[G_burnett]

Originally Posted by Vincent Wee-Foo Based on hypothesis of Universal Vortical Singularity, the creation of all natural structures and living organisms has a fundamental link to this universal singular vortex mechanism. All steady state forms as physical structures are held stable by self-perpetuating vortical inertial forces, are EMF of different wavelengths. The fundamental building blocks of universe evidently are subatomic singular vortices, as described in the geometrical structure of an atom. Find a recently added section on fathoming the subatomic particles.,

The Gravitomagnetic forces compared to electromagnetic forces have the one basic difference that like poles will repel in the EMF platform and mass in the GMF of similar polarity will attract but this may be a paradox of quantum mechanics based on perspective and platform, where the mass came from in transient inertia (eg. the expanding universe) can be quantified as being of negative now gone from there and positive to where it will be so vectoring two forms in parallel opposite interaction joins the two beyond fringe pondering.

Originally Posted by Vincent Wee-Foo Evidently, the reality we are conceiving can be preceived as a persistence illusion from another perception, all states of matter are merely EMF interactions in different wavelengths. Physical objects weaved by vortical inertial forces are likened to ideas of nature, the analogue for physical object is an idea of nature is on the physical object conceived in a higher order thought is consolidated by EMF of different wavelengths. A solid object relevant to us that has a physical form is consolidated in a steady state by EMF waves of a particular bandwidth, this solid object can be a relatively hollow matter to EMF waves of another bandwidth with other frequencies that have a form in a different state, and vice-versa. Examples of this are light can pass through diamond or glass, and electromagnetic fields can radiate through solid wall and other physical forms that are relatively hollow matters in another state. By all mean Graham, I am with all ears. Looking forward to more insight of your theory next week. For unifying,

hmmm ok my friend vincent please dig out the gallery pics as i can not seem to post them here being all thumbs or something ...
The vectoring of universal form in nature having a similar nature of interaction is to my belief independent of being perceived in the macro or universal scale of interaction. The movement, speed or velocity, direction, fluid transitional state, wave form, density or lack of the above or in of any scientific platform of study, be in the way of either basic interaction by;
1. A reflection to an impact smashing type event horizon,
2. Attraction to an event horizon or,
3. Repel in an event horizon.

I will independent by form of consideration be mostly dealing first with particle form that are relatively the same size and volume of force but as I get further into the descriptions this will change without further explanation as the vectoring will hold true to other scenarios and dimensional further belief pictorial representation.

New to my thoughts are the more recent considerations of frame dragging perception from outside the event. After the creation of the black hole we are in mind set to miss the reasoning behind the creation and vectoring can be a valid key.

What form or amount of form that created the black hole is looked at but not so much the interaction of the form prior to the event and indicators are viewing the event plus two determinable by vectoring that the hole was created by passive form of transient fluid form stream parallel interaction …. What the form of the particle was/is in terms of having a mass quantifiable, or measurable prior to the event may be negligible to the event but the amount of the singularity stream (s) is definitely a factor as would be in the surmise that the very energy in space static expanding would play a part as would a static form of mass being the event horizon point of event on a y axis the stream(s) would interact with.
Further the event would make the transient form of the particle mass at the instantaneous event horizon a factor to any hypothesis.

I hope as the hypothesis is thought of the reader will put there own platform of study to personal relativity to the application in terms of mass, momentum, varied directional event horizons of interaction to the testing of these vectors and feel free to comment, request clarification and submit replies.

In the below first construction pic 1, two running lines are coming from a negative beginning to a positive direction, and crossing a vertical snapshot event axis in one dimensional space. Negative is in the sense it is from a place it is no more at when observed and positive is where it is going to be.

I have tried to determine the event happening with neutrons but will use the proton as the form in transient form as an easier example.

As we look at the two lines, picture 2, it shows one line of a particle form in a blown up perspective, having spin on its axis and spin in its direction therefore as shown having polar field four ways, axis of particle spin, directional spin with a wave frequency created, and designation/beginning state so as in picture three at any given snapshot slice of the direction from where it came before the slice it was negative and after a slice taken it was positive and where the snapshot is taken the only matter for perception is it having interaction with a second line.

As depicted in all picture 1, 2, 3, by the vertical ray intersecting the streams the vertical plane will give location of the event horizon of interaction on this singular dimensional.

The below picture 1, 2, and 3, is a progressive descriptive pictorial using a vector pictorial description on transient particle form interaction. This is particle form in the term of not being with mass as it is in a transient form here but could be in a varied state of mass quantifiable if in a slow speed or wave length for example of perspective such as in color view determination but having form of charge/polarized field strength, such said as being positive and negative and axis when in transient motion and having mass considered when static not having directive mass out of transient space or rather on impact/interaction (non transient) being the event mass becomes more quantifiable.

The basic rule of thumb shown in (picture 1) below, is in that two forces are interacting by parallel approach. The nature of the particle unit in transient form is not noted as mass or without mass but is a transient force of a particle by its nature of having come from a place of origin where once gone from that place we can say it has negative value as where it came from and at where it will be in a place ahead or in the front of the directive vector it will be positive.
What happens in the event of two transient form parallel going the same way having the same charge can be applied in rule one application in the singularity form of positron stream a little later explained.

This is a bit of a paradox to understand because at a given snapshot through the stream the particle form will impact as positive but come from negative and can be attracted to negative either in the vertical axis or horizontal in-coming for the example and could repel or attract depending on spin that can create polar field direction.
We will not get into all the possible variations of interactions in this brief as they extend into mass variations as well in transient form.
The two streams, and referred to as streams herein because even though it may be a particle at rest, in transient from it is not perceived as a unit of mass while it is in transient form, in the above, have a spin that will allow the perception of opposite nature when in parallel direction to the other an so will react in a way of attraction within the boundaries of the event horizon.
The boundaries are dependent of when the particle in transient form will be able to be influenced by the other. As such the event described herein is one of neither fluidness there are nor real parallel lines except for pictorial reference as the form proton particle is depicted as transient.

In the measurement of such form depicted (in pic.3.) by the dots along the horizontal plane the Uncertainty Principal is being considered as I believe should be where in a snapshot view being able to determine the position of the particle form in transient form one can see the near impossible task of prediction in taking a snapshot slice, determining the slice or even determining the axis but given enough time the form will be where predicted in a slice on the given time thread and in the quadrant perspective in eight dimensional depiction the prediction is that this event will take place.

The circles are indicative examples of the varied positions possible of snapshot perception and to indicate variant time lines that may result in the parallel event before and interaction will take place and outside the singularity of a proton example there in this hypothesis's is for the mechanics of Rule 1 interaction despite and not in spite of particle form composition.

In further study I believe the interaction theorized will be able to be calculated without uncertainty in the study of quark composite but I personally am not there yet. Feel free to tell me you are into this field of study and I would be happy to join the conversations.

more to follow

Graham