”Nature’s Reality Is De-light-full!” serves as a manifesto for redefining how science conceptualizes space, matter, and field interactions. By demonstrating that field profiles in optical waveguides, LEDs, and thermal systems possess non-discrete, dynamic boundaries surrounding an asymptotic central void, the authors argue for moving away from rigid point-mass abstractions toward a holistic, receptive-responsive understanding of the natural universe.
I have tried to send feedback before. But couldn’t without logging in the conventional way, which I was unable to do.
Dr. Alan Rayner, my coauthor of this article, and I are very careful in our choice of words in describing anything including real and abstract notions.
I wouldn’t use the word ‘asymptotic’ for the local void. I wouldn’t use the word ‘central’ either. The local void is volumetric physically and neither ‘asymptotic’ nor ‘central’ can be generalized in all circumstances. Further, in mathematics and physics, people often misunderstand these terms because they have no trouble assuming that a ‘point’ with no dimension actually exists in comprehensively real nature, or Nature. This is a grave error in describing physical reality.
The word ‘holistic’ is also hugely problematic when it comes to describing reality with comprehensive reasoning. There are no ‘wholes’ or ‘parts’ in Nature.
Interested people can read further work published by Alan and me, separately and together.
2 Comments
”Nature’s Reality Is De-light-full!” serves as a manifesto for redefining how science conceptualizes space, matter, and field interactions. By demonstrating that field profiles in optical waveguides, LEDs, and thermal systems possess non-discrete, dynamic boundaries surrounding an asymptotic central void, the authors argue for moving away from rigid point-mass abstractions toward a holistic, receptive-responsive understanding of the natural universe.
I have tried to send feedback before. But couldn’t without logging in the conventional way, which I was unable to do.
Dr. Alan Rayner, my coauthor of this article, and I are very careful in our choice of words in describing anything including real and abstract notions.
I wouldn’t use the word ‘asymptotic’ for the local void. I wouldn’t use the word ‘central’ either. The local void is volumetric physically and neither ‘asymptotic’ nor ‘central’ can be generalized in all circumstances. Further, in mathematics and physics, people often misunderstand these terms because they have no trouble assuming that a ‘point’ with no dimension actually exists in comprehensively real nature, or Nature. This is a grave error in describing physical reality.
The word ‘holistic’ is also hugely problematic when it comes to describing reality with comprehensive reasoning. There are no ‘wholes’ or ‘parts’ in Nature.
Interested people can read further work published by Alan and me, separately and together.