AuT-the F-series Vibrational model and folding 2

Before getting back to the application of this model to models and how to interpret observations in articles are misinterpreting what they see, let's look a little deeper into this model
Information theory predict that the total growth of information is at the rate of  2^n (exactly 50% increase.
Compression grows based on F(n) with a convergence of around 61.8%.  Hence compression occurs at a higher rate than the expansion of information.  The universe does not completely compress because the universe is envisioned to have expansion and compression phases whether in a spiral or vibration model.
The difference 61.8-50 is not important but the ratio of the % change in compression to F-series expansion to 2^n (exactly .5) necessarily converges (infinitely) to 2 which follows the linear spiral models in the early research of Spiral modalities where curved (as opposed to quantum) models were used to predict expansion and contraction based on a fixed amount of information.  That is, f(pix), the special equation required to calculate any value of pi; and 2^n, the growth of information, both changing at a coverging rate.  The changing rates of the two converge on 2.
Thing singular result appears from initial examination that FS(convergence)% to F(pix)(convergence)% converges on 1.61 approx and infinitely because F(pix) converges on 1; and  FS(c)% to 2^n(c)% converges to 3.24 (approx double) because 2^n % convergenceis constant at .5.
This suggests a relationship of pix to 2^n of converging on 1:.5 or 2:1 and the same relationship would exist with pi.
Again, this is a mathematical tautology, it's true because of how the number converge, but it gives a relationship between curvature (based on an evolving pi irrespective of the amount of compression) and the increase in information.
Since pi is always on one side or the other of this relationship; i.e. pix is always on one side or the other of 1; expansion vs contraction can come from the net value over all points of this relationship of pix to any other feature of the universe and it continues to be tied to the growing amount of information 2^n based on infinite divergence tied to information theory and infinite convergence tied to F-series compression..  The same  relationship exists with pi to 2^n since the rate of convergence for fpix and fpi converge on 1 or they become identical at x=infinity and do not change no matter what number is used for the numerator.
In other words, you don't need intersecting spirals to get to a result that converges and diverges on a number experienced in the universe.
The flip side of the argument is that we experience spirals so that the expression of pi relative to expansion and contraction in multiple dimensions goes from a vibration type movement to a spiral type average.
If when N in the Fpix equation is equal to 1 you have vibration in one dimension, then when n equals 4 (our pi) vibration would be in 4 dimensions but relative rates would remain constant which is what we experience.

	pi for u(2)	pi for u1		-1
x for pi	4	converges on					summed		f(pix)	PI FOR
1	% change	0.78	-1^x	x-1	2x(-1)^x-1	f(pix)	n/f(pix)	n+n/fx	n/(n+n/fx)	4
2	0.498402556	1.565	1.00	1.00	-4	-3.00	-1.333333333	2.666666667	1.5	2.666666667
3	0.664543524	2.355	-1.00	2.00	6	5.00	0.8	4.8	0.833333333	3.466666667

Above is the method of calculating p for any value of n

pi	ratio	f(pix)	diff	f(pi)%	fs	fs incr	copy col g
converg	f(pix)%	rate of	in %	rate of	rate of	rate rel	Perc ch
% DIFF	2^n%	convergence	ai/ak	convergence	convergence	to f(pi)	% FS incr
1.5	1.11	1.8	0.83	2.52	0.773809524	0.307067271	2.666666667
0.769230769	2.80	0.714285714	1.08	0.551020408	1.165899627	2.115891916	1.35
1.197368421	1.54	1.296296296	0.92	1.58436214	0.871754596	0.550224329	1.736111111
0.866920152	2.44	0.818181818	1.06	0.690672963	1.118513222	1.619454186	1.575384615
1.122187742	1.69	1.184615385	0.95	1.366863905	0.905876811	0.662741044	1.634672619
0.906298169	2.31	0.866666667	1.05	0.763950617	1.089990975	1.42678198	1.611729899

Above is the ratios which are discussed (without taking them very far).

Write me, I may send you my spreadsheets. Who knows?

These drawings can be found in earlier versions of this theory and on the original cover of A spiral in Amber published in 2016 although the quantum model had been adopted by then.

There is one more element to obtain before we move on.
Information diverges from 2^n where n=1.
The % of change of F(Pi), that is there is a percent change of F(pi) from one value to the next and then there is a % change in this %,  diverges Infinitely from approximately 2 towards 1:

1	% change	0.78
2	2.006410256	1.565
3	1.504792332	2.355
4	1.33418259	3.142
5	1.250795672	3.93
6	1.198473282	4.71
7	1.163481953	5.48

The F series increase % diverges from 2 after jumping from 1, and the rate of difference between the F-series % change and the fixed rate of change for 2^n converges on 2.

Ok, let's change gears entirely more or less for a second and set up the discussion for CT1 substitution.

Shared memory:
If a bubble has 0,1,1 (zero is important in AuT unlike pre-AuT physics where the source of everything is unimportant (how can you figure that?).
What this really is, however for each bubble going out:
0, 1',1''=2'
1'+2'=3'
1''+2"=3
And so forth. This is shown in the drawing above.
What is important is that while you have a 3 it is made up of 1" and 2".  It is not just a 3, it is a 3 with the two prior states added (and zero).
That is, the bubble contains all of the numbers and states and  any one of these numbers in a higher state bubble can be substituted by a like number from another bubble as x changes.  When this occurs with a ct1 state, it appears as velocity.
While in ct1 you would not have this type of substitution, all of these spirals would look similar except the matrix would be more dense.  So if you look at ABC you can see where an exterior state is substitution for an Interior state and this could be ct1 substitution giving velocity.
And this continues.  What this shows is that all the information is preserved in each circle based on where it started and alignment can come from common starting points or tying can come from this.  Moreover, the theory suggests that all information building is done in the same fashion so that sharing of sub-states also occurs.
The difference in higher states is that to get to quantum sharing you are sharing the "bundles" based on an initial state of 1,1,2 where the 1 in question is not the original one, but the compressed 1 state and this continues for all additional compression states.
At higher states the ct1 within the bubble 1" can be substituted by an outside ct1 state.
At very high states, see ct4, you can see a matrix with ct1 states passing between the internal matrix between (directly or after a period in between) other ct4 states.  Ct2 states can also do this in theory.
To the extent that this looks like mitosis, it is to be understood that what we see and experience reflects what is happening on a smaller level since the algorithm doesn't change as it extends to higher states.
We will return to this shortly.