10.Sequencing
Reminder: step nine:
The normal, everyday space of reality, here called Newton space, is, in the accountant’s view, fused from two Euclid spaces.This concept is seamless and ideal, according to the numbers, and is full of conflicts relating to what is where and when. The position of a point in space has four varieties per plane, which are fixed into 1D places by twice three elements. The splitting and fusing of half identities are modeled by logical statements that are relevant in the a, bspace, or both spaces.
Step Ten
Quod Erat Demonstrandum
The task of explaining how genetics functions breaks down into showing, by which means Nature expresses the idea of an organism concurrently as a 3D and as a 1D logical sentence, that is: how Nature translates the expression of the idea in a 1D logical sentence into a logical sentence that is a description of the idea in 3D. This is what we do in step ten. It has been shown that a map exists between properties of a point in 3D understanding and this point’s position. The points are distinguishable from each other and yield differing triplets as their respective 1D translations.
We show now that the linear position of an element in a 1D sequence of arguments alters the position of points in 3D space,(Please see Table V_SQ in 10.num.1) This table is structurally identical to table V, and contains, like V, the results of the comparison if( SQ_{αβ}=SQ_{γδ},.t.,.f.).
The difference between Table V and Table V_SQ is that we have generated the additions in the sequence of aspects first as {a,b,c,k,u,t,q,s,w}, and then as {a,b,c,k,u,t,s,q,w}. The permutation of the aspects has influenced the number of .t. values in the course of the comparison of every sorting order with every other sorting order.
For practical reasons, we only publish those pairs of reorderings that are differing in the result {.t..f.} as the consequence of the change in the permutation {..q,s,w},{..s,q,w}. These few cases are sufficient to prove that the consequence of a change in a linear permutation of logical arguments is equivalent to changes in 3D properties.
Cause and Effect
The cultural agreement is that life begins as two half identities fuse, and not as the genetic material gets created in the ovaries and testes. We thus give precedence to reading over writing, translating 1D into 3D, over translating 3D into 1D.
To keep in line with cultural conventions, we call the 1D way of stating one and the same Zusammenhang ‘the Cause,’ and call the resulting 3D entity ‘the Effect.’ Viewed as such, a permutation of the first level linear arguments ‘causes’ some properties of the points in a 3D aspect to change.
The change happens by mediation (mitigation) of the translation table , which is used to compare the identity of two orders. It is evident that a change in the sequence of the first order arguments {a,...,w} results in differing properties of a point (a_{1}p_{1},p2,p3). How this is effected depends on the sequence of comparisons done while building table V. We may thus call table V the language connecting cause and effect. The same cause resulting in the same effect can be transmitted in many ways. The ways of putting the link between 1D sequence changes and changes in properties of 3D points are as different among each other as human languages are different among each other.
Upper Limits
Each line in table 4 is as well a statement about amounts and a statement about places and distances. The human brain distinguishes between what and where. In the table (4.num) we see that one line connects the amounts of the addition and its place under differing ordering aspects. We now investigate, how many differing places exist and how many differing properties for amounts can exist. While the number of places that can be assigned to n objects is well known,namely n!, we must count the number of more dimensional assignments of symbols to objects. We arrive at n?=p(n)**ln(p(n)), where p(n) denotes the number of partitions of n. Charting n? against n! we see a very interesting interdependence. (Please see 10.g.1). We see that there cannot exist an ‘ideal’ organism, as the temporal sequence of evaluating symbols makes it possible that this comparison is redundant.
Creative Accounting
As we learn the world, we feel by the skin’s neurons what is really there. Just watch little children as they put everything in their mouth to get a hold on its properties. Impressions that come to the brain by means of tactile sensations have a differing sense of reality compared to impressions that we hear, see or imagine. We are used to distinguishing between objects and logical relations, but it appears that this distinction has no foundation in logic. As we see in 10.g.1, logical relations and the objects on which they are perceived are both only abstractions.
We turn combinatorics on its head by reversing the direction of conclusions. The question used to be, ‘how many logical relations are possible given n objects and a set of rules R.’ Now we ask, ‘what proportion of an object is necessary to carry one logical relation?’
Building f^{1} of n? and n! we see that there is a small fraction of difference of the number of objects that are included in these logical relations. This is the trick Nature uses to create matter, relations and spatial positions.
In the final two steps we shall look into the mechanics of the interplay between places, amounts and order.
