Proof that time yields dimension-equations- 2.8125 of 3 (And no it doesn't)

After a bike ride in a mist, getting stuck at the office while the mist turned to rain, then getting back I was back in the feeling slightly ill phase during day 2 post vaccine dose 1.

I was feeling run down again so I strpped naked and sat in the sun to make  vitamin d.

All that exercise and I still look like this?  It is just too much to bear.

   I've got a great deck for this,  no one can see me but I'm totally in the sun this part of the afternoon.

It is Monday.  The weekend seems an eternity ago.  I sneezed wrong today and my back hurt all morning; but I've done my exercises.  I am exhausted; but I need to walk the dog soon.

All in all while there is a substantial amount of the workday ahead of me, I've gotten a fair amount done.  I did interviews which needed to be done; I corrected documents that need to be corrected which clears the way to file two documents subject to editing the already finished drafts.

I uploaded everything for the one I want to file Thursday or Friday except those two documents; so that is a lot.

I am not up for what lies ahead of me despite all that is being accomplished.  Today I hate what you represent because I cannot hope to accomplish what that requires.

Interestingly I had it backwards in june of 2013.  Time yielding dimension instead of the correct answer which is just the opposite.  I'm an idiot. 

June 10, 2013

Proof that time yields dimension-equations- 2.8125 of 3
We have now proved the following e-hologram concepts using mathematical concepts apparent in o-space.
1) dimension is a function of time.  That is time and space do not exist, time exists and gives rise to the appearance of dimension in a singularity defined as everything or a tendency for everything to happen, existing without time and dimension as we know.
2) There is no space in the universe and all black holes go back to the singularity.
3) Time slows as it is used to make dimension indicating that acceleration and dimension are interchangeable.
4) Matter converts to energy when all of the time applied to matter is used for acceleration and not the passage of time which shows that time is attached to matter/energy (referred to as tendency) to give it apparent place in o-space.
Let's look at some broad conceptual equations:
m=Sf(t1)dt+f(t2)dt+f(t3)dt
m=place & existence of what we perceive as matter and energy, change of time (dt) is the time which we are familiar with.
F(t1)+f(t2)+f(t3)+f(t4)=T(total)

inverse, negative, denominator time; differentiation, opposite of integration
Differentiation compared to integration
"In simple terms, differentiation is the act of finding the rate of change of the gradient/slope of any function while integration is the area under the curve of function with respect to the x axis.
Repeated differentiation can also determine if a point is a local maximum or minimum of a function and be used in equations to help explain the motion of objects. "Integration, or anti-differentiation, can also be utilised to find the length of a line on a graph, also referred to as a path of a function, the surface area of 3-dimensional graph functions and also volumes of 3-dimensional graph functions. Simply put, differentiation is used to find the rates of change of things, and integration is used to measure lengths, areas and volumes.
Differentiating is really just finding the slope of a curve at any given point. Since virtually anything that happens can be graphed as a curve, the slope gives you a rate or a rate of change depending on graph is defined.

For example if you graph your position vs time. The slope of the curve is the speed that you are going.

If you graph the speed vs time, then the slope is the acceleration.

One is a rate the other is a rate of change.

Integration is just finding the area under a curve. Again, virtually all activities ca be graphed. The areas under the curves help to solve a myriad of problems.

Look at the speed vs time graph from above. The area under the curve is the distance that you traveled. So that you can go from rates of change to rates and from rates to total quantities."
We discussed how integration leads to the differentiation of times due to relative acceleration using e-hologram theory in an intuitive and simple manner.
Now let's discuss how we get to the same place using gravity wells, of the application of gravity to matter's time.
We theorize that gravity has the tendency or represents the tendency of tendency to give up time.
****
The difference between general and special relativity is that in the general theory all frames of reference including spinning and accelerating frames are treated on an equal footing.  In special relativity accelerating frames are different from inertial frames.  Velocities are relative but acceleration is treated as absolute.  In general relativity all motion is relative.  To accommodate this change general relativity has to use curved space-time.  In special relativity space-time is always flat.

The theory of relativity sets a severe limit to our ability to explore the galaxy in space ships.  As an object approaches the speed of light, more and more energy is needed to accelerate it further.  To reach the speed of light an infinite amount of energy would be required.  It seems that the speed of light is an absolute barrier which cannot be reached or surpassed by massive objects (see relativity

Below the rocket, something strange is happening...

In the rocket, you can make measurements of the world around you. One thing you might do is ask how the distance to an interesting star you are headed towards changes with T, the time on your clock.  At blast-off (t=T=0) the rocket is at rest, so this distance initially equals the distance D to the star in the non-accelerating frame.  But once you are moving, however you choose to measure this distance, it will be reduced by your current distance d travelled in the non-accelerating frame, as well as the whole lot contracted by a factor of γ, your Lorentz factor at time T.  Eventually you will pass the star and it will recede behind you.  The distance you measure to it at time T is

(D - d)/γ = (D + c2/a)/ch(aT/c) - c2/a

A plot of this distance as a function of T shows that, as expected, it starts at D, then reduces to zero as you pass the star.  Then it becomes negative as the star moves behind you.  As T goes to infinity, the distance asymptotes to a value of -c²/a.  That means that everything in the universe is falling "below" the rocket, but never receding any farther than a distance of -c²/a as measured by you.  It all piles up just short of this distance, asymptoting to a plane called a horizon.  You see this horizon actually form as the rocket accelerates, because there comes a time when no signal emitted from "below" the horizon can ever reach you.  Everything falls toward that plane, and as it does so it begins to redden, due to the increasing red shift of its light, because you are accelerating.  Finally it fades out of visibility.  In fact, as anything gets closer to the horizon, it ages more and more slowly; time comes to a complete halt there.  The horizon is a dark plane that appears to be swallowing everything in the universe!  But of course, nothing strange is noticed by the non-accelerating Earth observers. There is no horizon anywhere for them.

And inside the rocket, something strange is also happening...

Whereas time slows to a stop a certain distance below the rocket, it speeds up "above" the rocket (that is, in the direction in which it's travelling).  This effect could, in principle, be measured inside the rocket too: a clock attached to the rocket's ceiling (i.e. furthest from the motor) ages faster than a clock attached to its floor.
For a standard-sized rocket with a survivable acceleration, this difference in how fast things age within its cabin is very small.  Even so, it tells us something fundamental about gravity, via Einstein's Equivalence Principle.  Einstein postulated that any experiment done in a real gravitational field, provided that experiment has a fairly small spatial extent and doesn't take very long, will give a result indistinguishable from the same experiment done in an accelerating rocket.  So the idea that the rocket's ceiling ages faster than its floor (and that includes the ageing of any bugs sitting on these) transfers to gravity: the ceiling of the room in which you now sit is ageing faster than its floor; and your head is ageing faster than your feet.  Earth's rotation complicates this effect, but doesn't alter it completely.
This difference in ageings on Earth has been verified experimentally.  In fact, it was absolutely necessary to take into account when the GPS satellite system was assembled.

EVERYTHING BELOW ALREADY POSTED
Proof that time yields dimension-unified field theory- 2.25 of 3
The broad purpose of this blog entry will be to explain the paradox raised last time, to further show that time is the source of dimension (instead of both existing simultaneously) and having those points finished to provide a working model for a unified field theory.
Now I know many of you will be unhappy that I have a working hypothesis for a unified field theory, but just bear with me, you don't have to accept it but it will be there.
I suggest listening to "the marriage of Figaro" while you read the rest of this to give it the proper dramatic background music.

Now in order to see the effect seen on time by relative acceleration we are going to use a couple of math similes.  First simple differentiation.  X^10 . is the same as x•x^9.  This will be useful as we move forward, take my word for it.

 

Now you need to get your pencil and paper again.  I'll wait.  Got it?  Ok.

Draw a capital L. Imagine that this represents acceleration along the two legs of tendencies, from the point where the two legs of the L meet.  Just to save time later, let's look at the common point as the singularity.  Keep in mind if we're in the singularity and time gives dimension to tendencies to make us feel like we're in o-space, this means that any starting point of sufficient gravity has the tendencies of the singularity.  That is, the junction of the two legs is any black hole going any speed anywhere in the universe.  No matter is involved at this junction since matter and gravity are mere tendency to surrender time

 

Now we're going to look at time as a bag of X's.  This is important if you look to our differentiation equation. We can pull out some x's using differentiation since it is merely the rate of consumption.  They don't have to be x(s) but let's use x anyway because it's easy to type.  I'd suggest you draw a circle and put 10 x(s) in it for visualization purposes.  We don't get to the equation yet, because I don't want to force feed time travel to you, but you'll start to see where this is going shortly if you haven't already figured it out.

 

This analysis has to provide unified results for matter, different forms of energy and for gravity since some unification of fields around time is expected and Einstein spent considerable time looking for these unified principles without having all the components of e-hologram theory.   With e-hologram theory, it should have been easy for him, so lets see if it is..

Ok, let's start with a discussion of the "L".  As the two legs accelerate from the singularity (or any other point, the junction could be earth and the legs could be the paths of rockets launched from earth if you like that picture better) the time on the rockets slows down.  Remember in the last two entries we showed that time is consumed at different rates in drawing the lines faster or slower.

However, if the two legs of the L are the same length, time on each leg has changed the same amount relative to the junction from which they accelerated despite the fact that they accelerated in different directions.  We'll save for later what happens to the relative times of the rockets on the two legs as they accelerate away from one another (or two satellites orbiting in different directions around the earth so they pass each other in different direction-both will change the same relative to earth time if they are going at the same speed). 

Quickly let me point out that this supports the existence of the singularity because time varies only relative to a common point, common to all matter regardless of where the legs begin or end.  In this way, even if the legs are flattened and move opposite from one another, there is the same time variation because movement isn't real but just a simulation in the singularity from the common point, if you get my drift.  That is the two rockets going in opposite directions from the earth are not moving at all, they are just expending their time in opposite time vectors relative to one another.  Stick around, for a few more minutes and we'll be done till the next entry.

So, let's get our bag of "x"(s) out (the circle with 10 x(s)) in it and let's assume that when we pull out an x we're really differentiating.  The x(s) don't disappear, they just come out of the bag, like the x came out of the equation x^10=x*x^9.  The exact equations for the differentiation will have to come later, but they are inherent in the discussion that follows and are mostly written out already, but without solving for time vectors (just for vectors). Anyway...let's unify the fields!

Now remember our integration and differentiation are just flipping the coin in different directions, so don't worry too much about the math, just remember that we show consumption using differentiation while we draw out the movement with integration.  Both work with a delta(t) or a change in time.

Take out one x from our bag and apply this x to the movement of the shorter "L" leg and take a second bag (sorry forgot to mention you have two rockets, you need two bags) and take out two x(s) to show its vector.  What has happened here is that time has slowed twice as fast for the longer leg because two portions of time were needed to do the drawing of the line (integration) while only one was needed for the drawing of the other line (also integration) during the same time period.  It doesn't matter how fast you drew the L, because it's just a model and we're assuming that both Legs took the same period of time to draw.  Now this supports the singularity model and makes a lot of sense and explains why time runs slower in the two bags than the junction and why the longer leg has time running slower (more of it is being used to create dimension so less is available to turn the clocks as it were. 

But! you gasp.  Go ahead if you want.  Where's the unification of fields? you demand.  Well, here it is.  We're going to empty the bags.  Well, let's just empty one of them. Remember that there is a speed limit, so there is a limit to the number of x(s) we can take out of the bag in a given time.  That pesky speed of light! I've told you we can get rid of it, but that requires the 20 physicists from 20 countries to comment on e-hologram theory and we're about 20 physicists short right now.  So this is going to be easy.  As you empty x(s) [this is a metaphor for differentiation] from the bag, it goes faster and time goes slower inside of the bag because the x(s) are being used to create dimension (it's only an illusion, you're still in the singularity so if you have a problem with claustrophobia you're going to be in trouble with e-hologram theory).  But as you accelerate, if you're matter, what happens to you?  Here's a hint: e=mc^2.  Still don't know?  You don't lose time, but it is converted to vectors moving at the speed of light, it's turning into energy.  Energy is, as the equation indicates, matter which has used all of its time for vectoring relative to the singularity and none is left for time.  Inside of light, we can presume that time has stopped or at least nearly stopped moving!

Gravity still applies, because time has not been stripped, it's just being misdirected from one purpose to another and we observe this so we know it's right (if we assume everything else about e-hologram theory and the singularity in particular is correct).

Simple, intuitive and now we have everything except...unification!  Ok, let's go one step further.  Gravity wells are the tendency of matter to give up time taken to an extreme, I.E. in a black hole you've returned to the singularity and you've given up all of your time.

We know that you get the same math with gravity that you do with acceleration.  You drop into a gravity well and time starts giving up x(s) to drop back to the singularity, i.e. time is stripped from the tendency and it originally turns to energy (the bag empties of x(s) as it accelerates into the singularity (it doesn't have to go all the way for this to work, black holes are just the extreme example) and then the time is actually stripped off and you are back in the singularity unless you can add time back.  Gravity plus tendency at this point derives from  energy and you've unified the fields.

I have chatted up a couple of people of cern to do some experimentation concerning this.  We can convert the x(s) there or at Stanford or just about anywhere else where we can have acceleration and this allows us to manipulate time to some extent and we should fairly easily be able to see this movement between matter and energy and we should using earth's gravity without more to see the effect of stripping time from matter at some level (one stream at near light speed going up and another going down), but you have to know what to look for and that's another blog entry.

No guesses yet on the title question yet?

****

Hence this solution should and does suggest a unified field around time using a singularity universe

Proof that time yields dimension, mathematical- 2.25 of 3 previously known as: How accelerating along an axis changes the time using e-hologram theory (1 of 3).
Before I continue the explanation of inconsistency of integration time in e-hologram theory I want to say that I think I may have to expand this discussion somewhat in terms of entries because of time constraints and because as I continue to lose my mind, my ability to go on interminably with any particular issue is shortened.
The "inconsistency of integration" is not really an inconsistency.  The prior entry showed that by moving quickly along an axis, time consumption is accelerated outwardly while in o-space we see that the equation itself (apparent time in the accelerated body)  is slowed which appears inconsistent until you look more close.  Spoiler alert-it has to do with differentiation which is the measure of time and not coincidentally something of a mirror image to integration (one builds a line, area, space; the other breaks out change in an equation).  This is what is observed.
Equally importantly will be the analysis of gravitational time fluctuation which is similarly derived and includes a discussion of how "stripping time", the end result of the application of gravity to tendency (i.e. gravity is the visible effect of the tendency of tendancies to give up time) is very much the "physical" embodiment of differentiation and therefore is inherent in e-hologram theory.
I am going to incorporate a pun in the title.   The first person to identify the pun in a comment correctly can come by and get a signed copy of the book on e-hologram theory if I get it published before I'm dead.
E-hologram theory co-opts Einstein's letter (E), but only because his conception of time so closely embodies the requirements of e-hologram theory and that is the most commonly used letter in the alphabet; but the reason is the Einstein Time Conception.  Before I get further into the proof (which derives from what is already shown in the 1 of 3 entry); it is important to remember this is "fundamental theory" covering the infinitely small and infinitely large.  While it should have wide application to the Newtonian world; it "appears" unrealistic (just as relativity does) until you look closely. The test of e-hologram theory is whether it makes relativity more logical in the Newtonian universe.  While it is discomforting to think that we exist in a singularity, the evidence is overwhelming (even though it could be evidence of something else).  Also, while e-hologram theory is a good model (so I say) to our universe, without a clear understanding of g-space; it has little fundamental application outside of our universe.  While we've delved into g-space; we have to go much deeper to have a more complete understanding (a hint to the title question).
Since it is Sunday, it's also good to remember that e-hologram theory allows for a type of god without depart from concepts or science and physics, i.e. a type of god becomes possible with the theory as well as prognostication which makes it colorful although those concepts are not requirements of e-hologram theory.
***