- #1
DoctorSatori
- 8
- 1
Hello, my stage name here is DoctorSatori. I'm a scientific generalist and self-made philosopher with advanced degrees (and a few publications) in engineering mechanics. My research was in low-level energy/information across expanding radial boundaries [Navier Stokes conductive boundary equations and corresponding experimental runs [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00191691].
My Union Of Opposites Website [http://www.unionofopposites.com] gives information on my experiments and work experiences in predictive (low energy) mechanics]. Just as the solution for a radially expanding boundary in my experiments relies on two mathematical solutions (one on either side of the boundary), every change seems to lead to some sort of relational solution, rather than a purely objective one.
So my approach to the existence of a problem must necessarily be relational (subjective--for a change between any two systems/boundaries/objects) rather than purely objective. In other words, it makes a difference who's looking at, or involved in, an event.
My Union Of Opposites Website [http://www.unionofopposites.com] gives information on my experiments and work experiences in predictive (low energy) mechanics]. Just as the solution for a radially expanding boundary in my experiments relies on two mathematical solutions (one on either side of the boundary), every change seems to lead to some sort of relational solution, rather than a purely objective one.
So my approach to the existence of a problem must necessarily be relational (subjective--for a change between any two systems/boundaries/objects) rather than purely objective. In other words, it makes a difference who's looking at, or involved in, an event.
Last edited by a moderator:
