Volume 1 has reached 350 pages. I am fuming. Here I am trying to cut this down and it keeps growing. It is a monster, but the entire discussion of capacitance, even at this early stage is important to an understanding of the simultaneous and ongoing compression/decompression phenomena that define our experience. I do see a 50 page summary in what I'm editing this weekend, but I don't see publishing it out of context yet.
So I'm thinking of 3 volumes instead of two and later a cut down version of 50 pages or less. A little irritating. But in the interest of going beyond just disorganized blog posts, I am still planning, hopefully by the end of the month, to post Volume 1 and after that I will have to aggressively try to generate some sort of pamphlet to par this thing down to a few pages, certainly any theory can be covered in 50 pages. The extra bulk needed to justify the assumptions and short cuts which might only take 10 pages would drive it up to 50, but that may months off and something will be done soon.
Eventually I need to eliminate some of the parentheticals (Mark Twain says that parentheticals are only for people who don't understand grammar-haha).
But it is Sunday The most misleading part of the world is the illusion of self determination. I watched a video of a slaughter house and the number of dead in this particular one shows me how on a daily basis the life that we want to hold so dear in ourselves is otherwise ignored.
Our place in the universe is as easily solved with a single algorithm as with all of our self importance. We are killers and destroyers and only create in fits and starts and eventually bend creation to destruction again. This does not justify some grand view of ourselves that disproves quantum algorithm changes.
Just as the F-series evolves, so might the algorithm. If one wants to accept a god (and no earthly religions can even come close because they rely on true self-determination and randomness) then perhaps the algorithm is an evolving thought. Since any moment in the universe can be created merely by solving for x, so too can we perceive the instant (or instants since one is really too short to perceive) even if it is merely a fleeting fancy in the mind of the great mathematician.
As I have mentioned, AuT must, since it is right, provide an explanation for observed phenomena. In the example of the "finding" of the HIggs Boson" for example, the explanation of AuT was that the "finding" was a flawed observation which, of course, turned out to be correct.
While the connection between "false randomness", the "illusion of coincidence" and "quantum entanglement" is set out in more detail in the book version, a connection with quantum entanglement is worth discussing where an article points back to AuT as an explanation.
I used in the last post one of a couple of methods of explaining quantum entanglement. In that possible method, the common spiral link pulling differing particles back together. The other primary method has to do with positive and negative spirals giving rise to a connection, the one positive to the other negative. Either of these can potentially be explained by reference to solutions inherent in the algorithm. They both have their strengths and weaknesses in this explanation. The positive and negative are most easily tied because one solution is necessarily (well according to theory so far necessarily) opposite but equal to the other and even intersecting during certain times.
The other explanation allows the equivalence to be produced at one point in time and then carried across the universe for as long as one spiral holds a conglomeration of points together, the connection remains like a telegraph line tying two remote towns together in the old west.
http://futurism.com/science-creates-a-quantum-link-between-photons-that-dont-exist-at-the-same-time-2/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYhhZQx0Xhg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtxmraqZPH4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-fWDrZSiZs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUrzicaiRLU
No comments:
Post a Comment