Happy New Year!
As the New Year rapidly approaches, by the time this is posted it will have arrived for many of you, this post on time is particularly appropriate.
This post covers with a little more specificity how time and velocity interact by showing how the building of history successively is affected by ct1 exchange. It shows also how the breakdown and reshuffling of history in a net entropic environment gives rise to a breakdown in internal sharing leading to the phenomena we call aging which is, of course, just a reflection of greater disorder relative to any prior ct state generally although in localized settings the order may increase.
Drawings showing this process will follow.
Here's a discussion of the drawings:
The first figure shows ct4 as a box. Exchange of ct1 translates into velocity and as this velocity increases, the surrounding ct3 and ct2 states begin to thin, the ct4 more and more directly exchanging for ct1.
The second shows two ct4 boxes, ct4a and ct4b with a ct3 between them and ct1s on either side. This shows ct3 exchange between ct4 with multiple intervening ct1 exchanges. AS the velocity increases towards the speed of light (sol)ct3exchange is put off and ct4 has to be exposed to more ct3 states to the ct1 exchange. The same is true of the ct3 to ct2.
The third drawing shows internal (to the ct4) ct3 exchange although internal ct1 exchanges still intervene.
Above this is a ct3 leaving amid ct2 and ct1 and then breaking down to ct2 and then exchanging with ct1 showing how as more area is exposed, the ct4 begins to break down to allow the amount of ct1 exchange required.
Overall these drawing and this discussion shows internal movement of intermediary states (electron movement within an atom being the most pronounced) while allowing the structure to be maintained.
The standard model for exchange (1/(1-(v^2/c^2)) is entirely consistent. The idea that c is a fixed number means that quantum change is presumed to exist lest a quantum change in velocity would be impossible (aka Parminedes/Zeno). The substitution according to the preferred model is based on one ct1 state in ct2 changing state (from positive to negative compression for example) and an outside ct1 in space of the prior state taking its place creating a light speed effect. Presumably, any faster substitution would break the photon into space.
Since entropy is merely a reflection of underlying symmetry, to talk about aging or entropy as moving towards a state of disorder is inaccurate. We age and in our self centered way, we presume the universe is aging, when it is merely moving in a highly formulaec fashion towards greater compression and higher information although the compression level changes depending on the fpluspix states on average.
The movement of lower ct states (ct3 in this example) between (as opposed to within) a higher ct states (ct4 in this example) involves ct1 exchange. The amount of this ct1 exchange affects the "time" represented by the higher exchange, the internal movement (e.g. orbiting electrons), the vibration and the velocity. The more ct1 between the exchange of ct3, the slower the aging, the longer the appearance and the greater the apparent speed. Velocity externally (as opposed to internal velocity-within the shell of the ct4) prevents the ct3 from reattaching and becoming part of a new memory which slows the process of aging and time which are functions of the recombination. The more ct1 interferes with the recombination, the more the vibrational or lateral speed and the slower the history is built over quantum moments.
another way of looking at this is taht around each quantum ct4 state exists a cloud of ct3, 2 and 1 states, around ct3, ct2 and c1 and around ct5 a cloud of ct4 states with the lower states following. around ct2 is only ct1 so there is one ct1 state exchanged constantly for ct2, but other exchanges occur for the other ct states before ct1 exchanges slowing down the process unless the higher states are broken down.
There are drawings that help with this understanding, but I don't have those except as sketches, but they will come in book5 if not sooner.
The bottom line is that the histories built from recombined higher ct states are viewed as time by us. The dimension of time is absent since the recombination is not along an axis, but is instead regulated by compression/decompression states acting on f-series information arms.
History being a series of successive solutions, it can be reversed locally, but it cannot be reversed globally without changing the overall information matrix of the universe, effectively changing x for the entire universe.
Happy New Year.
Sunday, December 31, 2017
Friday, December 29, 2017
AuT Compelling 3-a closer look at time and history
There are alternatives and coincidences in AuT and the observations sought to explain them.
The question was asked (by me to myself) is time higher ct changes (than ct1) exchanging or is compressed information and decompressed information from higher ct states exchanging. The answer appears to be that it is a combination of these two.
It is easy to get caught up in these and to move in the wrong direction.
Some things are self evident from the idea (which is really more of a necessity of observation) that space is made of the same stuff as everything else; or more accurately, everything is made up of space.
While we only go back to ct0, it is fairly clear that ct0 itself may be a durable solution from something pre ct0, a ct-1 if you would or perhaps a ctA since numbers may be misleading for those solutions. Since we know how time builds (and that is in book 4 and will be discussed further in book 5 and in the near future in this blog) at least up to a point, we can see how velocity and history interact with great particularity.
First, let me go back to some early observations. While any study of even EHT would eventually lead to the disclosures in book 4 and more refined disclosures coming in book 5, it is significant that there was some confusion based on ideas which might appear in conflict. Let's itemize those:
1) CT1 compresses according to f(n)^2^n compression into ct2 and that pattern continues, at least loosely, into ct5. While we discussed the formation of gravity in the ct0-ct1 fpluspix compression, that is a background state which gives rise to compression and anti-compression as a preserved solution model (32/27 in prior posts, books 2 and 4). This necessarily equates ct1 substitution into velocity for two reasons: 1) movement through space "is" ct1 substitution by definition and 2) the fixed rate is seen as lightspeed (1:256).
2) History builds and deconstructs according to f-series compression; a) the future is made of compressed past and b) when ct1 states turn decompressive the history built up falls apart into its constitutent parts. To some extent a very transient history occurs in the ct2-ct3 transitions, but real history occurs only at ct4-ct5. As was discussed previously this is why history in a closed system repeats, being made from the past recombining in predetermined patterns. For the reason that time is based on universal quantum steps which cannot be the same on a grand scale because of changes in information (quantity and state) it only appears in one direction and travel is impossible because there is no dimension to travel down, although it may be traced, at least in theory, forward or backwards.
This led to some serious questions about how velocity is converted to time and what time was.
First, we need to look at what time is not. 1) Time is not some bullshit pre-AuT 4th dimension. Even dimension is not dimension, being only the number of solutions occurring relatively together based on place., but time is not that, nor is it some romantic thing put here so everything doesn't happen at once, even Eintein missed that one 2) Time is not some magical thing, neither is dimension. It is only a sequence of solutions. The trap of post super-symmetry is the idea that these thermodynamic free solutions don't affect the thermodynamic universe when, in reality, they give rise to thermodynamics.
So what does that leave us for time?
In order to understand that we need to look at some of the drawings that reflect the mathematical models.
This venerable old drawing shows ct1 states 1,1,2,3,5,8,13 and one going up to 21.
Information builds in this fashion. It also breaks down in the opposite direction according to this formula.
The drawing above shows how this process creates large packets of history compressed according to this underlying method. However, these packets also break down. At the ct1-ct2 interface, you merely have a ct1 substituting for a ct1 on a ct2 carrier. What this represents is a two place solution in place of a one place solution 11 vs 1. This gives rise to two dimensional features one of which is movement which we see as 1:256 substitution rates giving rise to our definition of the speed of light which reflections this information equation covered earlier.
| Information | 2*f(n) | 2^n | 2f(n)^2n | f(n) | ||||||
| N | max changes per quanum instant | |||||||||
| 1 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 2*1 | 0+1 | |||||
| 2 | 4 | 4 | 256 | 2*2 | 1+1 | velocity | 1:256 | |||
| 3 | 6 | 8 | 1679616 | 2*3 | 1+2 | Time | ||||
| 4 | 10 | 16 | 1E+16 | 2*5 | 2+3 | ct4 time | ||||
| 5 | 16 | 32 | 3.4028E+38 | 2*8 | 3+5 | ct5 time | ||||
| ratio of prior state to current state=maximum time | ||||||||||
| changes/quantum inst ct4 | 1.6796E+22 | at ct4 | 3*4 | |||||||
| changes/quantum inst ct5 | 5.7154E+60 | at ct5 | 3*4*5 | |||||||
| 1.62x10^-35 | plank lenth | |||||||||
| lightspeed | c=2.99792458x10^11k/sec | e=mc^2 | ||||||||
| 299792458 | m/s | (e/m)=c^2 | 6^8 | 10^16 | ||||||
| 1.62E-35 | Planck length in meters | 1.62 | 1E-35 | 6 | 10 | |||||
| At lightspeed there are | 1.6796E+22 | changes per quantum moment | 36 | 100 | ||||||
| For a distance | 1.62E-35 | there are | 1.6796E+22 | changes at light speed/quantum length | 216 | 1000 | ||||
| At lightspeed | 299792458 | m/s there are | 1.0368E+57 | changes per meter | 1296 | 10000 | ||||
| A quantum instant is | 3.4584E+48 | changes per second at ct4 at lightspeed | 7776 | 100000 | ||||||
| 46656 | 1000000 | |||||||||
| If a quantum moment is 5.40374x10^-44th of a second (betw ct2 and ct4) | 279936 | 10000000 | ||||||||
| Then the maximum ct4 changes are: | 1679616 | 100000000 | ||||||||
| 1.67962E+22 | per | 5.4037E-44 | of a second at lightspeed | 1000000000 | ||||||
| 5.40374E-44 | in A Planck length, the portion of a second | 1.00E+10 | ||||||||
The question was asked (by me to myself) is time higher ct changes (than ct1) exchanging or is compressed information and decompressed information from higher ct states exchanging. The answer appears to be that it is a combination of these two.
We have to look at one more drawing to get a feel for this.
This shows the packets of compressed information being formed and then deformed and absorbed by nearby states. One more drawing to understand how this can work even if there are decompressing packets of history (information/lower ct states)
This model of ct1 shows "positive A and negative B states making up an arm of the ct1 information state. If this model is accurate and continues into higher states, it means the following:
1) You have a high (ct4 for example) ct state which is balance. As one of the ct3 states falls out of symmetry (its charge changes making it an asymmetric ct3 at the location where it changed) it falls away and is replaced by another, symmetric (opposite charge to the asymmetric ct3) ct3 state or the ct4 state begins to degrade. A nearby ct4 state or another place on the same ct4 state may pick up the asymmetric ct3.
Why does this work so well with ct4 and ct5 and so poorly at ct2 and ct3?
Another Drawing:
What you can see (fairly clearly at the ct2 level) is that there are packets of information. At ct1, there are only 4 total "bits", but at each arm of ct2, the number of these bits increases by a factor of 2, so arm one has 4; arm 2, 16; arm 3, 32 and arm 4, 256 with these very large packets being compressed at ct3 and ct4. Ct3 shows this and it's already so high (1.68x10^6) of total compression that significant history and time is possible,but its not the even more compressed and interchanged history that is possible in ct4 and ct5.
Thus, when you put all these drawings together, you see that shared (and unshared) packets of information create a historical record. Slight changes in time will occur and times will vary even within a relatively closed system (on a bulk level think about the train example vs someone standing beside the train).
While the last drawing only shows a single ct4 and ct5, these can interact with adjoining ct4 and ct5 states to share the packets which become asymmetric.
This model is not meant to be a final model. The positive and negative combinations to form a stable arm (as opposed to multiple models) make sense for many reasons (magnetism would reflect this and it makes for a simple method of constructing and deconstructing adjacent states) there is a lot of math that goes with it, only some of which is reflected in the models for the very simplist of positive and negative changes (in prior posts, if you don't want to go looking for it, wait for book 5).
What we do have, however, is an entirely new view of what time and history are vs velocity which is base ct1 exchange as opposed to the maintenance of a higher ct state through sharing of otherwise symmetrically (polarity wise) higher ct states.
Wednesday, December 27, 2017
AuT-Time article
There is so much that is more important than me.
Then this
Would I trade my knowledge for
money, peace, love, sex
So much anxiety
about health, money, relationship, science
about sex and love
I see everything
I see through you and myself
but it brings me no peace
no sex no love
knowledge has no intrinsic value
unless you hide it
A man who has a good wife will never be a poor man. Why said this and why?
Time I know. My theory explains the difference between time and history. It cannot run backwards in the sense that the quantum universe cannot go back to an exact prior quantum state (the added information would prevent that even in an early universe). But information can compress and decompress so that it can run in two directions in terms of thermodynamics and so I have said and so the observations catch up with my explanations. I spit on pre-Aut Physics. And it spits on me.
Physicists Have Created a Set of Conditions in Which Time Seems to Run in Reverse http://flip.it/z_e9HZ
This section has appeared before, but its edited. This section which this set of posts deals with, which includes the list with the explanations, is now 45 pages long. It will be the anchor of book 5 and it is coming despite all the other things.
Or perhaps not.
I am being forced to pay attention to this again, to see the abyss of inquiry.
From nothing I have come and to nothing I will return in time. Sooner rather than later.
And why? Because of my insecurities of those of someone else?
I do not know and that is not my inquiry.
The art of fickle is an inquiry for someone else.
INTRODUCTION: What is Algorithm Universe theory
AuT is a theory that a single variable algorithm composed of infinite expanding series offset by compressives series define the universe from a non-dimensional, time free environment.
The methodology of the inquiry is to follow the universe back to its roots and outward to the next fixed solution set after black holes.
AuT predicts a much older universe, the big bang as one inflection point among many and an evolving algorithm defining the successive states with particularity from which black hole evolution is defined and from which subsequent compression states can be predicted with certainty based on the effect at very high compression has on remembered solution values.
Aut is a true theory of quantum mechanics because it defines a universe defined by quantum changes in a single variable giving rise to quantum moments for each quantum state for the entire universe.
AuT provides a new and more accurate perspective of what dimension, velocity, time and history are and how they come into existence, how they are connected.
The future can be based on the past as previous universe quantum states are compressed or as compressed information states decompress while the total amount of information increases with each quantum change in the universe.
Expansion goes on forever and the amount of compression also steadily increases in a fluctuating manner so that the amount of compression varies within a range, never fully compressed and never fully decompressed, the universe defined by infinite expanding series and offsetting infinite series of compression states as defined herein at least through ct5 (black hole) compression.
AuT is the subject of several books, the latest is Algorithm Universe Theory Book 4. This document condenses over two thousand pages. AuT is a unifying formula, which goes far beyond a unified field theory. AuT deals with the underlying, un-changeable symmetry of the universe below the level of entropy and thermodynamics.
That does not mean it is impractical, because it provides tools from which the entire universe may be better understood and manipulated.
AuT eliminates thermodynamics, not just entropy, it eliminates randomness. It explains how dimension and space time arise from a non-dimensional framework. In doing so, AuT explains the big bang as one in a series of average inflection points; when the universe will stop expanding and why in terms of gravity and dark energy or anti-gravity. In this context, AuT explains anti-matter and why there more matter than anti-matter.
It replaces entropy with super symmetry, redefining symmetry in terms of infinite converging series. It provides mathematical proofs reflected by observation of observed phenomena and successfully predicts what observations show in advance of their announcement
Then this
Would I trade my knowledge for
money, peace, love, sex
So much anxiety
about health, money, relationship, science
about sex and love
I see everything
I see through you and myself
but it brings me no peace
no sex no love
knowledge has no intrinsic value
unless you hide it
A man who has a good wife will never be a poor man. Why said this and why?
Time I know. My theory explains the difference between time and history. It cannot run backwards in the sense that the quantum universe cannot go back to an exact prior quantum state (the added information would prevent that even in an early universe). But information can compress and decompress so that it can run in two directions in terms of thermodynamics and so I have said and so the observations catch up with my explanations. I spit on pre-Aut Physics. And it spits on me.
Physicists Have Created a Set of Conditions in Which Time Seems to Run in Reverse http://flip.it/z_e9HZ
This section has appeared before, but its edited. This section which this set of posts deals with, which includes the list with the explanations, is now 45 pages long. It will be the anchor of book 5 and it is coming despite all the other things.
Or perhaps not.
I am being forced to pay attention to this again, to see the abyss of inquiry.
From nothing I have come and to nothing I will return in time. Sooner rather than later.
And why? Because of my insecurities of those of someone else?
I do not know and that is not my inquiry.
The art of fickle is an inquiry for someone else.
INTRODUCTION: What is Algorithm Universe theory
AuT is a theory that a single variable algorithm composed of infinite expanding series offset by compressives series define the universe from a non-dimensional, time free environment.
The methodology of the inquiry is to follow the universe back to its roots and outward to the next fixed solution set after black holes.
AuT predicts a much older universe, the big bang as one inflection point among many and an evolving algorithm defining the successive states with particularity from which black hole evolution is defined and from which subsequent compression states can be predicted with certainty based on the effect at very high compression has on remembered solution values.
Aut is a true theory of quantum mechanics because it defines a universe defined by quantum changes in a single variable giving rise to quantum moments for each quantum state for the entire universe.
AuT provides a new and more accurate perspective of what dimension, velocity, time and history are and how they come into existence, how they are connected.
The future can be based on the past as previous universe quantum states are compressed or as compressed information states decompress while the total amount of information increases with each quantum change in the universe.
Expansion goes on forever and the amount of compression also steadily increases in a fluctuating manner so that the amount of compression varies within a range, never fully compressed and never fully decompressed, the universe defined by infinite expanding series and offsetting infinite series of compression states as defined herein at least through ct5 (black hole) compression.
AuT is the subject of several books, the latest is Algorithm Universe Theory Book 4. This document condenses over two thousand pages. AuT is a unifying formula, which goes far beyond a unified field theory. AuT deals with the underlying, un-changeable symmetry of the universe below the level of entropy and thermodynamics.
That does not mean it is impractical, because it provides tools from which the entire universe may be better understood and manipulated.
AuT eliminates thermodynamics, not just entropy, it eliminates randomness. It explains how dimension and space time arise from a non-dimensional framework. In doing so, AuT explains the big bang as one in a series of average inflection points; when the universe will stop expanding and why in terms of gravity and dark energy or anti-gravity. In this context, AuT explains anti-matter and why there more matter than anti-matter.
It replaces entropy with super symmetry, redefining symmetry in terms of infinite converging series. It provides mathematical proofs reflected by observation of observed phenomena and successfully predicts what observations show in advance of their announcement
Digression 122617-countdownto new years
I said earlier that we should all be terrified from the moment we're born because we are all going to die. The counter argument was made that knowing we're going to die anyway should remove all fear.
Perhaps we should go back and forth between the two.
Occasionally life has been so very miserable that death seemed like a relief in the making.
Those days pass for some, for me they never last too long, perhaps one is coming on, I don't know.
I suppose my response would be that maybe life shouldn't last forever, but it could be a little longer than it is. More joy, more sorry, more frustration.
I also think it should be broken into sections and you should be able to start over at each one. That would simplify things. Want proof there isn't a god its that life doesn't work this way.
A better way still would be to mix things up and start all over and after a fashion that happens, but not exactly that way.
I know what my mistakes were in life. Not watching for what is important to me, whether the money, the freedom, the friends, perhaps even the enemies.
That doesn't mean you'll learn anything from this.
Birds perched on branches in the cold rain, what are they thinking? where are they going?
I'm suffering from indecisions, new years axiety about what to do in the coming year, fear of change which is coming whether i want it or not, writer's block, tension about whether i'm following the formulas close enough, stress about finishing articles, book 5, do I have to finish time first?, rewrite of venus, almost done, but is it too boring? did i miss, i must have missed one of the formula steps in all of the books? nostradamus, too complicated to continue without restarting at the beginning, rereading for the last time the edits to book 2 of the counselor's series, i just want to enjoy it but i have to read it where i can edit it in case something is wrong
robins, cardinals, red and brown, some puffy looking bird whose name escapes me, partridge? what are those small birds they shoot this time of year? is that a blue jay with its back to me? colors and anti-colors
isn't it better to have one great book than 3 mediocre ones?
people are waiting for me, can i disappoint everyone?
am i too worried about other people, myself? what about the calming effects of inevitable death, am i too close? to blind? what about these projects, the alternate futures, the problems with people i don't want to deal with who are forced on me, the ones i do want to deal with that are separated by gulfs of understanding, fear, financial disparity, learning?
The story structure:
1: setup-every day life of whoever, may be grand, horrible or indifferent
2:the changed circumstance, something an opportunity or challenge presented
3:the new situation where the hero reacts to the changed circumstance, may accept a challenge, run away from it, even ignore it as long as there is a reaction-up to 25%
4: changed plans/motivation-general desire gets specific, outer motivation, to get to venus for example, is revealed, may be to pursue or escape something, the place where the audience wants protagonist to succeed even if its an act of murder or some other ten commandments nono, its part of the changed circumstance
5. progress-seems to be working towards 4
6. point of no return-after series of successes (with minor setbacks) of 5 at the 50% mark, commttment is made (launch nto space)
7. complications-visible goal becomes harder to obtain, stakes go up, no longer deciding whether to go into space but surviving it.
8. major setback-at 85%, this is where the burgeoning love falls apart, where the mission is in jeopardy and there seems no way to succeed.
9. the final push, the hero finds hidden reserves allowing them to go on
10. at 90%-99% you hit the climax, hero must take last act, whether of success or self sacrifice, goal met or failed with a lesson
11.aftermath-of varying length to show where characters end up
but venus is too bumpy, can the first two stories follow this closer, can the last be made to work in this model, perhaps twice? once at the detonation, a second story built around the aftermath where all 11 items come to play in the aftermath? perhaps. i'd like to be finished, but finishing is decided for you sometimes.
the new year approaches/
Perhaps we should go back and forth between the two.
Occasionally life has been so very miserable that death seemed like a relief in the making.
Those days pass for some, for me they never last too long, perhaps one is coming on, I don't know.
I suppose my response would be that maybe life shouldn't last forever, but it could be a little longer than it is. More joy, more sorry, more frustration.
I also think it should be broken into sections and you should be able to start over at each one. That would simplify things. Want proof there isn't a god its that life doesn't work this way.
A better way still would be to mix things up and start all over and after a fashion that happens, but not exactly that way.
I know what my mistakes were in life. Not watching for what is important to me, whether the money, the freedom, the friends, perhaps even the enemies.
That doesn't mean you'll learn anything from this.
Birds perched on branches in the cold rain, what are they thinking? where are they going?
I'm suffering from indecisions, new years axiety about what to do in the coming year, fear of change which is coming whether i want it or not, writer's block, tension about whether i'm following the formulas close enough, stress about finishing articles, book 5, do I have to finish time first?, rewrite of venus, almost done, but is it too boring? did i miss, i must have missed one of the formula steps in all of the books? nostradamus, too complicated to continue without restarting at the beginning, rereading for the last time the edits to book 2 of the counselor's series, i just want to enjoy it but i have to read it where i can edit it in case something is wrong
robins, cardinals, red and brown, some puffy looking bird whose name escapes me, partridge? what are those small birds they shoot this time of year? is that a blue jay with its back to me? colors and anti-colors
isn't it better to have one great book than 3 mediocre ones?
people are waiting for me, can i disappoint everyone?
am i too worried about other people, myself? what about the calming effects of inevitable death, am i too close? to blind? what about these projects, the alternate futures, the problems with people i don't want to deal with who are forced on me, the ones i do want to deal with that are separated by gulfs of understanding, fear, financial disparity, learning?
The story structure:
1: setup-every day life of whoever, may be grand, horrible or indifferent
2:the changed circumstance, something an opportunity or challenge presented
3:the new situation where the hero reacts to the changed circumstance, may accept a challenge, run away from it, even ignore it as long as there is a reaction-up to 25%
4: changed plans/motivation-general desire gets specific, outer motivation, to get to venus for example, is revealed, may be to pursue or escape something, the place where the audience wants protagonist to succeed even if its an act of murder or some other ten commandments nono, its part of the changed circumstance
5. progress-seems to be working towards 4
6. point of no return-after series of successes (with minor setbacks) of 5 at the 50% mark, commttment is made (launch nto space)
7. complications-visible goal becomes harder to obtain, stakes go up, no longer deciding whether to go into space but surviving it.
8. major setback-at 85%, this is where the burgeoning love falls apart, where the mission is in jeopardy and there seems no way to succeed.
9. the final push, the hero finds hidden reserves allowing them to go on
10. at 90%-99% you hit the climax, hero must take last act, whether of success or self sacrifice, goal met or failed with a lesson
11.aftermath-of varying length to show where characters end up
but venus is too bumpy, can the first two stories follow this closer, can the last be made to work in this model, perhaps twice? once at the detonation, a second story built around the aftermath where all 11 items come to play in the aftermath? perhaps. i'd like to be finished, but finishing is decided for you sometimes.
the new year approaches/
Monday, December 25, 2017
Aut Compelling-part 2
Here are some promised holiday links.
Who thinks of these things?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h13UloeH_GQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7jwCYuQarU
When they give me the nobel prize (posthumously) they will say the one thing that AuT did (perhaps not alone) more than anything else was to recognize that space was made of the same stuff as everything else.
I'm not going deep yet (hell its Christmas Morning, you won't read this for several days anyway) but some discusion of this mind blowing determination is worth giving, my holiday present to you.
After e=mc^2 it was pretty obvious, perhaps, but to figure out the model of why and fully recognize it, as opposed to some half-way, indirect, even speculative recognition is pretty signficant. To see how it defines gravity, how the model differentiates it and force and all other states and to provide a model for the offsetting infinite series as a result are all pretty darn important, but the basic idea is what makes it work.
Long ago I used ct states, clock time states, to describe the various compression states. Then I thought perhaps I should call them information states and now that I've determined what time is I think perhaps my initial instincts were correct.
Let me discuss this.
ct1 substitution is velocity. If we assume that space is made of the same stuff as everything else, a stable of AuT then we can get to the solution where ct1 substitution is velocity and since movement through space is the definition of velocity, this answer is consistent.
In ct4 where you have movement based on ct1 substitution at 3 levels, this yields the same dimensional analysis that we expect.
Time and History as we experience them are based on higher ct state substitutions accompanied by the preservation of solutions by combining prior solutions to form present solutions without significant degrading of the underlying solution due to the number of solutions presented compared to the amount of degradation through state change from positive to negative at the ct0-ct1 information arm stage.
While the model may be imperfect at this point the comparative solution is reflective of what is observed and must be conceptually correct.
Knowing the source of aging and history it remains conceivable that two science fiction goals can be met.
One is that history might be clarified by increasing the local anti-entropy of a system.
It is also conceivable that aging could be reversed. One can see a scenario within the mathematics of AuT where a wealthy, elderly individual could spend time in an AuT driven anti-entropy environment and come out 20 years old.
All of this and more will come with the mathematical posts to follow. For now, however, there's some guy on the roof I need to chase off before he gets it leaking again (took forever to get that to stop).
Who thinks of these things?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h13UloeH_GQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7jwCYuQarU
When they give me the nobel prize (posthumously) they will say the one thing that AuT did (perhaps not alone) more than anything else was to recognize that space was made of the same stuff as everything else.
I'm not going deep yet (hell its Christmas Morning, you won't read this for several days anyway) but some discusion of this mind blowing determination is worth giving, my holiday present to you.
After e=mc^2 it was pretty obvious, perhaps, but to figure out the model of why and fully recognize it, as opposed to some half-way, indirect, even speculative recognition is pretty signficant. To see how it defines gravity, how the model differentiates it and force and all other states and to provide a model for the offsetting infinite series as a result are all pretty darn important, but the basic idea is what makes it work.
Long ago I used ct states, clock time states, to describe the various compression states. Then I thought perhaps I should call them information states and now that I've determined what time is I think perhaps my initial instincts were correct.
Let me discuss this.
ct1 substitution is velocity. If we assume that space is made of the same stuff as everything else, a stable of AuT then we can get to the solution where ct1 substitution is velocity and since movement through space is the definition of velocity, this answer is consistent.
In ct4 where you have movement based on ct1 substitution at 3 levels, this yields the same dimensional analysis that we expect.
Time and History as we experience them are based on higher ct state substitutions accompanied by the preservation of solutions by combining prior solutions to form present solutions without significant degrading of the underlying solution due to the number of solutions presented compared to the amount of degradation through state change from positive to negative at the ct0-ct1 information arm stage.
While the model may be imperfect at this point the comparative solution is reflective of what is observed and must be conceptually correct.
Knowing the source of aging and history it remains conceivable that two science fiction goals can be met.
One is that history might be clarified by increasing the local anti-entropy of a system.
It is also conceivable that aging could be reversed. One can see a scenario within the mathematics of AuT where a wealthy, elderly individual could spend time in an AuT driven anti-entropy environment and come out 20 years old.
All of this and more will come with the mathematical posts to follow. For now, however, there's some guy on the roof I need to chase off before he gets it leaking again (took forever to get that to stop).
Friday, December 22, 2017
AuT-compelling definitions of space and time 1 of several
It irritates the c**p out of me to see people ordering the older books.
If you accept that relativity took 10 years to develop, and AuT took half that time, then buying anything other than the last 4 books is like reading a paper on what relativity looked like after 3 or 4 years.
I've made that warning before, so I can only feel so bad about it.
The most compelling arguments in Favor of aut are the ready definitions of space and time. If you want a pre AuT definition of time, here are some places where you can find it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7bbYNCdqak&index=8&list=WL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKKbkS_LOu4&t=213s&index=20&list=WL
The problem with these definitions is that they are bullshit.
They argue that time is some magical, dimensional thing which it is not.
We're going to talk about these articles, later. First we're going to talk about AuT and we're going to get more specific on time.
The next few posts are going to cover this issue.
There are some problems with the calculations that I have been working with, so we're going to start by going over some of those calculations.
AuT is the first theory (if you get books 1-4 at least of Algorithm Universe Theory and not the old copies) that explain time in terms of dimension from the standpoint of algorithms that control and compel all the other events of the universe. It is easy to see the relationship of time and velocity, but without the model, the significance of this in terms of "place" and the resulting directional consistency, reflected in Newtonian misinterpretations (an object in motion tends to remain in motion being an example of an accurate statement that misses the significance of super symmetry).
Time vs Velocity Time (ct4 vs Ct1) can be explained using this simple spreadsheet and a drawing.
It is important to remember that a second is an artificial measurement.
This drawing reflect the post ct0-ct1 exchange (giving rise to positive and negative features based on fpluspix).
The first part of this (key take away), the number of changes per quantum instant is a pretty straight forward measure the substitution rate of ct1 at lightspeed. The difference at higher ct states (ct4 and ct5) has to do with the consistency forced on the system over longer periods of time.
The second, misleading take away, is confusing because it wrongly assumes that "light speed" has meaning. It does not. CT1 exchange giving rise to the impression of light speed is far different.
First, let's look at the old way: AuT suggests that the minimum length of time per quantum change is 1.679x10^22 of light speed at ct 4 and 5.7154x10^60 of light speed at ct5 according to the ratios of change suggested by the chart above. 1:256 for light speed from ct1 substitutions into ct2. Therefore as long as this rate occurs (1:256) in higher ct states the "light speed effect" is present. That does not, however mean you experience near light speed for these other states because "the light speed effect" occurs absent time.
For example, by multiplying column (n) for 3 times 4 you get the not completely unexpected result of:1.68x10^22.
The next part is a bit confusing because I am getting a different result today. Part of the problem appears to be improper assumptions, so what we're going to do in this rather lengthy post is to correct the analysis using the correct definition of time.
What we can look at realistically is the following:
1) We can determine the number of changes per quantum instant 1:256 for ct2. Conceptually, this occurs at this rate and not faster because only one ct0-ct1 fpluspix change occurs at a time because they are staggered in length.
2) If we establish quantum length, we can get changes/quantum instant per quantum length, but how do we get length? How do we get dimension?
To do this, we're going to look at an old drawing friend of ours along with a new drawing. I've also included the less accurate approximation that Newton uses and increased or changed the labeling slightly.
Many of you are thinking, "would you mind finishing the label" to which I reply, you can see what's going on from the prior discussion (see the books) of this figure and "rome wasn't labled in a day." Moreover, there are many researching space time with healthy salaries and grants. You are reading this all over the world, because you know I am right and they are wrong, or they were till they started reading this. And yet it will take time, perhaps more than I have to be recognized and paid for this. Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, but it would be nice to have fully labeled drawings, wouldn't it?
If you accept that relativity took 10 years to develop, and AuT took half that time, then buying anything other than the last 4 books is like reading a paper on what relativity looked like after 3 or 4 years.
I've made that warning before, so I can only feel so bad about it.
The most compelling arguments in Favor of aut are the ready definitions of space and time. If you want a pre AuT definition of time, here are some places where you can find it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7bbYNCdqak&index=8&list=WL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKKbkS_LOu4&t=213s&index=20&list=WL
The problem with these definitions is that they are bullshit.
They argue that time is some magical, dimensional thing which it is not.
We're going to talk about these articles, later. First we're going to talk about AuT and we're going to get more specific on time.
The next few posts are going to cover this issue.
There are some problems with the calculations that I have been working with, so we're going to start by going over some of those calculations.
AuT is the first theory (if you get books 1-4 at least of Algorithm Universe Theory and not the old copies) that explain time in terms of dimension from the standpoint of algorithms that control and compel all the other events of the universe. It is easy to see the relationship of time and velocity, but without the model, the significance of this in terms of "place" and the resulting directional consistency, reflected in Newtonian misinterpretations (an object in motion tends to remain in motion being an example of an accurate statement that misses the significance of super symmetry).
Time vs Velocity Time (ct4 vs Ct1) can be explained using this simple spreadsheet and a drawing.
It is important to remember that a second is an artificial measurement.
| Information | 2*f(n) | 2^n | 2f(n)^2n | f(n) | ||||||||||||||||
| N | max changes per quanum instant | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 2*1 | 0+1 | |||||||||||||||
| 2 | 4 | 4 | 256 | 2*2 | 1+1 | velocity | 1:256 | |||||||||||||
| 3 | 6 | 8 | 1679616 | 2*3 | 1+2 | Time | ||||||||||||||
| 4 | 10 | 16 | 1E+16 | 2*5 | 2+3 | ct4 time | ||||||||||||||
| 5 | 16 | 32 | 3.4028E+38 | 2*8 | 3+5 | ct5 time | ||||||||||||||
| Key Take away | ratio of prior state to current state=maximum time | |||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| misleading take away | 1.62x10^-35 | plank lenth | ||||||||||||||||||
| lightspeed | c=2.99792458x10^11k/sec | e=mc^2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 299792458 | m/s | (e/m)=c^2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 1.62E-35 | Planck length in meters | 1.62 | 1E-35 | |||||||||||||||||
| At lightspeed there are | 4.2998E+24 | changes per quantum moment | ||||||||||||||||||
| For a distance | 1.62E-35 | there are | 4.2998E+24 | changes at light speed/quantum length | ||||||||||||||||
| At lightspeed | 299792458 | m/s there are | 2.6542E+59 | changes per meter | ||||||||||||||||
| A quantum instant is | 8.8535E+50 | ct1 changes per second at ct4 at lightspeed | ||||||||||||||||||
The first part of this (key take away), the number of changes per quantum instant is a pretty straight forward measure the substitution rate of ct1 at lightspeed. The difference at higher ct states (ct4 and ct5) has to do with the consistency forced on the system over longer periods of time.
The second, misleading take away, is confusing because it wrongly assumes that "light speed" has meaning. It does not. CT1 exchange giving rise to the impression of light speed is far different.
First, let's look at the old way: AuT suggests that the minimum length of time per quantum change is 1.679x10^22 of light speed at ct 4 and 5.7154x10^60 of light speed at ct5 according to the ratios of change suggested by the chart above. 1:256 for light speed from ct1 substitutions into ct2. Therefore as long as this rate occurs (1:256) in higher ct states the "light speed effect" is present. That does not, however mean you experience near light speed for these other states because "the light speed effect" occurs absent time.
For example, by multiplying column (n) for 3 times 4 you get the not completely unexpected result of:1.68x10^22.
The next part is a bit confusing because I am getting a different result today. Part of the problem appears to be improper assumptions, so what we're going to do in this rather lengthy post is to correct the analysis using the correct definition of time.
What we can look at realistically is the following:
1) We can determine the number of changes per quantum instant 1:256 for ct2. Conceptually, this occurs at this rate and not faster because only one ct0-ct1 fpluspix change occurs at a time because they are staggered in length.
2) If we establish quantum length, we can get changes/quantum instant per quantum length, but how do we get length? How do we get dimension?
To do this, we're going to look at an old drawing friend of ours along with a new drawing. I've also included the less accurate approximation that Newton uses and increased or changed the labeling slightly.
Many of you are thinking, "would you mind finishing the label" to which I reply, you can see what's going on from the prior discussion (see the books) of this figure and "rome wasn't labled in a day." Moreover, there are many researching space time with healthy salaries and grants. You are reading this all over the world, because you know I am right and they are wrong, or they were till they started reading this. And yet it will take time, perhaps more than I have to be recognized and paid for this. Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, but it would be nice to have fully labeled drawings, wouldn't it?
A digression about an erroneous calculation:
Previously we calculated that a second, according to an analysis of planck length, yielded 1.07x10^37 changes per second (this is discussed on page 296 of sprials 2nd). I am uncertain where the error is, but the whole concept was in error anyway from a perspective point of view.
Previously we calculated that a second, according to an analysis of planck length, yielded 1.07x10^37 changes per second (this is discussed on page 296 of sprials 2nd). I am uncertain where the error is, but the whole concept was in error anyway from a perspective point of view.
Roughly it was determined in the approx fashion using these numbers
1) Light travels at 299,792,458 meters/s (the speed of light in meters per second).
2) Planck length is 1.62x10^-35 of a meter.
So if you divide item 2 (meters) by item 1 (m/s) you end up with the minimum length of a second which is NOT 1.07x10^37, but is instead 5.40374x10^-44 of a second, indicating that the minimum length of time is 5.40374x10^-44th of a second, exponentially faster than previously discussed a bit confusing.
What this means is that many of the calculations concerning the inflection point of the universe may have errors just, as discussed in the last couple of posts, the age of the universe given by a study based on pre-AuT physics (13.5 billion years) is probably inaccurate, but that isn't my calculation.
What this means is that many of the calculations concerning the inflection point of the universe may have errors just, as discussed in the last couple of posts, the age of the universe given by a study based on pre-AuT physics (13.5 billion years) is probably inaccurate, but that isn't my calculation.
Our perception of this change is discussed around page146, 169 and of spirals in amber, 2nd edition.
The idea is that what a second is depends on (1) ct1 exchange and (2) other exchange and (3) ct state and hence the minimum length of time varies accordingly.
In order to create dimension and time we need to look at place in AuT.
Let us start with the drawing on the left. This redraws the standard model for dimension. Transitionally, ct1 is not shown, but time, which has nothing to do with ct1 is treated by way of sequential changes along the other 3 axis. It is appropriate to show ct1 without a line since it exists as mostly balanced (off by 1 for the universe) positive or negative but without dimension.
Books 1-4 discuss how dimension builds, so that discussion is not repeated.
We're used to marking a point on the combination of these axis. That analysis is a reflection.
Instead, the non-dimensional analysis looks like this:
At Ct5 there are 5 different axis. We exist in a 5 dimensional environment but we only experience 4 dimensions. In terms of place, this difference is 11111 vs 1111 experienced. The difference will be discussed in a later post.
Newtons laws are reflected in the difficulty in changing between place. The matrix is reflected in a number of quantum points, some compressed, others not. The exponential scale of compression is retained. Essentially, the points are 11111 vs 1234 to 2111 vs 2234. The change at the ct1 level cannot easily shift to the more compressed place so the direction is conserved in the reflected result. This does not prevent the entire matrix from varying in the same way since at the ct1 level all changes occur together. The relativistic effect of the higher ct places changes how the ct1 changes are perceived.
By way of example, we're going to look at this feature: 13579. Any number may be exchanged with any other number.
as we move from 13579 to 23579 there is velocity. At 3,5,7 and 9 there are time features. If the number of ct1 changes move to another place, the velocity increases exponentially and time exponentially is reduced but the changes are incremental so this effect is reduced.
To get an idea of this, the multi-layered chart on the right is shown, but it is at best an image to look at. The point that it teaches is that along multiple axis of an increasingly dense matrix ct1 changes for each ct2 state, but the higher states are shared to reduce the effect overall.
Another old friend shows how this feature works.
CT1 exchanges (shown) create velocity both internal and external to the matrix formed by the increasingly dense sharing. Internal ct1 sharing is vibration, external is velocity but they both have the same effect on time.
A in this case represents ct3 made up of ct2 exchanges shown as a series of F-series exchanges. The ct0 exchanges vary the polarity but they are zero dimensional changes. These ct1 changes are velocity and they continue, externally or internally.
At ct2 and ct3 there is not sufficient sharing to overcome the effect of light speed ct1 substitutions. This is also discussed in the books.
In ct4 (electrons) this effect is also minimized, but there is an increasing effect on time at ct5. Exchanges before ct4 (believed to be electrons) are probably inconsequential and time likely does not exist outside of ct5 phenomena, at least transient ct5 states, believed to be protons and neutrons.
One more drawing is worth considering:
At every level these exchanges are occurring constantly, so every piece making up ct5 while made up of 16^32 ct4 in turn made up of 10^16ct3 and 1679616 ct2 but sequentially locked together as pairs with only ct1 states freely exchanging despite the internal exchange rates.
As long as the matrix can survive, time as we experience it can exist. There is some time at ct3, but "history" is transient.
"History" is the survival of information through f-series sharing along information arms. The huge bundles of solutions make this sharing possible in ct4 and ct5 and to a lesser extent in ct3. It is essentially absent in ct2, but not completely absent in theory, because theory suggests there is only 1 ct1 exchange in every 256 ct2 set even though there is a constant variation in ct0 according to the complex model of fpluspix.
History has two aspects that this collection of posts will examine.
There is the postive aspect of history where prior states are combined and recombined along 4 or 5 f-series states to allow us to "experience" the past through its inclusion in the future and the negative and spiritual effect of history which is the breakdown of states (as compared to recombination) which leads to the disappearing effects of history and in subsequent recombination the mathematical basis for both determining the future (based on it being made up of the past) and past life type memories and even quantum entanglement representing historical points joined by present and future recombination features.
All of these will be examined here.
And, while it is based on one more self serving and false human origin, human control algorithms, Merry Christmas.
The idea is that what a second is depends on (1) ct1 exchange and (2) other exchange and (3) ct state and hence the minimum length of time varies accordingly.
In order to create dimension and time we need to look at place in AuT.
Let us start with the drawing on the left. This redraws the standard model for dimension. Transitionally, ct1 is not shown, but time, which has nothing to do with ct1 is treated by way of sequential changes along the other 3 axis. It is appropriate to show ct1 without a line since it exists as mostly balanced (off by 1 for the universe) positive or negative but without dimension.
Books 1-4 discuss how dimension builds, so that discussion is not repeated.
We're used to marking a point on the combination of these axis. That analysis is a reflection.
Instead, the non-dimensional analysis looks like this:
At Ct5 there are 5 different axis. We exist in a 5 dimensional environment but we only experience 4 dimensions. In terms of place, this difference is 11111 vs 1111 experienced. The difference will be discussed in a later post.
Newtons laws are reflected in the difficulty in changing between place. The matrix is reflected in a number of quantum points, some compressed, others not. The exponential scale of compression is retained. Essentially, the points are 11111 vs 1234 to 2111 vs 2234. The change at the ct1 level cannot easily shift to the more compressed place so the direction is conserved in the reflected result. This does not prevent the entire matrix from varying in the same way since at the ct1 level all changes occur together. The relativistic effect of the higher ct places changes how the ct1 changes are perceived.
By way of example, we're going to look at this feature: 13579. Any number may be exchanged with any other number.
as we move from 13579 to 23579 there is velocity. At 3,5,7 and 9 there are time features. If the number of ct1 changes move to another place, the velocity increases exponentially and time exponentially is reduced but the changes are incremental so this effect is reduced.
To get an idea of this, the multi-layered chart on the right is shown, but it is at best an image to look at. The point that it teaches is that along multiple axis of an increasingly dense matrix ct1 changes for each ct2 state, but the higher states are shared to reduce the effect overall.
CT1 exchanges (shown) create velocity both internal and external to the matrix formed by the increasingly dense sharing. Internal ct1 sharing is vibration, external is velocity but they both have the same effect on time.
A in this case represents ct3 made up of ct2 exchanges shown as a series of F-series exchanges. The ct0 exchanges vary the polarity but they are zero dimensional changes. These ct1 changes are velocity and they continue, externally or internally.
At ct2 and ct3 there is not sufficient sharing to overcome the effect of light speed ct1 substitutions. This is also discussed in the books.
In ct4 (electrons) this effect is also minimized, but there is an increasing effect on time at ct5. Exchanges before ct4 (believed to be electrons) are probably inconsequential and time likely does not exist outside of ct5 phenomena, at least transient ct5 states, believed to be protons and neutrons.
One more drawing is worth considering:
At every level these exchanges are occurring constantly, so every piece making up ct5 while made up of 16^32 ct4 in turn made up of 10^16ct3 and 1679616 ct2 but sequentially locked together as pairs with only ct1 states freely exchanging despite the internal exchange rates.
As long as the matrix can survive, time as we experience it can exist. There is some time at ct3, but "history" is transient.
"History" is the survival of information through f-series sharing along information arms. The huge bundles of solutions make this sharing possible in ct4 and ct5 and to a lesser extent in ct3. It is essentially absent in ct2, but not completely absent in theory, because theory suggests there is only 1 ct1 exchange in every 256 ct2 set even though there is a constant variation in ct0 according to the complex model of fpluspix.
History has two aspects that this collection of posts will examine.
There is the postive aspect of history where prior states are combined and recombined along 4 or 5 f-series states to allow us to "experience" the past through its inclusion in the future and the negative and spiritual effect of history which is the breakdown of states (as compared to recombination) which leads to the disappearing effects of history and in subsequent recombination the mathematical basis for both determining the future (based on it being made up of the past) and past life type memories and even quantum entanglement representing historical points joined by present and future recombination features.
All of these will be examined here.
And, while it is based on one more self serving and false human origin, human control algorithms, Merry Christmas.
Monday, December 18, 2017
AuT-stasis: more nonsense on parallel universes
More than any other
theory AuT explains why we each have our own time. CT1 exchange at higher ct states is unique
for each. If it is internal through the
exchange of higher states, aging takes place faster. Outside ct1 state exchange means that it ages
slower.
Theoretically, a system could
be provided where a closed system of ct1 states exchanged preferentially with a
closed higher ct state exchange which would result in a rapid decrease in aging
with a minimum amount of movement or rather very rapid movement within a closed
space with less aging, stasis.One of the many things which may be more right than previously believed but totally wrong is the idea of parallel universes.
http://mashable.com/2017/05/
http://bgr.com/2017/05/31/
In order go get a feel for this, we need to consider the case of AuT as applied to observed phenomena.
First, AuT involves super symmetry. That means that whatever we do in the a-symmetrical universe filled with apparent randomness and entropy is the necessary result of what is effectively predestination.
That means that infinite parallel universes would have to upset this symmetry and upset the algorithm in order to exist in a true parallel fashion.
That said, at the point of g-space,where the algorithm is defined and populated with mathematics, it remains possible that an infinite number of algorithms are possible. Indeed, there is no logical reason not to have them. These could even be solved with a single count, a single quantum count, powering an infinite number of algorithms, each slightly different from the other or even with different logic controlling them, although this would be contrary to our logic.
These universe while being simultaneously solved would not have any affect on our universe unless the algorithms somehow overlap which is a possibility.
AuT explains prior lives as a possibility as well as prognostication. My book on Nostradamus is something of horror story as a result,because if he could be right, then what road are we on, and if we are on it, AuT says we cannot get off. Such an ignoble end to our time on the crust of the earth would be disappointing, but sadly, not unexpected.
Sunday, December 17, 2017
AuT Derivation of creation
We discussed and pointed out the unusual pattern of gravitational development in the last post.
Sadly, as with all things in AuT the solutions are both deceptively simple and, as the complexity of the universe indicates, convoluted in application.
In this case we saw several things.
One was the suggested "double tap" in the pattern. I'm not entirely comfortable with that one.
The other was the "return to two" which doesn't really do much for me either.
The initial (not final) pattern was 2, n+2, -n.
The problem with this solution, complex and discomforting as it is; because the other solutions are not forgotten. when you have, for example -5, you still have the 2,-3 and 1 results in place. And all of these co-existing solutions cycle together at different rates.
In the prior post we only show the beginning of the first 10 cycles. We have, just in this cycle of the big bang, 13.5billion x 1.07x10^39x356x12x60x60 quantum solution changes where this mixed up morass cycles. Since our big bang is one of billions of big bangs (albeit the first ones are very short, the very rough solution suggest from 1-10 there were 3 or 6 of them depending on how they are counted, a number that suggests over 100 billion big bangs, do the math) its not hard to imagine a universe as complicated as the one we observe.
The idea of what numbers from that list come into effect, do some drop out? Not likely, so they continue in the background in some fashion. The exact methodology is not so much in doubt as very complicated. For example, you may have a simple cycling of results
In the example above, -1,1,-1,1 would continue forever, as would -3, 5 and -7 always a part of whatever solution comes next. This result is suggested, and it would significantly change the scale of the results, but would still allow for cycling of compressive vrs decompressive results. The very long periods between big bangs and big anti-bangs suggests something different,that the results drop out in some way, but this is not a required difference.
The subsequent changes derive from 32/27; 2^4/3^3 or 2^n/3^n-1 or f(1)^n/f(n+1)^n-1 where f is the Fibonacci number for n.
Sadly, as with all things in AuT the solutions are both deceptively simple and, as the complexity of the universe indicates, convoluted in application.
In this case we saw several things.
One was the suggested "double tap" in the pattern. I'm not entirely comfortable with that one.
The other was the "return to two" which doesn't really do much for me either.
The initial (not final) pattern was 2, n+2, -n.
The problem with this solution, complex and discomforting as it is; because the other solutions are not forgotten. when you have, for example -5, you still have the 2,-3 and 1 results in place. And all of these co-existing solutions cycle together at different rates.
In the prior post we only show the beginning of the first 10 cycles. We have, just in this cycle of the big bang, 13.5billion x 1.07x10^39x356x12x60x60 quantum solution changes where this mixed up morass cycles. Since our big bang is one of billions of big bangs (albeit the first ones are very short, the very rough solution suggest from 1-10 there were 3 or 6 of them depending on how they are counted, a number that suggests over 100 billion big bangs, do the math) its not hard to imagine a universe as complicated as the one we observe.
The idea of what numbers from that list come into effect, do some drop out? Not likely, so they continue in the background in some fashion. The exact methodology is not so much in doubt as very complicated. For example, you may have a simple cycling of results
| 0 | -1 | ||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||
| 2 | -3 | ||||
| 3 | -3 | 5 | |||
| 4 | -3 | 5 | -7 | ||
| 5 | 5 | -7 | |||
| 6 | 5 | -7 | |||
| 7 | 5 | -7 | |||
| 8 | -7 | ||||
| 9 | -7 | ||||
| 10 | -7 | ||||
| 11 |
In the example above, -1,1,-1,1 would continue forever, as would -3, 5 and -7 always a part of whatever solution comes next. This result is suggested, and it would significantly change the scale of the results, but would still allow for cycling of compressive vrs decompressive results. The very long periods between big bangs and big anti-bangs suggests something different,that the results drop out in some way, but this is not a required difference.
The subsequent changes derive from 32/27; 2^4/3^3 or 2^n/3^n-1 or f(1)^n/f(n+1)^n-1 where f is the Fibonacci number for n.
Friday, December 15, 2017
AuT-The amazing, incredible and somewhat disappointing act of creation
Creation of our universe begins in g-space which from our perspective is a dimensionless, time independent environment.
In order to get a feel for this, we've created the idea that god lives here which is not the worst way to describe it.
So let's run through the steps.
God, the omipotent is a wise god so he starts to count "0,-1,1,-2, 3,- 4..."
We'll call him a male god because male privilege is reflected in the current manifestation of the algorithm, but sex doesn't matter much in a time/space independent environment.
Now you're asking yourself, that isn't how I count, why should god count that way? The reason is that starting a zero, the next step is "not zero" then not not -1 (-1^2) and so on. That's how god counts, don't blame me, blame him. The truth is that the initial count looks a lot like -1,1,-1,1 and so on, and god doesn't get bored with that,something much more fundamental happens.
Being a all knowing god he remembers his count -1, ok 1,ok what's between -1 and 1? -3, ok, and so on.
He ends up with a couple of different counts, but the one we're interested in looks a lot like this:
So here are the first, non-dimensional, big bangs.
If you look close what you realize you're seeing is the ct0-ct1 information arms.
Since at ct1 you have no point of reference, you don't have dimensions as we experience them, but you do have "one place" (1,11,111 shows our designation of 1, 2 and 3 places). At ct4 we have 4 places and 3 dimensions. Don't get "time" confused with this because we've already defined time and it has nothing to do with some "4th dimension" which is a lot of pre-AuT crap, and instead it has to do with substitution rates and information retention over successive quantum solutions allowing it to be more flexible then these solutions.
We're going to talk about this more, but for the moment, what you see is where the big bangs begin (last column to the right). It's a little more complicated than it looks because of the memory of all prior solutions, but essentially what we see is that regardless of the number of places that we have (1,11,111 (up to at least 5 and probably 6) you have a consistent change in the number of big bangs.
Ignoring the first 2 which are aberrational due to the math of our universe (which carries over to the f-series solutions from this same phenomena) you're big bangs vibrationally (infinitely expanding series) go: -7 (2 to -5 will be called contracting for the moment), 13 (-5 to 7 will be called expanding) and so on. Since there are 1.07x10^39th quantum points per second and since we're in a 20 billion year cycle (more or less) of expansion, you can actually calculate how many big bangs there are in the universe from a conceptual standpoint.
I will not move on to other business while you perform the calculation and then I will come back.
It is important to note that while "place" and "memory" will result in the generation of information arms and f-series (to establish place and allow offsetting compression respectively); the act of creation is finished at this point in time and its just god counting form this point forward (or backwards because god can start at infinity and count backwards after a fashion, just as pi has a solution because of the amount of information in play, so too does infinity have a "practical definition" but that is another story..or fact if you will.
In order to get a feel for this, we've created the idea that god lives here which is not the worst way to describe it.
So let's run through the steps.
God, the omipotent is a wise god so he starts to count "0,-1,1,-2, 3,- 4..."
We'll call him a male god because male privilege is reflected in the current manifestation of the algorithm, but sex doesn't matter much in a time/space independent environment.
Now you're asking yourself, that isn't how I count, why should god count that way? The reason is that starting a zero, the next step is "not zero" then not not -1 (-1^2) and so on. That's how god counts, don't blame me, blame him. The truth is that the initial count looks a lot like -1,1,-1,1 and so on, and god doesn't get bored with that,something much more fundamental happens.
Being a all knowing god he remembers his count -1, ok 1,ok what's between -1 and 1? -3, ok, and so on.
He ends up with a couple of different counts, but the one we're interested in looks a lot like this:
| big bangs (very small ones) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 0 | -1 | diff betw | Pattern | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | 1 | 1 | results | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | -3 | -3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | -3 | 5 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | -3 | 5 | -7 | -5 | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | 5 | -7 | 9 | 7 | 12 | 5 | |||||||||||||||||
| 6 | 5 | -7 | 9 | -11 | -4 | 11 | -1 | ||||||||||||||||
| 7 | 5 | -7 | 9 | -11 | 13 | 9 | 13 | 2 | |||||||||||||||
| 8 | -7 | 9 | -11 | 13 | -15 | -11 | 20 | 7 | |||||||||||||||
| 9 | -7 | 9 | -11 | 13 | -15 | 17 | 6 | 17 | -3 | ||||||||||||||
| 10 | -7 | 9 | -11 | 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | -13 | 19 | 2 | |||||||||||||
| 11 | 9 | -11 | 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | 21 | 15 | 28 | 9 | |||||||||||||
| 9 | -11 | 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | 21 | -23 | -8 | 23 | -5 | |||||||||||||
| 9 | -11 | 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | 21 | -23 | 25 | 17 | 25 | 2 | ||||||||||||
| -11 | 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | 21 | -23 | 25 | -27 | -19 | 36 | 11 | ||||||||||||
| -11 | 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | 21 | -23 | 25 | -27 | 29 | 10 | 29 | -7 | |||||||||||
| -11 | 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | 21 | -23 | 25 | -27 | 29 | -31 | -21 | 31 | 2 | ||||||||||
| 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | 21 | -23 | 25 | -27 | 29 | -31 | 33 | 23 | 44 | 13 | ||||||||||
| 13 | -15 | 17 | -19 | 21 | -23 | 25 | -27 | 29 | -31 | 33 | 23 | no good from here down | |||||||||||
So here are the first, non-dimensional, big bangs.
If you look close what you realize you're seeing is the ct0-ct1 information arms.
Since at ct1 you have no point of reference, you don't have dimensions as we experience them, but you do have "one place" (1,11,111 shows our designation of 1, 2 and 3 places). At ct4 we have 4 places and 3 dimensions. Don't get "time" confused with this because we've already defined time and it has nothing to do with some "4th dimension" which is a lot of pre-AuT crap, and instead it has to do with substitution rates and information retention over successive quantum solutions allowing it to be more flexible then these solutions.
We're going to talk about this more, but for the moment, what you see is where the big bangs begin (last column to the right). It's a little more complicated than it looks because of the memory of all prior solutions, but essentially what we see is that regardless of the number of places that we have (1,11,111 (up to at least 5 and probably 6) you have a consistent change in the number of big bangs.
Ignoring the first 2 which are aberrational due to the math of our universe (which carries over to the f-series solutions from this same phenomena) you're big bangs vibrationally (infinitely expanding series) go: -7 (2 to -5 will be called contracting for the moment), 13 (-5 to 7 will be called expanding) and so on. Since there are 1.07x10^39th quantum points per second and since we're in a 20 billion year cycle (more or less) of expansion, you can actually calculate how many big bangs there are in the universe from a conceptual standpoint.
I will not move on to other business while you perform the calculation and then I will come back.
It is important to note that while "place" and "memory" will result in the generation of information arms and f-series (to establish place and allow offsetting compression respectively); the act of creation is finished at this point in time and its just god counting form this point forward (or backwards because god can start at infinity and count backwards after a fashion, just as pi has a solution because of the amount of information in play, so too does infinity have a "practical definition" but that is another story..or fact if you will.
Thursday, December 14, 2017
AuT-preparing to reconcile time
The snow lies thin, wet and heavy
where it quickly melts
turning wonder into mush
soaking my feet
falling on my shoulders
making the world beautiful
while promising beauty quickly fades
A few dying snowmen stand guard
the larges of these still bears his arms
built in the shade it survives
one drooping to point to the ground
a message of what for whom
its once glad face
now a mask of crevaces
small facial decorations
lay on its chest and on the ground
it stands in a graveyard
my love dies in the light of day
just as the snowman melts
the cold drove me into your arms
but they are gone now
and the cold seeps into my bones
which feel like the sticks of the snowman
AuT-preparing to reconcile time
I finally got to the end of "the list" although it's only outlined and I am still wrestling with the exact definition of time. Clearly it is directly related to the ct1:ct2 substitution rate (1:256) which controls light speed and light speed gives a clear definition of the minimum size of a second so that substitution rate change and seconds can be directly correlated and the other substitution rates can then be worked into the equation (ct2 for ct3, ct3 for ct4, etc to give a precise measurement and reconciling these (substitution and time speed (1.07x10^-39th of a second minimum) allow for a solution and I have cleaned off a white board to incorporate this information.
It promises to be an exciting time for defining the universe in detail.
The summary will be fairly specific, but this is not just the list but the entire, edited press release, so I'll start after the address and the beginning.
INTRODUCTION: What is Algorithm
Universe theory
where it quickly melts
turning wonder into mush
soaking my feet
falling on my shoulders
making the world beautiful
while promising beauty quickly fades
A few dying snowmen stand guard
the larges of these still bears his arms
built in the shade it survives
one drooping to point to the ground
a message of what for whom
its once glad face
now a mask of crevaces
small facial decorations
lay on its chest and on the ground
it stands in a graveyard
my love dies in the light of day
just as the snowman melts
the cold drove me into your arms
but they are gone now
and the cold seeps into my bones
which feel like the sticks of the snowman
AuT-preparing to reconcile time
I finally got to the end of "the list" although it's only outlined and I am still wrestling with the exact definition of time. Clearly it is directly related to the ct1:ct2 substitution rate (1:256) which controls light speed and light speed gives a clear definition of the minimum size of a second so that substitution rate change and seconds can be directly correlated and the other substitution rates can then be worked into the equation (ct2 for ct3, ct3 for ct4, etc to give a precise measurement and reconciling these (substitution and time speed (1.07x10^-39th of a second minimum) allow for a solution and I have cleaned off a white board to incorporate this information.
It promises to be an exciting time for defining the universe in detail.
The summary will be fairly specific, but this is not just the list but the entire, edited press release, so I'll start after the address and the beginning.
INTRODUCTION: What is Algorithm
Universe theory
Notes for book5
The main idea behind AuT is not the theory itself, but
to follow the universe back to its roots.
The fact that explanations for many phenomena come forward are critical
because of the need to “prove” the validity of the theory. The more it explains, the better.
I know this is short, and not totally satisfactory, but I don't want to get ahead of myself, lest I exhaust myself too much. My eyes are blurred, my other computer died or is near enough death although I intend to clean it out to give it some limited life, I am tired.
I ran a bowl of thin soup, some stale bread and some fresh banana nut bread to a friend who was worse off than I was which I think was much appreciated. It was good for him, since I don't know if he'd have eaten anything otherwise and that is a good thing and a strange thing. And I otherwise helped out, but perhaps not enough;but in the end people have to be encouraged to help themselves if they can and this person can; but I understand temporary difficulty.
I hope to return, book 5 calls, so does the science of notradamus and the book edits i sent to my co-writer finally came back to me after so many months meaning there is yet another book to edit. But not tonight.
Wednesday, December 13, 2017
The Alabama Senate Election
Congratulations to Alabama where 49% of the voters voted for a very conservative democrat and 1.7% couldn't abide voting for whatever Roy Moore was and wrote in a candidate. Younger and older people fall in love, but despite some of the articles this wasn't particularly sanctioned in the 1960s. I believe a certain musician was run out of the country for similar conduct and he married his young partner. Great Balls of Fire!
I'm not sure what Roy was 40 years ago. The term pedophile or accused pedophile is thrown around a lot and his responses to the charges are lackluster. But I don't think what he represented 40 years ago made him the worse candidate, which I think he was. The relative time spent on his 1860's political views compared to his old sexual preferences seemed a little out of whack. The fact that over 48 percent of the voters voted for a candidate who thought we should go back to the moral values of the 1860's indicates that at least 52% might not have felt that way.
I have said before that the irrationality of people can be traced to the lack of cohesion that breaths life into mathematical by-products like us. We coat the outer crust of a single rock and think that somehow makes us special and some, like Moore, think it gives them the right to tell other people what creation is. Well, I may not have that right, but I do it anyway.
The republican inconsistency of abhoring abortion (over 50% of Alabama voters think it should be illegal-note that all the "facts" in this come from the "fake news" like cnn, I haven't verified any of them) while denying universal healthcare reflects one side of this equation, 70% of voters of certain ethnic groups didn't show up to the polls, waiting for whom to decide their fate for them?
One might say that Alabama did the right thing, but the right thing is hard to define. Jones (the winner) outspent Moore 10:1. Moore was potentially more defective than Hillary as a candidate (depending on how you look at these things) and Jones (who looks like a senate candidate) won by less than 2% and did not cross the 50% threshold...but it's Alabama. I do like the motto, "We dare defend our rights," but with the potential reference to the "primarily slavery driven" civil war, it seems like it comes off "the non-slaves dare defend their right to keep other people enslaved."
There is slavery today and very little is done about it. There is an inherent slavery embodied in the idea of 50% of the wealth being in 1% of the population of the world which is not all bad, but it does, in the name of logic, require some contemplation.
I couldn't support him, but I was a "give Trump a chance" type of guy despite his losing the popular vote, but his constant lying is off-putting and his decisions relative to the national park system fly in the face of Pinchott and Roosevelt who were the most far seeing of the presidents and presidential advisors in my opinion in regard to the limits of people's ability to husband the land and is, for me, the nail in the coffin in determining whether the president has the fiber (moral or mental) to lead. That being said, I consider him to be less defective than Moore although they are both comparable demigods and equally corrupt to outer appearances.
All people are corrupt if they believe they are right over other people unless possessed of opinions only based on logic. And what is right in one generation is criminal in the next.
I'm not sure what Roy was 40 years ago. The term pedophile or accused pedophile is thrown around a lot and his responses to the charges are lackluster. But I don't think what he represented 40 years ago made him the worse candidate, which I think he was. The relative time spent on his 1860's political views compared to his old sexual preferences seemed a little out of whack. The fact that over 48 percent of the voters voted for a candidate who thought we should go back to the moral values of the 1860's indicates that at least 52% might not have felt that way.
I have said before that the irrationality of people can be traced to the lack of cohesion that breaths life into mathematical by-products like us. We coat the outer crust of a single rock and think that somehow makes us special and some, like Moore, think it gives them the right to tell other people what creation is. Well, I may not have that right, but I do it anyway.
The republican inconsistency of abhoring abortion (over 50% of Alabama voters think it should be illegal-note that all the "facts" in this come from the "fake news" like cnn, I haven't verified any of them) while denying universal healthcare reflects one side of this equation, 70% of voters of certain ethnic groups didn't show up to the polls, waiting for whom to decide their fate for them?
One might say that Alabama did the right thing, but the right thing is hard to define. Jones (the winner) outspent Moore 10:1. Moore was potentially more defective than Hillary as a candidate (depending on how you look at these things) and Jones (who looks like a senate candidate) won by less than 2% and did not cross the 50% threshold...but it's Alabama. I do like the motto, "We dare defend our rights," but with the potential reference to the "primarily slavery driven" civil war, it seems like it comes off "the non-slaves dare defend their right to keep other people enslaved."
There is slavery today and very little is done about it. There is an inherent slavery embodied in the idea of 50% of the wealth being in 1% of the population of the world which is not all bad, but it does, in the name of logic, require some contemplation.
I couldn't support him, but I was a "give Trump a chance" type of guy despite his losing the popular vote, but his constant lying is off-putting and his decisions relative to the national park system fly in the face of Pinchott and Roosevelt who were the most far seeing of the presidents and presidential advisors in my opinion in regard to the limits of people's ability to husband the land and is, for me, the nail in the coffin in determining whether the president has the fiber (moral or mental) to lead. That being said, I consider him to be less defective than Moore although they are both comparable demigods and equally corrupt to outer appearances.
All people are corrupt if they believe they are right over other people unless possessed of opinions only based on logic. And what is right in one generation is criminal in the next.
Tuesday, December 12, 2017
AuT Another look at time 2, article review and relativity
I have no compunction about what I do to pre-aut physics just as the greater physics community doesn't care what it does to me.
In the first post we talked about other ratios giving rise to time. In book 4, where this topic is covered in more detail, it is bound to the difference in some substitution rate, ct0, ct1 or the ct0-ct1 information arms and some other or other group of higher ct rate exchange.
Time for a black hole might be different in this regard.
In order to understand it better it is helpful to look at how ct0 changes occur in a pre-space environment and what ct1 exchange is seen for different time states.
Higher ct changes are impossible for lower ct states of course and mathematically due to the number of places changing at once, the number effectively of coordinates changing at once, ct4 is made of ct3 substitutions and even the compressed ct4 states, neutrons and protons for example, appear to be made up of some combination of ct3 and ct4 state compression, transition arms of ct5.
In terms of dimension, ct1 exchange is the preferred exchange media for comparison purposes. The reason is two fold. First, we don't have 4 dimensions. That suggests, ignoring the perspective of ct4-ct5 carrier arms, that the "three polar coordinates" are ct2, 3 and 4 (f2, f3, f4). Second, we see movement necessarily as the change in higher states relatve to ct1 and movement, relative velocity, changes time.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2016-226&rn=news.xml&rst=6607
This article is not particularly enlightening on its face. It may, however, provide insight to the idea of localized compression (or decompression) giving rise to unique features within an otherwise largely uniform space-time fabric, at least for the moment. I suppose at best what I'd say is that this is an article to keep around in case something comes up that might bring it into the same sphere as AuT explained phenomena as the article a few days past on black holes that are too old not to explain using AuT.
Here is something else, probably the core of this post.
A lecture on relativity or more specifically pre AuT time.
In the first post we talked about other ratios giving rise to time. In book 4, where this topic is covered in more detail, it is bound to the difference in some substitution rate, ct0, ct1 or the ct0-ct1 information arms and some other or other group of higher ct rate exchange.
Time for a black hole might be different in this regard.
In order to understand it better it is helpful to look at how ct0 changes occur in a pre-space environment and what ct1 exchange is seen for different time states.
Higher ct changes are impossible for lower ct states of course and mathematically due to the number of places changing at once, the number effectively of coordinates changing at once, ct4 is made of ct3 substitutions and even the compressed ct4 states, neutrons and protons for example, appear to be made up of some combination of ct3 and ct4 state compression, transition arms of ct5.
In terms of dimension, ct1 exchange is the preferred exchange media for comparison purposes. The reason is two fold. First, we don't have 4 dimensions. That suggests, ignoring the perspective of ct4-ct5 carrier arms, that the "three polar coordinates" are ct2, 3 and 4 (f2, f3, f4). Second, we see movement necessarily as the change in higher states relatve to ct1 and movement, relative velocity, changes time.
Second look: Velocity may be slightly different. It may be ct1absorpbtion and ct1 dispersion
together. Otherwise, it looks like
gravity or anti-gravity.
Would that make aging absorption
or dispersion without the other? This is a complicated idea, one that lies at
the base of the validity vel non of this theory.
Different compression
times states, the single variable algorithm and the offsetting expanding and
contracting infinite series fit so well with observations. The idea of the exchange of ct1 states works
extremely well with describing acceleration.
The offset between compressed states, the ratios, work well with the
idea of time dilation. But the question
still remains of how ct1 changes within a highly compressed state create
standard clock time. The idea of ct1
exchange works well compared to internal sharing of ct1 states and seems a
likely result. The model is detailed to
a point but how does this detail correspond to other observations, and how
specific can we get, how perfectly can we match perfectly observations of
dilation with this model.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2016-226&rn=news.xml&rst=6607
This article is not particularly enlightening on its face. It may, however, provide insight to the idea of localized compression (or decompression) giving rise to unique features within an otherwise largely uniform space-time fabric, at least for the moment. I suppose at best what I'd say is that this is an article to keep around in case something comes up that might bring it into the same sphere as AuT explained phenomena as the article a few days past on black holes that are too old not to explain using AuT.
Here is something else, probably the core of this post.
A lecture on relativity or more specifically pre AuT time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbmf0bB38h0
The primary beneficial result of this view of time and the more accurate, albeit unfinished, view of AuT is that AuT defines a pure form of quantum time, not some hashed up 4 dimensional view which is neither accurate nor particularly illuminating.
The primary beneficial result of this view of time and the more accurate, albeit unfinished, view of AuT is that AuT defines a pure form of quantum time, not some hashed up 4 dimensional view which is neither accurate nor particularly illuminating.
What this doesn;t show is that each overlapping state is of a different length. This is an issue which will be addressed conceptually.
Monday, December 11, 2017
AuT-Another look at time
Last night I wrote about Parminedes, the father or at least grandfather of AuT. Then as I slept, a vision of time occurred to me, at once so obvious that I had to wonder at my stupidity until I reconciled myself to it being a function of Supersymmetry, not really my intelligence at all.
The interplay of high ct states continues to be important to this undertaking, but recognizing that the universe is in constant motion, another idea suddenly occurred to me, however inherent it is in the model to date.
What if, my sleeping mind asked me, aging was the ratio of postive and negative states within a system at the ct1 level (Or possibly the ct2 level). These states, you will recall, vary in length from -3,5,-7,etc.
It is important to see the part of the discussion of Parminedes to see why the rather obvious insight occurred to me, but that will have to come shortly, since this post will be full enough when complete.
In order to understand this, we note that we are constantly in motion, spinning, moving through the universe, vibrating. In the net entropy universe that we currently live in (for another 7 billion years or so) the amount of break down, negative solutions, is greater than the building (positive solutions). This means the number of negative ct1 states -3,-7,-11, etc is greater than the number of postive soutions, 5,9,13, etc.
We see a version of our f-series friends in the vibration fpluspix solutions 0,-1,1,-2,3 portrayed in the f-series as 0,1,1,2,3 although the ct1 f series model deviates from the vibrational model past this point. (f-series 5, 8; fpluspix -4, 5). Books will be written on this transition, after I'm dead.
We've previously discussed that AuT speculated that our ability to recognize the past comes from its incorporation in the future as an f-series solution along with information arms. The interplay between the f-series build up of the future and the negative state break down of the past warrants a more in depth discussion.
When we look at this figure as a two way street, we can get a better idea of how complicated this process is in a more compressed solution. Aa1 and Aa2 show two diffferent places where a break down of ct2 can occur in ct2 built up with, in this case, both postive and negative ct0 states within the ct1 state.
The complexity of this model is exponentially greater in higher ct states which would break down from the ct2 states in ct3, the ct3 states in ct4 and so on.
Looking at even this relatively early example of velocity and entropy interacting it can be seen that the process is far from simple. This complexity is why we "age" from the increased entropy, at a higher rate. The ct1 substitutions are velocity, but aging may be a couple of things. One is likely the break down of ct2 states resulting from the change in polarity of the ct1 states which in turn is due to the ct0 fpluspix changes from positive to negative. There are several layers of interplay:
1) The positive vs negative ct0 fpluspix ratio
2) The breakdown of ct1 states (ct1 states staying positive or negative would be aging, their staying constant would allow for combination at higher ct states presumably).
We've talked about changes in time itself which continues to be a one way steet.
Can time reverse itself? The answer is a little more complicated than it seems, because we cannot "go back" to a prior state without destroying information, resetting x which would entail reshifting the entire universe. Theoretically, it would then inexorably continue just as it had before so the net effect would be no effect at all. But in a net anti-entropy universe, time would be experienced a little differently, but exactly how is a little confusing to think about.
If there were more ct1 positive states being substituted, perhaps being added to carriers in effect, we'd age slower and move faster. If the ct1 states remain in place, we age, but if they change we move and this visibly seems a little confusing at this stage.
Substitution and movement along carrier arms are different conceptually but may be the same in practice. A longer examination of time will reveal the logic of one model vs the other.
Using this same broad model, if there was a greater build up of higher ct states, we'd age faster, we'd move slower. The idea is that the breakdown of higher ct states as a result of losing their component ct1 parts through polarity changes, is the conceptual aging (breakdown=aging) but the substitution of ct1 states (which may be adding them to the information arms) is velociy and anti aging. Again, logic may indicate one model but practice may support the other.
In an anti-entropy universe there is less "free" ct1 to go around as it is incorporated into higher ct states which is why the higher state compression remains important even with this idea of a different ratio (postive to negative fpluspix) being at work with the prior ratio.
All of these observations occur from a net standpoint, according to this model since ct1 positive and negative states remain no matter what inflection point is being approached.
Let's consider this. High gravity and high anti-entropy states have less movement, they are more organized, they move less relative to their environment, at least internally. When we launch a rocket, we see that as an act of intellect, but aut says that it is merely supersymmetry coming up with a rather complex solution that leads us to increasing the velociy of that rocket.
In this conceptual framework, that velocity, the increase in ct1 state substitution is actually an increase in teh amount of ct1 positive states absorbed. That rocket is becomeing anti-entropic. It isn't aging because velocity is the equivalent of ct1 postiive states building within a system relative to ct1 negative states.
This is a substantial, and intriguing definition of time.
Time is the ratio in a system of ct1 postive to ct1 negative states.
It raises many questions that I am not ready to answer, questions that were not answered by my dreams or, quite frankly, the obviousness of this suggestion.
As you watch a train go by at speed it shrinks in length relative to the still train? How in this model? Why in this model? And doesn't the train itself lengthen as it absorbs all this ct1?
At a very high entropic universe state (right before the next or last big bang) aging would be very fast, and speed would be slow. There being very little free ct1 thismakes a lot of sense, but is it entirely consistent with this model.
I believe that higher ct state substitution continues to be critical in our experience of this; that is we are building and destroying the higher ct states based on this ct1 increase or decrease in entropy.
For now, sleep has abandoned me and my day starts well before the sun arises. I watch the dawn arise with another day. The taking of the waters, has brought me back to some semblance of health, albeit a tenuous one. The constant coughing has become, despite the cold, sporadic. Only my problems and those of the world keep me awake.
Book 5 was supposed to wait, but these inquiries into time press me.
Don't rest, don't stop, don't allow yourself time to recupperate, they tell me. Your time is limited, the demands of the universe great.
The interplay of high ct states continues to be important to this undertaking, but recognizing that the universe is in constant motion, another idea suddenly occurred to me, however inherent it is in the model to date.
What if, my sleeping mind asked me, aging was the ratio of postive and negative states within a system at the ct1 level (Or possibly the ct2 level). These states, you will recall, vary in length from -3,5,-7,etc.
It is important to see the part of the discussion of Parminedes to see why the rather obvious insight occurred to me, but that will have to come shortly, since this post will be full enough when complete.
In order to understand this, we note that we are constantly in motion, spinning, moving through the universe, vibrating. In the net entropy universe that we currently live in (for another 7 billion years or so) the amount of break down, negative solutions, is greater than the building (positive solutions). This means the number of negative ct1 states -3,-7,-11, etc is greater than the number of postive soutions, 5,9,13, etc.
We see a version of our f-series friends in the vibration fpluspix solutions 0,-1,1,-2,3 portrayed in the f-series as 0,1,1,2,3 although the ct1 f series model deviates from the vibrational model past this point. (f-series 5, 8; fpluspix -4, 5). Books will be written on this transition, after I'm dead.
We've previously discussed that AuT speculated that our ability to recognize the past comes from its incorporation in the future as an f-series solution along with information arms. The interplay between the f-series build up of the future and the negative state break down of the past warrants a more in depth discussion.
The complexity of this model is exponentially greater in higher ct states which would break down from the ct2 states in ct3, the ct3 states in ct4 and so on.
Looking at even this relatively early example of velocity and entropy interacting it can be seen that the process is far from simple. This complexity is why we "age" from the increased entropy, at a higher rate. The ct1 substitutions are velocity, but aging may be a couple of things. One is likely the break down of ct2 states resulting from the change in polarity of the ct1 states which in turn is due to the ct0 fpluspix changes from positive to negative. There are several layers of interplay:
1) The positive vs negative ct0 fpluspix ratio
2) The breakdown of ct1 states (ct1 states staying positive or negative would be aging, their staying constant would allow for combination at higher ct states presumably).
We've talked about changes in time itself which continues to be a one way steet.
Can time reverse itself? The answer is a little more complicated than it seems, because we cannot "go back" to a prior state without destroying information, resetting x which would entail reshifting the entire universe. Theoretically, it would then inexorably continue just as it had before so the net effect would be no effect at all. But in a net anti-entropy universe, time would be experienced a little differently, but exactly how is a little confusing to think about.
If there were more ct1 positive states being substituted, perhaps being added to carriers in effect, we'd age slower and move faster. If the ct1 states remain in place, we age, but if they change we move and this visibly seems a little confusing at this stage.
Substitution and movement along carrier arms are different conceptually but may be the same in practice. A longer examination of time will reveal the logic of one model vs the other.
Using this same broad model, if there was a greater build up of higher ct states, we'd age faster, we'd move slower. The idea is that the breakdown of higher ct states as a result of losing their component ct1 parts through polarity changes, is the conceptual aging (breakdown=aging) but the substitution of ct1 states (which may be adding them to the information arms) is velociy and anti aging. Again, logic may indicate one model but practice may support the other.
In an anti-entropy universe there is less "free" ct1 to go around as it is incorporated into higher ct states which is why the higher state compression remains important even with this idea of a different ratio (postive to negative fpluspix) being at work with the prior ratio.
All of these observations occur from a net standpoint, according to this model since ct1 positive and negative states remain no matter what inflection point is being approached.
Let's consider this. High gravity and high anti-entropy states have less movement, they are more organized, they move less relative to their environment, at least internally. When we launch a rocket, we see that as an act of intellect, but aut says that it is merely supersymmetry coming up with a rather complex solution that leads us to increasing the velociy of that rocket.
In this conceptual framework, that velocity, the increase in ct1 state substitution is actually an increase in teh amount of ct1 positive states absorbed. That rocket is becomeing anti-entropic. It isn't aging because velocity is the equivalent of ct1 postiive states building within a system relative to ct1 negative states.
This is a substantial, and intriguing definition of time.
Time is the ratio in a system of ct1 postive to ct1 negative states.
It raises many questions that I am not ready to answer, questions that were not answered by my dreams or, quite frankly, the obviousness of this suggestion.
As you watch a train go by at speed it shrinks in length relative to the still train? How in this model? Why in this model? And doesn't the train itself lengthen as it absorbs all this ct1?
At a very high entropic universe state (right before the next or last big bang) aging would be very fast, and speed would be slow. There being very little free ct1 thismakes a lot of sense, but is it entirely consistent with this model.
I believe that higher ct state substitution continues to be critical in our experience of this; that is we are building and destroying the higher ct states based on this ct1 increase or decrease in entropy.
For now, sleep has abandoned me and my day starts well before the sun arises. I watch the dawn arise with another day. The taking of the waters, has brought me back to some semblance of health, albeit a tenuous one. The constant coughing has become, despite the cold, sporadic. Only my problems and those of the world keep me awake.
Book 5 was supposed to wait, but these inquiries into time press me.
Don't rest, don't stop, don't allow yourself time to recupperate, they tell me. Your time is limited, the demands of the universe great.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)