aut model v theory: 1-u/c

The hurricane is hitting today.  The issues I'd like to address today are many, but I'm not going to address much.  I'll spend a small amount of effort of one of the many crutches that pre-AuT mathematics to reconcile observations with what is really going on.

This is a bit of the book written from the tomb (alleged?) of christ. I must misunderstand that story because i thought there was no body.  A little confusing.  But that history is long trodden under time, as much fable as fact, but if even 50% factual, that would be worth consideration, but only to determine which parts made up the 50%.

And yet—and yet in my deepest heart I was thirsty for the open air, the blue sky, the pure sunlight, the tranquillity of large and silent spaces. The Lady went with me across the crowded quadrangle into the cool, clean, quiet German Church of the Redeemer. We climbed to the top of the lofty bell tower. Jerusalem lay at our feet, with its network of streets and lanes, archways and convent walls, domes small and great—the black Dome of the Rock in the centre of its wide inclosure, the red dome and the green dome of the Jewish synagogues on Mount Zion, the seven gilded domes....

As a writer of romance, I am a little irritated with how little of this "the woman" is being covered.  Who is she sleeping with?  Is the author gay?  Her lover?  It is autobiographical so I suppose I should find out, but I'd rather write that into something that I like before the reality is allowed to sink in.  I am not sure that I shouldn't add this book to the fictional book I am writing.  I think I shall since I'm extracting from it anyway.

The third romance book in the Counselor's sinful series (finished but not finally edited or published) has a hurricane in it.  I'm getting a lot of images that I will probably incorporate in that book with its fictionally slow moving and erratic hurricane.

 Some of my favorites: the top of palm tree, complete with coconuts floating in the water, roofs missing and houses flattened and the like.  Palms pointed all in one direction during the storm, fast vibrating street signs,  Denuded palm trees, piles of debris washed up against houses with broken porches where you can climb off the balconies and onto the debris, so looking like it may have come from some far away island, cars and boats piled up, generally debris and standing water everywhere, heavy objects and ship containers scattered and placed in the strangest of places,   A tired looking grey sky, stunned and in some cases scared people standing about, speeches from the back of a pickup truck, planes and ships unloading emergency supplies.

Let me mention that while book 2 is written, it has been substantially edited and those corrections (hopefully) are being made now, but you could read book 1 and hopefully by the time you're done, 2 would be in its second edition and 3 is being edited for the final time simultaneously with 2.

Wait a minte.  Is this a romance blog?  Or is it a physics blog where you read up on the true reality in a technical presentation?  I don't know.

1-u^2/c^2 is a factor used to create logic out of light speed limitations and conservation in pre-AuT mathematics.  The need to put things in absolute terms (^2) is very un-AuT and is one of many features of pre-AuT math that misdirect the analysis.
Let's discuss this briefly and how it works out in AuT.
As the speed of a system approaches the speed of light in absolute terms (not relative terms) its momentum approaches 0 (you can do 1/m to get it to infinity, it doesn't change the concept).
What's wrong with this equation?  The idea is that it is a time and mass based system.  It is dimensional.  Therefore, it's a superficial.
To fix the analysis you have to take time and dimension out of it and what does that leave you with
1-(m/s)/(m'/s')-dimension and time=1.  This is an AuT concept and is entirely logical, consistent with the rejected limit functions rewritten into quantum functions by AuT.

Let's apply this, but first, with one section at a time, let's repave this one place.

MODEL VS THEORY

            AuT is a model, not a theory.  AuM might be a better way to put it. 

          Why?  Because the idea of an information based universe, "we are in a computer program" and other pre-AuT nonsense was already out there.  Theories are like opinions.  Anyone can come up with a theory and everyone has many of them.

What makes AuT important is that it has a model which is supportable and predictable for the universe.

          Models, however, are different.  They take time to build.  If you put them together correctly, they are elegant and beautiful, or sometimes scary, but usually reflect the intention of intelligent design.  That is why AuT is so much more than anything else, because it shows more of the intelligent design.

          Unlike pre AuT physics, AuT supersymmetry means you cannot have even microscopic symmetry on a molecular scale.  Each quantum state may be information, but its length of survival varies preventing a symmetric result.  The relationship of one compression state to another does not prevent similar states from identical operation, but the length of stability in a given state varies from all others and transitions states along information arms causes even very similar ct states to vary relative to one another.

           Supersymmetry in AuT even has a different meaning.  It has nothing to do with position and function changing relative to any other point.  It means, instead, that you can predict in theory where things were, are or will be with any value of x.  An exact proof at later stages of the universe would, of course, be impossible because of the amount of data involved, but the ratio of siny(0) and siny(1) indicates that at early stages of the universe, these calculations can be made.  

There is a practical side to this model idea and that is the provision of explanations missing with non-model Theories.

Let’s look at two exotic examples, Quantum Entangle and Time Travel, in the next few posts.