[humanbydefault]

The first thing we bumped into -as we try to acknowlege the physical basis behind the controversial "uncertanty" and "probabilistic" outcome of any experimental quantum mechanical observation- is no doubts about it TIME.

The fundaments of the "wave function" lies in trying to get closer to the location of a "particle" that -at the same time- owns an initial momentum across a medium. I named those "changing status" FRAMES and divided them in 4 (four) parts of one cycle corresponding to one wavelength of a photon [light].

Each FRAME describes a particular instant inside the cycle and corresponds to the top points of 3 dimensional axes (x,y, and z).

My theory -"Bonding Harmonics"- states that chemical bonds are always found in 3D space between the actual axes and those top-points mentioned above are what's known as "anti-bonding areas".

As explained in my theory, the magnetic field is the collection of those "anti-bonding points" along 3D space, where no chemical bond is possible. It is at those coordinates where magnetism becomes a physical reality. As I said in my theory both magnetic poles are "divided in time" since they can't physically exist at the same time. The origin of magnetic poles is consequent with the elapsing of a "Standing Wave" process around the atomic orbit -just as explained inside the theory.

Chemical bonds are separated in TIME [undetectable-by-human-capabilities fractions of a FRAME] from what we observ as "magnetic fields" around atoms and molecules. The measured 'electron' along the chemical bond is the result of a similar process of "Standing Waves" ,but this time, between two or more atoms during chemical bonding.

My point is that there are 2 (two) different physical phenomena separated in fractions of a "Time-frame" [we can't possibly detect using any imaginable experimental apparatus] causing at the same time the "UNCERTANTY" generated with the introduction of Quantum Mechanics and its accepted misundestood and confusing conclusions.

HBD

[humanbydefault]

Q. Why is the understanding of 'TIME' and its relationship with what we know as '(physical) existence' so crucial?

A. Because its acknowledge would give us a clue about the mysteries involved in the understanding of 'mass.'

Allow me to illustrate this concept with the simplest of the everyday examples found in our daily lives: The clock.

Let's assume that we have one atom and we'd like to define a "set of references" for this single case.
According to my theory, the 'time' corresponding to 12 AM (when both arms of the clock are joining together at the top of the sphere) will correspond to the "North magnetic pole." No chemicial bond could occur at these spatial coordinates, just as I've explained before.
The 'time' corresponding with 6:30 (the point where both arms overlap each other and point downward) will be the exact instant where the "South magnetic pole" appears.

Now, what is happening at 3:15 and also at 8:45 ? The answer is the "flow of electrical charges" from one atom to the next across the chemical bond.
Those 'times' are also known as "Anti-bonding zones" of the atom.

If those 'times' can't be used to bond with other atoms then...when?
It depends on the number of harmonics existent in the "clock-sphere."
The interesting aspect of the whole things is that by the 'time' the clock finishes an entire cycle, it will also coincide with the 'time' a wavelength of light (photon) will take to complete its 'own cycle' ["c"].

Just as our originally chosen atom of my example has its own "set of time coordinates" with respect to its own, each atom participant in a molecule has its "own time setting" too and that is what makes a molecule so complex: the stability of any molecule depends on the achievement of global symmetry in time on the part of each constituents -individual atoms that ultimately form the given molecule-

The way we have classified the strength of the bonds between atoms inside a molecule > single, double and triple bonds< has everything to do with the 'time' or location of the harmonic involved in the actual chemical bonding and never with the so-called 'number of electrons' acting as glue between them.

The legitimacy of a chemical bond -explained in my theory in details- finds its 'roots' in the necessary correspondence between the "Bonding Harmonic" in charge of the link between 2 (two) atoms and the frequencies observed in the spectrography of the Hydrogen atom. As if the atom of Hydrogen (the familiar 'Proton') was the universal pattern from where all matter in the universe must be "tuned to."

The familiar colors found inside light (rainbow) come from the scattering of energy from those legitimate bonding between atoms of a molecule. But just the ones allowed the 'universal tuning fork' owns by Hydrogen alone.

The main idea [read picture] I tried to bring in the pages of my theory is that symmetry is universal from the smallest atoms to the largest galaxies in the universe. Also that the nature of 'TIME' is integrated to the main 4 (four) realities each atom could present at any given cycle. The 'temporal nature of a single molecule and its complexity with respect to their participant 'atomic times' makes impossible for us to ever be capable of experimentally demonstrate its "FRAMES OF EXISTENCE" in real time.

However I believe that there should be a way to mathematically predict those dimensional projections of matter in 3 Dimensional space including all 4 (four) realities of matter.

I am convinced that science [physics in particular] can and will enjoy once again the priviliges of being an exact science as it used to be before the classical Einstein-Bohr controversy. My theory explains -even to the layman- the reasons both were right at certain point and also wrong with respect to other concepts.

To me, personally, Einstein was right in that a final theory must be capable of describing the physical reality with 100% exactitude. The point where I find him wrong is with respect to the single reality he thought it could be described. I stated that there are 4 (four) different "FRAMES OF EXISTENCE" or realities if you will and that only an understanding of TIME and MATTER as the result of energy interactions in fractions of that TIME wil take us there.

HBD

[dleviwing]

Hi HBD;
I find your post more indicative of the magnetic moment properties of a particle reference frame than those of a time induced reference frame. Bonding is more dependent on the relationship of the motion of the bodies or waves; that’s why the harmonics are formed at points that represent integral levels of degrees of bonding.

You seem to have achieved a level of understanding that is quite rare. Your writing has also become more professional over these past few years. Congratulations and keep it up.

[humanbydefault]

quote:
"... that’s why the harmonics are formed at points that represent integral levels of degrees of bonding."

YES! That's it!

Since atoms -participant in a given molecule- bond in specific angles with respect to the assumed central axis (center of the molecule) the "stability of the compound" will depend on the deegre reflected during the match. Once the match is optimum and symmetry is closer to its highest levels, a lower level of energy is required to mantain the chemical bonding between them.

The perfect example and one that I hope one day will be confirmed by theoretical evidences is the case of chemical resonance in atoms of Carbon. Carbon atoms are capable of bonding in 2 (two) specific harmonics. If they bond in the lowest energy and closer to the "X" axis (closer to the 'electric plane' of the anti-bonding zone) then the bond will be observed as "single bond." as in the common case with graphite.

If the higher-energy harmonic (closer to the 'magnetic plane' of the anti-bonding zone) is the one participating in the match with other atom's orbital harmonics, then the bond will be observed as "double bond." -as in the case of diamonds. According to my views on this matter, I believe that diamonds are formed with bonds in the highest harmonics therefore the strongest chemical bonding in the universe.

Today chemistry focuses on chemical bonding in a highly simplistic and partial ways. What I mean by that is that when they speak about a molecule (whatever that would be) it's often "divorced" one side of the molecule from the other side as if bonds were unilateral phenomenon. I don't see it that way.

Molecules join together in a 3 dimensional structure because that's the way they achieve the closest symmetry possible. the minimum change is either side of the molecule -due to an action on one of its atomic bonds- will produce a literal "Faster-tah light" response that will be feel at some point of the chain, no matter how long the molecule could be. The reason I spoke about "FTL" response is not a violation of everything we know, and I'll explain in a moment my point.

I've said in various chapter of my theory that it is only at the conclusion of the 4 (four) frames of existence [one-wavelength-of-light-time] that symmetry is "forced to be ready" to make up for what we know as physical reality... Not before that 'incredibly short fraction of time' (!)

That's why any changes -no matter the point of the molecule targeted- will reflect a change along the chain that eventually brings stability in a form of harmonic-symmetry.

Do you agree with me on this, Dave?

HBD

[dleviwing]

HBD;
I probably would not express it the same as you do but I understand what you are trying to point out and agree with most of it.

It is difficult to express how standing wave particles interact with the environmental medium of electromagnetic waves and other particle systems.

[MJA]

Originally Posted by humanbydefault My point is that there are 2 (two) different physical phenomena separated in fractions of a "Time-frame" [we can't possibly detect using any imaginable experimental apparatus] causing at the same time the "UNCERTANTY" generated with the introduction of Quantum Mechanics and its accepted misundestood and confusing conclusions. HBD

Dear HBD,

Having trouble with measure? That is the trouble.

Our goal or quest is to unite all things equally, TOE is such.

Where man has gone wrong is to believe there is certainty in the measure of difference, even though measure has been proven probable at best. For you to say "there are two different physical phenomena" is the wrong direction. To find the solution to TOE., simply remove the uncertainty and difference that measure provides. All phenomena are equal or one.

MJA

[N0B0DY]

I think one aspect of the universe is material in forward time, and the other antimaterial in backward time; left-handed is offset by right-handed; up is offset by down; electron holes offset photon holes; and one is offset by negative one.

Offset being defined as the meeting point of both aspects, it appears that equality is rendered as none. If there was one at the bottom of a balance sheet, I think there would be some explaining to do.

[austintorn@aol.com]

The Balance Sheet of the Universe


— Accounting —

The universe bubbled out of “nothing”,
Pluses forming matter; minuses residing in forces—
All in perfect balance, self-sufficient,
Needing nothing outside of itself, zilch.


— Zero-Sum Game? —

Plus and minus from nothing came to be;
But while most charges rejoined, some went free,
The pluses forming matter, energy,
And the minuses forming gravity.


— Total Zero —

At Heaven’s birth, positive energy
Became matter, countered by gravity,
Whose attractive embrace is negative;
Thus, their sum must add up to nullity.


— A Little Bit of Nothing —

So from nothing was written our account,
And to nothing we’ll still have to amount—
But in between those two parentheses
The pluses rain on us from Heaven’s fount.

[humanbydefault]

Originally Posted by dleviwing HBD; It is difficult to express how standing wave particles interact with the environmental medium of electromagnetic waves and other particle systems.

Dave, there is a segment inside the text of the theory "Bonding Harmonics" that I titled "Jumping electrons versus frame-by-frame symmetry" I don't know if you can recall it...
Anyway, my whole point there was to explain how the physical phenomenon known as "Standing Waves" [interaction between two 'energy-sources' in 3 D space inside the 4 (four) frames of a time period corresponding to one cycle] is the "OWN SOURCE OF ENERGY ABSORPTION AND ENERGY SCATTERING" 'resembling the work of an 'energy-pump' and 'sucking' energy from the enviroment.

The whole point is based on the understanding that SYMMETRY must be complete and restablished at the end of each cycle (one-wavelemgth-of-light-time-period ="c").

If an atomic orbit was isolated from all sources of energy, even heat, at the end of one complete cycle the symmetry would be (always) automatically restore, as I explained using the "Ying and Yang" analogy of both sides of the orbital momentum.
However, in the presence of enviromental energy (E-M radiation, heat or any other kind) the "urge" for a still higher level of symmetry around the atomic orbit will 'force' that energy to be absorbe into the orbital momentum if and only if there is a matche between their energy. If no match occurs then we face what we call "transparency."

That's why I came up with the name "Atomic envelope" for the one own by each and every atom, and "molecular bonding envelope" in the case of molecules. It is precisely the same phenomenon causing the 'rotational pattern' inside "Standing Waves" what makes possible external energy to be "trapped" into the pattern with the only end of matching the "disturbance" in the overall symmetry around the atomic orbital.

The simplest example would be this:

Imagine that you have a container full with water. the water is at rest and no waves of anykind would disturb the status of the liquid inside. Now you introduce your hand and create a disturbance across the surface of the water. If there was any object floating on the water it would be certainly 'forced' 'pushed' into the oppening surface (between the waves) to compensate for the new symmetry-breaking-situation created originally by your hand. You see... symmetry was achieved by the existence of no disturbance on the water mass, just as it is the case with a "standing wave". The presence of energy of any kind around atoms will 'offer' just as the 'object mentioned above' the chance of bringing the disturbed symmetry into a better conclusion.

This I believe is the reason why planets exist around stars (suns). It is the presence of our planet Earth and the rest of the other planets of the solar system what helps to bring a sense of higher symmetry into the sun's harmonic orbits created inside the star.

I'll get back to this later on.

HBD

[humanbydefault]

Originally Posted by MJA Dear HBD,... For you to say "there are two different physical phenomena" is the wrong direction. To find the solution to TOE., simply remove the uncertainty and difference that measure provides. All phenomena are equal or one. MJA

Thanks for your comment and welcome to this thread.

It may have been a misundestanding during the interpretation of my statement that I will clarify in a moment.

I was referring to two different features of matter inside one cycle or "c". One is the orbital space 'reserved' for chemical bonding with other atom's orbital and the second (quite different in its intrinsic nature) was the four 'anti-bonding zones' [recognized by todays quantum chemistry as such] existent right on the "x" axis -for electrical flow of energy- and "y" axis -for the magnetic poles -North and South- {positive and negative} separated in TIME by 2 (two) FRAMES each.

You see, my friend, it has never been defined by any published theory that both magnetic and electric zones at the quantum level (along the atom's orbital momentum I meant) shares the properties explained in my theory. Since in "Bonding Harmonics" chemical bonds (all types) are the sole result of bonds formed between atom's harmonics [integral part of a "Standing Wave" resonance initiated in the very core of each 'bonding atom' and NOT AS THE RESULT OF NEGATIVELY CHARGED 'PARTICLES' WITH THE NAME OF "ELECTRONS"]. It is imperative that those chemical bonds reflected some sort of "handedness" AS THE RESULT OF THE RELATIVISTIC INTERACTION BETWEEN THE LINKING HARMONICS INSIDE THE BOND. If you look at my diagrams you'll see that I chose to differentiate them using the reference of "Ying" to 'left-handed' and "Yang" to those 'righ-handed'.
As I mentioned above to Dave, at those exact zones where bonding occurs between harmonics from two atoms inside a molecule a "pump" is also 'working' along the cycle "sucking e-m energy from the "atomic envelope" as the orbital momentum resumes its cycle (up and down). The scattering of that re-modulated or redifined energy is what we call LIGHT.
However MAGNETISM is the absence of "chirality" or handedness in the point where the waves responsible for the "atomic envelope" [the actual atomic orbital] reached their maximum value. It will occur in two (only) places: one will create the North magnetic pole and the second the South one. divided by half the time-period of one cycle.

I hope that clarifies my views in the sybject.

HBD