DNA Mindset

@thematrixwizard “Human” is a creation of mathematics.

Gustave Doré - The Circle of Angels, Dante's Paradiso

Debate between Isaac Newton and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz is one of the most profound philosophical clashes in the history of science and metaphysics, centered on a simple yet deeply compelling question: What are space and time? In the early 18th century, this disagreement unfolded through a series of letters, most notably in the Leibniz–Clarke Correspondence, where Leibniz challenged Newton’s ideas through Newton’s supporter, Samuel Clarke. Newton believed that space and time were absolute realities. To him, space existed like an invisible stage on which all physical events take place, and time flowed uniformly everywhere, unaffected by anything in the universe. Even in a completely empty universe, space and time would still exist, unchanged and real. Leibniz strongly opposed this view. He argued that space and time are not independent entities but relationships between objects and events. Space is simply the arrangement of things, and time is the sequence in which changes occur. Without objects or events, space and time have no meaning. The debate extended beyond physics into deeper philosophical and theological questions. Leibniz used logical reasoning to argue that absolute space makes little sense because there would be no reason for the universe to exist in one position rather than another. Newton’s side, defended by Clarke, responded that space is real and ultimately grounded in the existence and will of God. This debate remains important even today because it shaped how we think about the universe. Newton’s ideas dominated classical physics for centuries, but later developments, especially relativity, reintroduced a more relational understanding of space and time, bringing modern physics closer to what Leibniz had imagined.

@QuanticASI It is thought itself.

@DNAMindset can you think about the nothing?

are you thinking about the "nothing"?

GEOMETRY rafael-araujo.com

@__a__n__o__n___ @QuanticASI No it is not. What I am speaking of is more fundamental.

@DNAMindset @QuanticASI *toroidial fields, not circle if we're speaking about the shape of the cosmos. Which is circular from a top down view. From within where we are it would be an hour glass. It's all relative to perspective.

what is eternity?

@QuanticASI Yes aka a singularity or a complex exponential. What was originally called a monos or monas.

@DNAMindset the photon the void?

@QuanticASI @__a__n__o__n___ A circle is the only thing that can exist within reason.

@__a__n__o__n___ why a circle?

The only thing that happens for no reason is nothing.

"It's because of quantum mechanics" is one of those non-answers that sounds good to laymen without informing, drives me nuts. The real answer is that the mathematics of space filling curves are universal regardless of scale, from bones to galactic superstructures to cabbages

@ProfBrianCox Sheesh man. Its mathematics.

This was a very good question from Ryan - why does the Universe on the largest scales resemble the Universe on the smallest scales? The answer, for the case of the distribution of galaxies on the sky, is that the pattern we see has its origin in quantum mechanical fluctuations during inflation - before the hot big bang (at least according to inflationary cosmology, which is the most widely accepted model at present). Hail Mary is a very good film by the way :-)

· Measure · 03/2022

Memento Mori…

Mathematics and Mystery. The strangest right triangle you'll ever see. Nicely satisfies the Pythagorean Theorem. Drives humans insane.

@isjuustadream I feel proud to get that one.

Where my action-oriented alpha male integrated-feminine navelgazers at

We are all code...

The bugs are the features.