Expert

When Unification Integrates Everything Real

Niels Bohr once said that an expert is someone who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a narrow field. Albert Einstein said an expert is a person who has few new ideas; a beginner is a person with many. It has been said that experts expect the unexpected. Carl Sandburg said an expert is a damn fool a long way from home. In the IT industry an expert system is an information platform integrating all available relevant information for subject matter experts and others. Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems exploit such systems and more to do what they do. Knowledge Management systems recognize the implication of mobile sentience which may take unique independent action based on such information in net new scenarios.

The real question however is what must someone do in order to be considered an expert on unification? Unification, by definition, is not a narrow field. Worse is that we must intrinsically be part of the criteria necessary to be one, under traditional uses of the term. In hindsight, unification is the credible manifestation of the integration of everything real. No single person can be an expert in every domain of discourse including their constituent detail sets.

We might be prone to claim that an expert on unification is someone versed in one domain of discourse or another but that would be fallacious exactly because of what unification demands. It is an observation handed us by the unified Universe, not something invented by any human. What I can report is that I am in Einstein’s camp. I am out of ideas and did the best I could to gain this precipice. We have tried for almost 20 years to break not just the process, the framework, but also the Encapsulated Interpretative Models (EIMs) employed but they all wind up supporting the epistemology in an ever stronger almost self-clarifying manner, and to that end we mode shifted Carl Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit.

The primary requirements for unification (simplistically) are:

  • The ability to employ a common geometric basis point for all real objects in every frame of reference employed by any investigator anywhere
  • The ability to fully couple all forces on all real objects in those reference frames by those investigators everywhere
  • The ability to credibly systemically relate everything real no matter how restful the relation may be

Status quo thinking immediately fails these few tests almost across all domains of discourse, including theoretical astrophysics, exactly because nothing real can transition the spacetime-mass interface without first conversion to energy thus precluding the use of the first two points above. If one can not accomplish those then there is no hope of accomplishing the third point using the same approach. Consequently a new approach was required. That insight ultimately led to the development of the cogent description of M5. Exactly because these are real issues is exactly why various endeavors report the results they do and many of those are discussed In Unification’s Wake, Part 01: Stereotypical Questions.

Exactly because of these various issues coping with unification is inherently a multidisciplinary endeavor. Only because The Emergence Model is currently the only fully compliant EIM closing to unification we can draw certain conclusions based on its core constructs. That said, if in the future some other the cogent description of M5 is developed which is also simultaneously fully compliant then we would have to use the same process, framework, and epistemology in order to justify a given treatise. Requirements across the spectrum of the various activities, standards (including ISO 9001 Quality Management Systems (QMS) standards), and quality assurance programs like Baldrige and Six Sigma must all be integrated and coordinated through established systems engineering protocols from the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK). That is to say that Elegant Reasonism has been designed with that eventuality in mind.

We have tried since about 2004 to find some flaw where Elegant Reasonism fails the tests above and because we could not do that, and because so many others were entrenched in ardent denial that we were forced onto this path. Transformational leadership principles require us to lead with compassionate, empathetic articulation of the various issues and those principles guide us here in everything we do. The more we test Elegant Reasonism the stronger and more powerful it gets. That will be true even if someone finds a better EIM than The Emergence Model and even then their application of that new EIM will be a derivative application of Elegant Reasonism. We strongly encourage comprehensive systems review not just of what we did, and our original notes are available here, but of any experiment or effort ever conducted. We were able to mode shift every experiment we tested, including interferometers, bell inequality tests, and a very long list of others through EMCS01 and EMCS02. While many might find argument about the degree of standards compliance we used, or degree of detail sought, please realize that our objectives were supporting business decisions not claiming to be “the expert”. Even here all we are trying to report are our findings and efforts to date and provide an ROI for our stakeholders, that’s it.

Voir Dire AQ Relative to EIMs Employed

In an old IBM Systems Journal article from 1986, now technologically obsolete, entitled Computing as a Tool for Human Augmentation introduced a concept originated by Thomas Jefferson when he was penning the Constitution of the United States. Jefferson, evidently called it the Augmentation Quotient or AQ. All of which is theoretically moot absent implication cognition of Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs), encapsulation, and EIMs. Strategically here is whether or not a given individual has gained the precipice enabling perception of the unified Universe in order to egage it. Part of the issue here is that not only does evidence need to be mode shifted but that those reviewing resulting insights must be familiar with the process, framework, and epistemology in order to justify why that evidence is relevant. Epistemological consolidation can only take place in the holistic understanding of its relationship to the unified Universe via anchored evidence chains. These issues have direct bearing on voir dire processes in a legal setting but they also have direct bearing on what constitutes a ‘peer relationship’ in reviewing any evidence in any setting.

Implications

The immediate implications are for traditional approaches, constructs, groups, and organizations of every type and purpose, all of which are other reasons we mode shifted the Baloney Detection Kit. Everyone seems to put their head on a swivel and look around expecting some expert to pop out of some hidden corner. Almost everyone expected unification to have come from one of the hard sciences domains of discourse but the proverbial Keys to the Kingdom came from entrepreneurial business. Perhaps in hindsight that too is no great surprise. The mission of this network presence is to nurture truth as a function of the unified Universe across all of the various domains of discourse, their constituent detail sets, approaches, constructs, groups, and organizations worldwide. General situational awareness is covered under our general use license and requires no action unless you would like to formalize something. Commercial endeavors should immediately secure the appropriate licensing in revenue generating activities lest they fall prey to the same phenomena that plagued James W Marshall and Johann A Sutter. Peer groups may, and probably should, engage the network presence immediately to help one another get the fundamentals. Right now most of that costs nothing but your own time and effort.

Said another way the materials now available on the network are there exactly for the purpose of creating as many experts capable of wielding Elegant Reasonism both conversationally and transformationally as humanly possible. Where civilization takes all this is anyone’s guess. How the global marketplace reacts has yet to be seen but will likely find various consultants leading vanguard efforts in various sectors as traditional red herrings are slaughtered and reframed for execution anew. There are likely to be more than one phoenix out there. One can not repeat this enough, because we all need compassion and empathy: those individuals are entrenched and otherwise strongly vested in tradition will likely transition the standard stages of grief coping with the associated paradigm shifts necessary to embrace all this. Expect that, be patient, and lead by example. We have all held ardent sentinel positions at one time or another. Every human that has ever lived has committed Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) at some point and so none of free from that either. The goal and objective should be to help each other to the same side of the table and help civilization gain the precipice of unification that we might all see as we look.

 

#ElegantReasonism #EmergenceModel #Unification #KM #AI #Expert #ExpertSystem #Education #UserInterface #Consulting #Business #Process #Enterprise #Reengineering #Architecture

McGowen

By Charles McGowen

Charles C McGowen is a strategic business consultant. He studied Aerospace Engineering at Auburn University '76-'78. IBM hired him early in '79 where he worked until 2003. He is now Chairman & CEO of SolREI, Inc. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2439-1707