NLT is all about solving problems. It is also about internal consistency.
We've eleminated the Higgs Boson. But we still have this whole question about reality. Oh how irritating it is to have to handle these issues without a secret cave laboratory!
Anyway, you are sitting there thinking this whole NLT doesn't work because it explains other situations, black holes, gravity and such, but what have I done for reality lately,the boring day to day life you have to live because you are not mad like I am. Well, there's an explanation for that.
The question that NLT will answer today (without the cave) is why NLT makes your trees and flowers possible even though time remains non-linear. We live in a universe of quantum phenomena, but we keep find them as waves when we look closely. Yes we call the waves strings, well I don't but some people do, But they're still both quantum phenomena and non-quantum phenomena...or aren't they?
The reasons why large systems have quantum aspects that disappear is because of...exponential compression and the transitions they represent. That is, these are quantum phenomena, they are quantum items of compression, but on close examination, if you look close enough one quantum system breaks down into the prior system. As long as compression remains the quantum elements exist, but as you get to small enough states, as you divide them, you see the previous time state, that is once the compression level is small enough, you loose sufficient concentration to remain stable.
And so the end game is to figure out how to generate a state where it is sufficiently non-linear to overcome gravity, a negative gravity state so your cars will float like the Jestons. It will definitely happen faster if I get the the cave.
Friday, November 28, 2014
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
NLT and the end of popular fiction
At last the next paper on NLT is finished. The holiday season will be spent putting into the second edition. It is good that this is available in advance of the 4th when it is due to be delivered. There will be more on that including more in the series that have been started.
For now, however, I plan to just relax and write something fun, perhaps I'll publish the whale lawyer. And there is other work which has been ignored and I have to deal with those things.
Why is it that now all I want to do is write poetry?
The Science Behind "Interstellar" Revealed - Chinatopix http://tinyurl.com/ky9bm3o shared via www.newshog.co
NLT promises features of interstellar travel far in excess of those represented by wormholes, but the promise may not be recognized and it firmly establishes that a wormhole doesn't exist, at least not in the form provided by science fiction.
NLT does provide a permanency that can be either threatening or comforting depending on how you view life in general and your own life in particular. While there is hope for life, the greatest recognition of hope comes to those who have the greatest courage and, to a lesser extent, the greatest recklessness in living life.
For now, however, I plan to just relax and write something fun, perhaps I'll publish the whale lawyer. And there is other work which has been ignored and I have to deal with those things.
Why is it that now all I want to do is write poetry?
The Science Behind "Interstellar" Revealed - Chinatopix http://tinyurl.com/ky9bm3o shared via www.newshog.co
NLT promises features of interstellar travel far in excess of those represented by wormholes, but the promise may not be recognized and it firmly establishes that a wormhole doesn't exist, at least not in the form provided by science fiction.
NLT does provide a permanency that can be either threatening or comforting depending on how you view life in general and your own life in particular. While there is hope for life, the greatest recognition of hope comes to those who have the greatest courage and, to a lesser extent, the greatest recklessness in living life.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
kayak the vanishing Colorado
. i want to go before it's too late. The secret of climate change is that it is uncertain. This is not only the story of discovery, beauty and thirst, but it is the story of the uncertainty of rainfall.
We spend all of our time worrying about global warming. And it may kill us all. But global cooling would almost certainly kill us all. And the one thing we can be certain of is that we will experience both global warming and global cooling eventually. That we will all die and all we can do is to live rightly because even death is an illusion and life is an illusion and it is within the power of each of us, powerless as we are, to decide how we do them.
Record Drought Reveals Stunning Changes Along Colorado River http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/11/141123-lake-powell-colorado-river-drought-water/
We spend all of our time worrying about global warming. And it may kill us all. But global cooling would almost certainly kill us all. And the one thing we can be certain of is that we will experience both global warming and global cooling eventually. That we will all die and all we can do is to live rightly because even death is an illusion and life is an illusion and it is within the power of each of us, powerless as we are, to decide how we do them.
Record Drought Reveals Stunning Changes Along Colorado River http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/11/141123-lake-powell-colorado-river-drought-water/
NLT-A peak into the land of god 7 of 10 why don't the numbers line up perfectly part tres
There are few clues why we do not see simple transitions of linearity between clock time states.
First let's look at the history.
We cannot look for just patterns because photons and space have no real comparison, nor do photons and waves. Only at the transition of energy to matter do we begin to see quantum effects clearly.
While the equation e=mc^2 (ct3 to ct4) is familiar enough, the equation energy=photons*c (ct2 to ct3) is not well known, nor would it be easily understood if it was observed.
The much more complicated transition space=photon*c^1/2 (ct1 to ct2) is not only unknown but impossible to fully comprehend based on observations since we do not see transitions of this type. And then we have Non-linearity to linearity. Since the fractions can go infinitely in either direction c^ infinity or c^1/infinity non-linearity appears less as a starting point and more as an intermediary state of force that we only perceive as a starting point because we do not understand transitions or linearity.
We suppose that quantum gravity is a critical place because quantum gravity seems to be largely consistent from non-linearity forward. However, we may also look at linearity and non-linearity as merely transitional states among the many others that we perceive and understand better but which are not terminal in either direction.
Therefore, we can take the initial linearity as a base equation and gravity as a measure of quantum change and transition. We should be able to identify a feature of gravity that corresponds to 2^n transitions, but we should look for something that is more irrational.
What we are seeing here is a potential failure of quantum theory once we get beyond non-linearity. It also contains the only possibility for true randomness, because consistency is built into the non-linear/linear transition.
In such a case, even linearity becomes little more than the force by negative ct(0). All of our conceits must give way. Even Non-linearity becomes nothing more than a time orbit, the very existence of time itself is only one step back, Where it goes back to is unknown, but go back further it must in which case all of CT states are merely extension of this pre-linear foundation and perhaps, in that foundation, lies the fundamental particle which can be traced using exponential notation.
We are looking at light speed as a standard for scale, but we also know that scale doesn't work very well in any of the transitions, although there are reasons to believe that transitional speed in relevant to the inquiry. Let's look at the scale errors in the universe. Will use what we most closely observe, the smallest such particle that is stable alone (at least for an extended time) being an electron which is at the scale of 10^-20 vrs that "accepted" Planck length of 10^-8. We are working with very rough numbers because exactitude would require abandoning mass entirely in favor of changing clock times and their effects. This error is 10^12.
The next "error" is the electron (to allow a common scale) to BH which should be 10^32 (at most) and is instead 10^62 ( margin of error of 10^30; 3 times the error. However using planck length as the common scale, the margin of error for the two examples below (from the prior post) are 10^46 to 10^42 which are, shockingly, the same as the scale of error (at least using the average) as the scale of error for the plank length to electron mass error.
Is this some coincidence or some sort of "scale" error that follows all transitions. For example, is the Planck lengths to electron error of 10^12 a standard error of transition that would be found in moving from electron down to photons? From Photons down to space?
Does it carry forward for the larger transitions? And what would such a large factor represent? A measurement correction, god bridging some space?
Remember too that this factor of 10^12 is NOT just 10 followed by 12 zeros. No it is an exponential function x^n. We assume that it is 2^n, but it need not be. If Non-linearity is not an end point, then what else might fail in this intersection of information theory and quantum theory. Let's look at the problems with coincidence.
3^n where n changes yields-0-1, 1-3,2-9,3-37, 4-111, n-etc
compared to 2^2 yielding 0-1, 1-2,2-4,3-8, 4-16,n-etc
Originally the numbers for 3 seem very far off, but if you ignore planck length and instead concentrate on a single building block (CT1, for example) if you back out all the prior states you get 111-37-9-3=62 or 10^62. That happens to match up fairly well with what you might expect in terms of transitional size.
For the energy equation (which Einstein measured at 10^16) you would use 37-9-3=25
Still not very satisfying. So let's look at something different. We know that the transition between photons and wave energy is difficult to imagine. A 1^n is always going to be 1. 1^whatever=1
a 2 transition we know, as well as a 3.
a 4 transition grows very fast indeed, and is somewhat off the common scale.
But if we approach a number without arriving we get to a different type of scale.
In order to look at this, let's assume we use the next lower scale:
1 phase change=1 (1-0)
2 phase change=3-1=2
3 phase change=9-3=6
4 phase change=37-9=28
Let's combine the two, the next higher plus the next lower of higher change
CT(1)scale1(2)+scale2(1)=3
CT(2)scale(4)+scale2(3)=7
CT(3)scale(8)+scale2(9)=17 (close to the observed 10^16 scale)
CT(4)scale(16)+scale2(27)=43 (not so far off from the plank scale, but surprisingly close if you include the CT3 state (17+43=60) for the electron weight to the observed electron size.
These patterns are meaningless, however, even though there are reasons (negative times giving rise to energies,etc) to look for them unless you can find some reason for such a pattern.
The complexity of the analysis, however, should not detract for the fact that patterns may be intentional or accidental and the explanations for the transitions that we know must reflect those that are more subtle and based on the change in informational states.
We are down to three more points of inquiry...but first
Here is the set of equations and observations that we used in trying to select a proper scale:
First let's look at the history.
We cannot look for just patterns because photons and space have no real comparison, nor do photons and waves. Only at the transition of energy to matter do we begin to see quantum effects clearly.
While the equation e=mc^2 (ct3 to ct4) is familiar enough, the equation energy=photons*c (ct2 to ct3) is not well known, nor would it be easily understood if it was observed.
The much more complicated transition space=photon*c^1/2 (ct1 to ct2) is not only unknown but impossible to fully comprehend based on observations since we do not see transitions of this type. And then we have Non-linearity to linearity. Since the fractions can go infinitely in either direction c^ infinity or c^1/infinity non-linearity appears less as a starting point and more as an intermediary state of force that we only perceive as a starting point because we do not understand transitions or linearity.
We suppose that quantum gravity is a critical place because quantum gravity seems to be largely consistent from non-linearity forward. However, we may also look at linearity and non-linearity as merely transitional states among the many others that we perceive and understand better but which are not terminal in either direction.
Therefore, we can take the initial linearity as a base equation and gravity as a measure of quantum change and transition. We should be able to identify a feature of gravity that corresponds to 2^n transitions, but we should look for something that is more irrational.
What we are seeing here is a potential failure of quantum theory once we get beyond non-linearity. It also contains the only possibility for true randomness, because consistency is built into the non-linear/linear transition.
In such a case, even linearity becomes little more than the force by negative ct(0). All of our conceits must give way. Even Non-linearity becomes nothing more than a time orbit, the very existence of time itself is only one step back, Where it goes back to is unknown, but go back further it must in which case all of CT states are merely extension of this pre-linear foundation and perhaps, in that foundation, lies the fundamental particle which can be traced using exponential notation.
We are looking at light speed as a standard for scale, but we also know that scale doesn't work very well in any of the transitions, although there are reasons to believe that transitional speed in relevant to the inquiry. Let's look at the scale errors in the universe. Will use what we most closely observe, the smallest such particle that is stable alone (at least for an extended time) being an electron which is at the scale of 10^-20 vrs that "accepted" Planck length of 10^-8. We are working with very rough numbers because exactitude would require abandoning mass entirely in favor of changing clock times and their effects. This error is 10^12.
The next "error" is the electron (to allow a common scale) to BH which should be 10^32 (at most) and is instead 10^62 ( margin of error of 10^30; 3 times the error. However using planck length as the common scale, the margin of error for the two examples below (from the prior post) are 10^46 to 10^42 which are, shockingly, the same as the scale of error (at least using the average) as the scale of error for the plank length to electron mass error.
Is this some coincidence or some sort of "scale" error that follows all transitions. For example, is the Planck lengths to electron error of 10^12 a standard error of transition that would be found in moving from electron down to photons? From Photons down to space?
Does it carry forward for the larger transitions? And what would such a large factor represent? A measurement correction, god bridging some space?
Remember too that this factor of 10^12 is NOT just 10 followed by 12 zeros. No it is an exponential function x^n. We assume that it is 2^n, but it need not be. If Non-linearity is not an end point, then what else might fail in this intersection of information theory and quantum theory. Let's look at the problems with coincidence.
3^n where n changes yields-0-1, 1-3,2-9,3-37, 4-111, n-etc
compared to 2^2 yielding 0-1, 1-2,2-4,3-8, 4-16,n-etc
Originally the numbers for 3 seem very far off, but if you ignore planck length and instead concentrate on a single building block (CT1, for example) if you back out all the prior states you get 111-37-9-3=62 or 10^62. That happens to match up fairly well with what you might expect in terms of transitional size.
For the energy equation (which Einstein measured at 10^16) you would use 37-9-3=25
Still not very satisfying. So let's look at something different. We know that the transition between photons and wave energy is difficult to imagine. A 1^n is always going to be 1. 1^whatever=1
a 2 transition we know, as well as a 3.
a 4 transition grows very fast indeed, and is somewhat off the common scale.
But if we approach a number without arriving we get to a different type of scale.
In order to look at this, let's assume we use the next lower scale:
1 phase change=1 (1-0)
2 phase change=3-1=2
3 phase change=9-3=6
4 phase change=37-9=28
Let's combine the two, the next higher plus the next lower of higher change
CT(1)scale1(2)+scale2(1)=3
CT(2)scale(4)+scale2(3)=7
CT(3)scale(8)+scale2(9)=17 (close to the observed 10^16 scale)
CT(4)scale(16)+scale2(27)=43 (not so far off from the plank scale, but surprisingly close if you include the CT3 state (17+43=60) for the electron weight to the observed electron size.
These patterns are meaningless, however, even though there are reasons (negative times giving rise to energies,etc) to look for them unless you can find some reason for such a pattern.
The complexity of the analysis, however, should not detract for the fact that patterns may be intentional or accidental and the explanations for the transitions that we know must reflect those that are more subtle and based on the change in informational states.
We are down to three more points of inquiry...but first
Here is the set of equations and observations that we used in trying to select a proper scale:
What is seen is that much of this matter remains in orbit, increasing the gravity of the black hole (CT5) until a second unit of black hole is created (2x10^32 would be the starting point, but not the ending point.
The largest black hole is approximate 17billion times as large as the sun.
The smallest black hole is 6.3 suns. So we can say that a "hydrogen black hole" is 6.3 suns, a "helium black hole" is 12.6 suns. These very rough numbers can be worked backwards to get the size of fundamental units of other items (10^32 into 6.3 suns would tell you the size of the smallest particle of matter under this theory although that very rough number doesn't work any better than Planck Mass works for the smallest fundamental particle of matter).
Roughly, this yields the following analysis: 2x10^33g as the weight of the sun, 1.26x10^34g for a hydrogen black hole (hbh). HBH^1/32=11.6 grams.
This suggests that a fundamental particle of matter would be 11 grams (that’s a lot since an electron is 9x10^-28 grams and a proton 1.6x10^-24grams). We can make this worse. Using an electron as the minimum size (as opposed to any of the other quark particles) this suggests a conversion rate of 2^64 which implies an intermediary stage or a jump in quantum size of compression 2^16 (2^4) jumping to 2^64 (2^6). This progression of 0,1,2,3,4,6 has some frightening characteristics. For example 0+1+2=3; 1+3=4;2+4=6 suggesting the next progression would be 3+6=9. There is no basis for a non linear progression that comes to mind, but this would still be a patterned progression and if it turns out to be accurate, it would be worth additional study.
Using Plank Mass (PM) you get a conversion rate of 10^38 (sun) vs 10^-8 (Plank mass which is 10^46th and which is probably outside the astronomic margins of error for 10^32. However PM has been calculated using magnetic flux as 2.5x10^-4g http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0707/0707.0058.pdf. This yields a factor of 10^42. For electrons the scale appears way off 10^-28 to 10^34 which is 62, very close to the 10^64 integer jumping 2^6.
So you have PM which, while far from perfect, is at least a little closer.
The deviation for matter minimum size to Planck minimum size is smaller (10^20) than the electron minimum particle to black hole prediction-(off by 10^29) but both show predictions wildly off from observations.
The deviation for matter minimum size to Planck minimum size is smaller (10^20) than the electron minimum particle to black hole prediction-(off by 10^29) but both show predictions wildly off from observations.
For electrons to BH you have 10^62 and for protons or neutrons it would be 10^58 in terms of a pure mass scale. The “obvious” question is what is half way in size between a black hole and an electron where you have the so called “missing link” of matter. We can find some candidates. One possibility would be a black hole with no acretion disk, no populated event horizon. While such a "point" would have some "size" (fundamental particle size for a black hole just as we have the different types of fundamental particles for matter) it would be very hard to see. Unfortunately, it woudl also likely be at the center of several solar systems (from collapsed stars of a size 1/2 the size of 3.6 suns). Now these solar systems would be hard to see since they are dark so we cannot rule this out completely. There are more important aspects, however, that we should look harder at. Fundamental particle size is variable. From Plank Mass to electron to proton to neutron to quark and, god forbid we go off on this tangent, strings (see the article above for a more thorough discussion of going in for harmonics vs something more). The concept of orbits allowing the formation of several intermediary stages of matter and the concept that we have "massless" formations (EMF and Photons, not to mention space, but we mentioned it) and then "jump" to mass at the matter to energy transition indicates that mass is the wrong "scalar" for tracking change.
Since we know that an electron is a scale smaller than planck length of 10^-20 we can say that a lot more goes into the analysis of minimum particle size than a little math error.
We end up with some choices. First you can reject Non-linear time entirely, but that requires a rejection of Einstein and I’m not ready for that. Another is that you skip states or have intermeidate unobserved states which seems to work fairly well (10^-28 to 10^34 is a scale change of 10^62 which is very close (in terms of galactic hand grenades) to 10^64 which would be two states larger than matter (2^4 to 2^6). The next higher state suggested (10^512) would take a whole mess of black holes to reach, but so would the next linear state of 2^6. The final and best choice relates actual observation to mathematical calculation. We find these discrepancies for plank length vs fundamental length of particles observed. There are different ways to calculate plank length and different ways to define mass. It means that the reliance on the electron scale or Planck Mass scale is unwarranted.
http://thewestsidestory.net/2014/11/22/21589/space-researchers-may-found-albert-einsteins-black-hole-object/
http://thewestsidestory.net/2014/11/22/21589/space-researchers-may-found-albert-einsteins-black-hole-object/
NLT and Berkley Square
This movie has as good a description of NLT as most scientific texts I have seen (1933). I hate to misquote it, but it has a beautiful description of the constancy of time.
The movie is basically about an Engish scientist who goes back in time to have sex with a cousin and then falls in love with someone else. What a very strange premise for a movie, but one which I think should be remade.
However, the description of NLT:
He describes to a modern (1933 modern) a description of non-linearity:
Imagine a man on a river who passes a tree. After he passes, the tree is still there. Imagine sitting in a field of clover nearby. The clover remains.
Then imagine flying over it all in an airplane. You can see the tree and the man in the clover.
Of course, to really show non-linearity the man in the plane would have to see the other person in the two different positions, but it is still a wonderfully strange movie.
It shows the most interesting discussion of how people from different times with different expressions would interact, but from a starnge perspective, post revolutionary and quoting Lincoln is the 1787 range. It is quite amusing in its use of expressions.
Amusingly the counterpart from 150 years before changed places with the character from the future, but the story of his presence is only shown through a few words of a maid and the occasion comment from someone else.
The movie is basically about an Engish scientist who goes back in time to have sex with a cousin and then falls in love with someone else. What a very strange premise for a movie, but one which I think should be remade.
However, the description of NLT:
He describes to a modern (1933 modern) a description of non-linearity:
Imagine a man on a river who passes a tree. After he passes, the tree is still there. Imagine sitting in a field of clover nearby. The clover remains.
Then imagine flying over it all in an airplane. You can see the tree and the man in the clover.
Of course, to really show non-linearity the man in the plane would have to see the other person in the two different positions, but it is still a wonderfully strange movie.
It shows the most interesting discussion of how people from different times with different expressions would interact, but from a starnge perspective, post revolutionary and quoting Lincoln is the 1787 range. It is quite amusing in its use of expressions.
Amusingly the counterpart from 150 years before changed places with the character from the future, but the story of his presence is only shown through a few words of a maid and the occasion comment from someone else.
Saturday, November 22, 2014
why not to neglect your lover
I ate a can of soup. You can vastly improve a can of soup, if your stomach is up to it, by adding fresh hot peppers cut up in tiny pieces. But that's another story.
You should never pass up the opportunity
to write your lover a poem
or tell her that you think of her
remind her that you wrote her a song
or dedicated something special to her
or that she provides you relief, release
or whatever she provides
if you're lucky enough a reason to live
and if your even more lucky a reason to love
nothing lasts forever
so you should capture your gratitude
your passion, your fondness,
and if things last forever
what is better to save
than what you would say to your lover
what you would say about her
what she does for you
what you hope you do in return
what you wish you did
why you are a better person
and if you are not because of your lover
a better person than you were
then perhaps you shouldn't have one
because if you cannot write poetry to her
tell what is special, what is grand
what is greater than life,
what is greater than death
about what you share
and what you want to share
than you don't have a lover
and so you not neglect your lover
lest you find that you don't have one
lest your love suffers from neglect
which would make you less
even as your actions prove it
so take a moment
in your busy day
to reach out and do something
anything, anything special
and remember that life
is made of special gifts
and exquisite punishments
and love is something of both
and a lover is someone
who shares those with you
lessening the burden
and helping you
to embrace the pleasure
and allowing you togther
to understand it all
as something greater
than what either of you
would have apart
You should never pass up the opportunity
to write your lover a poem
or tell her that you think of her
remind her that you wrote her a song
or dedicated something special to her
or that she provides you relief, release
or whatever she provides
if you're lucky enough a reason to live
and if your even more lucky a reason to love
nothing lasts forever
so you should capture your gratitude
your passion, your fondness,
and if things last forever
what is better to save
than what you would say to your lover
what you would say about her
what she does for you
what you hope you do in return
what you wish you did
why you are a better person
and if you are not because of your lover
a better person than you were
then perhaps you shouldn't have one
because if you cannot write poetry to her
tell what is special, what is grand
what is greater than life,
what is greater than death
about what you share
and what you want to share
than you don't have a lover
and so you not neglect your lover
lest you find that you don't have one
lest your love suffers from neglect
which would make you less
even as your actions prove it
so take a moment
in your busy day
to reach out and do something
anything, anything special
and remember that life
is made of special gifts
and exquisite punishments
and love is something of both
and a lover is someone
who shares those with you
lessening the burden
and helping you
to embrace the pleasure
and allowing you togther
to understand it all
as something greater
than what either of you
would have apart
ya me canse one of two
'I've had enough,' says Mexican attorney general in missing students gaffe
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/09/protests-flare-in-mexico-after-attorney-generals-enough-im-tired-remarks
I am trying to decide if I've had enough...or not.
There is no limit to what I can withstand for the moment.
My law is that we must live according to the theory that every moment must last in eternity to be lived over and over again. How then, must you live your life.
I cannot say that my justice requirements compare at all to those of the Mexicans, but if we let small injustices occur then we can be nearly certain that we will see larger ones follow. Those who would enslave us in little ways will eventually enslave us as far as they can.
Today I rode my bike 6 miles, swam a very easy 2500 yards (only 800 im) in between and broke a period of relative inactivity that threatened this week and my continued existence.
I do not know what the balance of the day or of my life holds. I do know that at some point in time I must figure out what part courage plays in my continued existence, whether it be real or illusory. Somewhere out there is a decision.
I listened to a song which seemed to hold a truth for me, but now I cannot remember it clearly. But it said something about the need to explain myself to you. And though I am ready to do that, I do not have the words.
I am trying to decide if I've had enough...or not.
There is no limit to what I can withstand for the moment.
My law is that we must live according to the theory that every moment must last in eternity to be lived over and over again. How then, must you live your life.
I cannot say that my justice requirements compare at all to those of the Mexicans, but if we let small injustices occur then we can be nearly certain that we will see larger ones follow. Those who would enslave us in little ways will eventually enslave us as far as they can.
Today I rode my bike 6 miles, swam a very easy 2500 yards (only 800 im) in between and broke a period of relative inactivity that threatened this week and my continued existence.
I do not know what the balance of the day or of my life holds. I do know that at some point in time I must figure out what part courage plays in my continued existence, whether it be real or illusory. Somewhere out there is a decision.
I listened to a song which seemed to hold a truth for me, but now I cannot remember it clearly. But it said something about the need to explain myself to you. And though I am ready to do that, I do not have the words.
NLT-A peak into the land of god 6 of 10 why don't the numbers line up perfectly part deux
Scientists love a puzzle, so we have come to the part of this discussion where I will give them one.
First, why do we need a puzzle? After all, we can be pretty certain that CT1-CT5 exists, not just because of the math involved but also because it lines up well with information theory? The answer is that math is not reality. Math is just math. As long as the math explains reality, it's pretty helpful, but the prior post shows that what we like to think of as reality is much more complicated.
So what is the puzzle? The puzzle is what is the proper scale to measure clock times? We have shown that using mass is not a great way to do it. First, at CT0-CT3 states mass doesn't really mean a whole lot. We know why CT states all have gravity, but we don't know why some show mass differently. It is all fine and good to argue that CT coordinate shifts are inaccurate because mass doesn't work perfectly on scale, but that attributes an inordinate amount of "weight" to mass. Mass doesn't deserve unless we can attribute mass to space or non-linearity.
Another candidate is dimension. This candidate is a little better because coordinate change translates well into dimension. The problem that comes up, however, is very similar. Space appears to have no dimension (changing in only one coordinate at a time it wouldn't be very space like). Even so, a type of dimension is inherent in a coordinate based system. The problem with our traditional method of measuring lies in what happens during coordinate shifts. Black holes, for example, are point sources in the universe, at least potentially. We have shown earlier that "large" dimensional black holes are merely point sources which are separated by space, energy, matter, and the transitional forms that these transition between that are discussed above.
The universe is incredibly complicated, but NLT is elegant. Somewhere the transition between elegant and complex has to be explained. We know that NLT requires a steady state universe, one that has no entropy or randomness, yet we experience a transition of events that we interpret as entropy and randomness. We even experience and "act" as if we have self awareness and self determination. In a NLT universe, which clearly appears to be the case, even these features appear to have a "dream like quality" in that they do not exist, and yet we perceive them.
I write about us "changing the code" but in an NLT universe, we've already done whatever we're going to do. We can't change the code, we cannot escape the matrix. If we did, the theory goes, we would not exist. It isn't escaping the universe, it is only escaping linearity.
So the question of what the proper measurement is becomes problematic. The "information" theorists say, largely correctly, that we are measuring "information". Obviously, CT states are information states to some extent, they act like information in terms of exponential function. But information is as vague a description as time coordinates.
No, time coordinates, time information, whatever "word you use is inadequate to the task. For one reason, the words don't describe the feature changes. The addition of dimension, mass, energy and whatever is shown by the compression of black holes, even the explanation as to why the is inconsistency in units, the creation of mass and then the failure of mass to work internally (the failure of Planck mass vs observed quantum matter) and externally (the failure of the mass of black holes to properly correspond to exponential combinations of minimal mass, even though it appears to correspond largely to Planck predictions). But in this, there are clues. The clues, for example, include the fact that Planck mass doesn't correspond with observed mass. It shows that the interaction of different informational states involves much more than a simple observed quantity. Instead it has to do with something that is not observed clearly and not directly related to dimension or to mass, not to energy or to anything else that is tangible, but relates directly to each of those.
So there is your mystery. And we must solve it in 4 posts. So what do you think?
First, why do we need a puzzle? After all, we can be pretty certain that CT1-CT5 exists, not just because of the math involved but also because it lines up well with information theory? The answer is that math is not reality. Math is just math. As long as the math explains reality, it's pretty helpful, but the prior post shows that what we like to think of as reality is much more complicated.
So what is the puzzle? The puzzle is what is the proper scale to measure clock times? We have shown that using mass is not a great way to do it. First, at CT0-CT3 states mass doesn't really mean a whole lot. We know why CT states all have gravity, but we don't know why some show mass differently. It is all fine and good to argue that CT coordinate shifts are inaccurate because mass doesn't work perfectly on scale, but that attributes an inordinate amount of "weight" to mass. Mass doesn't deserve unless we can attribute mass to space or non-linearity.
Another candidate is dimension. This candidate is a little better because coordinate change translates well into dimension. The problem that comes up, however, is very similar. Space appears to have no dimension (changing in only one coordinate at a time it wouldn't be very space like). Even so, a type of dimension is inherent in a coordinate based system. The problem with our traditional method of measuring lies in what happens during coordinate shifts. Black holes, for example, are point sources in the universe, at least potentially. We have shown earlier that "large" dimensional black holes are merely point sources which are separated by space, energy, matter, and the transitional forms that these transition between that are discussed above.
The universe is incredibly complicated, but NLT is elegant. Somewhere the transition between elegant and complex has to be explained. We know that NLT requires a steady state universe, one that has no entropy or randomness, yet we experience a transition of events that we interpret as entropy and randomness. We even experience and "act" as if we have self awareness and self determination. In a NLT universe, which clearly appears to be the case, even these features appear to have a "dream like quality" in that they do not exist, and yet we perceive them.
I write about us "changing the code" but in an NLT universe, we've already done whatever we're going to do. We can't change the code, we cannot escape the matrix. If we did, the theory goes, we would not exist. It isn't escaping the universe, it is only escaping linearity.
So the question of what the proper measurement is becomes problematic. The "information" theorists say, largely correctly, that we are measuring "information". Obviously, CT states are information states to some extent, they act like information in terms of exponential function. But information is as vague a description as time coordinates.
No, time coordinates, time information, whatever "word you use is inadequate to the task. For one reason, the words don't describe the feature changes. The addition of dimension, mass, energy and whatever is shown by the compression of black holes, even the explanation as to why the is inconsistency in units, the creation of mass and then the failure of mass to work internally (the failure of Planck mass vs observed quantum matter) and externally (the failure of the mass of black holes to properly correspond to exponential combinations of minimal mass, even though it appears to correspond largely to Planck predictions). But in this, there are clues. The clues, for example, include the fact that Planck mass doesn't correspond with observed mass. It shows that the interaction of different informational states involves much more than a simple observed quantity. Instead it has to do with something that is not observed clearly and not directly related to dimension or to mass, not to energy or to anything else that is tangible, but relates directly to each of those.
So there is your mystery. And we must solve it in 4 posts. So what do you think?
Monday, November 17, 2014
homeless children
Child homelessness surges to nearly 2.5 million (+video) - Christian Science Monitor http://tinyurl.com/k6cm8sq shared via www.newshog.co
can this possibly be right? are we really this horrible?
NLT-A peak into the land of god 5 of 10 why don't the numbers line up perfectly
This post has the info from a prior post to put everything into context. The problem addressed is why don't the numbers in any physics inquiry line up properly. The discussion of exponential compression or exponential organization or whatever you want to call it raises an age old problem in physics. We get Planck lengths which are not only different from one another (there is more than one way to skin a Planck length cat) but are inconsistent with observed phenomena.
Somehow we have to reconcile these inconsistencies with a relatively well known and observable universe. While NLT is elegant, it doesn't solve every problem, but it does give several ways to approach these types of problem.
There is a unique inquiry afoot. The answers to the fundamental questions of the universe continue.
Somehow we have to reconcile these inconsistencies with a relatively well known and observable universe. While NLT is elegant, it doesn't solve every problem, but it does give several ways to approach these types of problem.
There is a unique inquiry afoot. The answers to the fundamental questions of the universe continue.
We have the solved the question of the event horizon. To recap, the event horizon reflect matter
falling into an orbit about a black hole which is a high gravity ct5 state as a
result of 10^32 matter or energy-a question yet to be fully explored, but to be
answer in principle here, into a single particle of clock time 5. The way to determine the very interesting question
of scale is to see what the minimum size of a black hole is. What are there two choice and why does it
appear to be 10^32 fundamental particles of matter?
First, there are two choices because if you are talking
about decisions based on the simple formula 2^n as n changes from 0 to infinity
in whole numbers, the bit coordinate increase than presumably you are talking
about a decision based system where the number of possible outcomes are
directly related to the initial state.
However, this does not appear to be what is happening.
Instead, as the clock time states increase, the each clock
time state becomes the fundamental unit of change. That is you start with non-linear time and
2^0 which is 1, one bit, plus or minus.
Then you go to the photonic state 2^1 or 2 where there are two possible
choices reflected in a two dimensional state, but the resulting force is a one
dimensional force, gravity (it cannot pull dimensionally, it can only pull to
non-linearity). In a normal
informational system, a coin flip for example, the next example would be to
have 3 coins tossed at once, but instead the concentration appears to be that
of the compressed state. 2^4 of the two dimensional state. This process continues so that at the
transition between matter and energy you have 10^16 fundamental units of energy
for each fundamental particle of matter.
Keep in mind this is only a scale function, a question of what happens
when you go from 10^8 to 10^16, you see a transition in terms of fundamental
particles of one type to fundamental particles of the next. The same result appears to be consistent with
the scale of black holes. While ct5
particles (black hole individual particles) would be very large indeed if they
were merely 10^32 fundamental particles of energy, they appear instead to
follow the pattern set by matter (and presumably by the lower states) in terms
of the amount of concentration necessary to have a stable unit.
Around this incredibly powerful gravity source, matter and
energy are drawn, but even though they fall towards the singularity, they
cannot reach it. They cannot even
transition from their current states to a CT5 state unless they reach a stable
quantity, at least not permanently.
Laboratory data from particle accelerators indicates that temporary
black holes can form. These would be
high energy states where an isolated concentration of matter occurs which
doesn't have the concentration to be stable but is sufficiently concentrated to
attain features of CT5.
This would indicate that in the high concentrations around a
black hole, those at the event horizon and perhaps closer, the concentrations
approach CT5 states and the speed with which the matter and energy
"drop" towards the point get faster and faster flattening out the
orbits and creating a situation where it is presumed that (1) the concentration
approaches CT5 without permanently being able to arrive leading to an easy
transition between those states (matter and CT5 since the energy is
sufficiently compacted to transition into matter and (2) the "disk of
material (matter and energy changing into matter) approaches an infinite
flatness allowing for an easy transition to the two dimensional states of
energy and the flattened matter. (3)
Presumably in between you'd have a highly concentrated state of matter at such
a high energy state that it would be difficult to distinguish it from either
energy or CT5.
What is seen is that much of this matter remains in orbit,
increasing the gravity of the black hole (CT5) until a second unit of black
hole is created (2x10^32 would be the starting point, but not the ending point.
The largest black hole is approximate 17billion times as
large as the sun.
The smallest black hole is 6.3 suns. So we can say that a "hydrogen black
hole" is 6.3 suns, a "helium black hole" is 12.6 suns. These very rough numbers can be worked
backwards to get the size of fundamental units of other items (10^32 into 6.3
suns would tell you the size of the smallest particle of matter under this
theory although that very rough number doesn't work any better than Planck Mass works for the smallest fundamental particle of matter).
Roughly, this yields the following analysis: 2x10^33g as the
weight of the sun, 1.26x10^34g for a hydrogen black hole (hbh). HBH^1/32=11.6 grams.
This suggests that a fundamental particle of matter would be 11 grams
(that’s a lot since an electron is 9x10^-28 grams and a proton 1.6x10^-24grams). We can make this worse. Using an electron as the minimum size (as
opposed to any of the other quark particles) this suggests a conversion rate of
2^64 which implies an intermediary stage or a jump in quantum size of
compression 2^16 (2^4) jumping to 2^64 (2^6).
This progression of 0,1,2,3,4,6 has some frightening
characteristics. For example 0+1+2=3;
1+3=4;2+4=6 suggesting the next progression would be 3+6=9. There is no basis for a non linear
progression that comes to mind, but this would still be a patterned progression
and if it turns out to be accurate, it would be worth additional study.
Using Plank Mass (PM)
you get a conversion rate of 10^38 (sun) vs 10^-8 (Plank mass which is 10^46th
and which is probably outside the astronomic margins of error for 10^32. However PM has been calculated using magnetic
flux as 2.5x10^-4g http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0707/0707.0058.pdf. This yields a factor of 10^42. For electrons the scale appears way off
10^-28 to 10^34 which is 62, very close to the 10^64 integer jumping 2^6.
So you have PM which, while far from perfect, is at least a
little closer.
The deviation for matter minimum size to Planck minimum size is smaller (10^20) than the electron minimum particle to black hole prediction-(off by 10^29) but both show predictions wildly off from observations.
The deviation for matter minimum size to Planck minimum size is smaller (10^20) than the electron minimum particle to black hole prediction-(off by 10^29) but both show predictions wildly off from observations.
For electrons to BH you have 10^62 and for protons or
neutrons it would be 10^58 in terms of a pure mass scale. The “obvious” question is what is half way in
size between a black hole and an electron where you have the so called “missing
link” of matter. We can find some candidates. One possibility would be a black hole with no acretion disk, no populated event horizon. While such a "point" would have some "size" (fundamental particle size for a black hole just as we have the different types of fundamental particles for matter) it would be very hard to see. Unfortunately, it woudl also likely be at the center of several solar systems (from collapsed stars of a size 1/2 the size of 3.6 suns). Now these solar systems would be hard to see since they are dark so we cannot rule this out completely. There are more important aspects, however, that we should look harder at. Fundamental particle size is variable. From Plank Mass to electron to proton to neutron to quark and, god forbid we go off on this tangent, strings (see the article above for a more thorough discussion of going in for harmonics vs something more). The concept of orbits allowing the formation of several intermediary stages of matter and the concept that we have "massless" formations (EMF and Photons, not to mention space, but we mentioned it) and then "jump" to mass at the matter to energy transition indicates that mass is the wrong "scalar" for tracking change.
Since we know that an electron is a scale smaller
than planck length of 10^-20 we can say that a lot more goes into the analysis
of minimum particle size than a little math error.
We end up with some choices. First you can reject Non-linear time
entirely, but that requires a rejection of Einstein and I’m not ready for
that. Another is that you skip states or have intermeidate unobserved states which seems to work fairly well (10^-28 to 10^34 is a scale change of 10^62
which is very close (in terms of galactic hand grenades) to 10^64 which would be
two states larger than matter (2^4 to 2^6).
The next higher state suggested (10^512) would take a whole mess of
black holes to reach, but so would the next linear state of 2^6. The final and best choice relates actual
observation to mathematical calculation.
We find these discrepancies for plank length vs fundamental length of
particles observed. There are different
ways to calculate plank length and different ways to define mass. It means that the reliance on the electron scale or Planck Mass scale is unwarranted.
If we reject Electron Scale, Proton/Neutron Scale and Planck Mass scales we are left with nothing more than informational states, but there are worse places to be in terms of a starting point. We know, for example, according to relativity that photos have gravity but no mass. The transition of states (2^n to 2^n+1) must have features converting matter in ways that are not immediately obvious because they stick into “dimensions” that we don’t perceive or come out of dimensions that we don't perceive. Perceive may include understand. Some of the length can be seen going outward into places that we do not accurately measure in black holes. Finding these locations, determining how informational states yield position, understanding how weights vary in terms of theoretical stability (e.g. Planck Mass) and actual stability (electron and quark products) and will be important. Will we find different informational state, will the interaction of states change the way that the end product is measured and weighed, how it is stabilized and destabilized? We are only up to 5 of 10.
If we reject Electron Scale, Proton/Neutron Scale and Planck Mass scales we are left with nothing more than informational states, but there are worse places to be in terms of a starting point. We know, for example, according to relativity that photos have gravity but no mass. The transition of states (2^n to 2^n+1) must have features converting matter in ways that are not immediately obvious because they stick into “dimensions” that we don’t perceive or come out of dimensions that we don't perceive. Perceive may include understand. Some of the length can be seen going outward into places that we do not accurately measure in black holes. Finding these locations, determining how informational states yield position, understanding how weights vary in terms of theoretical stability (e.g. Planck Mass) and actual stability (electron and quark products) and will be important. Will we find different informational state, will the interaction of states change the way that the end product is measured and weighed, how it is stabilized and destabilized? We are only up to 5 of 10.
Likewise there is no intermediary particle observed between
a black hole and a concentration of matter having characteristics of stability;
but that doesn't mean that such particles do not exist.
So what is this 17 billion sun version of the black
hole? Clearly it is not much different
that a larger atom or a molecule perhaps.
In between the individual units of the black hole you would find the
compressed type of matter that you find around the event horizon. This compression is such that there is not
much room for space, photons or energy, but those states would probably be
transitional states.
This model gives rise to the question of what you would see
around a helium atom. We have been led
to expect that there's a lot of space in there.
While the gravity is not enough to join everything together, we know
that there are unique forces at work and it is possible that the forces at work
are such that energy is held within the minimum matter state in a similarly
fluid arrangement, presumably transitioning between photonic forces and ever
temporary matter states. Of course,
because there gravitational effects are less, we might want to discount that,
but we're working with the same equations and as r becomes very small, the
effect on the masses makes them approach infinity whether we like it or not,
that is we are at very small separation distances compared to the mass and
there are reasons to believe that some similarities exist.
In fact, it seems likely that the very substance of matter
is related to the transition state, the matter-event horizon and the relatively
fluid transitions that can occur here.
To better understand the coordinate dimension disconnect, a
simple example can be examined. To do
this we will look at linear changes for a single point with 4 coordinates where
each point changes with the addition of 1.
This is vastly oversimplified where you have compression states and
negative states corresponding to positive states, but the example works well to
understand time. For this example you
have a point (P) having coordinates (x,y,z,t)
Pa(1,3,5,6) to Pb(2,4,6,7).
What can be seen here is that an observer at coordinate t might not
experience a change as it moves, but would observe the change in the other
points. Since only the change is
visible, the movement of the points is what we perceive and what we perceive as
time. The three that are seen are the changing
together or the perception would not be possible. The change must be common for multiple
particles through compression in order to observe change on a large scale.
So dimensions are not dimensions.
Coordinates are not dimensions
Multiple coordinates identify the position of one quantum
time point relative to another, but there is always some separation unless
compression is sufficient (temporarily or permanently) to allow new forces to
come into play, or to amend the existing forces, by increasing the
informational efficiency of the clock time by a complete state (integer 0, 1,
2, 3, etc) as each ct state transitions to the next. In between transitions, there appears to be
sufficient concentration to allow for transitional states to exist, at least
for high density matter (radioactive isotopes) and high enough density black
holes to have quasar characteristics.
It can be presumed that the force changes that allow black
holes to stay together, super-dupe strong and weak forces for lack of a better
name; correspond in some way or derive in some way from the strong and weak
forces holding energy together in sufficient concentrations to be stable and,
when sufficient amounts of matter are formed in proximity (radioactive
isotopes) to create transition states.
The lower the clock time of the point in question, the fewer
simultaneous changes define the position at once but the faster they can occur.
Coordinates correspond in function to information on the
location of a point and to a bit of information with two states.
We theorize this process continues indefinitely, each
transition occurring where r goes to zero (in the gravity equation) meaning at
an infinite concentration of the prior state which much "jump" from
this near infinity to the next higher clock time. At some point in time, the transition
"jumps" to non-linearity and we start the process over again.
This, of course, is an over simplification, but all the
operative components are present.
The "measurement" of the these relative black
holes (point black holes vs the orbit of neptune) provides additional support
for the theory, because the "space" perceived must be occupied by
something, in this case the transitional material at high concentrations, true
for black holes, and presumably true for lesser energy states, even those as dispersed
in terms of concentration as wave energy.
There appears little dispersion in photonic states and photons appear to
be point sources themselves, but we should not be fooled by our prejudices
since we know that a unique transition of force occurs from the prior
discussions.
Sunday, November 16, 2014
NLT-A peak into the land of god 4 of 10 views of godspace-the answer to all your questions?
There is a unique inquiry afoot. The answers to the fundamental questions of the universe continue.
We have the solved the question of the event horizon. To recap, the event horizon reflect matter falling into an orbit about a black hole which is a high gravity ct5 state as a result of 10^32 matter or energy-a question yet to be fully explored, but to be answer in principle here, into a single particle of clock time 5. The way to determine the very interesting question of scale is to see what the minimum size of a black hole is. What are there two choice and why does it appear to be 10^32 fundamental particles of matter?
First, there are two choices because if you are talking about decisions based on the simple formula 2^n as n changes from 0 to infinity in whole numbers, the bit coordinate increase than presumably you are talking about a decision based system where the number of possible outcomes are directly related to the initial state. However, this does not appear to be what is happening.
Instead, as the clock time states increase, the each clock time state becomes the fundamental unit of change. That is you start with non-linear time and 2^0 which is 1, one bit, plus or minus. Then you go to the photonic state 2^1 or 2 where there are two possible choices reflected in a two dimensional state, but the resulting force is a one dimensional force, gravity (it cannot pull dimensionally, it can only pull to non-linearity). In a normal informational system, a coin flip for example, the next example would be to have 3 coins tossed at once, but instead the concentration appears to be that of the compressed state. 2^4 of the two dimensional state. This process continues so that at the transition between matter and energy you have 10^16 fundamental units of energy for each fundamental particle of matter. Keep in mind this is only a scale function, a question of what happens when you go from 10^8 to 10^16, you see a transition in terms of fundamental particles of one type to fundamental particles of the next. The same result appears to be consistent with the scale of black holes. While ct5 particles (black hole individual particles) would be very large indeed if they were merely 10^32 fundamental particles of energy, they appear instead to follow the pattern set by matter (and presumably by the lower states) in terms of the amount of concentration necessary to have a stable unit.
Around this incredibly powerful gravity source, matter and energy are drawn, but even though they fall towards the singularity, they cannot reach it. They cannot even transition from their current states to a CT5 state unless they reach a stable quantity, at least not permanently. Laboratory data from particle accelerators indicates that temporary black holes can form. These would be high energy states where an isolated concentration of matter occurs which doesn't have the concentration to be stable but is sufficiently concentrated to attain features of CT5.
This would indicate that in the high concentrations around a black hole, those at the event horizon and perhaps closer, the concentrations approach CT5 states and the speed with which the matter and energy "drop" towards the point get faster and faster flattening out the orbits and creating a situation where it is presumed that (1) the concentration approaches CT5 without permanently being able to arrive leading to an easy transition between those states (matter and CT5 since the energy is sufficiently compacted to transition into matter and (2) the "disk of material (matter and energy changing into matter) approaches an infinite flatness allowing for an easy transition to the two dimensional states of energy and the flattened matter. (3) Presumably in between you'd have a highly concentrated state of matter at such a high energy state that it would be difficult to distinguish it from either energy or CT5.
What is seen is that much of this matter remains in orbit, increasing the gravity of the black hole (CT5) until a second unit of black hole is created (2x10^32 would be the starting point, but not the ending point.
The largest black hole is approximate 17billion times as large as the sun.
The smallest black hole is 6.3 suns. So we can say that a "hydrogen black hole" is 6.3 suns, a "helium black hole" is 12.6 suns. These very rough numbers can be worked backwards to get the size of fundamental units of other items (10^32 into 6.3 suns would tell you the size of the smallest particle of matter under this theory although that a very rough number).
So what is this 17 billion sun version of the black hole? Clearly it is not much different that a larger atom or a molecule perhaps. In between the individual units of the black hole you would find the compressed type of matter that you find around the event horizon. This compression is such that there is not much room for space, photons or energy, but those states would probably be transitional states.
This model gives rise to the question of what you would see around a helium atom. We have been led to expect that there's a lot of space in there. While the gravity is not enough to join everything together, we know that there are unique forces at work and it is possible that the forces at work are such that energy is held within the minimum matter state in a similarly fluid arrangement, presumably transitioning between photonic forces and ever temporary matter states. Of course, because there gravitational effects are less, we might want to discount that, but we're working with the same equations and as r becomes very small, the effect on the masses makes them approach infinity whether we like it or not, that is we are at very small separation distances compared to the mass and there are reasons to believe that some similarities exist.
In fact, it seems likely that the very substance of matter is related to the transition state, the matter-event horizon and the relatively fluid transitions that can occur here.
So dimensions are not dimensions.
Coordinates are not dimensions
Multiple coordinates identify the position of one quantum time point relative to another, but there is always some separation unless compression is sufficient (temporarily or permanently) to allow new forces to come into play, or to amend the existing forces, by increasing the informational efficiency of the clock time by a complete state (integer 0, 1, 2, 3, etc) as each ct state transitions to the next. In between transitions, there appears to be sufficient concentration to allow for transitional states to exist, at least for high density matter (radioactive isotopes) and high enough density black holes to have quasar characteristics.
It can be presumed that the force changes that allow black holes to stay together, super-dupe strong and weak forces for lack of a better name; correspond in some way or derive in some way from the strong and weak forces holding energy together in sufficient concentrations to be stable and, when sufficient amounts of matter are formed in proximity (radioactive isotopes) to create transition states.
The lower the clock time of the point in question, the fewer simultaneous changes define the position at once but the faster they can occur.
Coordinates correspond in function to information on the location of a point and to a bit of information with two states.
We theorize this process continues indefinitely, each transition occurring where r goes to zero (in the gravity equation) meaning at an infinite concentration of the prior state which much "jump" from this near infinity to the next higher clock time. At some point in time, the transition "jumps" to non-linearity and we start the process over again.
This, of course, is an over simplification, but all the operative components are present.
The "measurement" of the these relative black holes (point black holes vs the orbit of neptune) provides additional support for the theory, because the "space" perceived (in the largest example outward to the orbit of neptune) must be occupied by something, in this case the transitional material (matter transitioning to energy CT3 states which may also transition to lower ct states and ct5 states) at high concentrations, true for black holes, and presumably true for lesser energy states, even those as dispersed in terms of concentration as wave energy. There appears little dispersion in photonic states and photons appear to be point sources themselves, but we should not be fooled by our prejudices since we know that a unique transition of force occurs from the prior discussions.
We have the solved the question of the event horizon. To recap, the event horizon reflect matter falling into an orbit about a black hole which is a high gravity ct5 state as a result of 10^32 matter or energy-a question yet to be fully explored, but to be answer in principle here, into a single particle of clock time 5. The way to determine the very interesting question of scale is to see what the minimum size of a black hole is. What are there two choice and why does it appear to be 10^32 fundamental particles of matter?
First, there are two choices because if you are talking about decisions based on the simple formula 2^n as n changes from 0 to infinity in whole numbers, the bit coordinate increase than presumably you are talking about a decision based system where the number of possible outcomes are directly related to the initial state. However, this does not appear to be what is happening.
Instead, as the clock time states increase, the each clock time state becomes the fundamental unit of change. That is you start with non-linear time and 2^0 which is 1, one bit, plus or minus. Then you go to the photonic state 2^1 or 2 where there are two possible choices reflected in a two dimensional state, but the resulting force is a one dimensional force, gravity (it cannot pull dimensionally, it can only pull to non-linearity). In a normal informational system, a coin flip for example, the next example would be to have 3 coins tossed at once, but instead the concentration appears to be that of the compressed state. 2^4 of the two dimensional state. This process continues so that at the transition between matter and energy you have 10^16 fundamental units of energy for each fundamental particle of matter. Keep in mind this is only a scale function, a question of what happens when you go from 10^8 to 10^16, you see a transition in terms of fundamental particles of one type to fundamental particles of the next. The same result appears to be consistent with the scale of black holes. While ct5 particles (black hole individual particles) would be very large indeed if they were merely 10^32 fundamental particles of energy, they appear instead to follow the pattern set by matter (and presumably by the lower states) in terms of the amount of concentration necessary to have a stable unit.
Around this incredibly powerful gravity source, matter and energy are drawn, but even though they fall towards the singularity, they cannot reach it. They cannot even transition from their current states to a CT5 state unless they reach a stable quantity, at least not permanently. Laboratory data from particle accelerators indicates that temporary black holes can form. These would be high energy states where an isolated concentration of matter occurs which doesn't have the concentration to be stable but is sufficiently concentrated to attain features of CT5.
This would indicate that in the high concentrations around a black hole, those at the event horizon and perhaps closer, the concentrations approach CT5 states and the speed with which the matter and energy "drop" towards the point get faster and faster flattening out the orbits and creating a situation where it is presumed that (1) the concentration approaches CT5 without permanently being able to arrive leading to an easy transition between those states (matter and CT5 since the energy is sufficiently compacted to transition into matter and (2) the "disk of material (matter and energy changing into matter) approaches an infinite flatness allowing for an easy transition to the two dimensional states of energy and the flattened matter. (3) Presumably in between you'd have a highly concentrated state of matter at such a high energy state that it would be difficult to distinguish it from either energy or CT5.
What is seen is that much of this matter remains in orbit, increasing the gravity of the black hole (CT5) until a second unit of black hole is created (2x10^32 would be the starting point, but not the ending point.
The largest black hole is approximate 17billion times as large as the sun.
The smallest black hole is 6.3 suns. So we can say that a "hydrogen black hole" is 6.3 suns, a "helium black hole" is 12.6 suns. These very rough numbers can be worked backwards to get the size of fundamental units of other items (10^32 into 6.3 suns would tell you the size of the smallest particle of matter under this theory although that a very rough number).
So what is this 17 billion sun version of the black hole? Clearly it is not much different that a larger atom or a molecule perhaps. In between the individual units of the black hole you would find the compressed type of matter that you find around the event horizon. This compression is such that there is not much room for space, photons or energy, but those states would probably be transitional states.
This model gives rise to the question of what you would see around a helium atom. We have been led to expect that there's a lot of space in there. While the gravity is not enough to join everything together, we know that there are unique forces at work and it is possible that the forces at work are such that energy is held within the minimum matter state in a similarly fluid arrangement, presumably transitioning between photonic forces and ever temporary matter states. Of course, because there gravitational effects are less, we might want to discount that, but we're working with the same equations and as r becomes very small, the effect on the masses makes them approach infinity whether we like it or not, that is we are at very small separation distances compared to the mass and there are reasons to believe that some similarities exist.
In fact, it seems likely that the very substance of matter is related to the transition state, the matter-event horizon and the relatively fluid transitions that can occur here.
So dimensions are not dimensions.
Coordinates are not dimensions
Multiple coordinates identify the position of one quantum time point relative to another, but there is always some separation unless compression is sufficient (temporarily or permanently) to allow new forces to come into play, or to amend the existing forces, by increasing the informational efficiency of the clock time by a complete state (integer 0, 1, 2, 3, etc) as each ct state transitions to the next. In between transitions, there appears to be sufficient concentration to allow for transitional states to exist, at least for high density matter (radioactive isotopes) and high enough density black holes to have quasar characteristics.
It can be presumed that the force changes that allow black holes to stay together, super-dupe strong and weak forces for lack of a better name; correspond in some way or derive in some way from the strong and weak forces holding energy together in sufficient concentrations to be stable and, when sufficient amounts of matter are formed in proximity (radioactive isotopes) to create transition states.
The lower the clock time of the point in question, the fewer simultaneous changes define the position at once but the faster they can occur.
Coordinates correspond in function to information on the location of a point and to a bit of information with two states.
We theorize this process continues indefinitely, each transition occurring where r goes to zero (in the gravity equation) meaning at an infinite concentration of the prior state which much "jump" from this near infinity to the next higher clock time. At some point in time, the transition "jumps" to non-linearity and we start the process over again.
This, of course, is an over simplification, but all the operative components are present.
The "measurement" of the these relative black holes (point black holes vs the orbit of neptune) provides additional support for the theory, because the "space" perceived (in the largest example outward to the orbit of neptune) must be occupied by something, in this case the transitional material (matter transitioning to energy CT3 states which may also transition to lower ct states and ct5 states) at high concentrations, true for black holes, and presumably true for lesser energy states, even those as dispersed in terms of concentration as wave energy. There appears little dispersion in photonic states and photons appear to be point sources themselves, but we should not be fooled by our prejudices since we know that a unique transition of force occurs from the prior discussions.
NLT-A peak into the land of god 3 of 10 views of godspace-a cup of tea edited
I am sure that many of you are thinking
if you look for the right thing (not a hologram) a study of the transition zone of a black hole (event horizon) and at the surface of a radiating particle, the view should yield similar comparisons and perhaps something interesting.
Matter and energy and ct5 states are interchanging.
As is disclosed in EHT and NLT we see black holes giving off energy, necessarily involving the change of matter into energy. The scale of the transfer is enormous.
But that seems much of a rehash of yesterday's post which was done for the walrus cabal's amusement. It is Sunday and, as I often do, I turn to more ecleastical musings. This Sunday's "sermon" will be on the God of Abraham who, by coincidence is the god of the Christian and the Muslem and who has apparently commanded us, at various times and for various reasons, to kill one another merely based on our approach to him. However, this is not a religious text, but is instead a text of physics so let us look at him/her from the realm, not of g-space (pre-linearity) but let us instead look one step closer to us. Let us assume he is a god of linearity, in NLT, experiencing a "void" in the words of Moses (or whoever else wrote genesis, Sumarian, Babylonian, or perhaps a wandering Neadrethal, the last of his kind, remembering a neandrathal story that was told to him long ago by Adam.
So where do you experience the dimensionless void in NLT? For those of you who guessed CT0, congratulations for actually reading some of this, but you are wrong. Just as we experience 3 dimensions in our 4 dimensional view of things (CT4) so would our god in CT0 experience lineairty of time but no space whatsoever. The CT0 universe is the universe of the mythincal 3 year old who got a "c-" on her school project (the linear universe).
No, we're talking about a biblical god that finds himself (sex is irrelevant for anthropomorphising and who really wants to take sexual credit for this mess). He would have the capability of being everywhere (changing his one dimension at a time) and getting there relatively quickly because he could change that one coordinate realatively quickly, but he would not experience dimension, nor light, nor anything else. His only "force" would be gravity, pulling him back towards non-linearity; but he would change quickly.
Apparently, it is a powerful place to start from, because he would change gravity to make first light (ct2), then emf (ct3) before he created the heavens and the earth (ct4). The part where he makes black holes (ct5) is probably hidden in the bible somewhere unless that was considered less relevant for some reason.
But that god would age, because he lived in a place of linearity, not ct0. So is he still with us or has he whithered away. And if so, where did he whither too? How is he affected by the non-linearity which apprarently causes him to live each moment over and over again into eternity?
One of my favorite posts, to my favorite reader, was to show that while my poems are fairly lackluster, they can rhyme, at least a little. I should write a new one today, but my mouth is on fire, and eyes and nose are watering from cutting up hot peppers and putting them in my breakfast, and so I'm going to take a shortcut and reprint (you can find it alone in an earlier post)...in honor of the pope's comments on euthanasia. It occurs to me that he claims to be in touch with the god of ct1, but not CT0, so perhaps the ct1 god is not so right about these things, or right in his non-dimensional way, that causes us to fight when we should be tending our metaphorical garden (the earth, and with NLT the remainder of the vast CT(infinity) universe) that I envision. But enough science, on to poetry.
A cup of tea with death
I swam 3000 yards
as I am wont to do
and afterward decided
to have a cup or two
I drank too fast
and choked a little bit
and as i made a gasp
death came to take a sit
I glanced into his sockets dry
and cape as black as pitch
showing death in all its forms
but not the suffering fits
there were fearful cancers
with flat malignant spread
canon balls and arrows
the fearfully aged dead
I knew some and some I don't
All the ways a person dies
and so I asked, 'a cup for you?'
"don't mind if I do," he sighs
Do you fear me little one
I answered not so much
his bony hand reached for mine
and held it in a clutch
Friend he said I'm here for you
whenever do you need me
I'm good for all in pain
of that I'm sure you see
I bring a peace to everyone
the emperor and slave
are equal in my gentle arms
from pain all do I save
The one who has too many kids
the ones who die alone
the ones with happy full lives
the ones without a bone
And all are treated equally
the sinner and the saint
the artist and the ditch digger
tell me if they aint
I relieve them of the loads
their burdens hard to bear
the work they think they have to do
their hunger and their fear
So tell me will you go with me
and swim that final mile
I put my hand on top of his
and gave a little smile
Not tonight my good old friend
Then I will wait for you
and when the world has been too much
we'll ride together we two.
if you look for the right thing (not a hologram) a study of the transition zone of a black hole (event horizon) and at the surface of a radiating particle, the view should yield similar comparisons and perhaps something interesting.
Matter and energy and ct5 states are interchanging.
As is disclosed in EHT and NLT we see black holes giving off energy, necessarily involving the change of matter into energy. The scale of the transfer is enormous.
But that seems much of a rehash of yesterday's post which was done for the walrus cabal's amusement. It is Sunday and, as I often do, I turn to more ecleastical musings. This Sunday's "sermon" will be on the God of Abraham who, by coincidence is the god of the Christian and the Muslem and who has apparently commanded us, at various times and for various reasons, to kill one another merely based on our approach to him. However, this is not a religious text, but is instead a text of physics so let us look at him/her from the realm, not of g-space (pre-linearity) but let us instead look one step closer to us. Let us assume he is a god of linearity, in NLT, experiencing a "void" in the words of Moses (or whoever else wrote genesis, Sumarian, Babylonian, or perhaps a wandering Neadrethal, the last of his kind, remembering a neandrathal story that was told to him long ago by Adam.
So where do you experience the dimensionless void in NLT? For those of you who guessed CT0, congratulations for actually reading some of this, but you are wrong. Just as we experience 3 dimensions in our 4 dimensional view of things (CT4) so would our god in CT0 experience lineairty of time but no space whatsoever. The CT0 universe is the universe of the mythincal 3 year old who got a "c-" on her school project (the linear universe).
No, we're talking about a biblical god that finds himself (sex is irrelevant for anthropomorphising and who really wants to take sexual credit for this mess). He would have the capability of being everywhere (changing his one dimension at a time) and getting there relatively quickly because he could change that one coordinate realatively quickly, but he would not experience dimension, nor light, nor anything else. His only "force" would be gravity, pulling him back towards non-linearity; but he would change quickly.
Apparently, it is a powerful place to start from, because he would change gravity to make first light (ct2), then emf (ct3) before he created the heavens and the earth (ct4). The part where he makes black holes (ct5) is probably hidden in the bible somewhere unless that was considered less relevant for some reason.
But that god would age, because he lived in a place of linearity, not ct0. So is he still with us or has he whithered away. And if so, where did he whither too? How is he affected by the non-linearity which apprarently causes him to live each moment over and over again into eternity?
One of my favorite posts, to my favorite reader, was to show that while my poems are fairly lackluster, they can rhyme, at least a little. I should write a new one today, but my mouth is on fire, and eyes and nose are watering from cutting up hot peppers and putting them in my breakfast, and so I'm going to take a shortcut and reprint (you can find it alone in an earlier post)...in honor of the pope's comments on euthanasia. It occurs to me that he claims to be in touch with the god of ct1, but not CT0, so perhaps the ct1 god is not so right about these things, or right in his non-dimensional way, that causes us to fight when we should be tending our metaphorical garden (the earth, and with NLT the remainder of the vast CT(infinity) universe) that I envision. But enough science, on to poetry.
A cup of tea with death
I swam 3000 yards
as I am wont to do
and afterward decided
to have a cup or two
I drank too fast
and choked a little bit
and as i made a gasp
death came to take a sit
I glanced into his sockets dry
and cape as black as pitch
showing death in all its forms
but not the suffering fits
there were fearful cancers
with flat malignant spread
canon balls and arrows
the fearfully aged dead
I knew some and some I don't
All the ways a person dies
and so I asked, 'a cup for you?'
"don't mind if I do," he sighs
Do you fear me little one
I answered not so much
his bony hand reached for mine
and held it in a clutch
Friend he said I'm here for you
whenever do you need me
I'm good for all in pain
of that I'm sure you see
I bring a peace to everyone
the emperor and slave
are equal in my gentle arms
from pain all do I save
The one who has too many kids
the ones who die alone
the ones with happy full lives
the ones without a bone
And all are treated equally
the sinner and the saint
the artist and the ditch digger
tell me if they aint
I relieve them of the loads
their burdens hard to bear
the work they think they have to do
their hunger and their fear
So tell me will you go with me
and swim that final mile
I put my hand on top of his
and gave a little smile
Not tonight my good old friend
Then I will wait for you
and when the world has been too much
we'll ride together we two.
Saturday, November 15, 2014
NLT-Black Holes and isolated Forces-pre event horizon analysis 2 of 3
Of walruses, quasar beams, and the event horizon
Something interesting happens at the event horizon in NLT and I am about to tell you what it is.
We start with the simplified equation for gravity (or gravitas for our walrus friends) Gm1*m2/r^2 where the mass and distance define the strangeness of the so called event horizon. But what, dear reader is the event in NLT.
Let's digress, because I know how you love my digressions. Apparently the idea of floating cars, instantaneous travel and unlimited power were unsatisfying to those who would provide me with the desired fully furnished cave laboratory. Of course I would prefer something exotic. The hills of Turkey, the mountains of the family home in the steppes of Russia, the always jewish physicist friendly greater German empire, a Roman alps location, The Brazilian border states, the Chilean moutnains, perhaps, I'd even settle for something in the hills of New Mexico. But those things which would foster brotherly love hold no interest for you. So how about a quasar beam weapon that you could blast through your enemies with? Interested? Well, that figures, let's continue.
At the event horizon in EHT, the old standby that had to stand down, gravity merely won. The matter falling into the black hole would turn energetic, photonic, spatial and then just disappear completely. Alas, even I am capable of a minor wrong turn, understanding that deep inside I knew the right way all along. Why? Because the gravity failed to disappear. The pesky gravity affected my gravitas and so I delved deeply into the math and the result is that we know that the blackest of black holes is little more than a black hole of ct5 states, a particle of that up to the point where there is enough matter to form two of them.
Now you are saying, so there is an accretion of matter, highly compressed, but not able to stably maintain a ct5 state because of a lack of concentration around a black hole. And the walruses are chewing their mustachios in delight, twirling their bowlers so fast the friction threatens to set them on fire, will I say there is their beloved hologram. Oh joy they think, we will be justified at last, the theory of NLT will collapse and we can start looking for our non-existent Higgs particles again, but in the back sits a chair bound walrus, nervously glancing about. It cannot be that easy. And of course, NLT being correct, it is not.
So the problem with our equation is that m1 and m2 are getting pretty big (the masses of the black hole and the accumulating matter). Worse still, r is going to zero.
But matter cannot go to to CT5, so what happens? First it flattens out, as all spinning systems do. And what do you have with an ever increasing very tight two dimensional system? Whatever it is it must be consistent with NLT and it must fit in with the rest of this blog.
The matter, etc cannot to go ct5 but is very very flat. Two dimensionally flat. Any guesses yet? We have to observe what is predicted and what we see is at right angles to the disc a beam of high energy which we know as quasars and the beam is the quasar beam I promised earlier.
And how is this consistent with NLT? Because if the "stuff" orbiting a CT5 point cannot go to CT5 but is 2 dimensional it can go from matter to energy and that is what it does, thereby having the power to leave at the point where it might otherwise go to light. There is one more but this is only 2 of 3 and something has to happen.
And, by the way, the quasar beam might be of use against an alien invasion, but wouldn't do much as an offensive weapon. If the chinese shot us the beam would pass through the earth and if the angle was right (not a direct line I'm told) it would fry them too, not to mention a number of other problems like pushing the earth out of its orbit. Still, something to think about when planning the zip codes of your cave laboratories.
Something interesting happens at the event horizon in NLT and I am about to tell you what it is.
We start with the simplified equation for gravity (or gravitas for our walrus friends) Gm1*m2/r^2 where the mass and distance define the strangeness of the so called event horizon. But what, dear reader is the event in NLT.
Let's digress, because I know how you love my digressions. Apparently the idea of floating cars, instantaneous travel and unlimited power were unsatisfying to those who would provide me with the desired fully furnished cave laboratory. Of course I would prefer something exotic. The hills of Turkey, the mountains of the family home in the steppes of Russia, the always jewish physicist friendly greater German empire, a Roman alps location, The Brazilian border states, the Chilean moutnains, perhaps, I'd even settle for something in the hills of New Mexico. But those things which would foster brotherly love hold no interest for you. So how about a quasar beam weapon that you could blast through your enemies with? Interested? Well, that figures, let's continue.
At the event horizon in EHT, the old standby that had to stand down, gravity merely won. The matter falling into the black hole would turn energetic, photonic, spatial and then just disappear completely. Alas, even I am capable of a minor wrong turn, understanding that deep inside I knew the right way all along. Why? Because the gravity failed to disappear. The pesky gravity affected my gravitas and so I delved deeply into the math and the result is that we know that the blackest of black holes is little more than a black hole of ct5 states, a particle of that up to the point where there is enough matter to form two of them.
Now you are saying, so there is an accretion of matter, highly compressed, but not able to stably maintain a ct5 state because of a lack of concentration around a black hole. And the walruses are chewing their mustachios in delight, twirling their bowlers so fast the friction threatens to set them on fire, will I say there is their beloved hologram. Oh joy they think, we will be justified at last, the theory of NLT will collapse and we can start looking for our non-existent Higgs particles again, but in the back sits a chair bound walrus, nervously glancing about. It cannot be that easy. And of course, NLT being correct, it is not.
So the problem with our equation is that m1 and m2 are getting pretty big (the masses of the black hole and the accumulating matter). Worse still, r is going to zero.
But matter cannot go to to CT5, so what happens? First it flattens out, as all spinning systems do. And what do you have with an ever increasing very tight two dimensional system? Whatever it is it must be consistent with NLT and it must fit in with the rest of this blog.
The matter, etc cannot to go ct5 but is very very flat. Two dimensionally flat. Any guesses yet? We have to observe what is predicted and what we see is at right angles to the disc a beam of high energy which we know as quasars and the beam is the quasar beam I promised earlier.
And how is this consistent with NLT? Because if the "stuff" orbiting a CT5 point cannot go to CT5 but is 2 dimensional it can go from matter to energy and that is what it does, thereby having the power to leave at the point where it might otherwise go to light. There is one more but this is only 2 of 3 and something has to happen.
And, by the way, the quasar beam might be of use against an alien invasion, but wouldn't do much as an offensive weapon. If the chinese shot us the beam would pass through the earth and if the angle was right (not a direct line I'm told) it would fry them too, not to mention a number of other problems like pushing the earth out of its orbit. Still, something to think about when planning the zip codes of your cave laboratories.
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
NLT-A peak into the land of god 2 of 10 views of godspace.
I have given up on educating anyone. It isn't that they are too far behind me, I now can see, however, that the only reason to finish this is because I have finished it already. There is nothing in here for you or I because we are nothing. NLT is the ultimate horror, the determination that we are no more than fish in a fishbowl. Well, maybe I'm more than goldfish, I am the Steven King of science. Read on at your peril.
As has been discussed all 4 coordinates in matter are identical. There are no 3 dimensions and time, there are only 4 changing coordinates, each identical to the others. Compression requires that 4 change at once, but each is unique even though via compression and linearity the appear to stay within a reasonable distance of one another. Fundamental particles combine and take on different characteristics, but at the quantum level there is nothing but compression at the rate of 10^16 allowing forces of combination, strong and weak nuclear forces, to form to maintain the concentration and for 4 coordinates to change close enough together to allow for the appearance of 3 dimensional space plus time. We already know that different time states (CT3, for example) only "experience" two dimensional space and others (CT5 for example aka black holes) experience 4. While historically the movement along one is expected to yield time, this appears unnecessary in NLT because linearity may be a common function to all 4 changing coordinates.
In addition is can be seen that the destruction of one state (via e.g nuclear explosion or dispersion of light rays into photons) necessarily releases the consequent forced, in a burst of energy which decreases exponentially from black hole destruction down to the destruction of photons into space.
At the event horizon, it appears that the theory from EHT holds true and that at least some matter is converted back into energy and possibly energy is converted. The question arises whether there is a transition between space and photons. It is not witnessed and yet it should be a relatively easy transition. The best answer is probably a reference back to the non-dimensional orbit theory of energy states. The argument would be that gravity is involved and that if the transition were to occur it would somehow be at the expense of gravity, although that state is one lower. However, this is just 2 of 10. The true horror remains to be arrived at.
As has been discussed all 4 coordinates in matter are identical. There are no 3 dimensions and time, there are only 4 changing coordinates, each identical to the others. Compression requires that 4 change at once, but each is unique even though via compression and linearity the appear to stay within a reasonable distance of one another. Fundamental particles combine and take on different characteristics, but at the quantum level there is nothing but compression at the rate of 10^16 allowing forces of combination, strong and weak nuclear forces, to form to maintain the concentration and for 4 coordinates to change close enough together to allow for the appearance of 3 dimensional space plus time. We already know that different time states (CT3, for example) only "experience" two dimensional space and others (CT5 for example aka black holes) experience 4. While historically the movement along one is expected to yield time, this appears unnecessary in NLT because linearity may be a common function to all 4 changing coordinates.
In addition is can be seen that the destruction of one state (via e.g nuclear explosion or dispersion of light rays into photons) necessarily releases the consequent forced, in a burst of energy which decreases exponentially from black hole destruction down to the destruction of photons into space.
At the event horizon, it appears that the theory from EHT holds true and that at least some matter is converted back into energy and possibly energy is converted. The question arises whether there is a transition between space and photons. It is not witnessed and yet it should be a relatively easy transition. The best answer is probably a reference back to the non-dimensional orbit theory of energy states. The argument would be that gravity is involved and that if the transition were to occur it would somehow be at the expense of gravity, although that state is one lower. However, this is just 2 of 10. The true horror remains to be arrived at.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
NLT-Black Holes and isolated Forces-pre event horizon analysis 1 of 3
As everyone knows who has read NLT, forces represent the prior stage of linearity in terms of how many coordinates are changing at once.
Now we are going to talk about the isolation of those forces within the next higher stage of linearity in terms of dimension.
This is most obvious when looking at the event horizon (which happens to be the next stage in one of the various elements of the pending or to be pending grant inquiries (still looking for that cave-laboratory).
And speaking of the cave laboratory, let's talk about the value of NLT. Every dime spent looking for the Higgs Boson is wasted according to this theory. So is that spent looking for strings and holograms. That doesn't mean that the math is wasted, it is, after all, the study of time from which this work will grow. But lets face it, wasting time looking at test results from CERN and Sanford when you're looking for the wrong thing, well, that's just wasteful. Worse still, until you understand what you're looking for, even when you see it you don't recognize it because you're trying to make something else. Give me 10% of that wasted money and I'll give you a floating car or something. Well, probably something and not a floating car, but I could really use the money.
And perhaps the greatest waste of all is teaching the balderdash to a new crop of students who should be studying non-linearity and inviting me to be guest speaker. It's not like I'll be around forever. Maybe even a very short time. Alas, but back to the discussion at hand.
As has been shown in CT4 (matter) we find CT3(forces) namely the strong and weak force which hold molecules together. These are not found outside of matter, at least as far as I know.
Likewise there is a force which I will call "black force" which holds black holes together which is not seen outside of black holes which gives them stability in proper concentrations (10^32).
We can, however, tell something about BFs from the other forces which we are familiar with.
One thing, of course, is that it is a force based on four dimensions (because it is a negative CT4 state). This is consistent with the discussions which are in the book concerning CT0, 1 and 2 energy states.
The more complicated CT3 energy states that give rise in 3 dimensions to the forces that hold matter together have not been fully evaluated and, again, this is part of the inquiry into field equations which is part of next stage with grants.
We do know that an understanding of one force will give rise to a greater understanding of the next and already NLT has provided huge strides past the prior methodology by showing how the forces build which should give some idea of how they evolve.
why are theses forces only visible or why do they only exist with a certain time state? what concentrates or gives them stability or existence. these questions may allow us to picture other time and force states
And we know from experience that the forces can only exist in the context and proximity, that is they have to change with, the next higher state. So BF will only be present within a black hole just as nuclear forces are found only in matter and presumably the same can be said of the other forces although that analysis requires some pretty tricky thinking...and why am I not surprised.
If we can harness CT5, that is if we can make a stable ct5 state short of concentrations that would crush us (a dilithium crystal in the lingo of star trek) it will be this analysis that will provide the key.
But that is another post story.
Now we are going to talk about the isolation of those forces within the next higher stage of linearity in terms of dimension.
This is most obvious when looking at the event horizon (which happens to be the next stage in one of the various elements of the pending or to be pending grant inquiries (still looking for that cave-laboratory).
And speaking of the cave laboratory, let's talk about the value of NLT. Every dime spent looking for the Higgs Boson is wasted according to this theory. So is that spent looking for strings and holograms. That doesn't mean that the math is wasted, it is, after all, the study of time from which this work will grow. But lets face it, wasting time looking at test results from CERN and Sanford when you're looking for the wrong thing, well, that's just wasteful. Worse still, until you understand what you're looking for, even when you see it you don't recognize it because you're trying to make something else. Give me 10% of that wasted money and I'll give you a floating car or something. Well, probably something and not a floating car, but I could really use the money.
And perhaps the greatest waste of all is teaching the balderdash to a new crop of students who should be studying non-linearity and inviting me to be guest speaker. It's not like I'll be around forever. Maybe even a very short time. Alas, but back to the discussion at hand.
As has been shown in CT4 (matter) we find CT3(forces) namely the strong and weak force which hold molecules together. These are not found outside of matter, at least as far as I know.
Likewise there is a force which I will call "black force" which holds black holes together which is not seen outside of black holes which gives them stability in proper concentrations (10^32).
We can, however, tell something about BFs from the other forces which we are familiar with.
One thing, of course, is that it is a force based on four dimensions (because it is a negative CT4 state). This is consistent with the discussions which are in the book concerning CT0, 1 and 2 energy states.
The more complicated CT3 energy states that give rise in 3 dimensions to the forces that hold matter together have not been fully evaluated and, again, this is part of the inquiry into field equations which is part of next stage with grants.
We do know that an understanding of one force will give rise to a greater understanding of the next and already NLT has provided huge strides past the prior methodology by showing how the forces build which should give some idea of how they evolve.
why are theses forces only visible or why do they only exist with a certain time state? what concentrates or gives them stability or existence. these questions may allow us to picture other time and force states
And we know from experience that the forces can only exist in the context and proximity, that is they have to change with, the next higher state. So BF will only be present within a black hole just as nuclear forces are found only in matter and presumably the same can be said of the other forces although that analysis requires some pretty tricky thinking...and why am I not surprised.
If we can harness CT5, that is if we can make a stable ct5 state short of concentrations that would crush us (a dilithium crystal in the lingo of star trek) it will be this analysis that will provide the key.
But that is another post story.
NLT-A peak into the land of god 1 of 10 views of godspace.
The land of the gods is a place where there is no dimension and we live in a place where dimension is a total illusion. Time is non-linear. What does this mean?
While the math is necessarily difficult to imagine, if we were there, you could, in godsville, run your hand along any dimensional line, starting at any point and watch things happen.
Presumably, based on the latest and greatest math from NLT, you would experience an infinite number of dimensions simultaneously. Just as we feel we can "manipulate" 3 from our position on the fourth, so could the infinite timelines be manipulated from the infinite plus 1. The problem is that NLT holds that our sense of existence is an illusion. Would that mean in true NLT that the inhabitant would also lose the ability to manipulate the environment.
That is, is it not possible that the more coordinates changing at once, the more dimensions is pre-NLT parlance, the less each one would be capable of manipulation from a point on the remaining dimension?
This is the first of several glimpses into godspace.
While the math is necessarily difficult to imagine, if we were there, you could, in godsville, run your hand along any dimensional line, starting at any point and watch things happen.
Presumably, based on the latest and greatest math from NLT, you would experience an infinite number of dimensions simultaneously. Just as we feel we can "manipulate" 3 from our position on the fourth, so could the infinite timelines be manipulated from the infinite plus 1. The problem is that NLT holds that our sense of existence is an illusion. Would that mean in true NLT that the inhabitant would also lose the ability to manipulate the environment.
That is, is it not possible that the more coordinates changing at once, the more dimensions is pre-NLT parlance, the less each one would be capable of manipulation from a point on the remaining dimension?
This is the first of several glimpses into godspace.
NLT-Higgs wasn't right, so what is next of non-linear time?
If Higgs Boson Wasn't Found After All, What of the Nobel Prize Award to CERN ... - Chinatopix
http://tinyurl.com/msrg8ky
shared via www.newshog.co
While NLT has been given a boost by, well, by being right, the inquiry is far from over.
So the question comes, what is next for NLT. Ignoring the question of "where is my nobel prize" where does the inquiry take us next?
The study of the universe doesn't stop, but here are some thoughts:
1) The event horizon: If a black hole is CT5 and not a worm (or at least wormy) hole as I mistakenly imagined during the writing of The Einstein Hologram Universe, what happens at the event horizon. Some of the answers were actually provided in EHT, because it was already clear that a pure singularity was not working. That included the idea that conversions to other clock time states occurred, i.e. the observed change of matter to energy in a ct4 to ct3 exchange. What we would not see is a CT4-CT5 transition unless the scale was present.
2) Background radiation: While there is certainly background radiation in the universe which EHT saw as evidence of time going linear, it seems unlikely that there was a "big bang" at least not the same type of big bang in NLT. Again, EHT had problems with the big bang since it was only time going linear and NLT saw a universe where there was no dimensional limit, no reason for things to originate in one dimension at a time. NLT sees an event free universe without entropy, at least not the way we understand it. So what is background radiation? Is it the evidence of the singularity itself? The presence of CT6 or 7 in the area?
3) What do 5th, 6th, etc dimensions look like? You might say, what does a fouth dimension look like, but we live in the fourth dimension according to NLT so we already know that. When I talk to people, the ask me what looking at 5 dimensions would look like and I say, that it would be like looking in 3 dimensions, but you'd see a fourth and this "sounds" confusing. Where, you ask, would the 4th line be drawn, in what direction would it go? How little you understand (having not read the book). There are no real dimensions. You can draw in as many as you want because they don't really exist. It is the number changing at once, not the direction in which they run. This is why in our four identical dimension clock time state we see in 3 dimensions. If we were in 3 dimensions and we could only see the page, we would wonder where the fourth would go. But we could draw it, we've all seen that drawing, the three lines, one appearing to go off the page. But could someone living on the page envision this so easily? Yes, it is hard to envision, but if you are only a projection from a singularity without time or dimension it would be easier and we should not let our prejudice of perspective prevent us from realizing that we are drawn on a dimensionless page. So knowing that we exist in 4 dimensions (all the same, not some magic time dimension), it should be easier for us to figure out what the fifth dimension would look like. Let me paint a picture. Time runs in both directions. We say it only runs in one, but in NLT each moment happens all the time. The moment when you started reading this, the moment you are reading this sentence, the moment when you move on, take an aspirin and ask yourself why you read it, they all exist together. The other three dimensions look exactly the same, only the "change" in position along them is "visible" to us. We would see the "time" dimension the same way as any other dimension if it were still, although the very act of "stillness" would prevent us, as beings of change, from seeing it. So a fifth would be much the same, no real change, just a perceived change along one of the 5. No one way streets because all of the streets are only perceived change. Actual change is as illusory as entropy! What a truly amazing singularity, so much more powerful than anything we have imagined before. We live in a place where quantum variability is seen only because of our conceit, the truth being as difficult to accept as our ultimate deaths, but die we do...and die we don't.
While NLT has been given a boost by, well, by being right, the inquiry is far from over.
So the question comes, what is next for NLT. Ignoring the question of "where is my nobel prize" where does the inquiry take us next?
The study of the universe doesn't stop, but here are some thoughts:
1) The event horizon: If a black hole is CT5 and not a worm (or at least wormy) hole as I mistakenly imagined during the writing of The Einstein Hologram Universe, what happens at the event horizon. Some of the answers were actually provided in EHT, because it was already clear that a pure singularity was not working. That included the idea that conversions to other clock time states occurred, i.e. the observed change of matter to energy in a ct4 to ct3 exchange. What we would not see is a CT4-CT5 transition unless the scale was present.
2) Background radiation: While there is certainly background radiation in the universe which EHT saw as evidence of time going linear, it seems unlikely that there was a "big bang" at least not the same type of big bang in NLT. Again, EHT had problems with the big bang since it was only time going linear and NLT saw a universe where there was no dimensional limit, no reason for things to originate in one dimension at a time. NLT sees an event free universe without entropy, at least not the way we understand it. So what is background radiation? Is it the evidence of the singularity itself? The presence of CT6 or 7 in the area?
3) What do 5th, 6th, etc dimensions look like? You might say, what does a fouth dimension look like, but we live in the fourth dimension according to NLT so we already know that. When I talk to people, the ask me what looking at 5 dimensions would look like and I say, that it would be like looking in 3 dimensions, but you'd see a fourth and this "sounds" confusing. Where, you ask, would the 4th line be drawn, in what direction would it go? How little you understand (having not read the book). There are no real dimensions. You can draw in as many as you want because they don't really exist. It is the number changing at once, not the direction in which they run. This is why in our four identical dimension clock time state we see in 3 dimensions. If we were in 3 dimensions and we could only see the page, we would wonder where the fourth would go. But we could draw it, we've all seen that drawing, the three lines, one appearing to go off the page. But could someone living on the page envision this so easily? Yes, it is hard to envision, but if you are only a projection from a singularity without time or dimension it would be easier and we should not let our prejudice of perspective prevent us from realizing that we are drawn on a dimensionless page. So knowing that we exist in 4 dimensions (all the same, not some magic time dimension), it should be easier for us to figure out what the fifth dimension would look like. Let me paint a picture. Time runs in both directions. We say it only runs in one, but in NLT each moment happens all the time. The moment when you started reading this, the moment you are reading this sentence, the moment when you move on, take an aspirin and ask yourself why you read it, they all exist together. The other three dimensions look exactly the same, only the "change" in position along them is "visible" to us. We would see the "time" dimension the same way as any other dimension if it were still, although the very act of "stillness" would prevent us, as beings of change, from seeing it. So a fifth would be much the same, no real change, just a perceived change along one of the 5. No one way streets because all of the streets are only perceived change. Actual change is as illusory as entropy! What a truly amazing singularity, so much more powerful than anything we have imagined before. We live in a place where quantum variability is seen only because of our conceit, the truth being as difficult to accept as our ultimate deaths, but die we do...and die we don't.
Monday, November 10, 2014
Like (as if) the failure to find the Higgs Boson is news to me.
Particle Discovery is not Higgs Boson Say Scientists - Dumb-Out
http://tinyurl.com/nl4lotw
shared via www.newshog.co
So here is some of the language from page 56 of NLT (published in September 2014): This is where I say the "Higgs Boson" Doesn't exist, despite the "Nobel prize stuff". Yeah, I'm going to milk this for all its worth, even though it offends all my readers, but I went out on a limb telling the physics cabal they were all wrong, that's a pretty big leap of faith, and my concept is still the right one. We'll see what tomorrow holds. For now:
From page 56:
So here is some of the language from page 56 of NLT (published in September 2014): This is where I say the "Higgs Boson" Doesn't exist, despite the "Nobel prize stuff". Yeah, I'm going to milk this for all its worth, even though it offends all my readers, but I went out on a limb telling the physics cabal they were all wrong, that's a pretty big leap of faith, and my concept is still the right one. We'll see what tomorrow holds. For now:
From page 56:
To
understand this we need to look at some additional measurements and
we’re going to examine something “huge”, the Hydrogen atom.
First, however, we’re going to stick with the individual particles.
We’re going to look at Planck length (above) a little more; and
fundamental particles. http://www.benbest.com/science/standard.html
and http://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/numbers.html
can be viewed as a reference
Despite
the enormous (relative) size of fundamental particles, as we break
them down, we end up with sizes where dimensional features begin to
break down (see the size requirements of electrons, for example).
There
are at least 16 predicted fundamental particles. Since NLT doesn’t
care about fundamental particles as particles, the number and type is
largely an unnecessary fiction, but like the larger particles, an
important fiction. The “17th” fundamental particle, the “higgs
boson” doesn’t exist in NLT and isn’t a fiction worth
considering (in NLT). This doesn’t mean that a time state can’t
be found that could be mistaken for H-B particles; just that the
Higgs-Boson is one of many “crutches” pre NLT physics needs to
explain things which are intuitive in NLT.
Saturday, November 8, 2014
Non-Linear Time Theory-I am right again Higgs boson is a myth
Shocking! CERN may not have discovered elusive Higgs Boson particle after all - Tech Times http://tinyurl.com/k59bc3u shared via www.newshog.co
If i seem to be gloating about so scientific set back you are wrong. no, but i am justifiably justified. Instead, it is the serene knowledge that a more powerful step has been taken in the realm of quantum mechanics, namely mine. see the 9/19/14 post bah-humbug to the higgs boson forexample.
If you read my earlier posts, heck if you break down and read the book ?non-linear time theory" you will see that I predicted these tests would be proved false. for I, yes I, disproved the Higgs boson as a concept. And yes, I wrote some of the scientists at the CERN and pointed this out. Did they write back? You can minimize a person, but you cannot make them not exist. Yes, the cabal can ignore me, but no matter how long they do, I will still be right. In a hundred years, it will not be their silly papers people teach, it will be Non-Linear Time theory. And the teachers will ask, why didn't they call him back? Ah, the story of my life, unreturned telephone calls. But I am the Parmethian Vampire hunter. I have driven a steak into the heart of string theory and left it to turn to dust in the street. If I have to do this is the dark, in the dead of night, then my response to those that ignore me, is that you are all a humbug, you and your Higgs Boson.
The Higgs Boson is unnecessary, it is not where gravity is not carried by some magic particle but is instead a force tied to time going non linear. and yes when you tell all these physicists including hawkin (who did help with my theory) that they will be wrong and you tell them why and a month and a half in advance of them realizing it themselves, it is time for the cabal to buy a few copies of my book, or at least read the frigging blog, It's free you cheapskates!
Yes, you can see what really drives the universe. I am right and i didn't need this stupid article to tell me because I, me and only me, have done the math and whether you read it or not I am standing above the crowd the only one who can see. but why gloat? At least it wasn't an article in the Huffington Post (which also ignores me).
The Higgs Boson is unnecessary, it is not where gravity is not carried by some magic particle but is instead a force tied to time going non linear. and yes when you tell all these physicists including hawkin (who did help with my theory) that they will be wrong and you tell them why and a month and a half in advance of them realizing it themselves, it is time for the cabal to buy a few copies of my book, or at least read the frigging blog, It's free you cheapskates!
Yes, you can see what really drives the universe. I am right and i didn't need this stupid article to tell me because I, me and only me, have done the math and whether you read it or not I am standing above the crowd the only one who can see. but why gloat? At least it wasn't an article in the Huffington Post (which also ignores me).
Shocking! CERN may not have discovered elusive Higgs Boson particle after all - Tech Times http://tinyurl.com/k59bc3u shared via www.newshog.co
NLT-compression and coordinate change speed and the new plan
I have a plan for NLT which is too bizarre to put into this blog. It provides what is needed for the one and the additional ability to develop by the other. Both need something easily provided by the other. NLT is ground breaking, of unparalleled power and interest, but is elegant enough for the common man/woman/alien to understand.
It is fun, it is funny, it is full of horror and sadness. It has unlimited potential and futility in equal amounts.
And, of course, it is all mine, you can only cling to it like a life preserver in the ocean, or steal it, or whatever.
It is fully developed and it requires future development.
It has exponential compression and conserved rates of change. It is subject to the rules relativity and it is free from them.
It has endearing value. And I have a strange plan that came to me when I saw that it could fill and need and perhaps fill one of mine. But, unfortunately for you, the plan cannot be written, at least not yet.
I have done many things today, rode and walked, written and edited. But many things remain elusive and illusory, so close and yet just out of my grasp.
It is fun, it is funny, it is full of horror and sadness. It has unlimited potential and futility in equal amounts.
And, of course, it is all mine, you can only cling to it like a life preserver in the ocean, or steal it, or whatever.
It is fully developed and it requires future development.
It has exponential compression and conserved rates of change. It is subject to the rules relativity and it is free from them.
It has endearing value. And I have a strange plan that came to me when I saw that it could fill and need and perhaps fill one of mine. But, unfortunately for you, the plan cannot be written, at least not yet.
I have done many things today, rode and walked, written and edited. But many things remain elusive and illusory, so close and yet just out of my grasp.
Friday, November 7, 2014
NLT-Second edition and Grant application 3
It can be argued that the work shown here is not complete or extensive enough, this work shows several
things: the minimum and fundamental size
of black holes, defines a black hole is, it eliminates the need to look for
things that don’t exist such as worm holes and small, permanent black holes or
other non-consequential potential aberrations. It eliminates the idea of a
hologram universe, although that is replaced to some extent by a singularity. The singularity, however, is easy to find
since everything around us is a part of it, past, present and future. It redefines the concept of what randomness
and entropy. It provides for the first time
a fairly clear basis for understanding what standard clock time is and it
provides a basis for understanding why smaller and smaller particles are associated
with larger particles. It provides a basis for determining the origin of forces
and dimensional characteristics and this is only a project which was no more
than a very loose concept 24 months ago without any funding and is now
relatively definitive. While the
mathematics are surprisingly elegant in their infancy, it has already been determined
that the exponential growth formula defines time states which defines time as a
two state bit which is a large conceptually step forward.
NLT-Second edition and Grant application 2
Targets of the inquiry
1) field equations
1) field equations
2) looking at large and small systems to see what leads to the apparent, if not actual, intermediary stages of time coordinates: black hole minimum to super massive black holes; matter forms: fundamental particles to atomic particles, atoms, molecules; photonic to wave
Again, these would all be solved for exponential growth, coordinate change, compression, force vs dimensional qualities and other concepts embodied within the theory.
In addition the math of the theory itself would be refined.
A special line of inquiry that needs to be continued is that related to randomness and entropy which are vastly different (absent) in a non-linear time environment.
A special line of inquiry that needs to be continued is that related to randomness and entropy which are vastly different (absent) in a non-linear time environment.
Thursday, November 6, 2014
NLT-Second edition and Grant application
The grant application may not be funded but it will be the most important grant application for those who hold it. Ten years from now when asked what was the most important document they ever held, it will be that document.
A lot of its material will go into the second edition of NLT although all the basic information is there and only the clarity of re-writing adds to its effect.
There are hundreds of pages of notes and formulas that need to be incorporated in the Third edition and hopefully that can be made possible through the window that the application and book give to what is time and other quantum phenomena. Even if the only result of the grant was to get the existing notes incorporated into NLT and finish the reconciliation of NLT it would be well worth it.
That's my story, anyway, and I'm sticking with it.
A lot of its material will go into the second edition of NLT although all the basic information is there and only the clarity of re-writing adds to its effect.
There are hundreds of pages of notes and formulas that need to be incorporated in the Third edition and hopefully that can be made possible through the window that the application and book give to what is time and other quantum phenomena. Even if the only result of the grant was to get the existing notes incorporated into NLT and finish the reconciliation of NLT it would be well worth it.
That's my story, anyway, and I'm sticking with it.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Obama and the republican congress
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/05/obama-midterm-elections_n_6106512.html
Is there anything as traditional as war in the Middle east? One really hates to see a democrat going to war. It makes the whole united nations thing seem so pointless.
One might ask why ask congress when most wars seem to largely be the result of executive "privilege". But you can hardly blame this president for asking permission to kill people without a clear goal. After all, with both houses of congress against him, he might be embarrassed, finding himself leading the charge with no army behind him.
And, of course, wars in the middle east have gone so well for Russia, the United States, the west in general. Well, at least it will help put us into poverty quicker and we can turn the reins of running the world over that much quicker to the Chinese. Let them figure out how to deal with mess?
It makes me wonder if there is anyone in government who has read the decline and fall of the roman empire. Probably not, the classics are wasted on the would be false bourgeois who are instead an oligarchy, read my other book if you want to know how to deal with it, but of course you don't have the time.
There is no right way to fight the war in the middle east. If you were, for example, to say that you will wipe out all religions that refuse to be inclusive, would you not create a paradox of sorts? And if you go the traditional route, the western powers vs all of the Muslim faith, can you really stomach the hypocrisy?
So we will destroy our economy, pounding our heads to a pulp in a war that we don't even know how to win and the desert will absorb the bombs and the blood as it has always done and the west will be left destitute and vulnerable to its real enemies.
And who does Obama have to thank for this mess that he plans to dive into? Why none other than George Bush the second. The president who watched the Russians bankrupt themselves against Afghanistan and then, heedless of the lesson throwing himself into the desert for no better reason than that his knowledge of cause and effect and history was too shallow to provide him any guidance, at least that is how it appears from the perspective of history. But he did show Saddam that he couldn't go and blow up buildings in the United States, not that Saddam ever attempted to do that directly or indirectly.
So President, go to Congress and lets find someone appropriate to kill in the Middle East. It will set a right proper standard for those who follow and for those who survive the bombs we drop. Don't worry about a plan embodying long term, medium term and short term intelligence. We won't be around long enough to use them all.
Alas, alas babylon.
Is there anything as traditional as war in the Middle east? One really hates to see a democrat going to war. It makes the whole united nations thing seem so pointless.
One might ask why ask congress when most wars seem to largely be the result of executive "privilege". But you can hardly blame this president for asking permission to kill people without a clear goal. After all, with both houses of congress against him, he might be embarrassed, finding himself leading the charge with no army behind him.
And, of course, wars in the middle east have gone so well for Russia, the United States, the west in general. Well, at least it will help put us into poverty quicker and we can turn the reins of running the world over that much quicker to the Chinese. Let them figure out how to deal with mess?
It makes me wonder if there is anyone in government who has read the decline and fall of the roman empire. Probably not, the classics are wasted on the would be false bourgeois who are instead an oligarchy, read my other book if you want to know how to deal with it, but of course you don't have the time.
There is no right way to fight the war in the middle east. If you were, for example, to say that you will wipe out all religions that refuse to be inclusive, would you not create a paradox of sorts? And if you go the traditional route, the western powers vs all of the Muslim faith, can you really stomach the hypocrisy?
So we will destroy our economy, pounding our heads to a pulp in a war that we don't even know how to win and the desert will absorb the bombs and the blood as it has always done and the west will be left destitute and vulnerable to its real enemies.
And who does Obama have to thank for this mess that he plans to dive into? Why none other than George Bush the second. The president who watched the Russians bankrupt themselves against Afghanistan and then, heedless of the lesson throwing himself into the desert for no better reason than that his knowledge of cause and effect and history was too shallow to provide him any guidance, at least that is how it appears from the perspective of history. But he did show Saddam that he couldn't go and blow up buildings in the United States, not that Saddam ever attempted to do that directly or indirectly.
So President, go to Congress and lets find someone appropriate to kill in the Middle East. It will set a right proper standard for those who follow and for those who survive the bombs we drop. Don't worry about a plan embodying long term, medium term and short term intelligence. We won't be around long enough to use them all.
Alas, alas babylon.
Tuesday, November 4, 2014
NLT-the explanation for the non-time based gravitational effect
THE RELATIONSHIP OF CLOCK TIME TO INSTANTANEOUS
AND SIMULTANEOUS COORDINATE CHANGES,
DIMENSIONLESS TIME ORBITS AND COMPRESSION
All that has been discussed so far brings us down to an
explanation of how time orbits have no dimension and how exponential compression,
and acceleration come together.
The transition from CT0 to CT1 is extraordinary. Before this there is non-linearity. At CT0 there is perfect symmetry with all
changes together. At CT(1) there is near
perfect symmetry in change. No “bubbles”
appear in space. Coordinates do change,
but it is uncertain whether they change independent from one another or not
without more math. We know that there is a compression of some form, but
it is unlike anything else. CT1 is the first "orbital" state we
can understand. Only one coordinate can change at a time. CT1(x,y,z,
etc) but only one of the three can change at once. It can change very quickly, and since the
changes are from Non-linearity there is no apparent speed limit, hence Gravity
seems to have an effect which is not governed by time which is what is expected
since it is a function of Non-linearity (everywhere at once) to linearity
(dimensionally based). There is no
requirement in this transition that a speed limit to get to coordinates is
required since the “force state” (‘negative’ CT0) is non-dimensional.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)