Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Elegant Reasonism A White Paper
_________________________________________________________________________________
Elegant Reasonism is an epistemology supported by an analytical framework which seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. ________________________________________________________________________________
1 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
NOTE: This white paper took almost 20 years of R&D in order to write. You are intercepting this effort well after it started. There is much data to articulate in the proper context. We are about to mode shift what it is you think you know into alignment with the unified Universe. Hang on to your hat, this is going to be a roller coaster ride.
This is Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74. © Copyright SolREI Publishing 2021 all rights reserved. SolREI Publishing is a wholly owned subsidiary and operating unit of SOLREI INC. Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 ISBN: 978-1-946009-95-1 ISBN: 978-1-946009-96-8
Paperback eBook/PDF
Also see The Emergence Model White Paper ISBN: 978-1-946009-60-9 Paperback ISBN: 978-1-946009-61-6 eBook/PDF Elegant Reasonism is a utility process patent pending 20200372376 16/405134 worldwide assigned to SOLREI INC and published by the United States Patent & Trademark Office 26 Nov 2020. See our Press Release. Licensing is available from SolREI through the company website.
SOLREI INC 515 N Flagler Dr.,P300 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 https://www.solrei.co Contact Us
2 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Table of Contents Elegant Reasonism.....................................................................................................................................1 Preamble.....................................................................................................................................................7 Acknowledgments.................................................................................................................................7 The Quest for Unification Is Over.............................................................................................................8 Press Release.........................................................................................................................................8 This Document......................................................................................................................................9 The Questions..........................................................................................................................................10 What Is Elegant Reasonism?....................................................................................................................12 Epistemological Process......................................................................................................................12 Recognition.....................................................................................................................................12 Detail Set Congruence...............................................................................................................13 Illumination....................................................................................................................................13 Analysis..........................................................................................................................................13 Developing a Treatise.....................................................................................................................14 Philosophy...........................................................................................................................................14 The Path to Epistemology...............................................................................................................15 Ontology....................................................................................................................................15 Epistemology.............................................................................................................................16 Axiology....................................................................................................................................16 An Elegant Reasonism Mind..........................................................................................................17 Neural Plasticity.........................................................................................................................17 Neural Network Reconfiguration by Programming (NNRP)....................................................17 Rationalization................................................................................................................................18 Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs).........................................................................................18 Abstractions...........................................................................................................................18 Human Physiology.....................................................................................................................19 Justification.....................................................................................................................................19 Concept Sieves...........................................................................................................................20 Concept Sieve 01...................................................................................................................20 Compliance................................................................................................................................20 Consolidation..................................................................................................................................20 Concepts & Terminology....................................................................................................................21 Encapsulated Interpretive Models (EIMs)..........................................................................................21 Encapsulation Instantiates Context.................................................................................................22 Nested Encapsulation.................................................................................................................22 Recognized EIMs................................................................................................................................22 M0...................................................................................................................................................23 M1...................................................................................................................................................23 M2...................................................................................................................................................23 M3...................................................................................................................................................23 M4...................................................................................................................................................23 M5...................................................................................................................................................23 3 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 M6...................................................................................................................................................23 M7...................................................................................................................................................23 EIM Evolution.....................................................................................................................................24 EIM Properties & Phenomena Capture & Reconciliation..............................................................25 Standards.............................................................................................................................................25 The Utility Process..............................................................................................................................27 Generalized Process Flow...............................................................................................................27 Technology Enabling Mode Shifting...................................................................................................28 Translation Matrices.......................................................................................................................29 2D Articulation Layer................................................................................................................29 Historical Context & Original Source Review..........................................................................29 EIM Integrity Analysis Layer....................................................................................................29 M2M re Paradigms of Interest/Nature Analysis........................................................................29 Paradigms of Interest Statistical Layer......................................................................................29 Logic Calculus Layer.................................................................................................................29 Reality Alignment Validation.....................................................................................................30 Bayesian Analytics Layer..........................................................................................................30 Translation Matrix Analysis Layer............................................................................................30 Meta-cognitive Analysis............................................................................................................30 Six Sigma Layer(s)....................................................................................................................30 ISO 9001 Unification Tool.............................................................................................................30 Decision Checkpoint Flow..................................................................................................................31 The Emergence Model.............................................................................................................................32 Clues Abound......................................................................................................................................33 Investigations...........................................................................................................................................34 Classes of Investigations.....................................................................................................................34 Critical Situationally Aware Thinking.................................................................................................35 Integrity..........................................................................................................................................35 Language Usage.........................................................................................................................35 Reconciliation.................................................................................................................................35 Validation........................................................................................................................................35 Scale................................................................................................................................................35 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).......................................................................................................36 Presentations............................................................................................................................................37 Elegant Reasonism Introduction Series...............................................................................................37 Part 01: Introduction and Overview...............................................................................................37 Part 02: Introduction to Mode Shifting...........................................................................................38 In Unification’s Wake Series...............................................................................................................39 Part 01: Stereotypical Questions.....................................................................................................39 Part 02: Mathematical Proofs.........................................................................................................40 Part 03: Communications...............................................................................................................41 Part 04: Relatedness........................................................................................................................42 Part 05: Business Impact................................................................................................................43 Education.................................................................................................................................................44 Elegant Reasonism 101.......................................................................................................................44 4 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 Knowledge Management.........................................................................................................................45 Knowledge Barriers.............................................................................................................................45 Unification...............................................................................................................................................46 Accomplishing Unification.................................................................................................................47 Executive Summary............................................................................................................................48
5 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Table of Figures Figure 1: SolREI Studios Channel on YouTube.........................................................................................7 Figure 2: 3D Plates - Paradigm Shifts......................................................................................................14 Figure 3: Epistemology questions, rationale, justification, sources.........................................................16 Figure 4: Transformational Leadership....................................................................................................17 Figure 5: Susanne K Langer circa 1948...................................................................................................18 Figure 6: Niels Bohr material particles are abstractions defined by their interactions............................19 Figure 7: Elegant Reasonism Generalized Process Flow.........................................................................27 Figure 8: Translation Matrices Enable Mode Shifting Across EIMs.......................................................28 Figure 9: Elegant Reasonism Decision Checkpoint Flow Chart..............................................................31 Figure 10: Einstein letter to Lincoln Barnett 19 June 1948.....................................................................32 Figure 11: Elegant Reasonism Introduction and Overview Presentation via SolREI Studios.................37 Figure 12: Elegant Reasonism Introduction to Mode Shifting Presentation via SolREI Studios............38 Figure 13: In Unification's Wake, Part 01: Stereotypical Questions Presentation via SolREI Studios...39 Figure 14: In Unification's Wake, Part 02: Mathematical Proofs Presentation via SolREI Studios........40 Figure 15: In Unification's Wake, Part 03: Communications Presentation via SolREI Studios..............41 Figure 16: In Unification's Wake, Part 04: Relatedness Presentation via SolREI Studios......................42 Figure 17: In Unification's Wake, Part 05: Business Impact Presentation via SolREI Studios...............43
6 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Preamble Unpacking that sentence on page 1 of this document could fill libraries. These and other network based materials are generally available free to registered users of SolREI.co in the User Library. Registration is free and the company does not sell or trade your information. If you do not wish to register, you may watch video presentations via SolREI Studios with paid advertising. If you would like to review presentation charts ad free without registering, they are available via ISSUU/SolREI. Click the lens below to review SolREI Studios materials.
Figure 1: SolREI Studios Channel on YouTube
Acknowledgments Unification could not have been accomplished absent the insights of a large number of people both living and gone. Their insights, contributions and in well over 250+ case examples and references of their work are available in the User Library. Three people deserve special mention: Albert Einstein, Susanne K Langer, and Lev B Okun. Concept Sieves on page 20 represent over 400 equations, 60+ physical properties, many thought experiments, and propositions that were a part of an almost 20 year systems review and represent some of the most brilliant scientists in history. What is here only exists because of them.[1] [2] NOTE: Proof sets based on Encapsulated Interpretive Models (EIMs) (p 21) which do not or can not close to unification does not merit proof relative to the unified Universe. Elegant Reasonism proof sets demand and require truth as a function of the unified Universe as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. Having such a proof with Detail Set Congruence (p 13) is necessary but insufficient to meet requirements of Elegant Reasonism. If you can not demonstrate such alignment you need to comprehend this material. Also see video Presentations beginning on page 37 for even more detail watch those video presentations on SolREI Studios.
7 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
The Quest for Unification Is Over Being able to reflect the manifestation of everything real derived from one concise cogent paragraph (e.g. M5 or M6) has long been sought and with The Emergence Model comes that solution. From that precipice the unified Universe has been described Bang to Bang, and in this context we can reflect both before, during, and after that Event. But that is not the whole story. Indeed in hindsight it never was. New terminology, processes, and methods are now available. We must now provide critical credible paths to manifest everything real, and there is no single equation for that. Weaving that tapestry requires threads from across civilization exactly because those other Events are action dependent. The Decision Checkpoint Flowchart on page 31 illustrates that gating perception, Langer Epistemology Errors obfuscate discerning the path forward and they always have.[3] What we did during our systems review, and must now continue to do, is employ industry standard techniques, processes, and methods to pull back a bit and connect all the dots in full compliance of Elegant Reasonism. Only then can we recognize the path to the precipice of unification. Perceiving the threads of unification are a tapestry larger than any single discipline. Those threads must be holistically discerned from a unified, holistic, point of view. One that reintegrates philosophy and science. The Universe is unified whether or not our thinking about it is. That strategic clue, now patently obvious in hindsight, should drive the core message of unification behind the initial insight. There is a great deal more to unification than astrophysics or cosmology, and it ripples throughout every fiber and thread of civilization.
Press Release On November 26th, 2020 the United States Patent & Trademark Office published Elegant Reasonism worldwide. The press release is on SolREI.co, and it contains links to the actual filing was made May 7th, 2019 articulating the basics of the IP asset. When the USPTO took this action, they unleashed a powerful epistemology that enables perception of and engagement of the unified Universe. Perception of the unified Universe has for thousands of years been obfuscated by the inherent commission of what SOLREI calls Langer Epistemology Errors (p 18). The human central nervous system (CNS) instantly furnishes the human brain with abstractions in order to relate to the world around us all (e.g. reality). Langer Epistemology Errors occur when we (e.g. humans) mistake any given abstraction for actual reality. The Elegant Reasonism Generalized Process Flow on page 27 outlines the utility process left to right toward the unified precipice. The Decision Checkpoint Flow on page 31 demonstrates the relationships between decisions and effectiveness gates on that path and process. Readers here should take careful note of the recursive, looping nature, of reviews and reiteration of thinking. Humans have been making these mistakes for thousands of years. Great care and diligence must be rigorously vetted working through what it is we thought we knew as we mode shift our thinking in order to reflect the unified Universe. There is now a great deal of work to do…. 8 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
This Document This document is a highly integrated white paper. Ordinarily such a document would contain the most concise condensed information about a subject, topic, object, or device. Here that is not practical and the reason it is not is fairly straight forward: Elegant Reasonism accomplished unification by conducting an almost 20 year systems review resulting in The Emergence Model which is the first EIM to be fully compliant. One of the compliance factors is that it close to unification. Turning all of that around answers why all that detail is not directly here but indirectly linked from here. That is to say the unified Universe would not fit in 50 pages or less. NOTE: This document discusses changes (e.g. paradigm shifts) associated with fundamental context relative to and respective of what it is you think you know. It is highly unlikely it can be assimilated quickly. Read to completion of material and to cognition of concepts contained herein. DO NOT EXPECT THIS MATERIAL TO BE IN TRADITIONAL CONTEXT. Take the time necessary to fully comprehend what is being articulated. Anything less does a disservice to yourself. Please use the Contact Us form to let us know the degree to which any greater or lesser specificity is required articulating any given concept. The best manner to experience this document is to: 1) Register here: https://www.solrei.co/register/ 2) Login there then explore this document and its linkages. Links will resolve into the website, SolREI Studios channel on YouTube, or our ISSUU presence.
9 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
The Questions Inevitably questions arise anytime something new occurs in civilization. Humans do not like change. We have all grown comfortable with our familial surroundings and communications standards. Driving by empirical approaches to science we weave together what are proffered as proofs in peer reviewed journals and papers. Over the course of the last several hundred years a barrier to knowledge has emerged in the form of questions that no one asks any more. We rationalize away the need to ask such questions and then espouse emotion when confronted with them. •
•
•
•
Q: Modern science is the most successful model of how to think about nature in history. What on Earth makes anyone think it is wrong? A: It is not wrong, it is just that it is logically correct. That logical correctness has resulted in the successes civilization has enjoyed over the last several hundred years, especially in the last century. That success blinds many to what must be confronted. Abstractions (page 18) immersed in Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) (page 18) have obfuscated the path to unification. Elegant Reasonism reconciles that situation and now allows us all to mode shift what it is we think we know into alignment with the unified Universe. Q: Why won’t current modern thinking achieve unification? A: The spacetime-mass interface precludes unification. It’s just that simple. Nothing real can transit that interface exactly because it is instantly turned into energy by a fairly famous equation. That interface, created by the core constructs of EIMs employing them, precludes the use of a common geometric basis and from being able to fully couple all reference frames. Therefore thinking employing these constructs will never accomplish unification. This same issue is deeply involved in many other areas of research. See Elegant Reasonism Introduction Series, Part 02: Introduction to Mode Shifting on page 38 where many of these details are unpacked, also see In Unification’s Wake Series, Part 05: Business Impact on page 43. Mode shifting surrounding issues drove EIM Evolution on page 24 and established The Emergence Model on page 32. Q: What are the implications of simply continuing with our logically correct assumptions rather than conducting systems reviews to mode shift what it is we all think we know? A: The implication is that resources and effort would be expended that would never close to unification. Another implication is that those efforts will be misinterpreted as something sourced from inside an EIM which can never close to unification (e.g. perpetuate the erroneous belief that we are describing reality when in fact we have committed Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs), see page 18). Yet another implication is that we are simply not perceiving the unified Universe comprehensively. There are elements and factors we pass over that are important clues which wind up being ignored. The largest immediate impact is the issue of resources and effort. See In Unification’s Wake Series, Part 05: Business Impact on page 43. Q: Can you accomplish unification? A: The answer to this question is yes or no. It is not some elaborate rationalization attempting to justify why unification is not necessary, nor constraining the answer within any given discipline of science. The Universe is unified whether or not your thinking about it is. We need only observe that the Universe’s reference frames are fully coupled is patently self evident and that it has historically been our thinking which was insufficient to recognize the issues involved. See In Unification’s Wake Series, Part 04: Relatedness on page 42. ◦ Q: Do you comprehend why your answer above is ‘No’? A: If not then you need full comprehension of Elegant Reasonism (e.g. the body of work this white paper reflects). 10 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 •
Q: Can you employ a single real geometric basis point for every real object in every reference frame? NOTE: This necessarily includes the spacetime construct if you believe that construct real. The implication is you must transit the spacetime-mass interface in doing so and nothing real can accomplish that. A: If your answer is based on any EIM employing a spacetime-mass interface your answer must be No. Note: ‘c’ mode shifts assignment to Severance in The Emergence Model. See Elegant Reasonism Introduction Series, Part 02: Introduction to Mode Shifting on page 38. NOTE: The implication of this question is not just that predominant thinking can not, or does not, accomplish unification. The implication is that such thinking based on such constructs will NEVER accomplish unification under any circumstances, regardless of dedicated resources.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Q: Why did the Big Bang bang in the first place? Can you describe everything real before that moment? A: Mode Shift the discussion effectively leveraging Elegant Reasonism and you will have your answer. The answer to this question is highly dependent on the EIM used as the basis for both the question and the answer. The Emergence Model answer to this question is outlined in the Bang to Bang article on the website. Status quo thinking based on M1, M2, or M3 can not answer these questions without employing constructs that are intrinsically logical in their nature and whose core constructs preclude unification. See Recognized EIMs on page 22. Q: What are the implications of Unification? A: See Presentations beginning on page 37. Holistically comprehend the body of work this white paper reflects. Unification is a tapestry a great deal larger than any single discipline in any field of study. In fact, it by definition requires the unified approach of integrating every field of study in context of the unified Universe. Q: Can you fully couple all reference frames? A: Full coupling of all reference frames requires and demands knowing the answers to the previous questions above in full holistic comprehension of Elegant Reasonism. Elegant Reasonism is an epistemology supported by an analytical framework employing Technology Enabling Mode Shifting (p 28), but it was that approach which produced The Emergence Model, and it is that EIM which closes to unification in full compliance. One factor in compliance is closure and another is coupling (e.g. fully coupling). Q: Is The Emergence Model the best EIM? A: All we can say at the moment is that M5 and M6 close to unification, are fully compliant and meet the realm of c’s. Elegant Reasonism is the utility process which produced these EIMs. There is absolutely nothing stopping others from employing the same techniques to produce a potentially better EIM than this one. Elegant Reasonism rules require and demand at least one fully compliant EIM be used in any given investigation, and at the moment the only one closing to unification is The Emergence Model, and so we offer it as fodder in the interim. The addition of more fully compliant EIMs will only make Elegant Reasonism more powerful than it already is. So it is strongly encouraged to pursue such investigations. Having spent almost 20 years in such a pursuit, we’re done. Time for others to engage. We are happy to help facilitate mode shifting systems reviews, but we have little interest in creating additional EIMs. This one was exceedingly difficult and came at great personal cost. We have no desire to repeat that experience. Q: Why is all this so difficult to communicate simply? A: Elegant Reasonism is simple to the point of elegance, and that’s why it has the name it does. What is difficult is coping with fundamental context change. Communications presumes a common basis of interpretation. When that basis is in flux communications become challenging. See In Unification’s Wake Series, Part 03: Communications on page 41. Q: Why can unification not be achieved/perceived by tweaking existing concepts? A: Three major factors contribute to this issue; Abstractions, Encapsulation and Langer Epistemology Errors. 11 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
What Is Elegant Reasonism? Elegant Reasonism is an epistemology employing a utility process supported by an analytical framework which seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. An epistemology is a philosophy of knowledge, and Elegant Reasonism joins the historical approaches that have been around for thousands of years. The distinction here is in how truth is established then rationalized and justified. Elegant Reasonism based truth must be derived relative to and respective of the unified Universe. Our Press Release is available on our website. Elegant Reasonism is the epistemological framework which produced the first Encapsulated Interpretive Model (EIM) to close to unification: The Emergence Model. Investigations employing Elegant Reasonism generally fall into two categories: 1) an investigation relative to some set of paradigms of interest or of nature, and 2) investigations specifically developing an EIM. Currently there are seven to nine recognized EIMs (depending on how you count them and what should be there). The two categories of investigations should not be confused. Nor should the process be confused with the result. Elegant Reasonism is the utility process, and The Emergence Model is the result.
Epistemological Process Elegant Reasonism as a utility process reflected holistically herein is generally divided into three phases or process steps: Recognition, Illumination, and Analysis all of which are in support of development of a Treatise that is fully compliant. The Generalized Process Flow is depicted on page 27 and the Decision Checkpoint Flowchart is on page 31.
Recognition Coming to grips with the answers to The Questions asked beginning on page 10 requires understanding the intricacies of abstraction interaction. Depicted in Figure 6: Niels Bohr material particles are abstractions defined by their interactions on page 19. When we realize in full context of Systems Engineering what Susanne K Langer observed in Figure 5 on page 18 our minds become freed from any logic trap imposed by any EIM exactly because it allows us to envision alternative simultaneous truths which must both respect and re-instantiate an EIM (see page 21), which may manifest the same set of circumstances, properties, and phenomena. They are in essence alternative definitions for the Abstractions discussed on page 18. Carl Sagan noted that “If there's something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives. What survives, the hypothesis that resists disproof in this Darwinian selection among 'multiple working hypotheses', has a much better chance of being the right answer than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy. He notes that this is a problem affecting jury trials. My dad, who was an attorney, and I discussed this many times. Retrospective studies show that some 12 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 jurors make up their minds very early – perhaps during opening arguments – and then retain the evidence that seems to support their initial impressions and reject the contrary evidence. The method of alternative working hypothesis is not running in their heads.[4] This is another reason why Figure 9: Elegant Reasonism Decision Checkpoint Flow Chart on page 31 is as recursive as it is and why Elegant Reasonism rules demand a plurality of EIMs be employed by investigators as they enable mode shifting via Translation Matrices (one of which must close to unification). Translation Matrices analytics, depicted by Figure 8: Translation Matrices Enable Mode Shifting Across EIMs on page 28 are specifically designed to illuminate this type of issue. Diligently adhered to full compliance generally surrounds an issue like a marshmallow rendering it illustrated to investigators. So much so that Elegant Reasonism has been said to be self-clarifying in that regard.
Detail Set Congruence Epistemologically a “detail set” is the holistic set of facts, as interpreted by a given belief system, in context of one or more EIMs of the Universe within a given domain of discourse. Congruence of such a detail set is constrained by encapsulation exactly because that is where context is made manifest by the interpretive model. Consequently it is insufficient to ‘only’ have congruence. We must have congruence and full compliance to Elegant Reasonism holistically (e.g. it must also have congruence within an EIM which closes to unification). This is yet one more reason that unification must be a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science (as opposed to fighting your way past encapsulation after you are already immersed within it [which is akin to saying you will walk off the end of a Mӧbius Strip]). Believing congruence within an EIM which does not (or can not) close to unification constitutes valid evidence is a mistake of epic proportions as there is a very high likelihood Langer Epistemology Errors have been committed. See Decision Checkpoint Flowchart on page 31.
Illumination What Albert Einstein envisioned in his papers both in 1905 and again in 1916 were absolutely logically correct, but therein lay the strategic clue left us as we recognize the implications to The Questions asked beginning on page 10. Recognizing their logical nature then affords us the opportunity to represent simultaneous truths, the question we asked dealt with the manner to accomplish that. The answer was Translation Matrices on page 29, but that required us to inventory all the abstractions and that required a relational database which SOLREI called their ISO 9001 Unification Tool discussed on page 30. Holistically these technologies enable mode shifting. Mode shifting switches thinking patterns instantiated by evidence chains down through the analytical stacks of Translation Matrices EIM to EIM for a given investigation or systems review. This is a great deal more than ‘tweaking a parameter’. Entire patterns must be so shifted as well as the critical situational awareness thinking that goes along with them. Once properly enabled we can then effectively mode shift abstraction paradigms.
Analysis The analytics imposed by Elegant Reasonism, outlined beginning on page 29 can be intimidating and daunting, but the rigor and discipline may help facilitate changes in your thinking. They also help instantiate standards, methods, and techniques. Taken bit by bit helps us to affect our individual 13 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 paradigm shifts necessary to inculcate the mode shifted perception. That headache you feel or the stress you feel in accomplishing such a feat is NNRP (p 17) in action and leads directly into The Path to Epistemology discussed below. The image in Figure 2 is static, and the objective is really not to trick you or get you to see the plates inverted. Rather the objective is to encourage you to be able to flip the plates in your mind at will dynamically. Getting to that point is hard. The point here is that some of the Langer Epistemology Errors we as a civilization have committed require changing our focus away from the medium of space and onto the real objects in our reference frames. The analogy between that skill and this skill here exercises similar mental acuity. Consequently, Elegant Reasonism strives to ‘reflect’ the unified Universe via Encapsulated Interpretive Models (EIMs), see page 21, rather than declare a description of it. The intent is to never cross the line into commission of LEEs. The unified Universe is always held distinctly litmus.
Developing a Treatise The recursive nature of the Decision Checkpoint Flow on page 31 will also likely facilitate paradigm shifts. There are many ‘Ah Ha!’ moments that will occur at each of the three phases of an Elegant Reasonism based investigation, but none are more powerful than those which occur during the development of your aligned Treatise exactly because those insights are not available in any other manner. They are completely obfuscated to all others not versed in wielding Elegant Reasonism. Only when we step back away from old EIM thinking can we mode shift into alignment with the unified Universe to perceive and engage new vistas and in Susanne K Langer’s words “ask a whole new world of questions”. Figure 2: 3D Plates - Paradigm Shifts
Philosophy Humanity has been dancing around the philosophical issues here for decades. Richard Feynman in his now famous lectures discussed many of these same issues. These issues are exactly why Elegant Reasonism reintegrates philosophy and science and why unification must be considered a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. Justification of these insights will come in the fullness of time. Elegant Reasonism as a new epistemology integrates existing traditional epistemologies and in that sense acts as a superset. The distinction here is the source of truth being the unified Universe as that aforementioned philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. Empiricism, one of the traditional epistemologies employed across science, is necessary but insufficient to meet the demands of Elegant Reasonism. We need only point out that it failed to accomplish unification to make the case for its integrated position here. However, that rationale is also insufficient. The reason it is insufficient stems from its inability to deal adequately with Langer Epistemology Errors. If everyone makes the same epistemological mistake, empiricism will not catch it. It did not catch it in the case of M1, M2, or M3, and civilization made fantastic strides despite and in spite of that mistake.
14 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 In hindsight it should come as no surprise then that unification demands an integration of all real concepts as a derivative of the EIM closing to unification. The Emergence Model closes, but it may not be the only such EIM to do so. There may be others, we don’t know. All we know at the moment is that this one does. Philosophically unification requires integration of all concepts considered real as a fundamental derivative of the EIM establishing that fundamental context. That does not necessarily mean there is a single equation, but there is a single set of constructs establishing that context.
The Path to Epistemology The path to epistemology is the story of The Emergence Model leading to all of the subatomic particles, to the Periodic table, on to molecules. The story takes a twist when inorganic molecules form dynamic architectures of mass that can move independently as a function of their architecture. Such constructs lead to organic molecules. Systems of systems of these types of molecules lead to higher order composite systems of systems representing biology and ultimately sentient beings like us. When we look at the central nervous system in Human Physiology (p 19), we can see and measure action potentials across that neural network that is the basis of purposeful human action. Action potentials are directed by information stored in the brain. The human brain is divided into a set of “Brodmann Areas” after Korbinian Brodmann who in 1909 studied the cerebral cortex and defined its histological structure and cellular organization. The cells holistically comprising these systems don’t just form intellectual patterns forming knowledge, they remember system states across these various Brodmann Areas. It is those memories which when holistically immersed provide a sense of self the brain interprets as sentience.
Ontology Ontology is the philosophical study of being, but herein specifically refers to that in full context of the unified Universe through Elegant Reasonism. Ontology in this context requires an understanding of The Emergence Model and its ability to manifest biological systems, especially the CNS and Brain systems and the implications of them. See An Elegant Reasonism Mind below and Neural Network Reconfiguration by Programming (NNRP) also below. A number of high browed books have been written over the last years questioning if we are in a simulation and the answer is no; the simulation is within us. The CNS instantly furnishes abstract constructs in order to relate to existence. We can observe The Emergence Model path from MBP to higher ordered constructs. Preonic configurations whose internal resonance lasts long enough to persist. The gradient of destructive resonance producing the virtual particles commonly associated with The Standard Model of Particle Physics. Mode shifting them we find them configurations of MBPs like everything else except their resonance exceeds Severance at some point. Where that point is determines their lifespan. We can continue this penetrating inorganic and organic and that taxonomic split to super massive black holes. The ontological point to be made here is the simple insight that biological system connections produce a CNS feeding the brain such information. Laniakea offers some interesting contemplations at the other end of the system scale.
15 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Epistemology Epistemology is the philosophical study of knowledge. Herein again, this is in the full context of the unified Universe through Elegant Reasonism. Epistemological pursuits must necessarily include recognition, perception of problems/challenges, justifications, rationalizations, etc. There are already several epistemologies within the broader domain of philosophy. Each has a different source of truth. Empiricism, for example, demands repeatable evidence. Rationalism demands logical argument. Etc. The distinction here is that Elegant Reasonism demands truth as a function of the unified Universe and it recognizes the relative axiology respective of each of the traditional epistemologies. They are as a result statistically weighted relative to their ability in how they manifest alignment with the unified Universe. This is difficult for many but we need to recognize the traditional insights and questions about epistemology in full context of the unified Universe. What happens when we mode shift Epistemology? How do those questions change relative to the unified Universe? When we start asking where information is epistemologically stored we are presented a simple answer: within architectural systems of Figure 3: Epistemology questions, rationale, justification, sources mass as defined by The Emergence Model. Albeit that definition is a function of The Emergence Model and another fully compliant EIM which also closes to unification may have a different answer. At the moment we don’t have another such model. We must take a long hard look at the traditional epistemologies in context of commission of Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) on page 18. We must position traditional epistemological interpretations relative to and respective of particular Encapsulated Interpretive Models (EIMs) (p 21) and then hold their plurality interpretations relative to and respective of context made manifest by the unified Universe as the final arbiter and litmus. It results in a Darwinian approach.
Axiology Axiology is the philosophical study of value derivation. Again herein, this pursuit is in full context of the unified Universe through Elegant Reasonism. Money, for example, is the instantiation of value. The knowledge to asses the instantiation of value relative to the unified Universe is priceless, precious, and exceedingly powerful. We must then recognize with great power comes equivalent responsibility. SOLREI INC encourages Elegant Reasonism be wielded transformationally. 16 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 There are many programs which specialize in teaching transformational leadership. Scaled Agile Frameworks are one great example in global enterprise and depicted in Figure 4 here.
An Elegant Reasonism Mind A full treatment of this subject is beyond the scope of this white paper but will be presented in due time. We will Figure 4: Transformational Leadership cover encoding, memory storage process, engrams, consolidation, and many others areas of study. While the actual infrastructure underpinning a given entity’s mind will likely not change (for biological entities), what will change are the neural pathways built as a result of critical situational awareness thinking, learning, and life experiences in context of Elegant Reasonism. The real question is how human perception will evolve overtime in the full holistic context of Elegant Reasonism. Imagine a mind which intrinsically perceives and engages the unified Universe and what it can accomplish. What would such a mind create? How would civilization be changed with such minds as its basis?
Neural Plasticity Neural plasticity of the CNS to process information, perform complicated simultaneous mental and physical tasks, and express feelings and emotions is peerless. The human brain is viewed as the seminal achievement of biological evolution because of its complexity. Variations in individual behaviors known as behavioral plasticity are not limited to only motor movements. Responses to individual sensory inputs as well as the expression of emotions and feelings are also quite variable. Behavioral plasticity is only possible because of the ability of the CNS to modify its output. Minute adjustments in motor behaviors, sensory reactions, and emotional responses are mediated by numerous brain mechanisms. The term ‘neuroplasticity’ or ‘neural plasticity’ is often used to characterize the neural adaptations that enable the CNS to generate variations in individual behaviors. Neuro plasticity occurs at all levels of the CNS including molecular, cellular, systems, and cognitive levels. [5]
Neural Network Reconfiguration by Programming (NNRP) NNRP is a hypothetical concept developed by SOLREI INC during the holistic systems review undertaken developing the body of work this white paper reflects. Part of the contention is that the gap between Neural Linguistic Programming (NLP) practitioners and the scientists who have discredited it is a domain of discourse which will be filled by NNRP in context of Elegant Reasonism. The 17 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 hypothesis is that the gap can be filled through comprehensive approach to programming which takes into consideration all memory storage areas of the CNS and not just linguistics. Memory encoding has more areas of the brain and CNS linkages which must be taken into account, and Elegant Reasonism is uniquely suited to accomplish that integrated view. NNRP is therefore a set of methodologies, practices, technologies, and techniques comprising specific technologies which can be used for essentially the intended purposes of NLP, except formal use documents comprehensive engagement in a way that can be scientifically proven using the deep rigor, discipline, and analytics holistically reflected by Elegant Reasonism.
Rationalization Herein, rationalization effectively transpires when one holistically comprehends Elegant Reasonism and can wield it reasonably well maintaining critical situationally aware thinking. That means you can navigate the Generalized Process Flow on page 27 reasonably well and can determine and make decisions based on the Decision Checkpoint Flow on page 31. Skill mastery comes when you can do these things dynamically in an active dialog conversationally.
Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) LEEs occur when we mistake abstractions for actual reality. Langer points out that commission of such errors is a fatal epistemological error. Susanne K Langer was an American Philosopher who in 1948 wrote about symbology, recognition, and in her book: Philosophy in a New Key, pp 70-83, that year made this epistemological observation [3], which everyone essentially ignored her epic observation. Abstractions Abstractions have a tendency to insulate and isolate higher ordered ideas from lower ordered detail. When fundamental core constructs of a given EIM are layered many times, fade of replicate can Figure 5: Susanne K Langer circa 1948 systemically creep into our thinking. LEEs only amplify this situation. Fundamental core constructs of a given EIM are constituent abstractions and are highly systemic throughout higher ordered constructs of which they are constituents. That is to say they are nested within higher ordered constructs. Commission of LEEs at that fundamental level magnify that amplification up through higher orders of complexities necessarily integrating them and ignores our duty to epistemological integrity. Geometry, for example, is not valid (e.g. real) unless it has a basis. Yet we institutionalize obfuscation of that point. Our progeny as a result
18 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 follows a virtual path through knowledge. Elegant Reasonism resets epistemological considerations as a function of the unified Universe not our egos.
Figure 6: Niels Bohr material particles are abstractions defined by their interactions Abstractions are inventoried as a part of the Generalized Process Flow on page 27 in the ISO 9001 Unification Tool on page 30 and populate Translation Matrices on page 29 working through the Standards (p 25) based Decision Checkpoint Flow on page 31, eliminating Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) (p 18) engaging the investigative domain of discourse as a given team works toward developing a fully compliant Treatise.
Human Physiology The central nervous system of animals, especially including humans, instantly furnishes their brains with abstractions in order to relate to the world around them. Cognitive biases must subsequently be addressed, handled appropriately and preferably transformationally. See Figure 4: Transformational Leadership on page 17. Consequently Langer Epistemology Errors represent an epistemological challenge that must be dealt with intrinsically in our approach to science. When we critically review the design of Elegant Reasonism, we can patently observe that it is specifically designed to deal with these issues as well as the resulting psychology. We must not allow past logical successes to obfuscate the path forward. We must fully embrace science in a unified context.
Justification It is necessary but insufficient to have logically correct solutions. Fully compliant justification must also close to unification. Justification occurs when the evidence chains of a given investigation meet the investigative metric objectives holistically consistent with Elegant Reasonism. That usually means full compliance with Quality Management System (QMS) Standards and investigative methods and mode shifted metrics. Such methods include, but are not limited to Six Sigma, Root Cause Analysis, and a great deal more. It also means successfully surviving the discipline and rigor of Translation Matrices analytics. When we take M5’s Most Basic Particles (MBPs) as a system, the implication is far reaching exactly because that means everything real is a system or system of systems. That in turn finds 19 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 incredible value in Systems Engineering principles, practices, and the profession as a whole. Systems Engineers are trained in gathering systems requirements and data to QMS standards in some of the most complex situations on the planet.
Concept Sieves Concept Sieves are sets of paradigms of interest usually employing sets of specific mathematical equations established by a given investigation and specifically designed to aid attaining their goals and objectives. The constituents of their ‘sieve’ is designed to illuminate and illustrate insight factors for the purpose of developing the Treatise resulting from their investigation. Mode Shifting concept sieves is an investigative technique unique to Elegant Reasonism. Any given investigation may employ as many different concept sieves as needed to support their particular quest. There are any number of masterful bodies of work which might be used in the creation of concept sieves in order to mode shift what it is we think we know in context of an investigation. During our original systems review we used the set of physical properties as a concept sieve, for example. Concept Sieve 01 There are some 400+ equations associated with concept sieve 01. We are still working to get the mode shifted view articulated onto the website. It may take us months or years to get the website updated with this information current course and speed. Integrating this information from our body of work requires mode shifting the entire pattern complex of each equation and that task is considerable. Please bear with us as we work through these issues.
Compliance Full compliance holistically herein means that 100% of a given investigation simultaneously complies with all standards, Elegant Reasonism rules, and meets requirements demanded by what SOLREI INC calls the realm of c’s.
Consolidation Cognitively, consolidation is the post-acquisition of long-term memory. Memory consolidation is a category of processes that stabilize a ‘memory trace’ (e.g. engram) after its initial acquisition. The term is commonly used to refer to two types of processes: synaptic consolidation, which is accomplished within the first few minutes to hours after learning and occurs in all memory systems studied so far; and system consolidation, which takes much longer, and in which memories that are initially dependent on the hippocampus undergo reorganization and may become hippocampal-independent. Another recent focus of research deals with reconsolidation. Consolidation in Elegant Reasonism occurs during the process methods associated with the right hand side of the Decision Checkpoint Flow on page 31. Usually during the development of the unified Treatise. This is where the holistic insights come into their own. This requires an evolution in thinking in order to drive critical situationally aware thinking into everyday life and considerations. Drawing analogies between these stages of Elegant Reasonism processes and processes in the human brain are by design exactly due to path to epistemology issues and because of NNRP (p 17) which holds the potential to shape An Elegant Reasonism Mind (page 17).
20 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Concepts & Terminology There is a great deal to unpack in that statement on the cover of this white paper and doing so could fill volumes of encyclopedias. This document is intended to be electronically delivered and is linked out across the network to the company’s website and various delivery platforms for printed and video materials. There is considerable breadth and depth in that body of material. Terms are holistically defined when links herein are resolved at their source within our website. See the section on Critical Situationally Aware Thinking on page 35. Elegant Reasonism as a utility process, is liberal in the sense that a plurality of EIMs are expected to be deployed in any given investigation and minimally at least one of them must close to unification. Elegant Reasonism is conservative in the sense that it demands simultaneity in paradigm reflection between and across EIMs. That is to say paradigms of interest or of nature must equivalently be made manifest in (e.g. in context of) the EIMs employed by a given investigation. Presumably there may be other such fully compliant EIM s in the future an in that eventuality Elegant Reasonism will seamlessly integrate them and their results in order to mode shift what it is we all think we know into better alignment with the unified Universe. Mode Shifting is not a simple tweaking of one EIM to another. Rather, it is a comprehensive paradigm shift in how one must conduct modes of thought EIM to EIM. What transpires is a simultaneous pattern shift of the entire comprehensive EIM to those patterns as established by a different EIM. The tool used to accomplish this feat in Elegant Reasonism are Translation Matrices. Such an act is referred to herein as mode shifting. https://www.solrei.co operates in many different modes. It is a website to be sure. It is also an information repository. The User Library there may be accessed and cross referenced in support of given investigations or communications. The website hosts education materials, courses (currently under development), and much more.
Encapsulated Interpretive Models (EIMs) As defined within Elegant Reasonism, EIMs are required to be quantified, codified, enumerated and once declared may only be iterated and specific iterations must be referenced and results in what we call the process of encapsulation. This rule eliminates ‘scope creep’ and differing interpretations about various factors under differing conditions. At issue here is elimination of Langer Epistemology Errors and gaining the precipice to unification. The inability to enforce encapsulation on EIMs has historically resulted from the erroneous belief that we were working directly with reality rather than abstractions of it. Consequently, we were changing logical definitions at the macro level and not paying attention to the highly amplified systemic nature of physical definitions at the micro level. Abstractions have a tendency to insulate and isolate higher ordered ideas from lower ordered detail. When we ignore such errors, we introduce fade of replicate issues into usage of abstractions. Elegant Reasonism eliminates these problems by enforcing encapsulation in order to establish credible mode shifting between iterations of recognized enumerated EIMs. While you likely will not see this even in our own work, it has always been a requirement to denote (for example: M1.0000) an enumerated EIM with some indicator following it of the specific iteration of that enumeration which 21 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 provides the basis for the prose being consumed. This was not a problem so long as we were the only ones looking at the work. It is a problem (to our horror) when we start moving that information out to civilization. Sorry about that but at the end of the day we only had finite resources.
Encapsulation Instantiates Context If you hang around any higher education campus for any length of time you will inevitably hear someone say “well, its correct because the math works”. What we would point out is that mathematics is dependent on a common foundation of context. That math may work in M1 or M2 but fail utterly in M5. Just the reverse is also true. These issues are just one factor why we must mode shift the entire evidence chain EIM to EIM rather than tweak such factors. Change that context and that math may no longer work. Science is replete with what are called singularities (e.g. places where the mathematics fail) and beneath the event horizon of a black hole is just one example. So much so that the term is often used as a synonym for that phenomena. Mode shifting singularities is exhilarating and often addictive. It is for these reasons that Elegant Reasonism fundamentally impacts the manner in which we have historically constructed “proof papers”. Something discussed in the In Unification’s Wake Series Part 02: Mathematical Proofs presentation on page 40.
Nested Encapsulation In one sense we might observe that the distinctions between M1 and M2 are made manifest by how concepts are or are not encapsulated. M2 externalizes factors (e.g. demands forces be discretely recognized) influencing real constructs possessing mass and M1 internalizes them (e.g. allows variability internally). We might also then observe that M1 does not apply rules isotropically, for example spacetime is allowed to rapidly expand but no other real object is. We must then critically assess the spacetime-mass interface across all scales and recursively re-ask these questions in context of the Decision Checkpoint Flowchart on page 31.
Recognized EIMs Elegant Reasonism, as a utility process, requires a plurality of EIMs to be employed in any given investigation and at least one of them must close to unification. There is significant caution in the following words because the hard cold truth is that many, if not most, reading this have committed Langer Epistemology Errors and believe they are working directly with physical reality rather than abstractions of it. Having said that, and with my Systems Engineering hat on, all physical configurations have two views; one logical and one physical. Physical views are almost never used outside of manufacturing if only because there are almost always more than one physical way to accomplish the same logical result. Logical views are precisely defined with specific inputs and specific results. Consequently we almost always gravitate to logical views. Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs), and the need to avoid them, further entrench the need to not fall prey to logic traps resulting from the belief that we are working directly with reality rather than abstractions of it furnished by our central nervous systems providing our brains with abstractions so we can cope. Because of all this holistically The Emergence Model is holistically comprised of two EIMs: M5 (the logical view) and M6 (the physical view). Emotionally physicists all want to jump on M6 rather than M5 and we can not encourage strongly enough not to do that. As a civilization, we are not ready for that. We do not have enough information yet. SOLREI INC has already proposed to the U.S. National Science Foundation to create an R&D computing system specifically designed for that purpose and to provide investigative 22 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 results to industry and academia. Such a system would likely be, at least an order of magnitude more powerful than Summit.
M0 (M0) is the Newtonian logical view and honors Sir Isaac Newton.
M1 (M1) is the modern variant mass EIM that is a derivative of Einstein’s insights. It is not what Einstein believed, but it is often erroneously touted as such. M1 is logical in its intrinsic nature.
M2 (M2) is the original invariant mass model developed by Einstein. M2 is logical in its intrinsic nature.
M3 (M3) from a Systems Engineering point of view was intended to be the physical view of M1 or M2. However, when it was realized that no such real construct could be created fell into disuse.
M4 (M4) is an emulator EIM that is based on M5 (or M6) where certain variables are set to 1 or neutral values (positions) such that either M5 (or M6 as appropriate) may emulate M1 or M2. M4 proves that both M1 and M2 are logical in nature.
M5 (M5) is the logical view of The Emergence Model of Particle Physics and essentially represents a mode shifted view of The Standard Model of Particle Physics. M5 represents the most commonly used EIM representing The Emergence Model exactly because it is logical in nature and allows us the freedom to explore issues logically. It is not dependent on direct knowledge of physical instantiation. In that sense it is much easier to work with. The Elegant Reasonism Introduction Series presentations linked on page 37 have the exact language detailing this EIM. M5 is a logical derivative of MBP’s intrinsic nature.
M6 (M6) is the physical view of The Emergence Model of Particle Physics and essentially represents a mode shifted view of The Standard Model of Particle Physics. There are many difficulties working with M6, the least of which is that we know next to nothing about the architectures of mass or details of the intrinsic nature of Most Basic Particles (MBPs). M6 requires and demands direct, fully compliant, physical instantiation of The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance producing configurations of MBPs which make manifest physical properties, phenomena, and all forces.
M7 (M7) is reserved. The back story on why it is reserved has to do with momentum associated with the original systems review undertaken by SOLREI INC. When we first started we took predominant 23 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 thinking at face value. It was not until much later, after considerable momentum had already been established, did we discover that predominant thinking was not consistent with Einstein’s fundamental beliefs. The schism between M1 and M2 surfaces into view around the epicenter of how mass is treated, perceived, and engaged. Had we realized that at the beginning the numbering herein would have resulted in M1 being the logical view of invariant mass with M2 being the physical view of that same model. M3 then would have been the logical view of the invariant mass model and M4 would have been its physical view. M5 would then have been the emulating EIM. M6 would have been the logical view of The Emergence Model and M7 would have been its physical view. Specifically due to the momentum of our work we left nomenclature as it was and created M7 as a reserved EIM in case civilization at some time in the future wanted to reorient the body of that work.
EIM Evolution Over the last several hundred years EIM’s have without question or reservation evolved. Generally they all concern themselves with real objects and the medium between them. What constituted the medium occupied the minds of some of the most brilliant humans to have ever lived. Prior to the 20th century many, if not most or all, believed in something they called the luminiferous aether. It was characterized as a perfectly clear, perfectly viscous fluid that held all astronomical objects and constructs. The Michelson-Morley Interferometer experiment changed all that in the late 1800’s exactly because it was designed to detect the luminiferous aether and it famously failed to do so. Only a few years later Einstein published his papers and the world was gripped by relativistic notions. There was a common thread throughout all of these contemplations and experiments. They were all logically correct within the confines of the definitions of the abstractions defining them. The one thing none of them could do was accomplish unification. Circa 2004 McGowen began a systems review looking into the details of impact dynamics across the solar system. Scale was an issue understanding those dynamics as was the inability to employ a common geometric basis. The inspirational ‘Ah Ha!’ moment came when McGowen realized the strategic implications stemming from Einstein’s logical correctness. That implication was that it could be set aside as a logically correct lens through which everything real could be perceived and engaged. That it meant it might not be ‘the only such lens’. He then set out to employ industry standards and technologies to instantiate the creation of a net new EIM through which the problems he was dealing with could be dealt with appropriately. The result of that systems review was The Emergence Model. The Emergence Model consisted of two views one logical and one physical. The physical view was required to support the logical view, but it was the latter that was more precise exactly because there are almost always more than one way to physically do something. The Emergence Model derived its basis from a new construct he labeled Most Basic Particles (MBPs). The derivation of the concepts surrounding this construct arose from Thought Experiment 4 concerning ‘something vs nothing’. Therein ‘space’ became defined as dimensionless nothing. That forced everything real to be a derivative of the intrinsic nature of MBPs. That nature produced The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance configuring MBPs in everything real, following Knot Theory. Severance became the reason for consistency and causality typically associated with traditional concepts from science. Force, all force, is the work instantiated by the action of architectural mass. Because any MBP, or any configuration of them, may then act as the geometric basis for all reference frames many of the traditional problems and issues simply vanished under this EIM. Under The Emergence Model the unified Universe grows unfathomably ancient and the concept compression issues presented by objects like BX442 simply became moot. There was plenty of time for 24 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 them to evolve to their perceived state in the locations we find them today and at their calculated ages. The Big Bang was mode shifted and reconciled. Black Holes for all intents and purposes are essentially graviton stars.1 The Standard Model of Particle Physics mode shifts rather cleanly into The Emergence Model of Particle Physics. Physical properties, phenomena, etc. can all likewise be mode shifted by Elegant Reasonism between traditional modes of thought into those modes which can perceive and engage the unified Universe. This document is about that process and not the specific details of that original systems review. All things at the appropriate time. Right now, here, what is important is that people understand the utility process and epistemology that is Elegant Reasonism. Some may want to focus on The Emergence Model. What those people need to know right now is that other than its ability to close to unification the Emergence Model is essentially irrelevant exactly because it is not assumed or presumed that it will always be the only such model to close to unification. The only reason we are discussing it here at all is that Elegant Reasonism requires at least one EIM to be employed which does close to unification. When and if any other such model is developed it can join the list of recognized such EIMs and that addition will only serve to make Elegant Reasonism more powerful than it already is.
EIM Properties & Phenomena Capture & Reconciliation 2nd of The Questions on page 10 points out that nothing real in M1, M2, or M3 may transition the spacetime-mass interface without conversion to energy, thus precluding unification under those EIMs. We must always capture such circumstances because they are a major clue when reconciling that set of circumstances not only across the Generalized Process Flow on page 27 but also the Decision Checkpoint Flow on page 31. Mode shifting this specific example during the original systems review resulted in the variable ‘c’ being mode shifted away from the speed of light and assigned to Severance under The Emergence Model on page 32. The curve of matter approaching the speed of light made famous in classrooms around the world is mode shifted to show where Severance occurs and those insights are powerful. This same insight explains why and how synchrotron radiation emits photons when there are nothing but electrons in the stream (e.g. without atomic shell quanta calculations). This leads to an understanding of The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance producing the centripetal force on the electron which produces the photon at the familiar velocities we are familiar with in all interferometer experiments. Since everything on Earth contains electrons they can produce photons at no other velocity due to the intrinsic nature of MBPs comprising their architectures. This simultaneously reconciles Edwin Hubble’s cosmological velocity measurements and helps us to mode shift Einstein’s papers on Relativity. Einstein was logically correct, but he like the rest of us committed Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) described on page 18. See the User Library on the website for original papers on these various subjects by the original source authors. Also see the Acknowledgments page for a more comprehensive bibliographical reference.
Standards One insight that only becomes obvious in hindsight of what has been accomplished by Elegant Reasonism is that unification constitutes a tapestry a great deal larger than any single discipline of 1
There is a possibility that they are Preon Stars but that requires a great deal of theoretical R&D which has not yet been completed. Requests have been made to the National Science Foundations to pursue implications of architectural mass for science, industry, and academic comprehension.
25 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 science. Indeed, once the unified Universe can be outlined Bang to Bang we humans must then comprehend the relatedness as a general concept and subject. See In Unification’s Wake Series Part 04: Relatedness on page 42. Unification means that there is a credible evidence chain linkage path from that single cogent description of The Emergence Model to everything real in the unified Universe. Perceiving and engaging those various facets is only achievable through Elegant Reasonism. SOLREI INC desires to work with internationally recognized organizations to establish baseline standards for Elegant Reasonism and the interrelationships with standards already accepted by the international community. Including, but not limited to American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to establish ISO guidelines for Elegant Reasonism. This task is important for quality and integrity of results and their application across the global economy. There are many other ISO standards which Elegant Reasonism leverages in its generalized process flow. A few of these are, but not limited to: • • • •
• • • •
Baldrige Performance Excellance Program Building Success through People International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) ◦ The Systems Engineering Guidebook ISO 9001 Quality Management Systems Standards ◦ Guidance on the requirements for Documented Information of ISO 9001:2015 ◦ Implementation Guidance for ISO 9001:2015 ◦ ISO 9001:2015 for Small Enterprises ISO 30300:2011, Information and documentation – Management systems for records – Fundamentals and vocabulary ISO Workshop: Growing the services industry with ISO Standards Joint Auditing Standard for Quality and Environmental Management Systems Six Sigma
Elegant Reasonism constitutes a new epistemology. An epistemology is a philosophy of knowledge and in this particular case it should be noted that the source of truth is the unified Universe itself. Epistemologies include how that knowledge is justified and rationalized. There are implications which ripple through civilization necessarily, and by definition, without exception. It can be very easy to get caught up in the details of all this and we must not lose critical situationally aware thinking. When we contemplate the implications of an epistemology capable of deriving truth from the unified Universe and then inculcating that into the very fabric of human physiology simply by learning about it we become attuned to our surroundings like never before. We perceive more broadly and deeply and our engagement increases our reach and range. There are many implications to 20th Century Critical Thinking and we must now be wary that we are also situationally aware. Being able to operate in a standards based Elegant Reasonism context may be one of this century’s most important accomplishment.
26 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
The Utility Process All processes have rules and Elegant Reasonism is no different in that regard. Elegant Reasonism is generally divided into three phases or process steps: Recognition, Illumination, and Analysis all of which are in support of development of a Treatise that is fully compliant. All such Treatise, so developed all have one thing in common: they are in alignment with and reflect the unified Universe. Compliance in this case means, among other requirements, that the Treatise must close to unification. The first stage must recognize what the problem (area of investigation) is and that may be more difficult than one might first imagine. Once through that gate we must illuminate issues and begin elimination of Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) on page 18. Only then may we move into analysis and finalization. Associated with all of this is the Decision Checkpoint Flowchart on page 31. This is a recursive process that incessantly seeks improvement and refinement consistent with the best spirit of quality management system standards.
Generalized Process Flow The general process flow operates left to right as depicted below and works toward a Treatise that reflects the results of a given investigation whose fundamental and essential truth is fully compliant with the unified Universe.
Figure 7: Elegant Reasonism Generalized Process Flow 27 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Technology Enabling Mode Shifting Elegant Reasonism employs relational database technologies to instantiate abstraction inventories and Translation Matrices (described on page 29) to enable mode shifting. In the image below the background image is that of the 2D Articulation Layer (top most layer) of an example Translation Matrix and described on page 29. In this layer the columns represent one of the seven recognized EIMs and the rows represent the paradigms of interest defined by a given investigation. A given investigation may employ more than one such matrix. Some may employ Concept Sieves (see page 20) and others specific sets of paradigms of nature. A list of physical properties, for example, or some given set of phenomena. The foreground table depicts subsequent analytical layering. The ISO 9001 Unification Tool (See page 30) is the relational database detailing the abstraction inventory and the declared relationships between all abstractions. Definitions contained there are employed by the Translation Matrices. All investigative team members should be using the same instance of the same tool set.
Figure 8: Translation Matrices Enable Mode Shifting Across EIMs It should be noted that these analytic layers are examples not a complete list. Any appropriate set of analytics may be employed so long as they are holistically consistent with Elegant Reasonism. 28 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Translation Matrices Translation Matrices enable and empower mode shifting. Example analytical layers are, but not limited to those listed/linked below. There is no hard and fast rule that says all of these layers are required. Determining whether or not they need to be deployed is a function of the investigative team requirements, goals, and objectives. Those decisions will likely be determined by team leadership. The term ‘layer’ is used below, but it might also be referred to as an area if a given team chooses to implement their work in manuscript form rather than a spreadsheet or mathematical matrix.
2D Articulation Layer Articulate how each paradigm of interest or of nature (POI/N) is made manifest relative to and respective of EIMs employed by a given investigation. These are indicated in Figure 8 above on the background table by the rows of that table and enumerated Pn1, Pn2, …, etc. Each intersecting cell must characterize and reflect how that POI/N is made manifest relative to and respective of the particular EIMs employed. Also note that at least one EIM so employed must close to unification.
Historical Context & Original Source Review McGowen found it useful to articulate differing historical perspectives on some subjects. Such circumstances often arose in insight transition periods throughout history. Inventorying such abstractions often drives iterated EIMs. Investigators will have to determine the value of these activities.
EIM Integrity Analysis Layer These metrics simply validate the integrity of each EIM employed as implemented by investigators.
M2M re Paradigms of Interest/Nature Analysis These metrics check the manifestation integrity EIM to EIM for given sets of paradigms of interest.
Paradigms of Interest Statistical Layer These metrics check the integrity of the chosen paradigms of interest or of nature being explored by the investigative team as they deem appropriate.
Logic Calculus Layer These are metrics associated with the logical correctness being investigated by the teams.
29 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Reality Alignment Validation These metrics are associated with checking/validating the actual real unified Universe. It should be noted here that reality is unified whether or not we think of it that way.
Bayesian Analytics Layer Bayesian analytics integrate before, during and after, beliefs, metrics and conditions. More than one area or layer may be needed here. There may also be a need to integrate areas of cognitive biases to penetrate some areas and recognizing Epistemological Process on page 12.
Translation Matrix Analysis Layer These are metrics/analytics appropriate to the investigation being undertaken and are holistic to that effort in context of the tools being employed, including all techniques (potentially unique to that particular effort).
Meta-cognitive Analysis These may be thought of as practical application metrics.
Six Sigma Layer(s) Six Sigma is an industry standard method used to calculate errors per unit of measurement (usually in the millions). Here however, we must take special note of EIM encapsulation boundaries and their impact/influence on such calculations. We must calculate Sigma values internal to each EIM, but we must also calculate them down the analytic stack for each layer and then also holistically for the investigation as we move into development of the associated Treatise. Each investigative team must assess how to represent the holistic Sigma values in their Treatise as a function of the goals and objectives handed to them by stakeholders.
ISO 9001 Unification Tool The ISO 9001 Unification Tool is a relational database housing the abstraction inventory which populates Translation Matrices. This is not, nor should it be construed to be, a simple flat file. It is anything but that. Essential context is established through these relationships and complex patterns depend on these abstractions to be correctly laid out. Any subsequent dependency on these definitions which use this or similar implementations must correctly manifest relative to and respective of the EIMs employing them. NOTE: The ISO 9001 Unification Tool available from SOLREI INC is provided empty by design. What is delivered on download is a relational database, created using LibreOffice, that provides the framework for any given investigative team the means to populate the database using term definitions they understand. It is not SOLREI INC’s place to decide for the international community what those definitions are. Over time it is our intention for these definitions to be populated by the various international technical committees as is appropriate. That work, at this juncture, is TBD.
30 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Decision Checkpoint Flow
Figure 9: Elegant Reasonism Decision Checkpoint Flow Chart The Decision Checkpoint Flowchart guides successful practitioners from its upper left to lower right, through the Generalized Process Flow on page 27. One of the gating factors is recognition of whether or not anyone on any team is committing Langer Epistemology Errors. That is to say: are they mistaking abstractions for actual reality? Do they comprehend the distinction between an abstraction and reality? The actual real unified Universe must always be held unique, distinct, and litmus exactly because the Universe is unified regardless of how we think about it. While we recognize this is a fine line to walk, we must strive to never cross it lest we fall prey to Langer Epistemology Errors.
31 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
The Emergence Model We discussed briefly many of the distinctions of The Emergence Model in EIM Evolution on page 24. The Emergence Model of Particle Physics is essentially a mode shifted instance of The Standard Model of Particle Physics. Both approaches to particle physics are creatures of their respective EIMs. The former emerges holistically from M5 & M6, while the latter emerges from M1, M2, and M3. The former closes to unification and the latter does not, nor will it ever since its core constructs and their relationships preclude it. Nothing real can transition the spacetime-mass interface without first conversion to energy and in that act eliminates all possibility of employing a common real geometric basis for any reference frame. The Emergence Model does not have that problem due to the manner in which it is derived (e.g. intrinsic nature of Most Basic Particles (MBPs)) and in how it defines space as dimensionless nothing resulting from Thought Experiment 4: something vs nothing. The somethings that are real emerge as MBPs or configurations of them. Space defined in this way becomes irrelevant in almost every discussion. The Emergence Model is the holistic integration of M5 & M6. It is not one or the other. The intrinsic nature holistically reflected is symbiotic and synergistic. Elegant Reasonism expects that all models of real systems aligned with the actual real unified Universe to have two ‘views’ consistent with information science and Systems Engineering, and The Emergence Model is no different. The logical view is described by and referred to by its model enumeration M5. Its physical view carries the designation M6. Holistically and together then they are The Emergence Model of Particle Physics. Elegant Reasonism rules state that at least one fully compliant EIM be employed in every investigation and because The Emergence Model, today, is the only EIM closing to unification it is included here as reference. There is no requirement stating that another fully compliant model could not be so employed presuming such an EIM were developed at some time in the future. The addition of multiple EIMs would only make Elegant Reasonism stronger and more powerful. Until that time, The Emergence Model is included Figure 10: Einstein letter to Lincoln Barnett 19 June 1948 herein.
32 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74 Standard Reference Frames in The Emergence Model are The Event Frame and Local Frames and these are defined on the website and in the video presentations available via SolREI Studios on YouTube listed here in the chapter on Presentations beginning on page 37. The Event Frame has seven phase steps (EFPS1 - EFPS7) which characterize predominant action in that [interactive] phase (e.g. between relative and respective architectures of mass). Both types of reference frames may be nested and nested within each other. Local Frames however do not reference beyond their boundaries and are completely and eternally isolated by space as defined by The Emergence Model. These reference frames are scale invariant and isotropic. Meaning that they can scale from individual MBPs out to quantum realms and all the way up to include the entire unified Universe and their character and nature does not change. Inertial and momentum factors must be accounted for consistent with invariant mass metrics (e.g. Einstein’s original beliefs depicted by Figure 10: Einstein letter to Lincoln Barnett 19 June 1948 above). Also emerging are other new concepts from The Emergence Model. One is that because The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance configures MBPs into everything real implies that Severance limits all real object ability to remain configured. Ultimately these relationships establish the concept for the frangibility of architectural mass. Ever wonder why craters are wider than they are deep? You now know why and planetary sciences will never be the same again. There is also the strong implication that everything real is a system or system of systems. It is in this context that the Frangibility of Architectural Mass is first recognized. What follow then is another new concept: the Energy Signature Taxonomy. Have you ever looked at a crater on any celestial body and wondered by they are all essentially wider than they are deep? They are so exactly for these reasons. It is that frangibility that is the key reduction factor in the Bang to Bang article. What is not realized until 100% of these various factors, concepts, etc. are fully mode shifted is the depth to which they affect how we all perceive evidence.
Clues Abound Once you have comprehensive understanding and can wield Elegant Reasonism effectively maintaining critical situational awareness thinking dynamically and conversationally, then you will almost instantly perceive and engage clues civilization has had either in our hands for thousands of years or naturally all around us. What we can report at this juncture is that clues are absolutely everywhere and once you can wield Elegant Reasonism you will gain the precipice which perceives the unified Universe allowing you to engage it through that lens of truth. Someone once said evidence is evidence and it does not change. The point we are making here is akin to holding the desert glass used to make necklaces for the Pharaohs of Egypt and have been in museums for how long now? That glass held iridium and was produced during meteoric impact. We didn’t know that until Gene Shoemaker gave us a new lens to perceive such events. The evidence didn’t change, but our perception of how to look at it did change. What we are pointing out is that we are now walking through another similar gateway of perception. This one perceives and engages the unified Universe. We can show you the door, but only you can change your own paradigms so that your perceptions can turn the key to unlock those insights and wield the utility process articulated herein.
33 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Investigations Unification, as a concept, means everything real has a credible relationship that can be illuminated and illustrated by evidence chains holistically by Elegant Reasonism. Only in hindsight of describing the unified Universe Bang to Bang can we set aside the inorganic taxonomies to focus on the organic and the naturally virtual capabilities of central nervous system (CNS) systems to perceive those linkages and apply critical situationally awareness thinking. Unification demands that all of these various realms be considered in a unified manner. We must be able to recognize the relationships between these various areas and render them credible in terms of how the unified Universe has made them manifest. Reality is unified whether or not we think of it that way. The unified Universe does not care what or how you think. It will simply persist past your ignorance and assimilate you in time. The universe knows all conquests for power and glory are fleeting. What persists is the source of truth and in seeking truth as a function of the unified Universe itself we powerfully establish capability to perceive and actively engage.
Classes of Investigations Susanne K Langer observed that with new insights come a whole new world of questions. When we realize the full implication of encapsulation relative to Encapsulated Interpretive Models (EIMs) on page 21 and the influence that has respective of and relative to The Path to Epistemology on page 15 we must then back up from that recognizing the impact to Axiology on page 16. One must recognize how these issues impact Detail Set Congruence on page 13 relative to Epistemology on page 16 as a whole. Failure to recognize these various issues constitutes a barrier to knowledge. One that becomes a gating factor working across Figure 9: Elegant Reasonism Decision Checkpoint Flow Chart on page 31. Let’s then recognize that for each of the Recognized EIMs on page 22 there exists a body of questions and relationships. Within each there are various domains of discourse each with multiple detail sets associated with them. Those relationships are constrained consistent with Detail Set Congruence on page 13. Mode shifting the various factors across EIMs present pattern shifts in those relationships relative to and respective of the requirements for/of/by unification. Along with those patterns our very mode of contemplation must shift as well. That’s why that function is called Mode Shifting. The point here is that there are classes of investigations due to these various factors. Developing net new EIMs is one class. Conducting systems reviews employing existing Recognized EIMs and Elegant Reasonism rules requiring that at least one EIM employed must close to unification. More such EIMs is better but the least is one within the plurality set required. The kinds and types of questions needed and desired is different between these two classes of questions. The clear implication is that so too are the abstraction inventories required by a given investigative team.
34 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Critical Situationally Aware Thinking Critical situationally aware thinking means that you can conversationally wield Elegant Reasonism with recognized expertise, both internally and externally. That means you are able to parse language, detect baloney, recognize incongruous constructs and thinking among other skills.
Integrity You must be able to recognize the source of constructs EIM to EIM. You must know when integrity is violated. Holistically any given EIM must comply with the realm of c’s, one of which is consistency. For example no EIM employing the spacetime-mass interface should also suggest gravitons exist exactly because that is not how gravity is made manifest by M1, M2, or M3. In those models gravity is a phenomena resulting from mass warping spacetime. There is no need for such particles, physical, virtual or otherwise. Suggesting such is a failure in critical situationally aware thinking. Conversely gravity in M5 is a function of the work instantiated by the action of exactly such configurations of architectural mass into gravitons which makes that force manifest (in that EIM). Discerning such distinctions means one must wield each concept relative to and respective of the EIMs making it manifest.
Language Usage An attempt should be made to employ language consistent with modern understanding. Historical terms traditionally employed inconsistent with that understanding must assure integrity of the Treatise. Many historical terms were incorrectly assigned. Virtual Particles in The Standard Model is one example because those particles are in fact real and do exist. They just do not live very long. Use of the term virtual there implies that those particles are not real and that is erroneous. Careful review of historical context then is vital in the Recognition Phase of the Generalized Process Flow on page 27.
Reconciliation Reconciliation of constructs employed by any given investigation are systemic and must be reconcile from their most fundamental form holistically compliant with Elegant Reasonism. That means all the way through the associated analytics. It means that simultaneous truths must be made manifest consistent with requirements articulated by the body of work this white paper represents.
Validation All valid geometry requires a basis. Do not blow past such requirements. Question any status quo that supports such action. Test your work against the unified Universe which is always held distinct and litmus. If that work does not agree with nature and experiment then something is amiss. When that is examined do not forget to make sure the effort is mode shifted to assure that perspectives are aligned relative to and respective of the appropriate EIMs and to what we find with unified reality.
Scale Core EIM constructs must span scales in an isotropic manner consistent with their definitions. Mode shifting scale based issues are difficult and often employ many different patterns requiring a great deal of work in order to get across the Decision Checkpoint Flowchart on page 31. At any given scale it should be patently obvious how action within the Event Frame is derived from those core constructs. 35 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) These are in no particular order of importance. •
Q: Why can we not ‘see’ M5 from M1? A: Encapsulation manifests fundamental context of interpretation. We are therefore precluded from perceiving any given EIM from the confines of any other EIM. Remember fundamental core constructs of an EIM are highly systemic up through all higher orders of complexity. The core constructs of M1, for example, preclude perceiving unification. We therefore must have an approach which recognizes these issues, by design, like Elegant Reasonism.
•
Q: This is all theoretical physics stuff, how does this affect me? A: The quest for unified truth is not confined to science of any particular discipline. Truth as a function of the unified Universe is isotropic within Elegant Reasonism epistemologically. Elegant Reasonism accomplishes unification. By definition that demands credible evidence chain linkage however RESTFUL (e.g. function of REpresentational State Transfer). Susanne K Langer’s body of work links concepts as far removed as art appreciation. Ludwig Von Mises body of work links economics. As civilization develops many other areas will recognize these issues and develop similarly integrated approaches. The distinction will be the credible epistemological linkage back to the unified Universe.
•
Q: This is your truth, not my truth. This does not affect me. A: Your perceptions are your own. There is only truth. The unified Universe follows that same intrinsic truth which is the reason Elegant Reasonism seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe. SolREI Studios has a number of playlists discussing related topics from psychology to neurosciences and astrophysics. Part of why Bayesian Analytics Layer on page 30 are integrated into Translation Matrices, see Figure 8: Translation Matrices Enable Mode Shifting Across EIMs on page 28, is that we must take into account our own cognitive biases during any given investigation and abstraction inventory as we work through the Generalized Process Flow on page 27 and especially the Decision Checkpoint Flowchart on page 31.
•
Q: Who did all this? A: None of this could have been developed absent the insights from a large number of people throughout history and still alive today. Charles C McGowen stubbed his toe on the issue about 2006 and drove the creation of Elegant Reasonism and The Emergence Model resulting in this white paper. Along the way he also had to create a publishing house, video studios, and a great deal more. He studied aerospace engineering at Auburn University but IBM hired him before he finished at Auburn. His bio is on the back cover of several publications and he has two children; Lindsey and Charles. The filing made by SOLREI INC bears his name as the inventor for that reason. He is just a regular guy that works incredibly hard and can be rather strategically focused. He is a Keirsey INFP personality.
36 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Presentations SolREI Publishing has created a number of presentations which SolREI Studios then has turned into video presentations online. Presentations in PDF format are available from ISSUU.com/SolREI. Our SolREI Studios channel has created a variety of original content videos and several themed video playlists so far with many more in development. • •
Elegant Reasonism In Unification’s Wake
Elegant Reasonism Introduction Series Part 01: Introduction and Overview Presentation Charts Presentation Charts with speaker notes Elegant Reasonism is the utility process which produced The Emergence Model.
Figure 11: Elegant Reasonism Introduction and Overview Presentation via SolREI Studios
37 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Part 02: Introduction to Mode Shifting Presentation Charts Presentation Charts with speaker notes
Figure 12: Elegant Reasonism Introduction to Mode Shifting Presentation via SolREI Studios Historically we humans believed we could just tweak this parameter or that factor and ignore consequences to everything else. That is simply an illusion and ignores the fantastically amplified consequences caused by systemically integrated abstractions from the core of how we perceive reality. Elegant Reasonism implements tools called Translation Matrices to document the relationships EIMs have to paradigms of interest or of nature down through a rigorous analytical stack in order to enable mode shifting of what it is we thought we knew into alignment with the unified Universe. Mode Shifting is not a simple factor tweak. It is a comprehensive change in how our thinking must recognize patterns as a function of essential context changes.
38 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
In Unification’s Wake Series This series is intended to elaborate on insight resulting from having accomplished unification (e.g hindsight). How has perspectives changed in a given area or subject. Please Contact Us if you see something we should cover not already in a presentation. Remember that we are few and you guys are many. You may get a reply agreeing with your suggestion and that someone, somewhere should pursue that effort. Right now we are busy just getting this much. So please bear with us.
Part 01: Stereotypical Questions These are knee-jerk kinds of questions we get when folks first consider that unification has been accomplished. Everyone usually thinks it was done in context of what they already knew rather than what actually happened and why. Some get so caught up in those aspects they don’t stop to consider these questions and answers. Presentation Charts
Figure 13: In Unification's Wake, Part 01: Stereotypical Questions Presentation via SolREI Studios
39 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Part 02: Mathematical Proofs Presentation Charts
Figure 14: In Unification's Wake, Part 02: Mathematical Proofs Presentation via SolREI Studios It is necessary, but insufficient to simply say “the math works”, and the reason this is true has to do with comprehension of essential interpretive context. We must separate the mechanical aspects of mathematics from interpretations of constants and variables as they are assigned to represent different aspects across sciences. In essence what we must do is to mode shift our thinking to represent what it is we think we are proving. Traditional mathematical proofs operate within a given EIM. The mechanics of mathematical operations do not change EIM to EIM, but what they work with relative to and respective of fundamental and essential context does change and we must be critically situationally aware in our thinking in order to establish viable proof as evidence.
40 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Part 03: Communications Presentation Charts
Figure 15: In Unification's Wake, Part 03: Communications Presentation via SolREI Studios This presentation attempts to answer questions involving why Elegant Reasonism is so difficult to communicate to the uninitiated. Essentially everyone desires new information and concepts to be in the same fundamental context and that is simply not the case here. This presentation attempts to help other to comprehend those issues and how they relate to the framework that supports the epistemology that is Elegant Reasonism.
41 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Part 04: Relatedness Presentation Charts
Figure 16: In Unification's Wake, Part 04: Relatedness Presentation via SolREI Studios There is a distinction to make sure you the reader here understands and understands the implications of and it is that Elegant Reasonism is the utility process that produced The Emergence Model. The utility process requires at least one EIM employed be fully compliant and close to unification. It is The Emergence Model which satisfies that requirement. The utility process only does to the extent that the EIMs it employs do. There is nothing restricting or inhibiting other investigative teams from implementing other EIMs so long as they are fully compliant holistically under Elegant Reasonism. It may be that others see what we did and decide they can do better. Go for it. We’re done. The Emergence Model is the source of relatedness in this presentation.
42 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Part 05: Business Impact Presentation Charts
Figure 17: In Unification's Wake, Part 05: Business Impact Presentation via SolREI Studios The only business defense against Elegant Reasonism is wielding it better than your competition. Any competitor who can wield Elegant Reasonism better than you can eviscerate you as a function of their will, desire, and resources. There are several reasons for this. One is that Elegant Reasonism enables them to see what you can not. Another is that it enables and empowers the capability to mode shift existing knowledge into to alignment with the unified Universe. While that is fantastic for scientists it is a very lousy situation for global enterprise and here’s why. Global enterprise now has to protect their existing portfolios because mode shifted insights constitute net new insights and are available to be patented under existing global treaty and appropriate national legislation. You can’t patent what you can not perceive and you certainly can not engage it. Therefore if you want to protect your existing portfolio then you had better get to it before someone else does.
43 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Education SolREI is currently working to develop a number of courses from general information to certification for professional purposes. Proper development of these materials will take some time, so again, please bear with us. We are working as fast as our meager resources allow. Generally, licensing Elegant Reasonism is free for non-revenue associated activities. All activities associated with creating value for revenue generating purposes require acquisition of a commercial license. The prices associated with these courses has been waived until the courses are fully developed and considered complete. At that time prices will go into affect. Until then they are free to registered users under the Elegant Reasonism General Use License. This document, for example, is being shared under that same general license. Contact Us if you have any questions or would like to establish a commercial license for your institution, organization, or enterprise.
Elegant Reasonism 101 This course currently under development is intended to be the initial course for certification wielding Elegant Reasonism. While this course is under active development we encourage review and assessment of this material for education purposes and refinement of goal attainment relative to and respective of the skills determined to be required.
44 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Knowledge Management Knowledge Management, or simply KM, was developed as a concept, process, and software application primarily by the Information Technology industry supported by education both in academia and business. Exactly because Elegant Reasonism has the potential to penetrate Langer Epistemology Errors which dismantle logic traps, concept compression issues and many other types of situations that would otherwise ensnare people and lead them to erroneous conclusions, a massive KM opportunity exists to empower future generations.
Knowledge Barriers A knowledge barrier to entry manifest when a receiver of new information encounters paradigms which do not fit into their world view (e.g. ‘belief system’) and at that point they cease listening and begin to formulate rationalized objections. Such objections may not be voiced, nor may they be communicated necessarily by body language, though both are probably good indicators of the existence of some barrier to entry for the new idea. While many examples of ‘barriers to entry’ exist in abundance in society, worrisome are those obfuscated by Langer Epistemology Errors. Those must be ferreted out and mode shifted through an effective systems review. Systems Reviews take time, money and resources which may not be available.
45 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Unification Historically, maybe by tradition as well, the quest for unification has been within the domain of discourse associated with theoretical physics, often astrophysics. People like Stephen Hawking, Albert Einstein, and many others come quickly to mind and are examples but by no means are they the only ones. The mistake we all made was first characterized by Susanne K Langer in 1948. We believed that the abstractions we were working with were reality. The central nervous system of human physiology instantly furnishes our brains with abstractions in order to relate to and work in the realm in which we exist. Biological entities are hard wired, essentially to commit such errors exactly because of this situation. Recognizing Langer Epistemology Errors, with simultaneous recognition that what Albert Einstein created with his papers was logically correct, results in critically situationally aware thinking that may employ many tools, practices, techniques, and processes from information sciences in pursuit of other EIMs that are also logically correct. The almost 20 year systems review conducted by Charles C McGowen following Elegant Reasonism principles resulted in The Emergence Model. Unification was the furthest possible objective of that original systems review. Unification was discovered accidentally. The original systems review dealt with impact dynamics on celestial bodies. There were many aspects of that which simply did not make sense in the traditional manners in which they were perceived. Consequently McGowen employed a standards based approach to parse those dynamics. Unification was not even recognized when it was first written down. Recognition came a few years later and even then only on review. What happened next was almost instantaneous and that ‘Ah Ha!’ moment was the implication demanding investigations of the Big Bang. Once we could reflect what it was we thought we knew Bang to Bang, it was very patently obvious that the single science of physics was necessary but insufficient to bring everything together. That’s when the requirements of unification became a quest to comprehend the failures in philosophy and science that had obfuscated the traditional path. That’s when it was recognized that unification had to be a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science, not after you were already in science. Elegant Reasonism as an epistemology integrates and embraces the other traditional epistemologies (i.e. empiricism, rationalism, constructivism, etc.) statistically weighted relative to and respective of holistic truth sourced from the unified Universe. When we do that in the fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism, especially in context of Decision Checkpoint Flow on page 31 we begin to perceive everything around us in a different manner (e.g. context). The ‘Ah Ha!’ moments come so fast and furious that the feelings can only be described as ineffable. Unification demands critical situationally aware thinking. That means we are aware of the fundamental context driving any given conversation. It means we have to have a mode shifted ‘Baloney Detection Kit’. [4] In the interim we suggest you watch In Unification’s Wake Series Part 05: Business ImpactPart 05: Business Impact on page 43. Unification is nothing short of unified thinking about everything real.
46 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Accomplishing Unification Accomplishing unification was the result of an almost 20 year systems review into what it is we all thought we knew. In hindsight there are two types of investigations. One mode shifts what it is we think we know using Elegant Reasonism, as filed and holistically articulated, as part of an investigation into some given set of paradigms of interest/nature. The other is a specialized quest to determine a net new EIM and that is a beast of an entirely different character. These two types of investigations are two sides of the same coin. One can not just sit down and write one cogent paragraph that fully complies with unification requirements. That paragraph must be reverse engineered as a product of a comprehensive systems review and that’s why these two types of investigations have the relationships they do. Mode shifting what it is we think we know inevitably begins with our own individual perceptions and paradigms exactly because they filter how we interpret evidence. The quest for unification may be over but the real work lay ahead of us all. Again, in hindsight, it should have been obvious that unification required a much broader canvas than any single discipline of science in order to attain. The tapestry that is unification literally integrates everything real in the unified Universe and if one can not lay out a credible path to those real constructs then unification has not been attained. Now it seems patently obvious that expecting unification to come in the form of an equation is too simplistic. There must be credible manifestation of evidence chains linking everything real to the unified Universe and doing that requires a reintegration of philosophy and science.
47 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Executive Summary Historically humans believed we worked directly with physical nature. Only in recent times did we realize our central nervous systems furnished our brains with abstractions in order to relate to the realm in which we all exist. Science worked to organize taxonomic relationships between the various abstractions in order to discuss analysis and conduct empirical experiments. Along the way our abstractions took center stage and we forgot the insulation/isolation character they bring. Abstractions tend to insulate and isolate higher ordered ideas from lower ordered details. Lager Epistemology Errors are committed when we mistake an abstraction for actual reality. Fundamental abstractions only amplify systemic issues. Layering such abstractions into composite higher ordered constructs magnifies these problems and constituents suffer fade of replicate phenomenon which tends more often than not to cause misdirection or obfuscation of results. Modern information sciences, industry standards, and quality metrics provided a needed approach in conducting a systems review that resulted in an EIM which closes to unification. Backing up from that, one company located in South Florida codified that approach and those results into a new epistemology whose primary purpose is to seek truth from the unified Universe. Accomplishing unification came at civilization from an orthogonal angle and coming to comprehend the implications of that precipice took on a life of its own. That quest is now over. What remains is the considerable task of communicating what has been accomplished and helping others to wield Elegant Reasonism effectively and productively in support of all life. Old mysteries seem to have answers yet new mysteries abound and that too in hindsight is expected. Development of An Elegant Reasonism Mind (p 17) is worth the effort. Elegant Reasonism helps explain why one EIM can not be perceived from the precipice of another exactly because each establishes fundamental context. Mode shifting our critical situationally aware thinking EIM to EIM gains the perspective of the precipice capable of perceiving unification unlike any previous approach. For this reason Elegant Reasonism is currently poised to mode shift what it is we all think we know into alignment with the unified Universe. The only question is who will do that work and why. Opportunity abounds but that awareness is double edged and it does not favor the apathetic. Global enterprise should move with a sense of urgency to secure their commercial license. Elegant Reasonism is an epistemology, supported by an analytical framework, which seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. Unpacking that sentence would fill libraries if taken to the fullest degree. The implications are even more astounding than the accomplishment. Especially for global enterprise and national interests. Langer Epistemology Errors not only ensnare thinking in logic traps they obfuscate the credible path forward and that can have dire consequences for strategic direction in any enterprise. The credible question presented In Unification’s Wake is how this will affect humans long term. In the short term it will likely cause volatility, not just in markets and business, but between cultures. Right now enterprises of all sizes and scales urgently need to review and comprehend Elegant Reasonism if only for the reasons cited in the In Unification’s Wake Series, Part 05: Business Impact on page 43. Existing IP assets are at risk of being refiled with the WIPO once mode shifted and there is nothing the existing holder can do about that except to file their application before someone else with deep pockets does. 48 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
Bibliography 1: Acknowledgements, , , https://www.solrei.co/info/library/user-library/ 2: et al, , , https://www.solrei.co/corporate/ip/elegant-reasonism/patent-pending-16405134/ acknowledgements/ 3: Langer, Susanne K., ,Philosophy In A New Key: A Study in the Symbolisim of Reason, Rite, and Art, 1948,https://www.solrei.co/usr/library/biographical/Langer_Susanne_Katherina/Philosophy%20in %20a%20New%20Key%2C%20Suzanne%20K.%20Langer.pdf?_t=1561297901 4: Sagan, Carl, ,The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, 1997, 5: Tublitz, Nathan,Neural Plasticity: A Window into the Complexity of the Brain , University of Oregon,2008,https://www.solrei.co//usr/library/science/Medical/Neurology/Neuroplasticity/Tublitz.pdf
49 of 50
Elegant_Reasonism_White_Paper_74
SOLREI INC 515 N Flagler Dr.,P300 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 https://www.solrei.co FAX: (772) 872-5300 Contact Us
50 of 50
