Now before I get to vent on that I will add my post about time. Oh wait, too late.
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/221735/20180224/astronomers-use-improved-hubble-telescope-to-measure-expansion-rate-of-the-universe.htm
http://www.newsweek.com/universe-expansion-hubble-space-telescope-817511
Algorithm theory should be more broadly recognized, Well, either that or I am a moron.
Speaking of morons, I'm going to suggest the books be read backwards. Its a developing theory so you get the most up to date stuff in book 7 (not published but you're getting it live here) and the go backwards to pick up on the elements that need a little more explaining.
A precise on Time
Just as bundles of reflected waves carry the image of a bridge onto the water as a mirror image, so too does the present yield the future. It is important to know that the more solid forms largely(but don't entirely) remain, planets, suns, even human bodies largely carry from one quantum time to the next.
Time is only those parts that come apart and come back together which is what we're going to talk about here and that only in relation to the movement through the "new ether" of ct1 space.
The transitions also occur both in a time free environment. This means per second to the extent second are tracked, gazillions of them can occur because seconds don't affect the transitions except at the ct4-ct5 level.
This is a little weird just as the idea that space has no dimension is weird, but that's the way it is.
When changes reach the level where they are ascertainable to us, they occur very quickly relative to a second, far below our ability to track them directly. I've done the estimates in the books as to how long a quantum of time is and there is a change in these higher time affected states 1 for each quantum of time, 1.07x10^39 per second was the low estimate.
This brings us to the discussions of bundles and how electrons, protons and neutrons fit.
One can look at the higher state of matter (with its two primary transitional parts having stable exchange rates with one another-protons and electrons) as a series of discrete lines and this is actually drawn out.
What one sees here is that in ct4 (the "circle") you can peel off huge bundles of information as ct3 wave bundles slowly coming off as 10 x 1.68x10^6 ct2 bundles and each of these 10 peeling off carries enough information towards the electron, another proton, or neutron or to another band within the neutron shown itself to carry the past state of the entity that was peeled off to the future.
Somewhere between the ct3 octagon and ct4 decagon (I think) the electron pops up and become something important in the way of stability. So lets examine this:
I. Compression
Let's look at Compression of the electron where the neutron is the stable ct4 state. We are using weight which is only an approximate measure of information, but it is what we have readily available.
1) An electron is 9.11x10-28 g
2) A proton is 1.6727x10-24g
3) A neutron is 1.675x10^-24 gram
Assuming 16 arms, an electron is not anywhere close to a full arm's worth of weight.
Looking at changes an electron is .0087 (not quite 1%) of one of the 16 arms. You can also look at this as an electron is 1/1838.64 of a neutron and a proton is the rest. The electron doesn't sound like much.
By weight, an electron is approx 5.4x10^12 wave elements and each electron is approx. 9.1x10^18 photons so we can see a lot of dimensional information is contained in an electron.
The results are no more satisfying looking at an electron as the stable ct4 state. There are in such an event 1.06x10^37 e per arm and 5.78x10^33n per arm and 5.79x10^33p/arm.
None of these numbers suggest any immediate logic, and all of them assume that electrons have mass and potentially some form of at least transitional dimension which makes sense to us but is not mathematically sound within the model.
The problem is that transitional elements (electrons) exist as both wave and ct4 arm elements, more specifically they exist between 3 places (111-2 dimensions) and 4 places (1111-3 dimensions) in AuT mathematics, again assuming they are not a minimum mass state.
The degradation of a neutron or the compression of electrons is not a mass/force equation because there is a dimensional transformation.
Worse still the data of this transformation is colored by pre-AuT mathematics of quarks and other fanciful daemons.
II. Forces
So lets ignore quantities which cannot be accurately determined in a common framework and just look at the relative forces.
10^38-Strong
10^36-electromagnetic
10^25-weak
1-gravity
These force elements provide a different look. Again, this is the AuT version, not the pre-AuT version of force.
The electron to proton exchange state is seen as the electromagnetic force.
This force is 10^36 and corresponds well to the number of electrons as a stable ct4 state. Unfortunately, everything seems to point towards the neutron (charge balance, wave features of the electron, missing mass etc) as the stable ct4 state
This number is interesting but not the most interesting number.
The force separating the electron from the proton based on its momentum is E=H^2/(2mr^2)-k(e)(e^2/r)
This force difference (or perhaps force balance) also supports the electron as a transitional state, more wave than particle. Waves are not part of ct4, except as portions or quantum elements of the arms.
One conceptual idea is that the electron is an incompatible charge state, part of an anti-proton but still capable of exchanging information. In this way, the electron cannot take the place on one of the arms, but as compatible states come off of the arm (decompression states) the decompressing electron can exchange them.
So one can look at this relationship, in terms of AuT, as being the uncompressive tendencies of the electron are equal to the compressive tendencies of the proton, one being based on a scale of 1.68x10^6 (wave compression) the other being 1x10^16 (ct4 compression).
The neutron is seen as bound by the strong force to the rest of the nucleus.
The weak force is seen when you look at the proton being held together.
The comparison is gravity to the weak force yields 4.3x10^24 changes per quantum instant (not a part of a second, but a time independent measurement. This corresponds very well to the weak force 10^25 and provides at least a little support to the whole idea of compression between states on the scale given vrs the force observed (gravity:weak force is equal to change at gravitational level:change (max) at the ct4 level where the weak force is observed but this is a concept from book 2 and while important, adds little to the discernment of the electron/proton relationship.
III. Transitional states for the sake of transitions
When looking at pure math, there is support for AuT conceptually.
The other numbers don't do much to help reconcile the status of an electron as a super stable intermediary, the proton to the election or either of them to the Neutron.
Substitution rates of x:y for electrons to protons should provide for a balance of the electron magnetic force to the average momentum of the electron E=H^2/(2mr^2)-k(e)(e^2/r) allowing the two states to be observed in terms of substitution rates so where a collapse is not happening and where the orbital state is stable E=4.3x10^24 (the suggested maximum rate of substitution for the neutron, approximately what it should be for the proton). Since neither is substitution at the speed of light, some form of correction for the reduced speed needs to be determined.
Time becomes fairly important in this inquiry because there is no time for the electron and the time of the proton or neutron is probably the result of exchanges within the electron-proton pairing. It is a fairly complex point of inquiry for AuT and one I'm not ready for yet. Lets see if things make it more clear.
The existence of these bundles within the cloud formed by atoms yields averages that can give rise to the type of non-linear time we experience.
I'm a little surprised by the wealth of material in Book 7 also. It's already 76 pages of new material and I'm only 1.5 weeks into a 7 week course (and as of today I'm 1.5 weeks behind!), mostly explaining gross chemistry using AuT which doesn't change the theory, but broaden its application. I would like to post more into the course itself, but to keep from interrupting too much I have elected to follow it here. Also, it requires cutting 1200 character posts which remain semi-lucid from these longer posts.
No comments:
Post a Comment