AuT Time dilation 5

So I"m dealing with this major math mistake in my spreadsheet which is like "pow" out of nowhere, trying to figure out wtf happened, when I get this call and "pow again" I'm distracted from my distraction and now here I am trying to explain it and having to rewrite some stuff, nothing critical, well nothing critical unless you talk about unraveling the space time equation that I was relying on to get from ct0 to ct1 but whatever.  JHC!
I'd like to spend some time on this distraction, but it has to do generally with the question of whether the friendship can be more important than anything else which I say it should be.  Not for anyone else, just for me.  This doesn't change the other issues, the dangers associated with being alone and the dangers of planning for an uncertain future, but that's an issue for another day.

Anyway, I'm going to get to the math in this post at leasst superficially, just accepting the numbers for what they are.
AuT is about supersymmetry.  It's hard to find a place where an advanced study of the mathematical cause (ie formula) or effect (features of the formula as it appears at our stage of compression) would not be worthwhile.
AuT is also dangerous.  The atomic bomb was born in physics (as opposed to math where AuT finds its origins); but it was largely brought to life by chemists (and geologists to be fair).  AuT is a little different, but it suggests several pathways to the creation of anti-matter; none of which bode well for the safety of men although, like nuclear science such features could provide sources of power which are unimaginable and can be created with only...well, its sort of obvious, but its one of those area where I don't get into it here because you don't explain how to make bombs that can destroy entire planets in blog posts, right?
I suppose at some point in time, I'll get bitter and work that out more completely but there is no rush and there is enough in AuT already to figure it out if you just look at it.

So here is the take on the messy math before, I am almost certain I have it right now and you'll still see everything, but you have to go around a little, take -1 in place of zero and stare at it with you eyes crossed to get it right.

The first ratio we're revisiting is the dimensional definition comparison of Pre-space phenomena with spatial phenomena.  It's important to note that these are first looks at infinite series.  while in the active universe these numbers are inaccurate, at the ct0-ct1 interface, there is a brief informational moment (when there is on a couple of positive ct states) when the -1 to 1 transition is actually accurate and this is the only important point, although much will be made, eventually, from the other transitions.
The reason for this accuracy is because pi is derived according to how much information is in place and if for pi1 or pi-1 there is only enough information for the first place, that solution makes sense.  There are, however, questions that arise at higher levels of compression which are troubling.

    So this is the new thing, so let's talk about it.   First, originally the mathematically incorrect one showed the top part but it was 1:64 which was closer to what I was thinking it should be, but maybe not.  You still get the same ratio, how is beyond me given the nature of the math error, but this is where we get into a very interesting "sticky wicket."

As time goes on, I'll get into this more, but let's jsut start at the beginning.

So first, I have to use a value of the numerator for pi so I'm stuck with -1, because that's as close as you can get to zero (-1 is not nothing and 1 is not negative 1 as discussed in the prior post).

Here we get into some "stuff" where you have 64:8 which is 8:1 from -1 to 1 (sinpix).  YOu have the same ratio, btw from 1 to 2 and from 2 to 4.  Why not from 3 to 4 or 4 to 5?  Don't ask me go ask your mother. (That's from Dr. Suess).

Now 8 is 2*2*2 or 2^3 which is neither here nor there because you still have this bizarre ratio 32/27 (2^5)/(3^3) which we needed before, it's jsut not exactly where it should be but its everywhere nonethess. You don't believe me?  It turns up at sinpi3 all by itself!  FCS!  Why is that?   Sure I wanted to see it because of this whole ratio thing, but why there?

The answer will probably turn up when I convert the ratios to 1 (quantum states) for 2 to 3 and 3 to 4; but it's just darn scary to see this type of thing, because its hiding something important.

            Pi0 and Pi1 are derivations of pi for different compression states of information and the resulting ratio of 1:64 is a critical ratio reflected in higher information states, such as photonic light, wave energy, matter and black holes.

          Pi(x) refers to pi for different values of the “place” in the F-series (1,11,111,1111,etc representing one, two, three and four places).

          Pi(x) is defined as f(pluspix) Pi= N+(from 2 to max x)N/F(pix)] as defined in more detail in the four books covering AuT, but is basically defined as:

 

          Pi is defined in terms of -1 and quantum change until a F-series “place” is introduced at f/f(plupix), in the example shown for pi=4.

          One of the things I don't exactly get is: 1) what I needed n+n/fx and f(pix) since pi is derived only from n/f(pluspix), the one with the top number 1.3333 highlighted in blue above.  I am baffled by my mathematics which is one of the places where the error arose.

          The critical numbers in this analyssis are 1,-3,5,-7,9 which derive directly from -1^x, the manipulation of those numbers being secondary.

           One idea is that the length of the base carrier is tied to these numbers which while very large, change at a much slower rate than F-series changes.

           There is, however, the presence of the 32/27 ratio which originates between -1 and 1 which, as previously discussed and discussed below, gives a basis for the F-series changes which appear durable conceptually throughout the process at least to sinpi4, whether it will hold for sinpi6 has not been done yet, but I'd say the math being fairly simple it probably will and the explanation for 3 and 5  will probably be more easily explined than not.

          The conversion ratio for quantum phenomena (1.185 or 32/27) yields the subsequent compression state for all future Compression states. 

          32 is 2^5.  27 is 3^3 so you get this result:

          N^(n+n+1)/(n+1)^(2+1)=ratio of siny(pi1)/siny(pi0)

          The effective ratio is:

N^(2n+1)/(n+1)^(2+1)

This can also be written:

n^(f(n))/((n+1)^(2+1)) for n=2
This is not "high math."   It's pretty simple, but its important because it explains how dimension can come from a single algorithm preserving certain results according to F-series building that allows us to increase a single variable and still have a result which is dimensionally satisfying.

The next part of the forward proposal is:

Time dilation is relative change.
What can be relative?
1) The choice of AuT is that this is one f(x)^2^x to another.  This allows the type of consistency that we observe.
2) There are other factors that can be considered.  One is the underlying carrier states (a) (f(x)) states (the AuT choice) or (b) some hybrid of f(pluspix).  It should be noted that directly or indirectly a and b are related, that f(x) derives from f(pluspix); but that the universe appears to have settled on f(pluspix) lengthened in effect by F(x).  The resulting equation affecting this is 1/x which is 1^-x which derives from -1^x.

The backward paragraph of the overview is

The averages of solution values (as positive or negative) at higher states give rise to effects that have positive, negative and converging (overlapping) results observed and discussed in earlier versions as overlapping positive and negative f-series spirals, although these are not the visible spirals we see when we draw a gravitational spiral, but are instead “effect spirals” which change the direction of the spiral movement at net inflection points which, for the universe as a whole, are seen as big bang and anti-big bang phenomena.  

And last, but not least...

From out of doors in the holy land
I cannot tell whether the river, the gardens, and the city would have seemed so magical and entrancing if we had come upon them in some other way or seen them in a different setting. You can never detach an experience from its matrix and weigh it alone. Comparisons with the environs of Naples or Florence visited in an automobile, or with the suburbs of Boston seen from a trolley-car, are futile and unilluminating.