|
No Form Action Theory |
|
|
No Form Action Theory |
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4318-2670
According to the no form motive force action, the three no form actions can be mutually transformed. This only provides the possibility of their mutual transformation, but another question arises: how do they transform? The method still needs to be sought from the no form action itself.
Since the basis for the mutual transformation of the three no form actions is the identity of no form, and since they are transforming under this identity, the transformation mode between the three no form actions should have a united nature. Specifically:
(1) When the manifestation action transforms into the isolation action, it requires the participation of the motive force action.
(2) When the manifestation action transforms into the motive force action, it requires the participation of the isolation action.
(3) When the isolation action transforms into the motive force action, it requires the participation of the manifestation action.
(4) When the isolation action transforms into the manifestation action, it requires the participation of the motive force action.
(5) When the motive force action transforms into the isolation action, it requires the participation of the manifestation action.
(6) When the motive force action transforms into the manifestation action, it requires the participation of the isolation action.
In other words, any transformation between these actions is not a direct binary process. The transformation of one no form action into another requires the participation of the third no form action. This united nature among the three no form actions is called "no form united transformation". In fact, this no form united transformation has been used in the previous sections. The identity of no form implies that the three no form actions are indivisible. Therefore, when one no form action transforms into another, it cannot be separated from the third no form action. The third no form action can provide the motive force, basis, or conditions for the transformation. This united nature of transformation stems from the identity of no form. It is precisely because the three are essentially identical that it's impossible for one action to be separated from the other two. This reflects the intrinsic, indivisible connection among the three no form actions, as well as their completeness. This united transformation mechanism clarifies the mode of transformation between no form actions, enhancing the logic and operability of the theory.
There is a special case of this no form united transformation. For instance, consider three entities (a, b, c), which may or may not be the same entity. Let A represent the manifestation action of a, B represent the isolation action of b, and C represent the motive force action of c. They can transform into each other, but A transforming into B doesn't necessarily require the motive force action C; it might require a motive force action D, which is not among the three. However, we are focusing on another situation: where C and D are the same, meaning the transformation between A and B requires C; the transformation between A and C requires B; and the transformation between B and C requires A. We call this situation the "no form integrated transformation" among A, B, and C, or simply say that A, B, and C are (or constitute) a "no form integrated transformation". In other words, to determine if A, B, and C form a no form integrated transformation, they must simultaneously satisfy the following six no form united transformations:
1. A transforming into B requires C
2. A transforming into C requires B
3. B transforming into C requires A
4. B transforming into A requires C
5. C transforming into A requires B
6. C transforming into B requires A
No form united transformation is the most basic transformation mode among the three no form actions. It reflects the identity among no form actions. No form integrated transformation is a special case, referring to the direct united transformation among the three actions A, B, and C. This indicates that the three actions of no form not only transform based on the principle of identity but also directly define and support each other in the process of no form integrated transformation. This direct transformation model shows that each action is both a necessary condition and a result of the transformation of other actions. Each action is both a product and a cause of other actions, forming a closed, self-sustaining system of causal cycles. This cycle emphasizes the indivisibility and intrinsic unity of no form actions. The relationship of this no form integrated transformation is not only interdependent but also mutually supportive. Thus, it forms a unified relationship that is both interdependent and mutually supportive.
The following are some examples:
1) This no form united transformation can be used in many aspects, such as human psychology. For instance, when a person is very passionate (motive force), to express it, they need a certain mode of isolation (such as singing, work, etc.). When a person has many ideas and knowledge (isolation), to have the power to act, they need to perform or demonstrate to others, which gives them the motive force for practice. No form united transformation can describe not only human psychological activities but also any process.
Let's analyze the example:
Scenario 1: A person full of passion wants to express themselves.
No form united transformation:
Passion (motive force): The initial state is a strong emotion or passion, which acts as the motive force.
Expression (manifestation): The passion needs to be manifested or expressed in some way.
Mode of Expression (isolation): To express the passion, people choose a specific form or method of expression, such as singing, writing, or painting. This choice isolates the passion into a specific form of manifestation.
Scenario 2: A person with many ideas and knowledge wants to transform them into practical motive force.
No form united transformation:
Knowledge/Ideas (isolation): This is the initial state, representing the knowledge and ideas that the individual already possesses. These are isolated and static.
Performance/Demonstration (manifestation): This is the act of transforming knowledge and ideas into a perceptible form, such as showcasing, sharing, or explaining to others.
Practical motive force (motive force): This is the result brought about by the performance/demonstration, such as gaining recognition, appreciation, or inspiration, which in turn stimulates the individual's motive force for action.
2) A tree seed contains life information and is an isolated entity. When it needs to take root, sprout, and grow into a big tree, this is the manifestation of this life information, requiring fertilizer, sunlight, and other motive force elements. This is an example of no form united transformation.
The seed itself represents an isolated entity, containing life information and growth potential. Sunlight and nutrients (motive force) provide energy and drive, while the growth process reveals the inherent life information of the seed. This process is the external manifestation of the seed's internal potential, the manifestation of life information. External factors like fertilizer and sunlight provide the motive force needed for the seed's growth. These motive force elements interact with the life force within the seed, driving the transformation from seed to tree.
According to the theory of no form action, potential should be explained as follows: Potential means that for isolation to manifest, motive force is needed. Potential is viewed as a state of isolation, containing possibilities for change and development, but the realization of these possibilities requires motive force. To realize and embody this potential, motive force is necessary. This explanation aligns well with the theory of no form action because it connects isolation and manifestation: it establishes a clear link between the isolation action (the seed as a unique entity) and the manifestation action (the seed's life potential becoming reality). This connection can only be completed with the participation of motive force action. Motive force (sunlight and nutrients) plays an indispensable and crucial role in driving the transformation from potential to reality. This explains why potential can become reality.
3) Concepts (isolation), reasoning (motive force), and judgment (manifestation) can transform into each other. This can be divided into six situations.
(1) Isolation transforming into manifestation: For an isolated concept, to know what it is (i.e., to manifest a concept), reasoning (motive force) is needed.
An isolated concept has not been manifested. To manifest a concept, we need to reason about it. Reasoning can help us understand the meaning of the concept, thus manifesting the concept.
For example, we know the concept of "table", but we don't know what "table" is. At this point, we can use reasoning to understand the meaning of "table". We can reason that "a table is a piece of furniture with legs, a top, and a surface structure used for placing objects". In this way, we have manifested the concept of "table".
(2) Isolation transforming into motive force: For an isolated concept, to reason and analyze it, we necessarily need to know what it is ("what it is" is the manifestation of a concept).
An isolated concept is not motive force-ized. To reason about and analyze a concept, we need to know what this concept is.
For example, to reason about and analyze the concept of "table", we need to know what "table" is. If we don't know what "table" is, we cannot reason about or analyze it.
(3) Motive force transforming into manifestation: When making a judgment through reasoning, we are certainly reasoning about concepts and also judging concepts.
Reasoning refers to the process of drawing conclusions based on premises. In the reasoning process, we definitely use concepts.
For example, to judge whether the proposition "a table is furniture" is valid, we need to use the concepts of "table" and "furniture".
(4) Motive force transforming into isolation: When we arrive at a concept through reasoning, we have certainly made judgments about concepts.
Reasoning can help us derive new concepts.
For example, through reasoning, we arrive at the concept "a table is a piece of furniture with legs, a top, and a surface structure used for placing objects". This concept is derived through reasoning about the concept of "table", and in the process of reasoning, judgments were certainly made.
(5) Manifestation transforming into isolation: When we know that some things have common characteristics (which is a basic cognitive judgment), how do we obtain a concept for this characteristic? This is when reasoning such as abstraction and generalization is needed.
Through observation and analysis of things, we can discover common characteristics. These common characteristics can form a concept.
For example, we observe that furniture like tables, chairs, and beds all have structures such as legs, surfaces, and boards. Through abstraction and generalization, we can form the concept of "furniture".
(6) Manifestation transforming into motive force: When we know that some things have common characteristics (which is a basic cognitive judgment), to perform abstraction and generalization, we need other concepts.
Through observation and analysis of things, we can discover common characteristics. To form a concept, we need other concepts as support.
For example, we observe that furniture like tables, chairs, and beds all have structures such as legs, surfaces, and boards. To form concepts through abstraction and generalization, we need the concepts of legs, surfaces, and boards.
Finally, we can conclude that concept, judgment, and reasoning can transform into each other: judgments form concepts through reasoning, concepts clarify judgments through reasoning, and reasoning and judgment are based on concepts. Therefore, concept, judgment, and reasoning constitute a no form integrated transformation. Of course, the mutual transformation of these three elements demonstrates a holistic thinking process. This explanation avoids simple binary oppositions and instead forms a powerful system of cyclical interaction among the three no form actions, emphasizing the mutual transformation and integration of concept, judgment, and reasoning. This understanding indeed transcends simple binary oppositions, providing a more dynamic and interactive model of cognitive processes. In this model, concept, judgment, and reasoning are no longer isolated elements, but interdependent and mutually influential cognitive activities. Each link is an aspect of the cognitive process, and together they form a complete system of thinking. This cyclical interactive system emphasizes the continuity and development of cognitive activities.
This is also clearly different from Hegel's dialectics, which is distinct from Hegel's deductive reasoning based solely on logical relationships. According to Hegel's dialectics, the concept is the thesis, it is the initial grasp of things by thought, an abstract generalization of the commonalities of things. Judgment is the antithesis, a further specification of the concept that connects it with concrete things and reveals the contradictions within the concept. Judgment is a negation of the concept because it points out the limitations of the concept, but it also enriches the concept by making it more concrete and definite. Reasoning is the process of connecting multiple judgments to arrive at new judgments. It is a unification of judgments because it integrates different judgments into a logical system. Reasoning is also a sublation of judgment because it transcends the limitations of individual judgments, reaching a more comprehensive and profound understanding of things. Compared to Hegel's dialectics, the explanation of the relationship between concept, judgment, and reasoning in the theory of no form action lies in the intrinsic logic and interactions provided by the no form integrated transformation in the cognitive process, rather than merely deductive reasoning from logical relationships.
This is where an important distinction between the theory of no form action and Hegel's dialectics emerges. In the theory of no form action, manifestation (judgment), isolation (concept), and motive force (reasoning) are at the same level, and the no form integrated transformation of judgment, concept, and reasoning forms a thinking process. Thus, thinking as such a transformation process is a higher-level phenomenon. According to Hegel's dialectics, however, judgment and concept are at the same level, while reasoning as the synthesis is a higher-level phenomenon.
4) Descartes' statement "I think, therefore I am" can be interpreted through the theory of no form action. The first "I" is the isolated "I", a conceptual "I"; "I think" is the motive force "I"; "I am" is the manifested, intuitive "I", manifesting my existence. Using the theory of no form action to explain this statement, we can say that for the isolated "I" to transform into the manifested, intuitive "I", it requires the motive force "I" to think. The first "I" in "I think, therefore I am" is a conceptual "I", referring to an abstract, universal "I". This "I" is isolated, without specific content. "I am" is the "I" as an existence, referring to the concrete, real "I". This "I" is manifested through thinking. These two "I"s are transformed and connected through the bridge of the motive force action of "I think". It is precisely this internal drive of thinking that allows the abstract "I" to become the subjectively manifested existing "I". Therefore, the isolated, abstract "I" gains content through thinking, thereby transforming into the concrete, real "I".
Let's examine whether the isolated "I", the motive force "I", and the manifested "I" can constitute a no form integrated transformation.
(1) The isolated "I" (conceptual "I") transforming into the motive force "I" ("I think"):
When we contemplate what "I" is, we are actually transforming the abstract, conceptual "I" into an "I" capable of thinking. In this process, we realize that "I" is not just an abstract concept, but a subject capable of thinking, perceiving, and acting. This transformation requires the participation of the manifested "I", because the process of thinking itself is a form of manifestation, presenting the "I"'s ability to think, remember, and its ways of thinking.
(2) The isolated "I" (conceptual "I") transforming into the manifested "I" ("I am"):
When we become aware of the existence of "I", we are actually transforming the abstract, conceptual "I" into a concrete, real "I". This process requires the participation of the motive force "I", because thinking is the proof of "I"'s existence. Without thinking, it would be impossible to be aware of the existence of "I".
(3) The motive force "I" ("I think") transforming into the isolated "I" (conceptual "I"):
When we reflect on our thinking process and try to generalize the essence of "thinking", we are actually transforming the motive force "I" into an isolated, conceptual "I". This process requires the participation of the manifested "I", because our reflection and generalization of thinking need to be based on concrete content and experiences of "I"'s thoughts.
(4) The motive force "I" ("I think") transforming into the manifested "I" ("I am"):
When we confirm the existence of "I" through thinking, we are actually transforming the motive force "I" into the manifested "I". This process requires the participation of the isolated "I", because thinking needs the concept of "I" as a premise. Without the concept of "I", thinking would lose its subject.
(5) The manifested "I" ("I am") transforming into the isolated "I" (conceptual "I"):
When we abstract the concept of "I" from concrete experiences and feelings, we are actually transforming the manifested "I" into an isolated, conceptual "I". This process requires the participation of the motive force "I", because abstraction and generalization are mental activities that require the involvement of thinking ability.
(6) The manifested "I" ("I am") transforming into the motive force "I" ("I think"):
When we become aware of the existence of "I" and begin to think, we are actually transforming the manifested "I" into the motive force "I". This process requires the participation of the isolated "I", because thinking needs to be based on the concept of "I". Without the concept of "I", thinking would lose its direction. For example, with a manifested "I" like "I am happy", when I think about this manifested "I" that is happy, the conceptual "I" becomes necessary.
We can see that the isolated "I", the motive force "I", and the manifested "I" indeed constitute a no form integrated transformation.
Descartes arrived at the conclusion "I think, therefore I am" through doubt. Descartes first doubted everything, but this doubt ultimately encountered something that could no longer be doubted. Because when the doubter is doubting, he can no longer doubt that he is doubting. This doubter exists presently or necessarily, which is why he can truly engage in doubt. When I doubt, I must necessarily acknowledge "I exist"; therefore, the "I" is indubitable.[1]
Descartes' intention was to establish a necessary connection between the doubter (myself) and the act of doubting itself. However, he didn't seem to provide a very convincing explanation for this necessity. My interpretation of "I think, therefore I am" using no form united transformation offers a powerful and reasonable answer to this necessity, because no form united transformation is a process based on no form identity, and the transformation between the three no form actions has an inherent connection and is essentially interconnected. Therefore, the necessity of the connection between the doubter and the doubt (I think) itself belongs to the necessity of the inherent connection between the transformations of the three no form actions. The intrinsic interconnectedness of no form united transformation provides an internal, essential explanation for the connection between the doubter and the act of doubting. In this way, the existence of the doubter and the act of doubting are no longer two isolated facts, but are connected through the process of united transformation of no form actions.
5) Let's interpret the syllogism of formal logic using the theory of no form action:
Major premise: All humans are mortal.
Minor premise: Socrates is human.
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
This syllogism is essentially saying that through "Socrates is human", we want to derive the conclusion "Socrates is mortal" (manifesting this conclusion). Here, the motive force action should be the attempt to derive the conclusion through the minor premise (the essence of this motive force is still the person doing the reasoning in the background), thereby manifesting the conclusion (manifestation action). At this point, we need the major premise "All humans are mortal" as a certain, isolated fact (isolation action). This is a no form united transformation. Alternatively, through "All humans are mortal", we want to derive the conclusion "Socrates is mortal" (manifesting this conclusion). Here, the motive force action should be the attempt to derive the conclusion through the major premise, thereby manifesting the conclusion (manifestation action). At this point, we need the minor premise "Socrates is human" as a certain, isolated fact (isolation action).
Both of these thought patterns represent typical modes of human thinking. Both approaches demonstrate how human logical thinking utilizes established facts or principles as support points (isolation action), and through these support points, derives new knowledge or conclusions (motive force action). This is a process that starts from isolated facts, is driven by reasoning (motive force), and ultimately forms clear conclusions. This interpretation emphasizes the transformation from isolated facts to manifested conclusions through the motive force of reasoning. It highlights the dynamic nature of logical thinking. This explanation allows for different reasoning paths within the syllogism, acknowledging that individuals may approach problems from different starting points (major premise or minor premise). This reflects the flexibility and non-linearity of actual human thought processes.
It's important to note that the major premise, minor premise, and conclusion do not themselves constitute a no form united transformation. This is because the essence of the motive force in the no form united transformation described above is still the person doing the reasoning in the background. In other words, when applying formal logic, since the driving force of reasoning is hidden in the background, formal logic becomes a relationship between propositions. Formal logic only abstracts and formalizes the thinking process, while hiding the underlying no form action mechanism.
Hegel also interpreted the syllogism of formal logic. He reinterpreted Aristotle's formal logic and syllogism in a critical and revolutionary way. Hegel believed that formal logic, with its emphasis on fixed categories and abstract reasoning, was limited in grasping the dynamic and interconnected nature of reality. He criticized the syllogism as static, incapable of explaining the development and transformation of concepts. He argued that formal logic fails to capture the inherent contradictions and tensions within concepts, which are crucial for their development and evolution. Hegel's dialectical logic emphasizes the interconnectedness and dynamic development of concepts. In Hegel's view, concepts are not static entities, but are constantly in motion, realizing self-unfolding and self-perfection through continuous development. In this logical system, contradictions are not errors or defects, but the fundamental driving force for the development of things. The core of dialectics lies in identifying and understanding these contradictions, and through them, revealing the deep structure and developmental trends of things. In Hegel's dialectics, concepts are not immutable, but evolve through a process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The contradictions and tensions within concepts are seen as the driving forces for their development and transformation.Hegel reinterpreted the syllogism as a dynamic process rather than a static structure. He viewed the major premise as representing the initial thesis, the minor premise as the antithesis, and the conclusion as the synthesis emerging from the tension between the two.
Hegel indeed recognized the motive force action in the syllogism of formal logic, which is correct, but his interpretation is somewhat forced (in fact, this motive force is the person making the inference behind the scenes). He believed that the major premise represents the initial thesis, the minor premise represents the antithesis, and the conclusion is the synthesis arising from the tension between the two. However, in a typical syllogism, the minor premise does not necessarily represent a contradiction to the major premise. For example, in the syllogism "All humans are mortal, Socrates is human, therefore Socrates is mortal," the minor premise ("Socrates is human") does not contradict the major premise ("All humans are mortal"). It merely provides a specific instance of the general principle stated in the major premise. Therefore, interpreting the minor premise as an antithesis seems forced, as it does not always align with the actual structure and function of syllogisms in formal logic. (Note: This also demonstrates the limitations of Hegel's dialectics, as not everything can be explained using dialectics)
However, the interpretation of formal logic syllogisms using the theory of no form action does not suffer from such forced explanations. The interpretation of syllogisms using the three no form actions is consistent and coherent, without the forced interpretations seen in Hegel's dialectical method. Syllogisms fully conform to no form united transformation. Through the lens of no form action theory, each part of the syllogism naturally fits into a dynamic, interconnected logical system. This interpretation avoids the problem of forced explanations that may arise in Hegel's dialectics, as it does not require the minor premise to necessarily represent an antithesis. Instead, it emphasizes the coherence and consistency in logical reasoning, as well as the natural transformation and development between concepts.
6) Using the theory of no form action to explain the relationship between knowledge, intuition, and thought.
Kant believed that knowledge is produced through the combination of thought and intuition. In this process, intuition provides the content of experience, that is, the specific objects and phenomena we perceive through our senses. Thought, on the other hand, provides the processing and interpretation of this intuitive experiential content, responsible for processing and organizing experiential content through concepts and categories. Kant emphasized the interdependence between intuition and thought. Without intuition, thought has no content, because intuition is the starting point of our understanding of the world; without thought, intuition has no form, because thought is our way of understanding and interpreting intuition. Intuition needs to be processed by thought to become meaningful knowledge, while thought needs the content of intuition to be concretized.
According to the theory of no form action, knowledge is understood as concepts and the relationships between concepts, which is isolation; intuition provides the content of experience, which is manifestation; thought provides the processing and handling of these intuitive contents, which is motive force. Based on Kant's understanding of knowledge, intuition, and thought, it can be easily seen that these three can undergo no form integrated transformation. Kant was remarkable in his ability to see the relationship between these three so profoundly. Although Kant did not directly discuss the mutual transformation between knowledge, intuition, and thought, his description of their relationship and interdependence indeed provided a philosophical foundation for this transformation and strongly suggested the possibility of such transformation within the framework of "no form action theory".
Knowledge, intuition, and thought undergo no form integrated transformation as follows:
(1) For intuitive content to transform into knowledge, it definitely requires thought;
(2) Of course, through thinking, conceptual knowledge can also be produced (transformed), and this new concept inevitably needs to intuit its content, or form concepts based on its intuitive content. This is what Kant meant when he said that the thought process can produce new concepts and knowledge, but these concepts ultimately need to be based on intuition and experience. Moreover, new conceptual knowledge produced through thinking still relies on some form of "intuition" for the formation of this new concept. This "intuition" doesn't refer to direct sensory experience, but to the process of grasping the distinguishing features of things after processing and abstracting sensory experiences through thought, thereby forming concepts. Concepts must have distinguishability, and this distinguishable intuition should be isolating intuition. This intuition is different from the manifestation intuition of sensibility. This distinguishable intuition should be what is commonly referred to as intellectual intuition. (Of course, there is also motive force intuition, which allows us to intuit changes. Patients with injuries to certain parts of the brain can observe static objects but cannot observe changes in object motion. In other words, the corresponding part of the brain responsible for motive force intuition has been damaged and lost its function. Thus, we obtain three types of intuition: manifestation intuition, motive force intuition, and isolation intuition.)
(3) If knowledge content is to be transformed into thought, it inevitably requires an intuitive understanding of this knowledge content (including the sensory manifestation intuition of the concept's content or the isolation intuition of the concept itself, and possibly motive force intuition as well).
(4) If conceptual knowledge is to be transformed into intuition, it will inevitably involve thinking through its content. Understanding a concept or knowledge requires intuitively grasping its meaning and essence.
(5) For intuition to transform into thought, it necessarily needs conceptual knowledge as the form and basis for analysis.
(6) For thought to transform into intuition, the result of thinking as a concept or judgment needs to be intuited, and thinking itself requires processing conceptual knowledge.
Therefore, knowledge, intuition, and thought can undergo no form integrated transformation among these three. As mentioned earlier, the mutual transformation of concepts, judgments, and reasoning demonstrates an overall process of thought. These three form a no form integrated transformation. Since knowledge, intuition, and thought also form a no form integrated transformation, this naturally creates a hierarchical structure of no form integrated transformation. As a result, these six concepts can be linked through this hierarchical structure. For example, when we obtain conceptual knowledge through reasoning and judgment (forming a thought process), this thought process certainly requires the participation of intuition. Otherwise, our thinking would lose meaning. For instance, the meaning of a concept ultimately needs to be grounded in intuition; without intuition, a concept is merely a symbol. This layered structure allows us to describe the relationships between these elements clearly and with foundation, as well as to clearly understand how they depend on and interact with each other. In other words, we can use thought as a pivot to connect the three elements of thinking (concept, judgment, and reasoning) with knowledge and intuition. This forms a clear and orderly structural relationship.
Kant believed that knowledge is produced through the "a priori synthetic unity" of intuition and thought, but these two abilities are themselves different and require some kind of bridge to connect them. From the perspective of no form transformation, Kant's notion of the a priori synthetic unity of intuition and thought can actually be understood as a no form transformation where the transformation between these two requires the participation of knowledge, thus forming a unity. In other words, they are unified in the identity of no form. This is precisely the deep logic of the a priori synthetic unity that Kant longed for.
7) Physics Domain
(a) In classical physics, Newton's Second Law defines force as the product of an object's mass and acceleration, i.e., F=ma. In F=ma, a is acceleration, which is actually a kind of change (change represented numerically), and this change is no form manifestation; while m as mass is isolation, mass m can be interpreted as a kind of energy aggregation, that is, isolated within an object. F=ma is actually the transformation of manifestation and isolation into motive force, and this formula is an example of no form united transformation. Since mass is a kind of aggregated isolation, according to the identity principle of no form action theory, mass must necessarily be accompanied by corresponding motive force and manifestation. In other words, mass as a form of isolation must have corresponding aspects of motive force and manifestation. Mass produces gravitational effects, which means mass generates motive force. In general relativity, gravity is explained as the curvature of spacetime caused by the presence of mass. It can be explained this way: the gravity (motive force) produced by mass as isolation needs space and time (the curvature of spacetime) to manifest itself. This is another example of no form united transformation. In this way, we can see the essence of gravity more clearly through no form action theory. It is the relationship between mass and spacetime.
Mass can be seen as a way to prevent changes in an object's acceleration. It represents the object's ability to resist changes in acceleration. Because mass, as an energy aggregation isolation, maintains a certain independence of isolation, the transformation of something with motive force into something with mass is a transformation from motive force to isolation. Therefore, on the surface, mass appears to be preventing changes in the object's acceleration.
Mass as isolation causes spacetime curvature (manifestation) due to the production of universal gravitation (motive force). Therefore, in a reference frame, simply simulating this spacetime curvature can produce the same effect as universal gravitation. In this reference frame, using acceleration can simulate such spacetime curvature, thus producing an inertial force field. We know they are equivalent, but we see that simulating a gravitational field in an accelerated reference frame is in the opposite order to mass producing a gravitational field. In a gravitational field, mass produces universal gravitation which then produces spacetime curvature; while in an inertial force field, mass produces spacetime curvature which then produces an inertial force with the same effect as universal gravitation. Although the order is reversed, they are equivalent. The reason lies in the fact that they are all transformative relationships between mass, motive force, and spacetime curvature (that is, transformative relationships between no form isolation, motive force, and manifestation). The key point here is that these two types of spacetime curvature are the same, as they are the common manifestation form of gravity and inertial force. Therefore, this simulation produces an inertial force with the same effect as a gravitational field. That is, their transformative relationships in no form action theory are equivalent. This is the reason for the equivalence of these two reference frames. This indicates that the equivalence principle is not merely the result of empirical observation, but is rooted in the deep logic of no form action theory. The necessity of no form united transformation guarantees the equivalence of gravitational fields and inertial force fields.
In fact, Einstein also noticed this same spacetime curvature in two reference frames. Einstein's insight into the equivalence principle was based on his profound understanding of spacetime curvature in gravitational fields and inertial force fields. He realized that although these two types of fields are produced for different reasons, they both lead to the same spacetime curvature, which is the fundamental reason for their equivalent effects. Einstein's general theory of relativity views spacetime curvature as a physical reality, not just a mathematical description, but something with observable effects. This indicates that the manifestation action is not merely a subjective perception, but has objectivity and plays an important role in the physical world.
The principle of the constancy of the speed of light in relativity is also an application that takes the invariance of the manifestation form as its basis (however, most current physical theories take the invariance of mass or energy as their basis, for example, the law of conservation of energy). It shows that regardless of the observer's state of motion, the speed of light always remains constant, which is an objective law that transcends the subjective perspective of the observer. It appears that this manifestation action plays a crucial role in physics. Einstein indeed elevated this principle of invariance of the manifestation form to a high degree in relativity. (As for why the speed of light always remains constant, we'll discuss that later.)
(b) The Schrödinger equation can be seen as the Newton's Second Law of quantum mechanics. I previously explained Newton's Second Law using no form united transformation, so can the Schrödinger equation be similarly explained using no form united transformation?
Schrödinger equation:
Isolation action (Wave function ψ): The wave function represents the probability distribution of particles in space and time, serving as the fundamental description of the system.
Motive force action (Hamiltonian): The Hamiltonian is the energy operator of the system, including kinetic and potential energy, driving the change of the wave function over time.
Manifestation action (Evolution of the wave function): The time evolution of the wave function describes the dynamic behavior of the system, manifesting the system's state at different points in time.
The wave function provides the initial state of the system, which begins to evolve under the action of the Hamiltonian. This indicates that the Schrödinger equation is indeed a no form united transformation.
(c) Newton's Third Law states: "For every action force, there is always an equal and opposite reaction force; or, the forces of action and reaction between two bodies are equal and opposite in direction." This is one of the fundamental principles of classical mechanics. Using no form action theory, we can explain it as follows: when a force pushes an object, in order to manifest change, it must be isolated into action and reaction forces in opposite directions. This is a no form united transformation. This explanation only accounts for why forces are differentiated into distinct forces. (As for why an equal and opposite reaction force is produced, we will explain this later.)
(d) Electric current (motive force) passing through a wire (isolation) drives the rotation of an electric motor (manifestation), converting electrical energy into mechanical motion.
Scenario: Electric current flows through a wire, causing a motor to rotate and converting electrical energy into mechanical energy.
Wire (isolation): The wire acts as a conduit, isolating and guiding the electric current. It provides a specific path for the current, shaping its movement and interaction with the motor.
Electric current (motive force): The flow of electrons constituting the electric current acts as the motive force. It carries energy and interacts with the magnetic field in the motor to produce rotational force.
Motor rotation (manifestation): The rotation of the motor is the manifestation of the electrical energy carried by the current and its interaction with the motor's magnetic field. This rotation represents the conversion of electrical energy into mechanical energy. The motor's rotation embodies the manifestation action, as it is the direct result of the conversion of electrical energy to mechanical energy, a concrete expression of the system's motive force and isolation actions.
(e) Consider a spring oscillator system. In this system, the initial state of the spring (at rest) can be viewed as the state of isolation (this state conceals the characteristics of the spring). When we apply force (motive force) to stretch or compress the spring, it begins to oscillate, and this oscillating state is the state of manifestation, which reveals the characteristics of the spring. This process is an example of no form action theory, describing the transformation of the spring from a state of rest to a state of oscillation through motive force.
(f) As an isolated glass cup, if it is to undergo a change to a new state (manifestation), such as being broken, there must necessarily be a motive force. The glass cup exists as an isolation. It has certain attributes like shape, size, color, etc. When the glass cup is broken, its shape, size, color, and other attributes change. This change is a manifestation. This manifestation is accomplished by motive force action. In this example, the cup indeed changes from one state of isolation to another (broken state), but in this process, the change in the state of the glass cup is primary, because the change in the glass cup is directly related to the glass cup and the motive force that breaks it. The broken state is merely the result of the change.
The action of breaking the glass cup is a manifestation of motive force action. It is the motive force that transforms the glass cup from its original state of isolation to a new state of isolation. According to Newton's mechanics, the effect of force is to change the state of motion of an object. From the perspective of no form action theory, this can be described as: the effect of force is to change the object's state of isolation or state of manifestation. From the viewpoint of no form action theory, the effect of force can be understood as a kind of motive force action, which not only changes the object's state of motion but may also cause the object to transform from one state of isolation to another, or from one state of manifestation to another. Changing an object's state of motion is changing the object's state of change, which is changing the manifestation state of the object's motion.
For example, when a glass cup is broken, the applied force changes the physical structure of the glass cup, thereby changing its state of isolation. This view emphasizes that the effect of force is not just a mathematical change in acceleration, but involves changes in the state of the object in a broader sense. Motive force can cause various types of transformations, not just changes in motion. This change of state under motive force action refers to the change in the state of a particular thing, while there are aspects of this thing that remain unchanged during the change. For instance, when a force acts on an object and changes its velocity, the object itself does not undergo substantial change. This provides a more comprehensive way of understanding the effects of force and changes in object states, combining physical phenomena with philosophical concepts, thereby enriching our understanding of these phenomena.
8) Psychological Domain
Consider a situation where a person is faced with making a decision. In this scenario, the person's initial state (a state of uncertainty, facing a multitude of conditions, waiting for determination. Isolation doesn't just refer to physical separation, but can also refer to psychological uncertainty and possibilities) can be viewed as a state of isolation. At this point, the individual is in an uncertain state, with various possibilities and conditions intertwined, constituting a state of isolation, waiting to be sorted out and chosen. When this person begins to think and weigh various choices (motive force), eventually, the individual makes a decision, transforming from an uncertain state to a definite decision state. This is the manifestation action, presenting the result of the thinking process, manifesting the state determined by those conditions. This process is an example of no form united transformation. It describes the process of a person transforming from an uncertain state to a decision state through thinking and weighing various choices.
9) Behavioral Domain
In the initial stage of artistic creation, the artist's inspiration and creative ideas are in a state of isolation. These inspirations and ideas are internal, abstract, and have not yet undergone any external expression or realization. During the artistic creation process, the artist's inspiration and creative ideas (isolation action) are transformed into concrete artworks (manifestation action) through the creative activity (motive force action). This process embodies the transformation from internal ideas to external expression.
10) Biological Domain
Gene data (isolation) needs to be manifested as the biological form of an individual (manifestation), which requires the drive (motive force) of gene expression regulatory networks.
Isolation action of gene data: DNA located in the cell nucleus carries all the genetic information of an organism. This information exists in the form of genes, guiding the structure and function of cells. Specific information in gene sequences, such as promoters, coding regions, regulatory sequences, etc., can be viewed as an "isolated" set of instructions. They independently determine all the potential characteristics that a cell or organism may develop, but these instructions remain relatively static and "isolated" before being read and executed.
Cell differentiation motive force action: During the development of an organism, cells undergo a differentiation process based on their environmental signals and internal genetic programs. This process involves the transformation from totipotent or pluripotent stem cells into specific functional cell types, such as neurons, muscle cells, or skin cells. This process is driven by gene expression regulatory networks, where the activation and deactivation of specific genes act as the "motive force action" in the creative process, propelling cells to develop in specific directions. For example, neural induction factors activate the genes necessary for neuron formation, guiding cells towards the developmental path of the nervous system.
Manifestation action of individual biological form: As cell differentiation progresses, different types of cells arrange and combine in a precise spatiotemporal order, forming tissues and organs, and further constituting the complete structure of an organism. This series of complex biological construction activities ultimately "manifests" as unique biological forms. Whether it's a human heart, a butterfly's wings, or the branches and leaves of a tree, these are all concrete realizations of genetic information through the dynamic process of cell differentiation. Therefore, the appearance, physiological characteristics, and behavioral patterns of an organism are all external manifestations at the macro level of its internal genetic data after a series of dynamic transformations.
11) Social Domain
The group aggregation of demands (motive force) forms interest groups (isolation), which then publicly express their demands through means such as street demonstrations (manifestation). A group of people having a common dissatisfaction or demand is the motive force. Under this motive force, they aim to manifest this dissatisfaction or demand in a strong and unified way, which requires the formation of isolated interest groups.
I have provided examples of no form transformation in many domains above. No form transformation is a very powerful theoretical tool that can be applied to various fields, capable of explaining various phenomena and problems. By understanding the mutual transformation of isolation, motive force, and manifestation, we can more comprehensively grasp the essence and internal mechanisms of complex phenomena. The theory of no form action is not only an explanatory tool but can also provide new ideas and methods for theoretical research and practical applications.
Summary:
The process of motive force action transformation embodies the variability of motive force. At the same time, the entire transformation process is actually an isolated entity. It has independence and distinguishability. Otherwise, we wouldn't be aware of such a process of change. The result of the transformation could be an entity of motive force, or of manifestation, or of isolation, or an entity primarily characterized by one of these actions, and so on. This means that the change of a motive force entity itself also manifests as an isolated entity. In short, motive force action, isolation action, and manifestation action are indivisible. No single action can exist or function independently.
The transformation between no form actions may also be accompanied by other transformations. For example, as mentioned in previous sections: isolation has characteristics of independence and distinction; motive force has characteristics of change and generation; manifestation has characteristics of intuition and identity. When isolation action transforms into manifestation action, the corresponding characteristics of isolation will also transform into the corresponding characteristics of manifestation. This accompanying transformation provides us with a way to explore the laws that the world follows. By mastering the transformation laws of no form actions, we can predict certain characteristics of the future development of things.
The transformation between things is complex, and some transformations may involve many other transformations. These can involve multiple levels and stages, encompassing various interrelated changes. A single event can trigger cascading transformations in different aspects of a system or entity. In these transformation processes, identifying and understanding which transformations are critical is crucial for a deep understanding of the nature and development of things. Therefore, continuously breaking down to the most fundamental transformations will be a valuable endeavor, as these are the fundamental transformations. Since no form actions are the most fundamental actions, any transformation between things can ultimately be decomposed into the most basic transformations between no form actions through continuous decomposition. Additionally, a single entity may simultaneously contain isolation, manifestation, and motive force, which can be confusing. It's important to clearly recognize which aspect of transformation for this entity is fundamental, similar to a glass being shattered. Since every entity has three aspects of no form action (isolation, motive force, and manifestation), the same entity can act as an isolating entity, a motive force entity, or a manifesting entity. This depends on the perspective from which this entity establishes a no form action relationship with other entities.
The essential nature of the three no form actions as no form is the fundamental reason why they can transform into each other. One no form can only transform into the other two no forms, which is the necessity of transformation. The mutual transformation between no form actions is not only possible but also inevitable. This inevitability also provides us with a pattern and guidance for exploring the world. This inevitability ensures a degree of order and predictability, which can be used to predict possible transformations within a system. The six modes of mutual transformation between no forms are definite, but how they specifically transform is uncertain. For example, an isolated glass cup needs motive force to undergo a change in its new state, but what kind of motive force is uncertain. It could be broken by external force or it could crack due to high temperature. Although the three no form actions differ in function and manifestation, they are all essentially no form, meaning they are not limited by specific forms and have the potential for change and transformation. Through this theoretical perspective, we can gain a deeper understanding of the changes and developments in things, as well as the fundamental principles behind these changes. No form action theory provides a powerful tool for understanding complex phenomena. It emphasizes the dynamic and conditional nature of change, as well as the interdependence between different states. This understanding helps us make more informed decisions when facing changes and provides us with a profound way to explore and explain the world.
References
[1]Heidegger. The Question Concerning the Thing, translated by Zhao Weiguo, Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 2010, p. 89.