BDTH 5 of 10

The real question we all face is how to live our lives.
I have been working hard to reorganize my life.
I think that is more difficult than solving the secrets of the universe.
I have solved the riddle of the universe, I am struggling with my life.

I have weighed in under 175 for two days in a row.  Whohoo.  I am a machine.

Appeal

          I would like to appeal your decision in light of the presentation at the APS seminar in Denver hosted by Kevin Dusling. 

          Additional detail appears in the print copy attached.

Forward to the Argument

I submitted an easily examined and reproducible model which defines the universe in a predictive model with applications to force, mass, energy and observed structures (including a new view of fundamental particles, atoms, the periodic table, molecules, and black holes).  It defines gravity, how it arises and how it relates to other forces and how they arise sequentially. 

The forward is 3 pages, the actual argument is 4 pages; but the footnotes which provides support for the argument is 14 pages. 

The model explains the three iterated functions that lead to the common "fractal" origins highlighted by similarities of Neutrons and black holes; explaining how Neutrons secure the atom in the same way that black holes secures the galaxy. The neutron functions one-base state, one fractal smaller, than the black hole.  

The model explains how the lesser effects of time in the lower base state of the atom cause it to appear to change faster (move faster) than the surrounding galaxy.  Rather than drone on about this, I only ask that you look at the chart below consider the simple equation from which the chart is built as proof that the compression iterated function, fractal model is compelling.

I submit proofs of the following: 1) the significance of the advance, and 2) the soundness of the science, 3) the importance of the advance.  The importance is simple, the model supplements any other model and it describes the universe below the level of time, energy and matter and shows how those dimensional features arise. 4) The accessibility to readers is also clear since it is a very simple model and 5) lastly, it must have reproducibility and since the equations are simple, they are easily applied to existing observations and the results are given below in the single chart which is the focus of this appeal..

Before I get into this in detail let me give my personal impression.  I have watched presentations of a number of similar papers.  I get it.  Non-mainstream thinking tends to be theoretical and not practical.  This is not theoretical; this is a specific math model.  Specific mathematical results are given which support the model based on observed results.

This is a long model, complex in application.  The audio book covering the model is 7 hours long and only a summary.  Proving the entire theory is not necessary, however.  The single chart with only the most basic equations is so predictive of all dimensional structures including force and time, that it is compelling evidence of the validity of the model.  Rather than defending the entire paper, this appeal will focus primarily only the evidence within the chart.  Footnotes are included in the print copy attached to provide more detail.

You may have looked at this paper and observed it was too simple, especially since it was submitted by someone who is not associated with a major university, and summarily ruled on it. That is fair, but the appeal is to ask that you look at the results and see that this merits publication because it is predictive.  Radical, but predictive.

Gravity and its place in the force hierarchy is given. The forces that turn out to be less predictive are the weak and electromagnetic and they can be explained in terms of how they arise from the combination of two-dimensional states.

The article is 12 pages long, but one of the two primary features defines compression, force, mass and dimension.  They are all defined by three iterated equations and can be summarized in a single chart and based on the single equation made of two iterated functions (2f(n)^2^n).  If you can find fault in the results then perhaps there is a problem with the chart.  If, on the other hand, the chart properly reflects observed resulting mass (neutron and black hole primarily), force, range and type of force (which it does) by applying the equation above; then the appeal should be upheld, in my opinion.

The second feature presented in this appeal, separating time from change, is specific in terms of how it is derived, but there is no single equation, although time is derived from the same iterated functions and the same resulting ratios, being a net result of dimensional states folding and unfolding.  This result is also clear and reproducible when applied to existing equations such as the Schrodinger equations for wave derivation or the equations for velocity and gravitational time dilation. 

It is worth noting that this time concept is supported by work published after my initial publications.   Phys.org: The discrete-time physics hiding inside our continuous-time world. https://phys.org/news/2019-04-discrete-time-physics-continuous-time-world.html.  The phys.org article appeared many months after I first published the conceptual separation of time from change in September of 2018.  Links to my original articles can be found at www.gmfpc.com.

Finally, before getting to the summary argument, I want to provide links to two video articles, one a 12-minute discussion of the theory and the second a longer slide presentation with audio for the first 8 slides.  I would suggest you will watch at least the first, shorter of these two so you will have an overview of the theory.

The Denver 12-minute video: https://youtu.be/yczljGjPDYE

USA PowerPoint link: https://youtu.be/EjVR26KtAgo

BDTH 4 of 10

I may never hit 10 of 10. I just randomly stuck a number in there.

I could not make myself go to the gym yesterday, even though it should have been a stair and weight day.   I weighed in at 176 this morning, something which affects me very little since I am now transitioning between one pound over and 1 pound under my target weight which is good enough, I would argue.
  I feel like I did some real damage to my calves in my last swim, but I swam another 'freezing' (70-72 degree) 45 minute, 2000 yards and while I had to be careful about the 'charlie horses' I finished in good form and then warmed like a turtle in the sun which was pleasant.  The very cold water I think is good for me and surprising I do not experience the same level of shock as I do in the warmer pool although I have some trouble breathing at first and never get warm, at least not till I am out of the pool sunning.  It is very pleasant.

I have decided to include an attachment with more detail to the appeal.  Basically the appear, but with additioanl details like this:

What each force is in terms of effect as shown by compression tables (see the chart and especially the video version with the arrows which I will include in the attachment.
Each is a result of a specific compression/decompression state except electromag which is a combination of the ct2-3 state withing a ct4-5 matrix as it were.
How relative fractal speeds (ct3 compared to ct4, ct4t12 vs ct4t16, etc) reflect the lesser effects of time on lower ct states.

The ratio in terms of scale of all the forces work out perfectly.  But to understand how this works, you have to forget about force being a driver and instead see force for what it is below the level of thermodynamics, an effect.  This means that what forces have been attributed to before is slightly different than what force actually is.  Saying things like "the weak force holds together.." is inaccurate when in fact the weak force reflects the transition from one fractal state to the next as is shown in this chart.

and more specifically in slide 5 in the Denver slide show which is getting a lot of attention

The Denver 12-minute video: https://youtu.be/yczljGjPDYE

as well it should.

burning down the house 3 of 10

Two thousand yards including 1,000 im in a cold outdoor pool.
I have rewritten the top section already.
Also there will be foonotes, some of which may go into the documents, some which may go into a print copy of the argument that is attached.

Here are some notes on this which will be steadily added to:

The e=mc^2 can be seen explosively as releasing ct3-4 transitional states upon achieving ct4 isolation surrounded by ct1 primarily thereby creating the next dimension.

No other model is so clear in tying gravity to other forces and explaining the source of all forces from a common origin.

One feature of the model which is interesting is how it goes towards explaining why the universe is not filled with light and by the same logic why it is not filled with gravity.  If light existed for all of time, if gravity did, then it would eventually fill the universe.  Both have a lifespan, however long, tied to fpix compression and decompression due to changing values.

The only place where we certainly see hinge states is at the -1 to 1 transition, perhaps we would see that with -2 and 2 also.  I have not looked for that yet and if I found it I do not know what it would say about fractals but the AuT man trademark suggests it could be part of this transition.

So where are we at the second part. 

The combination of the charts is also described in slide 5 in the short Denver video or in the long article.

The simplicity of the underlying model is the application of two iterated functions: 2f(n) and 2^n

When combined, it can be seen from the chart above that both the relative mass, force strength and range are defined by the model with such specificity as to demand further investigation.

Force, energy and other dimensional features result from the folding or unfolding of space in the form of information arm folding where the base increases by 2f(n) and the number of folds by 2^n to get increased compression (ct) states.  The resulting mass of all sub-atomic and post atomic particles and forces correspond perfectly to these equations.   This chart appears complex, but it merely shows that forces, relative strength and observed range of forces follow the theoretical results of the model for loading and unloading of compression arms with the next lower compression state. It shows the narrow range of time explaining the otherwise unusual results of pre-time information arm changes in compression. The most telling proofs are that all of the forces except for electromagnetism line up with compression results, it describes gravity with specificity and the scale of the e=mc^2 equation is reflected by 2f(n)^2^n for n=4 as expected.

a.       Separation of Time and Change

            The results of the first example and table are enough to carry the paper; but there is an important secondary result. Change is quantum (1,2,3, etc) and is unrelated to time even though time arises because of quantum change. Every point changes at exactly the same rate and with each change in the same x, but fused quantum information changes based on the fpix number for the point in question separate them and folding puts remote solution points in proximity.

            This is superficially covered by slides 4 and 6 in the short Denver slide show and in the appealed article in more detail.

            Time is not a dimension but is an effect of dimensional change, ct1 changes within the matrix of a ct3-4 transition state (between the photon and the neutron).

            This requires a more nuanced view of how the conclusion explains otherwise complex phenomena:

            Phenomena 1: Time dilation: results from the number of these changes that can occur within a ct3-4 regional matrix compared to ct1 changes outside the matrix.  Gravitational time dilation reflects that an increase in gravity squeezes those lower ct changes out and the less compressed information states become more compressed.

            Phenomena 2 and 3: Waves (2) and Schrodinger type observations (3) arise from pre-time changes viewed from the standpoint of time. 

            Pre-time changes are net changes.

            Wave:  A wave results from a point photon being rotated for many changes in x when viewed from the standpoint of time just as a wave form is generated by rotating a circle against the movement of a sheet of paper.  When the pre-time changes in x are viewed from the standpoint of time, the point appears to exist over all the points of the wave.

            Therefore, a point photon for any value of x is still a point. In a dual slit experiment, one of two things occur (a) The pre-time structure of waves are collapsed by observation or (b) the pretime rotation is stopped by observation.  Hence, an otherwise mysterious wave-particle duality is easily defined by having pre-time and post time results for change.

            Schrodinger type results: For any value of x, Schrodinger’s cat is only at one place, but once time is applied, the cat appears to occupy many locations.

III.             important: A new predictive model of the universe is important

IV.            accessible to readers: The videos as well as the article are complete

V.               must have reproducibility and verify what is done-The math is both clear, complete and easily applied to existing observations of force for confirmation, even with a hand calculator.

It is worth adding that the Fractals depend on the Fibonacci base number for their design and folding results in even building of dimension on odd exponent rotational structures.  Hence galaxies, shells and Vitruvian man reflect the universe tearing apart and coming together along compression lines in response to the net compression vs decompression of space.   Time like the other forces arises as a result and not a cause of the changing dimensional results of basic math equations regionally and for the universe as a whole. Curvature and Fibonacci features result from fpix solutions and Fibonacci folding and unfolding.

burning down the metaphorical house 2

It is Saturday morning.
Yesterday I had a nice stair and weight workout, in the sense that I only did two sets and even these had slight reductions from my maximum lift.  That being said, consiistent with my recent live applications on mountains, the stair workout was challenging and not held back.
Very soon I will be able to transition to the outdoor pool which is largely cleaned out post storm and merely waits for the combination of ambient temperature and water temperature to reach a level where I will not have a heart attack when I dive in, something I may attempt this week or next.  Today is unlikely, but it is early yet to make that decision.

I have skipped days of exercise, but I am mainly on track, particularly if I swim today and get in at least 2000 yards, something that is far from certain.

I saw where VICE "read" the muller report over an 11 hour video which I consider an interesting public service.  I think it is very well produced, at least in first few minutes I have watched.  Will I watch all 11.55 hours?  Do not expect it, although I plan to skip ahead and see how that goes.  Having produced a 7 hour audio book over a great deal of time, only about half of which I personally produced, I understand the complexity of this undertaking and wonder if the same reader will cover the entire reading.

This set of posts is largely repetitive, so you can read or ignore them or wait for the last one in the series.  As is obvious, this is a response to a narrow, small minded rejection of my work.
This sounds bitter, but it is merely factual.  The mind rebels against the idea that the universe can be defined by such a simple equation, but it is more complicated than e=mc^2 and it gives rise to that slightly less simple equation and the underlying structural component of fpix allows for a sufficiently complex application that it makes sense.
Moreover, the curvature equation yielding as it does both the hinge and non-hinge solutions at least moving from -1 to 1 and from fpix to the first true base fractals (n=2 in the equation) means that the universe that causes me to type and you to read is adequately provided for with very high values of x.

Indeed, there is sufficient mystery in the makeup of quantum points governed by fpix, the exact rules of fractal buliding and destruction (limit equations) and the pre-space environment which yields both the count and the quantum elements of space that there is plenty of room for future inquiries, all of which will be built on my genius, not that i am a genius, but the model is effectively a work of genius under the definition of a quantum leap forward.
If only those judging me were able to set their prejudices aside for their own true intelligence which is part of what prevented them from making these conclusions which would otherwise have been easier for them to determine as they made one misguided jump (as from particle to field theory, from filled to empty space, etc) to another.

175.4, but the way, after breakfast, water and a half cup of coffee, is still considered within the framework of the target weight, despite being .4 stone over what it should have been.  I think a shower would make the difference between the two although why I do not know.

So without further ado, I give you the next draft of the appeal, although the technical argument and chart are not included in this post, being essentially that previously presented.

This is a long and complicated theory, very complex in application.  Proving the entire theory is not necessary, however.  The reason is that a single chart with only the most basic equations is so predictive of all dimensional structures and force, that alone it is compelling evidence of the validity of the model.

I would like to appeal your decision in light of the presentation at the APS seminar in Denver hosted by Kevin Dusling.  Please do not blame him for adding to your workload since I think he was doing a substantial service.

I submitted an easily examined and reproducible model which is novel and seems to define the universe in a way more predictive than the standard model with applications to force, mass, energy and observed structures (including atoms and the periodic table, molecules, black holes).  It defines with specificity gravity, how it arises and how it relates to other forces.  It explains the common "fractal" origins and similarities of Neutrons and black holes and how the Neutron secures the atom in the same way, one fractal smaller, that the black hole secures the galaxy.  It explains how the lesser effects of time in the lower base state of the atom cause it to appear to change faster (move faster) than the surrounding galaxy.  Rather than drone on about this, I only ask that you look at the chart below in light of the simple equation from which the chart is built.

In this email I submit below the following proofs: 1) the significance of the advance, and 2) the soundness of the science, 3) the importance of the advance.  The importance is simple, the model supplements any other model and it describes the universe below the level of time, energy and matter and shows how those dimensional features arise.

4) The accessibility to readers is also clear since it is a very simple model and 5) lastly, it must have reproducibility and since the equations are simple, they are easily applied to existing observations and the results are given below in the single chart which is the focus of this appeal..

Before I get into this in detail let me give my personal impression.  I have watched a number of similar papers get presented.  I get it.  Non-mainstream thinking tends to be theoretical and not practical.  This is not theoretical.  Specific mathematical results are given which support the model based on observed results.

This is a long model, complex in application.  Proving the entire theory is not necessary, however.  The single chart with only the most basic equations is so predictive of all dimensional structures and force, that alone it is compelling evidence of the validity of the model.  Rather than defending the entire paper, this appeal will focus primarily on the evidence within the chart.

You may have looked at this paper and observed it was too simple, especially since it was submitted by someone who is not associated with a major university, and summarily ruled on it. That is fair, but the appeal is to ask that you look at the results and see that this is at least worth publication because it is extremely predictive of gravity and its place in the force hierarchy. Indeed the force that turns out to be less predictive is electromagnetic and it can be explained in terms of how it arises from the combination of two force pairs.

The article is many pages long, but one of the two primary features (compression, force, mass and dimension are all defined by one equation and can be summarized in a single chart and based on the single equation (2f(n)^2^n).  If you can find fault in the results then perhaps there is a problem with the chart.  If, on the other hand, the chart properly reflects observed resulting mass (neutron and black hole primarily), force, range and type of force (which it does) merely by applying the equation above; then the appeal should be upheld in my opinion.

The second feature presented, separating time from change, is specific in terms of how it is derived, but there is no single equation, although time is derived from the same ratio, being a net result of folding and unfolding.  This result is also clear and reproducible when applied to existing equations such as the Schrodinger equations for wave derivation or the equations for gravitational time dilation merely by substituting dx for dt; the change in an underlying quantum time for time.  It is worth noting that this concept is not mine in a vacuum.   Phys.org: The discrete-time physics hiding inside our continuous-time world. https://phys.org/news/2019-04-discrete-time-physics-continuous-time-world.html.  The phys.org article appeared many months after I first published the conceptual separation in September of 2018 and is much less specific.

Finally, before getting to the summary argument, I want to provide links to two video articles, one a 12-minute discussion of the theory and the second a longer slide presentation with audio for the first 8 slides.  I would suggest you will watch at least the first, shorter of these two so you will have an overview of the theory.

The Denver 12-minute video: https://youtu.be/yczljGjPDYE

USA PowerPoint link: https://youtu.be/EjVR26KtAgo

Burning down the house 1 of 10

I bailed on several mornings to take long hikes in the snowy foot hills to clear my mind.
I am not worried about what I missed because I see articles on triangles being presented in my area, search this blog for the last time I used triangles and you will see how far ahead I am.  After a fashion.

I missed exercising yesterday, not in celebration of hitting my target, but in recognition of a certain amount of exhaustion.  I will pay eventually for the lack of excess in that regard, but mainly not doing my back exercises I think.  Today I will get at least some exercise.

http://3tags.org/article/the-particle-physics-of-you

http://space.about.com/od/Space-and-Astronomy/fl/Scientists-Detect-Gravitational-Ripples-in-Space-Time.htm?utm_content=20160215&utm_medium=email&utm_source=exp_nl&utm_campaign=list_space&utm_term=list_space

They have a periodic table of the elements special, superheavy elements and their production.
It is all so much nonsense.

but I am not?  I say no and as part of this I will provide the proofs and show how a theory built on high school calculus can beat all the weird symbol bullshit that is out that by chaning perspective.

This is a multi part and often repetitive series that will ultimately take us to a place we have been before but in a slightly different and logicallly argued way.

The one worthwhile area, perhaps the most important single undertaking lies in the 'how' to get my articles published to the broader audience.
So let me start with this:

1.     Overview of an Article:

I.                   Significantly advance

a.      Model of the universe below the level of thermodynamics

          This includes two parts.

          The first part is to redefine force and matter in terms of a specific mathematical model so that force is a result of the application of the model, dimension is a result of the mathematical model (as opposed to a driving ‘force’ for change it results from change). 

          The second part is to separate time from change where time results from the same dimensional changes that give rise to force.

II.                Scientifically sound-Simple proof of the model

a.      Force strength, range and Compression State

This one chart shows that the model yields results which are backed up by observed results

CT	2f(n)^2n	Dim State	Force	AuT Force		change	PreAuT
State	Compres- sion state			spew	Aut Strength	range	recorded
1	4	Space-0					strength	range
	256	1	Gravity	G/AG		ct1-2-1	1	inf-g
2	1679616	1		PreCharge
		ct2-3	Charge	net sum precharge	variable	ct3-4-3		inf-EM1
3		2		Prephoton		ct2-3-2
	10^12-10^13	ct3-4	P-E interact	net compression	4.5*10^12-10^16	P-N	Prot/Elec:abs
4	1E+16	ct3-4	Energy//time	Atomic Prot/Neut abs	e=mc^2 (10^16)	N-P	10^16
	Transitional	ct4-5	PostAtom	N-P-N weak	10^25	N-N	10^25	10^-15
	Transitional	ct3-4-5	Forced molecular	N-P-e-P-N:EM	10^36	N-P	10^36	Inf-EM3
			strong	N-N 2 arms	10^38	N-P-E	10^38	10^-18
5	3.4028E+38	ct5	Very Strong	ct5 collapse	10^96	N-BH
6	2.136E+96	ct5-6	Non-Weak	ct5toct6	10^96<	BH-U

The simplicity of the underlying model is the application of two iterated functions: 2f(n) and 2^n

When combined, it can be seen from the chart above that both the relative mass, force strength and range are defined by the model with such specificity as to demand further investigation.

Force, energy and other dimensional features result from the folding or unfolding of space in the form of information arm folding where the base increases by 2f(n) and the number of folds by 2^n to get increased compression (ct) states.  The resulting mass of all sub-atomic and post atomic particles and forces correspond perfectly to these equations.   This chart appears complex, but it merely shows that forces, relative strength and observed range of forces follow the theoretical results of the model for loading and unloading of compression arms with the next lower compression state. It shows the narrow range of time explaining the otherwise unusual results of pre-time information arm changes in compression. The most telling proofs are that all of the forces except for electromagnetism line up with compression results, it describes gravity with specificity and the scale of the e=mc^2 equation is reflected by 2f(n)^2^n for n=4 as expected.

b.      Separation of Time and Change

            The results of the first example and table are enough to carry the paper; but there is an important secondary result. Change is quantum (1,2,3, etc) and is unrelated to time even though time arises because of quantum change. Every point changes at exactly the same rate and with each change in the same x, but fused quantum information changes based on the fpix number for the point in question separate them and folding puts remote solution points in proximity.

            Time is not a dimension but is an effect of dimensional change, ct1 changes within the matrix of a ct3-4 transition state (between the photon and the neutron).

            This requires a more nuanced view of how the conclusion explains otherwise complex phenomena:

            Phenomena 1: Time dilation: results from the number of these changes that can occur within a ct3-4 regional matrix compared to ct1 changes outside the matrix.  Gravitational tiem dilation reflects that an increase in gravity squeezes those lower ct changes out and the less compressed information states become more compressed.

            Phenomena 2 and 3: Waves (2) and Schrodinger type observations (3) arise from pre-time changes viewed from the standpoint of time. 

            Pre-time changes are net changes.

            Wave:  A wave results from a point photon being rotated for many changes in x when viewed from the standpoint of time just as a wave form is generated by rotating a circle against the movement of a sheet of paper.  When the pre-time changes in x are viewed from the standpoint of time, the point appears to exist over all the points of the wave.

            Therefore, a point photon for any value of x is still a point. In a dual slit experiment, one of two things occur (a) The pre-time structure of waves are collapsed by observation or (b) the pretime rotation is stopped by observation.  Hence, an otherwise mysterious wave-particle duality is easily defined by having pre-time and post time results for change.

            Schrodinger type results: For any value of x, Schrodinger’s cat is only at one place, but once time is applied, the cat appears to occupy many locations.

174.6-the magic number

The official weigh in, first one in perhaps 10 days.  It is 6:17.  I am exhausted with a long day ahead of me, but I have officially reached, and to a small extent, exceeded my target weight even after a day of more or less regular meals.
I only swam 1800 yards yesterday, only 600 im; but it was a targeted low workout, first time in the pool in nine days.
I did not sleep well, but I think officially I got enough sleep.
I am celebrating in the way you would expect, a bowl of cereal with some sort of coconut awful flavored poured over it; not because it is what i wanted the coconut awful, but because it was all that there was.   This has been a lifestyle and portion diet, not one of desperation.  I dont have to fit into a wedding dress.  I would have used water if I had known how bad the ca was.
I suppose most people will mark today as the day the Muller report is issued, three days after the fire in Paris, the day before good friday.  One day it will be marked as two days after my speech which was, oddly, the day after NotreDame burned; as if Godwere takingfromthat for some reason.
AuT strips the magic of numbers. It is very good at that.
Pi is not an infinite series, it is only a function of the amount of information in a region defined by the quantum base of the region.  It is not magic, it is an average.  Space time does not exactly curve, it just has results which are more primarily higer ct states, in this case higher ct5 transitions; it officially breaks at the level of the black hole where it begins to be 5 over fpix, the denominator of pi up to the appropriate number of places and the fuse for quantum space states.
AuT says there is only one magic number, -1
I will come back to this.

a small step in a long road

I have finished a very small step.  I was not up for much afterwards, it has been exhausting.   I managed to keep exercising, indeed, the ability to do the two moderate back to back hikes and to feel fine tonday indicates the health, without any altitude related headaches.  But I am ready to sleep in your bed, and I am glad to have that behind me.

I do see that the road remains long in front of me.  I think about this as a justification for my existence.  My proof of being, but a proof which shows that being is meaningless.

I am published, it cannot be taken from me, but I have to reach the higher press, I have to have the world bend down and say, you did this, you are the one.  I am osmonedes, king of kings, look on me and weep.

From inside a ct5 state bundle you will have galactic views similar to ours but of an exponential scale.  You will see in 4 dimensions.  And when you look at the atom you will see a ct3-4 fractal of what we see as a more time sensitive, robust ct4-5 fractal which moves faster because it is less sensitive to time as much as because the underlying states change faster, if indeed they do.  is it 'only' insensitivity to time/

Even inside one (since we are in such a bundle) we only see in 3 dimensions, but the actual "look" of a bundle like this, multiple black holes in orbit, is a 4 dimensional galactic view where we would look like background radiation.

And yet people still think they will find some meaning inside the nothing that is inside the black hole, because what choice would they have otherwise, than to look on me, physicist of physicist, and weep.

The Washington Post: See a black hole for the first time in a historic image from the Event Horizon Telescope. https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2019/04/10/see-black-hole-first-time-images-event-horizon-telescope/