My work in Physics

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins k.p.collins at
Sat Jan 4 14:41:48 EST 2003

Further clarification below:

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message
<4TxR9.94292$hK4.7647070 at>...
|"Pauli 'exclusion' is in-there be-cause the energy-density
|within the spherical Geometry are never the same at any 'point'
|within the compression-expansion harmonics"
|Except, of course, with respect to [non-physically-real idealized
|case] 'spherical symmetry'.
|Sorry about the typos. I've fixed them below.
|Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
||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[x]  o[f] refraction' variations, the energy's traverse is
|altered in accord with the energy-density variations.
||Only the energy-density variations are [themselves] =continuously=
||It makes for extremely-rich, and extraordinarily-useful,
|energy-interaction possibilities [w]hich Physics has not yet even
|begun to explore [outside of Tapered Harmony].

For instance, in accelerator collisions, the fanning-out of so-called
'particles' of supposedly all the 'same' type [so-called 'pions', for
instance] rigorously reflects the continuously-varying 'atomic'
energy-density "index of refraction" as the SSW<->UES harmonics
proceed in their periodicity until the energy imparted in the
collision becomes sufficient to 'disrupt' the harmonics -then what
was 'instnataneously-prior' an SSW<->UES harmonic, 'just' breaks
apart, sending the energy that was 'contained' within it back into
the energy-surround.

The important thig to grasp, here, is the rigorous correlation
between the observed fanning-out of the detritus of the impending
breaking-apart of the SSW<->UES harmonic and the continuously-varying
energy-density 'atomic' 'index of refraction'.

It's Beautifully-exact - no so called 'uncertainty', and, in it, the
spherical Geometry of the SSW<->UES harmonics can be read exactly.

The result is a spherical-Geometry instance of the planar instance
that Newton would've observed, if, somehow, his prisim were to
continuously diminish in height as he opserved its refraction
traces - the the same-color traces would fan-out, like multi-colored
searchlights being driven in a particular synchrony with respect to
each other - the effect would be particularly-beautiful.

And, it is Beautiful - in the traces of same-type 'particles that're
observable in accelerator collisions - reducing entirely, and
exactly, to the continuously-farying energy density of the SSU<->UES
harmonics - the continuously-varying 'atomic' 'index of refraction.

That's all for this update.

K. P. Collins

||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 [central] "nucleating" energy-density
|variations waxing and waining, and imagine the way your path would
|'morphed' in accord with those energy-density variations, which is
|all just simple refraction within a spherical, periodicly-varying
|Geometry [with the aditional compounding of motion vectors that
|derives in the energy-density variations]
||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
|dynamic spherical Geometry. I mean, everything in-there is
|predictable - no so-called 'uncertainty', no so-called
|'position\momentum' problem be-cause there exist no 'particles
||Pauli 'exclusion' is in-there be-cause the energy-density
|within the spherical Geometry are never the same at any 'point'
|within the compression-expansion harmonics [except, of course, with
|respect to [non-physically-real idealized case] 'spherical
|symmetry'.] - so there's the appearance [illusion] of their being
|'exclusivity' with respect to '[discrete] energy levels' - but there
|exist no such discrete energy levels or 'electron orbit[s] [there
|[exist] no 'electrons'[ within physical reality]]. All there is is
|the |continuously-varying energy density. With respect to such,
|there're only certain[...] 'portions' of the continuous
|energy-density variation with respect to which incoming energy,
|having particular frequency, can interact, anything below that
|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
|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>...
|||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
||||been referred to as "atoms" as spherical standing waves that're
||||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
||||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
||||with the SSW Geometry, and be-cause the SWS is, itself, a
||||compression-expansion harmonic, there is a rigorous periodicity
||||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
||||The same is True with respect to SWS<->SSW interactions during
||||'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
||||relative extremes, resultant energy transitions and
||||changes will both tend to be relatively greater than is in the
||||case with respect to SSW 'shelling' dynamics - the observable
||||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
||||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
||||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,
||||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
||||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
|||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
||||the energydynamics of both the SWS and SWS compression-expansion
||||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
||||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
||||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
||||Anyway, anyway, anyway...
||||K. P. Collins
||||[I'll Love by sparing Love the travail.]

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list