Resolved: Reality is a differential of potentials.

I would like to avoid a controversial argument as much as humanly possible, but an idea undefended is an idea untested. Since the first formalizations of argument, be it from Eastern or Western philosophies, debate has been about defining differences. Throughout history debates, premises and doctrines have arisen from our projections of our personal, individualistic understanding of the world around us. Even metaphysical and religious doctrines must link themselves, however tenuously, to the physical reality in which we find ourselves. In parallel with the development of cultural ideas has been the development of ethics, morality, and the languages that allow these concepts to be shared. Everything about our lives as human beings, for as far back as we can study human culture directly, has been linked to the ability to not only have, but also to share our ideas with each other. Throughout all of these secular institutions, the language of mathematics has become central to communication of complex ideas. This language, for a language it is, is the only language found to date that has both the specificity and strictly controlled morphology required to clearly explain the increasingly esoteric boundaries of complex ideas. Certainly one could argue Gödel Incompleteness vs. Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory and the provability of truth, but this quickly becomes esoteric and largely impractical for any relevant application outside of artificial intelligence and epistemological debates in philosophy. When addressing largely philosophical questions such as cosmology from a testability perspective, however, scientists have long depended upon predictive mathematical models. Obviously traveling back in time to observe the creation of our universe is beyond our capability, and largely believed to be impossible (also because of mathematical predictions). At the end of 2014, one of the cornerstones of ‘scientific’ cosmology, The Big Bang, was re-examined using discoveries from quantum physics. Quoted from the summary of the paper: “It was shown recently that replacing classical geodesics with quantal (Bohmian) trajectories gives rise to a quantum corrected Raychaudhuri equation (QRE). In this article we derive the second order Friedmann equations from the QRE, and show that this also contains a couple of quantum correction terms, the first of which can be interpreted as cosmological constant (and gives a correct estimate of its observed value), while the second as a radiation term in the early universe, which gets rid of the big-bang singularity and predicts an infinite age of our universe. ” – [Cosmology from quantum potential - Ahmed Farag Ali and Saurya Das – PDF @ . http://arxiv.org... ] While the headlines and blogosphere have been filled with rejections, counter-interpretations and praise, the science is mostly beyond the ability of others to really understand. I’ve seen claims such as ‘black holes are impossible’ and ‘Hawking debunked’, but that is really extending the research farther than the conclusions presented. The most stunning part of the paper is that of the altered Hubble equation, which predicts an infinite age to the universe. It removes the requirement for beginning and ending singularities and provides an alternate source for the ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’ premises added to bing bang theory. It does this by doing nothing more than deriving (can be described as adding-in) findings (read measurements resulting in predictive equations) from quantum physics. In the summary above, this is what is described in the modified Raychaudhuri equation, dubbed the QRE. [. https://en.wikipedia.org... ] [. http://arxiv.org... ] In order to explain this in a way other than mathematics, yet more clearly than most available articles can, I will describe a difference between classical physics energy, and theoretical physics energy. In classical Newtonian/Einsteinian physics energy is described, roughly, as the potential to do work. A far better and more modern description is: “The Lagrangian formalism of physics is the way to start here. In this formulation, we define a function that maps all of the possible paths a particle takes to the reals, and call this the Lagrangian. Then, the [classical] path traveled by a particle is the path for which the Lagrangian has zero derivative with respect to small changes in each of the paths. It turns out, due to a result known as Noether's theorem, that if the Lagrangian remains unchanged due to a symmetry, then the motion of the particles will necessarily have a conserved quantity. Energy is a conserved quantity associated with a time translation symmetry in the Lagrangian of a system. So, if your Lagrangian is unchanged after substituting t′=t+ct′=t+c for tt, then Noether's theorem tells us that the Lagrangian will have a conserved quantity. This quantity is the energy. If you know something about Lagrangians, you can explicitly calculate it. ” ( Taken from Jerry Schirmer’s explanation @ . http://physics.stackexchange.com... - a very good summary ) Due to a schedule conflict I have to leave right now for a flight, finished or not. I will pick up where I left off. .. The part missing here is where I describe how the quantum boundary is pure unbounded energy and explain this is pseudo-linear algebra (approachable to average people).