real vs. imaginary e-pairs

[AntonioLao]

Maxwell’s 1873 treatise on electricity and magnetism definitely avoided the use of imaginary exponentials for describing the space-time variations of the electric and magnetic fields. For this reason he invented real hyperbolic functions. The hyperbolic sine and cosine are given as sinh(x)=(exp(x)-exp(-x))/2 and cosh(x)=(exp(x)+exp(-x))/2. It appears that the argument x is most likely rational. In contrast the imaginary exponentials are given by sin(q)=(exp(iq)-exp(-iq))/2i and cos(q)=(exp(iq)+exp(-iq))/2. It appears that the argument q is most likely a multiple of irrational number, p.

Modern conscientious authors on classical electromagnetism cautiously pointed out these differences and strongly emphasized the use of only the real parts in every application. However, the physical descriptions of the imaginary parts started the old and new quantum revolution: old – Bohr, Sommerfeld, and Schrödinger; new – Heisenberg, Dirac, Born, and Jordan. Starting with Schrödinger complex imaginary wave equation, even though its solutions are imaginary wavefunctions, quantum physicists were capable of extracting eigenvalues of real energy quanta. Furthermore, the square absolute of the conjugate product becomes the probability of a particular location for the manifestation of elementary particles. Nonetheless, those fields of infinite degrees of freedom remain imaginary with brief moment’s appearances of virtual particles in high energy experiments. True dynamic physical balance between real and imaginary exponential pairs can be restored only by the use of square symmetric Hadamard matrices as space-time quanta of energy squares.

[mkirkpatrick]

We must keep this real,and leave out the imaginary e-pairs,we must remain focussed
and be ardent in our attempt to release the fusional power of energy entwined.



regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

We must keep this real

Being realistic must not imply disregarding the power of imagination. They go hand in hand.

[mkirkpatrick]

Being realistic must not imply disregarding the power of imagination. They go hand in hand.

They do indeed,however imagination is real,imaginary places or things are not.



regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

imaginary places or things are not

I often imagine what it would be like to live in the Orion's star system?

[mkirkpatrick]

I often imagine what it would be like to live in the Orion's star system?

If you practise lucid dreaming,then focus on Orion,you will visit there in a blink of an

eye.



regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

in a blink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(constellation) Perhaps this star system is beyond our imagination as Shakespeare used to say http://www.online-literature.com/shakespeare/hamlet/6/ There are more things in heaven and earth ...

[mkirkpatrick]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(constellation) Perhaps this star system is beyond our imagination as Shakespeare used to say http://www.online-literature.com/shakespeare/hamlet/6/ There are more things in heaven and earth ...

I have a sneaky feeling that Shakepeare was a lucid dreamer,this would explain his
writings.


regards michael.

[AntonioLao]

Shakepeare was a lucid dreamer

It is still a mystery how he could produce so much in such a short period of time? Some think that Shakespeare might represents the works of many persons put together.

[mkirkpatrick]

It is still a mystery how he could produce so much in such a short period of time? Some think that Shakespeare might represents the works of many persons put together.

Yes indeed,i have heard this too.Some say Francis Bacon did the work.



regards michael.