What has been done, pretty conclusively, is to prove that space is the same stuff that black holes are (and everything in between) and that there is a dimension/time free environment which controls what we experience (spoiler alert-thermodynamics free). Even time turns out to be something different that what it was considered in other theories. I've changed the entire world of physics and it is read all over the world, even though it has yet to be published for peer review-working on that.
I claim to you that I have figured out super symmetry of the universe and this post will discuss that somewhat. And yet, what is really important, though I know what it is, though it is well within my grasp, is denied to me.
I want to claim some intellectual or at least clever accomplishment, even though it largely would fly in the face of my theory, and yet that has nothing to do with what is important and my inability to get what is important when it is within my grasp indicates some sort of mental retardation.
Anyway, you're reading the posts of a retard, what am I worried about?
http://www.independent.co.uk/
As I was looking at this relatively mundane, but interesting article, it occurred to me that there might be more to what is in plain site than what is hidden in the "yawn" dark matter galaxy.
Where is the evidence that ct1 is the same stuff as you and I?
In the article above, there is a quote:
"We found many times more mass indicated by the motions of the stars than there is mass in the stars themselves." That made me start wondering about the blatantly obvious.
Mass and
motion are interchangeable if ct1 is correct, but how do we show it?
According to Newtonian Physics: Inertia is the property
of mass that resists change. It is directly related to the
momentum, the kinetic energy which is the same feature that shows the interchangeability of mass and energy, namely e=mc^2, or the energy is equal to the mass with a velocity (ct1 exchange) of the speed of light (1:256 at the ct2 level).
Mass and velocity are both directly
proportional to the momentum, its kinetic energy, so...
If you increase either mass or velocity, the
momentum of the object increases proportionally. Both mass and velocity change the same thing the same way, proportionately: (If y is directly proportional to x, then the graph of y as a function of x is a straight line passing through the origin with the slope of the line equal to the constant of proportionality: it corresponds to linear growth, the x and y axis are mass and velocity, the bisecting line is momentum.), hence Einstein's equation.
Somewhere a mathematician is saying, one line on a graph, how does that show anything? You can, for example, have an axis of x which is desert and y which is the spread of the plague (everyone dies before it gets across the desert). You can take such disparate things and get proportionality.
But this is a little different, because this is a conversion equation, e=mc^2 is the function, not just of portionality, but of conversion.
How can two things that are totally different be the same? Einstein said that energy and mass were the same thing, but Friedlander says that mass and velocity are the same (and does a pretty lengthy job of explaining it). The thing about AuT is that it gets rid of nonsense distinguishing features, to some extent this means that all units are units of the same thing, supersymmetric solutions to equations, even the camels and miles of desert.
Somewhere a mathematician is saying, one line on a graph, how does that show anything? You can, for example, have an axis of x which is desert and y which is the spread of the plague (everyone dies before it gets across the desert). You can take such disparate things and get proportionality.
But this is a little different, because this is a conversion equation, e=mc^2 is the function, not just of portionality, but of conversion.
How can two things that are totally different be the same? Einstein said that energy and mass were the same thing, but Friedlander says that mass and velocity are the same (and does a pretty lengthy job of explaining it). The thing about AuT is that it gets rid of nonsense distinguishing features, to some extent this means that all units are units of the same thing, supersymmetric solutions to equations, even the camels and miles of desert.
If an increase in mass or velocity increase momentum, then both must be convertible into each other just as mass and energy are on some fundamental level, even if not on the level of thermodynamics.
So, AuT holds:
So, AuT holds:
If a given mass encounters 5 external ct1 exchanges along a ct1-2, 2-3 or 3-4
axis, then it goes 1/5 the speed of one that encounters 25 such exchanges along
the same axis. The reason that more can be encountered is presumably
because, for example, a ct4 particle has 1x10^16 possible ct3 exchanges along
the ct3-4 axis. This equates velocity directly to mass.
The other, simpler way is just to point out that 1:256 ct1 substitution in ct2 is the SOL and that ct2,3,4 and 5 are all pretty much shown by observation to be convertible into one another merely by removing the number of intervening lesser ct states.
It's hiding in plain sight.
The other, simpler way is just to point out that 1:256 ct1 substitution in ct2 is the SOL and that ct2,3,4 and 5 are all pretty much shown by observation to be convertible into one another merely by removing the number of intervening lesser ct states.
It's hiding in plain sight.
Moreover, AuT has held, since the very beginning in EHT, that space was dark matter. If you look at space as potential velocity and the interchangeability of Mass, you come to the only possible conclusion. That I am right, of course, but also that ct1 is the stuff of ct4 and 5, that space and mass are the same.
And here is an initial attempt at audio-fying this book:
https://soundcloud.com/greg-friedlander/sets/aut-prefaceintroduction
I would highly recommend getting a copy of books 1-5 and reading them first, but then I would.
Coming in 2018, book 6.
No comments:
Post a Comment