RS2 Tutorial Book

This forum is dedicated to the student just starting out with the concepts of the Reciprocal System, or RS2. Questions and clarifications for the RS/RS2 concepts go here; please place new ideas and commentary in the appropriate RS2 fora.
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1403
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by bperet » Sun Sep 25, 2016 4:08 pm

Horace wrote:Also, for me another bad thing was the choice to use the word "displacement" instead of "deviation".
What about a more mathematical term, such as "delta?"
Every dogma has its day...

janto
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 12:55 pm

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by janto » Tue Mar 07, 2017 8:28 am

Bruce, just a quick question. What happened to the "RS2 Theory" introduction which used to be here? http://rs2theory.org/book/export/html/353

I saved a PDF of it all when it was still online, and happened to reference some of it's introduction for some other research I'm looking into, but am unable to find a link to it on the new RS website. Whilst it may not be what you have in mind for your tutorial, I would appreciate having it available as a real, downloadable, properly formatted PDF paper, which can be referenced by title, authors, and link. Any chance you could revive (revise) it?

At the time when I first looked into RS after reading daniel's early papers, found the RS2 Theory introduction quite effective at helping me to understand some of the more basic, fundamental concepts which a newbie is confronted with, and could relate to a lot of the fundamentals through professional experience with computer graphics. IOW, it helped to make RS2 more accessible.

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1403
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by bperet » Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:35 am

janto wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2017 8:28 am
Bruce, just a quick question. What happened to the "RS2 Theory" introduction which used to be here?
I'll get a PDF made of it and put it on the main site. (Been working on getting the back-issues of Reciprocity out).
Every dogma has its day...

Detrix
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat May 04, 2013 4:48 am
Location: Holland, MI
Contact:

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by Detrix » Tue Apr 18, 2017 7:18 pm

I think the biggest hurdle, for those who have never heard of Larson's theory, is the concept of "motion" without a physical object moving. This is a very difficult thing to wrap ones brain around. I actually understand it, but to explain it to others... :roll:

Sun
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:50 am

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by Sun » Thu May 18, 2017 3:51 am

I've been gone through posts on Antiquatis trying to learn some history of RS2. It turns out to be very helpful to comprehand RS theory. Perhaps it is better to include the history of RS2 development.
Still a rookie but i finally reallize that the world being linear is not because it is linear but we observe it as linear. The need for using quaterion and octonion is so natural. From the spatial perspective, the polar aspect of unit motion creates a plane for the force field to play. Locations and geometry are just the observer effect. It seems to me Larson did not clarify where he stand as an observer, instead he switched back and forth from spatial to temporal all the time which brought me a lot of confusion.
So I suggest describing things from the spatial perspective as far as possible since we don't have a functional pineal gland. Such thing like natural reference system is really not helpful.

User avatar
dave432
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:18 am
Location: Chicago suburbs

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by dave432 » Fri May 19, 2017 12:41 pm

Thought it would be a good idea to make a copy of the RS2 Theory introduction a long time ago, if you still need a PDF version I could send it. No Internet at home so I make PDFs to read offline.
"just down the road a little way, turn left, cross the drawbridge, and you will be my guest tonight."
-- directions to the grail castle. We'll have some toast.

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1403
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by bperet » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:10 pm

It turns out that Sun's comments on dimensional splitting (1D vs 3D) became a kind of Rosetta Stone for RS2... Gopi and I have been working over the last couple of weeks to formalize the concepts--and it really clears up a LOT of things, both in the macro and microcosm. So... I think I am now at the point of writing this book with some coherence.

A number of things are going to change from Larson, simply because he never considered the concepts or just tried to fit a round peg into a square hole. Primary of which is I am returning to the conventional science approach of "actors on a stage," which Larson did not like for his universe of motion. But, he uses it anyway and just calls it a "region," like astronomers call aether, "dark matter." We have found that the region that atomic motions take part in is critical to the actual, observed properties, because it contains a number of environmental assumptions for the extraction to a 3D coordinate system (which we can measure and observe).

There are 4 regions (environments or a "stage") in which motion can interact. These regions are basically a set of dimensional assumptions for the behavior of motion:
  1. Time-space region (TSR), conventional space-time, the macrocosm of 3D space and clock time.
  2. Time region (TR), where the spatial aspect is fixed at unity and only time changes, as a 2nd power function. This is the "atomic configuration space" where atomic motion takes place.
  3. Space-time region (STR), the conjugate of the TSR, the macrocosm of 3D time and clock space.
  4. Space region (SR), the time region for antimatter.
Larson's "sectors" are pairs of these regions:
  • Material sector: TSR (macrocosm) + TR (microcosm)
  • Cosmic sector: STR (macrocosm) + SR (microcosm)
Larson's terms are confusing, because they are flipped around from conventional terms (he took time, the yin aspect, as positive, rather than negative).

What if, for the purposes of this book, I used terms that were common to Science Fiction to reference these concepts?
  • Time-space region: Normal space.
  • Space-time region: Hyperspace (since it is the macrocosm that moves faster than light).
  • Time region: configuration space or subtime (normal, atomic motion).
  • Space region: Subspace (since intra-atomic motion is instantaneous, like Star Trek's subspace communication).
I am not writing this book for scientists, but for the general population. I want the terms to be comprehensible with a conventional knowledge base. Thoughts?
Every dogma has its day...

Sun
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:50 am

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by Sun » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:54 am

It turns out that Sun's comments on dimensional splitting (1D vs 3D) became a kind of Rosetta Stone for RS2...
So glad to hear that.

I would suggest do not make this book Science Fiction style, because it might be quoted by a lot of academic papers in the future. RS is good enough to be comprehensible by college students, while conventienal science can't even explain spin-½ to a student below "professor" level. I suggest make it more academic like Larson's books.
I'm planning doing an experiment about gypsum, extracting its pharmacological effects (anti-inflammation and antipyretic effect) by water without physical contact, which might violate the active ingredients theory, which is completely powered by RS theory. I don't want it to be rejected by the reason that "quoting a science fiction book".

Another thing is the concept of Yin and Yang. It might be a problem when extending RS theory to life science. The cosmic sector, time region, energy, is actually Yang in Chinese philosophy. All of the ancient books of China, for example 《Lao Zi》(Taoism) ,《Huangdi Neijing》(anatomy and physiology of human body) are written from a time perspective. Yang in these books is refer to motions from time region. So it may provoke confusions when making correlation between these knowledges and RS theory.

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1403
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by bperet » Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:23 am

Sun wrote:
Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:54 am
I would suggest do not make this book Science Fiction style, because it might be quoted by a lot of academic papers in the future.
I am not writing this for academia... Larson tried for 40 years to get their attention and was rejected, refused and attacked. I've been selling Larson's books for 10 years now. Initially, it was not a big job--perhaps ONE book a month. Then the --daniel papers came out--totally non-academic--and in that first week, I had over 100 book orders. Now, book sales are about one a day, because of the daniel papers--which are humorous, full of Sci-Fi references and are written for non-academia. These are the people that are interested.

Being raised in New England farmland, we had a saying, "Never teach a pig to sing. It is a lot of work--and annoys the pig." I think it is only sensible to address those people that will actually listen, than try to "do a Larson" and force it upon those who will not.

It all comes back to the vMemes of Spiral Dynamics. People get stuck in particular valuing systems. In this case, the "orange" (scientific, entrepreneurial) system. Larson was a "yellow," systemic thinker, just one vMeme away, so he was able to catch some of the fringe people--but not many. The basis of Clare Grave's work is that people will NOT change the way they think about something, as long as that knowledge answers the questions they ask. The trick to change is getting people to question the system, so what they know will no longer answer those questions--and they have to start looking for answers, again. Non-experts will question a system, because the knowledge they have ISN'T answering those questions that get asked. And when enough of them do, the ego of the "experts" does not want to get left behind, since they would no longer be an "expert"--so they start to read and question, as well.

The challenge here is that RS2 is a "Tier 2" vMeme, a generalized theory in a world of over-specialization. IMHO, the daniel papers proved that humor is a wonderful tool to get people to consider things that, in an academic sense, would be out of the question. Perhaps I should let daniel author this book!
RS is good enough to be comprehensible by college students, while conventienal science can't even explain spin-½ to a student below "professor" level. I suggest make it more academic like Larson's books.
From what I've seen, we no longer live in an academic world. The days of the "think tank" and research institutes are gone. People send me links to "scientific achievements" all the time... and when I look at them, it usually comes down to a convoluted way to get funding... such as the LIGO nonsense with "gravity waves" from binary black holes. There is no longer any common sense in academia--it has gotten so theoretical, that they have forgotten about Nature and "natural consequence." Not to mention that academic books are boring... I know, I've read hundreds of them. People lack the patience to read technical books--of those I've sold, I'd bet only 1% have actually read the book they bought, cover-to-cover.
I'm planning doing an experiment about gypsum, extracting its pharmacological effects (anti-inflammation and antipyretic effect) by water without physical contact, which might violate the active ingredients theory, which is completely powered by RS theory. I don't want it to be rejected by the reason that "quoting a science fiction book".
Just mentioning RS theory will cause immediate rejection in the scientific community--that has been the case for over 50 years now. But there actually IS a big market for such research and if you get interesting results from your experiment, I can put you in touch with those people. They are desperate for experimental results and would really grab on to something like this.

Note that I am not writing it AS science fiction, but just using terms FROM science fiction that accurately describe concepts in RS2. Classic example is hyperspace--a region that exists faster-than-light. Perfect for the cosmic sector, the sector where the speed of light is the minimum speed, and far easier to understand than the "space-time region," particularly with the confusion over Larson's backward use of space-time.
Sun wrote:
Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:54 am
Another thing is the concept of Yin and Yang. It might be a problem when extending RS theory to life science. The cosmic sector, time region, energy, is actually Yang in Chinese philosophy. All of the ancient books of China, for example 《Lao Zi》(Taoism) ,《Huangdi Neijing》(anatomy and physiology of human body) are written from a time perspective. Yang in these books is refer to motions from time region. So it may provoke confusions when making correlation between these knowledges and RS theory.
Zuoqian would be the expert here, but I based the correlation of yin-yang on Chinese philosophy. I can understand the confusion. For example, heat is a time-region phenomenon and is hot, causing expansion (definitely yang), but you have to remember that it is crossing a unit boundary to do that--inversion--from the time region to the time-space region. Though the effects of thermal motion in the TSR are yang, the cause in the TR is yin. This is one of the big difficulties in trying to explain reciprocal relations--everything flips, depending on where it is observed from.

Space is obviously yang, being all 1D, linear relationships and by default, expansive. Time, when observed from the cosmic sector, is also yang--but for conventional observers, we see time through the lens of "equivalent space," how time effects space, which is polar, compressive and has an inverse temperature gradient--cold. So I guess what it actually breaks down to is that the coordinate realms, when observed from within that realm, is yang, and the equivalent space (or time) are the yin. From a conventional perspective, effects of time are yin.

I guess I need to add some definitions of causality to this paper, to explain the above.
Every dogma has its day...

SoverT
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2015 7:27 pm

Re: RS2 Tutorial Book

Post by SoverT » Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:20 am

bperet wrote:
Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:10 pm
I am not writing this book for scientists, but for the general population. I want the terms to be comprehensible with a conventional knowledge base. Thoughts?
I like it a lot. Even as a technical thinker, being a computer programmer, I still have trouble keeping straight the various combinations of regions and sectors. Reading it in terms of Sci Fi immediately felt more approachable and understandable/relatable.

I fully agree with the assessment of the state of what passes for academia now, as well as the complete timewaste of engaging with that system.

Post Reply