Dark Matter Update .

Andre Willers

28 Jun 2012

Synopsis :

Dark matter and energy are fictitious , but crumpled branes
seem to be real . This adds significantly to complexity . This reallity might
not be a simulated locale .

Discussion :

Briefly , slingshot-effects are sufficient to explain
supposed gravitational anomalies . They simply exchange energy between rotating
masses and linear kinetic energy . The momentum transfer is called the
slingshot effect . It also means that a significant percentage of the energy in
the system is “in transit” , as it were . We are talking interstellar distances
. It is a dynamical system . The observed effect is either an overmass or an
undermass , depending on the dynamics of the in-transit momentum transferring masses
.

The Crumpling of space-time from brane collisions actually
increases the complexity of possible paths . Luckily , we can compute this from
general theory (See Appendix I) . This is because of one of the few
Hyperdimensional Theorems we know to be true : We can always find a set of
dimensions , so that the distance R from the center of random Beth(0) movements
is R=d*Square root of(n) , where d is a
step and n is the number of steps .

This seems contradictory . But remember , these are deterministic
systems . They only become random because of random constraints . Thus ,
constraints increase randomness by the same order that the constraints are
random .
If the space-time crumpling is beyond our understanding , it is ,by
definition , random . Then we can use
the Crumpled Paper Algorithm . See
Appendix I .

See Appendix III for some Randomness .

Are we in a simulation ?

In Appendix I we derive mu=2.1773242 * 10^ (-4) , meaning
ratio of volume-of-mass to volume in a Planck Universe that is crumpled .

This is another way of saying that the possible number of
crumplings (N) is

N=2^ (1/mu) (from
Binomial distribution .)

The degrees of randomness
in the crumpling .

Also a measure of the degree of complexity .

N = 2^4592.7933 . A large number .

In Appendix II we derive a measure of complexity from observed Planck quantities and found it wanting in the complexity stakes
.

1/dx * 1/dmv
<= 2pi/h ….from Heisenberg
uncertainty principle

<= 9.482514 * 10^33

But , the complexity of the crumpling completely overshadows
the planck complexity .

Thus , if we are in a
simulation , N will have to be drastically lower . In other words few and major
folds in the space-time crumpling . These should be detectable . One thinks of
black-holes . In an artificial locale , the number of black-holes per cubic
parsec should give an indication . A nice little problem for the Dear Reader .

More likely , the number of singularities simply balance the
values of the Planck values . Not cause , but in a dynamic balance .

What use is this argument , one might ask .

Well , you can make a super-battery . Spin a particle in a
capacitor field . Very high energy densities can be achieved . Store energy in
spin .

The Karma of Constraints .

Andre

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Appendix I

Crumpling Paper and Space-Time

Andre Willers

23 Feb 2012

“The moving finger writes , and having writ , crumples it in
random ruins.”

With apologies to Omar Khayyam .

Synopsis:

Crumpled paper gives a good approximation of spacetime as a
membrane with clumpy masses .

“Empty” spaces not occupied by the membrane gives an
impression of dark matter .

We derive an expression to give this ratio using Infinite
Descent and Beth(0) Random Walk .

Discussion :

1.The Crumpled paper :

Consider a paper disk of radius r and thickness d .

It's volume is then Vp=pi * r^2 * d

Draw a line from the center to the edge , in steps of length
d , over the edge , then back to the center Let nu=r/d , a measure of the
thickness of the paper . Note that it is a pure number .

The number of steps in the line is then n0=(2r/d)+1

But the number of steps to the edge of the original paper
disk is n1=r/d=(n0-1)/2

r=d*(n0-1)/2

n0=2*nu+1

Vp=(pi*d^3*(n0-1)^2 )/4

Crumple it up in a way that is as random as flipping a coin
(ie Beth(0) )

The Trick : The line we have drawn up above breaks up into
random vectors by rotating through a third dimension = crumpling into a ball .

We thus have a continuous line of random steps of known
number of steps .

In 3 dimensions , the mean square distance from the center
then is known

R = d * (n0)^0.5 ….
See true for all dimensions as long as all are of Beth(0) order of randomness.

Volume of crumpled ball Vb=4/3*pi*R^3

The Ratio Vb/Vp = mu then gives the ratio of crumpled ball
space to volume of paper mass .

Mu={4/3*pi*d^3 *n0^(3/2)} / (pi*d^3*(n0-1)^2 )/4

Notice the d^3 term and pi cancels out . This has profound
physical implications .

This simplifies to

Mu=4*4/3*(n0^3/2/(n0-1)^2)

Expressed as thickness of paper , nu , which is a pure number
independent of metric chosen .

mu=4*4/3(2*nu+1)^3/2 / (2*nu)^2

mu=4/3*(2nu+1)^3/2 /
nu^2

This gives a quartic equation in nu , which can be solved
exactly algebraically .

(mu)^2*(nu)*4 – 2^7/3^2 *

**(nu)^3 – 2^6/3^2****(nu)^2 – 2^5/3^2*** (nu)^1 - 2^4/3^2 =0
Test it on A4 paper:

A4 paper has thickness d~0,1 mm and r~150 mm

nu=150/0,1

nu=1500

mu=4/3*(3001^3/2)/(1500^2)

mu=0.097421589

mu= 1- 0.90257841

This means that the crumpled A4 paper ball encloses about 90%
empty space .

This agrees with experimental results . See NewScientist.

Note that the force applied does not matter . As long as the
paper is untorn , mu will be the same .

How many times can it be folded ?

Solving the above (see below) gives mu=1 for about nu=14.7 to
14.8 .

This means there are no empty spaces left to fold into .

This can get complicated , so I will keep it simple .

Take a piece of paper and fold it . You then have a new piece
of paper .The test-circle of same r will have double the thickness .

Ie , nu will double .

Between 7 and 8 folds , nu will hit the ceiling of mu=1 ,
regardless of the starting value of nu .

This is the maximum number of paper folds , as confirmed from
other sources .

Physical interpretations :

Take an m-dimensional space . Randomness of order Beth(0)
applies equally to all . The underlying equalizer . Collapse it to three
dimensions and let the third one approach single Planck lengths .

Then we can use the above paper approximation . Notice how d
cancels out except for an addition of 1 in final ratio .

What does it mean ?

See the physical universe as a brane (ie sheet of paper) in a
multiverse . Crumpling it means it has mass and singularities . Both are
aspects of the same thing .

An estimate of the number of singularities can be made from
edges and points in crumpled paper .

Can we crumple the paper to a ball that is just paper ?

That is a particle .

The answer is “Yes” .

Such crumpling means that mu=1 (no empty space in any dimension
)

This gives an quartic equation in nu that solves to four
values , other dimensions than three denoted by i=(-1)^0.5

See http://www.1728.org/quartic.htm
for a calculator

nu1= 14.722181 (this makes the physical particle universe
possible . Mass .

Nu2= - 0.004167 + i*0.49558
(Rotation :Spin :charge and magnetism)

nu3 = - 0.004167 -
i*0.49558 (Rotation :Spin :charge and
magnetism) notice the minus sign .

Nu4= - 0.49164542 (quantum effects as the particles dither.
Inertia?)

What does a negative nu mean ?

nu=r/d . A negative nu means one of r or d must be negative .

1.If r is negative , it can be interpreted as curled up
dimensions , inside the “outside” dimensions as defined by i . See http:andreswhy.blogspot.com “ The inside
of zero” Aug 2009

2.If d is negative , it can be interpreted as quantum effects
. A particle does not “occupy” all the space . Likes hopscotch .

3.But notice the the two are interrelated .The notorious
observer effect . Where we place the minus sign between r or d .

There should be relationships between nu2 , nu3 and nu4 .
Various rotations between macro- and micro dimensions .

This means the contraption is not symmetrical But we already know that ,

Physical constants :

Things like charge , mass , etc should be derivable from
these basics . Hint:use lots of crumpled paper .

There is hope . The fact that it is quartic equation , which
is always solvable , means that the Universe can be understood . Complicated
and perverse , but as long as you stick to Beth(0) randomness , it can be
understood . For higher orders of randomness , good luck .

Dark Matter :

I nearly forgot . Using Planck units , we can define the
ratio of thickness of the brane as

nu=c*PlanckTime/(1*Planck Time)

nu=c = 3*10^8

This gives a

Mu=4/3*(2c+1)^3/2 /
c^2

Simplifying (c is very large) . This gives the approximation

mu=4/3* 2^1.5 / c^0.5

mu=2.1773242 * 10^ (-4)

mu = 1-0.999783357

This means that 99.9783357 % of the universe can be
interpreted as being “Dark Matter”.

Ie with attractive and repulsive qualities . Basically empty
space .

May you have joy of that .

An interesting aside :Creative artists .

How many pieces of paper does an artist need to crumple up
and throw away before he finds something acceptable ?

Something acceptable would translate to mu=1 . Thus , we can
say 7-8 truly random foldings should
give a result .

The same holds for cryptanalysis or any attempt to find an
unknown .

Algorithm :

Try 8 times , crumple , then put it aside and try again later
.

There is a quantum connection , strange as it might seem .

And what about a nice little Crumpling App for smartphones ?

But the randomness should be from truly random tables , not
pseudo-random generators .

Randomly yours.

Andre

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Appendix II

__Slingshots , Dark Matter and Dark Energy.__
Andre
Willers

17 Apr 2011

__Synopsis :__
Dark matter
and Dark energy are misinterpretations of slingshot effects where the
probe-mass is not infinitesimal .

In other
words , they are observational artifacts .

__Discussion .__
Reproduced
in Appendix A for ease of reference .

Field Theory
assumes that Probe Masses can be infinitesimal . Yet , if we combine finite
probe masses with SlingShot theory , a better fit to explain astrophysical anomalies
is obtained . Also meson interactions .

__Why Slingshot ?__
1. Because
we do not have a theory of three interacting masses . But we can do it for two
masses . But everything rotates and orbits . So , we can describe all moving
delineated masses as interactions of two masses slingshotting .

2. It is a
valid mechanism for converting angular momentum into linear momentum .

See Penrose
Process (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_process )

And
vice-versa .

__The alert reader will notice reactionless drives and high-energy storage devices lurking in these seeming innocuous statements .__**:**

__An Example__
A simple
slingshot , though the principles hold for more complex cases .

V2={(1-m/M)v1+2U1}
/ {1+m/M}

We choose
not to let m be small relative to M .

But we are
also too lazy , ignorant and old to count every particle in a universe .

So we cheat
and say : let x = m/M , then integrate v2 for 0 <= x =<1 .="" nbsp="" o:p="">

This means
that the probe mass m takes on finite values from zero to our major mass M .
This then includes subatomic and atomic and any other particles .

__This gives values__
Integral (v2)
dx (from x= 0 to 1) =
2*ln(2)*(v1+u1) ………(1)

Integral
{(v2)^2} dx (from x= 0 to 1) =
2*(v1+u1)^2 – 4*ln(2)*v1*u1 + 1 ……(2)

Equation (1)
tells you how to make an inertialess drive .

The
Spindizzy strikes again !

Equation (2)
is an Energy equation and is responsible for all those horrible contortions of
Mond (especially the last term of +1) .

It also
tells you how to make stable , high , density energy storage devices .

Remember ,
magnetism is spin . If there is spin , there are Slingshots .

Galaxies
seeming to orbit too close and fast/slow are simply exchanging slingshot masses
(cf mesons)

Bits and
pieces of the universe keep on flying around , creating space-time as they go.

It depends
on their entanglements . The present universe looks more like an amoeba , with
tentacles shooting out . The extent of space and time depends on where you
look.

__Vacuoles ?__
Mini-universes
created by tendrils of slingshot masses enclosing . Interesting spin effects as
different tendrils have different velocities .

These should
be able to be created in the laboratory .

__Complexity :__
Invert the
Heisenberg Principle to define the Complexity of a Beth(0) Universe .

dx*dmv >=
h/2pi ….Heisenberg uncertainty
principle

Let 1/dx be
all the possible values of x (ie the complexity of space)

Let 1/dmv be
all the possible values of momentum . (ie complexity of time)

1/dx * 1/dmv
<= 2pi/h ….from Heisenberg
uncertainty principle

<= 9.482514 * 10^33

This is the
measure of Complexity of the Beth(0) Universe we find ourselves in .

__This almost certainly means that we are in a simulation .__
The
Complexity of Beth(0) is too small .

But is it
sufficient for open-ended complexity of Beth(>0) ?

I can intuit
that there is a threshold .

Bah .

I can also
intuit that we are probably on a chaotic boundary threshold .

Go one way ,
and you recycle (Karma concept)

Go another
way , advance .

And it was
designed this way .

__Storming Heaven .__
Shooting
tendrils of space-time into the multiverse will decrease the Heisenberg
constant , thereby increasing the complexity past the threshold of recycling .

The Poor
Civilization's Singularity .

__The mass of the soul .__
This can now
be calculated from first principles from the complexity of momentum .

It is about
4! gm = 24 gm relative to the
surrounding universe simulation .

And may you
have joy of that .

May God have
Mercy .

Andre

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Appendix A

__The Problem with Fields .__
Andre
Willers

21 Dec 2008

__A sad tale of Hidden Assumptions and Fictitious Forces .__
Our story
begins with Isaac Newton about 400 years ago . He proved that radially
symmetric bodies (like balls) can be treated as a point-mass from a
gravitational viewpoint as long as f=G*m(1)*m(2)/ (R^2) holds . This is his famous Law of Gravitation
.

Fast forward
to the Twentieth Century . Space probes were measured to have accelerations not
predicted by expected theory . (See New Scientist 20 Sept 2008 p38
"Fly-by Fright." )

Fright
indeed . Physical laws were under threat .

It was first
noticed with the Pioneer probes and stimulated the MOND (Google it)
modification to Newton's Law .

But the
effect was small and controversial .

But then
even a bigger shock came . Probes doing slingshots around the Earth (like
Gallileo in 1992 , Near Shoemaker in 1998 ) showed such large divergences from
expected velocities after the slingshot that the matter could not be swept
under the carpet anymore . (The favourite human response.)

__Is our understanding of physics wrong ?__
No .

__What is going on ?__
They treated
planets as point sources in their programs .

(Remember ,
these are the guys that mixed up newtons and poundals on the Mars probe) .

__The Earth-Moon illustration .__
The system
orbits around a common center of gravity which lies inside the Earth .

Even school
atlases' state this .

You can
treat the Earth as a gravity point-source , but then you must include the Moon
as well (and other bodies , but their effect is very small) .

The velocity
change during the slingshot maneuver is dependant on the Earth's rotation
around the common center of gravity . The Earth-Moon rotational plane coincides
roughly with the Earths equator . Hence the observational datum that the
velocity change is proportional the difference in the angles incoming and
outgoing with reference to the equatorial plane .

__What is happening ?__
Are
conservation laws being violated ?

No .

__Internal Slingshot .__
It is simply
a slingshot maneuver around a virtual mass .

The
Earth-Moon rotating system is not radially symmetric . It is lumpy . The velocity change is dependant on a large
number of factors , but can be calculated .

The energy
comes from the weak coupling between angular momentum and linear momentum .

From a
really basic viewpoint , this can be easiest seen as the difference between a
straight line touching a circle and the continuation of the circle . (Newton's
laws measure forces by disturbances from a straight line .)

Another way
of looking at it :

The
gravitational attractions on an outside probe of masses rotating around each
other and about a common center of gravity do not cancel out . A small
vector-residue is left .

This is a
dynamical effect . Movements only need apply .

**,**

__This can be calculated__
But will
vary in every instance .

(A
software-computer (General Theory) is not possible .) This is because there are
three bodies involved :

Earth , Moon
and Probe .

The
Three-body Problem has no general solution . This is well known in
mathematics Now are you happy ?

Calculating
this gravitational difference gives rise to a disturbing effect : the
mathematical terms for the field probe does not vanish .

In hindsight
, a necessary effect because of the general insolubility of the Three-Body
problem . But not obvious beforehand .

This is
simply restating there is no general solution of the Three-body Problem .

Two bodies
plus a probe makes a three-body problem . Every case will be different . Use
Chaos theory .

This will be
true for any body in the solar System (ie Pioneer probes) , as well as any
rotating set of bodies in this Universe .

__The Field Assumption .__
Beloved of
theoretical physicists , mainly because they are too lazy to do it properly .

The
Classical definition is a probe mass , charge or whatever examined near the
identifiable object . The forces the probe experience are defined as the Field
. The Probe is then ignored .

This has the
hidden assumption that the effect of the probe can be cancelled out .

(Ie that it
is really a Two-body Problem).

In most
radially symmetric objects like balls or charges this can be done .

But , alas ,
it breaks down if the objects are lumpy . Then the pesky mathematical terms
denoting the probe just won't go away .

Without the
hidden assumptions about symmetry , error margins have to be specified .

We cannot
use our software computer (ie theory) to cancel out the interference of our
test-probe .

This is
analogous to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle , but not similar .

You have to
understand levels of Randomness

Error-margins
at Beth(x+1) level for Beth(x) levels
can be made arbitrarily small (although maybe not zero) .

__General Relativity and Tensors .__
This effect
can be clearly seen if you use Ricci's Tensors to denote gravitational fields.
This is the really general granddaddy of fields .

Tensor
theory very clearly requires that tensors are only defined in continuous and
differentiable spaces . (Rather amusing , since this takes place before any
metric is assigned . Sub-Space !) Hence
the problems with quantum gravity . A quantal system is by definition discontinuous . Trying to describe it by
continuous methods is futile .

Or
Bio-fields . Things are just too idiosyncratic for meaningful abstractions
using fields .

__Fictitious Forces .__
The major
culprit is centripetal force (also known as centrifugal force ) . This is a
fictitional force to balance the theory's bookkeeping .

From the
above you can see that a large composite body like a galaxy composed of many
objects rotating around each other and all around a center will have a nett
attraction either larger or smaller than by gravity alone .

**, objects that we observe to fall around it in orbit will have a higher speed than required by the fictitious centripetal force of purely gravitational attraction .**

__If larger__
Dark matter
, anyone ?

**, things fly apart .**

__If smaller__
Negative
Dark matter , anyone ?

If you look
at the maths , being

**will smack of design (The probability of this is very small for Beth(0) randomness ) .**__exactly the same__
Stellar
engineering on Beth(2) or Beth(3) scale .

Does this
sound familiar ?

**.**

__Dark Matter__
Phlogiston ,
ahoy! Your buddy Dark Matter is coming .

You can then
dance the Ptolemaic Gavotte .

__Can Fields be salvaged ?__
Maybe .

But then
horrible contortions are necessary .

Dimensions
writhe in semi-being . As a last resort , a marriage counselor might have to be
called in .

But why
bother ? There are better ways .

If you have
to , assign error margins to every field-point and interact the error-margins .
This will automatically result in spiky discontinuities . Gauss would have
loved them , but unless you are as expert as he was, try the simpler route .

Once again ,
why bother ? Use Beth(x) systems .

And if you
are feeling adventurous , try numbers that only exist at different Beth(x>1)
levels .

Guaranteed
to lose weight .

Andre .

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Appendix III

__Orders of Randomness 2__
Andre
Willers

15 Aug 2008

I have been
requested to expand a little on orders of Randomness and what it means .

Please note
that human endeavours at this date use only randomness of the order of flipping
a coin ( Beth(0) )

Aleph is the
first letter of the Hebrew Alphabet . It was used by Cantor to denote

Classes of
Infinity (ie Aleph(0) for Rational numbers , Aleph(1) for Irrational Numbers ,
etc

Beth is the
second letter of the Hebrew Alfabet . It means “House”

I will first
repeat the derivation of Orders of Randomness from http://andreswhy.blogspot.com : “Orders
of Randomness” because it is so important .

----------------xxxxxx

__Start Quote:__

__First , simple Randomness .__
Flip of a
coin .

Heads or
Tails . 0 or 1

Flip an
unbiased coin an infinite number of times ,write it down below each other and
do it again .

All possible
0 and 1’s

**An example : Beth(0)**

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Flips(1)
0,1,1,1,1,… etc

Flips(2)
0,1,1,1,0,… etc

.

Flips(infinity)
0,0,0,0,0,0,…etc

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This
describes all possible states in a delineated binary universe .

“delineated
binary” means a two sided coin which cannot land on it’s side .

Now draw a
diagonal line from the top left of Flips(1) to Flips(infinity) .

At every
intersection of this diagonal line with a horizontal line , change the value .

The Diagonal
Line of (0,1)’s is then not in the collection of all possible random

Horizontal
coin-Flips(x) .

This means
the Diagonal Line is of a stronger order of randomness .

This is also
the standard proof of an Irrational Number .

__This is the standard proof of aleph numbers .__

__Irrational numbers ,etc__
Since any
number can be written in binary (0,1) , we can infer that the order of
randomness is the same as aleph numbers .

This means
we can use number theory in Randomness systems .

Very
important .

Google
Cantor (or Kantor)

__Define coin-flip Randomness as Beth(0) , analogous to Aleph(0)__
Then we have
at least Beth(1) , randomness an order stronger than flipping a coin .

Then we can
theorize Beth(Omega) <->Aleph(Omega) .

**End Quote**

----------------xxxxxx

__Cardinal Numbers .__
The cardinal
number is the index x of Aleph(x) .

Cantor
proved that

Aleph(n+1) =
2 ^ Aleph( n )

Where n is
the cardinal number of the infinity .

__Tying them together :__
He also
proved that

P(A) = 2^ n

Where A is
any set , P(A) is the PowerSet of A
and n is the cardinal number of set A

Thus ,
Cardinal Number of P(A) =(n+1)

The PowerSet
of A = the Set of all subsets of A .

This sounds
fancy , but it is simply all the different ways you can combine the elements of
set A . All the ways you can chop up A .

You can see
it easily in a finite binomial expansion (1+1)^n = P(A) = 2^n

There we
also chop and dice , using infinite series .

Can you see
how it all ties together ?

__Why 2 ?__
This derives
from the Delineation Axiom . Remember , we can only talk about something if it
is distinct and identifiable from something else . This gives a minimum of 2
states : part or non-part .

That is why
the Zeta-function below is described on a 2-dimensional plane , or pesky
problems like Primes always boil down to 2 dimensions of some sort .

This is why
the irrational numbers play such an important part in physics .

Z=a+ib
describes a 2-dimensional plane useful for delineated systems without feedback
systems

Its in the
axiom of Delineation , dummy .

But we know
that Russell proved that A+~A

The
difference can be described as the Beth sequences . Since they are derivatives
of summation-sequences(see below) , they define
arrows usually seen as the time-arrows .

These need
not to be described a-la-dunne’s serial time , as different Beth levels address
the problem adequately without multiplying hypotheses .

__Self-referencing systems and Beth sequences .__
A Proper
Self-referencing system is of one cardinal Beth number higher than the system
it derives from .

Self-referencing
systems (feedback systems) can always be described as sequences of Beth systems
. Ie as Beth(x) <-> Beth(y) . The
formal proof is a bit long for inclusion here .

The easiest
way to see it is in Bayesian systems . If Beth(x) systems are included ,
Bayesian systems become orders of magnitude more effective .

Life ,
civilization and markets are such . See below .

__Conservation Laws :__
By
definition , these can always be written in a form of

SomeExpression
= 0

__Random (Beth(0) Walk in Euclidean 2-dimensions__
This is a
powerful unifying principle derived from the Delineation Axiom .

In Random
Walk the Distance from the Center is = d * (n)^0.5 . This is a property of
Euclidean systems .

(Where d =
step , n=number of random beth(0) steps)

Immediately
we can say that the only hope of the
Walker returning to the center after an infinity of Beth(0) steps is if d ~
1/(n)^0.5 . This is the Riemann Hypothesis .

Now , see a
Universum of 2-dimensional descriptors
z=a+ib

Sum all of
them . Add together all the possible things that can be thus described .

This can be
done as follows :

From z=a+ib
Raise both sides to the e

e^(z) =
e^(a) . e^i(b)

Raise both
sides to the ln(j) power where j is real
integers.

j^(z) =
j^(a) . e^(b/ln(j))

Now , sum
them :

Zeta=Sum of
j^(z) for j=1 to infinity

Now we
extract all possible statements that embody some Conservation Law . Beth(1)

This means
that Zeta is zero for the set of extracted statements if and only if (b/ln(j))
is of the order of Beth(0) and a=(-1/2)

Tensors .

The above is
a definition of a tensor for a discontinous function .

__Riemann’s Zeta function.__

__This can describe any delineated system .__

__If Zeta = 0 , conservation laws apply .__
Zeta =
Sigma(1/j )^z for j=1,2,3,…,infinity and z=a+ib , where z is complex and i
=(-1)^0.5

The z bit is
in two dimensions as discussed above .

This
function has a deep underlying meaning for infinite systems .

If you
unpack the Right-Hand side on a x-yi plane you get a graph that looks like a
random walk .

If every
point is visited that a random walk would visit over infinity (ie all) ,
without clumping , then Zeta can only be non-trivially zero if a=(-1/2) .

Why (x – yi)
plane ? See “Why 2 “ above . The system is fractal . Two dimensions are
necessary in any delineated system .

Remember ,
randomwalk distance from origin = step*sqrt(number of steps) .

So if the
steps = 1/ ( sqrt(number of steps) ) , then the Origin might be reached if and
only if a= -1/2

This is
easily proven .

If a= - 1/2
, then b can be any real function . This would include Beth(0) and Beth(1) , but not higher orders of beth .

If a= -1/2
and b is an unreal number , then a cannot be equal to -1/2 anymore . Conservation cannot hold at
any level .

__Consequences:__
Conservation
Laws can only hold for Beth(0) and Beth(1) systems .

This is
forced by the two dimensions of delineation .

Mathematically
, this means that Beth(2+) systems of feedbacks can only be described in terms
of attractors or/and fractal systems (ie not in isolation)

Physically ,
conservation of energy and momentum need not hold for Beth(2+) systems .

This has an
interesting corollary in decryption (unpacking) . A Beth(2) mind unpacking
Beth(0) or Beth(1) encryption is functionally equivalent to Non-Conservation of
Energy .

__Some other consequences :__
If a<
-½ , then Riemannian Orbitals are
described . Beth(any)

Also
described as nuclei , atoms .

If a>
-½ , then a diffuse cloud is described .
Beth(any)

Also
described as magnetic effects .

What does
this mean?

Present
technology uses Beth(x) technology in a rather haphazard way .(Quantum physics)
.

A better
understanding will bring about a sudden
change in capability .

Andre

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

## No comments:

Post a Comment