I'll begin with a 'short' excerpt from AoK, Ap6:
I first observed the nonlinear perspective phenomenon during
the summer of 1983. I was immersed in thought, considering
some notions in a notebook while walking early one morning.
Suddenly, I was startled by an "explosive" visual phenomenon.
I had almost walked directly into one of those telephone
poles that sometimes exist in the midst of a sidewalk. The
"eruptive" nature of my visual experience was curious. It was
easy to see that this phenomenon had saved me from a bump on
the head. This was so obviously "useful" that the experience
gripped my attention. I retraced my approach to the telephone
pole repeatedly and, during this "experimentation", the
nonlinear components of visual perspective began to become
apparent to me. As I continued on my way, the phenomenon
showed itself with every passing telephone pole and tree, yet
I was not completely won over by it. I was well aware of how
"linear perspective" is used in artistic and architectural
renderings and "knew", after all, that this was "how things
were". I decided that the things that I had experienced were
significant in regard to visual avoidance, but that they
would have to be integrated with respect to "the larger
linear-perspective phenomenon". Almost immediately
thereafter, I came upon a dump truck that was delivering a
load of gravel to a construction site and I stopped to watch
this operation. As the bed of the truck rose, the motion of
its contents occurred nonlinearly with respect to the angle
that was formed by the truck's chassis and its dump bed. The
gravel moved only a little until the bed of the truck was
raised to a sizable angle, and then the friction of the
gravel on the truck bed was overcome and the load slid forth
during a relatively-short period of time. This reminded me of
my earlier experience with the telephone pole and fixed, in
my mind, the interesting time-course and angle-variation
qualities that the two experiences shared. I recall saying to
myself that, "If one more thing happens, I'm really going to
believe". The third event occurred about a mile further along
in my walk. I turned off into a children's playground that
had a hexagonal "merry-go-round". I set it spinning as
rapidly as I could and then perched myself atop a nearby
slide to observe the merry-go-round's motion. The
nonlinear-perspective phenomenon showed itself even in this
relatively-complex situation. The vertices of the hexagon
rapidly drew near and then receded as the apparatus spun. The
ends of the planks which formed these vertices seemed to
undergo a change in conformation as the merry-go-round
whirled. (Others have since observed the same phenomenon with
me.) I became convinced of the generality of the nonlinear
components of visual perspective right then and there and saw
the notion of "linear perspective" as incomplete in cases
that involve motion in 3-dimensional space. (A further note:
I expect that the dynamics of nonlinear "perspective" will be
shown to have some GENERAL significance in the physical
sciences.)
I'd been studying Physics since a Child, but on that day back in
1983, as a result of this extraordinary walk, I saw, almost
completely, what would, afterward, become Tapered Harmony.
It's the "GENERAL significance" referred to in the closing sent-
ence of this "aside", which is a footnote in the paper version of
AoK and a hyperlink in the electronic version.
What I saw that day is that the nonlinearity of perspective ["NL-P"
as it's discussed in AoK, Ap6 =must= extend right into 'atomic'
energydynamics.
So, since that day, I've been rewriting all of Physics in rigorous
accord with the "NL-P".
The first phase of this is finally accomplished. I've reworked all
of the experiments upon which 'quantum mechanics' was founded,
and am able to demonstrate how, when the NL-P is incorporated,
all of them reduce to Deterministic energydynamics within cont-
inuous wave dynamics in which all 'things' that have been consi-
dered to constitute 'discrete particles' are reduced to thresholding
within continuous wave dynamics.
I've discussed all that's necessary in former posts, and have posted
a few Verifying QBasic apps [the Compton Refraction analysis of
last Winter, with its coincidence with the NL-P, the coincidence of
the hydrogen spectrum with the NL-P, etc. [more of these apps will
be posted as my personal circumstances permit]].
I've been searching for a way to make Tapered Harmony's synthesis
fundamentally clear to those who are 'unfamiliar' with it and, this
morn-
ing, I found it.
It is that, as a result of 'atomic'-'level' nonlinearity of
perspective [NL-P],
Poynting Vectors' area factors must also vary in accord with the
NL-P.
Recall that, in Tapered Harmony [TH], what have been considered to
constitute 'atoms' are viewed as quantities of energy that are
'trapped'
in spherical harmonic 'compression'-'expansion' interaction with an
extreme-fluid energy surround because, as a sphere undergoes
compression, its volume/surface-area ratio varies nonlinearly - as
the
compression becomes extreme, this ratio heads rapidly off toward
infinity.
What I saw back in 1983 was that, if an 'atom' is a quantity of
energy
'trapped' in spherical, then the density of the 'trapped' energy
would
also increase nonlineary, heading toward infinity, during the
extreme-
'compression' phase of the spherical harmonics, and that this
probably
coincides with what have been considered to constitute the 'discrete
particles' comprising 'the nucleus'.
I've Verified that treating the 'atom' this way yields results that
are
virtually identical with the results produced by the traditional
[1900-
present] view of 'quantum mechanics', but does so in a completely-
Deterministic way.
In the TH approach, there's no so-called "uncertainty", be-cause
all there is is thresholding within continuous wave dynamics. That
is, there are no 'particles' whose 'positions' and 'momenta' have
to be 'worried' about. Yet, all experimental observations are
rigorously
accounted for within the continuous wave dynamics.
As I said above, this morning I realized that what's been referred to
as the "Poynting Vector" sits within the 'quantum' approach as a
'chink in its armour', and that by 'prying-open' that 'chink', the
essential
difference between TH and 'qm' can be exposed.
Because of the NL-P, the areas inherent in the Poynting Vectors are
not 'static' but are, themselves, varying in a way that's rigorously
correlated to the NL-P - which means that their calculations have
been
artificial.
Stuff like "uncertainty" that's invoked by 'qm' derives not in
physical
reality, but in this artificiality that's induced by the False
picture of
there 'being discrete particles', when the only stuff that exists is
wave<->wave energydynamics.
What have been considered to constitute 'discrete particles' are
'just' energy-thresholding dynamics that occur at the various degrees
of 'compression' and 'expansion' of the spherical harmonics that
have been considered to constitute 'atoms'.
This sort of thing is readily apparent in the four examples of the
nonlinearity of perspective that I experienced on my walk in 1983,
with the dump-truck example being the easiest to cross-correlate with
'atomic' energydynamics - the potential energy of the soil in the
dump
truck's bed is increased until a threshold is crossed, and then the
soil
slides out of the dump bed. This's Exactly analogous to the augmenta-
tion of central potential energy that occurs periodically during each
'compression' phase of the spherical harmonics that are what have
been considered to constitute discrete 'atoms' - when the central
potential energy crosses a threshold at which, because of the NL-P,
no further energy, having the frequency of the incident ratiation can
fit in
the 'instantaneously'-occurring volume, the incident energy is
'rejected'
as if the central volume constitutes a physically-real 'particle' -
but
it's =not= a 'particle' - it's 'just' energy 'compressed' up to [or
beyond]
the correlated energy-flow threshold - and the incident energy 'just'
goes where it's more free to go.
All of the experimental results upon which 'quantum mechanics' was
founded reduce to the simple NL-P energydynamics that have been
discussed in this post.
What's here opens up new vistas of stuff that folks can accomplish
in applications of Physics.
It's Funny - when I look back on that morning walk of 1983, it's as
if
God reached down and 'tapped me on the shoulder' - it was just
that much of a 'blot right out of the blue' :-]
I was, then, living with my Parents - my Mom was in the last two
years
of her struggle against the cancer that took her - and I'd just
attended
morning Mass because, penniless, it was something that I could still
do. Afterward, I went home by a circuituous route, and the NL-P
observations just happened.
And I rewrote all of Science.
k. p. collins
--
"Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"
