Does God Hold the Atoms Together (part 1 of 3)

I ask here not so much for a new world view or scientific paradigm as much as for an overhaul of our apparatus of mathematical physics. Where our current views are a matter of expertise they are notoriously a matter of faith, an intelligibility of a consistent and self-referential faith at that. To say this seems reasonable where we are aware of frontiers or anomalies of our systems at its fundamental grounds of axioms and definitions - what we suspend in our judgments as undefined save that we feel assured that our system does have truth in its inner laws- that we can make sense of the world.

As this makes of physics or of mathematics itself a possibly provable basis as a faith, like religious faith there are side effects of struggle and all its ugly consequences justified in evolutionary terms which affect the species and individual unto the limit of war. Those who in the archetype of self-righteousness who set up a command post to defend science seem to me not defending science and its methods as much as defending - in some cases without sober scientific honest judgment and that justified as collateral damage as if some project or purpose can wait in unlimited time save their own expediencies - against those from some similiar assertion of right and right of struggle who are attacking science.

The reasonable scientist who loves the field or those who are authentic in their religous faith are seemingly everlastingly lost as de trope or collateral damage. Science and faith loses its vague concept of its ideals of its humanity. But as conflicts resolve from the ashes our humanity and tolerance and ultimate sense of shared experience and freedom seems to reassert itself as humanity.

This proposal here comes at the foundation, the blank page and back to the drawing board among my many speculations of which there is a freedom for fresh directions - as well the same mistakes as if resetting the cell differentiation soundly back to the stem- after the cob webs are cleared and finding our selves again close to our beginnings. Philosophically it is a question of what is and how we see "motion". Mathematically it is what symbols and processes, continous transformations and algorithms, involve that place where ideas of information meet our ideas of action. Physically it is a question of the nature of mass and any laws of conservation and symmetry in all its subtile interpretations and the hireachy or interface of those interpretations as a unified physics.

* * *

From a more complicated level concerning the mysteries of the binding energies (the strong force) we find conceptually if not explicitly, analogies to the questions of the existence of an aether wind. The math as limited as it is, being a beautiful picture behind the dullnes of its application on a human working level called physics in that it is a limited dimensional mechanistic reductionist viewpoint. Yet the mystery of such fresh views insprie generations of emulators to the crafts of Einsteing and Heisenberg. Not to go in that direction in this lecture I offer this topic question: Is there an analogy called the Dark Fluid or Dark Aether wind? Will it change also our general concept of mass? I will now rather discuss more basic ideas on how we imagine motion.

* * *

I would like to add that although it seems we are justified in asking what other conclusion the answer can be, that any of this explains or connects to ideas of what consciousness is beyond the scope of our universe of discourse and knowing for now. This theory addresses things that make those questions lesser concerns on a lower level.

* * *