The Rational – An Early-Days Introduction


Rational is defined as that which adheres to the principles and that iteratively bind Cause, Effect, Function, and Form into The Rational.

The Rational is defined as an implementation of the Principles that iteratively bind Cause, Effect, Function, and Form into Rational Paradigms.

Property is defined as any given lever, mechanism, or machine.

This is a model, so the question “why” will remain a loose cannon and red hearing. Instead we will describe a hypothesise that we pray will guide us to an implementable model.

This attempt to model what we call Persistence (rather than existence or the existential) requires that we restructure our understanding of gravity and mass. We have attempted and will continue to construct Robust definitions that build on Simple Attributes, Conditions, and Properties defined in our lexicon. Eventually we will arrive back at a Rational encapsulation of another phenomenon that is still, to most, clearly as poorly understood as mass, gravity, Density, and Ambivalence. Our model arises as an attempt to understand Ambivalence. The model asserts that ambivalence is central to what it means to be Homo Sapiens : Terra Virtualis  and other simpler Rational Paradigms.

We strongly advise against any attempt to argue for or against an interpretation of the lexicon. This is a reasoned undertaking that obviates logic.

 

Disclaimer 

Use at your own risk.  Author makes no promise for fitness for use. User takes on all liabilities. 

 

Conditions2free writing (circa 6/4/2008 7:03 AM)


  1. An attribute of the above definition of Rational requires precise definitions for its primary components, Form, Function, Cause, and Effect.
  2. The Rational Model Of Complex Mechanisms defines them as follows.
  3. Cause is defined as difference opened. ©
  4. Effect is defined as difference closed. ©
  5. Function is defined as a zero volume container – a point or Fulcrum. ©
  6. Form is defined as a contiguous aggregate of Function – a line segment or Chase©.
  7. Moving any further is problematic in book form. We must start to build a context into which all of what follows fits divinely, Rationally. To do so requires that we jump around shoring up holes and foundations as we progress. We will need to go back and forth around and around to do so. Expect to feel light headed or dizzy from time to time. We will be shedding baggage as we begin to see this encapsulation of complexity in the world around us and most importantly in the world within us. This a model of You and me and God’s plan for us, so we can survive and rejoice in what comes, has always been coming, and always will be. Understand that God, the infinitely complex and the infinitely simple, has a message for each of us and this model is one way of preparing for his message. Understand also that this is only a step, and in the case of conflict arising from reading what follows, the words herein must be surrendered to the greater truth as it is further revealed. Remember that we all sacrifice the whole truth of any given experience for the Value to which we are constrained. The Rational Model Of Complex Mechanisms defines Value as any flow within a given flow. ©
  8. Now we have to bind Cause and Effect, Form and Function together so we can build. We need this binding to be precise and simple. The Rational Model Of Complex Mechanisms further defines :
    Innate is defined as that which arises directly out of Cause and Effect. ©
    Intrinsic is defined as that which arises directly out of Form and Function. ©
    Abstract is defined as that which arises directly out of the Binding. ©
  9. All of the above describe the lever. Levers can be confusing because we lack a simple language for them. While traditionally the lever has been explained as a fulcrum across which lies a bar. Part of the bar to one side of the fulcrum is described as the effort arm, and the part of the bar to the other side of the fulcrum is described as the resistance arm. This standard teeter-totter, balance, or scales of justice model is quite simple to grasp. Teaching anything more elaborate about levers quickly becomes complicated. The key to grasping all levers simply is to treat the bar that lies across the fulcrum as a bar in and of itself. The Chase is the name we will use, from here on in. If you adhere to these two encapsulations, the Fulcrum and the Chase, you will quickly see that we live in a world of fulcrums and chases. Even more startling will be the discovery that fulcrums and chases can be small. Molecules and atoms are aggregates of fulcrums and chases as are the components of atoms and the components that lie within those components. Levers can be so small that they simply lie outside of our current Capacity for Technologically Augmented Perception, TAP. The degree of smallness is limited only by our imaginations. The Rational Model Of Complex Mechanisms (The Model) asserts that indeed this increasing smallness is infinite.
  10. The lever, a Chase bound to a Fulcrum, can take a variety of shapes. Some of the other common shapes are, pulleys, pendulums, wheels, and springs. We ourselves are a mass of levers. The most easily grasped are our joints and bones. Our knees, elbows, ankles, and shoulders are fulcrums; our legs and arms are Chases. We can simply encapsulate a large mass of levers that together form their own larger lever as a mechanism. The Rational Model Of complex Mechanisms (The Model) defines a Mechanism as follows.
  11. A Mechanism is defined as an aggregate of levers that implement a lever.
  12. As you think about this you can imagine or see around you that, clearly, there can be mechanisms that are aggregates of mechanisms. Automobiles, trains, firearms planes blenders lighters, are aggregates of mechanisms which we call machines. Bugs, birds, plants, life itself in addition to life’s capacities are aggregates of mechanisms. There are self-evident differences between inorganic and organic machines (life). Because this can become complicated, we will need to encapsulate these parts or components, these mechanisms of mechanisms, as simply as possible.
  13. The, Innate, Intrinsic, and Abstract define The Three Conditions. Their differences are encapsulated by the flow through them. These differences are absolute. They describe the shape of flow. The striation of flow, the innate, the innate directly giving rise to the intrinsic, the intrinsic directly giving rise to the abstract, The Model asserts is the conditional shape of flow – Context.
  14. The Model defines Context as the Conditional shape of flow.
  15. The origin of Flow is a mystery as flow gave rise to the Universe. This flow is also known as Transcendence. The Innate Condition is always the initial motion of Transcendence.
  16. The model defines movement as Form implementing Function, and Function iterating Form. © All movement is helical. Motion is defined as the change in shape of a given helix. While movement affects the flow through the helix and the flow of the helix, motion is the aggregate change caused by that movement. Motion is the aggregate shape of change. The Innate and the Abstract Conditions are motion; the Intrinsic Condition is movement. While the Innate can bee seen to move quite clearly, The Model assures us that such appearances are deceiving. Movement is always constrained to the Intrinsic Condition. This is confusing because Humans have no capacity to perceive movement. Humans construct an encapsulation we describe as movement from our sensory aggregate of changes. We are taught or allowed to assume that the central nervous system is a singularity expressed as the mind. The difficulty is that our brains have no sensors of their own. We have no way of experiencing our minds as the aggregate that they are. The mind is our experience. This constraint on our intelligence, we are sensory intelligences, denies us an easy encapsulation of concurrence. Concurrence is our song and dance. We are concurrence, and hence we have the capacity to orchestrate our muscles and limbs. We can use our multiplicity of leavers to some purpose that originates either from the inside or from the outside. Because we are aggregates in every sense of the word, we can have been aspiring to things greater than ourselves both as individuals and by extension as peoples. We can express this aspiration as Persistence.

Original footer
Copyright Donald Weetman Cameron; Written and designed by Donald Weetman Cameron; Developed by Donald Weetman Cameron and Rick Silliker
Document name :
Conditions2free writing; Created : 6/4/2008 7:03 AM
Amended :
10/10/2018 1:00:00 PM, Printed 7/31/2008 2:41 AM; Size 46592 bytes
Page
3 of 3

Directly out of Cause and Effect

 


As we were discussing the RMCM, throughout the past 14 years, we (Rick and me, Don) came to believe that we needed categories of “simplicity” to allow us to find the outermost construct of a given complexity, presuming Complexity grows inwardly. At some distance from where we are now we intend to apply the model to existing disciplines – Arithmetic, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Linguistics, etc. to provide an universal encapsulation that completes the missing pieces of a general theory of everything.

To that distant end, we introduce our first and simplest aggregate as well as our first investigative lexical tool. The Innate (Innate Condition).

The Innate is defined as : that which arises Directly out of Cause and Effect. Innate encapsulates an event, the action of closing a switch. The innate requires a capacity for flow whether or not the flow actually occurs. As you can see, things become quickly complicated; a door is like a switch. A gate is a switch, and a lightswitch is a switch but only when the power is on?

We intervene here with Condition.  A Condition is a flow. The Innate Condition is any given flow arising Directly out of Cause and Effect.

Rational (Neo-Rational)


Rational is defined as that which adheres to the rules that iteratively bind Cause, Effect, Function, and Form into The Rational.

The Rational is defined as an implementation of the Principles that iteratively bind Cause, Effect, Function, and Form into Rational Paradigms.

Property is defined as any given lever, mechanism, or machine.

This is a model, so the question “why” will remain a loose cannon and red hearing. Instead we will describe that which gets done, rather than speculating on what is possible to do.

This attempt to model Persistence (rather than existence) requires that we delve into gravity and mass. We have attempted to construct Robust definitions that build on simpler Attributes, Conditions, and Properties also defined in our lexicon. Eventually we will arrive back at a Rational encapsulation of another phenomenon that is still, to most, clearly as poorly understood as mass, gravity, Density, and Ambivalence. Our model arises as an attempt to understand Ambivalence. The model asserts that ambivalence is central to what it means to be Homo Sapiens : Terra Virtualis – Rational Paradigms.

Difference Closed


The above definition of Effect also asserts a source of or for “Difference”. Analogous to the Electrical term “switch closed” where the original source of difference is both voltage and amperes are free to flow. The RMCM asserts that Inwardly flowing Gravity is our source for closing difference, Difference Closed.
Within Delta when Gravity flows inwardly ∞- and does so in critically proximity to the outward flows, Cause, Timelets from each flow bind into a single unit of time. As time is bound, the passing inward and outward flows discretely snarl implementing a three dimensional unit of mass. Together time and flow at critical proximity discharge a DarkSpark. The DarkSpark is a discrete existential event of both mass and time or MassTime. We already know of this result as a point.

Difference Open


The above definition of Cause asserts a source of or for “Difference”. Analogous to the Electrical term “switch open” where the source of difference is both voltage and amperes. The RMCM asserts that Gravity is our source of difference.

From Delta when Gravity flows outwardly +∞ it opens difference. The RMCM asserts that this is Cause and Causation which lies outside of any universe already implemented or universe implemented yet to be implemented. The switch in this case is Time or more correctly Timelets – granules of pre-time in one dimension.

The Point – Beyond SpaceTime To MassTime


No Science No Math No Logic

The smallest construct in the known universe is The Point. The point occupies no “Space”. I could never accept space as a truth. Sure, we “use” the word, and most understand the reference. “Space” then must be an illusion or a concept. As we shed the shackles of this undefined construct, “Space”, and the many others that fill our minds, you will experience a range of emotions. Some will experience general discomfort, anxiety, claustrophobia and even vertigo. I tell you this as we will be shedding many shackles herein. I have been yelled at. laughed at, feared, and I have confounded too many to count. So, of the assertions to come herein, no arguing with others, mistreating others, or harming anyone by misusing the assertions including the lexicon, to blindside, bushwhack or deliberately confound.

I have known this since late childhood

4a : a geometric element that has zero dimensions and a location determinable by an ordered set of coordinates
b (1) : a narrowly localized place having a precisely indicated position
• walked to a point 50 yards north of the building

(2): a particular place : LOCALITY
• have come from distant points
c (1) : an exact moment
• at this point I was interrupted

(2) : a time interval immediately before something indicated : VERGE
• at the point of death
d (1) : a particular step, stage, or degree in development
• had reached the point where nothing seemed to matter anymore

Point. (n.d.). Retrieved June 27, 2018, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pointPoint : APA

 

Gravity and Mass – the chicken or the egg


The consensus is, “gravity arises from mass”, and we come to understand that the greater the mass the greater its gravity. Unfortunately, velocity also increases mass and does so without any significant increase in gravity. This is a paradox. This paradox still remains, and this may have led to a quagmire of compensating theories and complicated arithmetic. The most definitive of these work arounds is Schrödinger’s cat, which requires something called a state. To try and explain our world further we are enjoined by other words such as force (strong and weak), as well as …

“… quantitative concepts like mass, force, velocity, mole; qualitative concepts like organic/inorganic, animate/inanimate, solid/liquid/gas, and intelligence; and theoretical concepts like inertia, entropy, valence, and natural selection.” link

 

We accept these words at face value, and in fact learning many more Words so familiar to us that their truth seems obvious or self-evident. As our children grow they will encounter many of these words and cope with the incumbent mathematics as well as concepts, ideologies, philosophies, dogmas, and theologies that quickly increase complication. {complexity} and:

confusion, difficulty, obstacle, problem, snag, aggravation, development, dilemma, drawback, embarrassment, entanglement and on and on.

All these and so many more essential and common words that the language of logical learning spreads among a thinning student base. Leaving many with poorly developed logical reasoning and unfinished explanations.

This cynical observation presumes three principles:

First Principles
RMCM : 5Mathematics is the manipulation of Function and Form to elucidate Cause and Effect.

First Principles
RMCM : 6Science is the manipulation of Cause and Effect to elucidate Function and Form.

First Principles
RMCM : 7 In the cases of Mathematics and Science, Technology is the final proof.

We have surrendered to a Logical Universe of only one infinity – the outwardly infinite. Imagine instead two infinities. A true Divinity that is both outwardly and inwardly infinite. Where would we even start? The RMCM asserts We start by encapsulation, and we call this Divinity “The Rational”.

In “The Rational” instead of gravity arising from mass the RMCM hypothesizes quite the opposite – that gravity is the source of mass. In this assertion whole categories of words are orphaned along with the connections they enjoyed. To implement the new paradigm we will need a new lexicon by which we can reorganize the language of our experiences and their connections.

Respectfully and Fraternally
DWCRMCM
Custodian of the Fourth Experience
Church of the Fourth Experience – C4E

To Where Goes Infinity?



Most of us accept that infinity is a term for that which is too expansive for measurement. This gift from Aristotle, infinity is viewed as that which extends endlessly outward from a given center, origin, or source,
While our minds can only presume the boundless, we seem to have learned to live with infinity, when encountering linesIrrational numbers, and time. However we could accept absolute infinity if there is a compelling reason to do so.

The modern compelling experience for accepting infinity, as a truth, lies within software development. All programmers and developers are familiar with the “infinite loop”. This nasty little experience occurs when executing a computer program that contains a logical error. At some conjuncture a small loop of code designed to repeat a task continuously until a change signals stop. However, if when writing the code one either forgot to put in the “stop” or put in the “stop” incorrectly, then the repetition zips along with no graceful way out – reboot the computer or executing a previously design kill-switch to unconditionally stop the errant program. This infinite loop is a modern experience with the truth of infinity.

Other more traditional experiences with infinity are those of being lost at sea beyond sight of land, lost in the desert with no obvious way out, or lost in a very large forest. A pregnant woman in labor has had an experience of infinity. Children experience the idea of infinity waiting for Birthdays or Christmas.

Notwithstanding the above I will introduce you to hypothetical implementations of infinity that defy argument.

Experience


Experience is defined as any change to a given aggregate that becomes an attribute of that aggregate.

Experience joins us at the simplest of entry points into this model. Experience serves us, as defined, in any given context, for any given scope, extense, mass, or density of mass. Experience can be understood as both morphology and movement as well as attribution. Experience is God’s witness. We are experience, and this is what makes us God’s witness.