Continuity as materialistic idealism in Western math: the case of Clifford and Noncommutativity

Clifford argued that scientists and mathematicians who accurately accept the implications of analytical techniques must accept certain limitations to their scientific theorizing. They must accept that material interactions alone can result in changes of motion. For example, continuity implies that “energy” (then a newly emergent concept in physics) can only pass from one piece of matter to another; it cannot be transferred through a void.

 https://journals.openedition.org/philosophiascientiae/293?lang=fr

Conceptions of Continuity: William Kingdon Clifford’s Empirical Conception of Continuity in Mathematics (1868-1879)

Josipa Gordana Petrunić

 Conversely, Clifford argued the “infinitesimal” is fundamentally and irrevocably empirical; it cannot be understood without appealing to descriptive properties of material space.

 Continuity is even easier—a function f is continuous on an interval [a, b] if it is possible to sketch its graph over the interval without lifting the pencil from the paper

It's quite fascinating that a function is defined by a visual materialistic process of perception (making a line) - in contrast to LISTENING to music - whereby time is continuous without any need for an external visual measurement!

 while in 1933 G. J. Whitrow argued that the problem with relying upon the formal definition of limits in calculus is that the “continuum”, upon which it is based, is nothing but “an ingenious theoretical substitution for the vague empirical notion of the continuous” [Whitrow 1933, 157].

Precisely! This is how I found this "Clifford" maths article - I was searching for that Whitrow article since the link was no longer active in my previous blogpost.

 Such “magnitudes” have not, however, been “carefully defined” and pedagogical appeals to extensive magnitude mean that mathematicians have been explaining “number” as the product of a process of measuring [Dedekind 1963, 9].

 The notion of “continuity” is an axiomatic one. It is not empirical or contingent upon the observation of motion in space. It is an assertion—it is an exercise in logic....

 ”Continuity“, he argued, is based on arithmetical rules which involve the notion of a ”cut“. It exists as a constructed mathematical tool rendered axiomatically true by fiat, and used in mathematical puzzle-solving, though not necessarily in scientific theorizing.

 So what did Clifford have to say about all this?

One such claim was that ”number“ ought to be understood as motion—as a ”step in space“—where a ”step“ could be understood as a simple geometrical displacement. Thus, all number would be geometrical at root, unless specified as ”discrete“ in nature. ”Continuity“ would therefore constitute a fundamental property of ”number“ understood as ”continuous magnitude“. The implication here is that a certain kind of physical space is necessary in order for numbers and their related operations to exist. These specific claims set Clifford apart from the conventionalist philosophy that defined the works of people such as Dedekind, because they indicate Clifford’s deeply empirical approach to mathematical knowledge.

 Accepting such an interpretation required that mathematicians revise their beliefs regarding the universality of certain mathematical principles, in particular the principle of commutativity. It also required that mathematicians quench any desire to ideologically preserve commutativity in light of the useful tools that could emerge when adherence to such traditional principles were abandoned.

  the continuity hypothesis would lead to the view that non-flat geometrical structures could cause physical phenomena. In other words, continuous geometrical displacements in non-flat space might manifest themselves in the form of seemingly discontinuous phenomena perceived by humans in Euclidean space (i.e., as gravity, electromagnetism, or colour change) [Clifford 1876b, 21].

  That this property of being curved, or distorted, is continually being passed on from one portion of space to another after the manner of a wave;

And so Riemann stated:

 “the degree to which these assumptions are borne out by experience” [Riemann 1867, 67]. Indeed, “It is upon the exactness with which we follow phenomena into the infinitely small that our knowledge of their causal relations essentially depends,” he wrote, adding that it is possible, and even likely, that conventional Euclidean measurements based upon “the notion of a solid body and of a ray of light, cease to be valid for the infinitely small.”

So what did Eddie Oshins have to say about all this? pdf

 
 




ah so you took science classes and designed boats and repair motors? Cool. Have you read "Forces of Production" by MIT professor David F. Noble? See the independent inventor is squashed by Platonic patent law since power is not based on efficiency production but rather on market control. Noble's earlier book "America By Design" would be another good read for you - how science is really controlled by the aristocratic elite secret societies.

So I was just reading my quantum mechanics professor article in a 2019 book on Sunya (Buddhist Emptiness) and Quantum mechanics. He was approached by the military - NSA, NASA, etc. because they needed to use his "design" or "invention" for secure quantum cryptography communications and also satellite quantum entanglement signals to Earth.

So as my professor emphasized - when I took Quantum Mechanics my first year of college - he emphasized that everyone should take quantum mechanics FIRST before learning classical physics. Why? Because quantum mechanics is now the foundation of science - not classical physics. So the problem is that everyone takes Newtonian classical physics in high school and so turns into these "gee whiz" type inventors, etc. So then if you really study quantum mechanics you realize that time is asymmetric inherently.

So Western science messed up a long time ago - starting with Plato and the "Greek Miracle" as irrational magnitude from symmetric logic. Sure the Union won the Civil War because the Union made STANDARDIZED parts that were replaceable - using engineering - instead of just individual inventors. But it's precisely this mass production of parts based on symmetric logic of math that is creating the ecological crisis - what one philosopher of science calls the "Music Logarithmic Spiral" - as I exposed - the Actual Matrix Plan. https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_matrix43.htm

So again what quantum mechanics has taught us is that at "zero" time there ALREADY is a non-local "force" that is a newly discovered causative force. I've discussed this with quantum physics professor Basil J. Hiley. So are you aware of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect? That means at zero energy of electromagnetic force there ALREADY is a non-local force that changes the "spin" of the particles.

Spin is what creates magnetism - not classical physics.

So also nonlocality is not limited to the microscopic realm - it can be extended simply by understanding noncommutative logic. So the 5th dimension is something that exists within us and we exist within it because it depends on "spinor" logic - or noncommutative phase logic. So that means the order of operation changes the value of the result - and since the average value of light (with zero rest mass) is the limiting invariance that means science is inherently limited by the time-frequency uncertainty principle. But science relies on external measurements - logic does not.

So the Universe has unlimited energy to be sure but it manifests in biology through radical ion synchronization as a resonance with nonlocal entanglement - meaning the photons are converted into electrochemical energy based on the spin of the electrons. For example consider sugar - fructose is a toxin for the liver because of the light - the direction or phase of the light is left handed when our body digests right-handed sugars, not left-handed. So normally it is stated that left handed sugar will just pass through but Corn Syrup is a PATENTED mass produced product (secret process) that has no enzyme connecting the fructose to the glucose. So it's not just passed through by the small intestine digesting the enzyme and thereby separating the fructose from the glucose. No corn syrup is then just digested directly by the liver since the left-handed sugar is toxin - again due the direction of the light.

So similarly science as a whole is Left-brain dominant using right-handed technology while Ecology of life on earth is left-handed amino acids with right-brain dominance. Therefore science as mass produced technology using standardized math is inherently destructive of ecology on Earth.