Questions on theory

May 24, 1988

1103 15th Ave. S.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55414

Dear Dewey,

Thank you for having Jan send me copies of section 2 and Section 3 of the Outline of your Reciprocal System of physical theory. They are of inestimable value to me, I discover, the more time I have to spend with them.

My time for study recently has been more limited than usual, working with Phil Porter, Ed Navarro and Bill Mitchel to put out Vol. XVI, No. 2, Winter 1987-1988 issue of Reciprocity and preparing with Rainer Huck and Robin Sims the details of our 1988 ISUS, Inc. Summer Conference in your fair city of Portland. The Librarian, Ms June Wostel, of Gregory Heights Branch Library has graciously granted our request to reserve the Library Meeting Room, the place where we met in 1985, as the Meeting Place for our 1988 Conference. Robin Sims has reserved accommodations for us at the Jade Tree Motel. Robin is back from Australia and Rainer and Robin are planning the Conference Program. I’m working now to initiate production and assembly of Vol. XVII, No.1, Spring, 1988 issue of Reciprocity, which, I hope, we can circulate in June with more news of our Summer Conference to add to the publicity of the Conference appearing in Vol. XVI, No.2.

Returning to my studies, I wish to ask you some more questions about your theory.

  1. ISUS members currently as well as earlier have been expressing an urgent interest in learning more about the mathematics appropriate for using the Reciprocal System to revalue and unify the science of physics. My own inclination is to postulate that the physical universe as a whole and in all its parts is entirely finite. Consequently, since finite mathematics is one of humankind’s most highly developed forms of knowledge, we don’t have to reinvent the wheel; it is enough for us to study and learn what the mathematicians have to teach us about counting and computing and computing finite groups of the Reciprocal System. For more on this see Ed Navarro’s Letter to the Editor.
    Enclosed is a mathematical note of David Halprin about the Larson Number System, submitted for publication in Reciprocity. I have to write a discursive introduction to it. Although I do not quite comprehend his equation for computing reciprocals from integers, I have faith in David’s arithmetic. I have written to him to learn the denotations of K,A,B,C and r. Do you understand what David is trying to say? How would you propose to set up an algebra for teaching about computing reciprocals from integers and vice versa for calculating spin combinations constituting atoms, etc.? I’m aiming to print David’s note in vol. XVII, No. 1 as a follow-up to his note in Vol. XV
  2. Do you, Dewey, consider photons to be primary motions as well as space-time progression translations? If so what other motions, if any, do you consider to be primary?
  3. In the Reciprocal System is the physical universe conceived to be made entirely from motions at unit speed, that is identical units of motion?
  4. Does the R.S. contradict the prevalent view among physicists that physics is in some fundamental sense timeless?
  5. How does a progression differ from a succession of jumps?
  6. In what sense is space-time progression continuous?
    In what sense is space-time progression discontinuous?
  7. How does a succession of motions relate to and differ from a combination of motions?
  8. If the physical universe is finite, then there must exist a maximum speed in the physical universe, must there not? It is not unit speed, since the speed of cosmic entities exceeds unit speed? Is the speed of some cosmic entity maximum and if you know theoretically what it is, please tell me??
  9. Do you challenge Einstein when he claims: “the distinction between past, present and future is only an illusion, even if a stubborn one”?
  10. Do you agree with Bertrand Russell that “to realize the unimportance of time is the gate of wisdom” and that “it is a mere accident that we have no memory of the future”?
  11. Do you dispute Percy Bridgman’s opinion that “in any operational view of the meaning of natural concepts the motion of time must be used as a primitive concept, which cannot be analysed but must be accepted so that it is meaningless to speak of a reversal of the direction of time”?
  12. I think you consider a living organism to be a material system (body) under the governance of a cosmic control unit (a psyche, mind). Is the body, including the brain constituted by motions in space and is the cosmic control unit constituted by motions in time?
  13. I think that you also consider a human being to be under the governance of another non-physical control unit (the human spirit). I wish to learn in what sense this control unit is non-physical. Does non-physical imply motionless, spaceless, timeless or in some other sense beyond time and space and motion?
  14. I think of the Creator mentioned in the Declaration that all women and men are created equal and independent in ultimate human worth as possibly a spirit without body, parts or passions? What do you think about the possible existence of disembodied spirits?

I have many more questions to ask, but will stop here, because I realize that have you many more good uses of your time besides answering questions and I have other things to do also. I look forward to meeting with you and Dorothy again in August and meanwhile Winnie and I send our best wishes for the well-being of you and yours.


International Society of  Unified Science
Reciprocal System Research Society

Salt Lake City, UT 84106

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer