# The Shunyaverse in a Shunyasutra

The greek concept of the universe has overshadowed many other cosmogenies, based on the idea of Monas or unit. Here i explore the underpinning notion of the Shunyaverse, based on the idea of Shunya.

This may be a topic about something and nothing!

The flowing river shows how vorticity is streamed.

One simple formula for motive in a Trerry W Gintz fractal generator describes in analogy the behaviour of a stream, and the cosmogeny of our universe without a large scale streaming motive.

I define SpaceMatter as my perception of Newtonian Motive in a region.

I define a region as my conjugation of Shunya by means of the synaesthesia of my focal sensations and my proprioceptive sensations.

I define Newtonian motive as that active principle that provides MULTI polar and MULTI oriented and MULTI lineal motion within a region as a fractal dynamic of subjective subregions.

I define a fractal as a subjectively apprehended pattern of almost self similar subregions of space generated by iteratively or recursively described processes.

I define iterative or recursive as direct or complex patterns of repetition.

I define process as a set of procedural instructions which generate a model of a behaviour or some form or a subprocess.

The notion of an acceleration is the initial and sustained action of an arbitrary motive.

The notion of a celerity is the final consequence of an action of motive, whether a gross or net motive, where final indicates cessation of action of gross or net motives.

The notion of celerity is defined variously as a scalar, vector or corpuscular magnitude of uniform motion in arbitrary orientations and or specified orientations.

The action of motive within a dynamic region is counteracted by an opposing action of motive. This results in 2 situations: either the motives are equal and opposite, resulting in an inertial region in which equilibrium of motive gives rise to corpuscles in a state of rest or uniform motion in some lineal course rectilinear or trochoidal; or net, that is one motive exceeds the other resulting in a net accelerative motion giving rise to corpuscles in non uniform motion in some lineal course either rectilinear or trochoidal.

The equilibrium case is defined as the inertial case. The net or non equilibrium case is defined as the general dynamic case, which clearly contains the inertial case.

This motion is subjective and thus always relative to the observer or some fixed reference frame established by the observer.

Within this system I define a net motive as a zero precisely when a corpuscle does not move , or if it moves it moves uniformly in a straight and non trochoidal line of motion.

I define a corpuscle as a infinitesimal region of motive with a boundary that defines the region elastically. An Inelastic corpuscle is one in which the shell or boundary is inelastic. The elasticity of a shell is defined as that fluid motive in that region which transforms shape but maintains the content of motive as constant.

Fluid motive is defined as motive that inhabits a region whose boundaries transform arbitrarily but in equilibrium with the surrounding fractal regions or in net action with the surrounding fractal regions.

Where a boundary is in net action the region is no longer described as corpuscular. The region has not been named but I name it as viscous corpuscle , to maintain the denotation.

Viscous corpuscles have a boundary region that is in net action with the fractal regions around it which are also viscous corpuscles.

Thus in general a fluid consists of fractal regions I have defined as viscous corpuscles, that is their boundaries are in net interaction.

The general and arbitrary denotation of SpaceMatter is therefore
A aggregation of viscous corpuscles in a fractal pattern where the viscosity varies with the net interaction of the boundary and the dynamic centre or rotational centre of the region.

The dynamic centre or rotational centre of a region is that region within or without a region around which all or the majority of rotation is subjectively determined as acting. Thus a dynamic centre is directly related to a notion or definition of curvature by that procedure that determines either a total or major centre .

If a region has 2 or more dynamic centres or rotational centres, that region may be divided into the aggregation of 2 or more single dynamic centres/ rotational centres.

Such a system of centres may give rise to the perception of independent parts where non exists! That is the dynamics of such a system may be modelled by parts but the region cannot exist as independent parts.

Where such a system can exist as independent parts such a system will be described as a conglomerate or aggregate system. The non conglomerate will be described as a compound system, thus making conglomerate ( aggregate) and compound logical opposites.

The existence of conglomerates and compounds means that fractal regions can be divided either into independent regions or transformed independent regions. The transformed independent regions require a more complex process of separation , or in reverse integration. The study of these behaviours has become the province of Alchemy/Chemistry, while the motive of transformations in this special case for Alchemy has been retained to physics as Electric motive and Magneto motive.

I say that the separation of the conglomerate regions into independent units is studied under the tribomagnetic and the triboelectric propertiesor motion behaviours of spacematter, that is currently retained to physics; while the study of the separation and integration of compound regions is retained to Alchemy/ chemistry, where the electric motive and the magnetic motive are in a more complex dependency for the dynamic or rotational centres.

The separation or integration of compounds is accompanied by various displays nd sensations and auditory disturbances. These represent the transformative work that is involved in separating uch compound arrangements and indicate an environmental set of motives which determine the compound nature in its complexity.

Thus a compound is not such by internal motives alone. Compounds are such by a complex environmental pattern of motives which determine the efficacy, rate and outcomes of these separations/ integrations.

As such, these compounds are environmentally sensitive, and so may transform as the greater environment transforms.

The work that the environment does in integrating or separating bot conglomerates nd compounds has come to be called energy. It is clear however, that this word is in every sense a redefinition of Newtonian motive.

Through this new terminology we have described the biology of organic chemistry , and the zoology of biological forms. These re clearly more complex conglomerations or compounds of these fractal regions.

The electric and magnetic motives form a part of a system of motives described mechanically in the past. The 4 or 5 motives earth, water, wood, wind, fire and metals, or earth, water, wind, fire and beast/slave represent an Alchemical tradition of taxonomy or categorisation of Knowledge about interacting dynamically with SpaceMatter. This tradition has been redefined with empirical observation and a rule of logic based on Aristotle. Prior to Aristotle, the rule of logic was the Logos Analogos rule of the ancient Mesopotamians and Harrapans.

The Egyptian rules of logic may be similar, undoubtedly, but harder to find documentary evidence for due to papyrus being destructible and scribes being retasked or disbanded when Libraries were destroyed..
The clay tablets with cuneiform have survived much better.

The logic of Logos and Analogos was taught in the Pythagorean schools, and Eudoxus of Cnidus is one of the main sources of this kind of logic.baristotle used this basis with innovations of his own in setting out an introductory course for juniors in his Lyceum, but the innovations contradict fundamental Pythagorean logic in some instances.

Logos Analogos logic was the basis of many kinds of algorithms including arithmetic, trigonometry, logarithms differential and integral Calculus, they also extended to rules in Algrbra, group and ring theory.

The fluid dynamoc of Newtons Principia book 2 loses its way because of the increase in complexity of fluid dynamics. The fluid essenyially is defined as a viscous corpuscular region whose pragmatic boundary is defined by the net boundary interactions of the corpuscle or corpuscles. Newton did not make this definition i did. Newton noticed the profile of a lubricity relationship in a resistive medium. Because of this resistance lubricity axis in his thinking he was at pains to describe actual fluid behaviour in term of a solid strain analogy inwhich the solidity was gradually transformed into infinitesimal solid elements. What kept these solid elements in connection he did not frame. he simply utilised the balance of motives to define an instantaneous chain of equilibria which meant that instantaneous velocities were intimated to each cylindrical region. The distribution creates an instantaneous velocity profile which he used his method of fluents to describe as logos analogos proportions. Translated into modern calculus speak this mean he reasoned fluid motion as a differential equation of velocity in which equilibrium forces appear as velocity profiles with a recogniseable form.

The net motive force behaviour results in iterative or recursive differential equations that are hard to understand and solve, Euler, Navier and Stokes wrote these descriptions down but struggled to give general solutions. In point of fact D'Alembert found a problem qhich meant the equations could not possibly describe actual observable flow for example.

Nevertheless many were attracted to the problems, with particular success for Helmholtz who showed vortices were a natural consequence of the descriptions, and Kelvin who developed equations in collaboratin with Helmholtz that gave specific results. However little progress was made on the Navier stokes Equations until Computational fluid dynamics was developed around a set of numerical models of the equations which a computer could iterate.

Only rexently has Aerohydrodynamics advanced sufficiently to give a satisfactory explanation of powered flight of an aerodoil. This involves a combination of laminar and vorticular flows. Claes Johnson has attempted to wake people up to this new solution.

The other main use of fluid mechanics was research done by Maxwel in opposition to Kelvin and Helmholtz. He was not interested in the motion of the fluid, but rather in the transmission of stress and strain in the fluid. This was due to Faraday defining electric charge effects as electric tension, and Magnetic effects as magnetic tension. The tension was transmitted in a ropelike or tube like elastic, hydraulic system. These tubes formed and disintegrated by vorticular lines of force. which he imagined as a field of such vortices all regularly arranged i a equilibrium system. This system was able to tramsmit strain from stress by the metallic conductors.

What he could not explain is what these tubes were. But he could say they originate and end on the surfaces of conductors, while others rotate arround the conductors. Their metaphysical cause was Electro motive and Magneto motive.

I say a fluid is a region of points and the lines of their motions where the points act as conglomerates or compounds in direct analogy to corpuscular or fractal regions with multiple dynamic centres of rotation. This is so a compound or conglomerate region has a point or a system of points around which i may be centred. However, these points are in dynamic relative motion, and so self organise into equilibria which balance out all the motives in the system and the environment of the system. These compound or conglomerate points transform relatively to take the shape of all the environmental motives rhey interact with through the viscous or net boundary motives of the regions they are the dynamic centres of. This interaction iterates the subjective process of centre identification. Thus a fractal pattern emerges in which the dynamic centres of regions are themselves points in the net boundary motive interactions .

The structure of viscous corpuscles is therefore defined as fractal and iterative or recursive, with compound or conglomerate centres that are directly driven by and involved in the net motive boundary interaction.

Because of this direct link with the dynamic centres the notion of a corpuscular form disintegrates, it becomes transitory or instantaneous, Thus it is proprioceptively sensed as some kind of expansive field or regional effect, rather than a corpuscular boundary or skin effect.

The subjective experience of this description is dependent on Scale.