CHAPTER 7
Ultralogics
7.1 The Fall of Communism and Other Stuff What does the fall of communism in the USSR have to do with the subject matter of this book? I mentioned previously that I had applied the GGU-model mathematical methods to certain philosophical concepts. On August 15, 1981, I presented a paper entitled "Mathematical Philosophy Status Report I" at the Annual Meeting of the American Scientific Affiliation. It was held at Eastern College, St. David PA. In this paper, I predicted that any political system based upon the atheistic writings of Marx and Engels would eventually be overthrown. The reason that such political systems can not survive is often due to a logical contradiction between the actual stated political doctrine and the intuitive inward "feelings" most individuals have relative to a divine purpose behind human existence. Then no one took my warnings seriously, but now my prediction has come to past. Thus logical concepts do play an important role in everyday affairs. Why do I mention this "ancient" history?
In this book, I'm presenting very strong warnings to the Christian community that, in the disguise of scientific truth, the same force that produced Marx styled communist doctrine is trying to force Christians to alter their beliefs. But, there is a way for Christians to overthrow systems that continue to present science fiction as some sort of "truth." You can do this by means of your "vote" and the proper use of your hard earned money.
First, you can change by your vote the state and federal legislators, the mayors, the country executives or managers, etc., and, especially, the school boards. You can vote individuals into office who will not spend your money on projects that perpetuate the scientific myths I've written about. Especially, remove local and state school board members who vote for curriculum and textbooks that don't tell the truth about scientific matters, that don't allow students to choose. My almanac states that there are about 160 million active Christians in the United States and 1.6 billion in the world. If 160 million individuals wrote letters and had them delivered to NBC, ABC, CBS News, CNN, National Public Radio and Television, etc., stating that they would no longer listen to or look at any program that did not tell the truth in scientific matters, as I've presented it to you in this book, this might have a sobering effect. Or, you could also boycott sponsors of such programs. This would have a devastating effect upon those who continue to lie to you. Why not stop buying those magazines and newspapers that continue their incorrect use of positive statements, statements designed solely to force you to accept as true, statements that have no truth value? Then you could, through your vote, prevent any of your tax money from being spent to foster any organization that continues to present science fiction as science truth. Yes, Christians still have the power to correct this wrong. But, will you have this power in the future?
I've given you a lot to think about in the previous pages. In reality, many new and deep concepts have been presented. You could spend considerable effort just investigating how theoretical science is being used to control your thinking, how you are often prevented from knowing about other theories that correlate to your personal belief-system, and probably write a book restricted to thousands of examples. Perhaps, I'm expecting too much from you.
I can hear the cry " I don't understand what you're writing about. All these technical terms and ideas are to much for my meager brain." For almost thirty-two years, I've heard the same complaints from many of my students. Often, I don't understand what it is that they don't understand. Indeed, what does it mean to understand a concept? I won't discuss it much, but I've actually created a mathematical model for the processes of understanding.
Well, as I've written before, to understand a concept that is being described partially by words, you must have a language. There's nothing I can do to alter the methods humans use to communicate. If the concept is new, you need a new language. New technical terms are often associated with old technical terms or other technical terms introduced previously. All of these terms are expressed with appropriate connecting structures in collections of sentences. These sentences give word-pictures that depict relationships between all such technical terms. Sometimes these relationships are illustrated by diagrams in the hopes of aiding comprehension. Indeed, the more distinct ways a concept is illustrated in word-pictures, diagrams, or whatever, the better opportunity one has in gaining a more in-depth understanding. Defining technical terms and using all of these educational techniques doesn't, however, end the effort an individual must put forth.
Some students don't want to expend any effort in learning a new concept. Some believe that their mind must grasp instantaneously the new idea. If it doesn't, then they'll give up. They don't search for that allusive moment when the mind says "Ah ! yes, I see what you mean." And it can be a prolonged search. A concept often has great content, content that can't completely be described. It takes time and effort to understand. It takes hours, days and even years of deep thought and reflection. You may need to go to other authors and use many distinct and often clever means before that moment of "Aha!" arrives. It's a very slow and exhausting process.
On second thought, I don't really believe I'm expecting too much. I believe honestly that you're capable of grasping firmly all that has been and will be discussed by me, if you wish. After all, what I've discussed relative to the attempts to use incorrect logical techniques to destroy personal choice is very, very significant. You must be given some knowledge of what is meant by "logic," and similar stuff, so that you can protect yourself. For too long, the scientific community has placed itself out of reach of the general public by claiming that "the material is simply much to complex for you to understand." Stick with it and go slowly. I have confidence in you. Indeed, you'll slowly acquire much of the same intuitive feelings I have about the workings of the NSP-world.
7.2 What Is Formal Deduction? We now come to the final concept, the final "thing" needed to produce a universe. In what follows, I'll give you some idea of the concrete everyday experience that has been abstracted in order to obtain the behavior of this "thing." You perceive a written set of statements, mentally process these statements and then your mind (brain? whatever) directs you to write down some deduced conclusions. As I've mentioned, I have no idea how the brain actually performs this task and for our purposes such knowledge is unnecessary. Logicians have discovered a set of written rules that duplicate this mental process in the following sense. From a given set of statements - the hypotheses - the rules direct us to write down in a very simple step-by-step fashion a finite set of statements. Each statement written down corresponds to a deductive conclusion that agrees with one obtained by the above physically real mental process.
The rules are so specific that computer programs have been created that allows a machine to check and determine if our written collection of statements is deduced in accordance with the rules. The formal application of these rules of logic yields a formal collection of written statements called a formal deduction, a deduction that can easily be checked.
The rules for logical deduction may also be abstracted and embedded into the same mathematical structure - the G-structure - that's used to obtain the event sequences, the IUN-selection process and ultrawords. Indeed, the logical rules I've abstracted are considered to be extremely simple in character and are compatible with all know forms of human deduction.
The idea that certain physical behavior is absolutely random assumes, without any possible verification, that there is no logical way to "predict" even a general event sequence for such behavior. Indeed, the behavior is lawless, there is no logical relation between the behavior of a particular entity at one instance of time and its behavior at another instant of time. Recall that this notion is one of the methods used by many so-called intellectuals in their attempts to control your thinking about Natural phenomena.
What if an IUN-process could be applied to an ultraword and a Natural system produced, a system whose behavior is "predicted" independent of whether or not it is conceived of as random in character? Is this a fantastic possibility? I think not if the process comes from an interpretation of an entity in a mathematical theory. The philosophical concept of absolute randomness does not come from such an association. It, probably, can't be modeled mathematically. Ultrawords can be used to predict behavior that is perceived to be scientifically random in character. The notion of using ultrawords to produce such random behavior is not chosen for abstruse political or philosophical reasons. Ultrawords exist mathematically and I'm giving them a possible meaning. But is there a "logic" that guides all ultraword predictions; indeed, is there even a "logic" that "predicts" what some believe is random behavior?
As I've stated, ultrawords are necessary only as an intermediate step. They can aid in human comprehension of those processes that might produce an event sequence - processes that are only partially comprehensible. As such an intermediate step, ultrawords may be conceived of as a catalyst; they are a necessary platform from which to launch a universe. Of course, we have also given them a physical meaning. Shortly, I'll discuss what could happen to an ultraword when the conditions are just right.
Remember that scientists use logical deduction. At the least, deductive methods are applied to the rules of the scientific method, rules for experimental inquiry and rules for constructing the machines used to gather data. For logicians to explain by rules how nontrivial logical deduction occurs, a set of hypotheses is necessary. A logical process can then be thought of as something that "operators" upon this set and out pops the deductions. The logical rules determine specific relationships and properties between string of symbols and it's these properties that are mathematically modeled. What results from this modeling is quite remarkable when given a physical interpretation. What results is a force-like process that has many describable properties and a portion of these properties mirror the behavior we associated with a very simple form of human deduction. Indeed, this force-like process exists only because we can describe and mathematically model human logical processes. But this force-like process has numerous properties that do not mirror any form of human reasoning. This force-like process is called an ultralogic and is our major IUN-process.
In this book, I'm not going to discuss, in any depth, how an ultralogic compares with human logical processes although such a discussion is significant for certain philosophical concepts and their relation to how a universe is created. Rather than use the "[resp. . . . ]" approach, I'll make one comparative statement that encapsulates in its content all of the relations between any form of human logical deduction and an ultralogic such as *S.
(LU) The ultralogic *S is infinitely more powerful than, faster than, refined than, uniform than any form of human deduction. Indeed, take any property P for human deduction that can be modeled mathematically. Then, whenever "better than" has its ordinary meaning, the ultralogic *S is infinitely better than property P.There are infinitely many ultralogics that can be substituted into (LU) in the place of *S. But, *S is of a special type. In fact, *S, when restricted to a Natural language that you and I use to think, is a human deductive process S. But S would be considered as a very trivial, extremely weak, if not, a foolish process that's too weak to produce the "great" deductive results of modern science. What comes next is a physical interpretation for the ultralogic *S, an interpretation that justifies the belief that there logically exists a universe producing process that has properties that are similar to thought patterns. The ultralogic *S, when restricted to the Natural world is so very weak, so hardly observable. But the fact that, from the NSP-world viewpoint, it can produce a universe is absolutely remarkable. Indeed, Scripturally, it's another portion of the signature of God. For in 1 Corinthians 1:27, Paul writes: "But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. . . ."
7.3 Physical Ultralogics In this section, I'll discuss the last and most significant interpretation needed before I can give you a detailed explanation of the properties of the GGU-model. You should pay particular attention to the following results, results not generated by my imaginative mind, but results that are obtained automatically from a mathematical model. I repeat that I have little control over what the mathematical model is saying. I'm acting simply as a translator.
Recall what an event means. When you have a description of how a Natural or ultranatural system behaves or appears at a moment of time, then the event is the assumed or actual phenomenon that, at the least, is being described partially. Our model says that an event can be a Natural event or an N-event, and such an event takes place within our universe. An event may involve processes or it may involve objects, and these processes or objects may need named constituents like an electron, or an Earth, or Sun. Such objects are called Natural objects or N-objects. On the other hand, the force-like process called an ultralogic when applied to an ultraword can produce "things" that can't be Natural processes or Natural objects. I interpret physically all such "things" as ultranatural events or UN- events. This mathematical model actual describes entities that behave like natural objects but, due to their properties, can't be natural objects. These things I call ultranatural objects or UN-objects. Also there are processes occurring that can't be Natural processes and these are called ultranatural processes or UN-processes for short.
In section 6.3, I described the idea of intrinsic Natural processes or IN-processes. One of these was a process that mirrors finite human choice, another imitates human logical processes. Then you have the significant intrinsic ultranatural processes or IUN-processes termed IUN-selection and another IUN-process termed an ultralogic. These IUN-processes take place in a portion of the NSP-world. Like the Everett-Wheeler-Graham theory many scientists accept, some of these NSP-world processes can't be detected within the Natural world by means of any laboratory experimentation. This, however, doesn't detract from their possible existence and, moreover, many other IUN-processes affect indirectly or directly the Natural universe.
I'll denote the basic ultralogic process by the symbol *S, where we use the phrase "hyper S" in speaking. Now simply consider *S to be a force-like process that produces things. Such a force-like process can't be detected directly. Of course, neither can subatomic forces. However, many of the results of * S can be detected since they are but Natural events. This is why I call such a force-like process an intrinsic ultranatural process. With this brief review of appropriate terms, I can now physically interpret the ultralogic process.
(i) For any changing Natural system, there exists an intrinsic ultranatural process *S that yields uniquely the Natural events that comprises the changing Natural system. This IUN-process is not directly detectable within a laboratory setting although all the N-events are indirect evidence for its existence.The next result has numerous applications. The IUN-process *S can produce a lot more than Natural events.(ii) The force-like process *S, when it yields these Natural events, also produces numerous ultranatural events. These UN-events are closely associated with the Natural events and aid in and are necessary to sustain the Natural system's evolution.There's an additional aspect to statement (ii). Nothing that can be done in the Natural world can change the result that *S yields these UN-events. All that any scientifically acceptable intervention can do is to eliminate or alter the Natural events. You could fly an airplane through a cloud of water droplets and greatly disturb their positions. Such an adventure would not eliminate the UN-events under this interpretation. Further, note that the process *S is relative to a particular ultraword.(iii) It's possible for *S to produce a sequence of only ultranatural events that can only occur in the pure NSP-world.Statement (iii) is somewhat significant when used in the GGU-model. You get ultranatural events whenever you get Natural events. On the other hand, you can obtain a sequence of ultranatural events without getting any Natural events.(iv) The force-like process *S cannot be reproduced by Natural means within laboratory setting. The process *S takes place in an ultrauniform manner.What do I mean by ultrauniform? There are many things that scientists consider to be "uniform," one of these is called uniform continuity. I'll try in the next chapter to explain the concept of continuity. For an ultralogic, ultrauniform is of a similar character. Basically, what it means for an ultralogic is that the process is very, very refined in character. The *S process proceeds in extremely small steps, steps that are smaller than the steps for any process that can occur within a Natural universe. Viewing this another way, one can say that over a very small finite Natural world time span, the process uses an enormous number of steps to reach its conclusion. Actually, ultrauniformity is scientifically so beautiful that it's not fully describable in a non-technical language.The next statement is very interesting and helps to answer the basic Wheeler questions.
(v) The force-like process *S applied to ultrawords produces Natural event sequences and all that they comprise, and also produces, simultaneously, ultranatural event sequences and all that they comprise.It's the ultralogic *S and the appropriate ultraword that answers completely the Wheeler questions.(vi) The force-like process *S applied to an ultimate ultraword produces not only an event sequence that yields a Natural system but, simultaneously, produces all the sub-event sequences that yield all of the sub-Natural systems. One might also say that the process *S is more powerful than any process that can occur within the universe.Thus any Natural system and, indeed, an entire universe can be produced in an ultrauniform manner by application of the force-like process *S to just one ultimate ultraword. The force-like process *S produces and holds everything together, so to speak. Unfortunately, this process can't be duplicated within a Natural world environment.Looking at specific time intervals yields the next important characterization.
(vii) The force-like process *S can, over certain time intervals, produce a system development that is comprised of ultranatural events or ultranatural objects only. Over other time intervals, the process can produce a combination of natural events and ultranatural events along with natural objects and ultranatural objects.There are many other properties I could reveal about these intrinsic ultranatural processes, ultrawords and all the rest. I've written on this subject at great length but I've done enough to prepare you adequately for the GGU-model and need not continue. However, there are infinitely many properties about ultrawords and ultralogics and the like of which we can have NO knowledge.Yes, there's a mathematical model that appears to vindicate those scientists and philosophers who believe that our universe is controlled by force-like processes that imitate those associated with human thought. But, much to my surprise, these processes may be assumed rationally to be a simple restriction of a much more powerful process that can only slightly be understood by the human mind. This more powerful process may be assumed to be hidden from direct scientific observation. But, although I've answered Wheeler's basic questions and many others with these discoveries, I haven't answered them in a manner that's acceptable to the majority of the scientific community. Why not? Because these processes have additional properties, properties that contradict some of the basic assumptions used by those scientists who are perpetrating the great scientific deception. These "ultra" processes coupled with various logically acceptable scenarios yield the MA-model and much more.
Chapter 8 or return to contents page or home page.