To show how the F-series equations work with different states the following models are useful:
CT1=0,1,1 the true clock time state varying only relative to x.
CT2=1,1,2 or in in terms of F(x)=4
The stacked result is
11 is 4^4 or (using our view) F(x)^2^x=4^2^2
The assumption of the transition is a little different than the actual transition from this point forward.
CT3=1,2,3 or F(3)=6
111 is not 6^6^6 nor is it 12^6. It is F(x)^2^x or 6^2^3 or 6^6. However it is also compression based on ct2, not on ct1. The base 6 is the Fsolution, the exponential 6 is the same 4 plus of 11 plus 2
CT4=2,3,5 or F(4)=10
1111 is not 10^10^10^10 nor is it 30^10. Instead it is 10^2^4 or 10^8. If you look, however at ct 4 what you have is 10, the F series ^11[which is F(x)=4]+^11[also F(x)=4) which is 10^8
For ct5
11111=3,5,8=16
not 16^16 etc but instead is 16^2^5=16^10 which is, not surprisingly the same 8+2 that you see for uneven ct3.
Hence, there is a pattern that arises for even and odd increases in ct states based not just on information theory but also; as a result of the relationship of stacked F-series function, based on the F-series.
This suggests that F-series stacking to make higher time states and information theory arise from the same features that define our universe in terms of compressed information states.
And if that doesn't get me the Nobel prize, well its a spiral problem.
Thursday, November 17, 2016
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
AuT-Volume II publication update
As you can certainly imagine, there will be at least a few surprises in the second edition of spirals in amber. At the present time it is believed it will be available after thanksgiving and before christmas. There are 100 pages of new content and it's a lot to go over and seems to be growing at an alarming rate.
It's possible also that I won't delete all of the old information from the first edition which means either including unedited material from the first edition or publishing the second edition without the last 100 pages or so of the first edition, neither of which appeals to me.
The good news is that the theory has survived the re-write in tact more or less. That is prior writings have radically changed the underlying work and the second edition of spirals in amber while heavily edited essentially stays true to the underlying concepts.
Perhaps the most important addition is more detail in why the ct1 (space) to higher interfaces is so important. This was actually addressed in the first edition, but without the requisite detail.
There may or may not be technical updates between now and publication, I assume there will be, but the theory more or less in its entirety has been given here, not edited mind you, but worthy of a quick read through these several thousand posts if you can't wait for the second edition, hopefully just in time for Christmas.
It's possible also that I won't delete all of the old information from the first edition which means either including unedited material from the first edition or publishing the second edition without the last 100 pages or so of the first edition, neither of which appeals to me.
The good news is that the theory has survived the re-write in tact more or less. That is prior writings have radically changed the underlying work and the second edition of spirals in amber while heavily edited essentially stays true to the underlying concepts.
Perhaps the most important addition is more detail in why the ct1 (space) to higher interfaces is so important. This was actually addressed in the first edition, but without the requisite detail.
There may or may not be technical updates between now and publication, I assume there will be, but the theory more or less in its entirety has been given here, not edited mind you, but worthy of a quick read through these several thousand posts if you can't wait for the second edition, hopefully just in time for Christmas.
Thursday, November 10, 2016
AuT-lumpy time
I could write a post about love or physics, and perhaps both
For the moment, I explained some things at lunch and want to put my thoughts down on paper
First, if all times are built on the prior times, then it may be possible to mine the present for the past. There are certainly some "elements" of that, light carrying old times, often billions of years old, into our telescopes, but it is the more relevant current moments that are worth considering. There is little question that in Aut the present in built on the past, but the methodology is complicated by the changes relative to ct1 that give us standard clock time and velocity which otherwise would not be perceived.
Time, as a relative change against ct1 can be measured in quantum steps and hence must be quantum, that is sct. If ct2 is 256 changing with one ct1 state changing at a time at ct3 is 6^2^3 ct2 changing at the same rate and ct4 is 10^2^4 ct3 then this incredibly large number divided by 256 is the speed of matter at the speed of light and to see the quantum elements, you would have to observe those in fractions (1.07x10-39) of a second to see the individual changes. Nevertheless, this should be an observable phenomena.
I also discussed the fact that ct6 (black holes) interact with matter like matter interacts with wave energy. When electricity (wave energy) passes through a wire it doesn't cease to exists nor does matter in contact with a black hole do anything weirder than be captured in the same fashion. In fact, all matter may be observed as being shared in a very loose ct5 matrix.
I also discussed that space alone would have no dimensional aspects, because space is non-dimensional probably because it has an element of non linearity to it (0,1,1,0) but that it also is carried on a carrier F-series 0,1,1,2,3 as a result of the stacking of times together.
I discussed that 1,1,2 in space corresponded to 11,11,22 in photons, 111,111,222 in wave energy and the like providing an explanation for the F(series) portion of the equation F(x)^2^x or for matter (2+3+5)^2^4.
I mentioned that pi proves that dimension is illusory because pi cannot be solved except for a finite value of x and that therefore dimension and velocity are (as observed) a function only of relative position along a ct1 spiral relative to other ct1 spirals in the type of stacked matrix suggested by the stacking of prior time states to get the current one.
It was worthwhile to me because it gave me some room to stretch and put these theories into one place where they make sense without getting too high falutin.
But more on this and perhaps more on love later.
For the moment, I explained some things at lunch and want to put my thoughts down on paper
First, if all times are built on the prior times, then it may be possible to mine the present for the past. There are certainly some "elements" of that, light carrying old times, often billions of years old, into our telescopes, but it is the more relevant current moments that are worth considering. There is little question that in Aut the present in built on the past, but the methodology is complicated by the changes relative to ct1 that give us standard clock time and velocity which otherwise would not be perceived.
Time, as a relative change against ct1 can be measured in quantum steps and hence must be quantum, that is sct. If ct2 is 256 changing with one ct1 state changing at a time at ct3 is 6^2^3 ct2 changing at the same rate and ct4 is 10^2^4 ct3 then this incredibly large number divided by 256 is the speed of matter at the speed of light and to see the quantum elements, you would have to observe those in fractions (1.07x10-39) of a second to see the individual changes. Nevertheless, this should be an observable phenomena.
I also discussed the fact that ct6 (black holes) interact with matter like matter interacts with wave energy. When electricity (wave energy) passes through a wire it doesn't cease to exists nor does matter in contact with a black hole do anything weirder than be captured in the same fashion. In fact, all matter may be observed as being shared in a very loose ct5 matrix.
I also discussed that space alone would have no dimensional aspects, because space is non-dimensional probably because it has an element of non linearity to it (0,1,1,0) but that it also is carried on a carrier F-series 0,1,1,2,3 as a result of the stacking of times together.
I discussed that 1,1,2 in space corresponded to 11,11,22 in photons, 111,111,222 in wave energy and the like providing an explanation for the F(series) portion of the equation F(x)^2^x or for matter (2+3+5)^2^4.
I mentioned that pi proves that dimension is illusory because pi cannot be solved except for a finite value of x and that therefore dimension and velocity are (as observed) a function only of relative position along a ct1 spiral relative to other ct1 spirals in the type of stacked matrix suggested by the stacking of prior time states to get the current one.
It was worthwhile to me because it gave me some room to stretch and put these theories into one place where they make sense without getting too high falutin.
But more on this and perhaps more on love later.
Monday, November 7, 2016
AuT chart-A pause for our advertisers to identify themselves
taking a break from reality.
I find that I"m needing to spend an inordinate amount of time just editing the prior posts and getting the book ready to publish. That isn't something I do here very much, but it is something that works well with some other editing.
I'm going to pause for a moment while I deal with minutia including publishing a romance novel I finally finished today.
I have a chart which looks something like this:
I find that I"m needing to spend an inordinate amount of time just editing the prior posts and getting the book ready to publish. That isn't something I do here very much, but it is something that works well with some other editing.
I'm going to pause for a moment while I deal with minutia including publishing a romance novel I finally finished today.
I have a chart which looks something like this:
But it goes on and on and sets out how the algorithm universe evolved over time and helps to set out where everything is going. It will go into the new book, assuming I ever get it done. I have quite a bit of editing to do, this new book having so much new information that it's now both a new edition and a new book.
This chart shows how space changed from just another ct1 state to a ct1 state against which other ct1 states are defined.
It shows how ct1 can be defined both by a simple cycle and a f-series algorithm that maintains that algorithm over time
It shows how higher information states result from associating multiple lower states with a single ct1 state thereby telling the obvious, that it is movement, velocity, acceleration and separation based on relative changes in space and changes from one ct1 line to another
it shows how positive and negative spirals may be aligned before being offset form other aligned spirals or that both sides may be misaligned
But mostly it shows that observations support an algorithm based universe including solutions for higher ct states and predictions of expansion and compression of the entire universe, solutions at individual quantum moments for time, the length of quantum moments and why they are quantum.
It even has allowed an in depth look into the mind of god, a time free, algorithm supporting "thing" and thereby says more about the true nature of the non-universal than other theories.
In short, it's just better and the chart shows how it is derived and it's coming to a something near you, probably eventually this blog, even
Saturday, November 5, 2016
Aut BAA 13-speed and compressionxx
The exponential comes from 11 being associated with 1, that is one space spiral (either inward or outward, but not both) being associated with 256 ct2 (photon) states. This is light speed and cannot vary because there is nothing between 11 and 1 in terms of F-series.
Likewise wave energy comes from 111 being associated with a single 11, hence both have the same speed.
Each speed comes from the change of one ct1 state at a time or one ct 2 state at a time respectively.
Ct4 slows dramatically because of the exponential associated with 1111 with a single ct2 state. Each state is necessarily tied to ct1 because each sub-state is tied ultimately to space.
The balance equations in Spirals in amber talk about catching up. E.G. if all the positive spirals of 11 are associated with a single 1 then shoulding all the 1's be associated with the negative spirals of 11? This type of balance is not required in an algorithm based solution but the conceptual framework remains plausible if not required and will be explained further.
It occurs to me that I have seen deeper into the mind of god than anyone alive. It is a strange position to hold. There are multiple universes, some of these are perfect and balanced in their solutions and of no consequence to time based entities. Others, like ours, are irregular having a beginning of sorts but no end but having consequential irregularities relative to their different functions of time.
But having seen god more clearly, I have come back with any tablets, any rules, other than entropy is an illusion, time exists in different ways relative to different levels of coordination of information and the like. There is the rule of irony which equates closely with the illusory role of entropy. Entropy, of course, if non-existent since the universe continually tends towards greater organization, bouncing like a pi solution between expansion that we wrongly call entropy and compression which is what it is.
And having seen god so closely, it occurs to me that the only thing I had to give up for this vision was the most important thing in the world to me. The rule of irony holds.
Likewise wave energy comes from 111 being associated with a single 11, hence both have the same speed.
Each speed comes from the change of one ct1 state at a time or one ct 2 state at a time respectively.
Ct4 slows dramatically because of the exponential associated with 1111 with a single ct2 state. Each state is necessarily tied to ct1 because each sub-state is tied ultimately to space.
The balance equations in Spirals in amber talk about catching up. E.G. if all the positive spirals of 11 are associated with a single 1 then shoulding all the 1's be associated with the negative spirals of 11? This type of balance is not required in an algorithm based solution but the conceptual framework remains plausible if not required and will be explained further.
It occurs to me that I have seen deeper into the mind of god than anyone alive. It is a strange position to hold. There are multiple universes, some of these are perfect and balanced in their solutions and of no consequence to time based entities. Others, like ours, are irregular having a beginning of sorts but no end but having consequential irregularities relative to their different functions of time.
But having seen god more clearly, I have come back with any tablets, any rules, other than entropy is an illusion, time exists in different ways relative to different levels of coordination of information and the like. There is the rule of irony which equates closely with the illusory role of entropy. Entropy, of course, if non-existent since the universe continually tends towards greater organization, bouncing like a pi solution between expansion that we wrongly call entropy and compression which is what it is.
And having seen god so closely, it occurs to me that the only thing I had to give up for this vision was the most important thing in the world to me. The rule of irony holds.
Friday, November 4, 2016
AuT BAA-12-speeding up photons
Let us talk for a moment on balanced algorithms (expanding and converging).
The model suggests that until you are far enough out on a spiral you cannot reach compression.
looking at 1,1,2 we can say that until you get to 2 you cannot create a photon and that once you move inward on the spiral you would lose the status.
It also suggests that when it does move in another outward moving spiral takes it place one, for example moving away from intersection with its other spiral and no two spirals would be at the same exact point because of the change in x.
The period of stability of any ct state is defined by when and how often these changes occur and they are viewed relative to ct1 as movement.
Perhaps the number would correspond to how many states are required. For example, if 256 in common were required, then until the f series of one reaches 256 (meaning the highest would be 256 changes higher) then a single photon couldn't exist. The way that the formulas work, all of ct1 cannot change to ct2.
This suggests extremely high values of x before any ct4 could form since the lowest would be 10^8, but we don't really see high values of x.
The way that creation of new information is envisioned (as an infinite expanding theory where each new state is built by adding two prior state, that is each quantum universe is built on the two prior quantum universes in this model, each change in x creates massive amounts of space at each transition in addition to everything else, but nevertheless the entire universe has inflection points that lead to the compression of these ct1 states according to an easily (see prior post) calculated "clock" relative to ct1.
Can we slow down a photon? Can we speed it up? There are two ways short of changing the algorithm that are suggested. The opposite models are exchanging each quantum states; one is that at each change in x all 256 photon states change and if you reduce the number that change you effect this change, the other (more likely) is that at each change in x only one of the 256 ct1 states making up a photon change and if two of them change at a time it would either speed up or slow down the photon depending on which change can occur.
Now this is an unnatural methodology and would allow other speeds of the ct states, even matter, to be affected in a similar way. Using ct4, the example would be that 1 of 256 states is light speed for matter (it would effectively have changed to individual photons along a series of inflection points, possibly one immediately following the other, but the numbers are covered a post or two ago from 10^8 (ct4) to 6^4 (ct3 wave energy) to 4^2 (photonic energy) or something like that, and anything less is slowed and this means that speed itself (of course) is a quantum event with just that many steps (per 1.07x10-39th of a second) but what if 2 of 256 were able to change, would that double or at least increase light speed of ct4? Would it force a dissolution of ct4 and could it be reassembled?
The model suggests it is possible. That is the model suggests that exceeding light speed is possible.
The other part of the model allowing greater than light speed movement is nothing more complicated than noting that distance and speed are only relative changes to the ct1 matrix. This means if you ignore the false distance you can plot against ct1 at any point.
This assumes that for ct4, 3 and 2 instead of 1 ct1 changing at a time would be for one for each information state of the photon (1 of 256) changing at a time for a miminal/maximum speed. Because you can only change one at a time, at least as far as the model looks at us, because of how the algorithm is solved light cannot change slower and cannot slow down. For a higher ct3 state (6^4) you still have going down all the way to 1 change per 6^4 which means that wave energy "theoretically" could slow down exponentially relative to photons even though this happens very rarely and is a confusing part of the model. When the ct3 state is associated (electricity being an example) with a ct4 state, you do see changes varying and, of course, ct4 has much slower changes relative to ct1, space.
There is a maximum amount of change, but over the dreadfully long period of a measurable amount of time, speeds can change dramatically.
These numbers only follow quantums over quantum changes. That is the follow a single quantum, less than a quark, of matter over 1.07x10-39th of a second and therefore can only be measured using the math model which, of course, I have figured out, thank you and the awful absurdity of a universe built on irony where the more bad injected into a system, the more resulting benefit is possible.
The model suggests that until you are far enough out on a spiral you cannot reach compression.
looking at 1,1,2 we can say that until you get to 2 you cannot create a photon and that once you move inward on the spiral you would lose the status.
It also suggests that when it does move in another outward moving spiral takes it place one, for example moving away from intersection with its other spiral and no two spirals would be at the same exact point because of the change in x.
The period of stability of any ct state is defined by when and how often these changes occur and they are viewed relative to ct1 as movement.
Perhaps the number would correspond to how many states are required. For example, if 256 in common were required, then until the f series of one reaches 256 (meaning the highest would be 256 changes higher) then a single photon couldn't exist. The way that the formulas work, all of ct1 cannot change to ct2.
This suggests extremely high values of x before any ct4 could form since the lowest would be 10^8, but we don't really see high values of x.
The way that creation of new information is envisioned (as an infinite expanding theory where each new state is built by adding two prior state, that is each quantum universe is built on the two prior quantum universes in this model, each change in x creates massive amounts of space at each transition in addition to everything else, but nevertheless the entire universe has inflection points that lead to the compression of these ct1 states according to an easily (see prior post) calculated "clock" relative to ct1.
Can we slow down a photon? Can we speed it up? There are two ways short of changing the algorithm that are suggested. The opposite models are exchanging each quantum states; one is that at each change in x all 256 photon states change and if you reduce the number that change you effect this change, the other (more likely) is that at each change in x only one of the 256 ct1 states making up a photon change and if two of them change at a time it would either speed up or slow down the photon depending on which change can occur.
Now this is an unnatural methodology and would allow other speeds of the ct states, even matter, to be affected in a similar way. Using ct4, the example would be that 1 of 256 states is light speed for matter (it would effectively have changed to individual photons along a series of inflection points, possibly one immediately following the other, but the numbers are covered a post or two ago from 10^8 (ct4) to 6^4 (ct3 wave energy) to 4^2 (photonic energy) or something like that, and anything less is slowed and this means that speed itself (of course) is a quantum event with just that many steps (per 1.07x10-39th of a second) but what if 2 of 256 were able to change, would that double or at least increase light speed of ct4? Would it force a dissolution of ct4 and could it be reassembled?
The model suggests it is possible. That is the model suggests that exceeding light speed is possible.
The other part of the model allowing greater than light speed movement is nothing more complicated than noting that distance and speed are only relative changes to the ct1 matrix. This means if you ignore the false distance you can plot against ct1 at any point.
This assumes that for ct4, 3 and 2 instead of 1 ct1 changing at a time would be for one for each information state of the photon (1 of 256) changing at a time for a miminal/maximum speed. Because you can only change one at a time, at least as far as the model looks at us, because of how the algorithm is solved light cannot change slower and cannot slow down. For a higher ct3 state (6^4) you still have going down all the way to 1 change per 6^4 which means that wave energy "theoretically" could slow down exponentially relative to photons even though this happens very rarely and is a confusing part of the model. When the ct3 state is associated (electricity being an example) with a ct4 state, you do see changes varying and, of course, ct4 has much slower changes relative to ct1, space.
There is a maximum amount of change, but over the dreadfully long period of a measurable amount of time, speeds can change dramatically.
These numbers only follow quantums over quantum changes. That is the follow a single quantum, less than a quark, of matter over 1.07x10-39th of a second and therefore can only be measured using the math model which, of course, I have figured out, thank you and the awful absurdity of a universe built on irony where the more bad injected into a system, the more resulting benefit is possible.
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
AuT-balance and distractions 11
I have to assemble everything because I'm getting ready to get my first set of edits back.
The lack of support led me to abandon this in favor of the things that bring bread to the table, but as you probably know I've laid out a theory that explains everything, at least up to g-space, explains at least what happens in g-space and leaves very little to the imagination. It's rather hard to believe that the acclaim is not louder, but then who really cares what I believe.
One item came up, however, in connection with the model which is, a slightly unbalanced model, but which fooled everyone before me into thinking it was balanced because of the converging infinite series being so far advanced. There is, however, a flip side and another balancing feature and I am going to address that in today's post while I wait for those edits to come in and make the last push to publish the second edition of spirals in amber (greatly enhanced).
The F-series on which the theory is loosely modeled is a diverging infinite series. All the other elements are converging infinite series. It does, however, appear that converging and diverging series exist and the model suggest, perhaps even demands, that there is a balance (slightly off and converging or diverging) between the converging and diverging infinite series.
That is while each converging or diverging series is infinite, there is one converging element for each diverging element and the "unbalance" between these two sets is either diverging or converging or both converging and diverging.
More on this later too.
Volume II coming soon-the perfect christmas gift for anyone, you know what I want for christmas.
The lack of support led me to abandon this in favor of the things that bring bread to the table, but as you probably know I've laid out a theory that explains everything, at least up to g-space, explains at least what happens in g-space and leaves very little to the imagination. It's rather hard to believe that the acclaim is not louder, but then who really cares what I believe.
One item came up, however, in connection with the model which is, a slightly unbalanced model, but which fooled everyone before me into thinking it was balanced because of the converging infinite series being so far advanced. There is, however, a flip side and another balancing feature and I am going to address that in today's post while I wait for those edits to come in and make the last push to publish the second edition of spirals in amber (greatly enhanced).
The F-series on which the theory is loosely modeled is a diverging infinite series. All the other elements are converging infinite series. It does, however, appear that converging and diverging series exist and the model suggest, perhaps even demands, that there is a balance (slightly off and converging or diverging) between the converging and diverging infinite series.
That is while each converging or diverging series is infinite, there is one converging element for each diverging element and the "unbalance" between these two sets is either diverging or converging or both converging and diverging.
More on this later too.
Volume II coming soon-the perfect christmas gift for anyone, you know what I want for christmas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)