[Einstein]

RP

It seems you have departed from the specific issue at hand and gone on to mass-field doppler effect.
Are you applying excerpts from the posted work - http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie - here?

Not at all. Einstein himself was my teacher through his writings. I merely borrowed his visualization technique to examine the behavior of gravity in comparison to an electromagnetically accelerated object.

Will you elaborate further on your contention, here?

You need a stationary frame of reference, next you need an accelerated frame of reference, and finally you need an object to be acted upon by the accelerated frame of reference. Three things.

In a rocketship using EM acceleration, the feeling of weight is felt. The rocketship accelerates through space. But what if the rocketship has no windows? Either the rocketship accelerates through space or the space is accelerating through the rocketship. The two situations are presumed to be equivalant. On the earth it is easier to visualize the space accelerating through the rockship just standing on the ground. In order for the feeling of weight to exist on the earth we have to be in an accelerated reference frame that is moving in the downward direction.

[Graybeard]

Hmmmm ... This is interesting

First ..... if these are the articles you have directed me to, could you label them in chapters, or do I just count down starting at chapter 1 = Total Field VII Pt. II, etc. In which case why does Total Field VII Pt. II come before Total Field VII Pt. I ??

• Total Field VII Pt. II
• Total Field VII Pt I
• Total Field Theory Addendum Pt II
• TotalFieldTheory Addendum Pt I
• QuantumFieldTheory (Take Two)
• Congrats from Heathersveet
• Hypothetical Particle Jungle Part III
• Jungle of HypotheticalPartic les Part I
• The electron Neg to Pos & Impel toRepel
• About This Book Pt II

If I number them down then chapter 7 = Hypothetical Particle Jungle Part III. If so, then in your first sentence you claim that a particle, one, has been found ... but I think you mean it has not and that this is just a typo. Then the article lists a bewildering array of particles, sub-particles, and sub-sub-particles ending up with, and this is really good Rascal,

Then there are tardyons, luxons (travels at the speed of light and has no rest mass), whereas, 'tachyons travel faster than the speed of light and has an imaginary rest mass'.
The list and the references go on and on...
Including and explanation that the article is licensed by GNU free documentation; using material from the Wikipedia article...
Welcome to the mad, mad, mad, particularly mad world of particles and 'particle theory'... (You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave?)

Have you read Kurt Vonneguts short novella 'Meet my Maker, the Mad Molecule'

The article concludes with a dissertion on why the name, 'The Standard Model' shows insufficient homage to the reality. But what do you expect from a Scientific core that labels the beginning of our Universe 'The Big Bang', our Galaxy, 'The Milky Way', our nearest galactic neighbours, 'The Local Group'. This is science, not fuking literature.

I am sorry Rascal, but chapter 7 as a denoument, or even as an explanation, or even a cohesive description of the rules, of Quantum Mechanics and the discrete universe fails. It gives no insight into any flaws in QM. It just calls QM names. If its meant to specifically define your position on the continuity of matter then I missed it ?

Next .... Lets define mass .... (as best we can )

• Mass: The mass of an object is a fundamental property of the object; a numerical measure of its inertia; a fundamental measure of the amount of matter in the object. Definitions of mass often seem circular because it is such a fundamental quantity that it is hard to define in terms of something else.
• Invariant mass: The invariant mass or intrinsic mass or proper mass or just mass is a measurement or calculation of the mass of an object that is the same for all frames of reference. For any frame of reference, the invariant mass may be determined from a calculation involving an object's total energy and momentum.
  • Inertial mass is a measure of an object's resistance to changing its state of motion when a force is applied. An object with small inertial mass changes its motion more readily, and an object with large inertial mass does so less readily.
  • Passive gravitational mass is a measure of the strength of an object's interaction with a gravitational field. Within the same gravitational field, an object with a smaller passive gravitational mass experiences a smaller force than an object with a larger passive gravitational mass.
  • Active gravitational mass is a measure of the strength of the gravitational field due to a particular object. For example, the gravitational field that one experiences on the Moon is weaker than that of the Earth because the Moon has less active gravitational mass.

The first two I take to be describing the same thing...... As for the rest ... well

Do you take gravitational mass to equal inertial mass by a strange coincidence ... or do you take them to be the same thing ?? You stated above that you take them to be 'unexpectedly equal'

For my money I take them to be the same, but I temper it by plagiarising Dave's description (DLeviwing) in his blog, The Toronic Paradigm,

Mass is a term that all of us believe we have some degree of understanding. The fact is however, we use the numbers and follow the procedures without a true understanding of inertia and the term we've come to know as "Rest Mass". Many have come to visualize mass as a physical quantity of nature and that this quantity can be converted to a non-physical quantity of nature called "Energy". Richard Feynman, though not the first to note this mystery, stated in his book, "QED, The Strange Theory of Light and Matter":

"Throughout this entire story there remains one especially unsatisfactory feature - the observed masses of the particles, "m". There is no theory that adequately explains these numbers. We use the numbers in all our theories, but we don’t understand them – what they are, or where they come from. I believe that from a fundamental point of view, this is a very interesting and serious problem."

One of the surprising and unexpected consequences of the Toronic concept was a solution of the term "m" (mass) in both the general equation for energy of particles (Rest mass) and that of Einstein's equations for radiant energy (Relativistic mass). Though the solution is extremely simple, it reaches into every aspect of Quantum and Relativity theories. It also poses a disturbing consequence; we may be using a term that is not truly representing physical quantities of a physical substance of nature, but only providing a comparison of structured fundamental particle units of matter; though, even this, is without a true reference.

Let me know your explanation of Mass and we will take this further

cool bananas ... greg

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by Einstein

In order for the feeling of weight to exist on the earth we have to be in an accelerated reference frame that is moving in the downward direction.

Not sure I get you here Einstein. Why couldn't we just be on the nose of a spaceship, called Earth, accelerating thru SpaceTime? Or is this what you mean and I am to dumb to get it?

cool bananas ... greg

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by Graybeard

Hmmmm ... This is interesting

First ..... if these are the articles you have directed me to, could you label them in chapters, or do I just count down starting at chapter 1 = Total Field VII Pt. II, etc. In which case why does Total Field VII Pt. II come before Total Field VII Pt. I ??

• Total Field VII Pt. II
• Total Field VII Pt I
• Total Field Theory Addendum Pt II
• TotalFieldTheory Addendum Pt I
• QuantumFieldTheory (Take Two)
• Congrats from Heathersveet
• Hypothetical Particle Jungle Part III
• Jungle of HypotheticalPartic les Part I
• The electron Neg to Pos & Impel toRepel
• About This Book Pt II

If I number them down then chapter 7 = Hypothetical Particle Jungle Part III. If so, then in your first sentence you claim that a particle, one, has been found ... but I think you mean it has not and that this is just a typo. Then the article lists a bewildering array of particles, sub-particles, and sub-sub-particles ending up with, and this is really good Rascal,

Have you read Kurt Vonneguts short novella 'Meet my Maker, the Mad Molecule'

The article concludes with a dissertion on why the name, 'The Standard Model' shows insufficient homage to the reality. But what do you expect from a Scientific core that labels the beginning of our Universe 'The Big Bang', our Galaxy, 'The Milky Way', our nearest galactic neighbours, 'The Local Group'. This is science, not fuking literature.

I am sorry Rascal, but chapter 7 as a denoument, or even as an explanation, or even a cohesive description of the rules, of Quantum Mechanics and the discrete universe fails. It gives no insight into any flaws in QM. It just calls QM names. If its meant to specifically define your position on the continuity of matter then I missed it ?

Next .... Lets define mass .... (as best we can )

• Mass: The mass of an object is a fundamental property of the object; a numerical measure of its inertia; a fundamental measure of the amount of matter in the object. Definitions of mass often seem circular because it is such a fundamental quantity that it is hard to define in terms of something else.
• Invariant mass: The invariant mass or intrinsic mass or proper mass or just mass is a measurement or calculation of the mass of an object that is the same for all frames of reference. For any frame of reference, the invariant mass may be determined from a calculation involving an object's total energy and momentum.
  • Inertial mass is a measure of an object's resistance to changing its state of motion when a force is applied. An object with small inertial mass changes its motion more readily, and an object with large inertial mass does so less readily.
  • Passive gravitational mass is a measure of the strength of an object's interaction with a gravitational field. Within the same gravitational field, an object with a smaller passive gravitational mass experiences a smaller force than an object with a larger passive gravitational mass.
  • Active gravitational mass is a measure of the strength of the gravitational field due to a particular object. For example, the gravitational field that one experiences on the Moon is weaker than that of the Earth because the Moon has less active gravitational mass.

The first two I take to be describing the same thing...... As for the rest ... well

Do you take gravitational mass to equal inertial mass by a strange coincidence ... or do you take them to be the same thing ?? You stated above that you take them to be 'unexpectedly equal'

For my money I take them to be the same, but I temper it by plagiarising Dave's description (DLeviwing) in his blog, The Toronic Paradigm,

Let me know your explanation of Mass and we will take this further

cool bananas ... greg

________________________________

Somehow we got out of communication about Total Field VII Part I. That's the one I wish you to read. It's about the unification of field theory with quantum mechs. and wave mechanics. You obviously went through a lot of trouble on this misunderstanding and I apologize for that. Appreciate the heck out of your forging ahead on to other things, anyway. I hope to engage you in a discussion about the contents of Total Field Theory VII Part I - after you click on 'Start Reading', The listings are from bottom to top instead of top to bottom.

The bewildering array of particles and sub particles is to demonstrate how the hypothetical particle cannot fulfill Einstein's statement that: 'If you can't explain it to you grandmother, you don't understand it'... Particle 'theory' has turned into a clusterfork.

Murphy is beckoning me to other issues right now, Greg. Thank you, and once again I apologize. I'm trying to navigate you into and beyond Archimede's Spiral and the extrapolation of the Golden Rectangle... How the latter can be implemented to explain physical dimensions and quantum mechanics...

Regards,
- RP

[RascalPuff]

Dear Greg:
The following is an exerpt from Total Field Theory VII Part I:

Field Theory is about continuous waves.
Quantum Mechanics is about discontinuous units (of waves, called 'particles').
The record repeats, the two subjects are generally considered mutually exclusive. Continuous Field Physics apparently contradicted by Discontinuous 'Particle' physics... (Quanta - photons - are not so much perceived as discontinuously surface 'particles', as they are preceived as discontinuously unsurfaced waves/fields).

Whereas, the apparently inherent, so called 'contradiction', is a 3-dimensionally misunderstood illusion: projected on a 4-dimensional phenomenon. Starring, the usual, 3-Dimensionally spellbinding, culpable party animals? Standardizing a three dimensional concept of a spiral, there is nothing unrealistic about Archimede's - Google acquired - spiral (It's just 3-Dimensionally expanding, in an allegedly 'acknowledged' 4-D universe)...
Spiral of Archimedes

Polar equation: r = a




whereas, in a material 4-D universe, a spiral is actually logarithmically accelerating (Google logarithmic spiral - Mathworld.wolfram.com). One need not carry out the accompanying equations to understand the difference between a 3-Dimensionally expanding spiral and a 4-Dimensionally accelerating one. Logarithmic Spiral

The logarithmic spiral is a spiral whose polar equation is given by
(1)
where is the distance from the origin, is the angle from the x-axis, and and are arbitrary constants. The logarithmic spiral is also known as the growth spiral, equiangular spiral, and spira mirabilis. It can be expressed parametrically as


(2)(3)

The logarithmic spiral can be constructed from equally spaced rays by starting at a point along one ray, and drawing the perpendicular to a neighboring ray. As the number of rays approached infinity, the sequence of segments approaches the smooth logarithmic spiral (Hilton et al. 1997, pp. 2-3).
The logarithmic spiral was first studied by Descartes in 1638 and Jakob Bernoulli . Bernoulli was so fascinated by the spiral that he had one engraved on his tombstone (although the engraver did not draw it true to form) together with the words "eadem mutata resurgo" ("I shall arise the same though changed"). Torricelli worked on it independently and found the length of the curve (MacTutor Archive).
The rate of change of radius is
(4)
and the angle between the tangent and radial line at the point is
(5)
So, as <IMG class=inlineformula height=15 alt="b->0" src="http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/equations/LogarithmicSpiral/inline12.gif" width=34 border=0>, <IMG class=inlineformula height=15 alt="psi->pi/2" src="http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/equations/LogarithmicSpiral/inline13.gif" width=53 border=0> and the spiral approaches a circle.
If is any point on the spiral, then the length of the spiral from to the origin is finite. In fact, from the point which is at distance from the origin measured along a radius vector, the distance from to the pole along the spiral is just the arc length. In addition, any radius from the origin meets the spiral at distances which are in geometric progression (MacTutor Archive).
The arc length (as measured from the origin, ), curvature, and tangential angle of the logarithmic spiral are given by
(6)(7)(The Cesàro equation is then given by
(9)
On the surface of a sphere, the analog is a loxodrome. This spiral is related to Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio.




A more comprehensive, simplified, less mathematical approach to this dissertation, follows.
Continuous Field theory inherently begets Discontinuous Particles:
Note the accelerating transition of the four dimensional mass, consisting of four ninety degree quadrants. Any more energy generated by that system, has no more room to occur inside that spheroidal electromagnetic charge (of 360o 4-D mass/matter system); the 5th quadrant of ninety degrees - generated by and a result of the four dimensions constituting the material energy that generates it, moves - is emitted - at right angles out of 4-D matter, in a fifth ninety degree unit of electricity, the 5th dimension. 'Quantum Leaping' out of the four ninety degree quadrants of physical matter. For this reason - of a 5th 90o unit, all quanta/photons have the same 'Quantum' value (plural - 'quanta'), though they may occur - always having the same value - in more extended units of or toward infra red, or more compact units of or toward ultra violet.

The following information is extracted from The Dictionary of SCIENCE, by E.B. Uvarov and D. R. Chapman, Penguin Publishers, copyright 1943 to 1975.
"Quantum - According to the quantum theory, energy exists in discrete units, only whole numbers of which can exist: each unit is called a 'quantum' <plural 'quanta'>. The quantum of electromagetic radiation is the photon; in certain contexts, the quantum of energy associated with nuclear forces may be taken as the meson.

Quantum Mechanics. The system of mechanics which, during the present century, has replaced Newtonian Mechanics as a method of measuring physical phenomena occurring on a very small scale (e.g., the motion of electronsandnuclei within atoms; see atom, structure of).

Quantum Theory originated with the discovery by Max Planck that the heat radiation from a black body (see black body radiation) is quantized, i.e., emitted in discrete quanta of energy, the magnitudes of which are given by the products of the frequency of the radiation and a universal constant, now known as Planck's constant. It was soon realized that all electromagnetic radiations are quantized (see photon) and the theory was developed by Niels Bohr, so that the spectrum of hydrogen could be accounted for quantitatively (see Bohr theory). This early version of quantum mechanics was refined by Sommerfield to take into account the elliptical orbits of electrons. More recently quantum mechanics has been developed in a speciaized form, known as wave mechanics, which is more versatile and involves fewer arbitrary assumptions than the original theory."

'Photo-electric effect'. In general, any effect arising from the result of a transfer of energy from light incident on a substance to electrons in the substance. The term is normally restricted to one type of the effect, namely the emission of electrons by substances when irradiated with light of a certain frequency greater than a minimum threshold frequency. Electrons emitted in this way are called photo-electrons and constitute a photo-electric current when the system is included in a suitable circuit."

(*Quanta may sometimes be collectively measured and/or otherwise improvisationally considered, in erg seconds <one erg = 10-7 joules> or Angstrom units <One AU=10-10 metre. A measurement of wavelengths of light & intra-molecular distances.> - KBR)
- The Dictionary of SCIENCE, by E.B. Uvarov and D.R. Chapman, Penguin Publishers.

Beware the lurking Jabberwock, paraphrased.
This record will not venture to define such terms as 'quarks', 'strangeness', or 'charms', let alone 'tacheyons', 'gravitons', 'glueons', leprechauns or put-ons; until any of these exotically spun, spin-doctored r.p.m.'s and an entire genre of similarly angularly momentized fantasys are proved to exist at all. Until further notice, none of these stick-on, would be elemental genus specimens, are so predisposed beyond a tangle of woofs, warps and waffling warbles, invented (without any sober dignity or restraint known to this record) to displace what would otherwise be innocent and viable ignorance of the behavior and dynamics of microcosmic entitys.... (For which the above innovated 'vocabulary', in the reserved perspective of this observer, departs the realm of study, while indulging in flapping flippancy.) Yes. The considered dynamics and/or entities likely do require a vocabulary, but this record cares not to seriously embrace such similarly levititious expressions of *'cleaving unto the spousal' arousal of the exemplary excercise in bad taste, namely the improvised dissolution to the 3-Body Problem, so aptly represented by *Misner, Thorne & Wheeler (*'Forego talk of acceleration. Fall is <'Your fault'>', for example. If this is *GRAVITATION, Barbara Lovett Cline is *MACHO, and Newton was a *WIMP.)
And now, this:
May the Reader mark the above issued definition of 'Quantum Theory', and especially its closure quote, alluding to the evolved adaptation of 'wave mechanics':
"More recently quantum mechanics has been developed in a speciaized form, known as wave mechanics, which is more versatile and involves fewer arbitrary assumptions than the original theory."

The above information with its closing note is simply a reminder that the popular perception of quantum mechanics is that it contradicts 'field-wave' considerations, whereas, quantum mechanics has been addressed more manageably, in context of 'wave mechanics'.

An Offered Avenue of Comprehension in the
Quantum Mechanical Field of 'Discontinuity' and
the 'Quantum Leap' (continued)...

The 5th dimension (5th ninety degree extension out of the four part, three hundred sixty degree quadrants) doesn't ‘mysteriously’ leap out of 4-D matter at all, but rather is an inevitably extrapolated, continuous - and accelerated - extension of it (the 4-D mass from which it originates and by which it - the 5th dimension, is generated), manifest in an apparently discontinuous unit - "Plank's constant 'h' factor"; photon - always having the same value, because it is consistently the 5th ninety degree unit extending out of the 4 physical dimensions that preceded and generated it.

The 5th ninety degree units (photons; 'Planck's "constant 'h' factor") photons, or 'quanta' - the smallest unit of energy known to academia. The described dynamic does not actually contradict continuous field theory (as popular perceived and alleged), but rather, is a result of and generated by the 4-D space-time continuum.

The 5th and 6th dimensions of electricity and magnetism respectively, are accelerating, just as the source from which they invariably originate (4-D matter), but the expansion of electricity and magnetism is exponentially extended from 4-D matter and therefore accelerating at a much faster - quantum leaping - rate. An illusion of 'contradiction' of continuous field theory, whereas the apparently 'discontinuous' particle is actually a 4-dimensionally and continuously expanding charge of electricity which generates 5 and 6 dimensional, 90o quadrants - photons - at right angles from it's 4-D boundaries.

Light and matter are both single entities, and the apparent duality arises in the limitations of our language. (Heisenberg)

(The record may be 'redundant' in the presentation of this issue, whereas, the repetitive descriptions wish to approach the unprecedented solution from several different perspectives. Thank you.)
This record describes the above explained ephemerality (the dynamics of Planck's 'constant "h" factor' known as the 'quantum leap'): as the 'translatory moment' - when the 5th 90o unit of electricity 'quantum leaps' out of the 4-D quadrant of 90o that generates furthermore, 90o of electricity, followed by 90o of magnetism; i.e. - the 5th and 6th dimensions of electricity and magnetism, respectively. Comprehensively and continuously emitted in discontinuous units, called 'quanta' and/or 'photons'; often referred to as 'photo-electric effect'. The 'translatory moment' is also when the apparently 'standing field' of actually expanding (ever acclerating) 4-D matter, projects the 5th and 6th dimensions of electromagnetism, abruptly accelerates beyond the accleration-rate of 4-D matter (an apparent 'standing field' <'obviously physical matter, corporeal reality at large, is not expanding'>, emitting the recognized electromagnetic field; in discrete - 90o units); 'quantum leaping' at light speed (relative to the apparently 'standing <'static'> field' from which it originates and by which it - electromagetism - is generated).

Illustration obtained from entering 'Geometry Junkyard' in Google.
(It also appears to be an expression of what is called the 'Golden Rectangle'...)
This shape, constructed by inscribing circular arcs in a spiral tiling of squares, resembles but is not quite the same as a logarithmic spiral. A similar spiral is used as the Sybase Inc. logo.

Above is a geometric expression of exponentially - extrapolating - spiral progression from a center source (in this case a rectangle rather than a circle). It is approximately the structure of a nautilus shell - pompilius nautilis linnae, as well as any number of sea shells, snails and an array of spiral shapes as they occur in Nature.

Referencing the above geometric expression; disregarding the rectangular center, there are four 90o quadrants exponentially progressing in clockwise motion, ending with the vertical straight line - where the evolution of the four segments preceding the vertical line fullfill a 360o whole.

360o divided by 90o equals four, followed by a 5th 90o 'pie chart' shape, extrapolated at right angles out of and far exceeding the - collective - area of the four 90o quadrants preceding it.
Repeat: note that the 5th 90o component occurs beyond 360o, and that, by way of extrapolation - exponential acceleration - the 5th component, although identical in 90o shape, very abruptly transforms to a size much larger than than all four combined 90o quadrants preceding it.
When the four 'sliced pie quarters' are gathered together in an equilateral circle , they complete a 360 degree whole. This represents a so called 'particle', more appropriately described as a 4 dimensional 'charge' of field energy.

The 5th section of 90o occurs outside of and at right angles to the described quadrant of four 90o segments. This record offers the (above diagrammatic) geometric expression - of an extrapolating spiral - as an example of 4-Dimensional acceleration of matter, generating a fifth 90o segment, representing the 5th dimension of electricity, contiguously extending - quantum leaping - at right angles out of the 360o, 4-Dimensional system from which it originates and by which it is generated; while the *6th 90o segment of 4-D charge-generated magnetism, exponentially extends at right angles out of the 5th.
(*Refer series of - immediate below - complementary illustrations, the first of which co-axially represents outwardly transient <5-D> electricity moving at right angles out of a central 4-D axis of apparently 'static', <corporeal> 'standing field' of material 'charge', aka, 'particle' <Note: a geometric 'point' occupies no space: whereas, the term 'Point charge' , refers to any 4-dimensional system of 'mass', i.e, sub-atomic 'particle' / 'charge'; that is, any electron, neutron or proton, individually or collectively constituting material reality; all of which Einstein established as four dimensional> Note <re: immediate below graphics>: a positive charge field moves outwardly; a negative charge field moves inwardly -alternative vector forces in nature:
...macrocosmically comparable to gravitationally impelling force and the repelling force of Lambda - the Cosmological Constant ).
________________________________

Greg:
Lemme know if you find VII Part I and hopefully we can go from there.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie (Log in. 'Start Reading'')
Best regards,
- RP

[Graybeard]

Rascal ...... I have read of some of this in your other posts on this forum. I will give it my undivided attention.

please be patient ... we will pick up again here. There is a lot to digest.

cool bananas ... greg

[Graybeard]

Ok Rascal ..... Sorry ... I just woke up .... Chapter seven is in Roman Numerals ....



(just printed it out and will read it tonite)

[RascalPuff]

Dear Greg:
here is the most relevant 2nd part of Total Field Pt. VII at http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie.

As you may see, we're dealing with more than six dimensions from this perspective. I can't identify any beyond the 4th of matter, the 5th of electricity, and the 6th of magnetism, though the 7th may be interpreted as 'heat'.

The string theorists may have an affinity for eleven and by George they've got them here. All they need is a heuristic definition for them, which, so far, to my knowlege they haven't got a definition for anything beyond (non metric) mathematics. Until further notice, as far as I'm concerned, superstring theory is a desperate, non-metric mathematical plug. (The Elegant Universe is it?)
-------------------------------------------
Notwithstanding, the herein proffered, unprecedented translation of the qualities of matter and space-time dynamics - provided by way of the recognition of matter (as an implicit 'standing <'static'> wave' system) and gravity, as the 4th D, generating the explicitly transient 5th and 6th dimensions of electricity and magnetism.
The implied enormity of this lately established, previously unrecognised information reservoir, including the exponential inclusion of logarithmic 90o segments, definable as physical dimensions, up to and beyond four, proceeding to - at least - eight or nine (90o quadrants), may allow for a tractable (self-sustaining *TOE') *'theory of everything', i.e., total field theory. - KBR .

(...'with the magnetic field')... moving at right angles to the (perceived and misunderstood as a 'standing' - 3-D, 'static, non-expanding') electric field emulating structure of a spider-spun web, as below illustrated...(Re: Google 'spider webs', and 'the spider's web Part II', drawing by Ben Prins, annotated by Bill Amos.)



.

....with (notably spiraling) magnetism moving at right angles to electricity (moving at right angles out of the 4-D center, 'charge'/'particle', thereby fullfilling the definition for a 6th dimension - an even much more abruptly enlarged projection from the 5th 90o segment preceding it, geometrically representing the 6th dimension of magnetism - **as exponentially illustrated below, in the logarithmic expression of 1,2,3,4,5, 6,7, 8 and 9, 90o segments - all potentially additional 'quantum leaps', alternately projecting parallel to and exponentially extrapolating at right angles from the first four 90o quadrants of the 360o whole, comprising the extensional 90o units, originating in, generated by and alternately projecting at right angles from and parallel to the 1st through 5th 90o segments


(Enter 'Golden Rectangle' in Google - mathworld.wolfram.com
<*This author - KBR - understands none of the below accompanying mathematical equations corroborating the geometric expressions; which is what the author understands and is motivated to present here, in the ongoing context of exponential - accelerating - extrapolation, as described in the above and below text preceding and following the geometric illustrations> -


Golden Rectangle

Given a rectangle having sides in the ratio , the golden ratio is defined such that partitioning the original rectangle into a square and new rectangle results in a new rectangle having sides with a ratio . Such a rectangle is called a golden rectangle. Euclid used the following construction to construct them. Draw the square , call the midpoint of , so that . Now draw the segment , which has length
(1)
and construct with this length. Now complete the rectangle , which is golden since

(**illustrated below in the logarithmic expression of 1,2,3,4, 5, 6,7, 8, 9 and 10, 90o segments - additional 'quantum leaps' , alternately parallel to and at right angles from the first four 90o quadrants of the 360o whole, and the extensional, alternating commencements at right angles and parallel to the 5th 90o segment. Alternative perspectives and definitions for dimensions <esp. 5 thru 8>, as well as the possibility of a heirarchy of 'quantum leaps' are directly implied here. <Any suggestions?> - KBR)

(2)

Successive points dividing a golden rectangle into squares lie on a logarithmic spiral (Wells 1986, p. 39; Livio 2002, p. 119).

*************
There is no precedent for this offered dimensional interpretation of 'quantum mechanical photon effect' - what this author calls 'the translatory - exponentially accelerated - moment'. There seem to be many other important questions and answers in view of these expressions. Truly Yours welcomes the casting of more light on this - especially geometric - 'translatory moment' described, illustrated subjection. This explication of the (logarithmic-geometric) cause of the 'quantum leap' (without the accompanying equations) is illustrated and described on page 463, in the 1979 published, 627 page (sold out) edition of Gravity Is The 4th Dimension (Extraterrestrial Physics 101, the contents of which continue as a work in progress).

Moreover, the 'quantum leap' is a sobriquet from the popular consideration that a given unit of microcosmic energy moves from one (Niels Bohr) 'orbit' (or, alternative 'shell' theorized station) to another, without ever occupying the space - interval - between the transposed orbit. There is no explanation for this perplexing enigma-apparent ('the quantum leap').

This record submits that the transposition of a given orbit, as it is perceived in 4 dimensions instead of three, offers the alternative interpretation of the so called 'leap', as occurring in a spiral shaped path - unanticipated; uncompensated-for, in the status quo 3-dimensional failures to comprehensively accomodate 'quantum leap', as comprehensively expressed in the above two illustrations of 4, 5 & 6 dimensionally equivalent geometric structures.
That is, the 4-dimensionally interpreted 'leap' is not per se, any kind of 3-D perceived vertical straight line ( ----> ) - up or down, to and from orbit A to orbit B, constituting the (short cut perceived) 'leap' (from one orbit or shell to another) - at all, but, rather, is a (lateral, long way around) coil shaped ( @ ) - *spiral-spin-up (360o) transiency (which may be alternately and approximately perceived within the structure of the 'YinYang' or 'Tao' symbol, from center to outside parameters) from a lower orbit to a higher one, and conversely (*spiral spin-down, this perspective also includes the ambivalent dynamics of 'chemical valence').
Yin Yang ('Tao')


The symbol of apparent opposites with its connotations of antipodal contention is actually an icon of mutually supportive , complementary reciprocity, since about the 3rd century BC; accompanied by a philosophy proffering that its complete gestalt is beyond human comprehension (which it may well be, for all of its elegant - prescient implying - simplicity.)
(Refer Fritjov Capra's TAO OF PHYSICS, which allows for *the illusion of apparent contradiction: actually mutually supportive; that being the central meaning of * 'Tao'. In this case, vis a vis, the 'inexplicable enigma' of quantum mechanics and its perceived 'contradiction' of continuous field theory.)

In the Bohr modeled atom of planet-like, nucleus-sun orbiting electrons, the orbits are not circular or elliptical, but rather - as with any other orbiting entity's 4-D path : spiral shaped.

The 4-D space-time continuum is presently said to be 'acknowledged' in academic and experimental physics; yet, the effects of that continuum, continue to go unrecognized, denied, discarded and unaccounted for. The round - O and elliptical - 0 - 3-D structure - wherever it orbitally occurs - is not anticipated or perceived as spiral shaped - @ , as it is in fact, in the prevailing, four dimensional setting.
There is no precedent for this offered (4-D spiral 'translatory moment') explanation, regarding the cited 'incomprehensibility' of Quantum Mechanical Dynamics; including a solution applicable to the 'quantum leap'.

Subsequent to this conceptual departure in what had formerly been the generally agreed conceptualization of field physics, Eddington said, "We'll call matter 'particles' on Mondays, we'll call it 'waves' on Tuesdays, and we'll call it 'waveicles' the rest of the week." - Paraphrased.

Eddington's slap-stick ambivalence about the apparent dilemma, directly implies the ambiguous enigma as illusory.

This record submits that continuous field physics does not contradict discontinuous 'particle' physics, or conversely.
They symbiotically (and, until further notice, invariably) accompany one another, the latter being generated by the former. As gravity is generally a push (at short distances) and a pull (at long distances), so particles and fields are likewise non-contradictory and mutually reciprocal. Co-existing together.
The particles (5th 90o unit of four D matter is electricity <moving at right angles out of matter>, the 6th 90o unit is magnetism - moving at right angles to electricity) projected at right angles from and outside of the 4-D accelerating fields of matter. (Until further notice, electricity and magnetism invariably accompany one another and are apparently two different vectors expressing the same obvious transiency at right angles out of a 'particle' (electromagnetic charge, misunderstood as being a static, non-expanding, 3-D 'standing' field).

"We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring, will be to arrive where we started, and know the place, for the first time." -T.S. Eliot, FOUR QUARTETS, p. 59
____________________________


Best regards and thank you for your patience,
- RP

[Einstein]

Graybeard

Quote: