So the Mandelbrot set is the basis of chaos theory and how we have mapped static, turbulence and how many plants grow. It is a map of how the dimensions are folded and how matter and energy flow along those folds. If it is but a small glimpse from the inside and a reflection of a more elegant pattern of how our dimensions and energy flows that can allow us to understand our universe not as chaos but as beautiful - I know this is true in my heart
Mandelbrot with Iteration map
Mandelbrot and Julia (circle)
Future Proves Past
Think timelines and Geometry of not just Universe but the Geometry of Timelines.
If we understand the Universal Geometry we will have it all and what may seem magic will be daily common experience.
IMO string theory is closer to being true than this dark matter/just make up invisible particles theory. String is dimensions curled up and holding the pattern there by the way they are curled and twisted and/or expanded to create 4D that is where all the "mass" you are missing is underneath in the framework of creating 4D reality.
Why is there collections of matter at certian points in our 4D universe? Why does it collect? What keeps it there and in flowing patterns?
This video shows how two sets that look completely different are the same set viewed from a different axis; Mandelbrot vs Julia and both warp and twist when you move the other set in point of view.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfteiiTfE0c
True.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
-
Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio
Mandelbrot to FOL
Iteration map shows warped petals and funnels.
opps
I didn't rotate the iteration map to make it easy sorry
Well it seems I am mostly talking to myself but you are welcome.
Rough sketch on iteration map.
Iterations are the number of passes through an equation.
My next question is why would the FOL connect most closely to the iteration map of the Mandelbrot set?
Theory:
It could be that the number of passes through an equation is like moving and stepping through fractal dimensions (rolled up dimensions). Since the FOL may be the pattern of folding of dimensions in the sub physical reality, that would be a lot like a 90 degree shift in axis view.
Made this one years ago.
As I recall I was thinking time was not just a line axis but a probability and for each X and Y axis the larger petal was the time probability and the end on the circle was probably backward time flow.
Well it was a long time ago I think that was my reasoning.
If you have and android phone or tablet you can go to app store and get Mandelbrot Maps that has both the Madelbrot set and in a small window the corrosponding Julia set and you can flip them.
I note the center line X axis or real axis the Julia is a perfect circle at about 0.2 X or so.
To answer a question on general. In our current theory of gravity it is a force or a warp in space-time usually secondary to a mass that creates a divot in space-time as it moves along its timeline.
What I am strongly leaning toward is that all the forces are just side effects of how the balled up/'fractal' dimensions warp and twist to support our expanded/open 4D space-time.
Another way to think about is the divine created the pattern and gave us our creative free will to twist and warp the pattern to view it in any way we choose. FOL to Mandelbrot.
To give a function in our 4D
Say space travel.
Negate the time axis by spinning it to a point.
Shield or fully Map the local 4D you want to move in space.
Then calculate the number of iterations on the Mandelbrot set from point 1 to point 2.
And then Iterate your ship through them - like a wormhole.
The problem is the MAP :). Where are you going? At what point on the Mandelbrot is the destination you want? Where are you on the Mandelbrot? How do you iterate a 4D object? Etc Etc.
It is my board so โฆ..
Back to my thought from this morning.
Space Travel using interdimensional methods.
My next thought was that this 'ship'/mass below the surface of our bubble of 4D reality would make a swell in space/time - opposite of mass on this side. A kind of Anti-gravity wave. It would look like a large object just under the surface of the ocean creating a swell in the ocean level above it. Is this how anti-gravity works?
Using the Mandelbrot for this purpose (space travel) may be like using a folded map to plot your course. You need to unfold and spread out the MAP to plot the course. The folded map of the Mandelbrot has shown us in fractal coasts, and plant growth how matter and energy accumulate in those fractal folds and bifurcations. That is important!!!!! The folds and iteration deviations is where energy and matter accumulate in the 4D bubble we exist in!!!
So if matter and energy follow the iterations of the Mandelbrot set, from small to large. It is just a mirror/blueprint of a way to create a 4D reality. Not everything seems to fit with Mandelbrot, or we have not figured it out. Think of it as a pattern on how to fold dimensions to downstep and create a 4D universe/bubble.
Ok so if matter and energy seem to flow with the iterations of the Mandelbrot set? What does this mean?
Does it mean everything is controlled by this set?
Does it mean nothing?
Does it mean that fractal folding/partial dimensions have validity?
Does it mean that there are a lot more dimensions that underlie our 4D universe?
What do you think?
If there is a universal pattern
if there is free will
if free will places each soul in the octave they most resonate.
Then you are where you should be and given the opportunity to go up or down as first note it the same note as the highest of the lower octave, and the 8th note is the highest and first note in next octave.
I gather you are not following at all.
Think of our entire 4D world as existing on the surface of a soap bubble and the the rainbow reflections are all that we experience - that is our 4D.
3 in a row very fast? HMM over target?
Gravity is defined by the mass the deviates the space time. If there were mass on the other side of the plane it would be anti gravity. If you can create a mass on the other side of plane you can manipulate anti-gravity.
example then reverse it and think of the deviated plane as the 4D plane.
If that mass is able to tunnel under that plane then the divot is a bump moving through time.
IMO that is why physics is endorsing dark mass and dark energy
I don't endorse gravity as a force. I think it is a side effect of the folding of dimensions to fractal.
that is my opinion
did you read my comment that mass and energy seem to collect at iterations and deviations in iterations? That is where mass and thus 'gravity' appears.
even if the deviation in space time is up not down it is still a fold in the supporting fractal dimensions that make the place for that mass. I am not quite to the point I say the folds are what we perceive as mass but close.
After all wave particle duality. Mass may be an illusion of perception.
note Weight is gravity based. Weight is local not universal
You are not wrong. All matter is wave.
And Engeneers have the keys.
But Trust - divine is one eye
Weight is base on the angle of deviation in space the downward force. Mass is just the amount of physical matter that deviates the space. It is really similar. Think superman - he was strong because his planet had more mass gravity - thus he weighed more there. Here he weighed less as he was more 'dense'.
Study Octaves
Fuck no I want Math - I will get eventually someone will turn the math to geometry.
I think in geometry - intuitively. I want someone to prove the math of the geometry.
Mass is Wave
Easy in a particle
Once you get to molecules and organisms it is a whole lot of folding and twisting of dimensions to have that wave appear that way
LOL
Fractal
it is proven that a mass is a wave.
We can perceive on or the other.
That implies that how we view things affects them.
it is very hard to perceive all reality in our 4D as wave as you cannot function here if you do.
relax you have a lot of years to be Einstein.
opps in gen Lol
Ok tutorial
2 is is a page of paper
3 is a box
4 is the box moving through time and space.
5 is seeing the box move through time and the timeline
6 is seeing the alternatives that the box could have changed course.
etc.
Octaves are spiritual
not attachments send the urls
I am not sure about G5 yet i am old and do not freak out easily
All matter is energy
If our reality is created by folds in universal dimensions and perception.
Two variables:)
1 : The folds and twists of universal geometry
2: Our perception of it and where we are in it.
:)
game theory
This video tries to explain dimensions up to 10. A droning boring voice but not too bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ca4miMMaCE
OK FEs here is my opinion on this.
If we are assuming that the rest of the universe is spherical then earth must be spherical; you can't change principles for just one object.
You can change the entire system and assume the 4D universe is flat. Math does this by placing a 4D plane on a bubble - like a soap bubble.
To understand just the frequency and vibration of the electron in a hydrogen atom they had to use the hopf hypersphere (pictures). Then add the nucleus and then atoms joining to molecules, and all those frequencies and vibrations interacting. It kinda boggles the mind to try and comprehend.
Gravity is a well documented force. It is the acceleration downward based upon the deviation in space-time that we define as mass. The divot in space-time (ie earths is larger than the moons).
The questions would be why the divot?
Why does mass create a divot?
What is mass that warps space-time?
The solar system is kept together by the divot the sun creates in space time. Each planet is kept in its orbit by the falling force down that slope and the centrifigal force of its velocity. Note each planet also adds a warp to the warp that the sun created.
So the question in gravity is:
Is it the mass that deviates space time or is it the deviation in space time that is a point for collection of mass?
Chicken or Egg?
My thought processes is that Gravity is just the deviation in space time and the question is if it is mass that causes that or the folds and twists of fractal/curled up dimensions that cause the warp.
Weight versus Mass:
1) Mass is a measurement of the amount of matter something contains, while Weight is the measurement of the pull of gravity on an object. 2) Mass is measured by using a balance comparing a known amount of matter to an unknown amount of matter. Weight is measured on a scale.
The divine tends to make things in an elegant beautiful manner that is why I think the Mandelbrot is just a part of the answer.
If this is right.
Then the FOL internal view to the shaded areas is rotated about 20 ish degrees up and about 45 is degrees away (into page) and and point of view is pulled back looking down at 65 degree angle; to warp the petals and funnel in that manner. Let me know if your perception is different.
Weight is based upon the divot in space time you are standing on. You weigh less on the moon.
Every time you hear the word gravity translated it to divot in space time.
None :)
Answers lie within are not given.
And frequency may be unique and may alter over time for each.
Tesla was an engineer. I actually think he may have figured out a way to shield a 4D object from space time timeline, but with no control.
Weight is Mass of object and the pull of the mass from another object - get it now?
Tesla stuff was used on fabled experiments.
They may not be true (montauk and Philadelphia).
But Elon did send a Tesla to Mars. Saw the Mandela effect real time.
WTF?
opps I forget some may be way younger.
If they have not taught you the difference between mass and weight. They should have done that in 7-8 grade or earlier.
Damn LOL
I wanted to discuss dimensions and people are mad about gravity.
LMFOA
OK Gravity is repeatable and mathematical.
What people don't get it is not a force but a divot in spacetime - falling it is mathematically falling. So can you all get on the same page.
The next question is why is it falling? That is my bet.
Gravity will IMO be a side effect of the fractal dimensions knot work under the surface of our 4D reality, as will mass.
RAnch secured
Tesla was mechanical Einstein pure thought and math.
Good Morning
Hope today people can share positive ideas and thoughts and not just tear others ideas down.
Imagine that each axis can be curved and curled.
The Z axis as example can be a line, a sine wave, or a circle curled up.
All dimensions not viewed at 90 degrees are considered partial dimensions or fractal. Our perception inside the 4D system is we can only perceive with our senses the 90 degree dimensions. We can envision (ie the Z axis on a sheet of paper is a 0.5 dimension at 45 degree angle) the others but not perceive them.
There may be very defined number of dimensions or infinite I do not know.
What would hold the universe together and not be dark matter and dark energy would be the folding knotting of fractal dimensions to support and pull the depression in space time we call gravity.
formula
The Mandelbrot is a Set of Boundary conditions. The Center black area is inside and the periphery is the 'speed' a number arcs to infinity. What is all the black is touching the 4D plane and all the periphery is the way fractal dimensions support that 4D? And if you rotate it around as you move through the Julia sets the Mandelbrot warps as you do so.
Divinity would and I am sure did create an elegant pattern.
My weak attempt at showing it in a picture.
An Example of how fractals give the structure for creation in our 4D plane.
This is Turbulence in real world verses Fractal.
The next question is what is the boundary event horizon? And I am not really sure; but it does seem that the lens we are seeing it through is a Hopf Hypersphere.
I figure the fractal dimensions are also in constant flux in relation to our 4D reality as well. If it does lead all the way back to FOL I feel that is a more solid pattern.
Energy IMO only becomes matter in a 4D universe (well it is suppose to in a few others like 11D too). The energy flow to the 4D through fractal dimensions that support the 4D framework (and probably also negate need for dark matter) and give a pathway for energy and formation of matter along those pathways.
I have no problem thinking there are 'unstable' X dimensional universes; as all that means is that dimensions only contains energy patterns not matter.
I may have incorrectly used the Horizon when I should not have, as following that train of thought would make every point in space/time a black hole and I am pretty sure that math collapses very very quickly. Boundary Event corrected.
HMM?
Have thought of it as Point of view like Game Theory and that the video game is 4D reality and the fractal universe is the code that creates and powers that game. But your post implies all energy is just information as well.
Working on E=MC^2
Looks like a KG of Mass either has a huge amount of energy to move it or the energy of a very large area (even though technically it should be a cube)
What if that KG of mass is that amount of area wrapped up and condensed into a very small area?
What if Mass is actually the crumpled up paper of space/time moving in a wave through space?
maybe you can see the numbers better on this.
That could make the forces in our 4D reality the loaded springs of fractal dimensions holding that area into a very condensed state.
That would make Mass not about about deviation in 4D but about compression density of space time and the deviation would be secondary to the fractal 'loaded springs' and amplitude of deviation relative to the amount of are condensed and the amount of compression of the area.
it is about the E=MC^2 equation - you seem to have missed that. That equation is about velocity and acceleration. Energy defined by the equation is Joule Newton through 1 meter.
all squared equations can be graphed as a square, it defines it that way in math and arrays.
Well if you can't jump math subjects just not worth my time.
All multiplication creates an array. Two numbers is a 2d graph.
Been thinking about Gravity and space time deviation and trying to understand it Mathematically and Geometrically. It seems to repeat some work I had done before about finding the point on an arc related to a square.
second rotated to make it easier to see.
It appears there may be a maximum gravity or space/time deviation.
87,807,178 m/s^2
Of course I could be wrong.
Or it could be the 211,985,280 m/s^2 as that is the line from Hypotenuse of C^2 to the edge of C^2 array and the arc could be bowed out toward the edge, but it is the math that creates the geometry not the other way around. What happens past that(which ever one) - well I figure a 4D boundary condition.
You mean acceleration? That is how physics defines gravity now meters per second squared.
I did notice the Joule and Newton are basically the same measure of Power as I understood it one for electric and one for matter.
Collective Consciousness. Casey wrote a lot about it.
Once I understood Gravity was Acceleration I also wondered was it Acceleration of Mass or Energy that created the warp in space time but that led to circular thought since acceleration has been shown to increase mass. i will probably revisit that again with the idea strictly from warping the space/time as that would do both. Ie Rienmann surfaces.
I guess we better go back to mass.
Mass is defined In physics, the property of matter that measures its resistance to acceleration. Roughly, the mass of an object is a measure of the number of atoms in it. The basic unit of measurement for mass is the kilogram.
Again a bit of a circle of thought. Mass is the resistance to acceleration, and Gravity is the acceleration, and power is the change to the velocity or cause of acceleration - and all use the other to define itself.
So if a 'knot' of space/time is accelerated it would change its space/time warp and thus its 'knot' density (mass) and the divot in space/time it is falling down (note also slowing time). That would bring us to power and force that moves/accelerates that 'knot'
If you haven't noted it yet but all of the things we have considered static are not they are variable.
KG, Second, Meters, etc. Actually all these things seem to be variable by the geometry of the framework of space time and energy (or energy change).
I just found a line in wiki about Mass that I just LOVE!
In modern physics, matter is not a fundamental concept because its definition has proven elusive.
I figure we may have to go to the quantum level to try and untangle the way space/time creates the 'knot' known as Mass that has resistance.
I do notice that it at this point physics starts moving a lot more toward Tesla (ie resistance, flow, etc).
This morning it occurred to me that Gravity should not be acceleration of an object it should be the force that a mass on space/time. It should be something like KG/m^2, not m/s^2. Acceleration m/s^2 should be the difference between two masses like special relativity.
Acceleration should be the force between two objects (qualifying velocity, vector, etc) not the force of mass on space time. The force that warps/dents space time would be a power or mass over an area or cube. That would bend space time acceleration appears to be secondary not the primary force.
Not offended even though you really tried. Answer why gravity that is suppose to be the force that warps space has no units referring to space? There seems to be no equations defining the force that bends space. Time Einstein covered that in special relativity, but I think got stuck on how gravity works when all he had to do was treat it like time if he was keeping acceleration concept. But it seems from Newton to now we are missing the primary force of warping of space and measuring and observing the interactions within the set not the boundaries of the set that are warped by the objects in the set.
Ok I get that. That would make the units of Gravity to be kg*m/s^2 - right? Not defining gravity as just m/s^2?
Arthur C Clarke laws
Any force that affects space should include the units of meter squared or meter cubed!!!!!!!!!!
Well I was not trying to add plasma, and I know the states of matter. Mass in basic is resistance to acceleration - like it is electric resistance. I do understand it is moving a mass takes power, do you understand by that definition it also allows mass to be viewed in its wave form?
Resistance most typically is an electric term. That would be open up the particle wave duality.
I understand I tend to think outside the lines :), but when shown I am wrong I will admit it, and when not sure will admit that too.
I believe Einstein - gravity deviates space/time or vise versa. But I don't think he got it down and that is the missing piece and am amazed physics is just ok with a unit system that warps space with no units referring to and measure of length involved in the denominator!!!
M over time is not how mass warps space!!!!!!!!!!
any warp of space must include force over a measure of length area or cube. M over time just does not fit the bill.
for the last sentence - I don't. 4D reality, but it is not really understood by us lol. I have held off on delving into quantum again as I feel it is futile for my agenda - no geometry involved. It is all about spin and time and mass. I am not even sure they measure trajectory. I feel it is all explained by geometry just like Einstein, and yes I am not a physicist other professional occupation.
electromagnetic ? hmm ? interesting. That fits.
Once they redefine gravity they can break through a lot of the bull shit of preconception.
it is very hard to find a unified theory if one of the basic forces is defined wrong.
Mass is resistance
Flow is acceleration.
etc etc.
mass = ohms
I tend to have a bit more than a 3D view of geometry.if you missed that. But I don't mind charging windmills. :)
My spiritually is fine it is mine not anyone else s. I would rather see if it fits math. Kinda science geek.
my last one was sarcasm back to you for what i felt was sarcasm from you
have a nice day you are so much superior to me you fart rose petals I cannot compete.
Well tomorrow i will just ignore this Aramaic dude and go on studying electrical and quantum.
Things to study and connect mass as resistance to electrical resistance. Quantum to see if has geometry aspects that connect to fractal. Gravity in relation to deformation of space to form a true formula with a measure of length, area or volume in the denominator.
General relativity appears to use force tensors to do a 'change of basis' of the 4D axis. Based on Gravitational constant (6.67408 ร 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2). The force tensor is based on Ricci curvature on a Riemannian manifold.
Second and third picture show a 'change of basis from rectangular to radial system. Einstein's is much more fluid and complex.
Thus next will have to be direct connection of force tensor to the mass?
Last picture is gravity calculation using gravity constant.
Essentially what Einstein's general relativity shows is that a force modifies the normal euclidean geometry we understand by changing the basis of the the axis of that geometry; that means bending , twisting or stretching/contracting the axis of our reality. Rotation is the easiest visual way to understand that in a euclidean way.
Any deformation in the fundamental axises of our 4D universe will alter the way those 4D objects are 'seen' from within the 4D set. The example Einstein concentrated on was time, but if you alter the 4D axis you will also alter the length, width, and depth. This will alter the volume of the object which will alter the density or mass of that object. Well that is what makes sense to me (but I do not see a math connection so I might be wrong what changes mass).
density is mass over volume so mass would not change with change of volume. The theory is mass changes with velocity/acceleration and gravity is acceleration down a divot in space/time.
I just played with the equations some!!!!!
I found:
someone tell me I am wrong that I messed up.
opps sorry forgot the squared
Since all but one definition of mass are circular. I will have to investigate:
Quantum mass : Quantum mass manifests itself as a difference between an object's quantum frequency and its wave number
Mass=Energy
Energy exhibits mass in relativity.
So long as the system is closed with respect to mass and energy, both kinds of mass are conserved in any given frame of reference. The conservation of mass holds even as some types of particles are converted to others. Matter particles (such as atoms) may be converted to non-matter particles (such as photons of light), but this does not affect the total amount of mass or energy. Although things like heat may not be matter, all types of energy still continue to exhibit mass.[note 9][24] Thus, mass and energy do not change into one another in relativity; rather, both are names for the same thing, and neither mass nor energy appear without the other.
Interesting:
Massโenergy equivalence also holds in macroscopic systems.[29] For example, if one takes exactly one kilogram of ice, and applies heat, the mass of the resulting melt-water will be more than a kilogram: it will include the mass from the thermal energy (latent heat) used to melt the ice; this follows from the conservation of energy.[30] This number is small but not negligible: about 3.7 nanograms. It is given by the latent heat of melting ice (334 kJ/kg) divided by the speed of light squared (c2 = 9ร1016 m2/s2).
So basically once moving to this line of research it has been shown that mass is not created by matter but by energy (be it matter or wave).
And sure looks like mass is not anything about matter but about deviation in space time by energy of what we perceive as mass or energy of wave or velocity.
I found another equation and this one I know very well Pythagorean Theory.
That means the hypotenuse of the static ('mass') energy added with momentum is the energy of the object. I kinda remember using that before.
smile
information comes after breaking mass to wave and energy being the cause of gravity and causing 4D warp. Spinning the axis to understand the warp in 4D then confirming the 4D boundary condition and the energy passes that - then energy becomes information :)
Everyone seems to ignore this but acceleration also decreases length.
Length contraction
Suppose there is a rod at rest in F aligned along the x axis, with length ฮx. In Fโฒ, the rod moves with velocity -v, so its length must be measured by taking two simultaneous (ฮtโฒ = 0) measurements at opposite ends. Under these conditions, the inverse Lorentz transform shows that ฮx = ฮณฮxโฒ. In F the two measurements are no longer simultaneous, but this does not matter because the rod is at rest in F. We conclude that the boosted observer measures a shorter length, by a factor of ฮณ, than the observer in the rest frame of the rod. Length contraction affects any geometric quantity related to lengths, so from the perspective of a moving observer, areas and volumes will also appear to shrink along the direction of motion.
These Lorentz transformations seem to be applicable to it all and are a semester of study in themselves.
Lorentz transformations are a way to shift the xD axis or rotate it to view it in a different way, It is used to be able to tell the difference in time and spacial time dilation and length compression but can also be used on any vector to see how the axis shift.
Basically the warp in space-time can be mapped with Riemann surfaces using the Lorentz transformations and the Einstein Tensor (force basically of gravity deviating space time). That gets us to the boundary of 4D that has been warped with a twisted or spun axis to view that boundary. Now Einstien Tensor is next to look into and how it relates to kg (and its static energy/waveform), p (momentum), and how that energy is related to Einstien Tensor.
Not sure but I think it would be
potential (ie statistics).
Move beyond 4D and you are in a system that is not a physical reality but with the potential to become a 4D reality. The energy is all there but the dimensional space is fluid and changing and dynamic except at the 'special' dimensional clicks where the 'arrangement' can 'bind' into a physical 'outside' reality
yea I know I can do the math barely on the time and x axis on a vector makes by brain hurt, and Reinmann surfaces I am just touching the topic with a glancing understanding, well so far.
after and arguement in general about energy and force last night I must admit.
E and F are not exactly the same except for every meter cumulative E= F * meter.
Then it dawned on me Gravity is a force on space time - thus units have to be G= kg/m or G=kg/m^2 or kg/m/s^2 - but kg has to be in there, not m/s^2.
There appears to be some issues with our unit definitions at least at that level of physics.
?G=kg/m/s^2 ?
Acceleration would just be the difference between space-time deviations of objects right?
Goals - Schwartzchild radius and Plank Constant will define the smallest amount of energy in smallest area of space - base. then Einstien Tensor etc.
and E=Fm doesn't make sense either E is both SE (static energy) and KE (kinetic energy), and Fm would not define KE - F/m^2 might.
I better get ready for work F, E, and G are all melding into one force in my mind - ahhhhh.
I keep getting to the point all energy/force is just acting on the axis of our reality - not us - well unless you follow the thought that 'us' are protrusions of twisted warped axis to create a standing wave in within the surrounding axis. Ahhh I need a brain nap.
Once you move beyond a 4D physical reality all the rules change. There is no mass thus no resistance, There is no work for there is nothing to move as flow proceeds without impediment. I see it as pattern, all axis relax to normal position and all energy sits in potential. To define further you would have to define a set and calculate the probabilities of an event not forgetting that the 'set ' is not isolated and the probability of an outside influence affecting the event (ie chaos theory).
Good video in the first min :)
On the way home thought - well the Lorentz transformation is basically just rotation around the Y axis and that is easily solved with trig and the pytharean theorm. Then in the first minute arctangent. I will have to check the math as I was pretty sure it would be sin and cosine and solving for hypotenuse or side. And if it this simple there is no reason for a series of solutions - it is a freakin table.
Wait I was doing this graphically a few months rotating Pythagorean theorems in 3 D space.
What is going on in Lorentz is the rotation of axis and frame of reference. Rotation around Y axis. This cause a perception of time dilation and length shortening. This can be perceived also as acceleration and deviation of space time that creates an area of space-time that has a divot. opps I just went beyond physics sorry.
Basically as I perceive it Schwarzchild radius is the total compression of mass excluding volume. The Planck length is the smallest measure that can be 3-4 D. I you placed that smallest mass over the smallest length? i will have to check the units but โฆ. is that the force that is every unit of space-time or is that the energy to break through space time?
your video so does not take it to the next level and bring it to geometry.I get algebra has to fit. I am geofag. so annoying algebra when I know it is just a rotation around Y.
So a series of 5 videos to try and explain something I got in a moment of free time?
People all we see and experience can be placed in Euclidean geometry if you spin the axis!!!!!!!
LISTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YES you can take it 4 or 7 or 11 D but for here you can figure it out if your mind is multi D and you can spin it , twist it and view in a different way - see hopf
You may use different terms from point of view, to acceleration, to warp in space time, to WTF.
But :) That is how you get to TOE
He started out so well and went back to traditional bs in later vids
The Lortetz transformation is a rotation on Y axis easy geo solve. Don't need all this bullshit. If want to do x can or time can. if want a vector can and all axis change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WTF it is rotation of axis!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DEFINE the angle of change and it is FUCKING Pythagorean!!!
sigh.
Draw a 3D axis
Rotate it around the Y axis - the time as Z dilates, and the X and length contracts. That is Lorentz.
the difference here is ego. Here i have none. What you show is basically a tendency to be passive aggressive which is way to subvert others to advance your own agenda.
Yes I advance mine but honesty I give ideas even if not sure I admit when a bit off and I ask for others ideas?
Do you?
No you act superior to just barely equal.
Please re-evaluate your approach to life.
>Sampling is a process of converting a signal (for example, a function of continuous time and/or space) into a numeric sequence
A Reinmann surface? See it can be just not one field it is all fields. It has to be all fields to be a TOE
I will add Fourier to my research.
tell me if I am wrong.
Einstein learned you had to spin the axis (Lorentz) and then added a tensor to bend space time. Is that tensor 90 degrees as is should be or is it following the Reinman surface? It does not matter geometry can figure it out. IE - bifurcations of reinmann set to map the fluid bend in 4d. i will figure out how to twist the axis so it is a function soon.
LMFAO
'how you use to mislead'
first sentence>>2225623
.passive aggressive.
i don't care if you have a different field and view. I call you out because you tell me wrong without solid evidence. You may be right, I may be wrong, You may be wrong and I am right, we may both be right, or we may both be wrong. That is logic.
from gen
Planck is smallest length.
Schwart is smallest mass
mass over length should be the smallest part of 4D.
copy
actually the energy on space time units should be realistically.
kg/m^3/sec
and the base unit of the smallest should be kg/planck*3/sec
copy
The funny part about mass is it is all just energy and has nothing to do with what we think as mass.
It is the velocity, the rotation, the wave amplitude, the only part of it we see as mass is the wave pattern that is static.
copy
The static energy of a mass is basically a force it is potential. the Kinetic energy is energy as it is active, as is the spin. The spin and amplitude of the wave of an object are a force as they are potential energy to be released.
and energy is mass.
copy
Einstein proved in basic physics and with equations ll reality is just perspective. Lorentz, reinnmann, and tensor. Research.
copy
i must correct Force is an outside energy acting on โฆ
Energy is internal or inherent
Both are energy and a force but one is within and one is exerted externally like a tensor.
Base energy over base area per mass should be.
Planck Constant (energy)/Schwartzchild Radius=
6.626070040(81)ร10โ34 (kgm^2/s^2)s over/
2(6.674ร10โ11 m/s^2ยทkgโ2ยทm2)*mass/c^2
or
the number divided out is
49640325258312756215088.821230791
sorting that jumble of units ahhh it should be an energy over a unit of space/time.
so does that mean?
Mass * 49640325258312756215088.821230791 is the energy on the smallest radius of space/time?
Actually that is addressed Frequency and Amplitude to matter - I just haven't figured it out yet and got there yet. It has also been admitted that there is gravity to energy and gravity is just the transformation of the axis viewed as bent space-time, first step for physics to get to the full pattern.
My plan was to graph the Planck length on the X and the Schwartzchild Radius on Y with the deviation arc of space-time below the X . But wow the difference will dwarf the Planck at 10^-35, and 1 unit of Schwartzchild (kg) at 10^-5. So my graph cannot be to scale.
The plan was to show the deviation of space time per unit length, then area per set of mass and then energy. It appears the triangle though a right triangle has a huge Y and very tiny X axis and thus is very hard to show the process of bisecting the hypotenuse to find the arc of deviation and repeat to find the Reinmann Surface of the deviation of space time. I can show you but it will not be to scale
The numbers are:
1.616228 X 10-35 as X
and
1.485183 X 10^-5 as Y or negative Y
Then an arc from 0 X to 2 times the value of X
Then figure hypotenuse of right triangle of the XY
then bisect and you can figure the midpoint of arc (space time variation) at the 45 degree (270-45). And repeat if you need to define the Reinmann surface in a simple 2D process.
In Lorentz transformations it is a smaller triangle and easier to see the shift around the axis.
Gravity is just a transformation - just like Lorentz. It is just spinning the axis.
It is odd the base is so far pushed into the axis LOL.
It is also the amount of energy to keep our base unit of space time in place. We are soo far.
weight is nothing it is defined by locality.
Mass is Energy. Axis are POF of reality. Physics just is lost in the algebra.
as I said before
it appears all is force on axis and what we see/experience perceive is just a spin of those axis
The key is not you.
The key is using the math to convince the 100th monkey. You may not get that all force is energy and all energy affects the axis and all axis are define our perception and that we have the ability to change that, but i weigh 170 Lbs.
What you don't get is chaos theory is based in fractals outside 4D and well defined.
if you stop your tirade and use Pythagorean theorem you may figure it out.
Planck length over Schwartzchild Radius
Ultimately it may actually come down to that if the axis are just twisted and knotted to make the appearance of mass - like a far off Mandelbrot connected by a filament.
>https://www.ted.com/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything/transcript
I have been humbled.
I figured someone had figured all this out before.
E8 Lie Group
picture shows how dimensions can form a 4D bubble of reality. Is it at every point or just supporting from the underneath or outside?
Copy
So basically quantum computing should be?
ON
OFF
Degree of ON (dimmer switch?)
Pythagorean Theorem 3D question?
Raised to the second.
The Lorentz Transformation is essentially a rotation around the Y axis- lengthening/dilating the time axis and shortening the X axis
A graphic for Lorentz transformation move from 1 to 2.
That shows cube in X axis getting shorter, and cube in T axis stretching.
forgot graphic
momentum is kinetic energy.
Force is potential energy that has not been used yet, basically.
You know I think you are onto something there.
E is SE - static energy and
F is KE - kinetic energy
And TE = SE + KE Or TE = E+F
thus
TE = mc^2 + ma
= kg 89,875,517,873,681,768 m/s^2 + kg m/s^2
I you apply trig to E=mc^2?
Would that make 423,970,560m/s^2 the radius of 1 kg of mass uncompressed?
or 1 KG of mass has radius of 423,970,560 light meters uncompressed?
>>2259108>
>2259170
E=mc^2
423,970,560 m/s^2 (Kg in lightmeters) * 89,875,571,873,681,764 m/s^2 (c^2)=
38,104,573,643,194,868,440,750,080 m/s^2 (lightmeters)
No I don't think so probably just the Hypotenuse.
The Hypotenuse of the 'Light Square' that 423970560 m/sec^2
or 1.41421356237309505 of Speed of Light.
Mass Radius has inluence beyond the light square of our 4D universe. The area that space time warps, and the spiral connection to the Mandelbrot Space.
Copy:
Speed of Light squared is the light square our 4D world exsists in.
They hypotenuse of that square - 423,970,560 m/s^2 is the Mass radius for 1 KG of uncompressed area of mass.
The ratio to speed of light is 1.414213562. The amount of radius beyond the light square is the Mass energy link beyond our 4D world to Fractal Space.
So the Yellow shaded areas are the ones that will show the foundation and linkage of space time and our further connection to our universe.
The areas in yellow appear to be two separate arc triangles.
Dividing 1.414213562 into two you get
0.707106781865475244.
Next will be calculating A and B of the arc triangle.
Y axis A= R- cos(angle) or 423970560 - 299792458 = 124,178,102 m/sec
X axis B= R- sin(angle) or 423970560 - 299792458 = 124,178,102 m/sec
Hypotenuse of each arc triangle = 175,614,355.99814955902579108016716 m/sec
Damn i made a mistake:
Y axis A= R- sin(angle) or 423970560 - 299792458 = 124,178,102 m/sec
X axis B= cos(angle) or cos(45)* 299792458 = 211,985,280 m/sec
Hypotenuse of each arc triangle = 245,678,570.398 m/sec
Sorry.
Crap I need Coffee
Y is right x is just C - 299,792458
Hypotenuse is
324,493,018.245 m/s
Light Square Mass energy that moves beyond that light square is in yellow and in 2D folded on the light square or the sphere depending upon how you view it. Note energy is split affecting X axis, and Y axis (1/4 of a petal each). When the Mass energy beyond the light square is folded the yellow shaded areas fold back together to create a wave pattern in '3D" beyond the C by C light square.
Well it took me a couple of hours.
The Mass Radius reflection - that separates along the X and Y axis can reflect back inside or outside the Light Square (Each one quarter of a petal on the node). This is the reflection outside. The inside will have cross petals and will warp the Light square into a circle or sphere.
Like a pixel. The movie may be a lot more valid than we think :)
This is the Mass Wave reflected to 'inside' from the circle or sphere.
The mass is energy is the hypotenuse of the Light square (c^2). The energy is greater than the speed of light so the remaining energy must go somewhere. It bends space time and follows the lines of geometry through the nodes of the Light Square. The energy would follow the wave 90 degrees from the 4D reality, at least until it reaches another node and may switch again (fractal).
The Light Square I have calculated using E=mc^2. But that is just for validity and conveniece, as I see no reason that the light square could be measured very large or very small. On the way to work this morning visualizing how the Mass wave surrounding the light square - it seemed to me that it would warp the square into a circle from that view. Like a pixel :). Pixels are tiny points of light and color when combined make a picture. Fractals define each pixel by the number of passes through the equation or node. Me may be watching a much grander movie than you think :).
We may be God's reality TV. :)
Just for comparison.
Geometry and FOL
Circle Trigonometry 4 quadrant.
Note on a circle with 100 Radius.
Notable numbers are
70.71
29.29
I am not saying I know everything. I am theorizing. In mathematical basically everything can be reduced to 2D and expanded All dimensions we think about are 90 degrees so that is how I vizualize them - after 4 that is very hard and why I reduce it down to 2D and then work up. I doubt I could do Einstiens General Field equations but do understand Mass influences the fabric of space time and thus must use energy to do that. I noticed that the C^2 of Einstien had a hypotenuse larger than C and I figure the over energy may be what is the tensor on space-time. I will have to look through General Relativity again and Schwartchild Radius again for further insight and probably have to explore the quantum potentiality as the 'petals' are probably quantum waves IMO.
I am not a physicist so I am learning.
They would have to be qauantum waves as if I am right the extra energy of Mass folds out of our 4D reality and then they would just be a potential in our 4D or a 'tensor' holding our 4D in its shape.
I am approaching the physics through geometry.
For example.
>>2259108 The Circle is the mass with a radius of 1 as the unit circle (you can make the radius anything you want as I did with the C^2/Light Square to make it align with E=mC^2). The Mass Radius shows that the only part of the radius of that mass that is fully within the Light Square is 45 degree. As the radius goes from 45 to 0 the force of Mass on the X axis increases and moves beyond the Light Square. The same is true for 45-90 for the Y axis. The first quadrant of the trig circle represents the rotation counterclockwise around the Y axis (Lorentz Transformation), represented graphically:
Thus Lorentz transformation around Y axis:
The change in X is based on the Sin Wave function from 0 to 45.
The change in Y is based on the Cos Wive function from 45 to 90.
Intuitively the change in angle should be the same.
The other quadrants should be different rotations as it appears quadrant 4 should be counterclockwise rotation around X axis.
It will take me several hours to finish quadrant classification and equations, that I don't have this morning.
Back to Mass Radius Theory.
The Radius of the Mass at 45 degrees is explained by E=mc^2. The other angles from 0-45 have undefined energy of the mass beyond the Light Square (R-cos(angle)). The undefined energy of mass is called Gravity, or the deviation in space-time by mass. In this graphical representation the gravity force will be defined in that arc triangle with the greatest for force of gravity on the X axis will be at 0 degrees, and the least amount of gravity on the X axis will be at 90 degrees.
In this geometric theory - the Gravity force on X or
GX=MassRadius-(cos(angle))
GY=MassRadius-(sin(angle))
Next will be moving back to physics to see if I am right or wrong.
Thinking about this wave pattern it might be the inverted sin and cos waves:
GX=MR-(1/cos(angle)) or GX=MR-(-(cos(angle)))
GY=MR-(1/sin(angle)) or GY=MR-(-(sin(angle)))
as the greatest force of GX is on the X axis and it should be added not subtracted.
Hmm?
It is possible the difference between General Relativity and the Quantum level is the 45 degree angle.
No this wrong. The Cos (X) is 1 at angle 0, and 0 at 90 so the original would be correct.
it may be important to do the Gravity Force vector squared, make it a square like C^2. I have circled the areas in the trig graphic.
Not sure yet.
The Lorentz transformation around Y (1st quadrant) is a deviation into Z axis (shortening the X and lengthening the Y(often shown as time dilation)). It may take rotating the axis 90 degrees to calculate the angle of rotation in Z. Or you could use a 3D polar right triangle to get both Z and and X angle change.
In Physists speak:
The graph shows quantum potential.
The line (length) is the quantum wave of the square (area).
The square (area) is the quantum wave of the cube (volume).
The cube (volume) is the quantum wave of the hypercube (hypervolume or space-time).
The quantum wave is the potential of possible outcomes.
This is the Trig Pattern of the 'petal' thing.
The difference is the angles are different and the the central petals are larger (time?)
opps.
It is my own personal drivel actually. I never said it was anyone else's. Just that a line can be a square seen on edge, A square can be a cube with the depth axis superimposed. Kinda simple.
A quantum wave is a wave with potential and the actual return of the value is not know yet.
It appears that our point of center is deviated to x,y 70.71,70.71 (or -70.71,.70.71), from 0,0 the center of the radius. Basically the center appears to be shifted to the surface of the circle or sphere.
I completed the rotation in a symmetrical way (8 circles) of the Trig circle diagram (and added one circle in the center.
Ok Einstein saw but with calculus. The Light Square is basically what he considered our 4D reality. What won him fame is that he figured out that the Area of the LS and the Arc Triangles (AT)(gravity) never changed just the shapes with the angle, and that changed our space time. He basically used the Y axis as time. As you change the angle you stretch time and compress length Ychange picture. Also notice the huge change in AT and which axis they lie on.
The area of the LS is 423,966,494.1036.
The area of both Arc Triangles are 70,588065044,315097.0307366
Opps forgot a step in the area of both Arc Triangle area.
opps the area of both AT combined is the quadrant area of the circle minus the area of the square/rectangle (LS C^2)
so
Light Square area 63,550,978,688,480,375
Both ArcTriangle area7,037,086,779,801,215.80
Process:
Radius= Mass (linear in graphs 100 for convenience)
Area LS = (R-cos))*(R-sin) (100base)= 4,999.9)
Area LightCircle = pi*R^2 (100base)=31,415.926)
Area LightQuadrant= ALC/4 = (100base)=783.9815)
Area ArcTriangles=ALQ-ALS=(100base)=2,854.0815 (at 45degrees equal and each ArcTriangle =1,427.04075)
As you can see I am doing this for me, for documentation and because it needs to be shown that basic geometry is easier to understand the universe than anything else.
So what is my next step?
-
Follow the tensor point of the angle/hypotenuse and the ArcTriangles?
A. Difine the "pressure on Y and X axis per angle.
B. Possibly rotate into Z and and follow the area deviation in each Y and X per angle.
or
-
Explore the wave axis by placing the sin or cos wave as the axis and see the change in pattern.
Option one is following the Einstien Tensor and warp of space time.
Option two is the 2 graphical representation of axis being a circle.
So in our system that just uses the first quadrant would only be sin to 90 degree pi/2.
So if you used the Sin Wave as the Axis (both X and Y). That would be warp the object and show how it would appear in a circular axis. Sounds like a good computer subroutine to use for rotation and transformation in motion but not sure if easy to show in static pic.
Equation in:
X'=sinX
Y'=sinX
Basically every line would become an arc and every arc a line.
So basically that is the polar system.
It could be useful in the next phase of computer systems to move from binary though, as it would return a number between 0 and 1 (basically the probability of the result).
Hi
My next step is the Tensor Point at the end of the hypotenuse from 0 to 90 degrees and to evaluate the Arc Triangle of each - and see how it relates to general relativity.
Some basic data everyone should have, for every 5 degree angle.
These numbers will be used over and over.
I figured I better just throw in a spreadsheet to be an ass :) LOL no I need it to make my life easier.
Copy:
This is the area of space time warp.
The area outside the square but within the circle - this base on 45 degrees.
This all quadrants.
This is the 45 flat space model.
corrected spreadsheet.
The Highlighted area is the arctriangle area. The area not contained by the light square at 45 degrees. The area of gravity or tensor activity.
This is the X deviation of light square to about 22.9 degrees.
The hatch is the deviation of the ArcTriangles or the gravity tensor.
I am having trouble seeing how to paste it at Tensor Point as a lot of the circles are overlapping and the pattern is greatly distorted.
I started at 42 degrees then 40 and then 38
included a spit view on 40 and 38 showing torsion lines..
36 degree and 30 degree angle pictures.
20 degree
30 degree
Looks a lot like the aperture on a camera. Gravity Lensing?
It appears the tensors are at the corners at end of hypotenuse (Light Square).
Can you get an EM field to do this (open the aperture)?
Base 100 Table of areas etc.
30 Degree Light Square
Highlighted area is area with no physical plane.
This is the torque angle offset from the 45 degree to the 30 degree LS
Torque Tensor Areas
This one shows you the right triangle of torque with one side being the difference in the length from square to rectangle.
Three Fold tensor areas back to primary tensor.
To me it looks like the areas are angled in 3D.
Thinking about this more.
Red Tensor line connecting to the edge of 30 degree rectangle corner transmitted to yellow triangle which deviates downward (say into Y or time), then the black triangle folds back more to horizontal.
In an area with matter or charge yes Electric.
I found this one interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v9eTvlLi-s
I calculated the lengths and angles of the 30 degree tensor triangles.
Area is 79.45 -base Radius 100
I don't buy all that video either. But the feedback loop I do, and the Lie8 group seems to fit pretty well too.
Actually all these lines and axis I am working with can be seen as sin or cos, or waves as well. What I want to do next is figure out that area in the middle that is not part of space-time.
I think it is just the opening of the aperture of the dimensions that hold our 4D dimension in physical form.
That is my opinion. I think fractal is in there and possibly the Lie 8 group (FOL would be a subset of that).
cute.
Just as in my diagrams I can visualize a fold in dimension at the line so i can with the Golden Ratio. That could be a different scale of the circles that make the petals (a zoom in or out); scale shift of a partially curled up dimension.
Note each square is just one quadrant of the circle.
Note the addition of the smaller scale to the current scale causes and angle shift (scale shift) in the 'new' plane of the 'new' square.
I figure if I am going to look into the golden mean I better simplify by diagrams to be able to see it.
Outside of Plane Tensor areas.
All Tensor areas showing Torque of the square in the center.
Lines are like quantum waves of arcs and circles. Any arc or circle can be viewed as a line if rotated correctly. Anytime you change dimensions lines can stay lines, become arcs, or circles.
Tensor area around the plane is a wave form with 45 degrees being flat space-time and:
3D base trig square at different angles.
I highlighted the tensor areas in the 3D view.
The 30 degree 3D plane.
with the 30 degree 2D.
here is the problem in 3d. I copied rotated and pasted back the same angles as the 2D one, and came up with this mess.
I got it better I had to rotate it in Z axis not the X axis
And here it is in 3 different views
I shaded the outer tensors and then spun it.
To make it easier to see I have highlighted the planes. The pink is the plane on X and the blue is the plane on the Y.
Not in 3D there are no petals and funnels as all circles are superimposed and part of the sphere. In 4D they may come back as you add a torus to make the sphere a hypersphere.
Well you probably could add the petals by placing the rotated copies at the upper right corner of the 3D rectangle. I may try that next. Figure the cube point make the cube, Move the center to the cube point and rotate around that point 4 times 90 degrees each time.
That would put the tensors at the center not the edge.
Hmm I will have to take a look at that.
the 3d rotated in all XYandZ
the last is just Z and X
Totally not my goal. My goal is to see if Einstein Relativity can be seen with simple geometry, and if the fractal dimensions fit in as underlying dimensional support of what the pattern of how God created our 4D world ( I think it is a bubble of 4D).
This is cubes in 3D that are offset to Tensor Point 71.71,71.71 in a 45 degree angle. The odd thing is that my probram in this view thinks the circle is just slightly smaller there should be no double lines.
Cubes (4) with circles for each plane, hypotenuses, and 3D hypotenuses.
Another way to view the trig 2D on the cube.
This is the simple first step in 3D.
The Face on the right with the circle and the Tension lines needs to be applied to the faces with they hypotenuses drawn in to be c^3 (area) instead of c^2,
The first is the 2D area of 45 degree c^2 rotated in 45 degree pattern in 2D.
The second is 3D cubes rotated in the same way.
8 partial or fractal circle dimensions can create a 4D physical plane.
Is this a cube representation of the Hopf Hypersphere?
The circle should probably be inside the cubes.
but yes it seems like if circle was sphere and each cube edge was one of the vortexes then yes this diagram could easily be the Hopf Hypersphere.
All based on 8 fractal dimensions.
I will need to figure the X,Y, and Z of each angle change from 45 to see the axis deviation and plot it. I will do the three axis and graph it to show that the Z axis stretches as the X or Y compress.
Once I can place Z on the 2D axis of each the X and Y I will be able to figure the trigonometric function to figure Z point as the volume of the Box will remain the same.
This is the 30 degree angle with the 3D axis and the area from the blue line to the end of box is the stretch in the Z axis. It seems to be focused in the Y-Z axis that stretches when you shift the angle below 45 degrees
Turbocad is a MF bitch Autocad so much better just can't afford it.
Nice find.
Fits nicely with Cos Wave on the X axis of the Planck length and Sin wave on the Y axis of that length. Which creates the circle and Trig Square on each base length.
Thus if each Planck length has a EM field - you have the Planck EM field and all you need is motion to create a current - Time.
Is that Current the tensor warping space time we call gravity? Why would it always point to the center (well it would be along the line).
Well if this is true it will join Geometry fags, EM and Tesla fags into one group.
30 degree cube view.
Let me tell you it is hard to get one that is decipherable and our brains can sort through.
You all are probably much smarter than me I am intuitive. LOL.
I know that I can make a line a square, or a wave form, I know I can make a square a cube, and on and on. I know dimensions fold and superimpose. I know 4D is just a small subset of our pattern.
i am basically a โฆ.
I can make it a graph in 2 or 3 D and would love to figure out how to do it in 4D but I can't do the higher math, sorry.
But if a cube can be a line - i can figure it out in geometry.
if you can give me a program that will let me move this and other images to z' 90 degrees it would move much closer to fractal.
>https://www.geogebra.org/
will look Turbocad sucks
Autocad better but expensive and limited to 3D
Hmm? What I need is a program that if I want a new dimension they create it at the 45 degree angle and allow me to rotate it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and yes that creates hyper spheres and hyper cubes and etc. Am I beyond the normal curve?
But what the fuck it is all just right triangles and Lorentz transformations for spinning we know all this fucking shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It should be easy!
If I can spin in 3D I can spin in 4D!!!!!!!!!!
I can shift from 1 to 2 to 3 D give me something to see 4 visually and i will give you 5 and maybe 6
Tensors cross dimensions
deep projection of cube 30 degree rotation.
Euclidean to Mandelbrot set.
The numbers for the Euclidean shift to Mandelbrot
define please I don't understand.
Is this the pattern to shift scale? Is this the pattern for the self similar chaotic changes in the Mandelbrot set?
The center of a tetrahedron will be found by using bisectors across the opposite face to find the point of the tetrahedron
opps wrong that is a pyramid
3D 30 degree shift of cube,lightsquare, Blue is cube, red is tensor lines, and black is 2D.
Tetrahedron rotation 45 and 650 degrees without the squares.
This diagram of 4 isosceles triangles in this pattern is also a tetrahedron.
Link Mandelbrot to Euclidean?
Tetrahedrons? 4 isosceles triangles to find center of next larger circle and 3 of the smaller circles. Note these 2X circles are shifted 1/2 radius of 1X circles to the right. Mandelbrot has both scale shift and shift of self similar pattern like this diagram.
Picture representation of scale shift to larger circle, and self similar shift of moving center of circle by 1/2 R.
Golden Mean is just a shift in scale as well - see the full circles for each square.
Golden Ratio in 3D. Each square is shifted to a plane rotated at 45 degree angle .
Yup I have been trying to figure out some of those connections.
Golden Mean with each square as a plane at 45 degree.
Mandelbrot circles. Working on the angles.
These are the angles that I came up with but they are approximations.
I notice that the angles are 3-8 degrees off symmetrical (of 30 degrees)but not all in the same direction.
clockwise - 90 to 86 - 4 degrees
150 from 142 -8 degrees
Counterclockwise - 120 from 125 5 degrees
45 from 48 3 degrees
There is something about the 30-45-60 degree interaction - hmm I think this is the scale shift point.
30 45 and 60 degree trig rectangles in 3D.
Back to E=mc^2 (here are a few I have a spreadsheet)
Velocity/ angle based on 45 being flat space:
degree Velocity m/s 90 degree base
1 293,130,403.38 , 3,331,027.31
5 266,482,184.89 , 1,665,5136.56
30 99,930,819.33 99,930,819.33
45 0 149,896,229.00
60 99,930,819.33 199,861,638.67
75 199,861,638.67 249,827,048.33
90 299,792,458.00 299,792,458.00
Note this is Relative velocity. And one is that 45 degrees is flat space and the 90 degree is rotated so the flat space is the X axis.
The 3D Cube I called Light Square and the change.
Opps I think I got that wrong.
Same velocity is 45 degree and 30 slower, and 60 faster velocity.
wrong attachment
After I posted this I realized that means that every degree of change equals relative velocity change of c/90.
or
Relative Velocity 3,331,027.31 m/s = 1 degree of plane change or rotation.
The true question is the shifted relative plane really from velocity that warps space time, or the warp in space time is perceived by us as velocity, or that the warp in space time is just us perceiving a shifted relative plane? Note Einstein showed that relative velocity cannot exceed c but not that true velocity cannot exceed c - my take if relative velocity exceeds c light will not reach the 2nd observer as the plane is shifted beyond 90 degrees.
Well actually light might reach the 2nd observer but from the past, around the sphere.
Note
Einstein had to use the 3D model to figure out relativity as just rotating a square around the Y axis does not stretch the object in Y (time) it just shortens the X (length). In 3D angle shift it does work as area and volume remain constant.
The stretching of time and shortening of length is attributed to mass increase with velocity. My intuition is that the warp is first and that 'relative mass' and 'relative time' are just variables based on a warped space-time. I will work on a graphic
If all areas with large gravity are shifts in relative plane from the observer? What shifts that plane? Is that force from inside or outside the 4D system?
Why?
Occam's Razor - simplest solution is not making something have infinite mass and speed.
Occam's Razor - is to see the deviation and the effect on the object and then search for the reason for the deviation.
Wave axis
X - uses Cosine
Y uses Sine
Z to X is Sine
Z to Y is Cosine
Back to space-time warp and what causes it and studying it. I will start with symmetry.
Naked 3D wave axis and sphere one
Area of circle pi * r^2 = 31,400
Area of sphere = 4pir^2 = 125,600
Divide that by two to get hemi.
HC=15,700 from Tensor that causes 100 deviation or 1/157
HS=62,800 from Tensor that causes 100 deviation or 1/628
This is the geometry of symmetrical space-time deviation by a tensor be it from within system or from the outside of 4D.
Note the right triangles give way to two isosceles triangles that define the curve of the deviation.
More detail and sorry they were not isosceles but 70.71 sides and 100 hypotenuse crossing at 50,50
I finished the calculations for above the sub 4D plane.
I notice a relationship between the Mandelbrot calculation and this gravity calculation
The focus point should be on the 50.73 line and that this is the only place of asymmetry. The angle from the diagonal from the lower right corner (41.42) and the 50.73 is 100 degrees not 90. This is the only asymmetry.
There is some connection between space-time deformation and Mandelbrot. I will start by link between 30, 45, 60 angles.
You may be right. I may need to pull that 100 degree triangle out in another dimension.
ie using the 41.42 and 29.29 grid as the X and the 50.73 and 41.42 on the Y axis.
Doing this will create and 80 10 90 triangle to purple imaginary plane.
I am studying geometry related to physics no one else seems to. I understand one tensor on the space time is simple but this is what it would be defined as if the tensor caused a 100 radius deviation. I don't care about your high and mighty I am better than you attitude - old scientist :) LOL.
What if this boundary condition creates a 10 degree shift? That would show the tensor is from the imaginary plane not ours!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But still confused 15 I would get - hmmm think.
I can to geometry, Wave geometry is kinda new :).
But yes it will all fit once we get it. Wave and line and circle and tensor and fractal and โฆ. hell I don't know
I know I should study the wave axis but i am still stuck on the Tensors as I have found an anomaly and intuitive link to imaginary (sub4D) plane. Still working on angles and values sub4D
Finished the calculations below 4D line. Note the triangles are spun and define the 10 degree shift noted inside the 4D sphere.
Drop Perpendicular off of small rotation triangle.
The triangle angle shift force lines below 4D are somehow related to fractals but I have not figured out how yet.
Where have I seen this before and how does it relate?
corrected math. Left large triagle 80 degree angle, Middle larger triangle 101 degree triangle.
the new figure that seems to have significance. It is the 10 degree rotation and how it works out of space time deviation. But this obviously shows 3D effects.
Is this where I saw the rotated triangles in 3D; the iteration table of the Mandelbrot set?
If the lines of the triangle are arced and you place another triangle as a result of the first two to be the two lines from the base arctriangles then the rotation of triangle fits the iteration of the Mandelbrot set.
Finishing the Tensors sub 4D back to the point of space time deviation in anomoly.
Note the 12.91 and 20.53 tensors.
Think of the black in the Mandelbrot set as the 4D plane (our universe) and all the boundary (color art) as the tensors on our 4D plane.
Easier to Read
Last night in bed it occurred to me that the 90 degree dimensional shift can be seen as an arc moving from grid plane to new point outside grid plane. The arcangle of the arc will define the perspective from the original plane and the graph area from the original 4D plane. The non graph area of the new triangle/square will be in the imaginary plane.
Yes I feel mass is a side effect of folds of fractal dimensions and returned to 'user' as a definitive result by perception; and not just distinct and real.
It seems logical to me that mass and gravity are the folds of fractal dimensions the create the warp in our space time that we perceive as mass and gravity. This seems much more logical than a distinct object of mass can change in length and mass to the infinite just by moving it at a different relative velocity. Occam's Razor; it is easier that space time changes with changing the folds.
very rough sketch of a dimensional shift defined by multidimensional arc. Looks a lot like fractal branching to me.
i want to rotate this and show that the graphed areas overlap thus that distant points in Pattern can be part of local 4D grid by perception. My problem graphed in 2D and graphing in 3D will just do what I have already done show squishing and lengthening.. If I draw a grid - 4D plane and rotate that to 3D and drop the Arc off the rotated plane over and over putting back into 2D inbetween each - it might work.
This is one iteration of what I described.
I made a grid in 2D, rotated it just to show it a 2D grid seen at an angle. Then dropped an arc into Z and made an axis with it from the corner of grid. Then I hashed the axis to the arc as the real or graphable part of the projection. Then I rotated it back until the hash part was superimposed within the grid (distant points in pattern perceived as part of 4D)
IMO
That is how the Mandelbrot set works - the real part of the equation - the black parts no matter how distant will be included as part of the set (overlap). Distant points and sectors can be perceived as part of a local set.
Second iteration with superimposition. Note the superimposition will depend upon perception.
opps the picture for
overlap is
A quantum wave return is the solid evidence seen. it is the matter or physical evidence that shows something is 'real'. The quantum wave is all possibilities that exist for that query. Which is real as the first is just a probability?
I guess the quantum wave is the universal god pattern - that is what I seek.
I guess I am stuck.
Someone in vqc basically asked me to square the circle by asking about the inner circle of the triangle so I did a couple related to sin and cos dropping perpendiculars off the 30 and 60 degree angles to get the center for the inner circle.
The two things I noticed while doing this is one that defining the inner circles is a scale shift just like in fractal and Mandelbrot; and number two that the 30, 45, 60 rectangles are the same figure vqc gave originally.
The quantum wave is the wave of a function that can produce all possibilities. The quantum wave of 4D reality appears to be connected to geometry and all that needs to be figured out is how Euclidian and Polar connect to Fractal in easy mathematical way and that should give the grid/database of the quantum wave of all 4D functions. As for gravity I am leaning toward gravity is the boundary conditions tensors holding 4D in place and that the ones that are not at perfect 45 degree angles produce a 'gravity' deviation of 4D.
It can be graphed. I don't see all the connections right now perhaps someone else does. All i see right now is you can scale Euclidean like Fractal, and that fractal is dropping tensors or axis off of 4D and that circles and triangles tie it all together. But just like the Euclidian iteration pic it does not connect it back to FOL until we figure out how to 'see' the warped Mandelbrot set from the outside and then it will be the FOL or similar (ie more complex).
It may wind up being something like the Lie 8 group, with 248 dimensions and each line being the radius of a circle and each circle defined by the dimension plane it is in. That all interactions of circles/lines are tensors that
may be defining our 4D reality.
Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-LC_l3gNuc
>Can you actually get a fractal out of a regular geometric figure?
Yes and no.
sierpinski triangles are regular real fractals. Mandelbrot is plotted in the imaginary plane (sqrt of -1) and iterations that remain level are black those that arc to infinity are colored (not in set). To try and get real geometric figures to Mandelbrot will probably depend upon the number of iterations or the actual value per iteration. But each iteration may be a 90 (or other) degree shift from the 4D plane.
Trump
"reiterate"
hmm?
lie8
Lie 8 group animations
I think the Lie 8 group may be the connection of Euclid to Mandelbrot.
If you are projecting a geometric figure not onto a flat plane but a tilted or warped plane it will alter the image. My question next would be is if you project onto a hypersphere? such as above or the Hopf Hyper Sphere .
Note the numbers in the sets appear to be on a very similar axis
Note the circular Lie 8 projecting on a multidimensional axis could easily create scale shifts and you would get the trails and self similar cells
Good convo with anon in general.
The only way I can think of that working is if all energy waves cancel out once all added together.
Multiverse
Last night dream of alternate timeline in a coma and could hear my daughter calling me back from a long distance. And realized the irregular tetrahedron in the gravity calculation connects to the other timelines by irregular tetrahedron in the time axis. The 10 degree shift from 90 to 80 shifts in time or imaginary dimension and supports the other timeline - and if repeated supports many.
colored with legend
opps forgot the black timeline Timeline Tensor
spun 3D should have drawn it 3D Black lines go 90 degrees to a new timeline Green triangle from Timeline 0 to other Timeline TL(X). Should be able to see tetrahedron better
The 3D irregular tetrahedron that I rotate in a simplier way to see it.
Quantum timeline wave will include all possible timelines and will collapse into one with the wave return of 100% - when the wave follows one timeline until the next timeline.
Tetrahedron Timeline Wave?
and then the 12 array into the Z axis
Gravity Tensor 45degree360 array.
for clockfag
ClockFags have brought me to time wave analysis.
interesting add music to the time wave analysis?
Everything is geometry.
I may not be smart enough to figure it out but someone will.
Gravity is geometry of warping of space/time, Mass is the geometry of the compression of space/time to create the illusion of mass.
Think of it as living on the surface of an irregular bubble and bubble being space/time and the warping irregularities are the mass time and energy events we perceive. The energy exists both inside and on the surface of the bubble but the space time and matter and all we perceive are just the on the irregular surface. The geometry of the irregular bubble is what seems to be all we study and we see side effects not cause.
CERN and the particle accelerators just smash energy together to compress the space time in a very unstable way that creates transient compression of space time that they view as particles. They study the particles but not the geometry of the compression of space time.
Nuclear reactions release stabilized compression of space time and thus much larger amounts of energy - it probably has something to do with a very small diameter and a very long tensor (like a very short long right triangle).
So what makes matter solid? What is hardness, how does it relate to surface tension. What role does temperature play?
EM wave pattern of a proton?
time to study the wave of matter
The larger the 'piece' of matter the shorter the wavelength. What happened to the wavelength? Is the wavelength still there buy viewed as short due to rotation into t i axis?
Strong Nuclear Force
The strong force acts between quarks. Unlike all other forces (electromagnetic, weak, and gravitational), the strong force does not diminish in strength with increasing distance between pairs of quarks. After a limiting distance (about the size of a hadron) has been reached, it remains at a strength of about 10,000 newtons (N), no matter how much farther the distance between the quarks.[5]
Fission
Typical fission events release about two hundred million eV (200 MeV) of energy, the equivalent of roughly >2 trillion Kelvin, for each fission event.
Size of Nucleus:
a helium atom has a size of about 1 ร ngstrรถm (0.1 nanometers or 10-10 meters), while its nucleus is only 1 femtometer (10-15 meters) in diameter.
10,000 Newton Meters to MeV= 62,415,064,799,632,000
then times 10X -15
So 62.415 MeV
That is not close to 200 MeV released
Where is all the energy coming from?
I messed this calculation up:
The size (diameter) of the nucleus is between 1.6 fm (10โ15 m) (for a proton in light hydrogen) to about 15 fm (for the heaviest atoms, such as uranium).
10,000/(15*10^-15)=.000000000000666 and that converts to 4.15684331565551 MeV.
and
200MeV converts to 0.0000000000320435 Newton meters.
There is an order difference of 4,800 times more energy in the fission reaction than the strong nuclear force.
I think I found my mistake the ratio is :
2.1362333333333333333333333333333 more energy in fission than strong nuclear force.
(I should have multiplied the size of nucleus not divided).
2.1362333333333333333333333333333 more energy in fission than strong nuclear force.
Now lets see if the other forces make up that difference.
Mass is almost all a binding field
It isn't the particle that has the mass it is the field.
quantum chromodynamics binding energy (QCD binding energy), gluon binding energy or chromodynamic binding energy is the energy binding quarks together into hadrons. It is the energy of the field of the strong force, which is mediated by gluons.
Source of mass
Most of the mass of hadrons is actually QCD binding energy, through mass-energy equivalence. This phenomenon is related to chiral symmetry breaking. In the case of nucleons โ protons and neutrons โ QCD binding energy forms about 99% of the nucleon's mass. That is if assuming that the kinetic energy of the hadron's constituents, moving at near the speed of light, which contributes greatly to the hadron mass,[1] is part of QCD binding energy. For protons, the sum of the rest masses of the three valence quarks (two up quarks and one down quark) is approximately 9.4 MeV/c2, while the proton's total mass is about 938.3 MeV/c2. For neutrons, the sum of the rest masses of the three valence quarks (two down quarks and one up quark) is approximately 11.9 MeV/c2, while the neutron's total mass is about 939.6 MeV/c2. Considering that nearly all of the atom's mass is concentrated in the nucleons, this means that about 99% of the mass of everyday matter (baryonic matter) is, in fact, chromodynamic binding energy.
So most of the mass inside a nucleus is not matter it is energy.
Energy perceived as Mass.
Why would we perceive this energy as mass?
Geometry compression - is that what is perceived as mass?
Binding energy?
A field? Or a Tensor? Or a Tensor Field?
How would that work? The particles spinning around each other very fast. why would they be spinning - deviation of axis. The energy is being used to keep the vortex open that the particles are spinning about that 'binds' them. That is what I picture.
Wait the vortex is not vortex down - it is a vortex in to a zero point to a dimension 90 degrees. Think space time warped to a point like a black hole - that warping is the binding force. Each force we understand has a different topology of 4D warping to create a force.