.
Logic and belief systems - From the epistemology perspective

A logical basis in the belief system of its subjective reality, is not tantamount to an absolute basis for its claim of proof with its logically deduced proposition that predicates the actuality of an empirical observation.

"Logic is the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.", "Logic is a branch of philosophy.", "Logic concerns the structure of statements and arguments, in formal systems of inference and natural language. Topics include validity, fallacies and paradoxes, reasoning using probability and arguments involving causality. Logic is also commonly used today in argumentation theory.". Excerpts from from Wikipedia on "Logic".

An analytical proposition of knowledge that is deduced through logic with its conceptual framework, are fundamentally based on the a priori posits that are established with its belief. Although description logic can address questions by its critical and generally systematic approach that is reliance on reasoned argument in conventional law of thought, it is fundamentally based on its specific branch of philosophy that draws conclusions in the abstract of its subjective reality. See the UVS subtopic on "The functions of logic gates with Boolean logic" that elaborates with a metaphor of digital systems of digital logic gates to illustrate on a logical tautology implemented by its logical negations in its logical system.

A propositional logical function of digital logic gates.

If scientists in consensus agreed that a theory with its propositional knowledge was correct on its logical basis in its subjective reality that emulates the objective reality, it would mean they have believed the theory was correct. If they thought it was incorrect, it would mean they have believed it was incorrect.

Nonetheless, an argument from authority can be fallacious, and an argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument. What one has believed as a truth that refers to reality is one thing, what is the truth could be another thing.

“A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.” - Albert Einstein

Generally, science practices that engage analytical methods to investigate and evaluate empirically observed natural phenomena through deductive logic for establishing their a posteriori knowledge in subjective realities, are very much relied on a supra sense of belief with varying degree of uncertainties in the fundamentals of nature. And fundamentally, the first principles for the hypothetical constructs of most mainstream scientific theories developed in their conceptual frameworks of subjective reality with their postulations, are asserted with the tautologies of their a posteriori knowledge.

A proposition for the actuality of a natural phenomenon merely concluded with deductive logic of its hypothetical construct, does not make it true or not true; the proposition is merely valid or invalid for its logically deduced conclusion in its subjective reality.

Insubstantially, the logic and belief system of a validated theory, could be logically construed in a delusion of its cognitive paradox, caused by the paradoxical effect of nature that renders the delusion with a subliminal natural negation.

A tiny wrong assumption can lead to its huge misadventures.

William Carpenter (1830-1896) published "A hundred proofs the Earth is not a Globe" based on his consistence description logic and reasoning that were supported with direct observations as evidence for Earth is not a Globe. Galileo might not have had understood those ancient navigation techniques in fine details than a skipper who had adopted the belief that Earth is flat, thus in critiques with description logic against the spheroidal Earth postulation in a rhetorical manner with such fallacies of affirming the consequent, it was refuted as junk science by such experts; Galileo's spheroidal Earth proposition in such manners was deliberated as nonsensical with the fallacy of argumentum verbosium. In the very obvious of hindsight, the flat Earth model is fundamentally incorrect, all proofs for Earth is not a globe are fallacious, these were as a result of localized perceptions in the paradoxical effect of nature, and ignorance to a transcendental level of the perceptions.

A flat Earth model

See the UVS topic on "Allegory of a flat Earth event" that illustrates a mechanism of natural negation.

“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand
is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.” - Galileo Galilei

“Nature is relentless and unchangeable, and it is indifferent as to whether
its hidden reasons and actions are understandable to man or not.” - Galileo Galilei

In the worldview of the Copernican heliocentrism, the Kepler's laws of planetary motion can illustrate with mathematical logic that orbits are elliptical, and these laws have had thus invalidated the postulation of circular planetary orbits. Despite logical analysis with mathematical principle can invalidate or disprove with the know-what proposition of its validated a posteriori postulation, it cannot prove its a priori posits for its claims of fact; it is a fact in modern astronomy that the Sun is not the center of the universe as was believed with the Copernican heliocentrism.

An incorrect hardcore belief would insidiously corrupt all its perceptions that are perceived in its delusion.

“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” - Richard Feynman

A self-reference analysis could fundamentally create a dichotomy in description logic that would be jointly exhaustive to infinitely regress in its manifold of deductive reasoning for everything it attempts to analyse. With circular reasonings, it therefore could irrefutably explain everything in its premise, and infallibly conclude anything in its subjective reality with its tautology for asserting its belief system.

One can persistently fool himself in a delusion that can paradoxically but consistently asserts his fallacious belief, and therefore becomes biased for believing what is not true.

See in an external link for a topic on "Delusional People See the World Through Their Mind's Eye" for the findings of behavioral and neuroimaging experiments on healthy people who harbor delusions.

“With lame logic and moot reasoning that asserts ambiguity,
we can persistently fool ourselves.” - UVS inspired -

With the various postulations for a finite (closed) or an infinite (open) universe, the universe is or is not filled with an all-pervasive physical entity of aether corpuscles, integrated with various combinations of posit for variant or invariant dimensions of space, variant or invariant dimension of time, therefore in such deviations, there are sixteen possible paradigms for the nature of objective reality.

Each of these paradigms with its posits in its conceptual framework, can be the basis for its hypotheses of empirically observed natural phenomena. And at its best, it can logically, coherently, quantitatively, and consistently explicate its propositional knowledge of empirical observed natural phenomena in its worldview.

Any independently concluded a posteriori proposition for any of the above sixteen paradigms in its own worldview of the universe, at its best, it can be logically valid for the physical laws or axioms of its a priori proposition, which could be consistently proven in its worldview with systemic negation by self-referencing with all sorts of circular reasoning.

With logical tautology, anything can be deemed possible by its self fulfilling prophecy that asserts with its validated logical reasoning. It can never prove anything with the posits for its premise, which at the first place is a belief postulated for proving its predication with the logic construes in its premise.

Knowing how to make it work is one thing, how it actually works is another issue, and what you think on how it fundamentally works could be another story.

Any theory extrapolated from a foundation that was based on an incorrect paradigm would be fallacious at its best, this is despite its valid conclusions deduced in its abstract can be analytically true, and can also pragmatically work.

“Without realizing the cognitive paradoxes that negate to cause delusions in the observable universe,
the paradoxical effect of nature has had fooled even the very intelligent people.” - UVS inspired -

If obsessed with logically consistent and coherent a posteriori propositions for a deterministic theory, axiomatically established on any of the paradigms with the rigors for precise quantitative predictions, and ignores qualitative evaluation for the a priori propositions in its paradigm, thus, in the subjective reality of its scientific model with its validated quantitative predictions of the empirically observed natural phenomena in exact science, one could persistently fool himself in all sorts of delusion with all sorts of artificial cognitive paradox.

The artificial cognitive paradoxes of such deterministic theories, caused their physical paradoxes as a result of their fallaciously contrived a priori posits that render all sorts of science delusion.

Such delusions in the worldviews of their scientific models, are stemmed from the cognitive paradox fallacies of their a priori proposition with all sorts of self-referencing in their fallacies of definition. These would render the illusions of knowledge in their pragmatic theories of truth with all sorts of circular reasonings, speciously validated by their self-fulfilling prophecies that assert their fallacious a priori posits with the pragmatically workable quantitative predictions of their a posteriori knowledge.

The foundations for such spurious deterministic theories, established with all sorts of assumptions for their a priori posits in their belief systems of the objective reality, are validated with their logical interpretations of empirical observed natural phenomena in their realms of subjective reality.

A mathematically proven deterministic theory that is analytically and logically deduced to be valid with its hard science in its subjective reality, although could be made unassailable by substantiating with deductive proof that has true value, its conclusion is merely analytically true for its a priori propositions in the premise of its a priori posits.

A fallaciously validated a priori proposition, causes the artificial cognitive paradox of its empirical observed natural phenomenon.

A fallaciously endorsed posit of a scientific model, is the mother of all its science delusions.

See the UVS topic on "Critiques of the scientific method" for further elaboration on the science delusions as a result of fallaciously endorsed posits.

“Intrinsically, a quantitative proof of a scientific theory, is not the proof for the scientific theory.” - UVS inspired -

“Any law of physics that suffers foundational crisis with any of its posits,
would paradoxically distort its perception of reality.” - UVS inspired -

“Physics should adopt the qualitative studies of natural phenomena as the primary discipline
for perceiving natural phenomena, and then their quantitative studies follow as
the secondary discipline for developing their a posteriori knowledge.” - UVS inspired -

“Without qualitative proof, it cannot be certain that
the quantitative proof of a scientific theory is true.” - UVS inspired -

“Despite quantitative research with truth value is an essential aspect for scientific works,
qualitative analysis must precede quantitative analysis.” - UVS inspired -

If obsessed with any belief system that the actualities of natural phenomena in objective reality, can be established merely with conceptual metaphors in metascience that are logically coherent and comprehensive for its successful explanations for the wonders of nature, it could lead to all sorts of fallacious assertions in its subjective reality, reified by all sorts of self-fulfilling prophecy and circular reasoning with what it postulates.

The propositions of such interpretations in their fallacy of misplaced concreteness, can be logically established with philosophical rigors and precise quantitative predictions in all sorts of delusion, construed with all sorts of artificial cognitive paradox for the perceptions of natural wonders in the belief systems of their subjective realities.

“By denying scientific principles, one may maintain any paradox.” - Galileo Galilei

A fallacy of its metaphoric proposition derived in its indoctrinated belief system, which can render its illusion of knowing in its delusion, could be logically stemmed from the fallacious postulation of its conceptual metaphor.

A fallaciously endorsed conceptual metaphor of a metascience, is the mother of all its fallacies.

Delusion is the mother of all its illusions of knowledge.

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” - Stephen Hawking

See an externally linked topic on "Allegory of the Cave" that elaborates on obscured perceptions by perceiving reality with shadows in its subjective reality.

See the UVS subtopic on "The apparent retrograde motion of a planet" that illustrates a fallacious conceptual metaphor of geocentricism that incorrectly concluded the actuality of a typical type of apparent observation.

“In the paradoxes of universal delusion,
advocating the subliminally negated truths,
is inevitably a revolutionary act.” - UVS inspired -

.
The UVS’ philosophy of science

In the philosophy of science of UVS, the entire structure of the observable universe is formed in a topsy-turvy vortical universe, it is thus intrinsically imbued with a paradoxical effect of nature. All its harmonically resonated manifestations of natural phenomena, are therefore inherited with its paradoxical characteristic that could manifest in topsy-turvy manners.

Evidently, the observable universe is overwhelmingly paradoxical.

Peculiarly, in a typical topsy-turvy manner, the paradoxical effect of nature delusively and subliminally manifest all sorts of natural cognitive paradox in the apparent observations of the paradoxically rendered natural phenomena.

In a paradoxically observed universe, to resolve the natural cognitive paradoxes of the apparent observations, it requires to invoke transcendental perceptions for perceiving the underlying structures and working mechanisms to evaluate the paradoxically rendered natural phenomena, so as to elucidate all sorts of delusion that are being rendered by the paradoxical effect of nature with its subliminal natural negations manifested in a typical topsy-turvy manner.

“With the visualizations on the underlying structures and mechanisms of natural phenomena,
these intuitively induce the resolutions for the revelations on their actualities.” - UVS inspired -

By elucidating delusions, it induces the resolutions on actualities.

Heuristically, the UVS research methodology with the coherently grounded transcendental perspectivalism in the paradigm shift of the UVS model, could effectively resolve the naturally caused cognitive paradoxes of paradoxically rendered natural phenomena by elucidating their delusions with their inductive resolutions, and thus induces the resolutions on the actualities of the apparently observed natural phenomena.

“Enlightenment on the paradoxical effect of nature enlightens.” - UVS inspired -

Science without enlightenment renders hypotheses in despairs with obscured perceptions of natural phenomena in their postulated subjective realities for pragmatism.

Science with enlightenment renders truths in awes with transcendental perceptions of natural phenomena in the realism of objective reality for their actualities.

See the UVS subtopic on "The epistemic process and methodology of the UVS research" for further elaborations.

Note: The UVS research with its methodologies and its philosophy of science, were independently conceived without the prior knowledge of the Age of Enlightenment at all. Despite some works of the UVS closely resemble the works of the earlier philosophers who influenced the Enlightenment, such as those works of Descartes, Francis Bacon, Locke, and Spinoza, UVS distinctly and fundamentally has its uniqueness in its own ways. Nevertheless, the treatise of UVS as it is now presented, has had severally incorporated the notions and terminologies of epistemology, empiricism, and paradigm shift at a later stage for dressing up the presentations of UVS. The UVS topics are also furnished to enrich with the later developments of the most influential publication of the Enlightenment: the Encyclopédie.

.
A qualitatively refined scientific method of UVS - The UVS' theory of knowledge

“The more you see, how strange nature behaves, the harder it is for us, to make a model, that explains
even how the most simple phenomena works. Theoretical physics has given up on this pursuit.” - Richard Fenyman

As a result of the paradoxical effect of nature that subliminally manifests in a topsy-turvy vortical universe, many natural phenomena in the observable universe are being negated to render delusions with cognitive paradoxes for their observations.

Thus, to establish the knowledge of any natural phenomenon for its actuality in the objective reality, it is necessary to cross-examine its propositions of knowledge with a multidisciplinary approach, which involves and overlaps the trilogy of metaphysics, physical science, and theoretical physics.

In the paradigm shift of UVS, as a qualitatively refined scientific method for checking the wholeness and integrity of any propositional knowledge that predicates the actuality of a natural phenomenon, the trilogy rigorously evaluates the predications with metaphysics for its ontological proposition, with physical science for its a priori proposition, and with theoretical physics for its a posteriori proposition.

See externally linked topics on "The Tripartite Theory of Knowledge", and "Scientific realism" for references.

Firstly, for its evaluation in metaphysics, it would require to invoke the hypothetical construct for illustrating the underlying structure and mechanism of the natural phenomenon that are coherently based on the UVS model. This process with its coherently established hypothesis and discernable systemic evidence, evaluates the ontological proposition of the natural phenomenon with metaphysical rigors for its belief in its theory of justification; this is the process for coherence theory of truth for its ontological actuality in the nature of reality.

See the “Metaphysical inspirations of UVS" for some concepts of UVS that emphasized on the essential metaphysical aspects of UVS.

Secondly, for its evaluation in physical science, it would require to invoke the transcendental perspective for its apparent observation of the natural phenomenon with the epistemic process of the UVS methodology in its conceptual frameworks of UVS. This process with its observational evidence and justified a priori posits, evaluates the a priori proposition on the predicated actuality of the natural phenomenon with qualitative rigors for its immutable truth in its coherently grounded transcendental perspectivalism; this is the process for correspondence theory of truth for its qualitative actuality in the objective reality.

See the “Philosophical inspirations of UVS” for the excerpts of some all-encompassing sculptural ideas that were inspired in the conceptual frameworks of UVS.

And thirdly, for its evaluation in theoretical physics, it would require to invoke the scientific modelling of its hypothesis. This process with its empirical evidence and evidently verified or proven a priori proposition that is proposed with its justified a priori posits, evaluates the a posteriori proposition on the predicated actuality of the natural phenomenon with quantitative rigors for its justification in its quantitative research; this is the process for pragmatic theory of truth for its quantitative actuality in its emulated reality.

In a nutshell, this is the theory of knowledge in the UVS research for cross-examining the propositions of knowledge with these criteria of truth in the multidisciplinary approach. And this is the basis for the epistemological paradigm shift of UVS as its scientific revolution for advancing our knowledge of natural phenomena and the universe.

Despite the inductive resolutions of natural phenomena in the UVS research are mostly in their qualitative forms, many of the evidently verified and proven a priori propositions with their elucidated delusions and resolved cognitive paradoxes, unequivocally are the well justified true beliefs that are free of Gettier problems. And thus by themselves, the predications of these verified and proven a priori propositions, are already significant contributions as the a priori knowledge for the actualities of the studied natural phenomena.

“I have often made the hypothesis that ultimately physics will not require a mathematical statement,
that in the end the machinery will be revealed and the laws will turn out to be simple.” - Richard Fenyman

Nonetheless, the followings examples are some significant revolutionary discoveries that have had applied the qualitatively refined scientific method of UVS that are completed with quantitative analyses for substantiating their a priori propositional knowledge, thus established their a posteriori propositional knowledge with their well justified true beliefs, and therefore extend the knowledge of the natural phenomena in their accurateness with quantitative precisions:

• Cometary outburst
  This research of UVS applied quantitative analyses for its inductive resolution on the barycenters and Lagrangian points of significant Solar System objects, so as to pinpoint the hypothesized energetic point sources that could cause the events of cometary outburst.

• The orbits of natural satellites
  This research of UVS involves the quantitative analysis of Dr. Vladimir B. Ginzburg on "The Universal Helicola", which quantitatively illustrates the spiral motions of orbiting celestial objects.

• The interactions of spheroidal pushed-in gravity in superior and inferior conjunction
  This research of UVS involves the quantitative analysis of Dr. Dr Yongfeng Yang on "Motions of Observable Structures Ruled by Hierarchical Two-body Gravitation in the Universe", which can quantitatively illustrate three-body interactions of celestial objects with their approximated barycenter motions.

• The axial precession of the Earth
  This research of UVS involves the quantitative analysis of Karl-Heinz Homann on "Sirius Transit Data", presented by Professor Douglas P. Hube from the Department of Physics, University of Alberta.

See the UVS topics on "The structure of the observable universe", "UVS worldview", "The vortical universe model of UVS", "Significant revolutionary discoveries of UVS", "Delusively inversed illusions of nature", and "Critiques of the scientific method" for more insights of the UVS research.

“The entire universe is apparently paradoxical.” - UVS inspired -

“Enlightenment on the paradoxical effect of nature enlightens.” - UVS inspired -

“By knowing the paradoxical effect of nature, it enlightens on
how nature does wonders in a delusory inverse manner.” - UVS inspired -

.
The functions of logic gates with Boolean logic - An artificial synergetic

To relate with an example of systemic negation that is constructed by artificial synergetic for its logical basis, one can explore the synergetic functions of logic gates with Boolean logic in the field of digital electronics, which are involved with modern technologies in devising of electronic products through designing and making of digital circuits.

The propositional logic of a digital system, is absolutely subjected to the tautology of its logical construct that could incorporate all sorts of logical negation for the system to pragmatically work for serving its purpose, and thus its logic can only be valid within the worldview of its logical construct.

The truth tables (figure 1) listed below are the outcomes of its logical operators (Logic gates, figure 2) in the order of AND gate, OR gate, NOT x OR y gate and XOR gate, are some of the Boolean algebraic functions that can also be represented with other logic gate equivalents in other configurations (figure 3), or in Venn diagrams (figure 4).

In binary numbers the function for AND and OR gate are quite easy to understand, these are very similar to the manner it is used in common languages. However, for a complex logical operator such as the XOR logic gate, its logic function is apparently counterintuitive, in a straight forward logical sense when a set of sequential inputs is applied, it apparently has a counterintuitive set of logical outcomes through its function of logical negation, which is obtained with a logic gate configuration comprises of universal gates arranged for the specific negated function.

This is a category of digital logic gates that implements exclusive disjunction, and can be physically constructed in different configurations using only NAND or NOR gates. NAND and NOR gates are universal gates that can be used to derive 16 possible Boolean algebraic functions. NAND and NOR logic gates are the two pillars of logic in digital electronics, in that all other types of Boolean logic gates that each has a specific digital logic function (i.e., AND, OR, NOT, XOR, XNOR, etc), can be created from a suitable network of only NAND or NOR gates.

In a scenario of one who does not understand the tautology, or the negations used in the propositional logic with De Morgan's laws for a systematical model constructed in Boolean logic, which is derived with the truth tables for those logic gates. Be it ignorance, inability to understand it, or refused to blindly follow in a religious manner for the truth tables on logic gate functions, therefore uses only limited types of logic gate that are comprehended, and omits those logic gates with complex logical negations that apparently have contradicting functions, or are counterintuitive and therefore are not correctly understood. In such manners the attempts for development of digital circuit to arrive to a solution for a digital logic application, is obviously a lame approach. The electronic system devised in such simplified manners, would have crippled functionalities, and its logical workability is bound to breakdown under certain logical operating circumstances.

“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” - Albert Einstein

On another hand, without understanding the applied logical tautologies and negations in the digital system to troubleshoot a logic circuit of an electronic device, is also a lame approach. With moot reasoning this would cause misinterpretations for the functions of circuitry unwarily with partial understanding and limited knowledge of logical operators, and therefore could only do guesswork in a trial and error process, and thus makes all sorts of fallacious deduction with a belief system of his own delusion.

“You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created.” - Albert Einstein

In another scenario, one who can design an electronic logic circuit according to an application requirement, accomplished by using appropriate logic gates based on faith in the truth tables under their known limited circumstances. And through this logic circuit development method, one can effectively apply a logical solution efficiently for any application in digital electronics. One does not need to know the complex details for the logic gate used, as in whatever logic gate configuration that constructs the required logic gate as an end product, nor the p-n junctions in the assembly of semiconductors as integrated circuit that forms the mechanism to trigger the function of the logic gate. This is an example of religiously incorporating a belief system in a process for its technical development, and can efficiently arrive to an effective and workable solution for its system application based on a systematical model, which is merely based on the understood logical functions for the logic gates used.

However, this approach is based on faith religiously in a belief system that within known parameters, one can productively conceive solutions for digital circuit designs regardless of its fundamental working principles on higher or lower level. On higher level the working principle is concerning the systematical model derived in Boolean algebra and the details of its logic gate configuration, on lower level it is concerning the physics of semiconductors. Anyone in this category although may know how to pragmatically develop any electronic logic circuit effectively and efficiently, but he can be blind to the fundamental working principles that are involved on the higher and lower levels.

In digital logic applications by religiously based on the truth tables for the developments of digital electronic devices, the applications can be boundless within the limits of digital logic functions, which are within the capabilities of semiconductor devices, available resources, and as much as one can imagine.

“Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere.” - Albert Einstein

However, if one is ignorance of the fundamental working principles that governs digital electronics, and therefore does not have the necessary knowledge that are required for research and development works to materialize a digital device for attaining some crucial logical functions in extreme circumstances, such as in sub-zero temperature environments, or extreme vibration situations, henceforth, any ingenious design or development of logic circuit device in an act of blind faith could be unrealistic and impractical. This would be so when the design is conceived beyond the known capabilities and properties of digital electronics that the required logical functions could not be pragmatically implemented.

In the digital logic sense, applying logic without religiously following an adopted logical function model based on faith is lame, and it is blind to follow the logical function model religiously without really knowing the underlying working principles, but has faith in it just because it usually works for serving its purpose.

“I maintain that cosmic religiousness is the strongest
and most noble driving force of scientific research.” - Albert Einstein

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” - Albert Einstein

Some resonated remarks received that are relevant to this Universal Vortical Singularity (aka UVS) topic:

'... a brilliant treatise that credibly extends modern human scientific knowledge and awareness of "How The Universe And Everything In It Truly Works".'
- Dr. Wayne Nowland, physicist, researcher, philosopher and author, planned and launched Australia's first AUSSAT communications satellite system, Feb 2014.

“We took the imaginary point singularity and made a dot.
. We took the dot and made a line.
. We took the line and made an angle.
. We took the angle and made a ramp.
. We took the ramp and made a screw.
. We took the screw and made a vortex.
. We took the vortex and made a torus.
. We took the torus and made a dot.
. We took the dot and indeed we see imagination rise its head.” - Graham Burnett (aka G_burnett of TOEQuest Forum), 10th August 2009

“Objectively speaking, even in its present mostly qualitative form, UVS makes a significant contribution to the discovery of spiral nature of the universe. No person holds a complete truth about the nature of the universe, and UVS brings attention of scientists to an interesting path of solving this very challenging problem.”, “With great respect, Vladimir.”
- Dr. Vladimir B. Ginzburg, mathematician, accomplished scientist, author of "Prime Elements of Ordinary Matter, Dark Matter & Dark Energy", "Spiral Grain of the Universe" and several other renowned books such as "Metallurgical Design of Flat Rolled Steels" for applied science, and holds over fifty U.S. and foreign patents, 28th Jun 2009.

“I totally agree with the science you present.”
- Dean Ward, a very knowledgeable researcher with in-depth knowledge in Tensegrity, Electric Universe and Aether Physics Model,18th Sep 2008.

“UVS is the future of science.”
- Allen Barrow (aka PoPpAScience of TOEQuest Forum), 12th Dec 2008.

“This aspect of our reality I feel very strongly about, how we can study and except something that is very distinct, as you show on your web page, and yet it only comes to light because it interacts with something that we can hold in a test tube. The "Vortex" is strictly a "mechanism" that is an "Ideal" in nature, and not a substance. The fact that something so dominate in our reality as the "Vortex", and yet so "Ideal" in nature, as to not be held in a test tube, shows that there is more than just a physical aspect to our Universe. The interaction of Mass and Speed equals Ideals.” - Allen Barrow (aka PoPpAScience of TOEQuest Forum), 1st Apr 2008.

~ This section on "The functions of logic gates with Boolean logic" in this web page, was written in appreciation to David Appleton for his very immersive lectures on semiconductor device, digital logic, and as my mentor.

~ With special thanks to Allen Barrow for sharing his insight on: The "Vortex" is strictly a "mechanism" that is an "Ideal" in nature, and not a substance.

~ With special thanks to Dean Ward (aka junglelord) for his support of UVS, his posts on Synergetics in Thunderbolts Forum for a thread on "Tensegrity Creates Matter!", and his assertion with "Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated".

~ With credit to Allen Barrow for his insight that a form such as a vortex that human perceive it to be physically real, is merely an idea in nature, is formed by fictitious force interactions as a "something of nothing". Excerpt: "If you walk into any of the many vortices that we see everyday and scoop into the effect with a test tube, you will not find any something that can be seen or studied that could be called a vortex particle. Yet we can see with our own eyes, the effect the vortex has on the material, that becomes involved as both the cause and effect, of this something that (apparently) is a nothing (Paradoxical Vortex)."

19th June 2007

References and links:
Science, Faith, And Belief systems - SCIENCE 2.0
Proof (truth) - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Argument from authority - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Argumentum ad populum - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fallacy - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Natural phenomenon - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Truth - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Abstract - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hypotheses - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Belief - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Law of thought - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Logic - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Science - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Self-fulfilling prophecy - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Inference - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Philosophy - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Validity - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fallacies - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Paradox - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Probability - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Causality - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Natural language - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Argumentation theory - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Conceptual framework - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tautology (rhetoric) - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hypothetical constructs - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Local reference frame - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Description logic - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deductive logic - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Scientific theory - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A hundred proofs the Earth is not a Globe - Flat Earthism
Flat Earth - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ancient navigation techniques - PRISM; Arizona State University
Affirming the consequent - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Junk science - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Argumentum verbosium - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Self-reference - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Delusional People See the World Through Their Mind's Eye - livescience.com
Heliocentrism - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Copernican heliocentrism - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dichotomy - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Space - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Time - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Paradigms - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reality - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Physical law - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Axiom - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A priori and a posteriori - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Negation - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Circular reasoning - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Exact science - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Physical paradox - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Conceptual metaphors - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fallacy of misplaced concreteness - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Metasciene - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fallacies of definition - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hard science - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Truth value - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Philosophy of science - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Observable universe - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Heuristic - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Transcendental perspectivalism - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The objective reality - From Joan Caccaro of Griffith University
Allegory of the Cave - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Myth - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Epistemology - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Criteria of truth - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Scientific hypothesis - ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA
Knowledge - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Multidisciplinary approach - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Metaphysics - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ontology - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Physical science - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Tripartite Theory of Knowledge - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Theory of justification - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Scientific realism - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hypothesis - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Observation - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Immutable truths - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Scientific modelling - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Empirical evidence - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Scientific revolution - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Theoretical physics - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Propositional knowledge - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Coherence theory of truth - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Correspondence theory of truth - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quantitative research - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pragmatic theory of truth - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Justified true belief - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Conventional wisdom - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gettier problem - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Universal Helicola - By Dr. Vladimir Ginzburg
Motions of Observable Structures Ruled by Hierarchical Two-body Gravitation in the Universe - By Dr Yongfeng Yang of Bureau of Water Resources of Shandong Province.
Logic gates - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Boolean logic - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tautology - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
De Morgan's laws - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Digital electronics - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
XOR logic gate - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Logical negation - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
NAND - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
NOR - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Exclusive disjunction - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
16 possible boolean algebraic functions - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
p-n junctions - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Semiconductors - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Integrated circuit - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Boolean algebra - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Achilles and the Tortoise - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Parmenides's - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Logical paradox - Logical Paradox.info
Rectilinear motion - Connexions; Sunil Kumar Singh
Trial and error - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Artificial intelligence - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wave - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Entity - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Matter- From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Potential different- From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Energy - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Electrical force - Physics 2000
Electromagnetic field - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Universe - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Luminiferous aether - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Human - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thought - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cognition - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Awareness - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Consciousness - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Intuition - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Intelligence - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Organism - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Organs - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ecology - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Evolution - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Self-evolution - SEE Self Evolution Education
Image of Flat Earth - Lock Haven University of Pennsylvania
Images of truth tables, logic gates and Venn diagrams - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

counter was reset on 02/02/2010

Disclaimers: The treatise of Universal Vortical Singularity (UVS) in its epistemological paradigm shift, is fundamentally unconventional. Its hypotheses based on a generally unheard-of UVS model, bound to have shortcomings, loose ends, and errors. Many details and assumptions in its propositions have yet to be further researched, probed, evaluated, validated, or verified. Its implicit explanations are for casual understanding of the UVS topics presented in the UVS worldview, so if any term or statement is offensive in any manner or from whatsoever perspectives, is most regretted. Links to other sites do not imply endorsement of their contents; apply appropriate discretion whenever necessary. For whatsoever reasons, at times the viewing for some of its contents could helplessly experience text corruptions, disorganized content layouts, missing images, failed animations, and some external links simply had ceased to exist.

Viewing tips: Despite the presentations of the UVS web pages has went through much accommodation for their viewings on smart phones, they are not very friendly to smaller low resolution mobile devices. It is therefore recommended to access and view the UVS contents with a system device that at least has a larger high definition screen, such as a larger smart phones, an android tablet, or an iPad. For the best experiences, use a MS Windows based PC or computer system to browse with Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox that is Java enabled for its interactive applets. (Such as Java Applet of Moiré pattern, JPL Small-Body Database Browser, and Planet Finder.)

Copyright information: This UVS web site is for non-profit purposes and not for commercial use. Wherever possible, direct credits to the origins of the works or images were provided, be it on fair dealings, with explicit permission from their owners, or the materials were believed to be from the public domain.