Relational Theory Overview: Resources for General Descriptions

[Jack Ackrell]

Any suggestions on where I can find general descriptions of relational theories please?

 

[yesicanread]

Please define the type of relativity your interested in heraing theories about, and I might try and give you mine.

A complete thought on the subject, and only a few lines of that would be nice.

You did ask for relativity theories right ? Or are you talking about people relations ?

 

[yesicanread]

Oh here's my theory. It is the set of geometry(Points, lines, planes), and Newton's third law.

I read Einstein did not refute Newton. As well. Today's physics try to include Einstein in they're ideas. So, my theory fits in quite well in comparison with other peoples efforts on the matter. It seems it all comes down to something you can see. Geomety fills that requirement very well.

Here's the link.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v83/cjsKtU/Hi.jpg

 

[wuliheron]

The link you provided is dead.

Your theory sounds like a form of Pantheism of some sort. I would recommend looking up Asian philosophy, pantheism, and contextualism. However, I warn you these are all quite broad fields of study. If you could describe more I might be able to help narrow it down a bit.

 

[yesicanread]

The link you provided is dead.

Your theory sounds like a form of Pantheism of some sort. I would recommend looking up Asian philosophy, pantheism, and contextualism. However, I warn you these are all quite broad fields of study. If you could describe more I might be able to help narrow it down a bit.

Hey man. I deleted it is why.

But here it is in what pityful glory it has. Read it with patience, because people agree, but always ask more questions that I didn't when making this. Nit picking.

1.) I began looking at the plane as if two opposite vertex's had two equal joining points on a plane axis. I considered that if I converted the two points used on the plane I could make a simplex, the axis/plane has three planar points right, and since the plane has three points I could make three sides to the simplex.

Reason: Which is possible since three points define a plane and the scenario would allow be use of geometry or conversion.

If the simplex vertex's are joined on the plane and by a perpendicular altitude between them. It may in fact resemble a sphere. Also If I convert back to using just two points on the axis plane and the vertex's. The degrees used in both triangles equal 360 degree. A circular type shape, a circumference. This 360 degrees may use different points from the plane, and still equal 360 degrees. So all sides of the simplex may be seen as circular. And thus the entire simplex has circular sides that meet equal points on the plane, and are equal. A sphere.

So the simplex or two point vertex has a circular/spherical equivilenence, and may be call AB.

2.) What if when two points on the plane are used I made point symmetry, and the one vertex starts the perpendicular action to the opposite equal vertex. Newton's equal and opposite reaction says this action has a equal and opposite reaction, the plane, as well as the reaction caused by reaching the opposite vertex.

If altitude is action from the vertex, it can't be infinite hight.
But the variation on the plane is inmeasureable one would suppose.(This is disorder I think.)

3.) Because action reconverts to action. The reaction is equal and opposite the action. And so when we create a circular/spherical/planar/geometric movement. That action has been converted back to action/reaction. and passed through reaction to convert to reaction.

4.) And so my description is complete intersection/geometry.Points, Planes, and lines.
and a description of Newton, however general, Which guided Einstein, and guides today's physicists.

I think you should read this knowing I'm not going to evolve this. This iss it !

:zzz:

 

[yesicanread]

Here's my Quantum Mechanics theory/simplification.

I will explain QM. And a Omnesient person/character.

1.) A plane is composed of a triangle. Or three planar(on a plane) point, that aren't formin a line(colinear), form a "Plane".

2.) In this triangle is the triangle inequality theorem. So it follows.

3.) This theorem is composed as Q = Action < Q + A = 2Reaction

4.) Triangle inequality theorem = Triangle inequality theorem. So, since we act without knowing the answer, we will always be less than the Q & A.

5.) 1.) through 5.) explain the indetermination in Quantum Mechanics.

6.) Q & A existed before we asked a Q.

7.) Q = Q. So who thought before us ? And also knew the Answer to thoughts questions ?

8.) Therefore QM will never provide a whole Q&A, & the closer we get to one the closer someone else is to seeing the Q.

Check it out. 1 through 8. I'm not being religious in my points. Just deductive.

Read points 1 through 8, and tell me if you understand.

Read this with a eye on the uncertainty fact about QM.

Edit. Here's the funny face.

 

[Iacchus32]

Any suggestions on where I can find general descriptions of relational theories please?

Do you mean in the sense that wholeness is perfection and, that everything is relative with respect to the whole? Here's a thread I started on another forum called, What is Perfection? if you're interested.