Theory of Everything

Hi ldibart;
Actually most of us call that field of science, physics. I guess you can put yourself among the great thinkers like Galileo and Newton now! All kidding aside, science is based on our ability to perform measurements and all measurements eventually reduce to the measure of distance and motion.

You made the comment that “all energy is motion, all matter is motion” but this is not quite correct. There has to be a fundamental entity that has the property of motion; we tend to call it the stuff of the universe or just fundamental matter. To make your statement correct you simply need to change the word matter to “mass”. Mass is the quantitative measure of matter based on the inertia property; the inertia property is basically the resistance to a change of motion.

If you would like to see how others share this understanding that motion is the key to understanding the TOE, then review the many posts of Analog, Graybeard, myself and a few others here on ToeQuest. A quick review of the concepts of “absolutes” can be found in my blog pages at: Toronics

Welcome to ToeQuest!

ldibart · Quote #3 (**permalink**) 11-24-2008, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Hello dleviwing

Thanks I will look at the links!
I think I need to explain a little to see if we are saying the same thing or if you may not see it the way I do

all matter is motion with its "fabric" space ,the mixture of space and motion create it all, this is what I am saying ...

I see matter as an energetic state, this energy is held in by space.

atoms come together because they are folding space around them. there is no rest state of matter it is always moving.

Profpat · Quote #4 (**permalink**) 11-24-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Hi Idibart;

So is space your fundamental substance?

ldibart · Quote #5 (**permalink**) 11-24-2008, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Profpat

Hi Idibart;

So is space your fundamental substance?

Yes, sorry and thanks I forgot to mention it

ldibart · Quote #6 (**permalink**) 11-24-2008, 09:21 PM

Quote:

sorry I can be very absentminded at times but here is trivial part I left out hehehe

there was this extremely hot dense "spot" where "everything" was, it was highly energized (motion) this "energy" actually made it be so "dense" because it was moving very fast and it moved and pushed in all directions as it did this space resisted it with as much "binding" force as motion gave off, making it extremely small and hot . as the energy slowed down its motion, space began to "loosen its grip" as the grip got loosened
space began expanding as space expanded the the motion had more freedom to move and form within the space this is basically it

dleviwing · Quote #7 (**permalink**) 11-25-2008, 05:39 PM

Hi ldibart;
Saying that space is the fundamental substance is like saying that steam is water; though true, space is simply one of the motion states of the fundamental substance often referred to as Aether, quantum foam, spacetime, and many others. It is primarily the chaotic electromagnetic wave state or as I like to call it, the randomized motion state of fundamental mater. What you call folding of space is actually the condensing of space by way of converting randomized motion into uniform motion; uniform motion produces the property of inertia and thus is what we see as mass.

To make sense of how you use terminology in your concepts, you must provide a root hypotheses of fundamentals and hopefully, axiomatic concepts that all terms and measure will trace back to. As yet, that is not evident in your postings. Maybe you should start from your early development of the concept.

ldibart · Quote #8 (**permalink**) 11-25-2008, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dleviwing

Hi ldibart;
Saying that space is the fundamental substance is like saying that steam is water; though true, space is simply one of the motion states of the fundamental substance often referred to as Aether, quantum foam, spacetime, and many others. It is primarily the chaotic electromagnetic wave state or as I like to call it, the randomized motion state of fundamental mater. What you call folding of space is actually the condensing of space by way of converting randomized motion into uniform motion; uniform motion produces the property of inertia and thus is what we see as mass.

To make sense of how you use terminology in your concepts, you must provide a root hypotheses of fundamentals and hopefully, axiomatic concepts that all terms and measure will trace back to. As yet, that is not evident in your postings. Maybe you should start from your early development of the concept.

hello

so basically you are saying since space is a motion state of the fundamental substance I cannot use it as the "substance"

If this is what is meant, then I wanted to ask
1.does this disprove that an atom is not held in place by space folding (sorry about the definitions

and by default that atoms do not come together because of the same process?

if not, then why can I not use space as my substance for mass's shape ie matter?

since space is one of the motion states of this fundamental substance? wouldn't I still be using the fundamental substance even if it is one "state of" ..the fundamental substance?

Profpat · Quote #9 (**permalink**) 11-25-2008, 07:08 PM

Hello Gentlemen;

I'm curious about the " Fundamental Substance " also. As David knows I believe in God and Strings, and to me both are the " Fundamental Sustance "

It seems to me you need an actual, physical, measurable, observable,( to the extent possible) " real " substance. I like strings being a 1 dimensional Planck Length string seemed as fundamental as one could get. ( I know strinngs are " just " a theory, but that doesn't mean it's wrong, just no physical evidence yet.

So my question, strings are my fundamental substance, what is yours?

Best,

Pat