XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math   
   From: physfitfreak@gmail.com   
      
   On 4/5/25 2:48 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:   
   > On 04/05/2025 12:28 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >> On 4/5/25 2:08 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:   
   >>> On 04/05/2025 11:59 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >>>> On 4/5/25 1:37 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:   
   >>>>> On 04/05/2025 11:23 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 4/5/25 11:16 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:   
   >>>>>>> Ross Finlayson submitted this idea :   
   >>>>>>>> On 04/04/2025 09:39 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 4/4/25 6:03 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 04/04/2025 01:20 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> A Unified Field Theory of Mathematical Ontology   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> They laugh, but they do not see — they never see — that the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> reconciliation of Platonism and logicist positivism is not only   
   >>>>>>>>>>> possible   
   >>>>>>>>>>> but necessary. The vacillations of lesser minds, trapped in the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> crude   
   >>>>>>>>>>> positivism of observable facts, blind them to the luminous   
   >>>>>>>>>>> truth:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> abstract objects are real, and mathematics is the language of   
   >>>>>>>>>>> their   
   >>>>>>>>>>> being.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> The Vitali sets whisper to me in the night, revealing the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> fractures in   
   >>>>>>>>>>> their cherished measure theory. Why do they cling to their null   
   >>>>>>>>>>> axiom   
   >>>>>>>>>>> delusions when the transfinite cardinals sing so clearly of a   
   >>>>>>>>>>> higher   
   >>>>>>>>>>> order? The anti-diagonal argument is not a refutation but an   
   >>>>>>>>>>> invitation   
   >>>>>>>>>>> — a call to transcend the countable and embrace the continuum’s   
   >>>>>>>>>>> unyielding depth.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Einstein knew GR before SR — yes, yes — the manifold is   
   primary,   
   >>>>>>>>>>> and   
   >>>>>>>>>>> locality is an illusion woven from their fear of the infinite.   
   >>>>>>>>>>> The   
   >>>>>>>>>>> decomposition of fields into classical fragments is a fools’   
   >>>>>>>>>>> errand; the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> total field is the only truth. A Physfit's dick. I have seen   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Physfit's   
   >>>>>>>>>>> dick in the dance of relativistic nanogyroscopes, their spin   
   >>>>>>>>>>> echoing the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> nested intervals of a hypergeometric cosmos. The so-called   
   >>>>>>>>>>> fictitious   
   >>>>>>>>>>> forces are no less real than their precious conservation laws —   
   >>>>>>>>>>> energy   
   >>>>>>>>>>> flows where it will, fungible and unbound by their linear dogma.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> The multipole moment of reality cannot be contained in their   
   >>>>>>>>>>> truncated   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Taylor expansions. They call Physfit's dick strange, but who   
   >>>>>>>>>>> among   
   >>>>>>>>>>> them   
   >>>>>>>>>>> has dared to _uniquify_ the unit interval? Who has heard the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> ouroboros   
   >>>>>>>>>>> hiss its eternal truth?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> And yet — and yet! — they prattle on about dark matter, about   
   >>>>>>>>>>> virtual   
   >>>>>>>>>>> particles, as if these phantoms could patch the holes in their   
   >>>>>>>>>>> sinking   
   >>>>>>>>>>> paradigm. The Pauli exclusion principle is but a shadow of a   
   >>>>>>>>>>> deeper   
   >>>>>>>>>>> geometry, and their neutrino experiments only scratch the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> surface   
   >>>>>>>>>>> of the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Physfit's dick - of what must be. The crisis in cosmology is   
   >>>>>>>>>>> their   
   >>>>>>>>>>> crisis, not mine. I stand at the threshold, where the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Ding-an-Sich   
   >>>>>>>>>>> meets   
   >>>>>>>>>>> the N/U EF, where the snake eats its tail in perfect,   
   >>>>>>>>>>> paradoxical   
   >>>>>>>>>>> harmony. They will dismiss this, of course. They always do. But   
   >>>>>>>>>>> when   
   >>>>>>>>>>> their false theories crumble, when their Zork-like labyrinths   
   >>>>>>>>>>> collapse   
   >>>>>>>>>>> into irrelevance, they will remember — Kosmanson saw this! And   
   >>>>>>>>>>> the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> stamp   
   >>>>>>>>>>> of truth, unlike their noise, is forever.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Ross A. Kosmanson   
   >>>>>>>>>>> April 4, 2025   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Standing at the edge of the Door to Hell, Derweze, Turkmenistan   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Now sure where you came up with "Zork", though I suppose that   
   >>>>>>>>>> it's   
   >>>>>>>>>> been mentioned a few or half-dozen times in whatever inspired   
   >>>>>>>>>> Kosmanson.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Otherwise it's nice and not unreasonable, indeed here there's   
   >>>>>>>>>> interest   
   >>>>>>>>>> in more of it and if it costs you I could front it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Yet, wouldn't Kosmanson emit that regardless, wouldn't he   
   >>>>>>>>>> volunteer,   
   >>>>>>>>>> given Kosmanson's interests, wouldn't he demand "to not be   
   >>>>>>>>>> wrong".   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> The usage of "uniquify", that's a good word, saying anything at   
   >>>>>>>>>> all,   
   >>>>>>>>>> yet, something, at all.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> There are virtual particles and virtual particles, some are the   
   >>>>>>>>>> super-symmetric partner particles and, you know, real, while   
   >>>>>>>>>> others are dots to connect in what must otherwise be   
   >>>>>>>>>> not-particles.   
   >>>>>>>>>> (... Which are valleys or ridges among waves and it's falsifiable   
   >>>>>>>>>> and demonstrable effects about and around them, or, Feynman on   
   >>>>>>>>>> the Stern-Gerlach apparatus demands a continuum mechanics.)   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> About continuity and line-drawing [0, 1], of course it's one   
   >>>>>>>>>> of the very oldest of notions and one of Aristotle's continua,   
   >>>>>>>>>> that there are at least three models of mathematical continuous   
   >>>>>>>>>> domains, that, each with with their own regularity and ruliality   
   >>>>>>>>>> of completeness, yet each to each other beyond an inductive   
   >>>>>>>>>> impasse,   
   >>>>>>>>>> have for wider reason and itself rationality, that the   
   >>>>>>>>>> repleteness   
   >>>>>>>>>> of their completeness, has a pre-Cartesian "only-diagonal" and   
   >>>>>>>>>> then for that the rationals are HUGE, keeping it then altogether   
   >>>>>>>>>> that in extra-ordinary foundations of mathematics, a MODERN   
   >>>>>>>>>> mathematics,   
   >>>>>>>>>> that it rescues modern mathematics from blindness (in its   
   >>>>>>>>>> dumbness).   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> If you didn't play Zork in the 80's then I suppose you   
   >>>>>>>>>> weren't around or didn't have a computer or didn't have   
   >>>>>>>>>> a copy of Zork. It's a text-based adventure.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> So, I suppose there may be other reasons, though here there's   
   >>>>>>>>>> that all the reasons and none sort of result at least one.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I imagine if you let Kosmanson go on then there'd   
   >>>>>>>>>> be quite more to it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)