[Mikal]

Fredrick...nice to hear from you. Thank you so much for what you have contributed here, it will give me alot to think about and do some connections with in and out patterns in my own experience. It has been a complete mystery for me to understand how through several experiences I rather defied gravity...I am earnestly seeking to grasp an understanding of gravity in regards to these experiences...I am quite skilled in grasping my experience but having difficulty walking the talk of science...thanks again..

peace Mikal

[Fredrick]

Originally Posted by Profpat Hi JAK: Thanks for your insight. My An Idea also uses the I Ching binary numbering system to come up with the numbers 0-7, to represent the 8 areas, and while I eliminated gluons, physicist use 8 gluons to explain the quark binding. And let us not forget the octrees: An octree is a tree data structure in which each internal node has up to eight children. Octrees are most often used to partition a three dimensional space by recursively subdividing it into eight octants. Octrees are the three-dimensional analog of quadtrees. The name is formed from oct + tree, and normally written "octree", not "octtree". Best, Pat

Thank you, Pat, for so clearly delivering visuals of the octree. However, from a conceptual perspective, a globe is according to me a better delivery as ultimate feature, not the cube. The cube is already an expressed spatial feature that therefore does not capture the in-out aspect of our universe best. The other things you mention are still the same. The eight parts are still found in the triple divided globe, yet the whole (the ninth part) is different from the eight parts.

[Fredrick]

Originally Posted by Mikal Fredrick...nice to hear from you. Thank you so much for what you have contributed here, it will give me alot to think about and do some connections with in and out patterns in my own experience. It has been a complete mystery for me to understand how through several experiences I rather defied gravity...I am earnestly seeking to grasp an understanding of gravity in regards to these experiences...I am quite skilled in grasping my experience but having difficulty walking the talk of science...thanks again.. peace Mikal

You are very welcome, Mikal. Just remember that science itself is a limited tool (though I consider it the best tool to deliver the toe), and that we are trying to deliver the toe within science. Which means that there is a without science as well (that can sometimes help with understanding what we can grasp within science). On top of that, I have only met wonderful people here at toequest, people with open minds, and a willingness to go a bit further than restricted to the clearly repeatable.

[Profpat]

Originally Posted by Fredrick Thank you, Pat, for so clearly delivering visuals of the octree. However, from a conceptual perspective, a globe is according to me a better delivery as ultimate feature, not the cube. The cube is already an expressed spatial feature that therefore does not capture the in-out aspect of our universe best. The other things you mention are still the same. The eight parts are still found in the triple divided globe, yet the whole (the ninth part) is different from the eight parts.

Hi Fredrick;

I guess you like this form better, and so do I:

[Profpat]

And in accordance with my An Idea, I would mark those 8 areas as:

[Profpat]

In addition I believe since those areas are also membranes, they could perhaps serve as 3 dimensional information storage rings. In other words they can designate color, sound, I Ching trigrams, storage rings, etc.

The problem with this structure is going to 2 levels of octrees that the cube structure provides. But I don't know if my An Idea requires 2 levels.

Best to all,

Pat

[Fredrick]

Not to be impolite, Pat, but your image is not the image I like for the pentaist toe. The image I like is as follows:

In the cube, the eight small cubes were miniatures exactly like the overall cube. In this picture the eight balls are slightly different than the whole, since each part is inherently a part of the whole (and not exactly like the whole each for themselves). Together, though, the overall large ball shape is also still visible. Forgive me for using the limited programming skills I have in portraying these eight balls; the general idea is to deliver the eight separated balls from the larger (ninth) ball from which the eight originate. As such, they show the decimal system.

Please understand that this is a 2D+ image. I gave up on 3D quite a while ago. 2D+ and 3D are exactly the same in their overall delivery, but 2D+ shows that the overall reality is based on duality, and not on three static parts.

I am interested to learn more about your words: "The problem with this structure is going to 2 levels of octrees that the cube structure provides." Will you elaborate?

Best to you, Pat.

[Felix Schrodinger]

Originally Posted by dipayankar I really wonder if this machine would juggle up the Higgs Boson. Does this particle exist?

Hi Dippy

I don't believe it does. The HB was 'invented' by Peter Higgs of Edinburgh University as an attempt to explain why particles exhibit mass. Ordinary particles are supposed to mill about in a sort of soup and when they collide with the Higgs they achieve mass. It's just flogiston by another name!

I've discussed this is more detail on my thread.

regards
Felix

[dipayankar]

Prof, where did strings come from?

Originally Posted by Profpat I don't know if it does or doesn't exist. Until proven otherwise, I tend to doubt it. I'm hoping they come up with some information on strngs myself, since it is now the fundamental particle of my theory. Otherwise the quark would be my FS, but where did that come from if not strings? Best to you Dipayankar, Pat

[Profpat]

Originally Posted by dipayankar Prof, where did strings come from?

Well being a Theist, I'm tempted to say from God. That of course wouldn't be a satifactory explanation for agnostics or atheist. If there is no God, ( which there is ), than something else must be eternal, and that something would be strings. Again this really fits a cyclic universe model of expansion and contraction. String theory states you can't compress smaller than a string before the expansion starts again. Otherwise we're back to the something from nothing paradox, which in my mind would be excellent evidence in God.

Best,

Pat