.01

Umberto Eco

a sign is an x standing for а у which is absent, and the process which leads the interpreter from x to у is of an inferential nature.

That the sign is [coded identity] equivalence[1 Saussure] or semiosis[2 Peirce] the latter, [the process] by interpretation or inference is nonsense sense.

Or that the sign is not teleological but ententional (mechanically driven by spacetime-innate osmotic or topographic differential forces).

.02

Force, Power and Control are but Nonsense 3. Nonsense 1 is Things Exist and Nonsense 2, Things Move.

Einstein's Intuition, Thad Roberts

Classically, a force is best understood as a mathematical construct used to mimic/predict observed changes in an object’s motion (for example, a change in its velocity). A common mistake is to use the definition of a force as an explanation for change. Forces do not explain changes—they merely act as placeholders for the mystery presented by those changes. For example, if we ask the question, “why does the volcanic moon Io orbit Jupiter?” The response we might get is “because of the force of gravity.” This is not really an answer. It simply renames the question. “Gravity” becomes a name for an unexplained causal connection. Using our equations for gravity we may successfully model how Io orbits Jupiter, how its path depends upon its velocity and distance from Jupiter, but we don’t even begin to explain these occurrences by referencing a force.

If we look a little more carefully into our question, we will notice that ultimately we are asking “why does Io appear to follow a curved path instead of just going straight through space?” Anyone who responds to this question by assigning responsibility to a force is technically sidestepping or ignoring the question.

According to general relativity and quantum space theory, what’s really going on is that, despite naïve Euclidean projections, Io is going straight through x, y, z space. Consequently, we do not need a magical force to explain its motion. What we do need to explain, however, is why it appears to us that Io is following a curved path. If Io is going straight, then why does it look like Io is following a curved path? The answer to this question is that we’re still conceptualizing spacetime as if it were Euclidean.

Empowerment, i.e., Force,* Power and Control are only Nonsense 3, so what are Nonsense 1 and 2?

Nonsense 1 is Things Exist (Existence).

Nonsense 1 is the nonsense sense that Existence explains word, as Nonsense 2 is the nonsense sense that Motion/Change explains Existence, as Nonsense 3 is the nonsense sense that Force explains Motion/Change.

Nonsense 2 is Things Move or Change.

Therefore Nonsense 1 (Existence) is another word for Word, as the first explanation of word in terms of things more than word. It is the nonsense sense that things move at all in straight line displacement {in space, with exponential order (!)}] in time (the timeline of history in exponential order (!)}).

.03

.04

.05

.06

.07

.08

.09

.10