My work in Physics

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Sat Jan 4 04:08:38 EST 2003


Can you see it?

The energy 'contained' within an SSW<->UES harmonic [within an
"atom"], is not just undergoing periodic compression and expansion.
It's also undergoing density variations, all continuously.

This means that, at the compression and expansion limits, there're
spherical-geometrical 3-D energy "index of refraction" variations.

And when incoming energy meets these energy-density-deriving 'indes
or refraction' variations, the energy's traverse is altered in accord
with the energy-density variations.

Only the energy-density variations are =continuously= varying.

It makes for extremely-rich, and extraordinarily-useful,
energy-interaction possibilities shich Physics has not yet even begun
to explore [outside of Tapered Harmony].

To get a handle on it, think of being under 'interogation' by some
'police' organization's officials.

You're sitting there listening to the guestioning of the fellow
directly in front of you, and the fellow 90 degrees to your left
starts simultaneously questioning you - it's a compound energy-flow
with which you must deal - you are the incoming energy - feel the
path you'll follow as you experience the compound energy-flow that
the questioning constitutes.

You know, just make yourself small and be the energy. See the
peripheral "shelling" and "nucleating" energy-density variations
waxing and waining, and imagine the way your path would be 'morphed'
in accord with those energy-density variations, which is all just
simple refraction within a spherical, periodicly-varying Geometry.

Or think about skateboarders practicing their techniques in a
well-done skateboard park. The paths they follow would be partially
analogous to the paths the incoming energy follows within an
SSW<->UES harmonic if the curvature of the ramps were not static.

Like I said, the energydynamics are 'violent' - not in any 'negative'
way, but in the extreme conditions they impose during energy
interactions.

It's all very straight-forward once one 'goes for a walk' within the
dynamic spherical Geometry. I mean, everything in-there is rigorously
predictable - no so-called 'uncertainty', no so-called
'position\momentum' problem be-cause there exist no 'particles
in-there.

Pauli 'exclusion' is in-there be-cause the energy-density variations
within the spherical Geometry are never the same at any 'point'
within the compression-expansion harmonics - so there's the
appearance of their being 'exclusivity' with respect to 'energy
levels' - but there exist no such discrete energy levels or 'electron
orbity [there are no 'electrons']. All there is is the
continuously-varying energy density. With respect to such, there're
only certains 'portions' of the continuous energy-density variation
with respect to which incoming energy, having particular frequency,
can interact, anything below that energy density, and the incoming
energy just passes-through - unless the energy density variation
catches-up before the incoming energy crosses the width of the
'atom'.

It goes on and on like this, incorporating the stuff of all known
experimental results. [Challenges welcome.] Only, the SWS, SSW, UES
view reduces everything to much-simpler form, while giving up nothing
of traditional explanatory power, and gaining much.that the
traditional approach to 'atomic' structure just couldn't see.

And it eliminates the 'epicycles' [non-physically-real 'particles] to
boot.

What's not to like?

"That =you= did it, Ken"

"Oh well" :-]

K. P. Collins

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message
<5ruR9.94133$hK4.7624206 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
|clarification below.
|
|Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
||Anyway, re. "how every so-called [Sorry] 'particle' gains its
||observable qualities - even while it remains continuous with all
||other energy":
||
||It all derives in Tapered Harmony's reconceptualization of
|what've
||been referred to as "atoms" as spherical standing waves that're
|in
||harmonic compression-expansion interaction with a continuous
||surrounding energy supply - SSW<->UES harmonics.
||
||This's what's schematically represented in all the QBasic apps I
||posted in the recent past, and I presume folks who are interested
||in testing what I'll discuss here will've saved one or more
||versions of those apps.
||
||The crucial thing, with respect to the topic of this msg [the
||"newer" stuff that I referred to in the post[s] to which this msg
||is in reply] is that, as the SSW<->UES harmonics continuously
||unfold, the energy densities of both the 'nucleating' [central]
||'portion of the SSW and the peripheral 'shelling' 'portion' of
|the
||SSW, undergo cyclical variation.
||
||Incoming energy [in the form of spherical wave shells [SWS],
||having various magnitude, will interact with the energy 'trapped'
||in the 'nucleating' and/or 'shelling' 'portions of the SSW<->UES
||harmonic in rigorous accord with the 'instantaneous' energy
||gradients in 'nuc' and 'shell', which is, of course, rigorously
||subhect to the continuously-varying spherical Geometry of the
||SSW<->UES harmonic.
||
||What this means is that the incoming SWS will 'see' 'shell' and
||'nuc' energy gradients which are, themselves, continuously
|varying
||with the SSW Geometry, and be-cause the SWS is, itself, a
||compression-expansion harmonic, there is a rigorous periodicity
|to
||the energy interaction dynamics.
||
||In the case of SWS interaction with the SWS while it's energy
||density is 'shell'-dominant, the curvature of the SSW is
||relatively 'gentle, and and so is the energy distribution within
||the relatively large 'shell', so all the SWS<->SSW interactions
||that'll occur will reflect commensurate energy transitions and
||directionality refractions - the observables  will be feferred to
||as pertaining to "leptons", and correlated to the so-called 'weak
||interaction.
||
||The same is True with respect to SWS<->SSW interactions during
|the
||'nucleation'-dominant 'portion' of the SSW<->UES harmonics, only,
||be-cause the energy densities are relatively greater during
||'nucleation', and be-cause the 'nucleating' curvature tends
|toward
||relative extremes, resultant energy transitions and
|directionality
||changes will both tend to be relatively greater than is in the
||case with respect to SSW 'shelling' dynamics - the observable
|will
||be referred to as pertaining to "hadrons", and correlated to the
||so-called 'strong interaction'
||
||What's been referred to as "antimatter" is not some sort of
||'contray' form of energy 'compartmentalization', but, rather is
||'just' the result of their being two phases in the SSW<->UES
||harmonics. During compression, the incoming SWS 'sees' a
||continuously 'shrinking' spherical Geometry, but during expansion
||the incoming SWS 'sees' a continuously 'growing' spherical
||Geometry.
||
||The 'difference' between 'matter' and 'anti-matter' is 100%
||reducible to these two energy-density-variation Geometries, which
||are both spherically convex with respect to the incoming SWS, but
||are exact inverses with respect to 'instantaneous' SWS
|energy-flow
||directionality.
||
||The last thing is what results in what's been referred to as
||"antimatter" having the 'appearance' of it's being 'the opposite'
||of what's been referred to as "matter".
|
|"Matter" and "antimatter" "anihilate" each other when they meet
|be-cause they embody the inverse Geometries in which they were
|created. When they meet, their inverse Geometries 'un-do' each
|other, and the energy that was 'contained' within them, having
|lost it's 'containment' Geometry just flows freely back into the
|UES. It's the same thing that would happen on the macroscopic
|scale if, say, a two-compartment cylinder, top-half filled with
|liquid stuff that's been sent spinning in one direction, bottom
|half filled with liquid stuff that's been set spinning in the
|opposite direction - then the barrier between the two bodies of
|oppositely-spinning fluids is removed, allowing the fluids to
|mix - when they mix, they'll 'slowly' 'anihilate' their opposite
|spinning-ness, giving off heat - leaving a quieted body of fluid.
|
||All of what's been considered to constitute evidence
||substantiating the existence of so-called [Sorry] "discrete
||particles" derives in the facts of the continuous variations of
||both the SWS and SSW Geometries.
||
||I wanted to do an app that presented all of this schematically,
|to
||help folks see it, but I've no 'time' during which to write the
||code, so folks'll have to put their thinking caps on and
|construct
||the imagery in their own good minds.
||
||All of the SWS<->SSW interaction dynamics [energy-exchange
||dynamics] are analogous to what would be a particularly-violent
||version of an "egg-beater" ty[p]e of amusement park thrill ride.
||Imagine yourself as first the energy of the 'portion' of the SWS
||that interacts with the SSW, and then as the energy of the
||'portion' of the SSW that interacts with the SWS, and 'go for a
||ride' on this 'egg beater' thing.
||
||In this extreme version of the "egg beater", the 'rider' [the
||energy] experiences not only the force of transition from
||peripheral Geometry to central Geometry, but, also, the whole
||Geometry's expansion and compression.
||
||All of the observable qualities of the so-called "discrete
||particles" derive in this extreme spherical-Geometry variation.
|
|
|Here, the various magnitudes of correlated energy derive in the
|Geometrical 'violence' of that 'portion' of the SSW<->UES
|harmonics phase during which the interaction occurs. If it occurs
|during 'shelling', the harmonics of the incoming energy has to fit
|into that portion of the SSW<->UES harmonic's dynamics, or the
|incoming energy will just pass-through relatively unobservable -
|stuff like the photoelectric cutoff frequency derives in thes
|phase -matching frequency correlations.
|
|The analogous stuff also applies to the 'nucleation' 'portion' of
|the SSW<->UES harmonics, except that be-cause the 'nucleation'
|energy is relatively 'condensed', there's a relatively-broader
|range of possible frequencies for the incoming energy. That is,
|incoming energy can interact with the 'nucleating' 'portion' of
|the SSW even when the 'nucleation' is non-maximal be-cause the
|energy density is commensurate with the frequency of the incoming
|energy.
|
|Throughout all of these dynamics, the incoming energy can interact
|with the SSW-bound energy only while their phases are sufficiently
|correlated. Hence the appearance of energy's being 'quantized'.
|
|Energy is =not= quantized. =Energy-exchange= [energy
|transformation] dynamics are 'quantized' be-cause of the dynamics
|of the phase-matching as discussed above.
|
|It's like if there were a continuously-rotating lunch-time
|automate machine. One is standing there continuously, but one can
|only get 'chocolate-cream pie' once every rotation of the device.
|
|It's the same with energy-exchange dynamics, except it's that the
|frequency-matching must be in-there for the analogue of 'getting
|the chocolate-pie' to happen.
|
|All of this is 'just' in the spherical Geometry of the SSW<->UES
|and SWS<->UES compression-expansion harmonics.
|
|All the interaction possibilities derive in the
|continuously-varying spherical Geometry and the energy-density
|variations that accompany the geometrical variation.
|
|That's all for this clarifying update. ken
|
||What've been referred to as "spin" and "angular momentum" fall
||right out of the during-interaction spherical Geometry be-cause
|of
||the energydynamics of both the SWS and SWS compression-expansion
||periodisities.
||
||What's been referred to as "magnetic moment" requires doing all
||this with two or more SSW<->UES harmonics, which I'll leave for
||later, after folks've had a chance to grasp what's here.
||
||The crucial thing is that the energy density that an SSW<->UES
||harmonic presents to any incoming SWS harmonic varies
||continuously, and for instance, the paths taken by the detritus
|of
||collisions in 'particle' accelerators 100% reduces to these
||interactive energy-density variations.
||
||The SSW<->UES harmonics are so variationally-'violent' that the
||Geometry of the incoming SWS gets 'morphed' from one 'instant' to
||the next - in much the same fashion in which Cosmologists've
||imagined matter being morphed and ripped apart as it transitions
||across the event horizons of so-called "black holes" - as the
||energy density that the SSW presents to the SWS continuously
||varies. This creates, for idealized instance, 'comma'-like energy
||distributions which have intrinsic angular momenta as they're
||flung  out of the collicion focus. Put such in a magnetic field,
||and the detritus follows a stereotypical path that rigorously
||correlates with the way it was geometrically morphed during its
||interaction with the SSW<->UES harmonic Geometry.
||
||The view that's presented here will, of course, become
||considerably refined as it's hammered on by Mathematicians, but
||it's fundamentals will stand, relatively unchanged, for all of
||'time' - because they are rigorously defined at all scales in
||what's presented here.
||
||Anyway, there's an exceedingly-rich 'new world' in what's here.
||I've already been able to show, for instance, how to derive
|energy
||in ways that'd not yet been conceived.
||
||So, what's here will open the "door" to Humanity's Future.
||
||I'll discuss further in the coming days [as what's left of me
||allows - it's 'hilarious' - my personal experience is not unlike
||the experience of the SWS as it encounters the "egg beater" stuff
||of an SSW<->UES harmonic - the main thing is that what I can See
||is just 'exploding' in magnitude - yet I've only these few days
||left(?) - where do I begin to describe the 'explosion's worthy
||stuff?
||
||Anyway, anyway, anyway...
||
||K. P. Collins
||
||[I'll Love by sparing Love the travail.]





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list