establishments, and I presume that the reason is that they know little of the field of endeavour and are thought to contribute little. However, if we equate specialists with concepts, we have to consider that generalists are context and given the above, that concept and context are independent but both are important/necessary [like orthogonalty], I believe, that this is why the world is in an Extinction event and perhaps Plato’s democracy is the place to start (chapter 67).

Conclusion: a Unified Field Theory, to unify everything cannot be simple [because it has to include everything], but it is simple when the mathematics of concepts is used, because the mathematics of concepts is immediately apparent from the fifth dimension and the dimensions embrace everything. The existing theory contains four fields ranging from sub-atomic to universe-wide, so this extension of the theory is simply filling in the ‘bits’ between. The ability of the mathematics of concepts to include mathematics, physics etc. is ‘complex/elegant’ [but the opposite to ‘simple/elegant’] and allows the areas of interest to be prioritised in a way that mathematics cannot do [without a mind/brain selecting them with some context in mind, which is, of course, the mathematics of concepts].

 

Further, the existing theory uses ‘common’ logic that assumes that a ‘particle’ affects the ‘object of interest’ but this ‘particle’ can be expanded into measurement, questing, trusting etc. In other words, this extension fills out the theory and gets rid of assumptions and relaces them with the dimensions, and unifies everything, so it could be called the Unifying Theory, or perhaps just ‘I’ve got it now’!

 

It is time that Newton’s work was updated and the mixture of measurement and logic in world O be sorted out. Newton has ‘carried’ science for far too long, and specialists rule the academic world, but it is time for generalists to expand context to its rightful 50/50 balance with concepts and ‘balance’ our civilization. Science has ‘mined’ the fifth dimension, to a limited extent, and done a lot better than the other organizations, as one would expect/hope, albeit, possibly by luck, but universities should be given their ‘due’ and are our best choice to give Plato a chance before fear/lack-of-change brings on Armageddon.

 

References: (1) all quotations are fully referenced in the body and earlier chapters can be found on   http://darrylpenney.com  if required.