As I get closer to the publication date, I will continue to put some of the newer material into posts. It won't contain everything that the final printed version will contain, but for those of you who don't want to buy a copy, it will provide much of the same material, certainly all of the building blocks of the theory and the results.
I'm also going to be available for speaking opportunities. What do you think, $10,000 or 20% of the door whichever is more; the deposit payable in advance plus airfare?
I know it's a little high for someone who isn't an ex president, but probably a bargain if my theories are right. Like hiring Einstein for a child's birthday party.
Anyway, I'm not expecting too many bookings since everything will be laid out in the 3rd edition, but might as well offer.
This short excerpt celebrates crossing the 200 page mark.
TYPES OF MATCHED SPIRALS and gravitational/linear features of space
The formula
represented by the drawing above is a function of space and photonic energy.
The larger models,
whether you include intersecting spirals or not still only represent
fundamental particles until they are assembled into larger constructs of a
fixed model of any point in the universe by the intersections.
We can use the model
to assume that broken intersecting spirals represent matched pairs of particles
or we can assume that matched particles are those corresponding particles on
opposite primary spirals.
We can also have
spirals that are opposite but equal on intersecting main spirals so that they
have no chance of coming together except during periods of overlap.
If the overlap is
longer, then without overlapping on the same point along a line and at separate
angles multiple "securing spirals" are possible. Referring to the "8" overlap (ct4),
there are 4 locations (including one above and one below without leaving the
plane of the page) where two unit overlaps of the type described above could
come off of it.
This is exponential
change. Because at each stage the
increase is an even number (because of the identity of the post-overlap
lengths) this type of process remains possible at every stage of compression,
but this process is not strictly equal.
Perfect compression would go from 8 to 16 and the impression that it is
from 8 to 18 has to result from either geometry changes or observational errors
(such as the inclusion of uncompressed materials along with the compressed ct5
materials).
Hence the change
observed is much closer to what is observed going from c4 to ct5. You end up with 10^36 which is much closer to
what is observed which is 10^39 (minimal black hole size).
The model of linear
spiral-NLC has a great deal of tension built into it even as a stationary
model. When viewed as a moving model,
one can see the movement of the various lines of attachment twisting the
universe into a higher compression state.
The Fibonacci spiral has some
interesting features, among these is that the ratios of consecutive terms (1/1,
1/2, 2/3, 3/5) is limited by the golden mean or golden ration which is (1+sqr(5)/2)
The linear versus
curved model suggests that F-series linear spirals lead to curved spirals
existing within the framework of a linear spiral approximately r=e^theta. To the extent that you could say that the
spiral may vary from linear to logarithmic, you can also envision Archimedian
spirals (r=atheta), hyperbolic spirals (rtheta=a) or hybrid parabolic spirals
(r-a)^2=4aktheta depending on the parameters.
These spirals arise
from observation at quantum points seeing between the linear at any fixed point.
What is observed may change. For example, the outward spiral as Hyberbolic
or Parabolic with a large value of "r" and a small value of
"a" lends itself particularly well to the expansion models of the
universe. This type of transition is
thought, however, to work poorly relative to the idea of a fixed information,
static universe. While aberrations are
inherent in the observed consequences (otherwise the universe would have a more
consistent distribution of matter) the aberrations appear to be in the higher
states over CT1 (and ct-1). In this way,
space (ct1) appears uniform and the higher states more chaotic, more subject to
curvature instead of linear features.
The force of the
mathematical constants are seen outward as "compression/fusion" reactions
and the fusion as the cosmological constant at ct4-ct5; where the NLC
Intersecting F-series sequential fusion reaction to maintain expansion against
the force of gravity in algorithm form against a fixed universe. The calculation of force can be derived from
1) number of intersections vs 2) total number of spirals as well as from
attributes of the algorithm, in this case 3) the e=mc^2 equation.
The effect is also
and 4) the length of intersection is followed by a period of gliding before
(perhaps) the turning inward (at 90 degrees in the case of the linear (as
opposed to curving F series) reflecting the collapsing part (which would
indicate we are (even though it's been a very long time) in the pre collapse,
post explosion phase (ct4-5 or ct5-6(maybe)) post overlap and pre-right turn
expansion on the surface of a spiral (as opposed to the balloon used
traditionally as an example).
Each compression
state is exponential when stable.xxx
It is uncertain if there is any reason
that ct1 should be unique as an inward spiral.
The model suggests this should be the case, but that is only based on
our geometry.
Compression occurs at
the edge of space. Space is fully
uncompressed which allows for the appearance of an expanding universe even
though the direction of the inward spiral is towards a greater compressed
state. The expanded states do not
collapse.
At transitions of the
spirals you can have shifts, for example force or even gravity running
backwards, or outward expansion transforming into inward expansion as a result
of the universe spiraling inward despite the illusion of expansion, something
even traditional theories envision in an Einstein bubble;
Red shifting
proportional to distance from us reflects the increasing size of spirals past.
If it is finite than the limits of the
universe can be determined with some certainty given a certain amount of
information. Fibonacci Spiral NLC
indicates that determination is a bit easier than in other theories because it
is based on specific spiral features.
Even with NLC without spiral theory, NLC provides a fixed amount of
information transforming against some preset formula so that Spiral features
merely provide a set of parameters for the variable portions of the equation.
The spiral
compression force can be viewed as "fusion" which provides more than
enough energy (given a sufficient quantity of compression) to overcome gravity
(sort of like a "fusion" rocked drive but where the entire universe
is the rocket. To understand how this is
possible, it helps to look at the most likely way that this compression
"force" would be handled. But
the fusion is not a force, it is, Instead, the result of the algorithm defining
the spiral.
As was mentioned
earlier, the compression occurs at each spiral to the tune of 55% of the
"intersecting spirals". What
we are about to discuss is how much intersection takes place at each
spiral.
“Compression"
occurs at ct1 (even though it is presumably running in the opposite direction. While we cannot be certain what happens in the
outward spiral, or at least don’t need to consider it more deeply than the
peeling off of quantum time states or the exchange of quantum time states, All
spirals may run in an opposite direction in some state before ct1 changes to
ct2, at ct2 to ct3 at ct3 to ct4 (e=mc^2), at ct4 to ct5 etc.
The original idea was that CT1 states at some point
contains information in only one changing coordinate state and opposite this
might be one with a fully compressed state.
Intersecting spirals show a much more logical
alternative. At the outermost point two
very decompressed spirals and they steadily gain more information from each
other as they move inward.
This would require that from the innermost spiral,
the original one line that creates both spirals, there are two essentially
equal, but somehow opposite spirals that each ½ half (approx.) of the
information in the universe, but steadily lose it as they move out (or gain it
as they move in) depending on the position.
This is consistent with an environment where
everything happens at once, all the information is in the one quantum moment
from which both spirals originate (from either end of the quantum moment
visible in all the linear, intersecting F-series spirals.
Either way, at the
outermost location, perhaps, for example only at the 170th spiral
outward the speed of each of the spirals start the 55% conversion at each step
but we may see 1/170th conversion towards the total compression of all the
data.
The modeling shows
that the information is exchanged towards compression at a rate which doubles
at each step.
These alternatives
are what we must apply to the observed phenomena to see if we come up with the
right numbers and since at the ct5/ct4 interface we observe slightly higher
compression states, if these come out at 55% higher, then perhaps we're on to
something, keeping in mind that compression occurs at exponential rates because
of conservation and the rate of change and the speed of the relative parts as
shown by the ct3-ct4 (energy matter) conversion ratio.
The most gratifying 1
change at a time into many approach in the F-series intersecting model comes
from the informational progression:
1 to 2, 2 intersecting next to 4, 4 to
8, 8 to 16 just as is expected from information theory. That is a single going into many and picking
up a second, these two going into many and picking up two more so that with
each half spiral the compression is doubled.
The relative speed can also be taken into account, 1 moving at half the
speed as it goes into two, two slowing further as they go into four, whether by
friction or weight.
It is left to the
fractional intersection as well as the portions of the spiral where there is no
interface to either explain or refute the suggestion of accuracy and to define
what portion of the logarithmic spirals contributes to what part of the reality
we perceive.
There is, of course, a
massive amount of missing information/mass in the traditional universe, so we
have that; but NLC solves problems and doesn't cause them so we have to at least
suggest some answer to the problems.
Calculating the difference between the
F-spiral observed
It has previously
been explained that compression occurs at certain limits which involve spiral
intersection which is one of the reasons intersecting spirals are used as a
model. This is consistent with
observations of the big bang. Likewise
compression states help explain the difference in estimated vs observed weights
for black holes. Since black holes are
only observed at great distances and within systems from which they draw
material, NLC predicts that the difference between observed mass and estimated
math is a function of unconverted non-black hole material held within the
gravitational well defined by black holes.
This means that in theory that an isolated black hole (unlikely given
the amount of intersecting spirals necessary to form one) would have the
theorized weight. This is the same thing
as matter containing loose bits of energy (holding it together and different
parts in orbit) and space.
While compression is
viewed as occurring from state to state only at the intersection of main
spirals, it is possible that once the higher levels of compression occur at
these relatively rare intersections that lesser spiral intersections between
these “primary spiral” interactions can give rise to fusion. This is observed, of course, in fusion
reactors and bombs.
Likewise, temporary
black hole like structures can be made by colliding masses as sufficient speed,
but these lack he compression possible at spiral interactions to be stable (it
would require material on the scale of 10^16 to be stable under the theory).
There is no fundamental reason under the theory why these changes outside of
main spiral interaction would not be possible.
The presence of
matter (ct4 matter) within ct5 up to unstable ct5 material could,
theoretically, go to the next higher state just as compression to fusion is
possible. In a larger black hole,
presumably this would give off massive amounts of radiation just as a fusion
reaction does but the scale would be much greater. The speed at which such a conversion would
occur is largely unexplored, but we can assume, given the dispersion of change
over the different spirals, that in standard clock time it would appear to
happen more slowly than a fusion reaction.
Whether observed phenomena, like quasars reflect this is uncertain, but
one does observe solar bursts of energy where black holes form from existing
suns. This feature of the dynamic
universe raises more questions than it answers, but the most intriguing is
whether the formation of suns capable of collapsing into black holes requires the
next higher state to be present (ct6) outside of main spiral interaction. Some explorations need to be left for later
in a first draft 500 page philosophy text.
One would expect,
given the compression requirements, that conversion of additional black hole
material should only be present in the presence of ct6 but the proximity of
that material is not easily envisioned.
When we look at fusion reactors, we see a separation from ct5 at a scale
of light years, and yet, in the absence of these black holes bringing together
galactic quantities of material we would not see the amount of compression
necessary to form these fusion reactors.
While we can say that our presence indicates a different result is
possible, we also cannot exist outside of the huge gravity wells. Testing this theory is not as easy as one
things. For example, the idea of sending
a nuclear fusion weapon into space outside of the presence of gravity wells
might appear to deal with this problem, there is nothing to say that this would
be inconsistent with the theory and, practically speaking, it is not possible
for us at our stage of development anyway.
While we expect our
rules of physics would apply in deep space, and while nothing in NLC says that
is not the case, the “rules” of NLC take on a new significance if science
allows us to even approach features of the universe as simple as “stillness”.
While non-black hole
material within the gravitational effect of a black hole provides the scale
necessary for the observed “mass” to match the theoretical mass, we have to
look in the opposite direction to find the same mass features in lower states
(ct3, 2 and 1).
If this is not
"observed" in other clock time states, then the answer could be that
there is no corresponding one on one state to compare. CT3, 2 are shown to be affected by large
gravitational fields under general relativity.
If ct1 doesn’t appear using traditional techniques for observing
gravitational effect, presumably it is because they are too small or too spread
out or even the unlikely possibility that their spirals run in the opposite
direction relative to the state we are in.
We are spared
wondering about this, because ct1 is shown to drop out into black holes. What this means, under NLC is that space has
the features of information linearity (i.e. gravity) and that this feature
becomes visible when the affecting gravity is as strong as that present at the
black hole-space interface.
What Einstein
predicted for light (that it bends when exposed to a large gravitational force)
is also predicted and observed for information based NLC. Space must have gravity in such a scenario,
the equation g(m1*m2)/d^2 for gravity applies to space. NLC merely provides the specifics in terms
of how space relates to other matter and the mechanism. While this disagrees with EHT theory (the
original theory that held that at black holes time become non-linear) it does
appear non-linear to us because of the relatively slow changes of linearity due
to the exponentially greater clock time slowing.
