The mind of nature

In the mind of nature is the answer to most all things about science. There, the forces of the atom meet the molecule that becomes the machine that walks. In a string of chemicals that is not even visible can be a complete description of the forces at work. By assuming certain things I have devised about the methods of operation of the smallest particles in the universe and the means of their interactions, it is possible to simulate a process with these mechanics and predict the outcome of a specific process with accuracy. The resultant complexity serves to prove the methods and are a type of vector which points at the validity of the assumptions of the simulation.

Within that framework, it is also possible to see those areas which cannot be utilized by nature as they cannot flow naturally from the structure. Many strange valleys exist in the path to life and some are likely to be sustainable in the same way that life sustains itself. It is reasonable to assume that a three dimensional analog process that has operated for 100 thousand-trillion cycles would be a very good approximation of the forces that operate that process. The answer is not really 42, but is certainly as interesting.

The inability of the sciences to inter-operate in a sensible way is a serious impediment to understanding the whole system. Between Physics and Chemistry there is a vast gulf of incompatibility. Even in companies that design computers, the communication between manufacturing, hardware design, software and other areas is crippled by lack of coherent rules of understanding.

The gulf between biochemistry and genetics is less marked, but has many of the same problems. The gap between bio-informatics and other computer sciences and genetics is almost absurd in its mechanism. All in all, it is a wonder that I can devise rules that allow me to project through these connected sciences.

By approximating the measured results of a controlled experiment it is possible to project the method upward and downward for the sake of predictability. It is a fairly simple process once you realize the nature of the smallest parts of that system and their "rule sets". I always wonder if the alchemists of the Egyptians were able to do this also. This type of technology does not leave much trace even after minutes if exposed to normal conditions. This type of experimental method does not require vast computational simulations or hardware at all. It requires an ability to devise a description of each of the interactions which is correct in its detail and predictable in its form.

The very nature of the projections point without question to the nature of i.n-space and it would be a natural progression to experiment with that.

The rules that apply as a pointing vector from i.n-space to actions in real space are not as easy to describe in the simple rules that might exist in three space systems. There are some factors there that can be used to help and one is the immutability of order. It follows from simple conservation of momentum.

On a separate note, that made me recall the association that energy is not conserved in its position with respect to the universe and when making calculations of the product of nuclear decay it is not necessarily a given that the balance of energy will exist within the frame of the investigation.

On another subject, I see they may try to keep rotating storage alive by doing quad bit tornadoes. It seems very odd, but that is the result of the economics of science. I designed a storage drive about 6 years ago that was easily expandable by the purchase of addition storage to a drive and it could be extended to any scale that one wanted. I can build these drives myself with the spare parts from drives thrown away. I can store continuously forever for all intents and purposes, but I see no point to remember most things. Very little is truly significant or new. I assume SSD will replace rotating storage anyway, though if were me making choices for them, they would go directly to light. C'est la vie.