AuT-D-Building an algorithm 7 Calculus 6 of 6 The non-mystery of gravity-part 1

I decided to break this one in half, the first part being the most important.  But it's a more complex issue to insert drawings so I'm slowing down a little and posting this one in halves.
There is so much I'd like to share, but I don't see that happening here.
How incredible that my actions are so inconsistent with what I want that I have to create an entire physics to somehow escape responsibility, but I don't.  In fact there is plenty of fault to go around.  How do I make you understand?  What it's like to not know where I fit in?  To not know whether you understand what this is for me?  How do I convince you that I screamed louder in the darkness than you did, that I screamed longer, that I still scream.   How do I make you care?
What is there here for me now that all the grey has been stripped away leaving me nothing but black and white, me and you, and everything else is grey.
How do I convince you that what is left is worth not having regret for the past?  How do I get you to see in this not my physics, but my poetry?

AuT-D-Building an algorithm 7 Calculus 6 of 6 The non-mystery of gravity

The average rate of change must be differentiated from the instantaneous rate of change dy/dx which is what AuT focuses on.  AuT has an instant relatively and absolute change depending on whether it is x or ct1 relative change that is being considered.

The wise man sees, (1) If the minimum size for ct4 (one lasting for 1x10-37^th of a second) is a ct3 carrier with a length of 10^2^4 and if this reflects a change relative to ct1 of 10^2^4*6^2^3*4^2^2 and (2) if there is a substitution for velocity between states based on changing ct1 for another length at the maximum rate of 1:256 (ct1 to ct2) then one can see: a) Stability is offset by speed and b) speed (substitution of ct1 at a maximum rate of 1:256) is directly proportional to the comparative rate of change between ct4 and ct3 (i.e. as the carrier gets longer, the substitution rate goes down slowing the velocity AND changing the ration of ct3 to ct4 thereby changing the amount of time dilation which is merely the ratio of ct3 change to ct4 change in this instance because of the stacking formula.

The underlying algorithms have no dimension or time (sct).    The transition to the visible dimension and time (sct) occurs as we move from ct1-ct2 and then only as a relative illusion starting at 1, then 2, then the 3 that we see.  The reason for this has nothing to do with true dimension.  While ct5 would see the world as 4 dimensional, there is no extra dimension.  

The compression/expansion solutions and F-series stacking interaction leading to gravity and anti-gravity effects is not very troublesome mathematically. 

The relativity allowed by comparing the non-dimensional ct1 to other states made by the expedient of stacking (1,11,111) information leaves room for the other forces to be developed along the same methodology, creating relativity, while not increasing the underlying equations.

The reason is that each "dimension" is nothing more than an information group changing relative to the next lower information group along the individual solutions (1,1,2,3,5-changing, for example 3 million beats represents 1 beat for the lower state).

  For this reason, any model that discusses dimensional characteristics related to the universe is, to any important extent flawed in the first analysis.

For purposes of creating the transition, drawings are used for ct1 to show how much dimensional characteristics related to non-dimensional underpinnings.  Quantum solutions mean that there is no "film" but there is a picture which contains in layers which are hidden in the solution in ways that appear irrelevant in state, but which represent history including changed position for each quantum moment which all exist for any quantum point and all of these points can be solved and while there is connectivity through singularity, predictability through solutions to shared ct1 proximity is also present.

CT1 does not need to have intersecting spiral arms in the definition, but the net effect is the same.  While there are alternatives, this one allows solutions have to change from state to state.  For purposes of simplicity, two spirals solved together are assumed and the pictures of this state showing a zero point with two, one length yes or no arms coming off of it makes a good model.  The "higher" ct-1 states occur when this solution allows the two yes/no arms to come together so that instead of maybe yes, maybe no, you get maybe, yes, no (or maybe no yes either is the same).  Hence algorithms where you never get past this maybe yes, maybe no does not create a  higher universe with compression states.  

You correctly surmise that there is no dimensional element just as there is no "true" yes/no.  It can be alternatively envisioned as 1/-1 but both analogies fail because there is no truth in this type of universe and no dimension for a negative and zero doesn’t exist as nothing.  These nomenclatures are just ways of solving the algorithm.  Stacking and the geo function offsetting results allow that you can get the otherwise impossible transition from a no to a yes or a negative 1 to a positive 1 without passing through maybe or zero.  “Maybe” becomes zero and is circumvented by manipulation of the algorithm and this simple manipulation creates the ability to have stacking of states, f-series growth, relative change and the universe as we experience it.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahWmkV0mtvk&list=RDo1gLGjPFkRA&index=9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gS9o1FAszdk&list=RDo1gLGjPFkRA&index=29

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VMFdpdDYYA&list=RDo1gLGjPFkRA&index=24