Entry

Weight for Newton became his model of force.

Weight is an old old idea, like money as a medium of exchange. One must understand the sensory codings in our experiential continuum. To keep it simple we usually designate the 5 senses, one for each digit on one hand. We model this into internal experiences and external experiences, interiorceptors and exteriorceptors. Being the supposed sensors that pick up these sources or causes of experience. Thus we use a cause and effect ,scientific model. But we are already at a level of complexity where most people would say who cares!

We further collate these sensory meshes,now recognising their inherent complexity, into systems designated visual auditory, gustatory/ olfactory and kinaesthetic/ proprioceptive.. Using this system the magic of encoding can be roughly exposited.

The notion of weight is a kinaesthetic / proprioceptive one derived by the musculoskeletal skeletal sensory mesh interacting in syncopy with the other meshes. We pit our strength against one another, against objects, against the elemental forces of nature, and we carry only what we can bear. Some bear more than others, and the weight they bear easily is a measure of their prowess.

The mechanical lever became a way of comparing these weights. By the lever equal weights could be compared by balance and by balance unequal weights could be compared, and considered in a rationed way. Thus the kinaesthetic mesh grounded our notion of strength and value, and this Newton took as his basic tool to establish a mechanical tool to quantify vis. The Latin word was taken to tautologically define a notion of mechanics, but it was Newton who gave an empirical standard definition of it . Vis and weight derive from the same root etymologically, but by different language routes. The process of giving a precise definition was one which Newton following Wallis, who in turn followed Euclid, used to great effect.

Thus we can readily see he Newtons explorations in Alchemy furnished him with a great understanding of density and all it's qualities.

Having a defined concept of vis and a tool to measure it made Newtons conception and theoretical structuring that much more understandable and impactful on space. Straight away newto could see that weight/ vis was proportional to bulk and the quality of matter. It therefore became necessary to have a standard quality of matter and this was taken to be water, barley grains or some other universal matter that was commonplace. The water standard actually came in quite late in the game, with grain crops and even precious metals or standard alloys being common place prior to that.

The quality of matter was crucial and eventually led to the establishment of so called density lists to define the notion of quality. From the grain models it became clear that a corpuscular model had to be devised, in which the recently observed corpuscles in the plant and blood samples viewed under primitive microscopes could be taken into account. This left the notion of quality dependent on the density of the corpuscles. In fact density and quality were interchangeable at this level. To separate out the notions of quality and density a fixed volume was established. It soon became clear that the count of grains in this fixed volume was the crucial ratio. Tautologically this was established by using the balancing tool! So density was not an independent notion, but rather a tautological complement to weight. The different practices and intentional goals for the balancing procedures was thought to be sufficiently distinct to ensure a valid process. In addition, quality was not just assessed on volume and density ratios alone, other sensory meshes were now brought into the interaction, so colour, texture and tast often selected the desired quality to undergo the balance procedures.

Newton was therefore stating as a matter of definition what was already commercially accepted: the quality/ density of a commodity conjuncted with its bulk was sufficient to indicate the amount of weight that would have to be shifted, and thus how many men, horses and carts would be needed to move it.

So now, with these standards and some other mechanical definitions Newton turned to Galileo and proceeded to make sense of his findings. Galileo showed how commodities of different weight fell to the ground with the same speed or velocity. This at once indicated that a different principle was in play not related to the bulk or quality/ density of the commodity. This principle was called motive by Newton and it produced this constant acceleration. The puzzle was how could different weights balance under this new principle? Well the clue was in the measurement tool. The constant acceleration, even constant speed did not change the ratios of the measuring tool. Because it was assumed to be a constant the ratios scaled equally if conjuncted with the commodity. It was Newtons suspicion that isolating a commodity revealed its true interaction, whereas comparing commodities revealed a constant relationship. This was the basis of his experimental .

The recursive and iterative nature of these Newtonian formulations are obscured by convention. Thus the choice of definition to smooth out tautologies or to label separate sub routines or procedures which are complementary to the formulaic notation are often downplayed to glorify some simplistic version of the actual complexity.

Newton, by his tool of balancing weights was able to put to practical use the law of levers, which Archimedes himself derived from the Euclidean extreme and mean proportionalities. These proportionalities were a theoretical way to record and measure circular interactions by the ideal/ formal means of the Platonic Mechanics. Such a mechanics linked directly into the Astrological mechanisms seen in the heavens and cast by shadows here on earth. The Platonic ideals formed a universal mechanics and were fully explored by students of Astrology for all time since. Newton's formulation therefore fits into a long established tradition, but distinguishes itself by its clear fractal structure.

The concept of a sphere of influence around a magnet and a charged rod are immediately demonstrated by the behaviours of reactive particles, which fall into a shape that delineates the action and reaction to this "Field" of influence. But over familiarity prevents us from seeing the field of influence we interact with most often and mostly kinaesthetically. This is the Weight field!

The Spaciometry of such a field, being so ubiquitous should give us pause when thinking of the electromagnetic fields. Such neat lines are in fact an anomaly. Most magnetic lines are involved in complex loops and trochoids which we do not care to think about for fear of hurting our brains!

From weight being synonymous with volume and density, Newton moved to the notion that weight was proportional to volume and density. Weight he realised had to include this motive or vis which accelerated all commodities in the same way. The volume and density were not significant in the acceleration because the acceleration appeared to be constant, but they were significant in the weight or force of a commodity. Conjuncting all three and holding any two parameters constant gave Newton his force model, and experimentation confirmed it locally weight is a conjunction of 3 measures, and is itself thereby a measure. Thus Newton was able to construct a model of conjuncted measures that itself was a measure and it measured a quantity he came to call vis or F for Fis or Force. The behaviour of the model depended on what was kept constant and what was allowed to vary. Mass ass a mechanical constant derives from Newtons formulations. Lagrange on the other hand developed a mechanical approach in which all the parameters, as he called them could vary , and it was the constraints on these variations that defined the mechanics. This notion was further developed by Hamilton and is the basis of modern mechanics today. The constants and the constraints are the defining quantities of our mechanical universe under a Hamiltonian Lagrangian, Grassmannian Mechanic, for it is these Three who set mechanics on its modern footing. To these we may add Mandelbrot for his notion of fractal geometry which clarifies the underpinning of all so called geometries and mechanics in line with the Grassmannian view.

F= V*d*a.

As straightforward as this looks it is in fact a recursive formula, highly iterative and dependent on the method of fluents to out into true effect.

F= V*(N/v)*a is a version dependent on Avogadros number N.

We can go on to expand a to (u1 – U2)/ t, the difference of two constant velocities.

We can go on to define t as the comparison of 2 pendula swinging, on and on we can go in a great tautological circularity to ultimately add nothing of utility to the model, but perhaps a sense of wisdom at the interaction of ourselves and our sensory meshes with space.

We are clearly taught a fiction under the cover of Newtonian Mathematical principles, and that is gravity is due to matter. Newton in no way implies this falsehood, which contravenes the evidence of Galileo which demonstrated that gravitational acceleration is independent of mass. The question of what is this constant motive was not answerable in Newtons day because it involved the use of what were called occult practices to determine. Nowadays we have forgotten even what the question was?

The cause of this constant acceleration is the electromagnetic field, that is a field that consists in 2 attributes, an electric field and a magnetic field.

Newton was able to show that the centripetal force of this electromagnetic field acceleration was proportional to the mass of materials of all descriptions around it. The quantity of matter, as he defined it was a measure of the electromagnetic field strength around a central region. Apart from metaphorising a magnetic "field" as the cause Newton had no clue what or how this operated

However this explanation will not suffice. And for this reason i point the reader to the Shunya Field Theory whose 2 attributes are a mechanical vorticular condensing field and a vorticular rarefaction field both of which are fractal in structure and exhibited at every scale. The dynamic uniformity we measure as acceleration is an artefact of this vorticular stucture and is only locally constant. In the "great rarefaction" of the vorticular fields perturbations should be measrable, but Ed Lorenz effects unpredictably switch these vortices into other "modes". Our Models can only approximate the collective dynamic.

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2004/MichaelRobbins.shtml
Einsteins Equation E=mc2 means that electromagnetic energy is "measured" by the quantity of matter. It, like Newtons quantity of matter is a mesure of the quantity of Electromagnetic energy by conjuncting the quantity of matter with the square of the constant speed of electromagnetic motion. That this motion is an undulatory wave motion is signigicant, because it means this energy is not measured by particle velocity but by field disturbance. that radiates from the central mass or in toward the central mass or quantity of matter.Yhis radiating field disturbanceimplies the central quantity of matter is in some form of disturbing or perturbing motion relatice to the field of electromagnetism. The probable nature of this disturbance i have surmised in my post. revisiting space.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s