You cannot study physics without the mathematics they are founded on and describe the actions and patterns based on mathematical potentials, not physics.
I'm not sure if that's a meaningful sentence.
If, however, you think that physics is based on mathematics, you've got it precisely backwards. Mathematics is a
tool used in physics. The mathematics that a physicist uses will be chosen in order to model a physical process of some kind. In other words, the maths is kind of based on the physics, not the other way around. Either way, though, that's a rather clumsy way of explaining how the two subjects relate to one another.
The non-physical Implicate Order becoming expressed as the physical Explicate Order.
That's just mystical mumbo jumbo. It's almost like a mantra to you.
IMO, a mathematical universe is the only model that potentially meets ALL requirements for an evolving geometric universe.
What are the requirements the model must meet? And what other models have you considered?
In my microtubule thread, I already used "differentiation" in context of "cognition" and a potential model for an evolving form of consciousness.
You used differentiation to do
what, exactly? Was it
mathematical differentiation, or a more generalised "grab a dictionary and look up the many usages of the word 'differentiation'" kind of vibe?
Derivative
, as expressed in symbolic values in Calculus.
It's rather ironic that you claim to know what a derivative is and then give an integral as an example of one (which it isn't, by the way).
Why do you pretend to understand things you don't understand? Why do you feel like you
need to pretend? Doesn't it occur to you that you're already on a losing streak with that nonsense, when you demonstrate over and over again your lack of understanding?
I have had to defend my use of the term "differential equation" in discussion of self-referential systems and behaviors several times now.
You have been unable to defend it, because you don't know what a differential equation is. You should stop pretending to know what it is. You could try to learn what it is, if you're actually interested. A good start, if you want to do that, would be to ask somebody who knows.
You're completely wasting your time when you pretend you can apply a "differential equation" to a "self-referential system". You've demonstrated no such ability. It looks like you're simply stringing random terms together and hoping somebody will believe you're a scientist, in effect. It's nonsense.
I cannot imagine why there is this vehement objection to the concept of existence in a mathematically guided (more or less predictable) environment.
Well,
I've told you what
my issue with mathematics guiding
anything is. Did you forget? You never addressed the question, even though I have asked you directly, several times.
The Implicate Order (potential) becoming Explicated Reality (matter) via mathematically logical operations. I can live with that.
You have invented a religion that you can live with. Congratulations, I guess. Just don't go pretending it's science.
