Physics 4

When i was young, shortly after learning how to use a slide rule i bought a calculator which, if you turned it on and off several times would start to count.  That seems to be something the universe does.

A.    Part 4

          There is a specific model for AuT.

          There are two parts to an Algorithm Universe.

          The first we have covered.  A non-dimensional mathematical formula that creates positive and negative solutions that match observed phenomena of expansion and contraction.

          This includes both the grand scale universe of contraction and expansion, but also orbital observations, a vibrational element.

          The second part (and not necessarily the last) has to (1) derive from the first part (fpix), (2) has to provide for building multiple dimensions, (3) has to have a logical basis and (4) has to match observed phenomena.

          We showed how fpix could go to a series of number defined by adding prior solutions.  One model which follows this is the Fibonacci sequence which operates according to the building of solutions based on prior solutions.  Fibonacci numbers therefore meet the first test.

          The building of dimension, the second part of the equation is a little more complicated.   The way that AuT handles this problem is with place.  When we count in base 10 every time we get to 10 we create a new place.  Then 10^2 gets us to the next place,10^3 to a third, and so on.

          The universe is based on information theory which is built into -1^n, the primary building block of ct1 (space) fpix solution and hence instead of 10^x we use a different base, base 2^n. 

          There are multiple ways to combine the Fibonacci series and place, the one that seems to work the best if f(n)^(2^n).  For reasons that are not entirely clear on first blush 2f(n)^2^n works better, getting rid of odd values of f(n) that can create problems.

          This creates a superficially simple count where every time you get to (2f(n)^(2^n) you create a new place.

          It is superficially simple because the fpix underlying solution means that the count is constantly shifting in both direction. 1,2,3,2,3,4,3, for example.

          At low values of n, this effect is more pronounced.

          The place portion of this equation (2^n) creates a series of mathematical ‘arms’ called information arms or compression arms which load up with matching solutions in order to create the transitional states we observe.  In the case of photons, for example, there are 2^2 or 4 information arms.  Using 2(f(n) you get 2^2 for the Fibonacci part raised to the 4^th power which yields 256 (4^4=256) which matches the 256:27 ratio discussed in moving from pi(-1) to pi(1).

          This has now taken us to the logic part, the third requirement for the formula.

          Our universe is an information-based universe with positive and negative states which attract in an attempt return to a neutral state.

          It is important the understand what this “matching of positive and negative fpix solutions” according to this ratio (256:27) means.  It means that we are taking a series of solutions of increasing length and folding them together mathematically to create a first dimension. The information arms mean that there are essentially 4 folds in going from space to photons, four folds in going from a non-dimensional state to a single dimensional state.

          We then repeat the process adding a place as the matched solutions increase, adding another set of folds.  Fortunately for us, the Fibonacci (or F) series allows for    place to be created in this manner. 

How about that 27 in the ratio?   That turns out to be important, as it represents the number of “unmatched” states that can exist within a matched solution. At the ct1(space) to ct2 (photon) state, this is the amount of space that can be trapped in the folds.

          You have correctly surmised that this means that if we look long enough we can see space and photons transition and you are right.  We do observe this, constantly, although until we discuss time, it is useless to try to explain how, so we’ll table that part of the discussion till later. 

          For now, we have developed a logical, new way of counting quantities of f(n) (instead of 1’s) to a count of 2^n to yield place. It takes a while to get used to this, but its just counting where the 1’s place is counting 2’s; f(n) for n=1: the 2’s place is counting 4’s; f(n) for n=2: and so on. For each place, you have to count with a different number.  The place count is basically 2^n instead of 10^n so that isn’t so difficult to conceptualize.  While this may look a little complicated, we’re creating mathematical dimensions based on a memorized base equation fpix.

          The ratios created are the ratio of the next lower place to the next higher place.

          If you’re getting a little lost, take a look at the charts.

          The 4^th leg, the observations, is the next part of the analysis.

          (4) The final phase is matching this formula to observations.  The rest of the discussion of AuT covers this, matching the AuT math formula to observations; but it is wrong to skip this entirely, so let’s look at a sample of how this matches observations.  We have already covered one of these. The matching of observed ratios of curvature to the first dimensional count.

          A second comes from the relative force of gravity to the strong force, but we’ll get to that later and as a matter of proof it has a lot to be desired.

          A third comes at the matter-energy interface (the ct3 (energy) to ct4 (matter) interface).  We all know that e=mc^2 sort of.  This is a scale equation, 1 matter = so much energy.  The scale is 10^16.  Using the 2f(n)^2^n for n=4 you get the proper scale for this transition. 

          A similar scale is observed at the ct4-ct5 interface of 16^32 for black hole minimum observed size although this is a more complicated analysis. You can see this scale of “neutrons” to “minimum size black hole” which assumes the minimum size black hole is between a neutron star weight and the observed minimum size of a black hole.  If you are wondering what happens to the tiny sized black holes that the standard model conceptualizes, the answer is that they simply do not exist, they cannot exist, not even for a fraction of a second.  Does this mean that we only observe black hole phenomena from a distance?  The answer is a surprising no.  It turns out that what we call molecular interaction, that “strong force” referred to previously, is actually the loading of the first arms of black hole (ct5) with matter (ct4) states. That, however, is for a later discussion also.

          Perhaps the most important of the observed phenomena is the co-existence of dimensions and the ramifications of this to the so-called mysteries of the universe like wave particle duality, time dilation, the big bang and other things which the standard model has trouble with.

          We’ve already shown what the constant transitions (due to fpix transitions from positive to negative at staggered rates) destroy the otherwise symmetrical relationships defined by the math formula which explains the imperfect symmetry of the universe.  We’ve also shown what black holes are, suggested the big bang was nothing but a net inflection point of the fpix solutions, although we have not discussed it in detail.  Very soon, we’re going to use this to explain time, duality and dilation.

          Pre-AuT Physics has a problem with approximate symmetry.  The standard model cannot explain why approximate and not perfect symmetry occurs.  

          AuT requires approximate symmetry due to both a vibrational and unbalanced compressing vs decompressing states.  Each quantum point having a slightly different fpix clock ensures that absolute symmetry is impossible.  AuT has a place for the findings of the standard model, but not the standard model itself.  The place is in the transitional states.

          The quantum moments of the universe mean that force and time do not function in the way taught by the standard model, but over values of x, the change in information arms (compression) yields the transitional features viewed by the standard model.

          Our existence, our forces and histories are the "net unwinding" of black holes (ct5).  AuT in an expansion period slowly bleeds ct1 from the more compressed states.

It should be possible to predict how it will absorb ct1 in the reverse direction, indeed we are in a pocket of net absorption, net anti-entropy, but the universe as a whole is entropic.

          The standard model fails the Parmenides test.  The Parmenides test is that the universe cannot be infinitely divisible.

          AuT deals with this with quantum space as information states.

          The view of spiral arms is because as we tear apart compressed space, we are tearing it down from one Fibonacci state to the next and this means it tears in a spiral shape.  The larger the sample, the closer we get to a curved perfect spiral.  For that reason, entire galaxies form statistical models, by and large.  A more balanced galaxy appears more spherical, but as it eventually tears down it will go spiral just as a spiral galaxy in a compression phase should become more spherical.

          Left and right have less to do with aut in symmetry because left and right require more dimensions than aut requires for an analysis.

          To accomplish this, the model has non dimensional and dimensional solutions.  The non-dimensional solutions, -1^x and fpix are below thermodynamics.  The dimensional solutions, 2f(x)^2^x define thermodynamics.

End part 4

If you are impatient Please see the author's Amazon page at: https://www.amazon.com/author/frzmn and the author's Facebook page for more links (only book 3 is fully up to date although books 7 and 8 cover the theory in connection with the standard model) and articles at https://www.facebook.com/frzmn1 or @frzmn1 which include the blog which has 5 years of development of the theory is you feel like slogging through that.
Video overviews can be found on this Youtube Channel: www.youtube.com/channel/UCxK8BwhzafIi1Jd0yE8mQXQ

Physics 4a and symmetry

I almost called you this afternoon.

It was raining

I almost put this into a post

to everyone in the world

I felt low 

I have been sitting here looking at my life, 

refusing to do the obvious work in front of me

the kind that puts bread on the table

I don't know if I am just too tired to do it or if I am legitimately pursuing something better.

The whole writig thing is so easy and so impossible

my heart is not in practicing any longer.

Where is my heart?

nothing is going particularly wrong

I read that all Hawkins wanted was to understand how the universe works so I should be happy.

I am full of misgivings about things

and what business do I have to reach out to you?

I reach out for the delete button and wonder what you would want

This post has to wait, because my mind has been carried away by the rain

But this is how the next post starts

Pre-AuT Physics has a problem with approximate symmetry.  It cannot explain why approximate and not perfect symmetry occurs.
AuT defines a necessarily approximate symmetry due to both a vibrational and compressing vs decompressing states.
It also slowly bleeds (currently) ct1 from the more compressed states.
It should be possible to predict how it will bleed in the reverse direction.
I wrote a post on the Parmenides test.
The Parmenides test is that  the universe cannot be infinitely divisible.
AuT deals with this with quantum space.
Left and right have less to do with aut in symmetry  because left and right require more dimensions than aut requires for an analysis.

Physics 3

A.    Part 3

The specific model is examined along with where we see the model working.

It would be possible to say, here is the formula, take it.

It is better to suggest a route to the formula.

The most important test of any theory is the Parmenides Test which was put forward by Parmenides via the Greek Muse.  AuT, in a prior form was, at the time, attempting to address this issue by pointing out that the infinite definition of pi, where the solution to the number of points for the denominator was infinite, was inherently illogical.  In case you think there is some ulterior motive for the dedications, it could be this contribution.  The standard model does not even attempt, in its most general form, to address the Parmenides test.  If you review the books, AuT solves the Zeno Paradox and if those cannot be answered by a theory, then it may be discounted.

There are many places where the model works according to scale because the formula was developed according to an observed scale:

E=mc^2 is one

Black hole compression is another, a little vague.

The Compression Count back and forward is another.

A more complex support for the model is the math surrounding the transition from ct-1 to ct1 and the transition from fpix to the specific model.

Since this is a lot to take in, it will be done in two posts.

This post examines one potential transition from fpix to the specific model.

This post also looks at the ct-1 to ct1 transition to find evidence of the scale.

After this post, I will put up the specific model and discuss how it applies to the mass energy equations and black holes.

A very important undertaking is arriving at a mechanism to get From -1^x to f(x)

This shows one solution where the difference in values can result from the addition of two prior values to get a current value.  In column 2 it is equal to column 2+abs(col 30 for example.

Ct-1 to ct1

This shows the breakdown of pi and pi for various dimensions:

This merely shows the first result for pi-1 (-1^x) and pi for 1 (-1^x) for x=1 and 2 respectively

Pi for -1 and 1 (for one place, not as a series, although series ratio is same)

Y=256/27 or 256:27

N=1

The purpose of this exercise is to force sin(y) for pi(-1) to be equal to sin(y) for pi1 to be equal to -1*-1.

When this theory was developed, it was put together with the formula first.  All the attempts at coming up with a justification for the observed formula, i.e. a formula that fit the observations, came from an analysis of the math to determine features of the formula and to explain other observed features.

The argument of the theory is that the universe generally works the way we need it to because the "net" sequential changes are small in large regions between the two vibrational options. The universe does not have an even vibration, but it does have an approximately stable vibration.

When we step back and look at the larger effects over time, as by examining a spiral galaxy, we see the universe pulling the knotted ball apart and the galaxies reflect that by coming apart as spirals.

We look at the less extensive changes, we see relatively stable orbits and when we drill down to the molecular, we see even more stable states, but overall there is currently a net unwinding which will last for 7 billion years or so.

When the net reverses, it will not be unlike what we see at present locally, only more so, some changes like a ct6 state may largely be invisible to us except as a large gravitational effect.

If you are impatient Please see the author's Amazon page at: https://www.amazon.com/author/frzmn and the author's Facebook page for more links (only book 3 is fully up to date although books 7 and 8 cover the theory in connection with the standard model) and articles at https://www.facebook.com/frzmn1 or @frzmn1 which include the blog which has 5 years of development of the theory is you feel like slogging through that.
Video overviews can be found on this Youtube Channel: www.youtube.com/channel/UCxK8BwhzafIi1Jd0yE8mQXQ

End Part 3

When this theory was developed, it was put together with the formula first.  All the attempts at coming up with a justification for the observed formula, i.e. a formula that fit the observations, came from an analysis of the math to determine features of the formula.
The universe generally works the way we need it to because the "net" sequential changes are small in large regions between the two vibrational options. The universe does not have an even vibration, but it does have an approximate vibration.
When we step back and look at the larger effects over time, as by examining a spiral galaxy, we see the universe pulling the knotted ball apart and the galaxies reflect that by coming apart as spirals.
We we look at the less extensive changes, we see relatively stable orbits and when we drill down to the molecular, we see even more stable states, but overall there is currently a net unwinding which will last for 7 billion years or so.
When the net reverses, it will not be unlike what we see at present locally, only more so, some changes like a ct6 state may largely be invisible to us except as a large gravitational effect.

post 2 physics

Ah Saturday morning.  Well, things seem to be coming to head here. With a little luck (good or bad) I will probably be homeless in the near future, but we'll have to wait and see how that pans out.  That is one of those things that goes back and forth and I suppose that probably involves good and bad as do most things, tending ultimately towards death.
I did a lot of "work" yesterday in terrible heat, but I got no exercise.  Today will probably be much of the same.  You may wonder how big a deal it is to me not to get exercise one day or another.  I wonder too.  I just know I'm a little jittery about things; exercise helps.

I have a series of posts on symmetry that I have not gotten to and I need to stay plugged in to finishing Nostradamus where I'm crawling past the mid point.  I should be further along, but I decided to to series as part of rewrite of book 4 along with the symmetry part and it takes some time and I'm having some second thoughts about some of the conclusions reached.

I am posting it to the physics discussion group, but not getting a lot of discussion which makes me thing the page is broke.

Another wrinkle is introduced in this post which is that the universe exists as a series of "quantum snapshots" so everything happens at once. Einstein famously said "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once." which was one of the foundations for this theory 5 years ago. It turns out that "everything happens at once" is different from "all histories happen together." It also turns out that because time doesn't really exist the way we thought it did, that everything does happen at once. Sort of. All histories do not happen together, even without time.

Post 2

There were a few issues left open in the last post.

What was argued, without a lot of support, in the last post was that space turns into photons (and vice versa), photons into waves, waves into matter (e=mc^2) and matter into black holes (observed).  This allows us to identify what gravity is, the big bang, why pi is what it is and some other things.

We left a few things unanswered:

1)     Seeing the conversion of space to matter (and back) -not covered here

2)     The closely related “why do we move in curves”-not covered here

3)     Gravity as folding (compressing)-partially covered here

4)     Exactly what is time.-not covered here

5)     What is wave particle duality?-not covered here

6)     The  specific method of compressing/folding to go from one state to the next

7)     The range of forces, we’ll get to this next too

So many holes, but we’re just getting started and all these will be filled.

There are equations and details in those videos and books, the purpose of this series of posts is not to provide mathematical proofs, but is instead to have a “physics discussion.”

In the last post, I made the statement that space and matter were the same thing.  This post I’ll say that every change happens at once.  This is not the same as saying that everything happens at the same time which sounds inconsistent, but we’ll get to time in due course.  For now, it is outrageous enough (and correct) to say that the universe exists as a series of quantum snapshots and all of our observations must logically support that (or at least not rebut it).  By the way, we know that there are 10^44 of these snapshots per second. I say “we” because this comes from a Planck analysis of time. 

A few details are required.

This is a discussion, not a lecture.  Some issues are worked out to my satisfaction, some are not. The big picture is clear, the little nuances not so much.

Here are the clues worked out in the last post, logic and gravity.

1)     Logic dictates that gravity must be derived differently from other "forces"

2)     Gravity moves towards a compressed state, antigravity to an uncompressed state as shown by our localized net gravity and the net dark energy of the universe as a whole.

3)     The pi equation suggests that there are 4 states and with photons, waves, and mass, we’re left with space as the only observed 4^th state;  and, of course, black holes as the 5th state on the other extreme with each state adding a dimension after the first one.

4)     The pi denominator gives an alternatively expanding and contracting model (fpix) driven by the compression or release of space and the net compression vs decompression of the higher states.

5)     The pi equation also suggests a non-steady state universe, one where the total amount of information increases constantly.

It’s time for the second clue.  There are so many to pick from, but we’ll use force, although in a little while we’re going to tear force apart along with time.

We’re also going to limit ourselves to 4 forces.  We have to rearrange them a little for this discussion:

1)                Strong force: strength 1 range 10^-15. According to AuT this results from compressing or decompressing what we’ll call ct4 into what we’ll call ct5 states which bind the nucleus together.  I use ct4 instead of mass and ct5 instead of black holes because ct4 includes some transitional states, electrons and protons, as well as non-transitional neutrons.  Ct5 include transitional black hole states which we call molecular states.

2) Weak: 10^-6 Range 10^-18.  According to AuT this results from compressing or decompressing wave energy into mass. 

3) Electro-mag 1/137 range infinite (AuT-compressed ct2 ( to a transitional photon or photon to wave)

4) Gravity 6x10^-39th range infinite (This results from space transitioning to photons or ct1 to ct2)

So where is our clue? 

          Range is a pretty big clue.  We talk about Gravity and E-M as having infinite range so we need to deal with both of these together.  The limited ranges also have to be dealt with.  Finally, there is the quality of the force, which is not so easy to deal with.

          AuT suggests that the ranges of gravity and EM are based on different features.

          Compression through folding comes (1) from space (ct1) to photons (ct2), (2) from photons to waves (ct3), (3) from waves to matter (ct4) and (4) matter to black holes (ct5).

          We also established the proposition that space has no dimension.  Since we are dealing with something with zero dimension, having an infinite range is pretty easy, ipso facto, a clue to space (a) having no dimension and (b) folding to create photons and gravity and (c) gravity having an infinite range.  The “loading” or “unloading” of the folds to increase compression is where force comes from.  Compression or folded space into photons created gravity.

          If you study physics you want to say that transitional photons create EM, and that is possible, but if you accept that you have problems with where gravity comes from.  There is another place to generate gravity and that is from the transition from -1^n to fpix.  This would leave a non-dimensional element (fpix to photons) to give EM its range. 

          However, for several reasons (e.g. the numerator of pi and wave particle duality), I will keep EM as photons loading into waves and the only way to give this infinite reach is by concluding that (1) its transitions with space are close enough to give it that reach or (2) it operates in a single dimension gives it a greater reach.  There are other reasons that have to do with time, for example, the transitions between photons and waves happen independent of time, but we haven’t gotten to time yet so we’ll table this for now.

          That leaves the question of why the range for the remaining two forces are so short and that is answered, because they are (1) folding of waves to matter (a short range process, limited to the range between electrons and protons) and folding matter to black holes (also a short range process between neutrons and other nuclear element).

There was a recent article where they suggested that the “pressure” in a neutron star was lower than the pressure in the neutron itself.  This last paragraph speaks to that.  A neutron is a fully compressed ct4 state.  A neutron state is an almost fully compressed ct5 (black hole) state, ipso factor, the pressure is lower.  Put another way, a neutron star is to ct5 as a proton-electron pair is to a neutron (or ct4). 

We will get to the reason for these transitional states in the next post.

Now for those of you who are paying attention, you are saying, whoa cowboy, we experience the strong force and we are not in a black hole.  And there, of course, you are wrong, because we have our toe dipped into a black hole.  The short version is that molecular interactions above the electron/proton/neutron) are all features of the transition from matter to black holes.

You’ll note there is nothing here about beta decay or bosons or mesons, but I mentioned before this did not follow the standard model and it will not.  If you want to see a little of why the standard model isn’t followed by this model you can look at books 7 and 8.

Here are parts of this discussion worth considering:

1) Quantum instances (the universe in individual snapshots) and infinite reach of forces suggest that we have to have regional "net" forces; because each one pairs with nearby opposite results; much like folding/compression occurs.

2) Its worth a passing mention, that positive and negative feature likely result from the net value of trapped states since the only "charge" in this system comes from the denominator of pi.

3) Compression, folding and loading are ways of talking about the transitions from ct1 to ct5 and while "knotting" up of the string of solutions is the result; the process is just having all the solutions together at any quantum instant.

4) Force cannot be force as we observe it because there is no time element in a snapshot.

5) A lot going on for such a simple formula for fpix (folding, positive and negative switching, net values)  and these differences, especially charge changing in a time free, dimension free environment (trapping as net charge) helps explain why EM extends as far as gravity.

If you are impatient Please see the author's Amazon page at: https://www.amazon.com/author/frzmn and the author's Facebook page for more links (only book 3 is fully up to date although books 7 and 8 cover the theory in connection with the standard model) and articles at https://www.facebook.com/frzmn1 or @frzmn1 which include the blog which has 5 years of development of the theory is you feel like slogging through that.
Video overviews can be found on this Youtube Channel: www.youtube.com/channel/UCxK8BwhzafIi1Jd0yE8mQXQ

The videos are surprisingly up to date, the one on compression deals with how the folding occurs in detail.

End of part 2

Post 1. Physics

2500 yards yesterday, all you can comfortably do now that May is the hottest on record.

I'm doing a series on the physics facebook page "discussion".  I haven't gotten onto physics world (and haven't even tried physics group yet) approval, but I'm pursuing it as if I will.

While I have other posts on symmetry that need to go up, I thought I'd share with you these posts for your comment.

I have more to say, but I am also running behind on everything.  I really need to be speaking in person.  No one is stopping me, right? 

Anyway, you don't care about any of that.

Part 1:

          I would like to attack time first, but it is necessary to accurately define dimension in order to deal with time.  I am offering this as part of a “discussion of physics,” not dogma, so feel free to take this lightly, or ignore it all together.  It will be true or false whatever I write and whatever you read.  The videos are a couple of hours long altogether and Rome wasn’t built in a day, so be patient with me if you decide to participate in the discussion.

          Let me start with something that is so intuitive that few believe it.

          Space and matter are the same thing.  If you do not already believe this, I hope to prove it to your satisfaction. 

We “see” the conversion from space to matter via the intermediary states every day, and this ties in to the wave particle duality; and can be used to show what the big bang is, and what it is not.

First, we need to talk about the several individual dimensions that coexist and make up the universe.  Space exists with no dimension.  Photons exist with only one regardless of whether we experience 3 dimensions or not.   Black holes exist in 4 dimensions.  Where does that leave us?  Waves exist in two dimension and matter in 3.  I save this last sentence for last, because this is NOT inconsistent with the standard model.  The standard model recognizes that waves act as if they only exist in two dimensions and well it should!

Time, well time has nothing directly to do with dimension which I will discuss in a subsequent post when I will attempt to show to your satisfaction exactly what time is via a discussion of time dilation (gravitational and velocity).

          Eliminating the old view of time will clear up a lot of things, but first we need a new view of dimension.  There is, as evidenced by gravity, a linear and non-linear component to dimension.  This distinction is the source of the distinction between gravity/antigravity and the other forces.  Gravity and anti-gravity (darkenergy) are the results of dimension coming into existence and vanishing at this level.

          Let’s go back to the beginning in terms of mathematics.

          Why is pi?  We know what is pi, well, we will in a minute, but why pi? 

          Fpix (the denominator of pi) is defined by this equation: ([-1^x plus 2x(-1)^x-1]) as x varies from 1 to infinity.  You’ll see a lot of this equation.  The differentiation in points (the universe exists as an ever-expanding number of these points) is because of the count. -1,1,-3,5,-7,9.  The -1 is a special case for another day.  This means that in 3 changes in x; the -3 changes to 5, after 5 pulses the 5 changes to -7 and so on.  It is likely that at each change in x another -3 is generated again.  The effect is to generate net changes between positive and negative over progressively longer numbers of x changes, it’s a lot like a growing sin wave with inflection points, this is important.  The highest values of fpix at the present state of the universe are on the scale of 10^100 and since there are 10^44 changes in x for every second (at least if you have any seconds) the half-lives of some of these fpix solutions exceed the period of expansion and contraction and re-expansion of the universe (60 billion years and change at this stage of the universe, this is constantly changing as new -3 results are generated).  Some of the -3 results change so quickly, 3/10^44^th of a second, that they serve little purpose in considering seconds, but these are at the edges of the universe, so they don’t matter so much to us.

          You may have recently read that at the “center” of the universe there are a bunch of black holes.  This 10^100 transition rate is the reason, those black holes are changing state really, really slow.  We are in the middle area of the universe, rate change wise.

          The really slow, really fast and middle speed changes are all bunched up.  How and why?  The universe starts with this non-dimensional “string” of solutions separated by solution order.  When it folds (and it really folds a lot, the scale is of the magnitude of 10^60) it traps a lot of free space.  It also traps photons, waves and matter.  When it unfolds, all these states are knotted up and they pull the knots as they go from 4 dimensions down toward 0 dimensions and this pulling is what you call velocity. The rate change of this pulling (and pushing as it rewinds) is acceleration.  Do you see it yet?  Why does everything orbit in a curve?  We’ll get to that.

The numerator of pi is usually given as 4 but it isn’t always 4.  Indeed, it likely exists as -1, but it certainly exists as 1,2,3 and 5 in addition to 4 and you probably guessed this is the case.  Right now, it exists as all these numbers.  It also represents “place” in a special series, but we will get to that in another post.

          There are probably 27,000 physicists working on particle accelerators alone and if this theory is accepted, they are largely wasting their time.  That’s a big pill to swallow and I don’t expect you to swallow it.  This is a theory; and, among physicists, theories are like gallbladders, most of us had one at some point in time.

          For the moment, all I want you to consider is the possibility that the derivation of pi is based on some underlying logic and that the values of pi; fpix for the denominator and 4 for the numerator arise from some logical underlying feature and ask yourself, “what is that feature, if not the number of dimensions of each of the states making up the universe?”

          Now you want to insist you are moving through space in 3 dimensions and you are right, sort of. 

Movement in 3 dimensions through a non-dimensional space is possible because space is the same thing as matter.  Let’s move back a few dimensions.  If you fold space just right, by matching those positive and negative solutions of fpix, space folds into one dimensional photons, just like energy folds into matter.  You also trap some unfolded space into the folds of photons, but we’ll get to that later.

If you fold photons, obviously you get two dimensional waves.  If you fold waves just right, yes you have it, you get matter, actually neutrons, because protons and electrons are partially folded waves.  We’ll get really specific as to how that folding happens, by the by.

However, no matter how much you fold it, space remains without dimension, photons exist with only one, waves with two, and so on and you also go from one numerator of pi to the next, but it’s always 1 for space, 2 for photons, 3 for waves, 4 for neutrons and 5 for black holes.

Since space is trapped in these folds, you can see that as you compress space, things tighten up and space expands because you release the trapped non-dimensional space from these folds.  Because the first fold is from non-dimensional space to dimensional photons, you generate gravity when you fold and anti-gravity (dark energy) when you unfold.   Why?  Because the definition of gravity is pulling towards the folding and anti-gravity is unfolding. 

What is the big bang?  It is the point where the net folding for the whole universe is outweighed by the net unfolding at an inflection point.  In 7 billion years, give or take, we’ll have a net anti-big bang.

You are not convinced yet, but we are just getting started.

If you are impatient Please see the author's Amazon page at: https://www.amazon.com/author/frzmn and the author's Facebook page for more links (only book 3 is fully up to date although books 7 and 8 cover the theory in connection with the standard model) and articles at https://www.facebook.com/frzmn1 or @frzmn1 which include the blog which has 5 years of development of the theory is you feel like slogging through that.
Video overviews can be found on this Youtube Channel: www.youtube.com/channel/UCxK8BwhzafIi1Jd0yE8mQXQ

The videos are surprisingly up to date, the one on  compression deals with how the folding occurs in detail.

End of post 1.

symmetry 3: lifespans

I swam 2500 yards after an emotional day.
I suffered some disappointment today, but the marketing thing started and I was forced to confront my arrogance.  The two were unrelated, although there was some connection in time and event.
And then I was forced to confront my love and realize how little strands of contact can be strong and how much they can mean to me.  I clung to the one today to a silly extent.
And I wondered, having figured out how the universe worked but uncertain as to the efficacy of the marketing (low expections, but my view of what was done made me realize I was probably only getting what I paid for), what reward there was.  I suppose if there is one, I will eventually see it.  Perhaps that is what death is for me.  Not exactly what I'm looking for.  Or perhaps I will live forever, the only fate worse than death, again perhaps.
In the interest of explaining the disappointment it was the reach of what was done, although that is the lesser undertaking.
Tomorrow, the work begins again on the audio book which is an important step.  I am engaged in the "work" of being a writer of both physics and other stuff.

AuT redefines energy as something that happens to change the compression state of things in one direction or the other, the loading or unloading of information arms in the old vernacular.
It also, as I am fond of saying, composed of two equations, one non linear in effect and the other linear.
Early on NLT referred to this generally.
This says a lot to average solutions and wh things are like they look, why there are "one dimensional and rotational vectors." when we have all these different dimensions.  This is possible because lifespans are so long, states are very durable.

One can imagine, at the midrange of the universe, the length of common solutions.
This is a complex discussion because we have to use time for it to make sense.  Time is the historical perspective at the ct3-ct4 level that allows us to view the non-dimensional, time free changes of x.  There is interconvertibility of dimension, the more fundamental solution, with changes in x which in turn can be interpreted as changes in time.
The calculations for this are presented below for those of you who like to look at spreadsheets and who wish to see how these numbers are discerned.

Let us look at this in terms of 13 billion years, or 1.3 x 10^10 years or 4.1x10^16 seconds
In each one of these seconds there are, by some planck analysis, 5.4x10^44 changes per second.
One can look at this and discern a couple of things. (a) things change pretty quickly and (b) in terms of scale the rate of change is much higher than the amount of time that has gone by.
There is another scale, however, and this is the "midrange" of fpix values.
Perspective suggests that There are a minimum of 7.3x10^64 points in the universe ignoring prior big bangs, perhaps 3.2x10^100 points total.  Twice this number would be the maximum length of fpix for the longest lived point, so this number represents the average lifespan of a point in terms of x.
If one were to divide this max by the number of changes in a second, then this shows that the average lifespan on a point in the universe is 1.78x10^56 seconds which suggests that the average lifespan of fpix state is 10^40 times longer than the lifespan of the entire universe (so far during this expansion cycle).
Conceptually, these offsetting scales (long lifespan vs 10^44 changes per second) is the reason we don't see things flying apart.

Information	2*f(n)	2^n	2f(n)^2n			f(n)
N			max changes per quanum instant
1	2	2	4		2*1	0+1
2	4	4	256		2*2	1+1	velocity
3	6	8	1679616		2*3	1+2	Time
4	10	16	1E+16		2*5	2+3	ct4 time
5	16	32	3.4028E+38		2*8	3+5	ct5 time
			3.4028E+38				ratio of prior state to current state=maximum time
changes/quantum inst ct4			1.6796E+22	at ct4	3*4	4.29982E+24	3*4*2
changes/quantum inst ct5			5.7154E+60	at ct5	3*4*5	1.46315E+63	3*4*5*2
			1.62x10^-35	plank lenth			16
lightspeed	c=2.99792458x10^11k/sec			e=mc^2
	299792458	m/s		(e/m)=c^2
	1.62E-35	Planck length in meters		1.62	1E-35
	At lightspeed there are		1.6796E+22	changes per quantum moment
	For a distance	1.62E-35	there are	1.6796E+22	changes at light speed/quantum length
	At lightspeed	299792458	m/s there are	1.0368E+57	changes per meter
	A quantum instant is		3.4584E+48	changes per second at ct4 at lightspeed
	If a quantum moment is 5.40374x10^-44th of a second (betw ct2 and ct4)
		Then the maximum ct4 changes are:
		1.67962E+22	per	5.4037E-44	of a second at lightspeed
	5.40374E-44	in A Planck length, the portion of a second
Changing value of 1 radian
540			60
67.5			-20
			12			5
540	67.5*8		52
			51.9230769		52/15 *180
		15.57692308				difference from 67.5
		105	420
		35	-140
		21	84			7
		15	-60
			304		105/304
			0.34539474
			62.1710526		180
		5.328947368				difference from 67.5
			age of universe			9
365	days/year		1.3E+10
24	hours/day
360	seconds/hr
3153600	seconds/year		4.0997E+16
13,400,000,000	years
3.45839E+48	changes/sec
1.46146E+65	pts
20bln
1
20,000,000,000				1.62E+35
20,000,000,001				8.8E+26
10000000001	avg years			1.4256E+62
7.30728E+64	1/2 pts
7.30728E+74	1/2 pts time avg universe			0.67	% through decompression
				3.4028E+38	full compression (ct5)
				2.2685E+38	current compression
				3.234E+100

I am right at the halfway point in the edits of Nostradamus and I will republish that this month if all goes well although it may yet have another rewrite, but there's no reason to have that very, very rough draft out there any longer.
I remain both generally optimistic and catestrophically nervous about things.