Chapter 129: Understanding Philosophy, Finally!

by Darryl Penney

Abstract: philosophy is a part of general mathematical physics, by definition, but it contains two unanswered, and (at present) unanswerable questions: ‘when did consciousness appear?’ and what does Descartes’ statement, ‘I think therefore I am’ mean? These two questions need ‘new think’ [context] that is orthogonal to general mathematical physics [concept] to provide a definitive answer and complete philosophy.

Keywords: consciousness; Descartes; relativity; general mathematical physics; creation equation; orthogonality

‘Today’s problems cannot be solved with today’s mind’

Albert Einstein and many great thinkers …

(Fair Food, edited by Nick Rose, p 250)

Einstein used an analogy to correct Newton’s law of gravitation [doubling it with curved space] and the quotation is the realisation of our limitations [using Newtonian physics] and in particular, our [present] consciousness. In a relative universe built on a lack of relativity [the absolutes are the ratios of the dimensions of an expanding universe, for example, the speed of light (distance/time) is a constant to any measurer (Michelson-Morley experiment)], consciousness is the product of every mind/brain and has a relativity that I call ‘new think’ [composed of top-down (philosophy etc.) and bottom-up organisation [the physical], sideways relativity and the entanglement of relativity (creation equation, below)]. Thus the concept of ‘modern consciousness’ [where we think that modern technology has changed our consciousness] is wrong and needs ‘new think’ as a relativity and for completeness.

Descartes statement has been around for a long time and seems to be true, but what does it relate to, and how does it fit into the scheme of things? At last it can be understood using ‘new think’ because it consists of a concept [I think] and a context [therefore I am] and is obviously a relativity [in modern terms: ‘I measure, therefore I am entangled (with the universe)] but not of the physical, but of the mind and the mind uses a higher level of a measuring space [because it can as a parasite] and that higher level is a probability space [quantum mechanics by an observer]. [The physical uses the creation equation (1+(-1))=0) where 1 represents energy and (-1) represents organisation and the mind/brain uses (a+b)=0, all a, b and the ‘+’ is anything]

Conclusion: with these two ‘perennial’ questions answered using ‘new think’, philosophy can be fitted into general mathematical physics without problems.

Prediction: [required by relativity] philosophy rejoins the science that it spawned and is totally definable.

References: [required as building blocks by top-down traditionally organised philosophy] everything can be derived from first principles above, but interested persons might find

more on xxxxxxxxxxx.com