The Conformal Mechanics of A Cyclic Universe...

Hi Tim, first I wanted to mention I just finished reading Penrose's new book: 'Cycles of Time, An Extroadinary New View of The Universe...' Roger's described the Universe very similar as I've been describing it for the last 30 years__Hawking Decay cycle, to recycle, in order for the 2nd law to make sense... If I didn't know better, I'd think he'd been reading some of my web-posted material. Here's a review link to his book: http://bagotbooks.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/cycles-of-time-roger-penrose-at-the-royal-institution/
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1011/1011.3706.pdf

Tim, your post, along with that old one of yours in my last post, pretty much fills in a lot of what I intended the symbols to represent. The thing is as I mentioned__I've really only recently developed all the idea links, so I haven't really had time to access it fully yet__but I do think we can add up all the system mechanics, the way I did with economics money mechanics systems, and truly draw new ideas, facts and mechanics with it... As is also mentioned in Penrose's book, there are still areas of fundamental physics and maths, where we simply can't yet do the complexities__but I do know this algorithm's capacity may open up some of these areas__though, I do still know some of them are impossible, as many of my incommensurability posts have mentioned, before. Still, if we attempt new additions of systems, systems' variables, and systems' mechanics__and place them into one composite positive and negative model/concept__we can derive real new information, as that's exactly how I used the isomorphic logic to that algorithm, to solve my economic headaches__back in the `80's. At the time I tried inverse/reverse/perverse applying the economic algorithm__E = 1/5X__back onto the physics problems, I was then working on, but it didn't work. I wasn't privy to the knowledge of using functions to do math back then, but my writing of that formula algorithm, in the last post__was a direct interpretation of logic functions into mathematics, or algebra/calculus__which I've really only learned over the last six or seven years of studying Peirce, and all the mathematicians and logicians he studied. That's really how I recently applied it to physics, where I couldn't years ago__as I had no deep logic functions knowledge then__just logic and math, geometry, algebra, trig., calculus etc. I just stumbled upon the E = 1/5X formulation of foreingn exchange calculations with trade to GDP's accidentally, then, by simply comparing the concepts I was working directly with. What a difference 25 years, self-education makes__but I do really have to slow down the research, and realize what exactly's in this ol' skull o' mine...

Anyway, let me get to your post, by way of this paragraph:

I see all this clearly. Even if I'm off a little on some aspects, I know the logic is sound, but considering what I'm saying here and if your representation is addressing all of this, then at it's current composition, is it only addressing the relationship of such things, or does it allow such a means of perhaps extracting quantitative values of those things being conserved?

It's really both, Tim, as far as I can see... I think it's a good method of raising the bar on the goals we seek__to some universal understanding level, for our or any others' minds to meet at a common point__and at the same time, while only preliminarily viewing and thinking about the algorithm's potential__I do think we can truly extract new, quantitative information and values with it. I haven't really even tried using it yet, but in quick thinking about it, I'd suggest preliminarily making a list of all the knowns and unknowns you may like to process toward new information__then generally place the information content into the positions within the algorithm, and just generally think out the logic__much the way you did in the paragraphs above this paragraph in your post...

Penrose also offered some new algorithms in his new book, that operate in similar fashion, and an engineer in the campground here, just gave me an old 1899 Maine Maritime Academy math book, our navy academy here, and there's some very interesting old algoritims, especially the 6th root of numbers, for doing water to steam calculations. Penrose's are more in the similar vein as my new algorithm, but that old 6th root of numbers, I've already extended to the 9th root, to cover the 512k bits of computer storage registers, etc. 2 is the 9 root of 512. I'd just not thought of all the applications of higher power roots, even where powers of base 10 are used__even though I've used them, but I mean as to the many opportunities to explore with them, in so many other areas__just thinking...

Anyway, it's still all so new to me, I've still gotta have time to process how I may wish to use the algorithm, or how I may simplify it__but what it's designed for is to simplify complexity__already existing__so I don't yet know if I want to reduce it's power representations. Just play with it, by adding groups of concepts and variable concepts, finding the center of conservation values for all the variable and invariable concepts, by possibly building extensional concepts necessary to find answers by forcing results to their most central values__just a quick suggestion, and don't really know if it'll even be of any value__till I really access it deeper. All I can tell you right now, is that the central numbers between all number differences within concepts, has a lot to do with a lotta' mathematical solutions__as that's what I'm always using more than anything else, and Peirce's 100 thousand pages of information contained an extreme amount of the same__especially his mechanical engineering and statistics. It's just my brain ain't functioning right now, Tim, as I just finished burning through Penrose's complete book today__220 pages...

Play with the ideas, and ask me some questions later, Tim, when me brain ain't so full of others' ideas... I'm taking a break from researching, over the next 3 to 5 days, to get back to my own self-functioning. Gotta' help my son move all my and his stored belongings to his house, as a lot of the stored stuff is his, anyway... That'll give me the break I need...

The Universal Isomorphic Algorithm__UIA = ∑∫∏v -> IC:M Iff / ≡ ∑’s •…(The universal isomorphic algorithm equals the sum of the integral product variables, implying the isomorphic center of mass, if and only if divided identical to the sum’s center…)

Does it allow further applications, or merely bring others to this level of understanding the relationship of such things? Or am I a little off the mark?

No, you are right on the mark__and it allows application attachments and extensions__that I do know__as I've extended my economic mechanics extensively, since first developing the logic, this formula is founded on. Tim, the formula is so powerful, it can even process legal values and morality__as I've often used the logic in public meetings, and people have asked how I came to know those conclusions__and I'd always explain the logic to em, but it usually just goes over most people's heads. It seems they can't understand how math and logic can interpret morality and law, etc.__when it's simply processing to__the center of fairness, which is the same as to the center of mass, or even thought's mass, if you can believe that... Gee, I think that's mathematical__at least it is in my book... There's just an awsome power in processing to the center of all or any differences__which is basically, all that algorithm does... It's just designed for handling massive amounts of information...

It's just 'A Mathematical Diamond Rule...'

P.s.
Btw Tim, this logic idea was first discussed on TQ with Ayia-Oba back in Feb. `07, and I reposted that post, as the first post, on my 'East Meets West' Thread, back in Sept. `09...