This is a combination of things I have gotten from source as well as my own interpretations. I spend so much time connected to source I no longer have the slightest idea which thoughts are my own and which are coming in, anyway take it as you wish:
In a general understanding of M theory, there are 13 dimensions. Three that we experience in our physical reality the fourth being space-time leaving nine others that are too large or small to be interpreted from our current perspective. What we do not perceive contains knowledge we do not have as we have not consciously understood or interpreted it in our observation. This is a concept stating: we are capable of understanding or solving any problem that exists, we just haven't had enough time or solved the existing problem yet. A societal understanding of this ideology would lead to an understanding that focus and intention should be spread around studying what we know and conceptualizing that which we don't. In the end everything can be broken down into a mathematical function, just depending on what class(system), you want to define it in. This is a demonstration of this breakdown within its method(or understood perspective).
If there are 300,000,000 voters in the U.S. and you as an individual represent just 1, you are acting as a ratio of 1:300,000,000 which is highly insignificant. However the culmination is actually a system comparing 1:1 300,000,000 different times(in theory under a popular vote). The fundamental math of this does not apply to both the individual and the result. This is much the same way that you cannot apply the same set of governing physics(aside from a uniform theory) principals to quantum and astrophysics. This is the sole purpose of why M Theory is coming into development. It is a way of understanding in a uniform way the transition from very small things to very large things. In this example you can break it down in programming terms to a method defining the function of governing forces to a vote. The electoral college would be the function of dynamics that create the result of the election.
0 -------------------------------------------------------------- 0 --------------------------------------------------------------0
Individual vote Electoral College Result
This same principal is the understanding of how we fit into the physical world as an observer. The idea of M theory is no where complete as it does not interpret the different methods that define our consciousness. In science, especially in new fields, there are so many unknowns, that it is necessary to make many assumptions about exactly what it is you are studying. In this case science makes a uniform statement about what an observer does to the function of a wave/particle paradox. This is the definition of the quantum double split experiment. This would mean that every aspect of humanity governs our consciousness and our consciousness is actually the method in between dimensions, or the two poles of our physical world.
0 -------------------------------------------------------------- 0 --------------------------------------------------------------0
Micro Entirety of Human Consciousness Macro
Smallest Dimensions Largest Dimensions
Quantum Physics Astro Physics
Now this begins to start to represent the framework of how the universe and our existence can be interpreted. As long as we continue the type of thinking of current society, we will see time as a single linear function. I.E. one o'clock two o'clock ... as well as 1994, 1995, 1996 ...etc. This would again naturally be conceived along the idea of the previous model.
0 -------------------------------------------------------------- 0 --------------------------------------------------------------0
Birth Mid-Life Crisis Death
This evolution of changing our perception of time is really not as crazy as it sounds in regards to other auditory and visual interpretations. If matter exists in multiple positions, how is it that we only see it as one, even more as a singularity in the same position that others perceive it to be. If I give you the latitude and longitude of a city you will find it in that exact location, even though it is theoretically positioned in multiple if not infinite positions. This is due to the method of our mind that acts as the middle location of the change from micro to macro or outward to inward interpretation.
Oddly enough at birth we are experiencing the most basic(micro) functions of existence, and in Death we are observing the most complex(Macro) experiences that make up the result of our entire life. Many people in the middle experience a mid-life crisis, in which they realize that the transition through has not given the results expected, or what is wanted based on their life experiences. If we were to apply a new object orientated view of this and think of our work now as what will be most beneficial in the end we get a completely different timeline.
Our mid-life crisis type of thinking is now a marker as to a starting point for thinking and we should be moving outward into the unknown as it contains the information which we do not already have. This model would be very impractical in true application but should act as a baseline to determine future application of this methodology. One of the most interesting concepts in computer design is the concept of threading. A single processor can, for practical purposes, do two things at once based on the speed it is operating at. If you want one thing to do many, you space them out very slightly with each other and run at very high speeds resulting in it appearing to be simultaneous. This is what we need to do with our thinking.
Time:
Current Model
0 1 2 3 4
0---------------I---------------I---------------I---------------I---------------I---------------I---------------I---------------I
Hypothetical New Model
4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4
0 --------------I----------------I----------------I------------ 0 --------------I---------------I----------------I----------------0
Birth Observation Death
As I said before this would not be completely practical so it would in fact be more like the way a torrent file grabs piece throughout rather then in a linear numerical order. This would be merely an example:
Current
___________________________________X_______________________________________
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0 --------------I----------------I----------------I-------------I---------------I---------------I----------------I----------------0
New |
__________________-X________________|______________________X___________________
1 2 8 7 6 3 5 4 0 7 6 1 3 2 5 8 4
0 --------------I----------------I----------------I------------ 0 --------------I---------------I----------------I----------------0
Birth Observation Death
This would greatly improve our ability to recognize the importance of what is in regards to what we don't know as well as the unknowns for the generations to follow. This type of thinking focuses on what we don't know which changes the methodology from what is the correct answer to fundamentally coming up with what is the most correct wrong answer or realistically what is the opposite of the correct answer. Now our scope is intended to understanding the poles of our thought. This can also be given additional dimensions.
0 --------------I----------------I----------------I------------ 0 --------------I---------------I----------------I----------------0
Left Brain Correct answer Right Brain
least correct answer (at a given level of consciousness) Least Correct Answer
Most incorrect answer Most Incorrect Answer
Our brain fundamentally operates on a logic tree being expressed as a neuro-net. A neur-onet is the connectivity format between thoughts. So if we can train our minds to think in terms of absolute polarity in terms of two answers one of left and right, your level of comprehension now entails all thoughts within the parameters. If your brain naturally organizes your thoughts given its Darwinistic upbringing, if you burn yourself you know not to touch something. If you only think of one option, say in relation to touching something hot, that being burnt is bad, you will only see this option. Or rather the inverse of the action to touch, or do not touch. Instead if you think that maybe being burned will result in you winning the lottery, you in turn think of it in its probability(as it is encompassed within the poles), you probably wont touch it anyway, but you have seriously enhanced your thought process. You are creating a bridge of opportunity to change the effect of winning the lottery, to the cause of touching something hot. This breakdown can be very easily put on paper and there begins a foothold into the next evolution in education resulting in creative thought all the time.
If I tell a student that 1 + 1 = 2 the student is being given one thought, the answer of 1 + 1 = 2. If you have effectively taught under this principal, from then on there is a paradigm in the student stating that 1 + 1 = 2. There is no encouragement for the possibility that 1 + 1 = 10 as it does if you were performing a binary operation. Making a statement in no way encompasses the poles of a thought and even if it did you would have to be making a statement that everyones mind works in one uniform manner in regards to education. Under this new type of thinking it would be much better to ask a student what does 1 + 1 = ? If this were to be modeled out at perhaps a higher thought it would be more apparent, however its complexity would likely defeat its own purpose in providing clarity. By taking a basic level of understanding it is easy to see the accuracy of the limited assumptions which are necessary to be made. In this instance a student learning what 1 + 1 is probably does not even understand what math is. By asking a question to a child which you know they do not know the answer too they will obviously return an answer in the form of a question. This would result in questioning by the student, seeking that which it does not understand, and it will seek the poles of understanding it has on the scope of experience it has undertaken up through this part of its life.
With each answered question from the teacher a new understanding is formed in a much more natural and permanent manner for the student. As this continues to advance and the child is now incorporating deductive logic in almost an AI sort of manner, the student will begin to form possible answers. In this example lets say prior to learning addition, the extent of mathematical knowledge within this child is the ability to count to ten. Let us also assume the student has some knowledge in an "Unrelated field", say knowing the letters of the alphabet. Now there will be an obvious assimilation of recognizing numbers and letters as building blocks to build more complex structures. So the student may deduce unknowingly an array of answers numbers:(1-10) or letters:(A-Z). If the student were to ask what the answer was and you stated two given its previous method of finding new poles the student will then seek an array of answers of the difference between why 2 is correct and why 1 and 3-10 are incorrect. By forming two groups it is easy for the student to recognize a pattern of [number, comparative number comparative ?] which easily eliminates all answers within the second array. By asking a question the student recognizes both the object that is the subject as well as the empty space around it, or rather what the object isn't equally or less in-equally in comparison to what the object is.
This type of thinking encourages us to expand our thinking, creativity, and critical problem solving skills. My thoughts are that this type of thinking should be taught first, to develop the format of brain function that will continue as long as the mind derives that this is the best type of thought process. It is a reverse catch-22 in the fact that the fundamental structure of the mind is based around not only knowing the correct answer is, but seeing all other possibilities as well as why it is the correct answer. My thought would again be on the three point line however I do not feel that another graphical depiction is necessary at this point. Questioning the child would be on the left moving into a middle section of teaching via more of a blend between questions and answers. This level of change is necessary because you are at the next point of readiness in the child's education.
You are now teaching this way to explain to the student how to teach others. More specifically teach the student how you taught them to an understanding that they could teach those younger in the same manner. Your mind would now begin to get to a point that it is understanding multiple directions of thinking, and this firmware if you will, is now finished installing. At this point you could continue with questions, however relying more on giving the answer. With a mind taught in this manner, giving it the answer will now systematically begin to have them think of what other answers could be related. The next thought is why is the correct answer different and then brought back to the other side of the equation to do the same thing to find out the question that this is the answer to.
My guidance and proof to this methodology would be like doing a maze. The maze is designed to be deceiving from the viewpoint of the front. If you start at the start of a maze it will take much longer then if you start in the back because you will not be deceived by the trickery of the maze maker. What would be even faster would be to do some of the back then some of the front and go back and forth as you are now collapsing the wave function of possible directions to go. You may not be collapsing it down to a uniform location of knowing all of the answer, however you have less noise and the path becomes easier to see. It is not about the single thought that you are having for a specific answer, but rather all of the thoughts you have that produce that answer.
Oh and here is how it looks adding dimensions:
One-dimension
0 -------------------------------------------------------------- 0 --------------------------------------------------------------0
C A B
||
Z
Two-dimension
Z
||
A
O
- - - -
- - - -
C O - - - - - - - - - O B
and when you go directly from c to b to source its three-dimensional :
A
O
- - - - - -
- - -
- Z - - - - -
- - - -
C O - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O B
Replies
interesting mathematical concept, dealing with quantum indeterminant factor of the scale in scope. Astrophysics or Subatomic. Well the key is the scope, speed of light(can be replaced with speed of any type of information energy, sound, text reading, etc), and energy density. The main variant to scope/system is density.
on a 3d system as a function of time, the probability of a quantum effect of a system being active or present at a point removed from the center of a system from the moment of initialization of the quantum effect over the portions of the system that can sustain and support said effect is something dealing with these numbers. Im still trying to formulate it. but i believe it something like the inverse of 4/3*pi*(ct)^2 minus 4/3*pi*(c*l*t)^2 over 4/3*pi*(cT)^2 and in addition to this is some ratio of interaction such that some moments of interaction cause entanglement or quantum information relay over total interactions included those interactions which didnt result in quantum exchange. This is where l is a ratio of the speed of light in a given space of a certain avg. energetic density and the absolute speed of light and t is the time from quantum effect initiation for any given particle carrying quantum effect and T is the time from quantum effect initiation for the system. The idea is that a quantum state initiated in a system that already has an extended/transferred form of quantum entanglement will at least spread that newly initiated quantum state throughout the system in all directions at the absolute speed of light through directly entangled particles and through newly entangled particles as a result of subsequent interaction of particles with a quantum state carrier propogating at the energy density conditioned speed of light l. Thus particles at given distances from system center have this probability factor of having said quantum effects upon them as a function of time and distance from initiator prime. I already know my math is not correct in representing this as i know its more complicated than this but the basic concept i believe is workable and best initiated with this formula. The math idea is that the circumference of a sphere defined by a absolute light speed and time is the maximum extent that a particle containing quantum information could reasonable reach in that time under the most favorable conditions allowing it to basically superconduct and slip stream through the density in between initial and end point and begin disseminating that info. The same formula of a sphere conditioned by energetic density speed limit be considered as the likely minimum extent at which probability takes hold any less than that is considered most likely to be under the influence of quantum information. In between these upper and lower limits is a probability dependant upon time and distance. The portion that remains under the influence of probability is further influenced integral summation of those portions under the minimum limit having their external influence into the probability region. The path of determinant factor however has a fixed ratio expressing from the area energetic density in proportion of its total size and the increasing absolute light speed total size. Agian this really becomes an integral rate expression and is quite complex.