Section 31 (last updated 1.28.2021)
discrete continuous- quality quantity
5:44:43 quality quantity quanta ratio (Hegel encyclopedia part 1)
#65- (June.9.2015) Quantum Dialectic
_________________
Vacuous (mindless, showing no thought)
The progressive development of the idea
When we look at a particular object, we derive forms from it –its size, shape etc. But what the ordinary understanding forgets is that the particular object is a configuration of these forms in the first place, or rather a state of being that captures the internal relations of these forms, and externalizes into the objects of sensation. If we only look at the external relations of reality, we see that the world exhibits an irrational principle, things seem chaotic, or rather even if there is an underlying order, such an order seems to hold no purpose. Why are somethings ugly, why do things die, why are some people stupid? All these even if we know have some reason, nevertheless exhibit an irrational element. As Marx says; “Reason has always existed, but not always in a reasonable form” (letters to Ruge). Why there is unreasonableness in the world speaks to the underlying fundamental contradiction that constitutes the nature of reason. Externality is the efficient cause, that which when the internal relations produce form, the nature of that form is exhibited to consciousness as an externality. (Find where Hegel talks about illusory reflection). External relations portrays to consciousness its forms of thinking, and it does this by way of aesthetic value.
The idea is a process that undergoes an externalizations. Back to the particular object, the forms we derive from it are actually more fundamental than the object because they are its principles. Carl Yonge calls these archetypes, Plato calls them forms. Both Plato and Young however where unable to explain what the universe of the archetypes looked like (Peterson 1:58 maps of meaning 9).
The idea takes on a form, that form becomes an ideology. The the etymological meaning of the word “ology” means a subject of study or a branch of knowledge. So when we say psych-ology, we are speaking of the study of mind or “psyche”. The word ideology therefore means the study of idea. When the idea transforms into an ideology, the ideology groups the idea and diversifies it into a group of objects each a particular expressive of the same idea. Ideology for consciousness is the study of its own ideas. Now ideology possess two possibilities: an ideology may turn into dogma which sees the idea as incontrovertibly true. Yet only at this stage, consciousness has not proved the truth of its idea. Ideology turns into science when consciousness engages in the activity of proving its idea. The proof of its idea is dialectical, an internal dialogue.
When the dialectic produces a concept it achieves self-consciousness, an affirmation of its affirming.
Source: Classical mechanics vs. Quantum mechanics. Borh vs Einstein
Every scientific discourse in principle is predicated by the facts that quantum is finally discovering. The principle of “quantum” requires a further understanding beyond its conventional use applied by modern science. It is in this sense that quantum mechanics is stated as the “fundamental science” even though it is discovered most recently. The most recent discoveries of science are the most fundamental facts of nature. Every other process conceived by it’s scientific discourse follows quantum mechanics. For example, atomic and molecular physics, including the structure of atoms and their dynamics, the periodic table of elements and their chemical behavior, as well as the spectroscopic, electrical, and other physical properties of atoms and molecules, can be accounted for by quantum mechanics. This includes the less obvious disciplines such as the anthropological and social sciences conceived as the Human being. What is the true understanding of quantum mechanics? How does science account quantum as the rational process of Being? The answers to such questions are first derived with the understanding of “quantum” as ontology. Quantum mechanics by its very nature is metaphysical; but what does this mean for modern science? Are the physical properties of the atom excluded because it’s relations are metaphysical? Modern science has yet to achieve the kind of ontology necessary for understanding the atom as the unity between the physical and by the more elusive term, metaphysical.
It is the process for the result, the activity for the content, the material.
Explain the difference between internal and external relations in the ontology underpinning science. Define atomism as external relation.
-every atom operates in the process of internal relations. Internal relation is the: (define). The quantum leap characterize the process of internal relations. Atoms in the quantum state relate inversely to how they do in the general level. In the quantum level the atom is infinite in relation with itself. In the general level atoms relate in the particular way, that is the defining nature. This finite nature is not the limit but the determinate. The relation in the particular sense is the determining process, not the mere result. Their is always the process prior to the result, but the result is necessitated by the process? This is a paradox that is actually concrete in the quantum state. How is the atom in the quantum level necessitated by internal relation, if internal relations is not necessitated by the atom? This latter question precisely elucidates the answer, that the atom is the necessity of internal relations, but it is only through such relations is the atom excreted as the universality of such relations. The atom is both finite but unbound. This is the universality of quantum in the atom. The atom is itself everywhere in itself. Every material object proceeds as a spectrum of sublation inducing the quantum process. This sublation is mediated by alternative levels of microscopic molecules to macroscopic inorganic aggregates. Every object constituting matter acts as wave-particle dualism. Where does this dualism become unity? What is the golden mean produced by this spectrum?
How the quantum constitutes the atom as internal relation has nevertheless always been the question. Hegel’s notion on Reason originates in the initial dialectical process of Being. The very fundamental presupposition that all form of scientific discourse presupposes as truth is that of being. That matter can be altered but never created or destroyed. This is predicated by Hegel’s dialectical notion of Reason.
The atom in relation to its quantum state always presuppose Being as constituting the atom. Nothing is never adopted as the true basis for the atom. Hegel explains the relationship between Nothing and Being as unity, he explains:
Remark 4: Incomprehensibility of the Beginning (explain whole section).
This is the initial and enduring paradox in the metaphysics dating back to the Ancient Greek tradition. The very initial claim to Reason in the world is asserted by Anaxogras and elaborated by Socrates (explain what hegel says about him). Aristotle’s less popular work on “the physics” results in the paradox which begins the implicit science of the quantum. This is really always a metaphysical course at heart.
Aristotle explains that the universe is rational because it is virtuous. That its harmony is its virtuosity, and anything that is virtues is necessarily rational. That the defining aspect to Reason is virtue. Virtue is the right set of relations that felicitate Reason, Aristotle explains: (define virtue), That something is only virtuous if it is also rational. The very basic claim to Reason is virtue. That virtue itself takes on a systematic process for truth. This is the very basic and implicit claim to quantum physics. Quantum as the Notion, is a truth about the nature of reality derived from the general level and deduced into its rational form. The General Level operates differently than the Quantum Form. The former term involves continuity in the substance constituting physics. The latter term includes that substance as taking a rational form. Both aspects of being do not exclude each other but complement each other by being each other. Their being each other is however sustained by their difference.
The dedication of this concrete unity achieves the conceptual negation of the quantum Notion. This initial negation is no opposition but rather sublation. The latter bearing the positive predicate in the initial development of the dialectic. It is contradiction as resolution, the latter bearing the process to the necessity. This is the dialectic nature of the Quantum. Aristotle began the implicate knowledge of the “quantum”, with the notion that virtue is Reason. The term quantum is semantics to the reality it elucidates as truth.
The Beginning claim of the quantum cannot be excluded from its advanced notion. The continuity in substance at the General Level necessarily takes on the Quantum Form. The former is advanced as the latter. This explains phenomenas like consciousness in the organic nature of the mind. Reason constitutes the dualistic unity of the mind and body. This particular process is in fact a projection of the universal. That the universal form of the quantum is projected at the general level. Modern physics conceive a negative contradiction in this unity. That the laws of general and special relativity are inconsistent with quantum physics. That physics operates as the complete inversions of quantum physics. Why is it that the abstract notion conceives of a negative contradiction, but its concrete reality is a positive one? Concrete reality is necessarily positive as it includes the abstract notion’s negative contradiction. Hegel outlines the difference between positive and negative reason, he explains: “”. Reason in the positive sense characterizes the existence of quality in the process of being. Negative reason characterizes the absence of quality in the process of non-being. This dual process of internal relation exists in the substance at the general level. The atom takes on this quantum form of internal relations prior to its external relations. The process of external relations in the General level is the projection of its internal relations. So that external relation is necessitated by internal relations.
The word “Quanta” is the amount that cannot be broken down numerically but nevertheless still constitutes amount. The “amount” is necessarily and universally true, that is, the One is always constituted by the Many. The Many is made up of the One. Religion introduces this relationship as a relation between different forms of truth. That the one does not take on the same state of being as the many. Contemporary religion presuppose this precondition as the initial truth for the relationship between God and humankind. They conceive that God takes on a different existence than human beings. Religion however takes this difference as being opposed. That Gods existence is inconsistent with the existence of the human being. Hegel refers to this as the aspect of the “alienated soul”, he explains: “l. This is the inversion of religion, every religious ideology possess the initial notion that the Many and the One are dualistic in their relation. God is the One independent from the Many creations. God is external in the internal relation with the human being. This however reaches a negative contradiction in logic. If the Many is constituted by the One, are they not the same? The many and the one make no sense outside of each other. That amount always involves the number. That is mathematically true in the quantum state of reality.
This is the first principles predicating the laws of nature (Bore ). The quanta refers to the quantity portraying the process. This process is of internal relations, which necessarily presupposes external relations. The notion of external relations is only true in that of internal relations. The laws of repulsion and attraction constituting gravity characterizes external and internal relations in the inorganic form of the universe. There cannot be infinite repulsion in matter. Planck reveals this early paradox about the quantum. Planck examined the atom in the general sense to result in this paradox.
http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/cosmo/lectures/lec08.html
“Planck noticed a fatal flaw in our physics by demonstrating that the electron in orbit around the nucleus accelerates. Acceleration means a changing electric field (the electron has charge), when means photons should be emitted. But, then the electron would lose energy and fall into the nucleus. Therefore, atoms shouldn’t exist!”
The resolution put forward by Planck is the famous speculation that sub atomic energy is transferred in small units, called quanta. This solves the problem of loss of energy by making energy differentiated, in other words discrete because if energy continuous in a disconnected manner, then the loss of energy at one discrete form does not imply the loss of energy at another discrete form, therefore solving the problem that energy is lost indefinitely. Bohr elaborated this idea by stating that particles are fixated in certain orbits which they cannot be otherwise. This hypothesis proved by empirical observation elaborates that physical structures are fundamentally logical relations.
Our picture of an atom where an electron revolves around the nucleus of proton is really a demonstrative schema of trying to explain the motion of a form.
The particle state, blue on the circle, simply demonstrates the discrete form of the wavelength of the motion. In nature there is no distinction between the discreteness from the wavelength.
Electron does not exist at one single spot in its orbit, it has a wave nature and exists at all places in the allowed orbit. What we take as the particle in a single spot is the conception abstracting a single place in the continuum of wavelength and the conception of that and not the whole makes it a discrete unit known as quanta. physicist speaks of allowed orbits and allowed transitions to produce particular photons (that make up the fingerprint pattern of spectral lines). And the Bohr atom really looks like the following diagram:
While de Broglie waves were difficult to accept after centuries of thinking of particles are solid things with definite size and positions, electron waves were confirmed in the laboratory by running electron beams through slits and demonstrating that interference patterns formed.
The bare form of an atom does not account for the diverse contextual complexity of atoms which in presents day quantum physics is figuring out that the conception concerns the forms of the atoms content. This by no means is a suggestion for subjective idealism because the conception is not externally imposed on determining the atom but the form of an atom is the form of the conception itself.
that an object moving in a circle at constant speed is accelerating. It is accelerating because the direction of the velocity vector is changing.
The first instance of motion is this
Discrete and extensive
Quantum has its limit in amount. The amount is simply defined by plurality. The limit in conjunction with amount compose the discrete magnitude. In this discrete magnitude, quantum is a plurality that has no being distinct from its limit, nor is the limit external to it.
The discrete nature of quantum has extensive magnitude, meaning that in the discrete unit there is the plurality of things where the amount of one thing is outside the amount of another. In this way the extensive magnitude is the continuity of discrete limits.
The continuous nature of quanta has also the inverse intensive magnitude. This is amount inside amount. Because the continuous is the extensive magnitude where the amount of one thing is outside the amount of another, the sum total of all amounts constitutes a general discrete amount. Intensive magnitude is the the amount of one thing is the same as the amount of another. This means that continuity is the limit of the discrete in the same way as the discrete is the limit of continuity. Keep in mind that the limit itself is the efficient movement of the discrete as continuous. Continuity is the limit of the discrete because it serves as the beyond for the next discrete.
In quantum, finitude and infinity (the spurious infinity supposedly separate from the finite) each already has within it the moment of the other. The limit the infinity reaches is itself as finitude. But this finitude is now the limit of the infinite has a limit beyond itself, that limit is once again the finitude that is infinite. The limit beyond the finite is the limit of the infinite. Beyond the finite is the continuous quantum.
Beyond the infinite is the discrete quantum.
Quantity generally is defined by the concept of quantum, which simply speaking means limit, not a particular limit here or there, but quantum means the limit generally.
Quantum consists of two forms of magnitude: continuity and discrete. The difference between these two determinations has in the first instance no immediate significance. The reason is that they define generally the form that the limit takes.
Discreteness defines the nature of the particular. Something in order to be particular takes on discrete quantity. Discreteness is defined by extensive magnitude which means amount external. Something discrete has the amount outside itself. Continuity is always the step beyond the limit, the limit of the limit, and so it is defined by intensive magnitude meaning that it has the amount internally.
The extensive and intensive relation of quantum explain how quantity is structured. The extensive magnitude meaning amount outside equally means that there is the amount inside that outside amount. For example, if one atom occupies space, the space is the extensive magnitude of the atom, and the atom is the intensive magnitude of space. Both the intensive and extensive accounts for discrete and continuous quanta. Quanta is both discrete and continuous simultaneously.
Quantum as the limit generally is (A) the self-relating discrete unit of continuity. (B) this discrete unit of continuity is enclosing meaning that it is bound on all sides. (C) it being bounded is other-excluding. The individual unit of discrete continuity is called “quanta”.
But this exclusion is the very continuity of the limit being the other limit.
The limit of the limit means that quanta, matter is always in motion.
Mathematically speaking each number is a quanta because any number is a discrete unit distinguishable from numbers generally, yet each number is continuous in that any one number presupposes a series of numbers.
Quanta alters into another quanta and the further determination of these alterations, namely that it goes on to infinity, lies in the circumstance that quantum is immanently self-limiting. Each quanta is self-limiting because any unit of discrete continuity limits itself as an other discrete unite of continuity. Quantum is the limit because it is inherently self-contradictory.
The self limiting nature of quanta is the duplicating mechanism of determination. When one determination is duplicated into another, the potential for a further duplication serves as the ought-to-be the next determination.
Magnitude
The proper understanding of Magnitude defines quantity as a determinate quality which is a certain measure in a specific movement rather than a measure of an object abstracted independently from any movement, this even includes certain kinds of movements abstracted as unrelated from their essential relations. For example Hegel says:
99
“In mathematics magnitude is usually defined as what can be increased or decreased. This definition is faulty, since it still contains what is to be defined; but it does at least imply that the determination of magnitude is such that it is posited as alterable and indIfferent, so that, notwithstaning a change of this determination (whether it be an extensive or an intensive increase), the thing in question,. for instance a house, or red, would not cease to be a house, or red.”
The magnitudes of increase or decrease for instance belongs to a quality to which a change in magnitude renders it a different quality. For example decrease in the depth of red turns it into the colour pink, and magnitude related to quality like colour renders alteration. But the mere notions of increase and decrease do not explain the change and alteration in quality due to the change in magnitude because it is assumed that the quality remains the same even though it’s magnitude changes.
“Absolute as pure quantity” is indifferent determination, determinations that remains always indifferent to any change within it.
“The Absolute is pure quantity”-this standpoint coincides in general with the attribution of the determination of matter to the Absolute, [a matter] in which, it is true, form would be present, but only as an indifferent determination. Quantity also constitutes the fundamental determination of the Absolute, if it is so grasped that, being what is absolutely-undifferentiated, distinctions in it are only quantitative.-Pure space, time, etc., may also be taken as examples of quantity, insofar as the real is supposed to be grasped as an indIf ferent filling for space or time.”
“when it is said of magnitude that its concept consists in the possibility of being increased or decreased, what is meant by that is just that magnitude (or, more correctly, quantity)-in distinction from quality -is a determination with respect to whose alteration this or that thing< is indifferent. As for the defect in the usual denition of quantity which was the subject of a reproach made above, this, when examined more closely, turns out to consist in the fact that to increase and to decrease means precisely to determine the magnide differently. Consequently, quantity would basically be just something alterable as such. But quality is alterable, too, and the distinction between quantity and quality that was previously mentioned is here expressed by the reference to “increasing or decreasing.” This implies that, in whatever direction the determination of magnitude is changed, the thing in question remains what it is.”
That remaining thing is the conception, the conception is pure quantity.
(Add to observer effect, unmeasurable aspect of conception)
“This is what does happen in fact when only those sciences whose ob-ject can be submitted to a thematical calculus are recognised as exact sciences. Here the bad metaphysics mentioned above (§ 98 Addition) appears once more-the metaphysics that sub s tes one-sided and abstract determinations of the understanding for the conrete Idea.
“There would indeed be something badly amiss with our cognition if we had to renounce the possibility of exact cognition of ob-jects such as freedom, law, ethical life, and even God himself, because they cannot be measured and computed or expressed in a mathematical formula.”
“it would be a serious mistake to interpret the above discussion as paraging the dignity of mathematics, or as supplying a clear conscience for ertia and superficiality, because it designates the quantitative determination as a merely external and indifferent one. We are not maintaining that quantitative deter m ations can be left to take care of themselves, or even that they do not have to be eated as precisely as possible […] But here again a distinction shows up at once, namely, that determinations of magnitude de do not have the same importance in the ob-jects of the natural world as those of the spiritual world […] when we consider God as the Trinity, the number “three” has a much more subordinate significance here than when we are considering, for example, the three dimensions of space or even the three sides of a angle, for which the basic determination is precisely to be just a surface limited three lines.”
(Add this to more activities happening within smaller space in organic matter)
“it is certainly the case that quantity plays what we may call a more important role in inorganic nature than in organic […] For example, spirit is in any case more than nature, and animals are more than plants; but we know very little about these things and the distinction between them, if we simply stick to a “more or less” of this kind, and do not advance to some grasp of specific determinacy, which is here in the first place qualitative.”
The fact that inorganic nature is more quantitive means that a greater area of space is covered by less distinct qualities. Whereas organic nature is more qualitative means that a smaller area of space is covered by more distinct qualities.
101 quantum “how much”
Quantum deals with how quantity is limited, the quality of quantity that determines limits, distinguishing quantity into distinct qualities, irregardless of the quality but the act of distinguishing qualities.
“Quantity, posited essentially with the excluding determinacy that it con tains, is quantum or limited quantity.”
Quanta
“Quantum is the way that quantity is there, whereas pure quantity corresponds to being, and degree (which will come next) corresponds to being-far-itself [being distinguishing itself as an other]. -As for the details of the advance from pure quantity to quantum, this progress is grounded in the fact that, whereas distinction is initially present in pure quantity only implicitly (as the distinction between continuity and discreteness), in quantum, on the other hand, distinction is posited. It is, indeed, posited in such a way that from now on quantity appears always as distinguished or limited. But as a result quantum also breaks up at the same time into an indeterminate multitude of quanta or determinate magnitudes. Each of these determinate magnitudes, as distinct from the others, forms a unit, just as, on the other hand, considered all by itself, it is a many. And in this way quantum is determined as number.”
“quanta”
What is the meaning of quantum? The plural term “quanta” is an indivisible discrete unit of process. Quantum is literally a point of relation where two variables are in contradiction. It is the relation that takes on an energy state. Quanta is literally a unite of process. Process is the generation of possibility which is bringing out, or making explicit, a form.
Quantum refers to matter that is infinite in supply.
The term quantum leap refers to the abrupt movement from one discrete energy level to another, with no smooth transition. There is no “inbetween”. The quantization, or “jumpiness” of action as depicted in quantum physics differs sharply from classical physics which represented motion as smooth, continuous change.
The way matter develops in the quantum realm is more abrupt. Quantum is the smallest indivisible unit of quantity that produce discrete energy levels. This means that energy levels are invariably generated in the quantum realm. But what gives rise to such abrupt energy levels? These abrupt energy levels are the product of reasoning, which whenever a contradiction is reached, that manifest as a quanta. Thinking is at the same time acting, and so the act of thinking is an exertion of energy, in other words, it takes energy to think. Matter being infinitely produced is the infinite working of reason. There is no difference between logic and matter, meaning that each logical notion does at the same time take on a material form.
This is why at the quantum realm the “observer” is at the same time synonymous with the object. There is no external means of observing the object. The observation of the object means at the same time the existence of it. Whereas for external relations, the observer is externally engaged with the object, meaning that objects bear a relative nature to one another, in a way where objects are different, and such differences assume relative positions of locomotion, subsistence, form, etc,. External relations is only true simultaneously after internal relations, meaning that it is indivisible from it but in their relation comes after. The notion that the objects existence is entirely dependent on its relations, defines logic, for one proposition can only exists relative to another, internal relation defines indivisible quantity.
Packet of energy- Matrix
The observer is a physical substance inherent in any phenomena
Quantum mechanics goes further than classical mechanics not just in describing the way the physical world operates but what forms of existence actually disclose the mechanics of nature? In classical mechanics nature exhibits a set of behaviours operating independently of the observer. In fact the idea of the observer is restrained in the methodology of classical mechanics because the discovery of a phenomena is said to be maintained as it operates in and of itself without the intervention of the observer. When quantum revolutionized the notion of the observer to involve the nature of the phenomena as having in and of itself the capacity to be changed by an aspect from its own conception, a new scope of existence disclosed the ordinary mechanics of nature. In classical mechanics, an object is disclosed within the laws of nature, things move in space because of gravity etc. quantum mechanics went further and made the laws of nature be disclosed by an indeterminacy of change, which becomes part of the physical make up of the object and its environment. In classical mechanics the observer is in nature, but in quantum mechanics the nature itself that the observer is in , is also disclosed by a further form, known as dark matter, which shares in the nature of the observer as having the capacity to conceive without being conceivable. We can only discern evidence of the existence of dark energy indirectly from its gravitational effects on objects, but never as an object in and of itself.
Dark matter being unknowable is not a lack of explanation into what it is but rather the reaffirmation of the possible explanation as potential energy, which really marks the broader notion of change itself. In quantum mechanics what discloses the laws of nature is its potential for change, and this is not merely an aspect of time governing the transition of events to other events, but change is rather also the physical form that maintains the structure of an object. For example, when the apple is metabolized, its physical structure changes from being a fruit to a vitamin source for the blood, and then that vitamin source is changed into muscle tissue etc. These forms of change preexist in the apple as its potential energy. The potential energy from apple to vitamin is present beforehand the metabolization, but this potential energy is not merely the transition from one matter content to another, but is also a change in moments, one disclosing an apple, another disclosing vitamins in blood. And the change is dependent on the nature of the observer, that the apple changes to vitamin because this transition is disclosed by an organ, blood. The relation between these two drastically different moments is defined as their quantum entanglement. Entanglement describes how seemingly two unrelated events can follow from one another? the quantity of one object in one dimension forms a continuity to the quantity of another object in a differing magnitude of a dimension. Take for instance, the photons shooting out from the eyes of the scientist when observing a macroscopic phenomenon has no effect on it due to the differences in mass between the size of the photon and a macroscopic object like a chair. But change the mass of a chair to be the same size of a photon, and theoretically, the photon form the eye of the observer displaces the object by moving it, trapping it by encapsulating it, or in any other way changing it. The lack of affect of a microscopic entity on a macroscopic entity speaks about the lack of relationship that quantum entanglement is trying to solve between varying magnitudes of dimensions. Entanglement concerns how unrelated objects across the universes in terms of distance can have a relationship is the same concerns as how differing objects in dimension can have a relationship, how can a bacteria be in a man?
Shape shifting example. How the many miners transform within the same object.
Matrix
In nature, each number is a possible event, a detail, disclosed within the present even in the object. So that the idea of a an underlying matrix behind the scene of things hints at the nature of the infinite possible events that go into any one single present and particular event.
Our modern idea of the “matrix” reduces the infinite variability of all concrete things into their bare abstract variability of numbers. The variability of numbers describes precisely the discreetness between objects while maintaining a general physical continuity – a general measure of things into quantity. A quantity is just a distinguished quality, measurable into a vector, a point, or a scaler, a spectrum. For example velocity which is the intensity of motion being the rate at which position changes, is a vector because it changes,i.e, from left to right or right to left, in other words it is a quantity the change of which is distinguishable into a definite measure, when left it is not right, and when right it is not left. In the infinite scale of uncertainty each number is every other number while at the same time being a particular number. This general uncertainty is warped by a particular element within itself which produces a general static picture where everything is one thing at a definite time. 1 is 1, 2 is 2, 3 is 3 etc. This is how the general uncertainty can still maintain each thing as distinct from another even though there is the uncertainty of both where one is not itself but possibly the other.
from everything. But as the particular conception excludes the most of reality, it is discrete in that sense, and what is not conceived is not the same as being “out of view” per say, but there is an actual physical boundary between the events such that it becomes a nullity, or a space, where an infinite set of other particulars are potentially there. The discrete measure between objects definite to themselves but not to each other is an unknown space where an infinite set of potential events can take place.
(Add here matrix as a boundary) quantum state
The “matrix” or whatever state we call it is the condition of an infinite dialogue. In this dimensions the proposition of ideas in the process of thought have substance to them. This means that unlike how our understanding is accustomed to ideas, we propose something and it is a mere proposition that is because it is a reference to something real outside of it, the noise that is associated with the word “dog” simply points to a real living organism that exists independently from the word describing it. But in the state of absolute dialectic, the proposition of something carries its own ground of actual being that thing, or it is what the thing is. this absolute state we recently discover is a “quantum state”, which is a state of a quantized system.
Packet of energy- quantization
Potentiality comes in the form of a packet of energy in the mind
There are elements related to phenomenons like Déjà vu or recollection that makes us ‘not trust our reality’, or introduces an element of distrust into what is considered “real” or what is considered a “possibility”. One difficulty is that to foresee an event to happen, either in a dream or in day dreaming, but we think that because it did not happen yet, this foresight is just a mere mental image of a possibility or a probability. On the other hand, after an event has happened, it is difficult to imagine as if it did not happen, because there is now the knowledge from the experience of it happening and there is the sense that it has always been there since it is now part of the past. The mind foresees events that have not yet occurred in the present as a possibilities or a potentiality because there is the uncertainty as to whether it will occur or not, in which way it occurs, and what kind of occurrence is it. For example, a man has a dream where he is crossing another man in an alleyway, in the dream the man turns to the other man and beats him continuously. However in real life months later, that same man finds himself exactly in the alleyway besides another man but he just simply walks by and does not harm. We can say that the dream was either false, that it was just a form of the imagination, or it was conveying some other message by positing an alternative scenario. In a dream however there are aspect picked out in the same event that convey aspects more real than the occurrence of the event in reality. First we have to note that an event is a multiplicity of a relation between many variables of different levels of physicality. For example, there are the two actual men as they perceive each other, than there are their microscopic operations that keep them alive that is imperceptible, then there are the more abstract thoughts, feelings and inclinations in the head of each man. Although the man did not physically attack the other man in real life, he had the strong inclination and feeling to do so, and in the dream that feeling was picked out as more real than the actual event which was just an ordinary crossing between two men.
This brings the nature of uncertainty as a fundamental function of possibility. The nature of potentiality has its place in the abstract operations of the mind. (Add when a car goes out of sight, we do not say it is now in a potential state because it is still there, it is just out of sight) but a scenario that happens in the mind is known as a possibility. The mind is the domain of nature where the uncertainty principle is placed.
The form of potentiality is not dispersed but is rather concentrated or discrete. We think that because potentiality does not occupy the present, it is no where to be located at a certain point, and this is on a perceptible level true because something that is uncertain within frame of perception cannot be located and so it’s possibility is distributed anywhere within the scope. But potentiality at a more fundamental level, at the speculative level of thought is a consideration of possibilities, the nature of potentiality takes on a discrete form, a concentration of a set of variables wherein if one variable does not occupy its place in relation to the other variables, the entire situation changes to be a different possibility.
This form of potentiality is what is known in quantum mechanics as “packets of energy”, a quanta is simply the measure of a certain number of variables occupying a necessary relation to each other exhibiting an event which if any of the pieces would different would change the event, as we say in common life, “all the pieces fall into place”. The mind is the domain where a possibility is measured as a quanta or a “packet of energy”, which takes on an instantaneous point flash, all the happenings that form the event are laid out simultaneously. This potential has the same possibility of occurring in relation to another potential, yet what causes one to occur over the other is which one is more rational. We say “rational” here not to necessarily mean better, although that is one implication, or rather which one is more rationalized by the observer, which one the observer determines to characterize the experience representing their identity. One possibility may perhaps be worst than the other but it’s rationalization takes on a more logical necessity for it to happen.
If we take for example state number (3.2.1) and we take the top right light variant out, it would not be the same probability density of the hydrogen. Like if we flip (3.1.0) to the side, it would be (3.1.1). This dispersion of quantization in the crude physical sense applies similarly to the possibilities of event. Any event requires a set of occurrence in a specific sequence to be the event. If someone dreams of being in the army, this presupposes with it military school, with strenuous training, deployment into a foreign country, and finally war, which includes killing and events like death or injuries. Missing any of these variables may perhaps be an incomplete experience of what it means to be a soldier.
Within this potentiality are also an innumerable other possibilities, like whether the solider dies or lives, becomes injuries or stays healthy etc. These also bring with them a series of other variables that need to fall into place to constitutes one possibility as a reality over another. Like the soldier was in a fire fight and was blind sighted by the enemy and was not killed due to the ego of the enemy wanting praise from his high commanders for capturing the enemy alive, but this chance that spared the soldiers life gave him the opportunity to escape from the enemy and in this possibility the soldier lived. In the alternative possibility where the soldier did not have the need for honour the spiller would of been simply dead.
These potentialities of event in the abstract domain form actual routes of experience. But in the notion of time only one possibility must take on a duration at a single time. There cannot be two possible events simultaneously happening for the observer at the present because even if they did the observer would not be able to differentiate them and therefore they would be the same event. The observer is the point in these potential routes that undergo the duration of taking on the transformations that would make the event occur in the way it does. This is why for example we are changing in time.
A quantized system provides a distribution of probability for the “observable” outcome of each possible measurement on a system. Observable in this sense simply means a quantity that can be measured, determined by some sequence of physical operations. In other words, the measurement of the behaviour of physical objects, how it changes and morphs into certain event particles. The different forms involved in a transformation of a physical phenomenon, or rather the operations of it, are discerned by assigning different observers in different frames of reference. This means that each change is accounted for by a specific observer disclosing it into a discrete reference frame that can be differentiated form another discernible change that is accounted by a difference reference frame. This is an automorphism, which is an isomorphism from a mathematical object to itself. It is, in some sense, a symmetry of the object, and a way of mapping the object to itself while preserving all of its structure. The set of all automorphisms of an object forms a group, called the automorphism group. It is, loosely speaking, the symmetry group of the object.
This distribution of probability has at its bare nature the form of a wave. A mixture of quantum states is again a quantum state. Quantum states that cannot be written as a mixture of other states are called pure quantum states, all other states are called mixed quantum states.
Mathematically, a pure quantum state can be represented by a ray in a Hilbert space over the complex numbers.[3] The ray is a set of nonzero vectors differing by just a complex scalar factor; any of them can be chosen as a state vector to represent the ray and thus the state. A unit vector is usually picked, but its phase factor can be chosen freely anyway. Nevertheless, such factors are important when state vectors are added together to form a superposition.
In the dialectic, the proposition of an idea is a probability of a thought process that presupposes a set of opposing determinations. These ideas in order to hold their ground maintain themselves as a manifestation of what they are opposing, and so they manifest into an actual experience to demonstrate their position. This is the nature of an “operation” which is the function of being active. No idea is a determination of thought unless it demonstrates itself phenomenologically into the full extent of its presupposition. For if an idea presupposes theft, the idea of stealing something that belong to others, then this idea in a matrix manifest as an event where an individual is a thief, an event where someone shoplifts for example. This constitutes one of the many events in that individuals life and the individual is simply the substrate enduring the operations of these ideas, this is why a life form is an organism, it changes and adapts to the environment to exhibit a specific function. Mathematically speaking an individual is a function because they are the expression involving one or more variable, whereas the idea is the operation, because it is what is being performed on the individual.
That convulsion is the moment now going through one possible event in the ascension of the total series of events forming the same object. The moment now is an experience from one part forming the total structure of the object it views as the independent body going through the experience.
Except the moment now is the clarity and concentration whereas the convulsion the moments that are not present
Pure conception
This means that something true is objectively itself. Explain Hegel objectivity is an idea as object.
It has within itself the mean of its own self creation.
(Add to above subjective nothing) Discrete and continuous (add to Hegel discrete and continuous)
Discrete and continuous are forms of extensive and intensive magnitudes. Discrete form describes intensive magnitude because it is the distinctiveness of quality separating it as a distinct and definite determination. Intensive magnitude as a discrete form is the internal relation of a determination with that of the negation of its inverse. Continuous is extensive magnitude because it is the relation where inverse determinations take on the same form while remaining distinct. Extensive relates to the covering of the area. (Add inorganic more quantitive than organic)
Discrete and continuous are synthetical conceptions meaning that they cannot be taking on their own without the presupposition of the other and it is important to discern in what sense is discreetness fundamental to continuity and how continuity involves discreetness.
Discreetness is left out by the senses
Limit of the senses in the form of the conception
The abstract powers of the mind in conjunction with the sensible faculties have evolved to provide the most stable and efficient conceptual form to the development of the organism operating in nature. The most efficient conception is however by no means a complete conception. The sensible faculties lack a comprehensive conception of continuity because not all details forming the object are perceived within the reference frame in which it is contained. A medium of quality is picked out. For example, air is an element that is not seen but only felt, but this does not mean that air bears no physical quality that are discernible because at the subatomic level air particles have mass and shape, and some microorganism only live off respiration (find term). Realistically air is a species of trillions of particles that if perception picks out would be too distracted to pick out anything else, this is why perception did not develop to perceive elements like air, its view of other things would be muddled. In comparison to the microscopic world the macroscopic perception of things is only a vague continuity.
The sensible faculties also do not perceive an accurate discrete form of things. The sensible faculties filter out the conception itself and only focus on the content of the conception because the conception is itself disclosed by a formless void which may not be a needed aspect for the perception of a thing. The void is not perceived as disclosing the object because the object is already disclosed by its conception so that when the conception changes from one object to another the void disclosing the conception does not have to be accounted for as part of the transition. Each conception of a different thing is separated by a discontinuity of not being the other. The discontinuity between events is part of the change of the conception from one thing to another.
The change between things is mediated by the disclosure of the conception within nothing. When looking at one thing the reason why you are not seeing another is because the sensible faculty filters out the form of the conception itself so as to not have the void appear as part of the conception of the object it is directly perceiving. For one thing this is done to achieve one reference frame to discloses the transition of the conception between things and so it appears that there is no discontinuity when the conception changes from one object to another.
Moreover, this is done for for efficient and survival reasons because having a discontinuity in the change of the conception misses details that aid in the survival of the conceiving organism. For example if a lion is running towards the observer and there is a void between two conceptions within the same reference frame to which the lion transition from one frame to another renders a missed moment that might be the deciding factor of whether to be bitten to death or avoid the bite and survive. The form of the conception is filtered out from the object of the conception, and only the object is left for perception and the conception merely presupposed in the abstract. But the form of the conception is as much a physical part of the object as the object is part of the conception. The question is why?
The senses purposefully limit the total qualitative make up of reality to a specific resolution not capturing all possible details in every possible form because this limitation of continuity is at the same time a limiting of discreteness. The limiting of both magnitudes is necessary for an efficient framework which a finite life form can operate within as it is bounded by a certain circumstances. But in no way is this narrow framework of continuity and discreteness compreresenive or even entirely accurate depiction of a fundamental state of reality independent of the efficient needs of the particular living form.
Discreteness is left out to have a sense of continuity and continuity is reduced to have a sense of discreteness. The sense of these two limits of one magnitude on the other serves as one necessary part of a conceptual framework.
Hegel- being-for-self
“The most familiar example of being-for-itself is the “I.” We know ourselves to be beings who are there, first of all distinct from other such beings, and related to them. But secondly, we also know that this expanse of being-there is, so to speak, focused into the simple form of being-for-itself. When we say “I,” that is the expression of the in nite self-relation that is at the same time negative. It may be said that man distinguishes himself from the animals, and so from nature gener ally, because he knows himself as “I”; what this says, at the same time, is that natural things never attain to free being-for-oneself, but, being restricted to being there, are always just being-for-another.” (96)
To say “I” which is a self identity is at the same time to excludes all things not identified with as I.
the discreteness implicit in the conception of events is just left out from the perceptible frame of reference, the senses focus on the object of the conception leavening out the void which serves to disclose the form of the conception disclosing its object. The reason why perception does not include the conception as it conceives the object is because when the conception changes from one frame to include one object to another frame including another, the change appears to be a lucid transition from one object to another within the same stable unchanging conception. Yet the illusory aspect of this change follows from leaving out most of the details of an event to achieve a high resolution of some particular objects rather than a muddling of all total objects. An important detail that is left out is the discreteness of the event because in order to have a smooth motion from one object to another without an interruption in the conception, this mediation is first presupposed by the question as to how objects are conceived as distinct from others because we cannot merely assume there difference as given as they appear for perception.
(Add quantum vibration ) In the quantum level the change in the conception of things
The discreteness of object is their conception disclosed within a void, the void that the conception is disclosed within functions as a mark of distinction first from the particular content of the conception and second that particularity against (find where else you said this) the indifference of the void. In the quantum realm every change in the conception is a formation of a new idea structuring the content of the object. In the quantum level every change in the conception is a separate frame of reference disclosing an object. The discreteness of the object is its conception disclosing it within nothing so as to denote its differentiation from another newly formed object of its conception. In a quantum realm the conception of one event is separated by a disclosure of void from the conception of another event.
In quantum realm every conception would be its own event rather than having one lucid continuous experience of one event. The limit of this is what ever can be conceived is a possible event. (Add to quantum state sec.1)
This is a fundamental truth because it means that our experience of continuity as a motion of one continuous event, tuning my head changes my conception but maintains a continuing transition of a world is predicated by a continuity of discrete happenings distinct from each other and not ordered in the transitory manner of objects connected with each other like vision presents but the same determination contradicting itself by being different forms concerning the same idea. by turning my head and finding the object I left behind there. But that so far as the object where the conception itself resides within is also disclosed by a conception, the order of reality is one in the abstract. In the abstract thinking of the mind the order of images events do not follow the same order of continuity in relation to each other as they do externally for perception. In thought the future of an event may be presented first before the beginning and the unfolding of its advance towards the end, for example, you can first imagine falling in love with a girl and that is the end goal and then follow that aim with all the way you can go about attaining it, talking to her, taking her out etc. All the steps necessary to get her to fall in love (add law of mind). Whereas in the external reality of the sensations, you first do all the things then only to attain the end of love, or in many causes at least sexual inter course.
(Add Alan watts camera lens turns on itself)
That is closer to the actual discreteness of the conception changing and that change is maintained as a discreteness disclosing its content. It is an internal infinite frame going in and out and through these conceptions, that is what ideas are and how your mind formulated ideas. Ideas are not presented as being bifurcated beside each other but each one internally changes to the other.
discreteness of the conception is left out so that the conception of one thing left behind for the conception of an other things does not constitute both object of the change as simultaneously present at the same time.
There is the misapprehension of absolute relativism following the idea that the conception determines the object. It is argued that if the object is determined by its conception and there are many conceptions than there is no basis outside any of these conceptions that determine a shared reality of the object for them all. If the conception determines the object and there is no standard of reality that determines the conception then the object is not real for the conception.
Hegel 5:23:00 quantity discrete and continuous magnitude
Hegel on atomism 98
“The atomistic philosophy is the standpoint from which the Absolute determines itself […] as One, and as many Ones. The repulsion which shows in the concept of the One was assumed to be its fundamental force; it is not attraction, however, but chance, i.e., what is without thought, that is supposed to bring them together. Since the One is fixed as One, its coming together with others does, indeed, have to be considered as some thing quite external.-The void, which is assumed to be the other principle [added] to the atoms, is repulSion itself, represented as the nothingness that is between the atoms.24 Modern Atomism and physics still maintains this principle-has abandoned the atoms, in that it just holds onto small parts or molecules; by doing that it has come closer to sensible representation, but has abandoned the determination by thought.-And since a force of attraction is put beside the force of repulSion, the antithesis has indeed been made complete, and the discovery of this so-called force of nature has occasioned much pride.”
“Since Atomism is still held in high esteem nowadays among those natural scientists who do not want anything to do with metaphysics, it should be remembered in this connection that we do not escape metaphysics (or, more precisely, the tracing back of nature to thoughts) by throwing ourselves into the arms of Atomism, because, of course, the atom is itself a thought and so the interpretation of matter as consisting of atoms is a metaphysical one.”
“It is true that Newton expressly warned physics to beware of metaphysics;26 but, to his honour, let it be said that he did not conduct himself in accordance with this warning at all. Only the animals are true blue physicists by this standard, since they do not think; whereas humans, in contrast, are thinking beings, and born metaphysicians. All that matters here is whether the metaphysics that is employed is of the right kind; and specifically whether, instead of the concrete logical Idea, we hold on to one-sided thought-determinations fixed by the understanding, so that they form the basis both of our theoretical and of our practical action. This is the reproach that strikes down the philosophy of Atomism. “
“Like many thinkers nowadays, the ancient atomists regarded everything as a many; and it was supposed to be chance that brings the atoms together, as they float about in the void. But the relation of the many to one another is not a merely accidental one at all […] Kant who deserves the credit for having perfected the theory< of matter by considering it as the unity of repulsion and attraction.
This involves the correct insight that attraction should certainly be recognised as the other of the two moments in the concept of being-for-itself, and hence attraction belongs to matter just as essentially as repulsion. Kant’s so-called dynamic construction of matter suffers from the defect that repulsion and attraction are postulated as present without further ado, rather than being deduced. The “how” and the “why” of this merely asserted unity would have followed logically from a proper deduction. Besides, Kant expressly insisted that we must not regard matter as present on its own account, and only fitted out afterwards (“on the side” as it were) with the two forces of repulsion and attraction here referred to; on the contrary, matter consists in nothing else but their unity.”
Continuous and discrete magnitude-Hegel
“in its immediate relation to itself, or in the determination of self-equivalence posited by attraction, quantity is continuous magnitude; in the other determination which it contains-that of the One-it is discrete magnitude. But continuous quantity is also discrete, for it is only continuity of the many; and discrete quantity is also continuous, for its continuity is the One as that in which the many ones are the same, unity.”
Cannot have one without the other-
“continuous and discrete magnitude should not be looked upon […] as if the determination of the one did not belong to the other, but they distinguish themselves only in this, that the same whole is posited first under one of its determinations, and then under the other. (2) The antinomy of space, of time, or of matter (with regard to its divisibility ad infinitum or, conversely, with regard to its being composed of indivisibles) is nothing but the affirmation of quantity, first as continuous, then as discrete. If space, time, etc., are posited only with the determination of continuous quantity, then they are divisible ad infinitum; but under the determination of discrete magnitude they are in-themselves divided and consist of indivisible ones; each affirmation is as one-sided as the other. “
“As the proximate result of being-for-itself, quantity contains within itself as ideal elements both sides of its process (repulsion and attraction). Hence it is both continuous and discrete. Each of these two moments contains the other within itself, so that there is no such thing as a merely continuous or a merely discrete magnitude. If we happen to speak of them as two particular and contrasting species of magnitude, that is just the result of our abstractive reflection. In the consideration of determinate magnitudes, this reflection prescinds now from the one and then from the other of the two moments that are contained in the concept of quantity in inseparable unity. So we say, for instance, that the space that this form takes up is a continuous magnitude, whilst the hundred people who are thered in it form a discrete magnitude. But the space is both continuous and discrete at once, so that we also speak of spatial points and subdivide every space e.g., a certain length into so and so many feet, inches, etc., which can only occur on the presupposition that space is in-itself discrete too. On the other hand, the dis ete magnitude consisting of a hundred people is equally and at the same time continuous; and what is common to them, the species mankind, which pervades all of the single instances and unites them with each other, is that wherein the continuity of this magnitude is grounded.
Degree
103 extensive and intensive magnitude
“The limit is identical with the whole of the quantum itself; as multiple within itself it is extensive magnitude, but as determinacy that is simple within itself, it is intensive magnitude or degree.”
“the distinction between continuous and discrete magnitude and extensive and intensive magnitude consists in this: that the former concerns quantity in general, whereas the latter concerns the limit or determinacy of quantity as such.-Like continuous and discrete magnitude, extensive and intensive magnitude are not two species (each of which would contain a determinacy that would be lacking in the other); whatever has extensive magnitude has intensive magnitude as well, and vice versa.”
Hegel makes Zeno say: “to say something once is like to say it forever”
Infinity number
104- “on this topic Zeno rightly says (in Aristotle’s report) that it is the same to say some thing once and to say it over and over again. “
“It is mainly the quantitative infinite progression that the reflective understanding usually relies upon when it has to deal with infinity in general […] that it is the expression not of true In ni but only of the spurious in nity that never gets beyond what merely ought to be the case, so that in fact it ts stuck in the nite. As for the specifically quantitative form of this finite progession, which Spinoza rightly calls a merely imaginary infinity (in nitum imaginationis),31”
“genuine Infinite is not to be considered merely as what is beyond the nite, and that we must renounce that progressus in in nitum in order to reach the consciousness of the genuine Infinite.”
“It is well known that Pythagoras33 philosophised with numbers, and conceived number to be the basic determination of things. To the ordinary mind this interpretation must at first sight appear to be […] quite mad. To answer this question we must first remember that the task of philosophy consists just in tracing things back to thoughts, and to determinate thoughts at that.”
Ratio-
The infinite of quantum is the value of self-determination
105- “In its determinacy of being on its own account quantum is external to itself. This self-externality constitutes its quality; it is in this very self-externality that it is itself and is related to itself. In this way, the externality, i.e., the quantitative, and the being-for-itself, the qualitative, are united.-Posited upon itself in this way, quantum is quantitative relationship [or ratio], [i.e., the] determinacy that is both an immediate quantum (the exponent), and mediation (namely the relation of any quantum to another )-the two terms of the ratio, which do not count according to their immediate value, since their value is only [determined] in this relation.”
Add to logic of mathematics)
Page 167 “We may, of course, be prompted at first to connect the most general determina ons of thought with the first numbers, and to say therefore that one is what is simple and immediate, two is distinction and mediation, and three the unity of both. But these combinations are completely external, and there is nothing in these numbers as such to make them the expression of precisely these determinate thoughts. Besides, the further we advance in applying this method, the more ob ous becomes the sheer arbitrariness of combining determinate numbers with determinate thoughts. For instance, [the number] 4 can be considered the unity of 1 and 3, and of the thoughts connected with them; but 4 is also just as much twice 2, and, similarly, 9 is not only the square of 3, but also the sum of 8 and 1, of 7 and 2, etc. Even today some secret societies place great weight on all manner of numbers and figures; but this can only be regarded a ha less game, on the one hand, and as a sign of ineptitude in thinking, on the other. Of course, it is also claimed that there is a deep meaning concealed in all this, and that one could nd a lot to think about here. *But what is important in philosophy is not that we can think about something, but that we really do think, and the genuine element of thought must be sought not in arbitrarily chosen symbols but only in thinking itself.”
Infinity is one determination
Infinity is itself one determination. Either by A) the collection of all things form a single thing, or by B) from a single thing you can arrive at an infinity of all things. These constitutes the perspectives of extensive and intensive magnitude. In extensive you can zoom out infinitely and the object will appear bigger and bigger relative to the observer which is one object and relative to infinity which is another. The closer the object is to infinity the bigger it is in extensive magnitude relative to the observer. And at this level you zoom out enough the collection of all things make up a single entity. However inversely, in intensive magnitude, when you zoom into a single object, you can get at an infinity of objects. Intensive magnitude the closer the object is to infinitesimal the smaller it is relative to the observer. The observer stands as the middle ground between extensive and intensive. Now at infinity being the limit of both magnitudes because it posits for both the same similarity, that magnitude becomes indiscernible at both inverse levels, something big closest to infinity is indiscernible as how big, and something small closest to infinity is indiscernible as how small, the approach to infinity as the limit of both magnitudes is what they share in common, such that if infinity is the common point, and the biggest size and the smallest size both approximate closes to that, than they are the most similar two points than any other points away from infinity and towards the observer.
For example in a bell shaped curve graph, the two points closes to the top point of the graph are the most similar in quantity, and as the number go away from the top and to the bottom, their difference in variability becomes the greatest.
Circle is infinite extension
In quantum states any determinations brings with it an infinite set of inverse determinations distinct from it. If some energy goes up, the energy left behind goes down or is down, the intensive horizontal distinction constitutes its vertical extensive continuity. If we have up and down we also have side to side, when the vertical extension is turned horizontally it becomes an inverse intensive relation of side to side. All these varying inverse determination that all presuppose each other all share the simple composition of a circle. The circle simply outlines the extent of content of the relation, which being more fundamental than the content itself, is its form. This is why every object involves curvature. For example, a line is always abstracted from a circle and not the other way around as our theoretical models requires that we draw a radius first to curve around it as a circle.
When we look at a straight object like a table and induce from that the concept of straight line, we only did that from an extensive magnitude measured by the distant of the observer to the phenomena, when we look closer and zoom into the aspect of the table that is straight we see ridges of an un smooth surface of curves, which are the intensive property of the straightness of the table when looked at from a distance. In this sense a line is abstracted from a curve. But the curvature of the line is only the intensive magnitude disclosing it as extensively straight.
The diameter of a circle is infinitely extending, which is what the lines is indicating as going in both directions, and the circumference simply discloses that infinite extension as a finite totality, as the same conception, the same quantity, which is identifying the infinite extension, pointing at it. The circumference of circle simply demonstrates that infinite extension of a line whatever magnitude is always disclosed by a relation to itself as extending infinitely. A line that surrounds itself as remaining distinct from this disclosure as it is infinitely expanding within the sur-rounding of itself.
The radius of a circle explains how any particular finite determinations is disclosed by the presupposition of infinite of its inverse determinations.
The intensive gap left by the half line of the diameter which is the radius is the negation of the inverse determination, which is a void for a potential inverse determination given by any definite determination.
When ever a particular determination is conceived, that brings with it the void of a potential inverse determination. The void being where he form of the conception not even its content is disclosed. In other words, a particular determination brings with it the means for it to be an other determination which is different from the first by containing its distinction but the same to its difference because they now both have the gap for their inverse determination of their differentiated relation.
In quantum state events are discrete because they are disclosed by the simple composition of a sphere. The conception of a certain determination discloses it as differentiated from its opposing potential determinations by relating the distinct form in contrast to nothing. The simple formal composition of a determination is an outline of its distinctive magnitude in void. The difference of a definite thing is it’s contrast to a null principle, which outlines what it is, otherwise if the void which outlines the thing is anything else but nothing, the being of the thing within the void would not be able to be differentiated from the being of another. So the principle of nothing so far is the form which a thing is discernible now constitutes the continuity of determinations distinguished from each other. In a quantum state we have now objects discerned in contrast to nothing and related in nothing to each. A thing maintains itself by enforcing its distinctness against nothing but by Nothing serves as the objects discrete quality by outlining this determination against it. Nothing however so far is required to outline the distinctness of a thing, is the negation of the things distinctness by being the other to which the thing is not itself, nothing is an other which is equal to itself, a null principle, not distinct but shared, is the same to the something identifying itself as other than nothing. And so the determination to remain distinct from nothing has to fill in the self relation of a void with itself as unrelated to itself as something, has to be equal with itself as not void. This serves as the continuous magnitude of the thing. When a determination maintains itself as something against nothing, it only does so by being an other to nothing, which so far as it is continuous as itself in contrast within nothing, is discrete from itself as an other distinguishable from nothing. In order for the thing to not be nothing, it must not remain undifferentiated like nothing is, but must constantly change itself into an other to remain something not nothing. But in doing so the differentiation it achieves is of itself because it is only itself within nothing. Its difference therefore does not become nothing but the other which it takes as distinct from nothing. Being remains not self identical like nothing is.
The continuity is of the same essential thing changing itself always as something that is not nothing. Nothing becomes the continuous relation it has with itself as an other thing it must maintain so as to be something. discrete events.
The quality of extension is always equated with Matter as we see with discrete and Spinoza for instance. Matter as the quality of extension is very interesting when we understand what that means in relation to discreetness. In space for example we see that the continuity between bodies in a solar system do not exhibit the same physical qualities of extension like objects do when disclosed by a single body. The quality of extension among things within the planet earth is different than the extension of the earth to the sun or to other planets. The physical extension of earth to other bodies in the solar system is less continuous and more discrete. The obvious less continuous is the space between the planets and their motion. For example the distance of the planet from the star and its speed around it formulate the magnitude of their extensive magnitude. When the perspective of distance appears vast the continuity is more discrete. Likewise if the distance is more minute the discrete of things appear more continuous.
For example if we zoom out of a solar system into a galaxy, the distance of the earth from the sun is so reduced that they appear to be the same discrete point. But the solar system as a whole appear to be same continuous body of mass, cluster of galaxies appear to be the same body when we know they consists if multitude of discrete bodies. The bodies within earth all appear to be continuous to each other with that their discreteness forms an undifferentiated extension of different things, there is no void of quality between an organism and its environment, the discrete body is always directly extended to some quality. But if we zoom into any one quality within the environment, we have a world of microscopic bodies whose extensive magnitudes are as vast within their microscopic realm as solar systems are within the macroscopic realm.
extension because the void between the discrete events is filled by their contradictory relation. The discrete events extend into each other, but this requires a third, their synthesis is the environment where their difference extend into each other forming the same continuity.
In solar system we see more discreteness between planets, their continuity is space between them, but when we go into each individual planet we see more continuity such as planet like Jupiter has the continuity of gas particles in their discreetness.
(On the heavens) What is natural is determined from the determination of the conception. For something going up the motion of down is unnatural. The criteria of what is natural is the motion away from and towards the centre. The relativity of the centre is the conception not merely the direct conception of perceiving something in front of you, but also the abstract conception of the ideal to which the movement in time aims to arrive at. These two forms of the conception are relatives because the direct concert conception is determined by the abstract ideal one. For example, in the process of travel the centre is the desired destination such that going down is to go towards it and going up is to go away from it. In cities there is a downtown which provides an objective criteria of the centre, going downtown is towards the city and north away. In part the criteria of the centre is determinable its speed in time. The speed of time is determined by the relation concurring within a space. Time is physically faster when there is more things happening in relation to each other as opposed to time is slower if the activities happening within a certain space is scarce. In a solar system there a lot of massive objects but relative to their space they are small also relative to each other their relations is every certain, but within small space on planet like earth, time is faster because there are more indeterminateness of relations.
(Add to quanta) (add to circles falling into itself)
The 4th dimension
Empirical science is apt to deal only with 3-dimensional objects as the only viable option for tangibility because the 3rd dimension provides a unique aspect of stability and certainty for objects in motion. We often read the dimension(s) as independent from each other, for example 3-dimensional space is often read as a geometric three-parameter model without considering time. Time in this sense is excluded as primary and is subordinate to space because the quantitative measures of a physical model chosen from the terms length, width, height, depth, and breath etc. are not subject to corruptibility and something indestructible supposedly involves no duration of change expressible by time. It is important to understand in what sense are quantitive properties incorruptible because they obviously involve changes of magnitude and are qualities of objects that decay. impenetrability concerns how an object is incorruptible. When a matter is impenetrable it is incapable of occupying the same space as other matter at the same time. This is the initial condition for an “other” dimension from the point of view of one dimension- or rather that one thing comes out of another in that they are distinguishable- man begat man. Impenetrability provides the certainty of incorruptibility and this is the feature that enables an investigation of space without considering time which does not mean the exclusion of time because time is still a quantitative measure of 3-dimensional space at least in terms of length, but that time as a spatial dimension is also subject to the quality of impenetrability because it is the corporality of a thing.
The topic of incorporeality is prominent among all major religions because it concerns the universal intuition about the degeneration of matter, that matter is inherently always in the process of decay. This led religions to recognize an incorporeal element in the world, one that is not subject to corruption.
Impenetrability is the invariable necessity for a substratum to subsist in any framework of uncertainty and change. The penetrability aspect of an object is its potential for changing, penetrating an object changes it. Impenetrability is the substratum that subsists or is what is being met by the change. How impenetrability explains incorruptibility concerns what it means for indivisibility to be indestructible. Indivisibility is indestructible because there is the factor of an element which cannot do away from another and this is indestructible because the object is not reducible to a single variable the exclusion of which denotes a nullity but is a relation whereby when one factor is excluded the other is presupposed to take place. This is why indivisibility is defined as something unable to be divided into equal parts because in a relation the moment one component is gone, there is always residue or a remainder of another part.
The fact of matter being impenetrable is simply the fact about the objects subsistence, that the physical impenetrability of an object is its quality of continuing a duration, or that the duration itself is a continuity, and there is no other type of being than that. When an object is penetrable it changes into something else by becoming an other object, but the change itself endures the transition and qualifies as an impenetrable object, change itself is the scientific object of physical impenetrability that it cannot be created or destroyed only altered and therefore in this way stabilized as space.
The first-dimension is commonly defined by length, e.g. x-axis. For example a straight line is a good description of one dimensional object which exists only in terms of length and has no other discernible qualities. In other words first-dimension is the abstraction or duration, of pure change itself as an object.
In the second-dimension the change itself becomes discernible as a form, a figure. The measurement of a length, width, thickness etc.
The third dimension we have a synthesis between the first two where we have a form that is in motion. In three dimension we have a figure that is able to move while maintaining form.
The way this works is, two objects moving at the same speed but one is at a further position then the other, will always be ahead unless the other changes it’s speed to be expediently. Speed is the change of position,
The 3rd dimension is distinguished by the fact of angular momentum. The stability of the first dimension being a duration, and the second dimension the duration itself is a indivisible form, there is always a remaining component,, we have in the third dimension the meditation of these two taking on a distinct form, an angular momentum. The angular momentum is the motion of going round and round in circles, dog chasing its tail, snake eating itself, forming a stable form, a sphere. A sphere is a simple 3-dimensional object because it is synthesis of first and second dimension. As a duration is continuous in that it is happening and as a happening it is indivisible because it cannot be otherwise, red is red, unless it is green, which means green is green, unless it is grey etc., white cannot be at the same time as black because it becomes something else, grey. The first and second dimension contradict each other because in order for a duration to be continuing it presupposes a constant change in form and therefore a form becomes indiscernible as a figure while in the second dimension in order for a form to be fixed as a discernible figure requires the duration to have halted on some level at a particular determination. The third dimension resolves how a duration can still be eluding while maintaining a homogeneous form because every time a duration moves in time it takes on a sequence of spatial extension, but when the spatial extension stretches towards a definite direction it can easily shift its form in another manner while maintaining the angular structure of the past. In the third dimension the nature of the movement being maintains a static form while changing, e.g., just because the man is swinging his hands back and forth while walking does not loose his identity as the man walking.
In physics, angular momentum is the rotational equivalent of linear momentum. It is an important quantity in physics because it is a conserved quantity—the total angular momentum of a system remains constant unless acted on by an external torque.
the quantity of rotation of a body, which is the product of its moment of inertia and its angular velocity.
The 4th dimension is the potential of a duration that became a form outside of it as its determining object. It is the idea that the matter is moving towards.
Space outside of earth is intensive and time extensive
If we look at the distinction between how space and time relates on earth as opposed to outside of earth we can an inverted ratio of extensive and instead I’ve magnitude. On earth space is extensive or rather there is extension of space, you can walk on the ground to get to point B from point A. Time on the other hand is intensive, it is disclosed within things as their subtle change. The future for instance is not external nor is the past, they rather happen at one point and either exists as a memory in the thing or part of its being. If we leave earth and venture out into space, what we find is the opposite relation, that space is intensive and time extensive. Outside of earth, objects in space are spheres disclosing within them an infinite spatial extension, you can go within, within, within a planet into a microscopic scale. While outside in space there is no extension of space, there is no direction, up down left right. The relation between objects in space like planets and stars are not spatial but rather their relation is time. To get to from one planet to another is identifiable with the life duration of that planet itself, it determines for that planet it’s stage of life, and also its physical condition, whether it is ultra hot big massive star, or a white dwarf or a brown dwarf at the end of its life, or whether it is exploded or not.