The paths of choice

Here I am determining the dependency relationships and associations that define observation and analysis. For the example I take the observation that it requires effort to lift things and they fall when not held. By starting with observation I hope to have a structure that can be easily followed. In this case te act of lifting is separated from the size of the object. Ultimately the force is measured by a standard and the resistance to force was measured by balance with a known.

This could be as simplistic as arm wrestling to measure relative force and holding two objects, one in each hand.

In this case the force is recognized as different from the object. It can be expressed as I stated before as a relational tree that has decisions upon specific observations that determine the nature ( parts ) of some effect.

This is a two dimensional relationship of my 3D portal like world where these relationships act as dimension. It can be viewed by its association or more complexly as its attribute and association dimensions.

The goal is to have a decision tree that contains the choices at specific observations and show how a specific choice leads to circular definition that is not immediately obvious due to its scale.

Certainly Force and Mass are interdependent in their definition. It then follows easily that if you were to describe it in a symbolic form, that F and M would be related by some property that results. In this case it is elevation, but could be motion. So if motion is proportional to the size of Force [ with respect to ] Mass then it easily follows that F/M = effect and so without getting more precise the relationship is observed and characterized in the relationship of the parts. When removed from other influences it becomes F=MA.

This perhaps should have been the first scientific observation. I am not sure why people chose things like existentialism and morality to consider as they are so astoundingly complex that analysis is almost guaranteed to be impossible without many facts.

The relationship of forces could be considered as F/M and I wonder at the relationship of the symbolism to the fact that a force across a balanced beam acts as a proportional divider.

MF=M²A Sorry, I couldn't resist the stupid joke I thought. I suppose the whole thing could be a real Emma Effer if you don't understand it.