Fiat Unum…

 

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sea_otters_holding_hands.jpg?uselang=pt

Fiat Unum: Entanglement?! Particles?! What?! Why?!

1) Particles are brief cognitive syntheses of the fields.

2) Particles do not travel: particles propagate.

3) Particles have a geometric pattern, each particle has a geometric pattern, depending that pattern upon the relations in the fields.

4) Considering that each particle expresses a system of relations, then, each particle is an entity/res with a systemic nature, if each particle is an entity/res, then, we have to think of individuation, then, each particle has an individuated geometric pattern sustained by an entanglement of nonlocal quantum relations, without that entanglement there would be no particles, and certainly there would be no propagation of these particles.

5) The particles have to be sustained by a cognitive nonlocality in the sense that they are syntheses: syntheses of what?! Each particle is a synthesis linked to an ontology of brevity of a pattern in a NowTime flux.

6) Particles are syntheses of the fields' cognitive dynamics, they have the OntoTime of a thought in a thinking flux for the existence.

Entanglement is the dynamics that supports the existence, the existence of the particles, our existence, the existence of each and everything, unity and diversity.

...black holes are not entities...,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gcle.jpg

Black holes are not entities, the entities are the systems, in the case of Sagittarius A*, the GalaxySystem.

The black holes are, in the systems, the “pantry” (lacking a better term)…, the systems need to guarantee a permanent critical mass available for dynamics of sustainability, if the black holes are the main source of nutritive energy for the galaxies, the source that guarantees them their systemic permanence, therefore indispensable for the sustainability of the galaxies, the galaxies must also be capable of the dynamics that guarantee their BlackHoleness…, not forgetting, in these dynamics, the role of the electromagnetic fields, in the flux that comes from the FutureNow to the PresentNow, which signalizes to the system the respective constitutive vital needs.

Without the electromagnetic fields the systems would not know anything about the gravitic proportionality that must be kept in the black holes (the “pantries”).

Of course, if things go wrong, and they can always go wrong, it will be for reasons of reflexive “anomaly”: the error is always enacted by “anomaly” in the cognitive dynamics linked to systemic reflexivity/reflexibility.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Milkyway_pan1.jpg

...reflections...

...reflections…, (re)flectere: the ontology of existence, we fold upon ourselves in ourselves synthesizing the beginning and the end in a same dynamics of existence, and there we can transcend, we can enact dimensions of us in us, opening the possible tunnels of our existence. From the FutureNow to the present... (re)flectere, the key to other suns, the key to other places...,

Nature, Mundus, Cosmos...

In the genetic pool of the words, transmitters and vehicles of transmission play the game “of survival”, drawing projectively a sense of subsistent essence or eidos of web of rotative synchronic solidarity.

Considering the terms Nature, Mundus and Cosmos, these can be approached as an example of synchronized genetic compatibility, exemplifier of the same eidos of web.

Nature, from the Latin natura (gnatura, natus, gnatus, nasci) with the meaning of birthing, has its Greek equivalent in ousia, which means: to produce, to give birth to. The equivalence of the terms makes displace a semantics of condensated parallelism that connects them to the Greek term gignomai with the meaning: to come to be. In turn, natura and ousia are related with the term genesiz (birth). All that exists in the Mundus, exists as presence and existence (natura, ousia, dasein).

In turn, the concept of Mundus synthesizes a sense of “set” of all the physical realities considered as existent realities: entities, patterns, structures, relations, situations and processes. In the gravitic web of meanings, the term Mundus is connected to the Greek term Kosmos by a relation of neighborhood compatibilized in a gravitic rotativity of active order, rooted in the cognitive displacement that signalized the passage of the mythological thinking to the so-called rational thinking.

According to some tradition, it was Pythagoras who introduced in the Greek thinking a notion of Kosmos, as the order that presides and resides in all the things. However, the notion of Kosmos appears, before, in Anaximander (Diels, frg, 12A10) and Anaximenes (Diels, frg, 13B2).

Nature, Mundus and Cosmos are gravitically linked to a trajective displacement of an eidos of order. But to speak of order implies to speak of synchronicity, term formed from the Greek syn+kronos, which means, literally, a relation of simultaneity between different times, thus eliminating a tempting assumption of reductive uniformity evidenced by some discourses on order. An order depends upon differences and not upon equalities. Harmony depends upon differences compatibilized in a systemic point: pattern, structure, and thus: order.

In this sense, at the fundament of genetic compatibility between the terms Nature, Mundus and Cosmos is a sense of constitutive irreducible difference, sustained by a dynamics of synchronicity, approachable from a topology of web of rotative synchronic solidarity.

Cosmos?!

«(…) “What’s the use of their having names”, the Gnat said, “if they wo’n’t answer to them?” “No use to them,” said Alice; “but it’s useful to the people that name them, I suppose. If not, why do things have names at all?”» (Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass, "Looking-Glass Insects").

The Cosmos, our Cosmos is a system, is an existent referent, but System, Cosmos, referent are names, words, enacted by human thought and language, that incorporate senses and meanings that form a classificatory abstract structure whose cohesion cognitively reacts to the causal dynamics of AnthropoGrowth and evolutive development with enactive perceptive effects in the general postulates that operate in the human construction of the general rules/laws...,

Is it relevant for the entity Cosmos, the name by which the humans designate it?!

Does the word Cosmos, with the meaning of order, express that which the entity Cosmos is as position, exposure and permanence of itself…?!

Picture composed from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Austrolopithecus_africanus.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hubble_ultra_deep_field_high_rez_edit1.jpg

Particles are nothing more than cognitive syntheses...

http://www.interactions.org/cms/

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/cosmic-uplink/heads-tails/articleshow/11287047.cms

Particles are nothing more than cognitive syntheses/structures of the fields’ sustainability rhythmic dynamics.

To speak of a measurement/quantification of particles is a gross nonsense, one can speak of perception/interpretation in the sense that the quanta express an enactive nature of the fields’ strategic dynamics of sustainability.

As to the particle and field proposed by Higgs, it may at most correspond to dynamics that may have taken place at a certain temporal rhythm of this reality we call cosmos, signalized at a beginning. To think that it is possible to reconstitute that beginning is a scientific nonsense, it is to ignore or overlook the role of the spontaneity dynamics in the sustainability of the systemic integrity as permanence, which depend upon the game occurred in a simultaneity dynamics of a temporal flux from the future to the present now, let us call it future now. The game of existence/life is, thus, strongly linked to the systemic spontaneity.

If it is true that there is a dependence from the past as memory, as experience, the present does not come from the past, the present comes from the future. Each moment now came from the future and never from the past.

That which is signalized as mass has to do with the gravitic dynamics that intervene in any cognitive synthesis: mass is enacted in that synthesis.

More mass or less mass depends upon the nature of the relations: links/connections, rhythms of the links/connections, autopoietic self-sustained strategies, dynamics in the retension/protension...

What can we know? What can we do? How can we know how to survive? How can we survive?

In the end, we are going around in circles, forgetting the fundamental, which are the questions: what is existence? What is life? In fundamental terms, what is the relation between existence and life? Can one reduce being to existence and existence to being? What is that thing that we call being (noun) and being (verb) and that is common to all things there (?): I am, you are, we are: the being (noun) is being (verb)...,

"chemical scum"...,

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2010-087

«The human race is just a chemical scum on a moderate-sized planet, orbiting around a very average star in the outer suburb of one among hundreds of billion of galaxies. We are so insignificant that I can't believe the whole cosmos exists for our benefit. That would be like saying that you would disappear if I closed my eyes.»

Hawking interviewed by Ken Campbell (1995).

One of the best dixit from Stephen Hawking! (Perhaps, however, the term "race" is not a good term, the term "species" is a better term.)

It is not only the human organisms that are self-sustained "chemical scum", it may be pertinent to state that: all life is "chemical scum".

Biochemics is enacted by a electrochemical gravitic mix, the "scum"/humus is the enacted substance.