Chapter 118: The Philosophy Fairytale – the New Prince Charming to Save the World.

Abstract: ‘World Peace’ is a joke about unattainability and logic implies that we should search for a solution in the forgotten places, and that is what this paper turns out to be about.

For 2,500 years philosophy has withered as it hived off the spectacularly successful sciences that have brought civilization to its ‘knees’ with overpopulation destroying the world. To cure civilization, we need organization of a new kind to restart evolution in a new form and the required organization can be found in a new theory of relativity. This new theory contains the mathematics of concept and context that, I believe will revitalize philosophy, manage civilization and provide the solution that we desperately need.

‘We have also arranged things so almost nobody understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster. We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces’. Carl Sagan (The Geek Manifesto, Mark Henderson, frontispiece) This state is already with us because fundamental physics ‘shut down’ 100 years ago and universities have progressively worsened their ‘siloing’ over 2,500 years and are incapable of fundamental research. The solution is simple when orthogonality and relativity is used.

Evidence is presented that suggests that philosophy has always been a science with its own mathematics and rules of concept and context that we have completely missed for 2,500 years and consequently, that all of science and mathematics is likewise incomplete. Organization has, by necessity, been considered top-down and it’s orthogonal has not been recognised as ‘bottom-up’ that is infinitely more powerful as a number of examples attest. These examples are not trivial and range across different aspects of science because the universe is fractal and based on a simple generator that I call orthogonality.

This is a serious quest with serious ramifications and I am using a simple letterform to generate comment. Philosophy would be the least likely candidate to be called a science because it has been said that all of the useful parts have been stripped out of it, it is said to have adherents that don’t seek answers because it doesn’t have answers to give and that philosophy has changed so little over time that the ancient Greeks could follow modern arguments. Philosophy has been pushed into the ‘wings’ over 2,500 years and yet, I believe that like Prince Charming, philosophy can emerge to solve mankind’s global excesses, such as overpopulation, global warming, wars etc. because this new mathematics is what philosophy needed, but never (properly) had.

If I am correct, then philosophy and everything in the universe is a science because everything can be uniquely derived at any time, anywhere from anything because we live in a fractal universe and every part of a fractal generates new space from a simple generator. As an example, philosophy would, in a fractal universe, have the same story as the fairy stories that we are familiar with, such as Cinderella, Prince Charming, the Ugly Duckling, Snow White etc. where philosophy is the frog, the duckling, Cinderella etc. and a transformation occurs. The aim, for the child and for civilization is the hope of something better and the problem is to use the correct means and mindset. We have to change the way that we have thought for 2,500 years, so, as an example, in the case of our universe, we say that it started [from nothing] with a Big Bang because the universe is expanding, but a more logical explanation lies in the creation equation that contains a restriction that the universe must expand for it to exist.

These examples look like ‘parables’ because we are using a new type of mathematics [concept/context] that operates on society. The orthogonality is apparent everywhere: philosophy is about organization and religion is about emotional energy [derived from the organization of religion] and they have been allowed to get ‘out of step because philosophy has faltered whilst religion has bloomed. Unfortunately, the Catholic religion especially, with its with its desire for more adherents is actively imposing restriction on birth control that is increasing (economic) misery [and endangering the planet] along with population. If not philosophy, perhaps economics will ‘step up’ because economics needs the same absolute truths that are presented here to anchor its organization to the physical to provide solutions that are truths and can be relied upon.

The form of this letter is to use general terms and present the more analytical part as a ‘box’ at the end for those interested. I will present three examples to show the breath of the problem and its solution. Firstly Euler’s equation [from mathematics] that is an enigma because no one knows what it means, and I will show, in simple terms that Euler’s equation, like everything in a fractal space ‘reflects’ the generator of the fractal. The second example [from physics] is the derivation of Newton’s law of gravitation that has never been derived before, even though it is so simple, neither by Newton nor Einstein, and the third example [from philosophy] is to show that ‘democracy’ [with its restrictions] is the long-running mainstay of the fairness in governance and is a direct statement of the underlying mathematics [of concept/context] that defines philosophy. These examples show the existence of a science that I call general mathematical physics that underlies traditional science that we have not recognized [from top-down] over the last 2,500 years, but now become obvious from bottom-up.

If we are to solve mankind’s immediate problem of overpopulation and it’s effect on the planet and it’s resources we need the correct method to do so, and further, we need to, not only reinvent evolution, we need to implement it, and that requires the organization that this letter presents. Just as it was (literally) impossible for Newton and Einstein to derive the law of gravitation, and they tried in vain, it (literally) ‘falls out’, below. It would be nice to say that we can ‘muddle’ through, but we cannot, as has become apparent [Newton and Einstein’s lack of success] and a new philosophy is needed, and this presentation is the unique, one and only method that will ‘see us through’ because it is (literally) written in the creation.

The first example is that if the universe is a fractal, everything in it reflects the creation equation and Euler’s equation is no exception. ‘Euler’s formula is ubiquitous in mathematics, physics, and engineering. The physicist Richard Feynman called the equation “our jewel” and “the most remarkable formula in mathematics”.’ (Wikipedia) In Euler’s equation [e power i times pi plus 1 = 0] when rearranged and e power 0 replaces 1, the equation becomes an orthogonality equation that could be thought of as a fractal entangled with the creation equation. “Pi” is a circle/sphere operator and logically a mathematical construction like a point or circle could not exist, but the surface of a sphere could exist [Big Bang] and that the creation equation only exists if the sphere is expanding. The “e” is given in elementary textbooks as the growth of money under compound interest and this aptly describes the necessary [constant] expansion of the universe from the creation equation with time and compounding rate. The “i” is an unexpected term that makes Euler’s equation so fearsome, and yet it has a logical simplicity as an orthogonality that must be there. The question is often asked ‘what happened before the Big Bang?’. The “i” provides the answer and it must be there to add completeness [relativity] to the equation because the opposite [orthogonality] to the universe is imaginary and if it is to be explored further, it must be a ‘mirror image’ orthogonality through the centre [because everything is relative].

To further indicate the fractal nature of the universe and the organizational absolutes that produced it, the four absolutes were simply derived from the dimensions of an expanding sphere as ratios that define our universe [see box], but the mathematical interpretation of ‘e’ and ‘pi’ is that they are infinite series that are shown to be exact in Euler’s equation and this indicates a relationship that must occur three dimensionally in a sphere under a constant influence [speed of light]. In other words, firstly, everything in the universe is an organizational solution that includes traditional mathematics and physics as special cases, and secondly, this solved a question that I asked myself, that the universe is expanding at a set rate [presumably the speed of light] irrespective of whether energy is present. This settles for all time, the question of the universe.

The essence of a science is ‘truth’ because a truth can be reproduced at will [repeatable experiments], and as an example I will use ‘democracy’. Democracy has had its adherents for thousands of years and it is simply, in general terms, that everyone over the age of 18 years has a vote, but there must be restrictions. Democracy is the cornerstone of our system of governance, but the politicians, with their propensity to seek favours along with votes have eroded the restrictions of democracy that applied to the ancient Greeks. Given that a city/state must defend itself, the defence lay firstly, in the hands of those actually defending the city-state, and secondly, only those interested, involved and informed made the decision to fight, bargain or surrender. Clearly, these restrictions eliminated the young, elderly, sick, obese, women [too valuable and ill-equipped], slaves [not committed] and mercenaries and allies [less committed].

Thirdly, the politicians and police are currently undermining democracy by pandering to these ineffectual voters and stripping the potential defenders of guns for their own ends. Defence [and its orthogonality, respect] are truths implicit in nature and lead to survival of the fittest for animals with a mind/brain. Given that Life’s mind/brain is capable of choice, based on concept and context [all a, b in (a+b)=1], there comes a point where survival of the fittest is abandoned and we must decide on a survival of the best if we are to regain evolution. Civilization reached that point with the invention of agriculture, and we have yet to formulate a replacement policy. Obviously, this letter is a first step and a solution is only possible using the mathematics of concept/context. The proof of this statement is firstly, that the world is presently in a mess, secondly, that the mathematics of concept/context has not been appreciated by philosophy [and others], and thirdly, the universities, which house our knowledge refuse to acknowledge the generalist.

The mind brain burns a simple sugar [glucose] to generate thought [organization] and the corollary is that organization, such as architecture, Church services, flags, songs etc. create emotion in the beholder/measurer. Thus, our mind/brain uses a probability space and the physical uses a measuring space and a new mathematic can be derived from the creation equation that concepts a, b [in the mind/brain] must be orthogonal and the context between them are measured by the mind/brain as choices and the degree of choice [measurement] assigns a value to the contexts. I call this the mathematics of concept/context, but I could equally well call it ‘democracy’.

In other words, democracy, that has been considered important [in the context of fairness] over thousands of years, is actually a truth because it (literally) is the creation equation and fundamental to everything. Thus, everything in a fractal can be traced back to the generator and that fact makes philosophy, as well as everything else, into a science and continuing this line of thought, “when are ‘thought’ experiments useful?”. The operator “+” in the creation equation means addition, logic, truths [from experiment] and absolute truths [from the creation equation], so clearly, thought experiments should not be permitted unless they are based on repeatable experiments [truths] or traceable to the absolute truths. This has not happened in philosophy, especially from its onset and has misled for thousands of years. As another example, the traditional law of conservation of energy is wrong, yet it is taught to everyone, whereas only the law of conservation of (total) energy and organization is an absolute [zero].

Conclusion: all of science is incomplete, as it stands, but completion can be obtained by recognizing a general mathematics that combines the existing top-down with the bottom-up organization of the creation equation [orthogonality] as well as the sideways orthogonality of relativity within the creation equation. This is simply a recognition of the relativity that must be contained in everything and there is nothing difficult in what I have said, but the cause of the problem, over 2,500 years, was not starting simply enough, allowing ‘siloing’ and specialization and not appreciating the strength of the generalist, as can be seen in the problems inherent in universities. This theory brings everything together because a fractal universe is based on a simple generator that allows only truths to be perpetuated and the time has come to repair the mistakes of our past and go forward.

Prediction: [relativity demands a prediction to a thought] given that philosophy has had a poor reputation that was likely earned because philosophers are (mainly) specialists and it is obvious that there are two aspects to the creation equation [concepts and context], so specialists are not the same as generalists. In fact, this letter, with examples from philosophy, physics and mathematics is generalist and shows that specialist and generalists are relative to each other [literally are orthogonal, in the limit]. Further, in loco parentis is a truth that offspring are disinclined to help the parent [and not vice versa] and so, philosophy has been left isolated as science embraces technology by limiting science to their own needs and bypassing the mathematics of concept/context and the truths. As the parent of the sciences, it behoves philosophy to correct itself and pass it on to its offspring.

By completing science, we can see what has been missing from philosophy and so, philosophy must admit that generalists are necessary and embrace their contribution. As an example, the local (Australian) philosophy journal only allows two submissions a year and my submissions were rejected for ‘style’! How is a generalist supposed to know the specialist’s style? That is the purpose of the specialist! This simple example shows the mindset that has caused philosophy to isolate itself, when it could be a science by stepping out of the shadows. This truth [specialist/generalist orthogonality] explains why universities are incapable of [effective] fundamental [generalist] research and that admission distorts academia and wastes time, careers and money. As an example, fundamental physics has been a ‘no-go’ area for a hundred years because Einstein and Bohr could not agree on the space we live in, and both were wrong! [http://bostonreview.net/science-nature-philosophy-religion/tim-maudlin-defeat-reason].

Finally, no references are cited because everything can be derived simply from the first principles and the examples given above. However, it is pointless ‘reinventing the wheel’ and most of it will be on my website darrylpenney.com when required.

Post prediction: The New Philosopher

The measuring space [that our universe is] explains why the universe is expanding, why the speed of light is constant to any observer, why conservation of energy is overall and not local, gravity and why it must be there [to create potential] and why gravity must be logical [organizational solution]. Likewise, quantum mechanics has never been defined because it is the logic of the difficulty of measurement [non-infinitely small measuring devices], the logic of the half-truth that creates choice in the form of shimmer [wave/particle duality] and this is made more complicated because our mind/brain uses a probability space [to access the general concepts that are non-physical].

Mankind has used electrons, from atoms, to generate electricity, the organization of electric and magnetic fields, from a measuring space, for electric motors, we have used organization where quantum mechanics is the combination of three factors on the atomic scale and we turned it into an electronics industry, nuclear physics to generate power etc. So, what can the proper application of organization, from bottom-up, and our ingenuity do with a direct truth from the creation equation, especially when it is a macroscopic problem? The specialist/generalist orthogonality is real, will not go away and is costing us dearly through mismanagement in the universities. The universities should encourage ‘lone wolves’ and generalists to promote ‘new niches’ instead of only reproducing what they themselves have learned.

[Darryl Penney, 16/11/2018, dwpenney2@bigpond.com 0410668511]

In the beginning there was nothing (0) and it is a property of orthogonality to make two independent things, but entangled [at the origin], such as (1) and (-1) [first fractal] and that forces the second fractal (1+(-1))=0 [this equation I call the creation equation because it yields the form of the universe] and it’s orthogonal is the logic of the half-truth [true, false, both true and false simultaneously] that yields ‘physical choice’ [shimmer presents opportunities for a reaction through the wave/particle duality] that leads to the working of the universe [‘a single particle could seemingly span a field as would a wave, a paradox still eluding satisfactory explanation’ Wikipedia, Elementary particle]. Life employs a mind/brain to make better choices based on the structure of the probability equation [mathematics of concept/context] in the brain as well as thought [(-1), organization] from the burning of a simple sugar [(1), glucose]. That is the answer to the above, but with a ‘twist’ because Life uses a probability space [(a+b)=1] that is similar to the measuring space [(1+(-1))=0], but allows all concepts a, b to be considered.

Notice that the creation equation exits only if (1) and (-1) are kept apart and this logic requires an expanding universe, which we have [Big Bang], and this expansion produces the dimensions of space-time, energy and organization. The equation also says that everything is relative to something else, with no exceptions, except that ratios naturally become absolutes and they are the conservation of (total) energy/organization [energy/time], constant speed of light [distance/time], dark energy [energy/space] and gravity [energy/separation] and this becomes the principle of relativity in a measuring space [and replaces the present one that the laws of physics are the same in constantly moving frames]. The absolutes produce stability – the first leads to Occam’s razor and the principle of least action, the second to the constant [to the measurer, Michelson-Morley] speed of light, the third to the infill energy/organization [dark energy] to balance the expanding energy/organization of the universe and the fourth to gravity.

The limitations of Newtonian physics have made gravity an enigma for a long time and I believe, it is not an attraction [Newton], not ‘bent’ space that introduced organization and shut down modern physics for a hundred years [Einstein, deflection of a photon by a solar mass], but simply an absolute [energy-organization/distance], where all matter is composed of energy and organization and the doubling effect that Einstein (eventually) found is due to relativity where:

Attraction equals E(1)/d times E(2)/d plus O(1)/d times O(2)/d where E is energy, O is organization and d is the separation of two masses (1) and (2).

This leads to twice the Newtonian value where only energy is considered and is in line with Einstein’s finding. Notice that this is the first time that Newton’s law of gravitation has been derived because Newton used an ‘inspired reasoning’ [Robert Hooke maintained that it was stolen from him] and Einstein used an ‘analogy’. Clearly, this explanation shows that the inverse-square law has nothing to do with it!

We now understand gravity completely in that it’s effect has and will always be constant, it cannot exist except between two objects [relativity], its value depends only on the total amount of energy/organization and the separation and shimmer [from particle to wave] has no effect because two terms are involved as a sum. Also, the equation E=mc2 is misleading because mass and energy are the same thing and the equation is a conversion of the units that we have assigned, but what is not so obvious is that all of energy/mass and all of organization contribute equally [relativity]. It was accepted in Newton’s time that mass had an attraction and in Einstein’s time that energy [photon] had the same attraction, but the fact that organization had an attraction [curved space] and gave the correct experimental answer was a ‘step too far’ and fundamental physics closed down.

This enigma is a result of the short-comings of Newtonian physics, and it is not an enigma when it is realized that energy and organization are ‘two sides of the same coin’ and further, that this complexity is a mathematical physics solution because the first orthogonality [energy/organization] produces a second where, in part, organization gives gravity [organization] and energy [of gravity] through the absolute. To maintain the condition that universe is expanding [(1) and (-1) kept separate] gravity must be a solution and be non-zero because a zero gravity produces random walk, which, in the limit, is not stable. The “e” in Euler’s equation determines a constantly growing universe [“e” is the driver in compounded interest].

From above, the statement that ‘the absolutes produce stability’ needs expansion, firstly, ‘the absolutes produce stability’ is, of course, true because they define the structure of the universe, secondly, ‘Occam’s razor and the principle of least action’ are an organizational requirement that only the simplest and least energetic response is possible if the organization is to have unique answers. In other words, the universe does measures organization and the measurement requires that the lowest energy be used [first absolute]. Thirdly, the requirement that all of energy/mass, length and time obey the Lorentz contraction together is an organizational requirement in that it is simpler that all change proportionately than to list an order of change.

Fourthly, compare the treatment of organization in Newtonian physics where organization is allowed upon experiment or peer review. The English philosopher, Francis Bacon was correct that physics must be based on experiment because [repeatable] experiment is a truth, but we can also use the long-term effects of evolution as truths [an experiment] and ‘thought’ experiments based on the absolutes and their logic. ‘The general idea of the importance and possibility of a sceptical methodology makes Bacon the father of the scientific method’. (Wikipedia) For example, ‘in loco parentis’ passes from parent to offspring and not visa versa as the major religions demand. Peer review is a half-truth that is true only for specialist subjects and false for general subjects because specialists think differently to generalists [relativity] plus two truths are violated [relativity, and evolution (the established resist change)]. Notice the ‘thread’ that I am using is not the usual [ancient Greeks to Newton to Einstein to the Snow White effect], but a different successful thread [ancient Greeks to Bacon (experimental truth) to this theory (absolutes, experimental truths and evolutionary truths)]

Fifthly, the principle of relativity, stated above could also be called the principle of orthogonality because they are relative to each other and everything contains elements that are either the same or independent to something else and it is the orthogonals that form the basis of the mathematics of concept/context that is immediately apparent from the probability equation.

Coulomb’s law for charges is similar in form to Newton’ law, and many people must have, like I, wondered about this, and both are, [inappropriately as it turns out] associated with the inverse square law [a single mass, charge or magnetic pole cannot exit]. A simple explanation is to use the fractalness that the neutron [mass] is a special case of energy [photon] and orthogonates to a proton, electron and a neutrino and that Newton’s law describes the mass attraction, whilst Coulomb’s law describes the charge attraction. Obviously they must be equivalent, apart from sign and magnitude.