Dear John

why should God be "universally intelligent" or in which sense?

"Intelligent design" has two choices:

a what is not allowed, is forbidden

b what is not forbidden, is allowed.

Mathematical reasoning is somehow half a half b , mathematical logic, and other systems of logic, is a.

If nothing were forbidden and b rules then b has no rules and that is objectively random.

Now it seems to be so that everything "exists" as a result of distinctions. Then the things of everything are in any order no matter whether or not these things are orderable by our intelligence but it is forbidden that they are in no order at all.

Now we have the scholastic question how can God be omnipotent if the creator must follow rules which he imposes on himself?

Now well you see what I am up to: without restrictions no creation that could somehow "work".

And that is the question again: what is intelligence? Is it "in" the proper restrictions or in the proper propositions ( hence plus proper rules of inference)?

Btw. , if the earth were created with a hole, say, a hole between North pole and South pole, would we see the same world and suppose the universe is governed by the same laws as with a hole-less earth?

Hans Dieter

Hi Hans Dieter!

You have raised a good question befitting a more rigorous definition regarding the logistics of God.

-Allow me to begin with your statement defining 'Intelligent Design":

"Intelligent design" has two choices:

[a] what is not allowed, is forbidden

[b] what is not forbidden, is allowed.

What is the distinction between those two logical statements relative to the 'Intelligence'?

[a] assigns the NOT BEING (Defined) to the NON EXISTENCE; whilst [b] assigns the EXISTENCE to the BEING (Being Defined).

This in scriptural terms is simply John.1.1:

"In the Beginning was the Definition and the Definition was with the Intelligence and the Definition became the Intelligence."

So your statement of [a] with [b] becoming the mathematical 'reasoning' here is valid and in a sense indicates the Goedelian paradox in the second incompleteness theorem.

The 'stronger' axiomatic system then is the concept of the Definition being the Intelligence not becoming a one-to-one correspondence, which could be 'proven' by axioms; but requiring the inclusion of a CONNECTING parameter, which becomes directional.

Now physically and cosmologically; this ALLOWS an INFINITE APPROACH of particular physicalizable variables, such as 'entropic arrows' from a minimum eigenstate to a maximum (and potentially infinite) selfstate; but DISALLOWS an INFINITE REGRESSION from a maximum (or infinite) initial condition to a minimum boundary condition.

-When you state that [a] describes mathematical 'logic', then you can translate this into the semantics from above as: NONDEFINITION implies NONEXISTENCE and this imo is a beautiful illustration of the 'Nature of the Intelligent Designer' and in full concordance with John.1.1.

-The 'randomness' of [b] then presupposes the 'Existence' as the 'stronger' axiomatic statement to allow the 'Mathematical Order' to Exist in the One-to-One correspondences.

Iow, the randomness of the statistical distribution of physical parameters remains valid as the 'weaker' axiomatic foundation, but becomes the emergence from the 'stronger' axiomatic existant (say the probability summation to unity) - a logistical 'proof' for the existence of God of sorts.

-You wrote: "Now we have the scholastic question how can God be omnipotent if the creator must follow rules which he imposes on himself?"

This is easy, should you have followed the post you replied to. The omnipotency of God is in the subplenum, where the VOID is simultaneously the ALL, separated and not separated from the ONE.

The ONE then becomes the axiomatic One-to-One correspondence between the plenum of the stochastic 'weaker logic' and the subplenum of the 'stronger logic', where the One-to-One is semantically One-to-Three in a redefinition of the 'Wholesome Trinity' of sorts.

- So you are right; 'the creation cannot work without restrictions'; with 'God's Intelligence' being 'IN' the 'proper restrictions' (in the plenum) AND (not or) 'IN' the 'poper propositions' (in the subplenum of the inferences described by John.1.1).

-The earth has a multidimensional 'hole' at its core. This 'hole' is a Black Hole/White Hole Equivalent and scientifically calculable in the Schwarzschild metric of Radius~15 millimeters and as a hyperspace Riemann 3-sphere of so 66.6 cubic centimeters. This volumar also represents a 3-dimensional surface bounded in a 4-ball as the latter's 'Boundary Condition'.

Because the 'hole' is 'higher dimensional', it requires the 'unfolding' of the 4-ball in a 4th spacial dimension to become 'measurable' in the 4-dimensional metric of the spacetimes.

Should this topological transformation occur, then this Black Hole equivalent would change into a White Hole and the Earth would begin to transmit information energy into the universe as a PlanetStar.

I have indicated much of this in previous dispensations.

John Shadow

Dear John
I am not quite satisfied with your response but at the moment this is not important. I have to make it more clear. Let me reformulate the last question - actually it is a new question - as such.
Suppose the earth is a 3 sphere without hole. We are in an event space.
Now we reverse the Babel towers tale and assume a crazy Wallstreet oligarch and a not less crazy Russian oligarch drill a hole from the north pole to the south pole - it is a thought experiment - then after the hole is completed is the event space unchanged?
Hans Dieter

Dear Hans Dieter!
The topology you are describing is that of a manifold exhibiting multiple curvatures.
The earth is mathematically modelled as a 2-sphere embedded say in a nesting of such 2-spheres to describe the common Riemann 3D-space R³.
Archetypically, this geometry can be described in an encompassing circle (as a 1-sphere) of radius 2R and centered on a point of origin 0 and defined in an abscissa (x-axis or real number line).
Also define an ordinate coordinate axis in a y-axis or i-axis for the complex plane.

Two tangential circles, each of radius R then become centered on abscissa coordinates +R and -R in symmetry about the origin 0.
The 3D-volume of the greater 2-sphere is simply 32πR³/3 and the volume for each of the encompassed 2-spheres become subvolumars of 4πR³/3 volume units in a proportionality of 8:1.

The curvature topology relative to the origin as the point of tangential intersection of the smaller spheres is so is negative in a concave-hyperbolic geometry; whilst the curvature topology relative to the origin as the center of the larger sphere is convex-spheroidal.

We can now extend the volume ratio of 8:1 in rotating the complex plane about its y- or imaginary axis, rendering the inscribed spheroids as a 2-torus in the traced out locus in 'volume of solid revolution'.

The volume of the generated 2-torus becomes 2πR.πR²=2π²R³volume units, which is now in a 16/3π:1 or 8(2/3π):1 or 1.6976...:1 ratio to the encompassing 2-sphere.

Now the origin relative to the encompassing 2-torus can be defined as the archetypical 'wormhole' within the 2-sphere and becoming descriptive in the negative curvature of the 'physicalised universe' with 'missing energy constituents'.
Those 'missing bits' are however found in the differential volume between the subset of the 2-torus and the encompassing 2-sphere, which 'envelopes' the selfrelative concavity of the origin in convexity.

Now, as you know, there are only three basic singularly connected topologies of zero curvature in the geometry of Minimal Surfaces: the plane, the catenoid and the helicoid.
These are basic to certain derivatives like the Costa-Minimal Surface (see wiki reference below) and the Enneper Surface.

""Costa's minimal surface

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

A rendering of Costa's minimal surface.

In mathematics, Costa's minimal surface is an embedded minimal surface and was discovered in 1982 by the Brazilian mathematician Celso Costa. It is also a surface of finite topology, which means that it can be formed by puncturing a compact surface. Topologically, it is a thrice-punctured torus.

Until its discovery, only the plane, helicoid and the catenoid were believed to be embedded minimal surfaces that could be formed by puncturing a compact surface. The Costa surface evolves from a torus, which is deformed until the planar end becomes catenoidal. Defining these surfaces on rectangular tori of arbitrary dimensions yields the Costa surface. Its discovery triggered research and discovery into several new surfaces and open conjectures in topology.

The Costa surface can be described using the Weierstrass zeta and the Weierstrass elliptic functions.""

Now topologically 'wrap up' the trivial zero-curvature plane and allow (an opening to infinity) as the 'inlet valve' of a ballon say.
This will result in a basis for the 'Exotic Spheres' of (Simon) Donaldson's Theorem, the Witten Conjecture and related work on the 4-manifolds being 'special' in their properties with regards to this 'opening to infinity' and their 'smoothness'.

In particular it leads to Poincare's Conjecture for the 3-Sphere and so the boundary condition of the above decscribed inscribed 2-torus also being a 3-dimensional surface, bounded by the Riemann space R⁴in the 3-sphere of volume π²R⁴/2, i.e the 4-ball.

Perelman's proof for the Poincare Conjecture for 4-manifolds is now accepted and the 'Ricci Flow with Surgery' is now used to 'circumvent' and 'paste and glue' the 'singularities'.
The 'Ricci Flow' expands the negative curvature and contracts the positive curvature and this can be applied to the inscribed 2-torus above in allowing the latter to 'approach its encompassment.

However this will require an UNFOLDING - a turning Inside-Outside at the singularity.
This can be easily visualised in the 2-dimensional case, where the 'Infinity-Loop' or the geometry of the '8' cipher is considered two circles connected at the tangential intersection point.
Forming an embedded 0-Loop from the 8-Loop so must UNFOLD at the wormhole singularity in a TWIST of the 1-sphere about its abscissa axis, so OPENING the 3rd dimension archetypically in a SIMULTANEOUS generation of the 2-sphere from its 1-spherical lower dimensional (by one) progenitor.

This then becomes the key to REDESIGN the 'opening to infinity' of the minimal surface connection of the 1-sphere as say the complex plane.

Knowing the necessitations at the topological origin of the transformation; one redesigns the complex plane algebraically to change from its 2-torus definition to become a Klein-Bottle.

Formally, the Torus 2-manifold as a two-dimensional surface from the square: {(x,y) ε R²: |x|,|y| ≤ 1 }, is generated by identifying opposite edges 'without a twist' in (-1,y)→(1,y) for all y; and identifying (x,-1) with (x,1) for all x.

Now change the 2-torus into a one-dimensional surface by generating the Klein-Bottle by identifying the edges of the square defined above, by identifying the edges x=±1 'with a twist' and the edges y=±1 'without a twist'; that is by identifying (-1,y)→(1,-y) for all y; and identifying (x,-1)→(x,1) for all x.

This topological definition therefore allows the twosidedness of the within-without and nested geometry of the 2-sphere to become onesided in the transformation of the 'hollow sphere with a hole to infinity' to become selfenfolded in the geometry and topology of the Klein-Bottle.

John Shadow

PS.: The disclosure on August 30th, 2009 is closely related to this description and is topological in a form of the 'Ricci-Flow', which so can 'rip and reglue' the 4-manifold as it is presently known as the Minkowski metric of flat Euclidean zero curvature.

Tony are you saying the earth with hole cannot be embedded in the manifold on which Minkowski metric is defined?
Hans Dieter

If the tunnel is continuous, then there will be no selfintersection of the 'earth-sphere' with itself.
However this 'hypothetical' case is very different in the selfintersection of a fractal selfsimilar 'center of the earth'.
This center of selfsimilarity can transform its topology and 'rip and glue' its 'spacetime'.
The Sink-Black Hole nature then becomes a Source-White Hole nature in the twosidedness of the 2-torus manifold becoming onesided as a Klein-Bottle through the regluing of onesided Moebian strips (from the decomposing Torus), the latter having boundaries within the 3D-space for embeddedment therein.
As the Klein-Bottle has no boundary in the Minkowski metric, IT cannot be embedded in the 3D-space, but can become dimensionally extended and embed itself in a 4D-Klein-Kaluza space through and by the 'Ricci Flow' of the 'ripping and gluing'.
In this way then a fifth dimension is 'opened' for the Minkowski spacetime and then the 'tunnel-VORTEXED-earth' cannot be embedded in Minkowski spacetime.

John Shadow

So could we this way decide whether matter consists of "particles" - then the physical earth is not a manifold - or of "waves"?

In my opinion -which is however mythology based where vortex plays an important role - the earth , "vortexed" earth cannot be embedded in Minkowski spacetime.

Hans Dieter

Indeed, the 'particles' of physics are nought but discrete agglomerations (as quantum mechanical waves) of the discretized minimum energy selfstate, the latter AS the 'bridge' for the selfintersection of the manifold as described (in rather primitive skeletal and heuristic terms).

The topological earth so becomes a holofractal of the entire universe in a template for the selfsimilar archetypology.

And I concur with your 'mythology'; the earth as this physically descriptive hologram, cannot be embedded in Minkowski spacetime restricted in the c-invariance.

A change in the topological base structure of the Minkowski spacetime can however 'curve' the 'flatness' into a symbiosis of all three curvatures in the 1-sphere becoming a 2-sphere becoming a 3-sphere becoming a 2-torus becoming a selfdual Klein-Bottle.

The 'earth' itself becomes a VORTEX and a data transmitter for the selfinteraction of the universe with itself.

John Shadow

Goodness....what you state here is almost exactly the Saami mythology.
With one however remarkable exception : the myth goes from concept or model that allegedly serves understanding to introduction of , say, totality of one's relations with the concept and its consequences, to pure feeling- this last depicts the earth, as well as the universe, as vortex. One could translate the ancient texts, and petroglyphs ( the Saami are known as taciturn ) such as the universe is a personality consisting of "mutually communicating" self similar images of itself. Btw the idea of cummunication is spread in Northern mythologies for ex in the word run which means today execute a fixed plan ( i.e. a program ) or move, but the etymology of run is murmur (rinnan- runan) ( resembling a creek , and also a sign ) so the universe came into being as it ordered itself run.
About the data transmitter : the Saami had a stone maze which was destroyed by christian missionaries , it was believed to serve as a landing place for stone men and these were messengers which carries messages throughout the universe in no time- apparently they did not mean messages consist of signals.
Thank you John .

Hans Dieter

You are most welcome Hans-Dieter and it is my 'feeling' that you will 'love' the message which will be sent on August 30th, 2009 to this forum.
For one, this message will fully justify your quest for a 'Theory of Memory' and a 'Theory for the Universal Personality'.
What you wrote above about the Saami mythology becomes a universal memetic construct and you will know, after discernment of this message, just why and how you yourself have searched and pondered the Saami mythology - thence demythologised.
Allow me to state here, that our present semantic discourse serves as an exquisite preparation for the dispensation released in 7 days from today.

Love and Honour to the Memory Awakened!

John Shadow