I have been working on some other things, figuring out the difference between a book and a screen play, for example (one is more like work, the other more like writing and if you write a screen play without an outline it is both, perhaps it is a book without the freedom of a book) and I have been working on Audio books (coming soon) and I have been working on things that worry me.
One curious one is that I worry about cancer, but more of someone else than myself. Oh yes, I worry about the crippling effects of old age, blindness, death and personal cancer; but when I was pretty sure I had brain cancer, I was more worried about the effects on everyone else than me although I suspect if I had turned out to have it I'd have been plenty scared. I worry about people around me getting it, that is probably natural enough, people I am close to.
I am worried about losing the partnerships, few as they are, that I have. I wonder at the people who live without those and what the substitute for them. I am not vulnerable enough with my writing, my quiet life, but occasionally the world interferes with my intentions and then it is important to have someone i can reach out to and I am jealous of those who have a wider or stronger net to catch them when they inevitably fall.
I worry about disappointing people. If tomorrow I was to suddenly stumble onto something unexpected and find that my theory of everything as it were (well everything except g-space) was somehow wrong, not in some particular; but overall, that would worry me (not surprise me so much, but worry me).
Lucky for us, I'm not wrong. Actually, it would be nice if I was wrong, life could have more meaning; but that is a philosophical question for another day.
60117 Quantum information theory and traditional physics vs Aut part 3 aut-post with gravity/magno/strong force and heat
AUT AND TRADITIONAL INFORMATION THEORY
AuT is non-traditional information theory but traditional information theory has features that speak to AuT.
SIZE:
There is no “size” in AuT because dimension is an effect and not a property. Nevertheless, since we observe from o-space, size is used in place of compression state as a point of reference.
1. Ct4 minimum size is not observed easily. What we see are neutrons which split into electrons and protons.
2. Unstable transitional states, identified as quarks, are not part of AuT. These are viewed as unstable transitional states. Stable states would involve F(n)^(2^n) concentration.
3. Neutrons themselves are a stable transitional state being tied to the effects of ct4 in the presence of ct5 taking on a ct5 level of compression while maintaining their ct4 properties in terms of ct3 exchange rates.
4. Trying to use “mass” to determine concentration is confusing because photons are said to have a rest mass of zero. This is not saying that have no information and since information is the basis for AuT, you are using a zero value which is an inaccurate word for what you are measuring. When you accelerate photons to achieve a mass type feature at the speed of light, you are looking at a non-quantum event which means you are injecting compressed information states to arrive at an answer which is also inaccurate.
5. The only clearly observed stable minimum size representing F(n) is the electron. However, transitional states are seen in Magnetism. It is theorized (from book 2) that protons are derived from exposing ct3 states to ct5 effects just as electromagnetism appears to result from exposing ct1 states to ct4, creating a semi-permanent ct2 state from ct1. This is not a force result, but a mathematical result tied to exchange rates built into ct1 exchange equations which pre-AuT mathematics interpreted as force driven.
6. Another feature of dimensional stacking (ct1 states to form ct2) is that the higher exchange rate with non-carried ct1 states (space for carried ct1 states in the form of photons) is why fast moving electrons are most closely associated with the minimum size ct4 state. The reason we know this derives logically from AuT. By definition (1:256 ct1 exchange) minimum size of any compression state is the fastest moving state for that ct state (whether particle, wave, photon or black hole material) and any transition beyond that would result in acceleration to the speed of light first (1:256) and breakdown to unstacked/uncompressed ct1 second. Hence, as you accelerate a proton, by way of example, it will stretch in terms of ct1 to ct4 minimum size solution until you have a single line of ct4 minimum states which will, at the inflection point, transition one at a time to wave states (ct3).
7. ct1 in the presence of ct4 can be an unstable ct2/ct3 state seen as electromagnetism, magnetism being the high ct1 exchange result. Ct3 in the presence of ct5 can become the strong force to form ct4 protons and neutrons where proton/electron pairs are a transitional state of neutrons. The suggestion based on the conversion between electro-magnetism and the weak force is that ct2 states in the form of electromagnetism slow further in terms of exchange rate.
8. It is not a suggestion, but a given that protons and electrons are made of the same basic stuff. So how do quarks fit in with the model? The answer is that when you look at information and see matter and force you can either make a direct connection, i.e. admit that we’re nothing more complicated than a movie playing, or you must come up with various features to explain the transitions. Quarks are the proof that AuT and it’s reliance on a single variable algorithm is accurate. If you accept that on a quantum level we control our own destiny, you have quarks. If you accept supersymmetry which gives the impression of control then you have Algorithm Universe theory. Einstein already proved that neutrons were interchangeable with energy. Why space time wasn’t immediately determined to be the same thing is only attributable as vanity, or perspective if you prefer. The fact that there is a ready and logical equation explaining the observed results strengthens the suggestion.
9. This gives a mathematical form to the observation that that as you accelerate, matter appears to stretch in length. You are seeing more of the surface area of the solution exposed to external ct1 states requiring that adjacent sharing states must move apart. While electrons do not move at the speed of light in a perfect vacuum free from other influences it likely would approach that speed due to the changing geometry of the interaction.
10. Aging has to be judged against this background. At the neutron state ct4 states appear to be stacked as ct5, that is every neutron is a type of black hole. Since aging happens at the state of matter primarily, it appears that both time dilation and aging are more of a function of ct5 phenomena than ct4 phenomena, that is ct4 states outside of the influence of the strong force would not age and would not compress to neutron/proton type pairs.
No comments:
Post a Comment