Dimensional changes are interpreted in AuT as additional places changing together. Acceleration is the exchange of ct1 with ct2 at a set rate. This translate to the same relative set rate between ct2 and ct3. Time is not a factor in this transition and it is viewed as lightspeeed whenever a ttransition is time independent.
The rate change of ct3 between ct3-ct4 transitions in place of ct3 bundle (electron) exchanges is velocity which is largely the (ct3bundle/unbundledct3)*c dilation effect.
The larger speed of unbundledct3 (not part of a ct4 information arm) is because of the increased "clouds" of ct2 and ct1 around each which go to 1 as it compresses to information arm parameters.
The unbundled ct3 exchanges in question are the ones that are shared with protons and when they are reduced as the limit approaches 1, the exchanges are ct3bundles with ct4 information arm protons.
Under Newtons laws momentum exists at our place in the universe. This means that ct3 free changes in place of ct3bundle changes continue in space until something happens to limit this rate or put another way, when the ct3bundle to ct3free exchange changes we see this as something coming off of or going onto the ct4 carrier arm and that is what we call a force acting on the mass.
Gravity time dilation is a slightly different effect but largely related because it also has to do with a reduction in ct2 and ct1 states as well as the reduction in free ct3 states as ct3-ct4 transitional states first go to ct4 neutron states and then compress further to eliminate adjoining ct3-ct4 transition states as they progress to neutron stars as ct4-ct5 transitional states and ultimately to ct5 states. There wold, therefore, be a different type of time defined by ct4 free states relative to ch4-ct5 transitional state having ct5 information arm characteristics.
Where it becomes counter-intuitive is where scientists build a super colider and accelerate a proton because the underlying symmetry solution says that the changes resulting in free ct3 for bundled ct4 should occur at the observed rate for the observed time.
The actual speed is irrelevant because from one quantum instant to the next there is a change at a set quantum rate at the ct1-ct2 level from which all other levels derive, because of "symmetry building" (the AuT version of symmetry breaking) and therefore only the net results from the two give the illusions of change between quantum states.
Increasing place in AuT is more consistent with observations and a little simpler in terms of modeling. Nevertheless, in SM the idea that spin and degrees of freedom being increased leading to the phenomena known as mass is very satisfying.
In AuT the degrees of freedom are the 1,2 and 3 dimensions represented by the one, ten and hundreds place. They only change in one direction except relative to one another which is why gravity connects all points, the ct1 connection changing together relative to ct2.
There are a plethra of intermediary states possible in AuT but they are limited by the possible changes in the information arms over time. In SM there are a limited number based on projected models, but there are heavy W and light W states which are better explained as ct3 partial arms in a state of building or breakdown.
For whatever reason, SM completely ignores the ct3 vs ct3 bundled transitions of time even while measuring speed as a version of time.
Actual velocity is shown by ct1 transition vs ct3-ct4 transition, but these transitions appear to happen in a time free environment, where bundled ct3 states, those with information arm attributes, are distinguished from free ct3 states which are the true representative exchanges occurring as they do along with the ct1 transitions which are measured as external velocity and as vibration within the ct3-ct4 matrix. Nevertheless, the memory of ct1 exchanges is preserved only in the ct3bundle exchanges apparently.
I still don't understand why no one sees the connection between these packet states (of information capable wave packets) proton groups and history with what is called time (as opposed to the change in the underlying symmetry) you can see clearly that it would be an appropriate line of inquiry, especially since the more elegant "unbroken" underlying symmetries of lower information states would suggest a more elegant change vehicle (i.e. a quantum unit change as opposed to a variable time).
Under SMM:: The new symmetry has less symmetry than the underlying dynamics. Less in one dimension, more change in multiple dimensions at once.
The reason-the vacuum is "asymmetric" with respect to the symmetry of the dynamics.
Breaking as opposed to changing or building is a problem of semantics, but otherwise shows the transition as the limit approaches a single change between compression levels.
In AuT the symmetries are maintained since one level is built on top of (or more particularly "out of") the other.
While SM misses most of AuT, it has AuT properties that are important for superconductivity
I previously discussed the similarities of dimension that under SM dimension results from the more degrees of freedom, consistent with place and the addition of resulting dimensions at each higher ct state. The terminology of SM, tying spin to the idea of dimensional freedom, is a little awkward, but the idea of these dimensional features giving mass is a common feature of AuT and SM although they arrive at the same point generally from different directions; AuT being supported by the underlying geometry and SM approximating results without recognizing the underlying super-symmetry except as a broken element, instead of as a necessary building block.
Bose Condensation-Condensing of a microscopically large number of spinless particles into a single quantum state-what carries the current in the superconductor, is the SM idea of compression. This is associated with symmetry breaking in these systems and with the underlying symmetry giving rise to different compression states in AuT.
This Higgs idea is correct to the extent it recognizes that there are different symmetries, incorrect in failing to realize that they exist together in every respect and that only observational prejudices allow us to ignore that space is pre-dimensional, but still the same stuff as the other higher ct states.
Goldstone said-Nambru stuck close to realistic superconductors with fermionic spins-goldstone instead said basic phenomena were result of what could be described from spin zero fields. This is not the worst analogy, but where it fails is that it allows "fields" in a "vacuum" when what AuT shows is that the vacuum is intermediary solutions which interchange with the solutions of slightly higher ct1-ct2 information arm state for electromagnetic fields and ct2-ct3 states for wave type fields.
The result of composite particles is a confused way of breaking up the ct2-ct4 states which are otherwise separated by virtue of the fill state of the various component information arms.
The Mexican hat field that breaks the symmetry by having a zero energy place for the mass to sit is worth more consideration in light of the other mass-field equations in order to better understand the interaction of f-series compression states; but the idea of eliminating the underlying symmetry is inconsistent with observations if you accept space as a quantum state because space never ceases to exist and never ceases to interact and exchange with the higher ct states.
SM takes this further with the idea of Massless vs Massive particles which is really nothing more than the recognition in AuT of building along the ct4 information arm matrix which leads to the Massive AuT particles exchanging in the thousands place in mathematical f-series solutions.
In SM the massless particle in nature is easy to produce since it has no energy use involved. This is a matter in AuT which is not viewed the same because energy is an effect and not a cause in AuT.
In AuT the idea of "ease of production" is not relevant since any mathematical result is as easy as any other mathematical result.
Because we live in a stable place in the universe we experience just the right amount of entropy, but that will certainly vary as the universe changes from net decompression to net compression.
Breaking symmetry gave degree of freedom allowing mass in three different states of spin by adding dimension in SM, which is the equivalent of the limit as ct1 and ct2 intervening states between ct3 goes to 1 to allow ct3 states to align along ct4 type mathematical information arm solutions (2f(4)^2^4) without excessive intervening ct1 or 2 states which allows ct3bundles to carry time between ct3-ct4 information arms giving rise to the illusion of time through the preservation of prior quantum state results over time in 4 dimensional environments. One can see both the similarities of different spin states to different "places" in the AuT solutions; but the SM perspective fails to see the existence of the intervening states as having a role in how much ct3 bundle sharing occurs or that this is the "broken symmetry" version of "change in x, the single variable" which AuT more clearly defines as time through a specific ct3-ct4/4 dimensional information exchange between quantum time solutions.
The overlaps of the two solutions are important in order to clarify how the standard model arises from an AuT analysis.
No comments:
Post a Comment