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.]
||||||||||||