NNRP Helps Penetrate Denial
The entitled assertion here is an expectation (e.g. hypothesis) not a documented piece of data. Why we have every reason for it to be true is a very long story but it is ultimately gounded in our experience gained through our original systems review. Many who are not completely familiar with all of the facets of Elegant Reasonism, what it is, or how we got where we are, likely do not understand Neural Network Reconfiguration by Programming (NNRP) or the relationship it has for paradigm shifts animals with Central Nervous Systems (CNS) supporting brains allowing them to learn holds. Even when they are Blinded by Success. When investigators realize that time, under the cogent description of M5, is an action displacement index they will then realize why belief systems which can not close to unification will ultimately succumb to those that do exactly because of incessant action. Thermodynamics holds the conservation of energy and under that Encapsulated Interpretative Model (EIM) whose lone fundamental constructs gained their energy ultimately in the Event we call the Big Bang. Elegant Reasonism enabled us to describe the unified Universe Bang to Bang (e.g. our bang and all subsequent bangs) which intrinsically enabled understanding of what existed prior to our bang.
Dr. Mary Lamia writes: “In common usage, the term “denial” usually refers to someone who fails to recognize the significance or consequences of certain behaviors. It also implies that something believed is untrue. In 1937, Sigmund Freud’s daughter, Anna Freud, expanded upon his concept of defense mechanisms in her book, The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense, in which she noted that denial may exist in our words, our deeds, or solely in our fantasies. In fantasy, she maintained, we keep the denial to ourselves. In both word and deed it is shared with the outside world and thus may not be compatible with the experiences of others in our lives. After all, she noted, people tend to judge the normality or abnormality of denial by the degree of its conspicuousness.”
Students of Elegant Reasonism will know that it is the utility process employing the technological framework which supports the epistemology that seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science is what produced the first fully compliant Encapsulated Interpretative Model (EIM) closing to unification and it is that EIM, not the process producing it, is the epicenter of unification. The process only enables searching for all aspects of unification because that is ultimately the nature of all that is real.
Basic Requirements of Unification
- All first fully compliant Encapsulated Interpretative Models (EIMs) under Elegant Reasonism Rules must reconcile 100% of all issues credibly instantiating the path to unification.
- All real objects may be referenced from and by a common real geometric basis point.
- All real forces acting in any real capacity or capability on those real referenced objects are fully coupled to the architectural mass as a function of the relative and respective action instantiating that force which may be a constituent construct of a complex discontinuous geometric map characterizing the geometric topology of the real objects in any given Event Frame. It should be noted that phenomena usually manifest their character and intrinsic nature through action within a reference frame capable of articulating not just observed behavior but all behavior necessary in order to instantiate the observed empirical result and eliminate all Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) at the same time. Otherwise we may be subjected to LEEs Empiricism Trap.
These requirements have been recognized by most credible theoretical astrophysicists for many generations. They are not new requirements by any stretch. The only new factor enabling proper positioning of them was the maturity of information sciences relative to cognitive application of knowledge management.
Bang Instantiated Entropy
If we presume that material resulting from Hawking Radiation to mean that under The Emergence Model that not only can state zero MBPs not entangle, they also can not remain entangled as they approach that state. However, noticing that too we must also recognize that they must necessarily move from an Event Frame exclusively into a Local Frame containing only that MBP. Presuming that set of circumstances true then we must also understand that such a Local Frame could also be nested within a larger Event Frame recognizing imaginary vector components of that Local Frame such that zero state MBPs possesses state 2 energy relative to other Event Frames. These considerations under The Emergence Model Implies Entropy Resulted From the Big Bang and are consistent with expectations in context of our Bang to Bang article. The cogent description of M5 ultimately leads to Proposition 0060 which states that no force exists absent some architecture of mass instantiated by some configuration of MBPs resulting from their Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance. Mode Shifting Hawking Radiation under M5 suggests that Local Frames of individual MBPs relative to other frames, of any type, may in fact contain unfathomable energy but they are not measurable mostly because they exceed Severance and thus escape measurement. Part of the point here may be that order, to the degree it can exist isotropically exists in two primary places: In Local Frames containing individual MBPs and within the event horizon of a Black Hole. That latter exists because architectures of mass are eviscerated during transition of that threshold. What happens after that (e.g. those MBPs surrounded by the construct manifesting the event horizon) would then be a matter of the intrinsic nature of MBPs.
Relative to the subject topic then there is a point to be made that cognizant understanding of unification is consistent with the natural order of things prior to a bang event. That M5 also is capable of characterizing the necessary factors of organic matter leading to biological manifestation of the CNS, and our brains suggests that neural plasticity enabling learning is reinforced by the utility process and framework supporting the epistemology which seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe. There is an element to this we noticed during our original systems review and it deals with what we came to refer to as the self-clarifying nature we believe we erroneously ascribed to M5 rather than the unified Universe itself. While M5 does exhibit that feature/phenomena we now recognize that any EIM in full compliance with the realm of c’s and Elegant Reasonism Rules would very likely exhibit the same traits and for the same reasons.
Perceived order manifests familial surroundings and generally makes people comfortable. They know where things are and expect behaviors and phenomena to be as they expect them. Selectively ignoring some data and information allows them to maintain their illusions of order, usually only at the selected reference scale. Knowledge taxonomy, from a knowledge management point of view, generally follows domains of discourse and their various constituent detail sets.
Implication of Recognizing M1’s Logical Nature
Predominant thinking in science philosophically, circa 2021, falls under the EIM M1. While M1 is absolutely logically correct within its domain of discourse and constituent detail sets it does not do so with exclusivity relative to other EIMs. Which is one reason M2 exists, not to mention M4, M5 and M6. The philosophy of nature we call science demands practitioners to embrace new ideas. It should be noted that scientists and engineers are no less human than all the rest of everyone else. Consequently we mode shifted Carl Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit (See Elegant Reasonism Introduction & Overview, Part 03: Mode Shifting the Baloney Detection Kit).
Part of the issue here is being Blinded by Success. Not until we are able to recognize the logical nature of entire domains of discourse and their constituent detail sets are we truly liberated from Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) ensnaring us within LEEs Empiricism Trap. That is when we recognize that the congruence we thought tied us to reality in fact tied us to the abstractions we created to reflect reality. That distinction matters a great deal. Once we recognize that distinction we are quite liberated to make manifest other, also fully compliant, also logically correct EIMs and that was the genesis of M5.
There is a phenomena that search & rescue teams are taught when going into forests looking for missing persons and it is that those missing persons do not want to be found. They must go out there knowing that the person they are looking for is working hard to avoid them. At first glance that might not sound logical but spend a few nights in the woods with wolves and bears stalking you and you will quickly come to understand the truth of all this. Part of the point here is for team leaders and enterprise management to understand that those individuals who are highly invested and vested in traditional M1 derived thinking will only come to embrace all this kicking and screaming. They will not come into this room quietly. Not quickly anyway.
Ultimately everyone will be introduced to the questions that M1 simply can not answer. What happened before and during the Big Bang? Ok, you think spacetime was made manifest by the Big Bang, explain what the galaxies are accelerating into? Reconcile black hole growth, rapid expansion and infinite compression in one cogent sentence consistent with the unified Universe. Can you do that? Grand design spiral galaxies take about 11 billion years to form through known gravitational forces acting upon them. Explain how BX442 could possibly have formed, in the location we find it, and so many others using the JWST in the time available since the Big Bang. We did in the Bang to Bang article herein. Explain why galaxies accelerate away from one another. Can you do that? We did in that same article. There are several points here and they are that over the course of time those entrenched folks are going to find their answers here more than anywhere else. They will embrace Elegant Reasonism ultimately even if right now they hate it and attack it. That is normal and expected as people transition through the standard stages of grief coping and dealing with traumatic paradigm shifts reality places on us all. For these reasons SOLREI INC very strongly encourages everyone to wield Elegant Reasonism transformationally with great empathy and compassion.
When we used the phrase above ‘everything real’ we also used the term restful. Very likely those outside of the information sciences/technology industry have crossed that term. It is a technology based architectural style employed by distributed hypermedia systems and establishes expected operational capabilities. We use that term here to represent expectations of compliance with the unified Universe. We contend that subjects as far removed as art appreciation are restfully made manifest through Susanne K Langer‘s body of work. We also contend that subjects like economics are restfully made manifest through Ludwig von Mises‘ body of work. Our original systems review created large concept sieves which had to simultaneously mode shift. When we back up from the requirements handed us by the unified Universe and realize the breadth and depth of those requirement its pretty hard to articulate to everyone every little detail of every facet in a codified manner. Expecting that is neither reasonable nor rational. It would take more proverbial real estate to accomplish than exists. What we can do is outline the utility process and framework supporting any epistemology which seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe; establish the general rule that truth be sought as a function of it and as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. While we can report that we had to seek an EIM that closed and The Emergence Model does do that, it may not necessarily be the best or only EIM that does so. There is no requirement that everyone must use the one we developed. If you would like to use Elegant Reasonism or any other process to develop such an EIM then go for it. What we will report is that any such process is inevitably going to look like what we did exactly because the same sorts of issues are going to crop up and you are going to have to deal with them. The point here is that exclusive consideration of what it take to accomplish unification is not compartmentalized to theoretical astrophysics and if you believe that it is you are in incessantly more rare company.
Nothing Real Can Transition The Spacetime-Mass Interface Absent Conversion To Energy
Because this is governed by a formula ubiquitously recognized by most these days it needs no introduction here. What most people do not recognize are the implications of this statement being true. This is the reason that M1, M2, in fact every EIM employing similar foundational constructs will never accomplish unification exactly because those common geometric basis points are destroyed in the process. Deniers can attack this anyway they wish. They can stomp their feet in anger and call all sorts of folks all sorts of names. The vitriol thrown at us deserves no characterization. Their behavior won’t change the hard cold fact that interface is precluding accomplishing unification and nothing they do will ever change that because it is a philosophical implementation not a science derived implication. It is for that reason that nothing in science will ever solve a philosophical question and therein lay the reason that unification must be a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science, not the other way around. There is no manner in science to distinguish multiple theories which are simultaneously true, have all consequences the same, and agree with experiment. Don’t take our word for this listen to Richard P Feyman make exactly the same point:
The Vain Attack Of Deniers
The second recognized stage of grief beyond denial is anger. Angry people attack those or things around them. They are faced with irreconcilable reality and their internal paradigms and belief systems they support don’t line up. They are struggling with paradigm shifts in order to make sense of the world around them, which to them appears to be crumbling. Their worldview of how things relate to one another are being thrown asunder. It is for these reasons that we very strongly encourage everyone to wield Elegant Reasonism transformationally. First of all there is no human alive that has not committed Langer Epistemology Erros (LEEs). Every single one of us has, at some point, done that and not just once or twice, or even three times but most likely many times daily. For these reasons everyone should approach all this with great compassion and empathy. We all have to help each other with all of this. We don’t like it anymore than anyone else, but in the end it was not our choice. It was rather handed to us by the unified Universe to deal with and candidly it does not care about our feelings. It just is what it is. Our place is to understand that as best we can. Unfortunately we are inside that characterization fighting to understand what the bigger picture is. Unfortunately, at the moment at least, the answer to that question is beyond our particle horizon. The implication to that is that we will never know the answer to that particular question. We must therefore back up and ask questions we can answer. We need a process, framework and epistemology that is absolutely lined up with the unified Universe and, for better or worse, what we developed was Elegant Reasonism.
Inevitably deniers will have to understand the implications the spacetime-mass interface holds for them. Administrators are going to have to determine the value of critical resources, capital, human effort has relative to the axiological value derived by their society and community.
NNRP may freighten some people, especially deniers who want no part of any of this because it frightens their belief system. All we can do in such circumstances is to lead transformationally with great empathy and compassion. The ultimate decision is theirs not ours. For those who can not fathom the restful linkages across knot theory to realize how sentience emerges from inorganic through organic we need only point out they are reading this information. We can also point out that interactions across Event Frames is not always visible, nor measurable. The Emergence Model explains dark matter as just normal matter but with configurations of architectural mass that do not interact in the same manners as what we call normal matter. You can’t see the air you breathe either but you know it is there. This context completely eliminates any need for dark energy. There is only one type of energy under this EIM. Consequently The Emergence Model is simpler, not more complex. Usually the complexities are associated with your own paradigm shifts and not the model itself. Which makes communications exceedingly difficult sometimes. Especially with the ardent defenders of status quo thinking. However, as awareness sinks in we know from experience that NNRP will facilitate neural pattern changes associated with paradigm shifts and people through their own neural plasticity will come to understand all this. How long that all takes is up to civilization and the people in it.
Epistemological Justification Caution
The caution about justifying insights developed by Elegant Reasonism to anyone not familiar with the utility process, or the technological framework it employs is that they will have no basis to comprehend what you are attempting to communicate. Our presentation In Unification’s Wake, Part 03: Communications outlines many of these issues. If you would like to hear our presentation of those charts they are available on SolREI Studios channel on YouTube. Please subscribe there and click the notification bell. There is a direct relationship between these issues and general communications, investigative teams, and individuals which might comprise peers in any review, community, or group.
Foundational Context Is Systemic To Interpretation
The reason insights from one EIM will not be recognized from another is due to several factors, least of which is that foundational context changes EIM to EIM. The very context used for fundamental communications changes exacerbating already difficult circumstances. When that happens investigators will need to ask questions which they know the other party can not answer using status quo knowledge. They must get the other party to want to become aware of the process and framework used to justify the insights. Successful investigators wielding Elegant Reasonism transformationally will find that epistmologically the other party will then under go transformation due to NNRP. How long that takes is up to the individuals involved and their willingness to embrace understanding why reality works the way it does. Many people ardently do not want to know that information. Others simply trust that some do and then they listen to those people as best they can.
Just because you have letters after your name does not mean you are going to instantly recognize insights which you have no basis to justify. Calling such insights gobbledygook doesn’t help either. All you are really saying is you don’t have the patience to understand new insights and that reflects more on you than this process. Which over time will become increasingly clear to everyone around you. The sooner you work to understand all this and its implications the better off everyone will be. Many of these same issues are presented In Unification’s Wake, Part 05: Business Impact. Again we presented that material through our SolREI Studios channel on YouTube if you have the patience to experience that. Bottom line is that this is not status quo thinking and the details it represents is new to everyone. One really needs to understand how the process works and employs its framework in order to understand the path to epistemology it represents. Then and only then will you be able to justify insights from others that are aligned with the unified Universe. You can not justify that which you can neither perceive nor engage. The mission, purpose, goal, and objective for all this is so others can gain the precipice enabling and empowering them to both percevei and engage the unified Universe.
Unification holds implications for everything humanity has ever studied, including Philosophy itself. All of it must ultimately be mode shifted.
- Philosophy: study of the unified Universe (e.g. everything real) as a source of truth mode shifts:
There are obviously questions we are not going to answer here because they are for you to answer, not ours to answer for you. We draw a pretty hard line there. It is not our place to give you those answers, especially if you do not want the answer in the first place. Consequently there will be many passionate individuals who will always deny what we have done here. Their worldview is not likely scientifically based. Even if it is they will ardently defend what it is they think they must because it represents their world view. All we can do is offer our empathy and compassion moving forward in as transformational a manner as we can. It will be up to them to decide whether or not the unified Universe is something they want to experience. There is another word we might use but believe it so obvious as not to be needed here.
#ElegantReasonism #EmgerenceModel #Unification #Philosophy #Science #Integration #EverythingReal #RESTAPI #Restful #Relationship #Pattern #ModeShifting #StagesOfGrief #Denial