My work in Physics

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Sun Jan 5 17:59:49 EST 2003


It should be obvious, but in case it isn't, the =effective=
'spherical Geometry' occurs as a function of =both= the incoming and
SSW<->UES harmonics 'contained' energies.

That is, the incoming energy alters the SSW<->UES harmonics Geometry,
within the latter, local to it's interaction 'zone' - non-linearly,
in an inverse-square-reminisent-but-not-inverse-square way - energy
densities augment local to the 'zone' of interaction, as a function
of energy's freedom to flow away from the 'zone' of interaction.

The effective spherical Geometry is analogous to 'atomic
cross-section' stuff in the traditional approach.

For those who were back in Compuserve's Science Forum in the late
1980's-early 19990s, this stuff stuff is all just "energy's freedome
to move" - its relative "ephemerance" [coined from the term
"ephemeral"]

Other matter: I've discussed, in long former posts, the
energydynamics of what's been referred to as "charge". Do I need to
go over that material again, here?

[I'm getting 'tired', so I'd like to feel free to take some 'time' to
'restore' myself, a bit.]

K. P. Collins

Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
|I've discussed it in the past, but I want to add it here so that
|it'll be grouped with the rest of the discussion.
|
|=All= of the evidence that's been held to 'substantiate' the
|existence of so-called 'quarks' also reduces directly to the
|continuously-varying spherical Geometry SSW<->UES
|compression-expansion harmonics.
|
|When folks probe what've been referred to as 'nuculear' constituent
|'particles', what they're actually doing is delivering incoming
|energy into the SSW<->UES harmonics, and the interpretation of there
|being "three quarks" in, say, a 'proton', is 'just' the result of
the
|fact [in Tapered Harmony] that, since the SSW<->UES harmonics
|['atoms'] are undergoing continuous compression and expansion,
|there're periodic limits within which probing energy can interact
|with the relatively 'nucleated' 'portion' of the
|compression-expansion harmonics. Outside of those limits, probing
|energy will just not interact with the energy 'contained' in an
|SSW<->UES harmonic in a way that's correlated with what's been
|referred to as the [so-called] 'strong nuclear force'.
|
|The relatively 'nucleated' 'portion' of the SSW<->UES harmonics
|'winks' in and out of it's energy-density existence, and any energy
|probes that are to interact in-there must 'fit between' when the
|relatively 'nucleated' 'portion' of the SSW<->UES harmonics
|'winks'-in and 'winks'-out. At currently accessible accelerator
|energies, this means that only three energy probes can 'fit'
in-there
|before the 'nucleated' energy expancs, heading toward its 'shelling'
|limit.
|
|There exist no such things as "quarks".
|
|And, because there exist no 'quarks', there's no need to search for
|'sub-particles' of the non-existent 'quarks'.
|
|What there =is= a need to do is gently-elegant experiments which
|probe the SSW<->UES harmonics in Geometrically-compound ways.
|
|There's an Awesome-Big future for Physics with respect to such
|Geometrically-compound stuff, the vast majority of which can be
|achieved at relatively-low [relative to 'superconducting-colider'
|setups] energy levels, This's not to say that such experimentation
|will be a 'cake-walk'. At least at first, it will not. This's
because
|all of the experimental design must be tuneable at the 'level' of
the
|SSW<->UES harmonics themselves. The just-getting-started approach
|that presently seems promising to me is one which is somewhat
|analogous to so-called "laser cooling" apparatuses, in which the
|emphasis is on spherical 'symmetry', but with variations that're
|tunable with respect to the spherical Geometry of the SSW<->UES
|harmonics. It's not necessary to use high energies because low
|energyie can be delivered in myriad ways in which they add and
|subtract with respect to this or that 'portion' of an SSW<->UES
|harmonic's compression-expansion periodicity.
|
|
|All sorts of new technological usefulnesses will come out of this
|sort of approach to doing Physics.
|
|K. P. Collins
|
|Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message ...
||Sorry - got to fix a couple of typos, and I've added an additional
||comment, below.
||
||Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message
||<0OGR9.94932$hK4.7701936 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
|||Further clarification below:
|||
|||Kenneth 'pawl' Collins wrote in message
|||<4TxR9.94292$hK4.7647070 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
||||Whoops!
||||
||||"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"
||||
||||Except, of course, with respect to [non-physically-real idealized
||||case] 'spherical symmetry'.
||||
||||Sorry about the typos. I've fixed them below.
||||
||||ken
||||
||||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=
||||varying.
|||||
|||||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 [visible EM spectrum] 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.
||
||Additional comment: And, of course, this 'fanning-out' phenomenon
|has
||it's expansion-phase correlate, only that's be fanning-in -the 2-D
||analogue of which would be Newton's prisim, somehow,
||continuously-iincreasing in height as he observed it's
||visible-spectrum EM traces.
||
||This sort of thing, of course, explains the observations that hold
||that 'particle' types "come in pairs", - why there's
not-so-"fearful
||'symmetry`" in-there.
||
||That's all for this update.
||
||ken [K. P. Collins]
||
|||And, it is Beautiful - in the traces of same-type 'particles
|that're
|||observable in accelerator collisions - reducing entirely, and
|||exactly, to the continuously-[v]arying energy density of the
||SS[W]<->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
|||be
||||'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
|||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 [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
|||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