Lloyd Gillespie's Blog

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie

Here's the one I was looking for Tim__for starters anyway...

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie
Hi RP, and let me try to answer your query with reference to a clean slate model. Let's view the entire universe as a background independence of an infinite pure quantum space/field/substance, traveling at c, everywhere__no quantumized matter formation yet__just a bare quantum theoretical model. Let structured matter be called quantumized matter, as this model evolves/forms into structured matter. c, in this model, has three possible ground internal motion states, and one total random motion state__this would be__Linear right chiral motion__Linear left chiral notion__Linear opposite chiral motion. The model has three states of time__Linear__Angular__Spin, and also__Past_Present_Future__all within the eternal Now Time__So the model's a 4D Universe of Einstein's conception. Now, total universal motion at c, can not form into structured matter, unless it transfers some of its linear motion to, first angular motion, then spin motion. The law of action/reaction requires the amount of stored energy in the field substance's linear velocity, to be a shared total velocity, as a volume of space/field/substance is condensed to a volume of structured matter__this simply means that linear, must first turn angular, then into spin motion__to form structured matter in one particular place in infinite space, while, all the while, sharing total energy/substance/mass velocity. In other words, as linear velocity decreases, angular velocity increases, thus increasing still further into localized spin velocity, created by the inter-meshing mechanics of the three ground states of motion__right, left and opposite chirals. The opposite would be the key in structured matter formation, by creating the tightest motion entanglements, due to its drastic asymmetries, of knot tying abilities, of the condensing motions of fields/substances/masses/energies present. The trick is to see that we can never witness this directly, even in Lene Hau's experiment, because we can't directly measure light with our light speed limited tools__yet we can know its existence through modal logics necessities of physical actions. Since these motions only become measurable at far less than light speeds, we measure only part of the velocity spectrum, and must use modal probabilities for the full spectrum's measurements__though this is possible and known.

So, to answer your question, and I'm not sure the above model gives a clear enough picture, but anyway__If the structured matter were to be expanding at c, as I believe you suggest, it would be violating the laws of motion, which must share the total velocity of all motions present. By being required to share velocity, to form structured matter, and the fact c is always a constant, no matter how measured in vacuum, the only motion resevoir for structured matter's condensation formation to come from is the total unstructured fundamental substance field matter energy properties, of the fundamental random linear quantum velocity__which must be shared, not to violate the laws of motion. We have no logic available to us to state that there's always an excess of the infinite FS feeding into the 4D Universe we witness, as the fundamental mechanics and laws of, would still require the shared motion velocities mentioned. In order for FS matter/field/energy/mass to condense and form into initial structured matter__such transformation requires a geometric path of actual condensation, thus requiring the larger volume of FS space, to condense into the smaller, yet much tighter knotted and wound, standing wave-particle-object within space. The only path option open to scientific logic, is shared velocity of the total motion...

This isn't to say that it's a strictly set fixed matter state__It's simply showing the truth must lie between these perameters of motion's shared velocities__possibly varying one side or the other some__maybe... It could be slightly skewed toward an expanding matter, along with c, which would mean the total initial velocity would have to exceed our present measurement of light speed, but it would still be c in an altered state of c, but, when we do this, we are simply stepping into pure speculation, beyond all our scientific knowledge. Yet, there are alternative models of c, which do show slightly expanding matter, at very small increments, over each year, which does interpret through billions of years to massive expansions of structured matter over time__but again, pure speculation, as no sceintific measurement is possible, outside what science has already established__Yet__Einstein's c is absolute__just as he long ago stated, until science develops further, to more accurately find ways to measure all the universe's motion and velocity differences. We can build many models, but so far, there's only one correct one__Einstein's, and I don't see the real problem between his and QM__I think it's just the man-made gauge math that's the real problem, and I advocate building a new background independent asymmetric math, to better match the real world and Universal conditions__at both relative and quantum levels__which, imo, would unite the two...

Here's an innate perception model I use to see the internal continuum's comparison to the external continuum. If we picture any concept in our mind's eye, how and from where is it formed...? What is its true and full quantum path...? Kant long ago mentioned the fact, that we actually control inner space to form concepts__that would be quantum controlling our inner space to form any concept, then how do we unite concepts, when we form more than one__and choose to unite them...? What and from where is the mechanics sourced...? If we look at this as a united objective/subjective model, we can see a bit deeper into all quantum actions. The base subjective energies of our inner quantum continuum field/energy, would then be absolutely required, by all modal logic's possibilities, probabilities and necessities, to be the source of our objective concept/object mechanics. From my findings, the mind is impossibe of function, without the subjective continuum field/energy, supporting the objective concept/object world. The brain's perception apparatus is just a simple muscle, which we contract and expand at will, to perform all the 'ratiocinator mechanics' necessary for all intelligence functions, imso, when combined with the five senses, memory, and will, etc., of the rest of the epistemic agents... To me, this whole quantum and relative mechanics is not as complex as many have made it out to be__It's just seeing it anew, in a simpler light, that's the real trick to me... In this model, the internal actions and objects, can be transposed onto the external universal model, back and forth, as needed__It just enhances the overall vision and theoretic abilities... Just a model, so do with it what you want...

Let me know if this helps or blunts your understanding...

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Dear Lloyd:
Please tell me what you think of this excerpt from Total Field Theory: Reinstatement of CC and Steady State Theories... It is a narrative circumspection of the information you responded to in missive 2247; the final result being an elaboration of the same question I asked previously.

Question: ‘Is matter expanding at the same rate of acceleration as light?’
Answer: ‘Yes, but, in a value of square (2). Consequently, the rate of acceleration is the same, but the expansion speeds vary with microcosmic (very small) and macrocosmic (very large) space-time, in a value of square.
Consider the (incorrect) distinction between electromagnetism & gravity as the status quo, i.e., the prevailing idea that microcosmic ‘nuclear binding forces’, ‘are not, and cannot be’ related to gravitational forces. This ‘disqualification’ of any unification of microcosmic electromagnetism with gravity is based on the false, prevailing and uncontested premise alleged in the ‘difference’ between large gravitational forces which cause planets to orbit, and the smaller forces which bind ‘particles’ together within the atomic nucleus - sometimes called ‘nuclear resinal forces’. [Imo, this is where asymmetric chirality comes in, and does the heavy lifting__and no-one has explored this mechanics far enough__Yet. It's the asymmetric chiral-knot theory, I've mentioned elswhere...]

In this sense, contemporary physical science still dwells in the archaic conceptual world of *Ptolemic-*Aristotelean dualization of ‘earthly & heavenly motions’ - *_forces acting on earth; until the time of Newton, who proved that large forces in the universe were the same forces acting on and near earth. That the fall of an apple was governed by the same forces that caused the moon to orbit the earth, and the earth’s orbit around the sun...

To me, it's all one simple system of FS motion and velocity variations of... Yet__It may take more science than we have to prove it...