Tell me your dreams now
that i can try to make them true
not the old dreams
that we used to have together
I dream.
Sometimes in my sleep,
answers come to me.
Sometimes questions
When I'm awake,
often times i have dreams,
day dreams they call them,
but they are rich textured.
Most people control their day dreams,
but mine are often like those in my sleep
often pleasant, usually nightmares
I have to wake up in order to stop them
from going to dark places.
I dreamt last night that I had received a package, full of things fom someone's death. Somehow they made it to a large mall, under construction, crowded and full of shops. A car was lost, where someone else, I think my brother, and I had gone to sit with someone who was ill or dead, I no longer remember. I had a child with me and somehow I had to find the car, hold the child, who was falling asleep, and carry what I could from the loose bits of the package. It had small statuary and some sort of china set that only had plates. There seemed to be a dissassembled stand for the china. None of the objects were familiar to me, but it seemed important that I take hold of them. I would look for the car, which seemed to be in a different place entirely, a neighborhood, and then go back for the package to find a woman picking through it to find the parts of value, the clerks cheerful, but not protective. I found a friend living towards one of the exits who volunteered to watch over what I carried while I went back for more, the statue of the carion bird and one other, other little bits and pieces I remember only for their bulk. I think they might have been playing some game with someone else, perhaps involving rackets.
After returning to the desk I was given a cloak for the child which seemed very rich and valuable, the child being well mannered but very tired. But on the way back the tunnels of the mall changed, the area was under construction. I was only wearing socks and there were nails and other sharp items everywhere so i had to slide my feet before I put them down. My arms were full of child, statuary and the like, but my concentration was down at my feet. Workmen were present, but moved around me without offering anything, nor being asked. At the end of this area, the place where my friend had been living was gone and the mall opened to the outside.
I awoke and though it was 5am I could not sleep so I got up to check my mail and to think about this dream. I was reminded of another I meant to write about, it had a house I lived in. A recurring dream. In the house were narrow, claustraphobic passages that had to be navigated, squirmed through, to get to or from important places like bathrooms. There were surfaces that seemed unsteady, at poor angles, without sufficient strength to provide adequate support. For whatever reason, I chose to live in this house which was falling apart and large.
It is the metaphorical house that I live in.
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
NLC-F-series: Why galaxies after the big bang
If I am going to finish my book, I plan not to write as regularly. This diversion into spiral theory has expanded the book beyond 450 pages. If you're complaining because I write too much, if you don't want to hear what's going on, then perhaps you get your wish. If you're bored, there are a few hundred older posts that go in many directions. directly or not you send me brochures for travel all over the world, you don't think that I see that. I get update letters, and that doesn't include things on the news where I search for pictures that will have one familiar face.
While I've spent entirely too much time already on F-series, occasionally, I continue to come up with "fun" reasons to talk about it further. It just works as a model.
Some of these ideas, they don't really arise to theories because the math isn't developed, have taken on something of a life of their own as I address various potentialities and force these flights of fantasy into the framework of what is seen.
After the big bang, my big bang which is the fourth or fifth intersection of colliding linear spirals, there were large enough black holes to allow for the accumulation of galaxies.
All of this new understanding is causing a major rewrite and as a special treat, given the fact that I may spend greater and greater periods of time away (the real treat) I give you one of the re-written chapters. If you type in "transitional changes" in the search bar you can see the original version of this chpater from which spiral posts originated.
FEATURES
OF TRANSITIONAL CHANGES AND
INTRODUCTION TO SPIRAL TRANSITION THEORY
While I've spent entirely too much time already on F-series, occasionally, I continue to come up with "fun" reasons to talk about it further. It just works as a model.
Some of these ideas, they don't really arise to theories because the math isn't developed, have taken on something of a life of their own as I address various potentialities and force these flights of fantasy into the framework of what is seen.
*The second is that each successive clock time type results from
slower, more coordinated collective changes to coordinates of a prior clock
time. For example, x, y and z
coordinates changing at the speed of light “gradually slow” and as they drop
below light speed changes to a state where each individual change is slower
than that previous for the faster change.
To accomplish this, as described later, informational changes are
not relative to the primary line of change but instead changes with an
information change that is changing. In
order to better envision this a system of spirals off of spirals is used where
one spiral is the primary, another is secondary and the third runs off the
secondary which is changing with the primary.*After the big bang, my big bang which is the fourth or fifth intersection of colliding linear spirals, there were large enough black holes to allow for the accumulation of galaxies.
All of this new understanding is causing a major rewrite and as a special treat, given the fact that I may spend greater and greater periods of time away (the real treat) I give you one of the re-written chapters. If you type in "transitional changes" in the search bar you can see the original version of this chpater from which spiral posts originated.
FEATURES
OF TRANSITIONAL CHANGES AND
INTRODUCTION TO SPIRAL TRANSITION THEORY
There are two aspects of NLC that represent the transition.
The first is the conservation of clock time. If two coordinates are changing, they will
change at the same rate as a single clock time change.
The second is that each successive clock time type results from
slower, more coordinated collective changes to coordinates of a prior clock
time. For example, x, y and z
coordinates changing at the speed of light “gradually slow” and as they drop
below light speed changes to a state where each individual change is slower
than that previous for the faster change.
To accomplish this, as described later, informational changes are
not relative to the primary line of change but instead changes with an
information change that is changing. In
order to better envision this a system of spirals off of spirals is used where
one spiral is the primary, another is secondary and the third runs off the
secondary which is changing with the primary.
Information can, using spirals, remain the same. Otherwise, if Clock times do not change their orientation, then
there are different clock times. CT1 and
CT2 are therefore identical except in their orientation to one another, or they
are altered in some fashion. In NLC, it
is indicated that they only change in orientation.
If they are different, either one ends when another begins, one
changes when the other begins (e.g. into a force type coordinate type), or one
continues but is drowned out in terms of perception relative to the “higher”
clock time. It is believed that all of
the information in the universe remains in place, but steadily changes in
orientation depending on what quantum moment is being examined. In this way, “traveling” back or “forward” in
time is illusory which fits well into the theory. It is also consistent with the idea of a
minimum quantum of time where things are not changing at all. What we call standard clock time is an illusion
that is explained later graphically.
Since it is uncertain how CT4 interactions with CT3, CT2 and CT1 it is important to come up
with some sort of transitional model that takes into account observed
phenomena, coordinate changes that have slowed dramatically which can be refined.
The theory chosen, Intersecting Spiral Theory, can be used to begin
to examine the relationship of different clock times, for example, to determine
if CT1 has CT2, CT3 and CT4 changes are active or dormant in terms of linearity. It gives predictions of how linearity can be
constant but still allow each quantum event to change at a constant rate even
though relative rates of change vary.
The answer may be suggested by higher Clock Time states (C4 and CT5).
The empty spaces within other forms of matter are CT1 time
coordinates under the theory, so it stands to reason that there would also be
CT2 and CT3 time states as well as space (CT1) within CT4 states. The best way to picture this is by looking at
CT5 states. This assumes that black
holes are CT5 states. To something
living within a CT5 state, the Universe would be a collection of several
fundamental “CT5 particles” which are black holes. It is clear that CT4, CT3, CT2 and CT1 states
would abound around the CT5 states in such an examination and the same should
be true from our perspective as CT4 inhabitants.
For CT4 inhabitants, we observe the presence of CT1 states, but
there are also likely CT2 and CT3 states, so called energy states, present.
The change in position of different forms of clock time (CT)
indicate that coordinate changes continue regardless. This means that in some way, there are
coordinate changes for each clock time and theory has to allow them to change
at different apparent rates while the actual rate remains the same for each.
The alternative would be to allow different rates of change for
each clock time which would take us down a different path.
Another feature of the model chosen is to allow clock time changes
of different points (P1, P2, etc) to occur more consistently with other points
(P1a, P2a, etc) at higher clock time states
allowing for greater concentration.
The model should stay consistent with a single quantum element
creating everything, as the changes get more complex and slow down they happen
closer together and you get compression.
From this we can infer that CT5 changes are incredibly slow within
Black Holes since they vary exponentially relative to the speed of light.
The effect for CT4 sub-light speed changes is standard clock time,
which spiral theory shows as movement along a spiral that runs separately from,
but connected to, the primary spiral.
Extraordinary change, equivalent to CT4 and Standard clock time,
can be forecast when matter changes to black holes. CT4 (matter) would appear to change very fast
from a CT5 perspective which might make it look more like energy looks to
us. That is, energy features are
actually just the same changes we experience happening much faster. Overlapping spirals provide a mechanism which
allows us to envision how this is perceived from static points along a spiral
of CT4 while not visible from CT3. The
model also indicates that a different time scale would be present along the 5th
intersection where 5 coordinates are changing together instead of just 4. This time need not be any different than the
time we experience, it would just be exponentially slower.
Other coordinate change features are experienced by consecutive
forms of concentration which visibly end for us at black holes (ct5).
One feature is they become the center of dimensional rotation due,
apparently, to the common line through the spirals which gives rise to
time. For both matter and black holes
this provides a rotational aspect. It
will be discussed later how at the 5th intersection of the
intersecting spirals, sufficient density becomes available for black holes to
form which allows them to serve as a core or center around which other clock
time states can exist to allow the formation of galaxies with the rest of space
spinning around them.
While there appears to be a collapse of space time at black holes,
that is unlikely. In fact NLT is a
reaction to this. If there were the
complete collapse suggested in EHT, then black holes would drop out of space
and would all go to some non-linear place.
Instead, what we appear to be seeing is coordinate change that is so
slow that it appears to not exist. Given
informational rate change consistency, we can expect the net change in a black
hole to be the same as the ultra-fast (so fast it appears invisible to us)
changes of ct1 (space).
This is a model, so it remains possible that Black holes are
something different. In EHT, for
example, support existed for a finding that they represent nothing more than a
reversal of all of the coordinate changes leading to Standard clock time. While this pre-NLC concept, now looks absurd
in the extreme, only continued analysis will answer.
If the change in coordinates is such that in black holes there is
the loss of CT1-CT4 there should be, as
a part of CT5, a type of non-movement associated with black holes that appear
dimensionless. Black holes have no
movement in the other dimensions, even Standard Clock Time appears to go to
zero. So what is CT5 that must come into play? What do black holes
experience that is one step greater in effect than Standard Clock Time? Is there a “super standard clock time” which
is available to us which would hold powers on a scale equivalent to the power
that standard clock time gives, the power of thought?
For example,
philosophers argue you cannot keep two thoughts in your head at one time.
Maybe you can with CT5. However,
the more likely suggestion of spiral coordinate analysis is that things happen
in a very similar way, just with more compression, more coordination and
relatively slower apparent time, even though net change is the same as is
observed.
Sunday, October 25, 2015
NLC How spirals change a the same rate but relatively different
I swam outside yesterday, so I could watch the unusual cloud patterns that are associated with weird weather. It was almost too cold to swim and I dropped 15 minutes from my workout but did manage to do all the hard work. The last few days leading up to this swim taught me that my heart wouldn't give out and while the cold was draining, it is, for now, a pain that can be withstood and afterwards, leaves one with a feeling of
Last night I had a class reunion. Every class has someone who writes physics, who could says the past cannot be changed and then, maybe in fiction changes it. I realized that for my class, that person was me. That doesn't mean I was the smartest one in the class, because that wasn't true; but someone has to write that stuff in every class and in my class it is me. Back to the recent past, however
I had a single drink, well most of one anyway, which was enough, to calm my nerves and having not drank very much, the coffeee I'm drinking today is invigorating and not medicinal. The touch of the past was disconcerting but the touch was gentle, almost a pet, when it could have been cruel. There is a great deal to be learned from last night, how the past should be seen and how it is, how we need to make the present so that it yields a past that is capable of kindness, howe we need to view and embrace the past to make a present, a past, that for me, rarely seemed kind at the time; but which held some measure of of stability for those who lived it which is reflected by the fact that at least some of us are still here..
And today, I think of you painting, with that unique scense of serenity that you embody and me reaping the paintings of the past.
The idea time as we experience it, is the story behind slower than light travel, that is the type of time that changes along the main spiral at a non-machine gun pace.
The best way to imagine this is that as long as the secondary spirals come off of the primary spiral they must change at the same speed. How ever if a tertiary spirals comes of the secondary spiral it is possible to imagine a scenario where it only changes along that secondary spiral so that its movement along the primary spiral is delayed or, more specifically, combined so that two spirals (one secondary and one tertiary) change at half the speed of the primary spiral
This requires a graphical reference. It requires a better reference, but for the moment we'll go back to our one example because it has labels.
It is presumed that for each quantum step out of the page that line A takes, spiral 1 changes. It is also the case that the overlap sprial moves one pont for each point that spiral A moves out of the page, but only along the thermodynamic line in this case. Relative to Spiral A, there is no direct change. While the spirals in this case are shown coming off at certain points, these are only exemplary. A mathematical process describing the entire universe from this formulation is beyond this post, anyway.
While all the changes are in one direction and all changing at the same speed, relative to at least one spiral, they change the rate of change. This relative difference would be what is mistaken for time, but the entire process remains fixed quantum movements.
I'm not sure that I'll tackle any more physics this weekend. I have some, but I'm a little unbalanced because the foundation of time to me shifts on the poor foundations that I have built. They did not have to be, but they are.
Last night I had a class reunion. Every class has someone who writes physics, who could says the past cannot be changed and then, maybe in fiction changes it. I realized that for my class, that person was me. That doesn't mean I was the smartest one in the class, because that wasn't true; but someone has to write that stuff in every class and in my class it is me. Back to the recent past, however
I had a single drink, well most of one anyway, which was enough, to calm my nerves and having not drank very much, the coffeee I'm drinking today is invigorating and not medicinal. The touch of the past was disconcerting but the touch was gentle, almost a pet, when it could have been cruel. There is a great deal to be learned from last night, how the past should be seen and how it is, how we need to make the present so that it yields a past that is capable of kindness, howe we need to view and embrace the past to make a present, a past, that for me, rarely seemed kind at the time; but which held some measure of of stability for those who lived it which is reflected by the fact that at least some of us are still here..
And today, I think of you painting, with that unique scense of serenity that you embody and me reaping the paintings of the past.
The idea time as we experience it, is the story behind slower than light travel, that is the type of time that changes along the main spiral at a non-machine gun pace.
The best way to imagine this is that as long as the secondary spirals come off of the primary spiral they must change at the same speed. How ever if a tertiary spirals comes of the secondary spiral it is possible to imagine a scenario where it only changes along that secondary spiral so that its movement along the primary spiral is delayed or, more specifically, combined so that two spirals (one secondary and one tertiary) change at half the speed of the primary spiral
This requires a graphical reference. It requires a better reference, but for the moment we'll go back to our one example because it has labels.
It is presumed that for each quantum step out of the page that line A takes, spiral 1 changes. It is also the case that the overlap sprial moves one pont for each point that spiral A moves out of the page, but only along the thermodynamic line in this case. Relative to Spiral A, there is no direct change. While the spirals in this case are shown coming off at certain points, these are only exemplary. A mathematical process describing the entire universe from this formulation is beyond this post, anyway.
While all the changes are in one direction and all changing at the same speed, relative to at least one spiral, they change the rate of change. This relative difference would be what is mistaken for time, but the entire process remains fixed quantum movements.
I'm not sure that I'll tackle any more physics this weekend. I have some, but I'm a little unbalanced because the foundation of time to me shifts on the poor foundations that I have built. They did not have to be, but they are.
Friday, October 23, 2015
entanglement
It was an interesting day today
I rode my bike to work after drinking my rationed coffee. At first I was pushing myself, one foot, one yard, one mile, but then the blood started circulating, having taken a day off to swim, my legs hurt but it was not so much as to distract me.
I took the dog for a walk in the park and saw the migratory birds.
I took a picture of a red headed woodpecker and a hawk that was hunting in the early afternoon, but too far away from either to get a good shot.
It was hot when I finished the bike ride home, a slower and more painful ride up hill. Riding a bike gives you a better feel for the steady slopes than driving or even walking. But afterward, hot as I was, with the strange sense that accompanies me whenever I have time to think, I jumped into the pool even though I had no idea what the temperature would be. Shocking. But later, after the walk, I jumped in again and swam some laps, so if it stays sunny I may do my swim from home which I'd really like.
My first day in the real pool was not bad. The pool had a person in it when I started and another came later, but both left while I was still swimming and it seemed as if much of the time I was alone with my thoughts which ran to quantum entanglement and my entanglement with you.
I feel like I solved nothing, but just thinking about dealing with these issues makes me wonder what it would be like if I was supported, and not fighting these battles alone. I spend an unhealthy amount of time alone I think sometimes, and yet I want to go into the wilderness and be further removed from other people.
As I sit here drinking water and watching the last light of the day fading, the clouds remind me that there are many who will face danger this evening, people who will wake up with their lives in turmoil and their possessions in ruins around them. This reminds me that outside of the storms in our relatively quiet hemisphere, many people without opportunity will be sleeping in the dust tonight.
And yet, when I think of them and how absurd we are that we do so little to improve our lots or those who are with us, my thoughts return to you and my own sense of loss and the peace of the evening is mixed with an anger at mankind and a melancholy that I accept as a part of my life for now.
The ship in the book I'm reading was originally named the Pandora, and the moral of the box story is the existence of hope. We survive sleeping in the dust and storms, personal and external, by hoping for something. Some hope for forgetting, but I only hope to remember.
I rode my bike to work after drinking my rationed coffee. At first I was pushing myself, one foot, one yard, one mile, but then the blood started circulating, having taken a day off to swim, my legs hurt but it was not so much as to distract me.
I took the dog for a walk in the park and saw the migratory birds.
I took a picture of a red headed woodpecker and a hawk that was hunting in the early afternoon, but too far away from either to get a good shot.
It was hot when I finished the bike ride home, a slower and more painful ride up hill. Riding a bike gives you a better feel for the steady slopes than driving or even walking. But afterward, hot as I was, with the strange sense that accompanies me whenever I have time to think, I jumped into the pool even though I had no idea what the temperature would be. Shocking. But later, after the walk, I jumped in again and swam some laps, so if it stays sunny I may do my swim from home which I'd really like.
My first day in the real pool was not bad. The pool had a person in it when I started and another came later, but both left while I was still swimming and it seemed as if much of the time I was alone with my thoughts which ran to quantum entanglement and my entanglement with you.
I feel like I solved nothing, but just thinking about dealing with these issues makes me wonder what it would be like if I was supported, and not fighting these battles alone. I spend an unhealthy amount of time alone I think sometimes, and yet I want to go into the wilderness and be further removed from other people.
As I sit here drinking water and watching the last light of the day fading, the clouds remind me that there are many who will face danger this evening, people who will wake up with their lives in turmoil and their possessions in ruins around them. This reminds me that outside of the storms in our relatively quiet hemisphere, many people without opportunity will be sleeping in the dust tonight.
And yet, when I think of them and how absurd we are that we do so little to improve our lots or those who are with us, my thoughts return to you and my own sense of loss and the peace of the evening is mixed with an anger at mankind and a melancholy that I accept as a part of my life for now.
The ship in the book I'm reading was originally named the Pandora, and the moral of the box story is the existence of hope. We survive sleeping in the dust and storms, personal and external, by hoping for something. Some hope for forgetting, but I only hope to remember.
NLC-more halloween science, spooky math, quantum intanglement and building a future viewing device
Ah Quantum entanglement. Two bodies affecting one another whether together or apart. Somehow hopelessly bound to one another no matter what intervenes. Is it anything other than another word for love?
http://time.com/4083823/einstein-entanglement-quantum/
Actually, it is. It is impossible in Pre-NLC math, but we've actually been looking at the model for it all month.
Yup, there it is. The overlap of two out of sync spirals to bring them into sync to force them to act together, (overlap spiral 1 and 2). In the NLC information based theory, space and time don't affect points which are just information. While quantum entanglement (and the F-series spiral) is certainly not necessary in NLC, QE can be theorized to be nothing more than the same process described. This works particularly well with only ct1 type overlaps, those less affected by dimensional and locational characteristics. Once you have greater overlap (ct1 and ct2 states as shown above) you begin to add shared or "tied" dimensional proximity characteristics. Spooky science is the name given to faster than light theories and the like that might be seen to "spook" Einsteinian physicists, but as has often been pointed out, Einstein envisioned NLC, he only didn't have all the tools, or perhaps all the time, to put it together.
One can understand in this model the types of energies that would be involved breaking one or multiple bonds of this type in the higher organization states and why with an orbital state (like electrons) there would, necessarily shown by the rotational speed of the particles, be fewer of these overlaps allowing for more rapid movement and at least giving the impression of a greater separation. In point of fact, it appears that the degree of overlap as well as conversion forces (can't say energy because ct1-ct2 are pre-energy models) is exponentially proportional to the amount of proximity perceived which we witness in particles. Quantum entanglement has so few overlaps, that positional identity is limited or even, as indicated, absent.
I woke this morning at 5 after nearly 9 hours of sleep, recovering from a sort of exhaustion tied into moving from my outside pool to the indoor full sized pool, perhaps. After drinking two day old coffee from a small ceramic cup, I forced myself to ignore the sluggishness I felt and rode my bike to work, still cold. But the energy of movement made me feel better.
The more I think about it, the more I think that the future is equally visible to the past. I think we are overwhelmed with our prejudices which lead us to imagine that because our brains are geared towards seeing in the past, that the future is less visible. I can explain this, but I won't because that would get into the post that I'm not ready to publish yet.
Nevertheless, I am fairly certain that we confuse our record keeping of the past with our failure to do record keeping of the future. I think we let ourselves get overwhelmed by the flow of information coming to us because it's easier for us, not necessarily everyone or everything, to see in the future.
I dare say I can prove it on a quantum level and it is certainly a part of NLC that in a fixed universe, seeing the future and the past from the right vantage point would be trivial.
If I was given resources, could I build a Nostradamus prediction machine, a machine that would have the ability to follow at least my methodology for seeing in the future? The answer is that anyone could. It's that easy of a concept. Assuming a fixed, non-linear universe, it has to be pretty easy to see into the future if you can see into the past; but it is from a series of fixed, pre-determined points and therefore "changing the future" would have to be impossible, even under traditional physics. Unfortunately, spooky math concepts might allow these type of changes under traditional physics theories, but not under NLC. What you can do with QE, however, is have early warning system of a type otherwise not possible. While a lot of you are thinking, "yeah, if this, if that," but that's not because I'm smarter than everyone else, it is only because the universe saw fit to put this crap in my head and everyone arrives at the same point eventually if it's right.
This also relates to the illusion of changing time. Quantum time means un-moving points of time and the science of predictability in physics means that pre-destination exists and if old time points disappear, where does the information go? You can argue it's easier to explain it as "changing" to the next event state, but that is actually pretty asinine if you think about it. How complicated would it be if every point had to change with every other quantum point in just such a way? It is much easier to just have a series of fixed states instead of constantly changing states. When we play a movie, we don't reorganize the whole movie every time, we merely take each scene in its turn, ignoring the scenes before.
And who is this director, if not ourselves? I can overcome myself, sometimes, and yet I cannot stop myself from falling apart inside and I don't deal with the things that ruin my entanglements. I thought I was close yesterday and perhaps I was; but today, I feel like distance exists and that I'm a million years away.
http://time.com/4083823/einstein-entanglement-quantum/
Actually, it is. It is impossible in Pre-NLC math, but we've actually been looking at the model for it all month.
Yup, there it is. The overlap of two out of sync spirals to bring them into sync to force them to act together, (overlap spiral 1 and 2). In the NLC information based theory, space and time don't affect points which are just information. While quantum entanglement (and the F-series spiral) is certainly not necessary in NLC, QE can be theorized to be nothing more than the same process described. This works particularly well with only ct1 type overlaps, those less affected by dimensional and locational characteristics. Once you have greater overlap (ct1 and ct2 states as shown above) you begin to add shared or "tied" dimensional proximity characteristics. Spooky science is the name given to faster than light theories and the like that might be seen to "spook" Einsteinian physicists, but as has often been pointed out, Einstein envisioned NLC, he only didn't have all the tools, or perhaps all the time, to put it together.
One can understand in this model the types of energies that would be involved breaking one or multiple bonds of this type in the higher organization states and why with an orbital state (like electrons) there would, necessarily shown by the rotational speed of the particles, be fewer of these overlaps allowing for more rapid movement and at least giving the impression of a greater separation. In point of fact, it appears that the degree of overlap as well as conversion forces (can't say energy because ct1-ct2 are pre-energy models) is exponentially proportional to the amount of proximity perceived which we witness in particles. Quantum entanglement has so few overlaps, that positional identity is limited or even, as indicated, absent.
I woke this morning at 5 after nearly 9 hours of sleep, recovering from a sort of exhaustion tied into moving from my outside pool to the indoor full sized pool, perhaps. After drinking two day old coffee from a small ceramic cup, I forced myself to ignore the sluggishness I felt and rode my bike to work, still cold. But the energy of movement made me feel better.
The more I think about it, the more I think that the future is equally visible to the past. I think we are overwhelmed with our prejudices which lead us to imagine that because our brains are geared towards seeing in the past, that the future is less visible. I can explain this, but I won't because that would get into the post that I'm not ready to publish yet.
Nevertheless, I am fairly certain that we confuse our record keeping of the past with our failure to do record keeping of the future. I think we let ourselves get overwhelmed by the flow of information coming to us because it's easier for us, not necessarily everyone or everything, to see in the future.
I dare say I can prove it on a quantum level and it is certainly a part of NLC that in a fixed universe, seeing the future and the past from the right vantage point would be trivial.
If I was given resources, could I build a Nostradamus prediction machine, a machine that would have the ability to follow at least my methodology for seeing in the future? The answer is that anyone could. It's that easy of a concept. Assuming a fixed, non-linear universe, it has to be pretty easy to see into the future if you can see into the past; but it is from a series of fixed, pre-determined points and therefore "changing the future" would have to be impossible, even under traditional physics. Unfortunately, spooky math concepts might allow these type of changes under traditional physics theories, but not under NLC. What you can do with QE, however, is have early warning system of a type otherwise not possible. While a lot of you are thinking, "yeah, if this, if that," but that's not because I'm smarter than everyone else, it is only because the universe saw fit to put this crap in my head and everyone arrives at the same point eventually if it's right.
This also relates to the illusion of changing time. Quantum time means un-moving points of time and the science of predictability in physics means that pre-destination exists and if old time points disappear, where does the information go? You can argue it's easier to explain it as "changing" to the next event state, but that is actually pretty asinine if you think about it. How complicated would it be if every point had to change with every other quantum point in just such a way? It is much easier to just have a series of fixed states instead of constantly changing states. When we play a movie, we don't reorganize the whole movie every time, we merely take each scene in its turn, ignoring the scenes before.
And who is this director, if not ourselves? I can overcome myself, sometimes, and yet I cannot stop myself from falling apart inside and I don't deal with the things that ruin my entanglements. I thought I was close yesterday and perhaps I was; but today, I feel like distance exists and that I'm a million years away.
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
nlc the cyclops and expansion
Well, I've ridden my bike 3 days in a row for the majority of my exercise, my neck feels almost normal, but I haven't swam in 5 days, a record for the entire summer. It has warmed up quite a bit so perhaps tomorrow I will brave that "freezing" cold pool and see if I can take it during the warmest part of the day.
Even as I grapple with my own future (and present), I'm holding off for a while describing how to predict the future. You WILL be disappointed, but having a scientific procedure is intriguing to me even if it seems unlikely to bear edible fruit. In an NLC universe seeing the future, especially on a quantum scale, should be relatively simple.
Its worth noting that our visions of the past and the future are fairly flexible and the farther we go in either direction the more inaccurate and limited our perception tends to be. In many cases, what we call "science fiction" gives a better vision of events than our histories of past. While I don't want to offend anyone, imagine if one or more of the various representatives of god in the past could have their life scrutinized. Would the all (any of them) hold up under such scrutiny. The religions of the world seem to think that only one of them could pass muster and, predictably, they don't agree on which one.
Using Nostradamus as an example of someone who could have used the early attempts to see the future, if you accept he foresaw anything, we were unable to see it clearly enough to change it and in the system or method for predicting the future this is explained, so I won't explain it here.
And I may not include that method at any time, it could, perhaps, die with this none to healthy earthly bark which you'd claim causes you so many problems while meaning only the best, but anyone who made a study of my work could probably piece it out. In the meantime, I will talk around it.
What is the reason to predict the future? You might think it is to win the lottery but that is typical unfocused non-generalized thinking and therefore not correct although it is related to the truth. The only reason is to see if the future can be changed. The idea of predicting the future is self defeating because whatever you see is either inaccurate or is already the future whether you believe in physic or NLC. Either theory gets you to the same place.
Nevertheless, if you were able to have a point predicted in the future, the challenge to NLC would be to change it. You couldn't, of course, under NLC so the proof would be in the inability to do so.
So what does this have to do with the idea of galactic expansion? Glad you asked. As far as I can determine, only NLC figured out that all coordinate change is in one direction, not just what is called time which isn't a dimension at all it turns out (Sorry pre-NLC physicists). This is a spectacular determination, but carries quite of bit of explanatory baggage with it.
Just as NLC fixes the future, so too it prevents coordinates from occurring at the same point twice. One explanation of this is spiral expansion/contraction So how does this concept of non-repetition affect expansion? NLC indicates pretty conclusively that spin is part of the overall change that shows that you cannot put any point at the same dimensional location twice without exceeding the speed of light. Spin in turn gives rise to the spiral functions that further define the universe. This is fairly easy to envision today with a universe spinning at an enormous size, but imagine the more compact universe where all the points are very compact, spinning near the center, but unable to be at the same point twice. At the center, spin and coordinate change has to be very high under NLC theory to maintain the overall light speed change coordinates. Even though there are no actual specific "locations" but only the impression of dimension, the model still requires the impression of movement in an outward spiral without the possibility of any of these myrid interacting quantum points every coming in contact with a lower line of the spiral where they might find their previous location. There has to be a mechanism mathematically to prevent the overlap which moves information away from the center rapidly to create this faster than light phenomena, logarithmic spirals work fairly well in this regard.
Under the phenomena of NLC, all information change is at a common rate. Stacking of information (as in the example of spirals off of spirals) allows for information to change at slightly different rates, one rate changing faster than others stacked on it, so that we get the effects that led the foolish pre-NLC physicists (come on, you know who are, raise your hands) to assume that only time one uni-directional. NLC, being a fixed, time independent system proved this could not be the case so the illusion of movement had to be explained using a system that prevented duplication. In order to arrive at this state of things at our speed of rotation it was necessary for the universe to extend the movement outward at a very high rate of speed, therefore the illusion of expansion.
Hence you have the relationship of predictability (you can view the future, but not change it) is governed by the same relationship as linearity (you cannot go fast enough to reverse the direction of one way movement in the universe).
Shazaaam!
This also jives fairly well with predicting the future, but there is one piece missing to explain how this phenomena could be used to take information in the future and observe it and also why it appears easier to see the past than the future, even thought it probably isn't. What is this missing piece? Why it's the unpublished post, of course. But it remains in here, in what's published and as this is rewritten, organized and worked into the next edition, all this will be clear. Perhaps, I will clear up at least some of the other issues.
How do I finish this? Ah, here it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO1rMeYnOmM
Even as I grapple with my own future (and present), I'm holding off for a while describing how to predict the future. You WILL be disappointed, but having a scientific procedure is intriguing to me even if it seems unlikely to bear edible fruit. In an NLC universe seeing the future, especially on a quantum scale, should be relatively simple.
Its worth noting that our visions of the past and the future are fairly flexible and the farther we go in either direction the more inaccurate and limited our perception tends to be. In many cases, what we call "science fiction" gives a better vision of events than our histories of past. While I don't want to offend anyone, imagine if one or more of the various representatives of god in the past could have their life scrutinized. Would the all (any of them) hold up under such scrutiny. The religions of the world seem to think that only one of them could pass muster and, predictably, they don't agree on which one.
Using Nostradamus as an example of someone who could have used the early attempts to see the future, if you accept he foresaw anything, we were unable to see it clearly enough to change it and in the system or method for predicting the future this is explained, so I won't explain it here.
And I may not include that method at any time, it could, perhaps, die with this none to healthy earthly bark which you'd claim causes you so many problems while meaning only the best, but anyone who made a study of my work could probably piece it out. In the meantime, I will talk around it.
What is the reason to predict the future? You might think it is to win the lottery but that is typical unfocused non-generalized thinking and therefore not correct although it is related to the truth. The only reason is to see if the future can be changed. The idea of predicting the future is self defeating because whatever you see is either inaccurate or is already the future whether you believe in physic or NLC. Either theory gets you to the same place.
Nevertheless, if you were able to have a point predicted in the future, the challenge to NLC would be to change it. You couldn't, of course, under NLC so the proof would be in the inability to do so.
So what does this have to do with the idea of galactic expansion? Glad you asked. As far as I can determine, only NLC figured out that all coordinate change is in one direction, not just what is called time which isn't a dimension at all it turns out (Sorry pre-NLC physicists). This is a spectacular determination, but carries quite of bit of explanatory baggage with it.
Just as NLC fixes the future, so too it prevents coordinates from occurring at the same point twice. One explanation of this is spiral expansion/contraction So how does this concept of non-repetition affect expansion? NLC indicates pretty conclusively that spin is part of the overall change that shows that you cannot put any point at the same dimensional location twice without exceeding the speed of light. Spin in turn gives rise to the spiral functions that further define the universe. This is fairly easy to envision today with a universe spinning at an enormous size, but imagine the more compact universe where all the points are very compact, spinning near the center, but unable to be at the same point twice. At the center, spin and coordinate change has to be very high under NLC theory to maintain the overall light speed change coordinates. Even though there are no actual specific "locations" but only the impression of dimension, the model still requires the impression of movement in an outward spiral without the possibility of any of these myrid interacting quantum points every coming in contact with a lower line of the spiral where they might find their previous location. There has to be a mechanism mathematically to prevent the overlap which moves information away from the center rapidly to create this faster than light phenomena, logarithmic spirals work fairly well in this regard.
Under the phenomena of NLC, all information change is at a common rate. Stacking of information (as in the example of spirals off of spirals) allows for information to change at slightly different rates, one rate changing faster than others stacked on it, so that we get the effects that led the foolish pre-NLC physicists (come on, you know who are, raise your hands) to assume that only time one uni-directional. NLC, being a fixed, time independent system proved this could not be the case so the illusion of movement had to be explained using a system that prevented duplication. In order to arrive at this state of things at our speed of rotation it was necessary for the universe to extend the movement outward at a very high rate of speed, therefore the illusion of expansion.
Hence you have the relationship of predictability (you can view the future, but not change it) is governed by the same relationship as linearity (you cannot go fast enough to reverse the direction of one way movement in the universe).
Shazaaam!
This also jives fairly well with predicting the future, but there is one piece missing to explain how this phenomena could be used to take information in the future and observe it and also why it appears easier to see the past than the future, even thought it probably isn't. What is this missing piece? Why it's the unpublished post, of course. But it remains in here, in what's published and as this is rewritten, organized and worked into the next edition, all this will be clear. Perhaps, I will clear up at least some of the other issues.
How do I finish this? Ah, here it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO1rMeYnOmM
NLC-predicting the future and the cyclops
I had pretty much decided I didn't want to look into the future. As I worked on "what's next" I didn't like what I was seeing. Perhaps the reason, which I didn't really see till just now, is because I feel if I saw the future clearly, I might see it without you in it. LIke everyone else, I have quite an imagination (complements of a pre-ordainined universe), and I can hide within it, imagining that I am doing what I need to be doing and not being borne along by forces operating according to some formula fixed billions of years before the first apes from whom I am decended were born. Unfortunately, my subconscious had other plans of me and last night I came up with a way to see the future more clearly. Perhaps it could be called a "method." I don't intend to share it right away. Perhaps I'll save it for the book (unlikely) it might actually cause one to be sold. And I don't intend to use it, by the way. If I had access to more technology it would be a temptation and I feel that one day it will actually be pursued since it is a technique in physics and not at all mystical. It would be more interesting and even more exciting if it were mystical, but it isn't. Bland science I would call it. But I am getting ahead of myself.
I realized then, sipping the small cup of coffee I allow myself, half blind and decrepit as I am, that I had become the cyclops. The story I have in my mind of the cyclops is that he was originally born with two eyes and gave one up to some god or the other in order to see the future. The first thing he saw was his own death and lived the rest of his life in misery, the same general class of information that plagues me, of course. My cyclops story may have had something to do with seeing himself being being murdered by someone else so he decided to live alone or perhaps that is embellishment. I have had my cyclops story questioned before, but I don't care, it's my story and I'm sticking to it.
I realized then, sipping the small cup of coffee I allow myself, half blind and decrepit as I am, that I had become the cyclops. The story I have in my mind of the cyclops is that he was originally born with two eyes and gave one up to some god or the other in order to see the future. The first thing he saw was his own death and lived the rest of his life in misery, the same general class of information that plagues me, of course. My cyclops story may have had something to do with seeing himself being being murdered by someone else so he decided to live alone or perhaps that is embellishment. I have had my cyclops story questioned before, but I don't care, it's my story and I'm sticking to it.
The way to read the future is really quite simple, quite elegant, even obvious in light of NLC. It may, in retrospect, be obvious period.
In fact, it has more than a little NLC in it, even in design and function, but it requires little, if any, acceptance of NLC. It does require accepting physics, but if it didn't it would be mystical and not just hard, boring science. NLC, at most, makes the concept more powerful or gives it additional grounding. At some point in the process of figuring it out, after the broad idea was fixed in place, I decided it had to be something available to Nostradamus, at least in some form and that clarified the theory behind the process, for I figured out the process for doing it first before having a concrete idea of the science behind it.
Now you do not have to rush around trying to figure out how to read the future. I've already written it up and must ponder it before I decide whether to post it or not, probably when to post it. It is tempting to save something for the book and this (irrelevant, by the way) tidbit would be just the thing. It is insightful, it may be useful, but it is more of a diversion than a useful tool at this point in time.
Moreover, it is something that Nostradamus could have used, although whether it could be thought to provide the kind of detail he is credited with in some circles is an interesting question. Oddly enough, NLC suggest that this kind of detail is at least possible working with primitive tools, however unlikely. And the theory sheds some light on how NLC works as well, not surprisingly. It may combine with an earlier idea associated with singularity theory that you can find if you search for nostradamus in my book (or earlier blog entries) but it is a method and not a scenario giving rise to a method.
It says a lot about who and what we are also which is intersting and which bothers me quite a bit given what I want out of life and the convoluted way I have had so far of getting there. I waited 30 years before, but I don't have another 30 years to invest, it is heartbreaking, death of love, inevitiable that it is, is heartbreaking. It is more than I can bear, so the idea of proving it is beyond me. Nevertheless, the idea was good enough that I allowed myself another half cup of coffee so I could write this up before I went forward with my day, and the next post which I may never publish (you won't be missing as much as you may be thinking, but it would certainly give the Nostradamus bunch something to think about and the 'mystics' something grounded to ponder).
If someone wants to write a horror story about this (the Greeks got there first, of course, and perhaps they stole it from the Sumarians) then you can add to your story that when I was writing the actual methodology down my cursor skipped all around the page and I had trouble getting it to the right place long enough to get it typed out, but my cursor is always flying over the page and occasionally blocking huge amounts of irreplacable data and deleting it.
I want to emphasis that although I think my theories are "basically" accurate, that it is much less exciting than it sounds, less exciting than my failure to post it now would indicate. If I win the lottery tomorrow, it will be with the same numbers I've been using for the last 5 years and so, perhaps, you will know it too. It does, however, suggest that the technology could be addressed scientifically and we could then, all become cyclops because it is unlikely that what we saw would be any more assuring than what was seen by the monster of Greek mythology who has come back as me.
In fact, it has more than a little NLC in it, even in design and function, but it requires little, if any, acceptance of NLC. It does require accepting physics, but if it didn't it would be mystical and not just hard, boring science. NLC, at most, makes the concept more powerful or gives it additional grounding. At some point in the process of figuring it out, after the broad idea was fixed in place, I decided it had to be something available to Nostradamus, at least in some form and that clarified the theory behind the process, for I figured out the process for doing it first before having a concrete idea of the science behind it.
Now you do not have to rush around trying to figure out how to read the future. I've already written it up and must ponder it before I decide whether to post it or not, probably when to post it. It is tempting to save something for the book and this (irrelevant, by the way) tidbit would be just the thing. It is insightful, it may be useful, but it is more of a diversion than a useful tool at this point in time.
Moreover, it is something that Nostradamus could have used, although whether it could be thought to provide the kind of detail he is credited with in some circles is an interesting question. Oddly enough, NLC suggest that this kind of detail is at least possible working with primitive tools, however unlikely. And the theory sheds some light on how NLC works as well, not surprisingly. It may combine with an earlier idea associated with singularity theory that you can find if you search for nostradamus in my book (or earlier blog entries) but it is a method and not a scenario giving rise to a method.
It says a lot about who and what we are also which is intersting and which bothers me quite a bit given what I want out of life and the convoluted way I have had so far of getting there. I waited 30 years before, but I don't have another 30 years to invest, it is heartbreaking, death of love, inevitiable that it is, is heartbreaking. It is more than I can bear, so the idea of proving it is beyond me. Nevertheless, the idea was good enough that I allowed myself another half cup of coffee so I could write this up before I went forward with my day, and the next post which I may never publish (you won't be missing as much as you may be thinking, but it would certainly give the Nostradamus bunch something to think about and the 'mystics' something grounded to ponder).
If someone wants to write a horror story about this (the Greeks got there first, of course, and perhaps they stole it from the Sumarians) then you can add to your story that when I was writing the actual methodology down my cursor skipped all around the page and I had trouble getting it to the right place long enough to get it typed out, but my cursor is always flying over the page and occasionally blocking huge amounts of irreplacable data and deleting it.
I want to emphasis that although I think my theories are "basically" accurate, that it is much less exciting than it sounds, less exciting than my failure to post it now would indicate. If I win the lottery tomorrow, it will be with the same numbers I've been using for the last 5 years and so, perhaps, you will know it too. It does, however, suggest that the technology could be addressed scientifically and we could then, all become cyclops because it is unlikely that what we saw would be any more assuring than what was seen by the monster of Greek mythology who has come back as me.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
what's next 2
I might have picked a less stressful topic to look at. I seriously doubt that 10,000 is a serious window. 5,000 years maybe.
But I'm currently going through some serious problems. I'd stop short of saying that I'm having a nervous breakdown, but that's the general direction of things. Of course, you'd think I'd already had one if you read my physics without thinking about it, but I cannot pick that up before tomorrow because of these other issue. Perhaps tomorrow.
For the moment, it has been since Friday that I swam last. During that 4 day period, my neck and muscles have only just now begun to return to any kind of functionality, so I needed the break. I've also, for the last two days, been riding my bike to work which has aspects of exercise and, given the generous weather, a certain calming influence. Unfortunately, this doesn't really compare with the intensity of the swimming workouts and while my body had pretty much reached the end of its capability to absorb any more punishment without the resort to some sort of break or cross training, my mind still needed it.
It was made worse because I find myself in a renewed turmoil that has recovered its immediacy. This is not a bad thing, despite the fact that it will likely drive me made because my "defenses" were breached and some of the pressure tied to avoidance is released even as the demons that torment me come in. You see one of the defenses is that if I know what to do, but there is a reason for me to delay it, then I can justify putting off a critical decision. This had a lot more validity 3 months ago than it does today, but I see already that every day I wait, the ability to find new barriers increases. It is hard to understand in the abstract. Perhaps it is enough to say that the strain is terrible, the absence of a deadening activity means that even the tiny cups of coffee I drink are enough to set my mind on fire, the beautiful weather in which I ride my bike provides moments of solitary joy; but after the sun goes down, I am forced to face myself.
of course mankind will be lucky to make ti 5,000 years, much less 10,000 years, but it has years to find out beyond the few that remain to me and every day that goes by I am that day poorer, the ability to salvage a life is that further gone.
In trying to determine what the world should look like given the assumption of a 10,000 year target one might ask, why 10,000 years and what is next.
Based on this obvious question, I venture that in a legitimate plan, each few years the plan would be updated and extended a like number of year. For example, at the end of 5 years, the plan could be extended to 10,010 years. Likewise if events dictated, it could be shortened.
A list of the hazards to be addressed is worth considering. It is almost certain that in those isolated war torn countries in the prior e-mail that those planning for survival looked at each of the more obvious dangers and the more successful would have looked far ahead, both in terms of what to fear and what to prepare for.
The position of the world is much more tenuous and yet precious little preparation is even considered. A solar flare, for example, could eliminate life as easily (much more easily) as a nuclear war. While not as likely, the scenario for mankind surviving past a solar flare would require dramatically different preparations than anything we are capable of. At the opposite extreme a period of solar or at least planetary cooling would provide challenges, which although not as extreme, are also beyond our capability even were we capable of the level of cooperation to address them.
Getting clear of earth, the solar system and even the galaxy eventually would have to be one of the targets to avoid these types of disasters. Sadly, the reason that we haven't seen other entities engaged in a similar activity, coming to earth to set up colonies to our detriment in all likelihood, is probably due more to the difficulty in accomplishing the task than to the lack of superior intellects and organizations in the great beyond. One can envision the scenario where we decide this type of undertaking. Arming the venture sufficiently to take on a hostile biosphere would be difficult to imagine, much less a hostile race. The size of an interplanetary force would probably be relatively small although to have a biosphere capable of surviving several hundred years at various accelerations the size of the maintenance crew alone would be daunting. How to do this has been addressed by several authors the most likely ones involve creating the crew at proximity and the colony on arrival, although that is outside of our current capabilities.
It is, therefore important to prioritize. The first 1,000 years might largely ignore the broader aspects of survival or at least delegate them to theoretical preparations. We would "hope" that nothing too terrible occurred during that time period and instead concentrate just on the immediate problems, climate, conservation, global war, overpopulation, general stupidity of the species in short. If we had the ability to address our own short sightedness and stupidity that would have to be enough for the first period, if we failed, we wouldn't reach past it anyway.
I have done all I can for the moment, knowing what it would take for me to find some sense of calm to continue, I wonder what you would do?
But I'm currently going through some serious problems. I'd stop short of saying that I'm having a nervous breakdown, but that's the general direction of things. Of course, you'd think I'd already had one if you read my physics without thinking about it, but I cannot pick that up before tomorrow because of these other issue. Perhaps tomorrow.
For the moment, it has been since Friday that I swam last. During that 4 day period, my neck and muscles have only just now begun to return to any kind of functionality, so I needed the break. I've also, for the last two days, been riding my bike to work which has aspects of exercise and, given the generous weather, a certain calming influence. Unfortunately, this doesn't really compare with the intensity of the swimming workouts and while my body had pretty much reached the end of its capability to absorb any more punishment without the resort to some sort of break or cross training, my mind still needed it.
It was made worse because I find myself in a renewed turmoil that has recovered its immediacy. This is not a bad thing, despite the fact that it will likely drive me made because my "defenses" were breached and some of the pressure tied to avoidance is released even as the demons that torment me come in. You see one of the defenses is that if I know what to do, but there is a reason for me to delay it, then I can justify putting off a critical decision. This had a lot more validity 3 months ago than it does today, but I see already that every day I wait, the ability to find new barriers increases. It is hard to understand in the abstract. Perhaps it is enough to say that the strain is terrible, the absence of a deadening activity means that even the tiny cups of coffee I drink are enough to set my mind on fire, the beautiful weather in which I ride my bike provides moments of solitary joy; but after the sun goes down, I am forced to face myself.
of course mankind will be lucky to make ti 5,000 years, much less 10,000 years, but it has years to find out beyond the few that remain to me and every day that goes by I am that day poorer, the ability to salvage a life is that further gone.
In trying to determine what the world should look like given the assumption of a 10,000 year target one might ask, why 10,000 years and what is next.
Based on this obvious question, I venture that in a legitimate plan, each few years the plan would be updated and extended a like number of year. For example, at the end of 5 years, the plan could be extended to 10,010 years. Likewise if events dictated, it could be shortened.
A list of the hazards to be addressed is worth considering. It is almost certain that in those isolated war torn countries in the prior e-mail that those planning for survival looked at each of the more obvious dangers and the more successful would have looked far ahead, both in terms of what to fear and what to prepare for.
The position of the world is much more tenuous and yet precious little preparation is even considered. A solar flare, for example, could eliminate life as easily (much more easily) as a nuclear war. While not as likely, the scenario for mankind surviving past a solar flare would require dramatically different preparations than anything we are capable of. At the opposite extreme a period of solar or at least planetary cooling would provide challenges, which although not as extreme, are also beyond our capability even were we capable of the level of cooperation to address them.
Getting clear of earth, the solar system and even the galaxy eventually would have to be one of the targets to avoid these types of disasters. Sadly, the reason that we haven't seen other entities engaged in a similar activity, coming to earth to set up colonies to our detriment in all likelihood, is probably due more to the difficulty in accomplishing the task than to the lack of superior intellects and organizations in the great beyond. One can envision the scenario where we decide this type of undertaking. Arming the venture sufficiently to take on a hostile biosphere would be difficult to imagine, much less a hostile race. The size of an interplanetary force would probably be relatively small although to have a biosphere capable of surviving several hundred years at various accelerations the size of the maintenance crew alone would be daunting. How to do this has been addressed by several authors the most likely ones involve creating the crew at proximity and the colony on arrival, although that is outside of our current capabilities.
It is, therefore important to prioritize. The first 1,000 years might largely ignore the broader aspects of survival or at least delegate them to theoretical preparations. We would "hope" that nothing too terrible occurred during that time period and instead concentrate just on the immediate problems, climate, conservation, global war, overpopulation, general stupidity of the species in short. If we had the ability to address our own short sightedness and stupidity that would have to be enough for the first period, if we failed, we wouldn't reach past it anyway.
I have done all I can for the moment, knowing what it would take for me to find some sense of calm to continue, I wonder what you would do?
Sunday, October 18, 2015
what's next
I've been thinking about what is next.
I am close to the end of this work, it will need more editing for a fourth edition, but I don't expect to add much. It may, however, be early to look at what is next, but an idea has come to me.
When I became a writer, it was the fulfillment of a long held dream; but it only came when I thought I had lost everything. It was only later, that I realized how little I had lost and then only when I thought I lost everything again. Apparently writing for me is a function of disaster. The more disaster, the more writing. What motivated me the first time was the need to attempt to do something important, therefore the writings on China and later physics.
While not happy with my financial success as a writer; my finances were otherwise provided by luck and opportunity, risk and perhaps a minimum amount of talent. And, more importantly, the content of my writing pleased me and suggested what I should work on next.
In one of my recent posts I talked about how nice it would be if we were intelligent and kind. We are neither. We are apes carved out of natural selection. We survived because we were able to wipe out our competitors. Most of our technological advances have come from studying war or from the desire to seek financial or moral dominance over others. We remain bent on killing each other, dominating each other. Pockets of morality are overwhelmed, the meek inherit the earth, they are buried there.
So it occurred to me that I should write what the world should be. This is far from writing of a perfect world, for we do not live on a perfect planet. The environment of the Galaxy, the solar system and the planet itself seek to kill us, losing the race only because it seems like we will kill ourselves first.
In looking for a model over which to design a survivable world I stated small and was unsuccessful. A life raft had little relevance, an ocean liner slightly more, but inadequate and too much like the unsuccessful model of dominant world powers going to ruin as they rely too heavily on the labor of others. A spaceship is tempting. They have redundancy and we are, after all, little more than a space ship. But what spaceship? Apollo 13 comes to mind, but it is too restrictive of a model. It had an attractive idea, a time limit of survivability for example, but then I realized that while we should have time limits for certain stages, for example we should hope to survive at least 10,000 years, a modest enough goal, however unlikely, but we must also have the need in our model for survival thereafter. The model had to have potential for survival but needed to face sufficient hardship.
What I arrived at initially were three models instead of one and several others would be equally applicable. Of the three, all survived after a fashion, but two failed and the third succeeded only by the help of others. The three that seemed to hold the most promise as a model were England during the blitz, Germany after D-day and Japan in 1945 shortly before the atomic bombs were dropped. Each of these represents a microcosm of our world large enough to have substantial redundancy and conflict and all were likely doomed. To say that we have, over the short time period I will start with (10,000 years), the same 1 in 3 chance would be grossly optimistic. I have to find the book that determined that when we cut down all our trees we would perish for a later edit of this post, but we are certain to cut down our last trees, at least statistically within the lifetime of our grandchildren if things don't change. That means our survival even for 100 years is less likely than the alternative. This ignores man-made or natural climate change and the plethora of disasters (again man-made, natural or galactic) likely to end life on earth, at least human life, at any moment.
I will start, therefore, with a fanciful beginning. I will not take the world as it is certain to be over the very short life span, 100 years or 1000, that I expect we will experience. Instead I will say what I think a world that might survive for longer would look like. A world designed to survive natural disasters and to avoid man-made ones.
In each of the examples chosen, there was near dictatorial rule. In each there was fanaticism for a cause. Each was beset with near impossible odds of survival, and yet each continued. Each experienced different levels of dissension, but at least some. Each survived for a time using innovation to different extents. Each used at least a certain amount of tunneling and stockpiling and preparation for last resorts, and each one that had to rely on the last resorts, failed spectacularly. That only one example survived does not, in my opinion, say much for it. The survival of England would be comparable to an earthly survival only if aliens come along at the last minute to rescue us. It is a nice thought, but if the aliens were like us, they would destroy us pre-preemptively at the first opportunity.
Hence while these make for good models to think about, they are depressing. The 100,000 year Reich lasted for 5 years. England survived, but at the expense of much of its prestige and culture.
It would seem that there must be some better model of what a perfect world for surviving in a harsh environment should look like. History suggests it should be innovative, flexible, balanced, but not necessarily kind. It has to have goals that doesn't bring it into conflict with survival. It has to have centralized control but not absolute control. It has to work well with others but be powerful enough to prevent power to become de-localized. It has to protect the individual while holding survival of the state higher than the survival of any one person. It is, strangely, something that is so unusual, there is no model for it. Aldus Huxley's Brave world might be a good starting place for such a world, but it is hardly a model for innovation. A static world would be safer than the erratic, greed driven one we live in, but only marginally so in the long run. A bucolic human race living at peace with the earth can only survive if the earth is peaceful in return and we know that within the 100,000 year time frame if not within the 500 year time frame the earth will seek, probably successfully, to wipe us out.
It is a tedious problem and perhaps I will attempt to tackle it or perhaps I will decide that since my life is hardly worth the trouble, perhaps there is no other life worth it.
I am close to the end of this work, it will need more editing for a fourth edition, but I don't expect to add much. It may, however, be early to look at what is next, but an idea has come to me.
When I became a writer, it was the fulfillment of a long held dream; but it only came when I thought I had lost everything. It was only later, that I realized how little I had lost and then only when I thought I lost everything again. Apparently writing for me is a function of disaster. The more disaster, the more writing. What motivated me the first time was the need to attempt to do something important, therefore the writings on China and later physics.
While not happy with my financial success as a writer; my finances were otherwise provided by luck and opportunity, risk and perhaps a minimum amount of talent. And, more importantly, the content of my writing pleased me and suggested what I should work on next.
In one of my recent posts I talked about how nice it would be if we were intelligent and kind. We are neither. We are apes carved out of natural selection. We survived because we were able to wipe out our competitors. Most of our technological advances have come from studying war or from the desire to seek financial or moral dominance over others. We remain bent on killing each other, dominating each other. Pockets of morality are overwhelmed, the meek inherit the earth, they are buried there.
So it occurred to me that I should write what the world should be. This is far from writing of a perfect world, for we do not live on a perfect planet. The environment of the Galaxy, the solar system and the planet itself seek to kill us, losing the race only because it seems like we will kill ourselves first.
In looking for a model over which to design a survivable world I stated small and was unsuccessful. A life raft had little relevance, an ocean liner slightly more, but inadequate and too much like the unsuccessful model of dominant world powers going to ruin as they rely too heavily on the labor of others. A spaceship is tempting. They have redundancy and we are, after all, little more than a space ship. But what spaceship? Apollo 13 comes to mind, but it is too restrictive of a model. It had an attractive idea, a time limit of survivability for example, but then I realized that while we should have time limits for certain stages, for example we should hope to survive at least 10,000 years, a modest enough goal, however unlikely, but we must also have the need in our model for survival thereafter. The model had to have potential for survival but needed to face sufficient hardship.
What I arrived at initially were three models instead of one and several others would be equally applicable. Of the three, all survived after a fashion, but two failed and the third succeeded only by the help of others. The three that seemed to hold the most promise as a model were England during the blitz, Germany after D-day and Japan in 1945 shortly before the atomic bombs were dropped. Each of these represents a microcosm of our world large enough to have substantial redundancy and conflict and all were likely doomed. To say that we have, over the short time period I will start with (10,000 years), the same 1 in 3 chance would be grossly optimistic. I have to find the book that determined that when we cut down all our trees we would perish for a later edit of this post, but we are certain to cut down our last trees, at least statistically within the lifetime of our grandchildren if things don't change. That means our survival even for 100 years is less likely than the alternative. This ignores man-made or natural climate change and the plethora of disasters (again man-made, natural or galactic) likely to end life on earth, at least human life, at any moment.
I will start, therefore, with a fanciful beginning. I will not take the world as it is certain to be over the very short life span, 100 years or 1000, that I expect we will experience. Instead I will say what I think a world that might survive for longer would look like. A world designed to survive natural disasters and to avoid man-made ones.
In each of the examples chosen, there was near dictatorial rule. In each there was fanaticism for a cause. Each was beset with near impossible odds of survival, and yet each continued. Each experienced different levels of dissension, but at least some. Each survived for a time using innovation to different extents. Each used at least a certain amount of tunneling and stockpiling and preparation for last resorts, and each one that had to rely on the last resorts, failed spectacularly. That only one example survived does not, in my opinion, say much for it. The survival of England would be comparable to an earthly survival only if aliens come along at the last minute to rescue us. It is a nice thought, but if the aliens were like us, they would destroy us pre-preemptively at the first opportunity.
Hence while these make for good models to think about, they are depressing. The 100,000 year Reich lasted for 5 years. England survived, but at the expense of much of its prestige and culture.
It would seem that there must be some better model of what a perfect world for surviving in a harsh environment should look like. History suggests it should be innovative, flexible, balanced, but not necessarily kind. It has to have goals that doesn't bring it into conflict with survival. It has to have centralized control but not absolute control. It has to work well with others but be powerful enough to prevent power to become de-localized. It has to protect the individual while holding survival of the state higher than the survival of any one person. It is, strangely, something that is so unusual, there is no model for it. Aldus Huxley's Brave world might be a good starting place for such a world, but it is hardly a model for innovation. A static world would be safer than the erratic, greed driven one we live in, but only marginally so in the long run. A bucolic human race living at peace with the earth can only survive if the earth is peaceful in return and we know that within the 100,000 year time frame if not within the 500 year time frame the earth will seek, probably successfully, to wipe us out.
It is a tedious problem and perhaps I will attempt to tackle it or perhaps I will decide that since my life is hardly worth the trouble, perhaps there is no other life worth it.
NLC Halloween science
I'm taking a break before tackling one of the larger edits I have. It's a cold morning, and yesterday, for the first time in months I took a weather day from swimming and allowed sore joints a chance to heal. My musculature is, oddly, in the best shape in years, all wasted. Everything below the muscles has continued to age and however much it heals it is always some less than the day before.
The destruction of empire, in view of desolation. But today, I am anxious to see whether it is, in fact, too cold to swim as it appears. I stepped outside and realized that the water temperature outside would not heat up in whatever sun there was today. I looked at the long term weather forecast, beautiful days for walking together, but too cold for the water temperature to rise during the day. I feel the time is past when every day I need only throw off my clothes and swim.
While I have dug out and dusted off my pass to the inside pool, it is a dirty, crowded thing, mocking the peace and beauty of swimming while the birds and bugs fly above me.
If that is what the future holds, then so be it. If winter comes, spring cannot be far behind, I've read.
For the moment, the joints are not as sore, the mind more rested than not.
There is, however, a growing restlessness. The muscles need the exercise they missed even as the swollen joints deflate. The mind becomes alert again, wanting something it cannot have, for a lack of a better word peace, the kind that comes from going to sleep feeling arms around the one that's wanted and waking up self satisfied. Perhaps I could be content if I had not glimpsed what life could be, if I did not see what could happen if people were intelligent and kind, if I controlled my own destiny instead of living like a kite with a cut string.
During this brief break, I am not doing anything of real value. My writing otherwise is near pointless. I could, perhaps, help save this country from the Chinese for a time, but it seems like empire is fading, a mirror of the lives of those who live in it. The science I have ruins itself. If it is false science, it is meaningless and if it is true it is pointless. Either way it is less than important. I should perhaps put this all aside and just write what I enjoy and perhaps that will come with time, for my time in this place where I find myself is finite. I feel like it can be measured now in months if not weeks. But I don't know what waits on the other side. Must I finish my life in a quiet mediocrity or shall I vanish is a blaze of glory; one perhaps that I will not be able to see.
I did run across this which I found irritating, not for its science, but for the conclusions of the writer who could only have sought some brief flare of sensationalism. It is not science as it is written whatever science hides in the underlying work. It is a parody of science as Halloween is a parody of the true horror that lies just behind the masks we wear on October 31.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/612340/Origin-of-the-universe-riddle-solved-by-Canadian-physicists-and-er-it-wasn-t-God. This article is incredibly stupid. The conclusion is not relevant, that's the worst of it. The science is old and dates from before 2002 and is largely covered in "The Theory of Everything" to the extent it has any real novelty, but it isn't terrible science, just the article is terrible. If you read that book, you'll see a lengthy discussion of expansion and virtual particles. What might be considered "new" in this 2015 article is to reach an absurd conclusion. This isn't to say that there is or is not a god, but to conclude anything about the universe from the perceived existence of virtual particles is nonsense.
Since there is nothing new or relevant in the article, why mention it? Well, the reason is that the mechanism which I wrote about some time ago for the creation of an intersecting F-series system appears here just in the guise of space-time and virtual particles. The article speaks in terms of expansion and the random creation of initial virtual particles working together to give more substance to the virtual particles.This is much the same as the mechanism for two intersecting spirals, although that's both are just model.
Another place where the two have some symmetry is with gravity as a pull towards non-linearity.
In the case of this article, they talk about the balance of positive and negative forces in the same way it was covered in 2002 speaking of the balance of: "negative gravitational energy of the universe and the positive matter energy." This is both the same and less than the discussion in 2002 and Hawkins which points out that the ability to create virtual particles gives rise to a universe which has the potential to create additional information, as long as the net amount of information is balanced around zero.
This was rejected in even the early discussions in NLT and EMT before a clearer understanding of the information basis for the universe provides a better definition, the amount of information in the universe under NLC is fixed. Virtual particles are, however, in both a good conceptual framework, because no particles in NLC are real, they not even particles, space itself is made of the same quantum building block, they are all merely quantum bits of information.
This article covers the same ground as NLT, they talk about minimum length, which NLC shows is more nonsense. It is, however, at least related to the concept of quantum information which is much like a minimum length. Sadly, this is even less novel, even NLC doesn't come close to getting this concept first, it being 2600 years old, as I was told, the work of Parminides and Xeno.
The absurdity in the article is because it continues to rely on mechanisms that are pre-NLC mechanisms and therefore necessarily more poorly defined. The conclusions and theories are presumptive in the extreme saying the same things NLC says about the beginning of o-space; but not getting any closer to g-space than any other theory. It says that we are organized nothing which is a term that I like quite a bit, but we are not nothing. Meaningless, perhaps, but not nothing. They make the same mistake as all classic (pre NLC) physics makes, they accept distance as a reality, the loose site of the fact that if you can divide nothing into two halves that have value than nothing is something farm more concrete than anything else. It is something that NLC has defined, while other theories fumbled with the concept. That is, that space is the same as non-space. Space is merely information expressed with a single coordinate changing at once. This article presumes that space is not the same building block but that you can, instead, drop out of space into some place that is not space, but is instead a primordial material from which virtual particles can be created. While they wander around this point, the article fails to realize what it is saying. This distance between a minimum size (more correctly the difference between one bit of information and no information, or the environment where the information is crated) is something so vastly more important than o-space that it can be seen as the "true" reality that our universe only captures as on file or a painting. I refer to it as g-space, but only to show that I have a poor understanding of something.
The writing is a failure of a sort, because they make assumptions that are not relevant. The article says the existence of imaginary particles somehow precludes a god at the point in creation. I'm not ready to say that science says much about god, but allowing the origin of the universe to be tied to a non-informational or informational balance of positive and negative particles or bits of information is fine, but it does not say anything about the environment where these are created, nor is it new. To assume they can exist without an origin that we fully understand, and thereby that there is or is not a god is not news, but sensationalist nonsense. We exist, therefore there is creation at some level. The more minimalist the source of creation, I'm assuming so far that quantum information is the smallest bit that has been arrived at, being smaller by far and simpler than two part virtual particles; but no matter how small we get, the question of where the information comes from is far more important than to say, aha, we can show a model for spontaneous information, therefore, it exists randomly. NLC firmly rejects randomness, the universe itself rejects randomness. The scientist who were interviewed for the article rejected randomness. The only one who doesn't seem to recognize this is the author. The more outlandish the origin of the universe, the less it answers any questions. Sadly, however, the science of origin is consistent with what NLC and particularly F-intersecting spirals covers so I rant for no reason other than to rant. I am merely frustrated that so many see so much more clearly than I do. I do not refer to the scientist and certainly not to the writer of this article. No, I refer to those who have captured the frustration that I feel in the fall.
http://www.arthritisandfolkmedicine.com/cole.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2DqZOUvFy8
The destruction of empire, in view of desolation. But today, I am anxious to see whether it is, in fact, too cold to swim as it appears. I stepped outside and realized that the water temperature outside would not heat up in whatever sun there was today. I looked at the long term weather forecast, beautiful days for walking together, but too cold for the water temperature to rise during the day. I feel the time is past when every day I need only throw off my clothes and swim.
While I have dug out and dusted off my pass to the inside pool, it is a dirty, crowded thing, mocking the peace and beauty of swimming while the birds and bugs fly above me.
If that is what the future holds, then so be it. If winter comes, spring cannot be far behind, I've read.
For the moment, the joints are not as sore, the mind more rested than not.
There is, however, a growing restlessness. The muscles need the exercise they missed even as the swollen joints deflate. The mind becomes alert again, wanting something it cannot have, for a lack of a better word peace, the kind that comes from going to sleep feeling arms around the one that's wanted and waking up self satisfied. Perhaps I could be content if I had not glimpsed what life could be, if I did not see what could happen if people were intelligent and kind, if I controlled my own destiny instead of living like a kite with a cut string.
During this brief break, I am not doing anything of real value. My writing otherwise is near pointless. I could, perhaps, help save this country from the Chinese for a time, but it seems like empire is fading, a mirror of the lives of those who live in it. The science I have ruins itself. If it is false science, it is meaningless and if it is true it is pointless. Either way it is less than important. I should perhaps put this all aside and just write what I enjoy and perhaps that will come with time, for my time in this place where I find myself is finite. I feel like it can be measured now in months if not weeks. But I don't know what waits on the other side. Must I finish my life in a quiet mediocrity or shall I vanish is a blaze of glory; one perhaps that I will not be able to see.
I did run across this which I found irritating, not for its science, but for the conclusions of the writer who could only have sought some brief flare of sensationalism. It is not science as it is written whatever science hides in the underlying work. It is a parody of science as Halloween is a parody of the true horror that lies just behind the masks we wear on October 31.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/612340/Origin-of-the-universe-riddle-solved-by-Canadian-physicists-and-er-it-wasn-t-God. This article is incredibly stupid. The conclusion is not relevant, that's the worst of it. The science is old and dates from before 2002 and is largely covered in "The Theory of Everything" to the extent it has any real novelty, but it isn't terrible science, just the article is terrible. If you read that book, you'll see a lengthy discussion of expansion and virtual particles. What might be considered "new" in this 2015 article is to reach an absurd conclusion. This isn't to say that there is or is not a god, but to conclude anything about the universe from the perceived existence of virtual particles is nonsense.
Since there is nothing new or relevant in the article, why mention it? Well, the reason is that the mechanism which I wrote about some time ago for the creation of an intersecting F-series system appears here just in the guise of space-time and virtual particles. The article speaks in terms of expansion and the random creation of initial virtual particles working together to give more substance to the virtual particles.This is much the same as the mechanism for two intersecting spirals, although that's both are just model.
Another place where the two have some symmetry is with gravity as a pull towards non-linearity.
In the case of this article, they talk about the balance of positive and negative forces in the same way it was covered in 2002 speaking of the balance of: "negative gravitational energy of the universe and the positive matter energy." This is both the same and less than the discussion in 2002 and Hawkins which points out that the ability to create virtual particles gives rise to a universe which has the potential to create additional information, as long as the net amount of information is balanced around zero.
This was rejected in even the early discussions in NLT and EMT before a clearer understanding of the information basis for the universe provides a better definition, the amount of information in the universe under NLC is fixed. Virtual particles are, however, in both a good conceptual framework, because no particles in NLC are real, they not even particles, space itself is made of the same quantum building block, they are all merely quantum bits of information.
This article covers the same ground as NLT, they talk about minimum length, which NLC shows is more nonsense. It is, however, at least related to the concept of quantum information which is much like a minimum length. Sadly, this is even less novel, even NLC doesn't come close to getting this concept first, it being 2600 years old, as I was told, the work of Parminides and Xeno.
The absurdity in the article is because it continues to rely on mechanisms that are pre-NLC mechanisms and therefore necessarily more poorly defined. The conclusions and theories are presumptive in the extreme saying the same things NLC says about the beginning of o-space; but not getting any closer to g-space than any other theory. It says that we are organized nothing which is a term that I like quite a bit, but we are not nothing. Meaningless, perhaps, but not nothing. They make the same mistake as all classic (pre NLC) physics makes, they accept distance as a reality, the loose site of the fact that if you can divide nothing into two halves that have value than nothing is something farm more concrete than anything else. It is something that NLC has defined, while other theories fumbled with the concept. That is, that space is the same as non-space. Space is merely information expressed with a single coordinate changing at once. This article presumes that space is not the same building block but that you can, instead, drop out of space into some place that is not space, but is instead a primordial material from which virtual particles can be created. While they wander around this point, the article fails to realize what it is saying. This distance between a minimum size (more correctly the difference between one bit of information and no information, or the environment where the information is crated) is something so vastly more important than o-space that it can be seen as the "true" reality that our universe only captures as on file or a painting. I refer to it as g-space, but only to show that I have a poor understanding of something.
The writing is a failure of a sort, because they make assumptions that are not relevant. The article says the existence of imaginary particles somehow precludes a god at the point in creation. I'm not ready to say that science says much about god, but allowing the origin of the universe to be tied to a non-informational or informational balance of positive and negative particles or bits of information is fine, but it does not say anything about the environment where these are created, nor is it new. To assume they can exist without an origin that we fully understand, and thereby that there is or is not a god is not news, but sensationalist nonsense. We exist, therefore there is creation at some level. The more minimalist the source of creation, I'm assuming so far that quantum information is the smallest bit that has been arrived at, being smaller by far and simpler than two part virtual particles; but no matter how small we get, the question of where the information comes from is far more important than to say, aha, we can show a model for spontaneous information, therefore, it exists randomly. NLC firmly rejects randomness, the universe itself rejects randomness. The scientist who were interviewed for the article rejected randomness. The only one who doesn't seem to recognize this is the author. The more outlandish the origin of the universe, the less it answers any questions. Sadly, however, the science of origin is consistent with what NLC and particularly F-intersecting spirals covers so I rant for no reason other than to rant. I am merely frustrated that so many see so much more clearly than I do. I do not refer to the scientist and certainly not to the writer of this article. No, I refer to those who have captured the frustration that I feel in the fall.
http://www.arthritisandfolkmedicine.com/cole.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2DqZOUvFy8
Saturday, October 17, 2015
Me and Paul
Paul Prudhomme died while I was in New Orleans. When I was a child, we shared a city together in the middle of nowhere Louisiana during the summers. The year I was born he opened his first restaurant there and closed it by the time I was one. I assume my family ate there, but I was denied the early privilege.
The fateful year I came back to New Orleans, he opened K-Paul's. He's credited with almost bring the red fish to extinction and developed, but failed to patent, on of the great cooking strategies of our age in the process which left another legacy as an example of how not to handle intellectual property which can be used for patent attorneys until everything is invented.
He met the woman he loved in New Orleans, that sounds familiar. How tangled life's webs are, not at all like the webs that are regular spirals of Archimedes and spiders. Those of my life are the exponential spirals of Euclid that grow increasingly larger and out of control.
The fateful year I came back to New Orleans, he opened K-Paul's. He's credited with almost bring the red fish to extinction and developed, but failed to patent, on of the great cooking strategies of our age in the process which left another legacy as an example of how not to handle intellectual property which can be used for patent attorneys until everything is invented.
He met the woman he loved in New Orleans, that sounds familiar. How tangled life's webs are, not at all like the webs that are regular spirals of Archimedes and spiders. Those of my life are the exponential spirals of Euclid that grow increasingly larger and out of control.
Friday, October 16, 2015
Time Passages
The very last chapter which I may have to break into parts is too daunting for me to pick up.
I feel like I can see into the future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa89bt0GZvQ
I should be able to control the future, but it seems when I try change it, I find myself merely fit into what I saw before I acted. Moreover I find myself unwilling to act no matter how obvious the path before me seems to be. I attempt to find logic in my actions, and all I find are justifications fixed by someone else holding me in place.
As I have mentioned repeatedly, dimensions are static and every dimension moves in only one direction along the spiral. This is obvious, even in pre NLC theories, but no one spotted it before me, apparently. This is not because of any genius, instead the universe fits these items into my vision through your eyes. I am like a wrench, I am used to turn a screw for reasons that were decided at a point on thermodynamic static line when the universe was designed.
I whose power should be able to do whatever I want am instead hamstrung from making the smallest changes, the changes that would bring me closesr to where I know that I need to be.
I can see the future as clearly as the past. My vision of the future is not unique, but is instead representative of what everyone possesses and, indeed this common in the extreme. My volume "China's Weaponized Economy" most recently enforced by China's taking over the spot for the most Billionares in the world by country is not so important to show genius on my part, but is instead proof that the future is as visible as the past to one with sufficient information, for it is consistent with what hundreds said before or at least thought and has now risen to the mainstream. We can tell as much about the future as we can tell about the past and in many cases more. But that is no reason not to change it, so why am I here tonight. What causes me to hesitate, why isn't desire inevitable.
I cannot bear it.
I am wearing my joints down, I am going to continue swimming until it becomes unbearable because it is the only way that I can live in opposition to myself. There are two of me. One is in the intersecting spiral that comes back from the future, who knows what will happen and knows what to do to save us and then there is me, equally knowledgable but unable to act.
I reach out and I can almost touch it, the future I can make for myself, the future that I need and past that I cling to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm6TsYypBpY
I feel like I can see into the future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa89bt0GZvQ
I should be able to control the future, but it seems when I try change it, I find myself merely fit into what I saw before I acted. Moreover I find myself unwilling to act no matter how obvious the path before me seems to be. I attempt to find logic in my actions, and all I find are justifications fixed by someone else holding me in place.
As I have mentioned repeatedly, dimensions are static and every dimension moves in only one direction along the spiral. This is obvious, even in pre NLC theories, but no one spotted it before me, apparently. This is not because of any genius, instead the universe fits these items into my vision through your eyes. I am like a wrench, I am used to turn a screw for reasons that were decided at a point on thermodynamic static line when the universe was designed.
I whose power should be able to do whatever I want am instead hamstrung from making the smallest changes, the changes that would bring me closesr to where I know that I need to be.
I can see the future as clearly as the past. My vision of the future is not unique, but is instead representative of what everyone possesses and, indeed this common in the extreme. My volume "China's Weaponized Economy" most recently enforced by China's taking over the spot for the most Billionares in the world by country is not so important to show genius on my part, but is instead proof that the future is as visible as the past to one with sufficient information, for it is consistent with what hundreds said before or at least thought and has now risen to the mainstream. We can tell as much about the future as we can tell about the past and in many cases more. But that is no reason not to change it, so why am I here tonight. What causes me to hesitate, why isn't desire inevitable.
I cannot bear it.
I am wearing my joints down, I am going to continue swimming until it becomes unbearable because it is the only way that I can live in opposition to myself. There are two of me. One is in the intersecting spiral that comes back from the future, who knows what will happen and knows what to do to save us and then there is me, equally knowledgable but unable to act.
I reach out and I can almost touch it, the future I can make for myself, the future that I need and past that I cling to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm6TsYypBpY
Thursday, October 15, 2015
NLC-The Static Model and the F series
I'm currently reading about a polar expedition after the civil war during Grant's time in the presidency. I also continue to swim outside in an increasingly cold pool. I'm sore because I have to swim so much so that my mind is cleared, so that I'm too tired to think, to tired to stay awake so I can sleep till 4. It is little enough to ask.
I will come back to the F-series in detail, but I want to take a minute to reflect and to discuss the dried sealing wax of the universe.
The spiral model would tend to look like a method for building a universe and mathematics (inconsistencies solved by NLC-lists are available in this post and in the published volumes although they are not updated), predict-abilities and observed phenomena (see prior volumes/posts especially the observations of black holes pre NLC) as well as Einstein suggest that the universe is fixed. As has been pointed out there is no legitimate difference between a totally pre-ordained universe (i.e. one governed by rules of physics) and one where everything happens at once except in the durability of the fabric. Since NLC requires that there is no true dimension and especially no true time, the idea of a dimension or time based failure of durability is nonsensical at worst and at best contraindicated. You can, of course, argue the universe is contraindicated, but I'm typing this so we have to work from there although I would be the first to volunteer that I don't exist, but perhaps I should save that for another post.
In an information based universe where time is clearly ruled out a time based universe is asinine, much as you'd like to think differently. Similarly, dimension is a phenomena of the data and is almost as meaningless as time which is what led to the spiral model to begin with. That is the F series is a method of expressing fixed data with dimensional qualities which vary based on a formula. The data is not carved into a pattern by the F-series, instead, it can be thought of more as a hologram where, depending on where you look at the fixed data it appears to have a different layout or even varies over time. The hologram universe theory is actually the basis for a non-linear, non-dimensional, non-time based universe for this very reason. For those who haven't read EHT, it shows how the combination of hologram theory and Einstein's reflections on time yield a universe where everything happens at once which requires an absence of time and this in turn prevents a dimension which you can look along to view time. So, the obvious question becomes, who uses spirals to view the dimensionless information. One answer is that we do. At any given point, we have enough of a connection to the spiral to have information from the past and the future. While some of you might believe our grasp of the past is better, I would disagree. Our opinion of what happened before is largely illusory and often times incorrect (what did you dream two night ago? did you dream about me?) whereas we can predict with some certainty what will happen next, we even believe intuitively (if incorrectly) that we can control what happens next. I can type "I want to hear from you" and having typed it be fairly certain that I wrote that only by looking back and seeing it, but before I wrote it I knew it would happen if I wanted it. Which is the better connection? NLC says neither is better since at any point along quantum lines the past and future are fixed and the knowledge of the past and future are fixed.
Let's look at this quantum instant which even the stupidist reader (i.e. the one who believes the least in NLC in my example) will admit is likely. That is there is some length beyond which there is no division (I calculated this with some specificity earlier, although in terms of length since an instant has very little significance if there is no time). During this quantum instant there is a past and a future. But there is no ability to "process" the past or future. Someone who exists in a series of quantum instances, our idiot for example (who is probably a nobel prize winning physicist) cannot during any one instant comprehend anything since comprehension requires that electrons move about in his linear brain. Non-liinearity means that he has to be able to comprehend without movement based on the fact that the knowledge of past and future exists in that quantum instant which is a unity with the past, present and future quantum points. If you take a moment to think about it, how can a series of instances where you cannot comprehend be strung together to form a series of instance where you can? While there are a million ways to try to explain this, they are all a bunch of hooey. The only logical answer is that in any quantum instant without movement there is sufficient knowledge to make that moment complete.
We can spend interminable time discussing this, the argument can be made that without change thought is impossible and therefore there must be movement in the universe, but this requires that thought be "original". If thought is a series of steps in physics then you should be able to take the thought and describe it in terms of mathematically defined states at quantum points. No movement is required. Our "perception of the thought," longing for example, we feel going on interminably, we imagine all sorts of solutions and wait impatiently for it to be relieved, but at the quantum level it is not such a thing. It is a series of electric-chemical reactions which at any moment are static unless there is no quantum length of time and there is some flow. The Nobel prize winning idiot says there is a maximum speed limit (also an illusion) but no minimum because if he accepts that there is a minimum amount of time he has to accept that there is no thought at quantum moments and if there is no thought at quantum moments, the thought that exists by stringing them together is an illusion. But then he has to admit that the information theory of NLC provides a solution because there is information in the universe and because information must have a minimum amount (yes/no, +/-, forward/back etc) and hence there is a minimum speed marked by the difference between one informational state and the next.
I'm headed to Las Vegas. I hope to spend some time (alone) in the mountains. I will be surrounded by people happily gambling away. I cannot enjoy this, because it is the height of hypocrisy in an NLC universe where chance does not exist. Even counting cards is irrelevant since the outcome of hard work (easy work for some) is pre-ordained and hence irrelevant. The time in the mountains will be hard won and as irrelevant as the time in the dice table, but I can bring my small tea cup and I can boil water on an alcohol stove or over some dried brush and drink tea and think of longing and wanting to talk to someone to give my views and listen to theirs. I can wonder if anyone out there understands what I am trying to say here and why the universe sees fit to make me describe the universe and why anyone else listens and if I am lost to the world, then it is only because the world is lost to me. How will I find it again?
I will come back to the F-series in detail, but I want to take a minute to reflect and to discuss the dried sealing wax of the universe.
The spiral model would tend to look like a method for building a universe and mathematics (inconsistencies solved by NLC-lists are available in this post and in the published volumes although they are not updated), predict-abilities and observed phenomena (see prior volumes/posts especially the observations of black holes pre NLC) as well as Einstein suggest that the universe is fixed. As has been pointed out there is no legitimate difference between a totally pre-ordained universe (i.e. one governed by rules of physics) and one where everything happens at once except in the durability of the fabric. Since NLC requires that there is no true dimension and especially no true time, the idea of a dimension or time based failure of durability is nonsensical at worst and at best contraindicated. You can, of course, argue the universe is contraindicated, but I'm typing this so we have to work from there although I would be the first to volunteer that I don't exist, but perhaps I should save that for another post.
In an information based universe where time is clearly ruled out a time based universe is asinine, much as you'd like to think differently. Similarly, dimension is a phenomena of the data and is almost as meaningless as time which is what led to the spiral model to begin with. That is the F series is a method of expressing fixed data with dimensional qualities which vary based on a formula. The data is not carved into a pattern by the F-series, instead, it can be thought of more as a hologram where, depending on where you look at the fixed data it appears to have a different layout or even varies over time. The hologram universe theory is actually the basis for a non-linear, non-dimensional, non-time based universe for this very reason. For those who haven't read EHT, it shows how the combination of hologram theory and Einstein's reflections on time yield a universe where everything happens at once which requires an absence of time and this in turn prevents a dimension which you can look along to view time. So, the obvious question becomes, who uses spirals to view the dimensionless information. One answer is that we do. At any given point, we have enough of a connection to the spiral to have information from the past and the future. While some of you might believe our grasp of the past is better, I would disagree. Our opinion of what happened before is largely illusory and often times incorrect (what did you dream two night ago? did you dream about me?) whereas we can predict with some certainty what will happen next, we even believe intuitively (if incorrectly) that we can control what happens next. I can type "I want to hear from you" and having typed it be fairly certain that I wrote that only by looking back and seeing it, but before I wrote it I knew it would happen if I wanted it. Which is the better connection? NLC says neither is better since at any point along quantum lines the past and future are fixed and the knowledge of the past and future are fixed.
Let's look at this quantum instant which even the stupidist reader (i.e. the one who believes the least in NLC in my example) will admit is likely. That is there is some length beyond which there is no division (I calculated this with some specificity earlier, although in terms of length since an instant has very little significance if there is no time). During this quantum instant there is a past and a future. But there is no ability to "process" the past or future. Someone who exists in a series of quantum instances, our idiot for example (who is probably a nobel prize winning physicist) cannot during any one instant comprehend anything since comprehension requires that electrons move about in his linear brain. Non-liinearity means that he has to be able to comprehend without movement based on the fact that the knowledge of past and future exists in that quantum instant which is a unity with the past, present and future quantum points. If you take a moment to think about it, how can a series of instances where you cannot comprehend be strung together to form a series of instance where you can? While there are a million ways to try to explain this, they are all a bunch of hooey. The only logical answer is that in any quantum instant without movement there is sufficient knowledge to make that moment complete.
We can spend interminable time discussing this, the argument can be made that without change thought is impossible and therefore there must be movement in the universe, but this requires that thought be "original". If thought is a series of steps in physics then you should be able to take the thought and describe it in terms of mathematically defined states at quantum points. No movement is required. Our "perception of the thought," longing for example, we feel going on interminably, we imagine all sorts of solutions and wait impatiently for it to be relieved, but at the quantum level it is not such a thing. It is a series of electric-chemical reactions which at any moment are static unless there is no quantum length of time and there is some flow. The Nobel prize winning idiot says there is a maximum speed limit (also an illusion) but no minimum because if he accepts that there is a minimum amount of time he has to accept that there is no thought at quantum moments and if there is no thought at quantum moments, the thought that exists by stringing them together is an illusion. But then he has to admit that the information theory of NLC provides a solution because there is information in the universe and because information must have a minimum amount (yes/no, +/-, forward/back etc) and hence there is a minimum speed marked by the difference between one informational state and the next.
I'm headed to Las Vegas. I hope to spend some time (alone) in the mountains. I will be surrounded by people happily gambling away. I cannot enjoy this, because it is the height of hypocrisy in an NLC universe where chance does not exist. Even counting cards is irrelevant since the outcome of hard work (easy work for some) is pre-ordained and hence irrelevant. The time in the mountains will be hard won and as irrelevant as the time in the dice table, but I can bring my small tea cup and I can boil water on an alcohol stove or over some dried brush and drink tea and think of longing and wanting to talk to someone to give my views and listen to theirs. I can wonder if anyone out there understands what I am trying to say here and why the universe sees fit to make me describe the universe and why anyone else listens and if I am lost to the world, then it is only because the world is lost to me. How will I find it again?
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
mightware 4
If I loath myself, how must I feel about everyone else? It matters so little to me what effect the contempt anyone besides you feels towards me. There is no more care in me to support a regard for anyone else.
There are so many different ways to approach the nightmares I have, those sleeping and those awake, those real and those in my imagination. Sometimes the eye drops help, other times not so much. One good thing about not being around me is not having to deal with this blindness. It is, inconvenient.
But, perhaps, not as inconvenient as the end of the universe as we know it.
Gravity spiral goes back towards non-linearity. The existence of this feature of NLC is well documented in last posts. The spiral movement towards gravity wells is one of the primary indications of the validity of including a spiral equation in the definition of the universe and is also the origin of spiral features within the universe on spatial scales.
The existence of gravity within the current state of the universe indicates an inward movement towards greater compression, but the universe is expanding indicating that the spiral is overcome by some other force, or by some initial acceleration. The part of the universe where we find ourselves is moving outward against the forces attempting to return it to non-linearity. This indicates that aspects of both expansion and compression are experienced by us. This indicates that we exist in a state where both are present.
If the area of intersection corresponds to the big bang, then perhaps then the big bang itself, that moment when the compressed universe at the ct5 or ct6 state (certain 5 if there is logarithmic compression) is the initial point where there is a meeting of an inward and outward spiral. This makes it possible that we are not in a position post overlap, but that we are actually within the overlap.
In such a scenario, there is not an abrupt 90 degree turn in physics, but as soon as we leave this overlap/collision area of the intersecting spirals, the universe as we know it ends just as abruptly; but in a fashion which might allow us to continue. For example, this may end the forces acting against gravity and allow the universe to start contracting which would be a very mild change in the universe and would tell us that we have a period where there is no overlap in which to contemplate the 90 degree turn leading up to the next compression state, the next big bang, to contemplate the end of a livable universe perhaps..
There are so many different ways to approach the nightmares I have, those sleeping and those awake, those real and those in my imagination. Sometimes the eye drops help, other times not so much. One good thing about not being around me is not having to deal with this blindness. It is, inconvenient.
But, perhaps, not as inconvenient as the end of the universe as we know it.
Gravity spiral goes back towards non-linearity. The existence of this feature of NLC is well documented in last posts. The spiral movement towards gravity wells is one of the primary indications of the validity of including a spiral equation in the definition of the universe and is also the origin of spiral features within the universe on spatial scales.
The existence of gravity within the current state of the universe indicates an inward movement towards greater compression, but the universe is expanding indicating that the spiral is overcome by some other force, or by some initial acceleration. The part of the universe where we find ourselves is moving outward against the forces attempting to return it to non-linearity. This indicates that aspects of both expansion and compression are experienced by us. This indicates that we exist in a state where both are present.
If the area of intersection corresponds to the big bang, then perhaps then the big bang itself, that moment when the compressed universe at the ct5 or ct6 state (certain 5 if there is logarithmic compression) is the initial point where there is a meeting of an inward and outward spiral. This makes it possible that we are not in a position post overlap, but that we are actually within the overlap.
In such a scenario, there is not an abrupt 90 degree turn in physics, but as soon as we leave this overlap/collision area of the intersecting spirals, the universe as we know it ends just as abruptly; but in a fashion which might allow us to continue. For example, this may end the forces acting against gravity and allow the universe to start contracting which would be a very mild change in the universe and would tell us that we have a period where there is no overlap in which to contemplate the 90 degree turn leading up to the next compression state, the next big bang, to contemplate the end of a livable universe perhaps..
Using CT1 as the main non-linear aspect, this indicates that both ct2 and ct3 spirals come directly off and vary directly with ct1 using the machine gun feed shown previously. CT4 functions quite differently. Given the much higher compression state (10^8 vs 10^4) a large number of spirals must intersect with each of the ct2 and ct3 spirals (graphically shown before). In order to maintain the rate of change as a constant, even allowing for variation and without increasing the rate past the speed of light one concept put forward is to vary the rate change between prior states and current states. This would mean that "accelerating" rate change to the speed of light is synonymous to bringing all change states to one time. Another possibility is that the rate change being spread out over multiple spiral lines allows it to be decreased (e.g. the rate change intersecting two spirals can be 1/2 the speed of light, over 3 1/3, etc). How these achieve the apparent variable speed from a single quantum change to light speed can be debated, just at the variety of method in which a static model (a now very complicated static model) can give rise to observed rate variations can be debated, but the outcome is no more complicated in concept than the recording of live action onto a cd and then taking the data and replaying it in order to recreate the variety that was originally recorded. It must be understood that the static universe is only information and the spiral is merely one potential model for how the information is organized.
The force expanding the universe in this model is the injection of material from one deflating sprial into another inflating one.
But you knew that, didn't you.
troubled sleep
If ever a man was driven mad by the thought of a woman
careful not to say by the woman herself
that person would lie awake at 4 am
all their actions in one way or another
to one extent or another
would be about her since the day they met
whether a day or half their lives
directed by forces deep inside
whether a day or half their lives
directed by forces deep inside
it would neither fade nor sleep.
alone but still feeling the hand
and tasting the breath of the other
death would have felt different.
loneliness requires being alone
perhaps one day to be free
to suffer alone
a life forever dedicated
against the conscious mind
alone but still feeling the hand
and tasting the breath of the other
death would have felt different.
loneliness requires being alone
perhaps one day to be free
to suffer alone
a life forever dedicated
against the conscious mind
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
NLC-time orbits after the application of Fibonacci F-series part 8I
In the excitement of the last few days this post was omitted. It is short, but it is, perhaps, the most important post of all. Conflict seems to have given way to a common purpose which creates a conflict of an entirely larger magnitude. Conflict rails against, common purpose seeks a compromise. I should stop writing and leave everyone following this to their own devices so that they might eventually reach the same point, but to what purpose?
I will go on, with great trepidation, since god seems to delight in posing a barrier to me; I will delve a little deeper into its realm with whatever impunity or problems relate.
What becomes possible with a fixed universe, as opposed to one which is built, is that "bridges" can be built between the present and past. Theoretically they can be built to the future also. Why they are not remains to be seen, but we will address this in detail to some extent later.
In a bridge you come up with a mathematical analysis of this general form:
F(tot)=F(past)+F(present) where F is the composite of applicable time states. If, for example, we are dealing with photonic phenomena, the easiest to deal with, we come up with a formula something like this:
F(tot)=Ct(1)pa+ct(1)pr+ct(2)pa+ct(2)pr where pa=past and pr=present. While a future coordinate is possible it is not observed so it will not be addressed. CT are informational states of time and in this case there we assume ct1 corresponds to 2^0=1 and ct2 to 2^1=2 As will be seen in the following two posts, it is likely that at the point where spirals go off of ct1 that they return within no more than two quantum moments to ct1 to insersect but then leave ct1 in their entirety. Where spirals come off of the intersecting spirals, two spirals can be connected.
I will go on, with great trepidation, since god seems to delight in posing a barrier to me; I will delve a little deeper into its realm with whatever impunity or problems relate.
What becomes possible with a fixed universe, as opposed to one which is built, is that "bridges" can be built between the present and past. Theoretically they can be built to the future also. Why they are not remains to be seen, but we will address this in detail to some extent later.
In a bridge you come up with a mathematical analysis of this general form:
F(tot)=F(past)+F(present) where F is the composite of applicable time states. If, for example, we are dealing with photonic phenomena, the easiest to deal with, we come up with a formula something like this:
F(tot)=Ct(1)pa+ct(1)pr+ct(2)pa+ct(2)pr where pa=past and pr=present. While a future coordinate is possible it is not observed so it will not be addressed. CT are informational states of time and in this case there we assume ct1 corresponds to 2^0=1 and ct2 to 2^1=2 As will be seen in the following two posts, it is likely that at the point where spirals go off of ct1 that they return within no more than two quantum moments to ct1 to insersect but then leave ct1 in their entirety. Where spirals come off of the intersecting spirals, two spirals can be connected.
Figure 5
There is shown above an initial f series intersecting spiral formed at the overlap of spirals 1 and 2 off of a main spiral (line A) which is coming out of the page so that only a point (or circle in this case) is visible. For the sake of creating a richer model, "thermodynamics" only occurs at the insersectionof a spiral coming off of and therefore connecting spirals 1 and 2 away from line A where they originate. Here one of these spirals is further advanced than the other so that one is in the past relative to the other. Where they meet at the overlap (at overlap spiral 1 and 2) another f-series intersecting spiral comes off of the point of overlap, part of which is in the past and part in the present and this is regenerated or moves, according to the model which works, down the line of thermodynamics with the intersecting spirals in the fashion shown.
In this way the there is a tie in between two different fixed time points which allows someone experiencing this perspective to appreciate the movement between the less advanced spiral and the more advanced spiral so that even though the model is fixed, there is the appearance of time.
This model is hardly adequate, it is the equivalent of imagining the effect of jumping into a freezing cold swimming pool (which I did earlier) by dipping the end of a toe into it (which I used an entire foot to get a better measurement).
However, this is one mechanism for explaining the perception of time and there you have it. It doesn't solve the bigger problems I referred to, but it makes for an interesting model. Ponder the dangers of continuing down this path; and yet I am drawn to its dark, even haunted depths.
Monday, October 12, 2015
playing games
how strange I feel tonight
hearing the siren song
drawn like the moth
forced to remember
we like the same music
move to the same rhythm
made together
for each other
and always apart
I thought you had won
the game called loved
if it were a game
they say the last one to love
is the loser of the game
I thought I had to lose
but today I find out
I have not lost after all
may not, for a thousand years
I would have gladly lost
because that is what love is
to want to be the loser
or to never have a loser
but sometimes the game
only has losers
let me be last
give me my love
worth not winning
hearing the siren song
drawn like the moth
forced to remember
we like the same music
move to the same rhythm
made together
for each other
and always apart
I thought you had won
the game called loved
if it were a game
they say the last one to love
is the loser of the game
I thought I had to lose
but today I find out
I have not lost after all
may not, for a thousand years
I would have gladly lost
because that is what love is
to want to be the loser
or to never have a loser
but sometimes the game
only has losers
let me be last
give me my love
worth not winning
NLC-time orbits after the application of Fibonacci F-series part 9 (with drawings)
Graphic representation of spirals Tying into other spirals
I consider it very unlikely that you will understand what transpires because you are being unnecessarily pig-headed. I may be psychotic, but I'm willing to accept what is real and what is not. Actually, if I'm psychotic, then I can't accept what is real and what is not. Whatever.
As I indicated there is an enormous variety and complexity in addressing this process of compressed intersecting spirals although the math remains fairly simple. The proof lies in using the principles to define a single operation in nature. This does not mean that this model plays in role in nature, only that some model is required as indicated above for explaining unique NLC operations (especially compression associated with information theory) and intersecting spirals provides a fairly consistent model tending towards observed phenomena as has been observed in the past with non-intersecting logarithmic spirals.
As will be seen from the lengthy discussion of the drawings to follow it is easy to tie intersecting F-series spiral theory in with information theory. It is also easy to see how a relatively simple system can increase exponentially (2^n) in complexity with some rather simple foundations.
The first drawing below shows intersecting spirals and after each intersection, the change in either spiral is shown.
Figure 1
To view the drawing above in another way we can look at the two intersecting spirals as if they are tubes. In this case, we're going to deal with a very simple model, a 4 coordinate spiral intersecting with a one coordinate model (our view of the universe intersecting with space if you would). As can be seen, at the first intersection you have ct1-ct2 where "space" picks up a single spiral and ct4 goes to ct3. While this shows one coordinate around another, it would be the same if it was shown a four dots together, the dimension is only used for understanding the graphic. At the second intersection, ct2 goes to ct4 and ct3 (the remnant of ct4 originally) goes to ct1. This would describe a pre-black hole type of spacial interaction along to intersecting spiral lines.
Figure 2
In order to give some perspective, in the drawing below on the right is an f-series intersecting two spirals like the model at the top of the page. As can be seen by the model on the left, the ability to extend the spiral outward without affecting in inward moving spirals is shown. This same interaction can be seen to a lesser extent with curved spirals but the discussion of the election between these has been covered sufficiently and the use of one as opposed to the other is merely a matter of selection since the universe contains aspects of both. This model is important because without a fixed amount of information certain numbers like pi remain unsolvable and in an information based universe, at least for a fixed sent of spirals (such as the limited number shown on the right) you can get a practical answer for sequential equations like pi or e (euler).
The discussion of the drawing on the left is much more complex because a single drawing is used to show several different potential phenomena, although curved spirals are avoided despite the fact that they can, at least in theory, be substituted for linear spirals.
What is seen on the right side of the f(8) spiral (see figure 1 above) is the "machine gun" type feed of one spiral into an intersecting spiral. There are many features of this interaction that are worth noting, perhaps the most significant of which is that at some point in the spirals are properly aligned, the downward (or upward) turn of the intersecting spiral will overlap with the downward (at least according to the drawing) of the intersected spiral. One potential in this phenomena is that for the loose (1 to 1) interaction of photonic ct1 to wave (ct2) compression states these overlaps could change the observable simultaneous data change from 1 (non-overlapped) to 2 (overlapped) which would provide a handy (if coincidental) explanation for the duplicatas personality of energy (wave and particle characteristics). It should be noted that the place where you would observe this is not at this outer spiral arm, but the positioning was not used for the purpose of illuminating any particular aspect of NLC.
Looking to the left side of the left figure, there is a non-intersecting spiral shown coming off of the main ct8 spiral and below this is an intersecting spiral coming off of the same main spiral. I have intentionally positioned these two spiral to show another intersecting spiral joining the two F-13 arms of this spiral together. I could have joined any other arms together, of course and I could have joined them using other offsets, such as having them offset from the same quantum point from the main ct8 spiral arm. The reason for this may make more sense for a view of the next drawing.
A single spiral coming off of the main spiral would make a first time orbit, but it would not be stabilized until it was secured exponentially in place, as by one (at least) intersecting spiral holding the exponential number of spirals together and preferably by the number of quantum points where intersection occurs divided by two spirals holding them together (a spiral with an overlap of 8 would have 4). An unstable number of spiral overlaps would generate a clock time state that would, over time, spontaneously degrade which could explain radioactive systems.
Figure 3
The drawing below shows spiral arms coming off (at right angles) from a single point on the main spiral A (in this case it can be off of any point on A (at 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, etc) and at any stage of compression. The drawing on the left shows two spirals, neither of which is intersecting, although they intersect each other at the overlap shown. This overlap forms a surface from which an intersecting spiral may spiral off based on the amount of overlap As can be seen, unless this overlap is "broken off" it serves to fix the position of spiral 1 to spiral 2 at the F5 position and the F3 position respectively. Going into the significance of each aspect of this exceeds the scope of this graphic analysis.
It's important to note that the length of any spiral off of the main spiral should be defined by the length of time during which the compressed state exists. Referring to the second figure 2 the process of compression can be reversed along the main spiral but this requires movement in a single direction so that the machine gun type movement shown in Figure 3 would have to end and the aspect of the spiral at this point would be unique and might correspond to an overlap of the spirals and if that were the case, then the spirals might have to remain offset unless a decompression event occurs. This is not required.
The Figure on the right shows that these types of overlaps can occur off of a central spiral A where the F series is not changed. One can imagine, in the example shown below, how one or more intersecting f-sprials coming more or less out of (or into) the page could (by coming off of the intersection of the spirals coming off of line a) join the operation of any two or more of the spirals in the same fashion as shown in the right. This provides a mechanism for explaining, using F-series intersecting spirals why certain point times change only with others (if they didn't we would fly apart). By carrying this out for successive layers, you get a multi-dimensional framework of interlocking points. The nature of the overlap is not self evident from what is shown below, but should correspond to compression states (2^n) of the type represented by overlaps of intersecting lines such as are shown in the second figure above.
Figure 4
That should give you something to think about while waiting for the next post. I have a lot to think about. When I vomit over all this, something comes out besides blood, but I am certainly bleeding. While the thought of abandoning this line of inquiry completely crossed my mind, you can imagine based on what you know why I decided that I needed to continue it to its conclusion. It hardly seems fair what I have to go through in order to put this before you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)