Prev: The "Poor Man's Prime conjecture" guesses all prime numbers are divisible
Next: octic polynomial equations
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 1 Apr 2010 02:56


Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Alright, I do not want to get too far into the Atom Totality theory
> for this is still a mathematics
> book. So I do not want to go far beyond the Geometry Principle.
>
> As I wrote earlier, it is easy to explain the strangeness of the
> Double Slit so that it becomes
> even teachable to grade-school kids. That the electrons are both
> particle and wave, both share
> elliptic geometry and hyperbolic geometry. So as they hit the slits,
> the electrons still behave
> as a wave component-- the hyperbolic component and as a particle
> component the elliptic geometry component.
>
> But then again to explain the Macroworld double-slit of the Bell
> Inequality. Here the strangeness is not particle wave duality, but
> rather the instantaneous change of one system
> that is at opposite ends of the Cosmos by a second system. So how does
> the Geometry
> Principle:
>
> Eucl == Elliptic unioned Hyperbolic
>
> How does that principle make commonsense of the Bell Inequality whilst
> keeping maximum
> speed that of light and no superluminal speed?
>

Ah, this post gets better all the time.

> Well, here we have to ask intriguing questions as to where the Nucleus
> of an Atom Totality is
> situated. In the Big Bang theory, there is never this question because
> in that theory, the Cosmos has no center and has no edges. But in the
> Atom Totality theory, there is a Nucleus
> and it must have a central location. And this center relates to why
> the speed of light has to be
> 3 x 10^10 cm/sec and not some other number.
>
> So, now, if we define instantaneous as the largest positive finite
> number as 10^490 sec

Nay, I am wrong there, I should have said 10^500 sec


> and define the largest distance as 10^500 cm, then the maximum
> possible speed in the
> Cosmos would be 10^10 cm/sec. Now I do not know how we can reconcile
> time with distance,
> like that. But let us say time and distance are askew for some
> physical reason or other.
>

I do not need time and distance askew, I need them the same. What
brings out
the difference between them of a 10^10 cm/sec disparity of the 10^500
cm
and the 10^500 sec, is that the centimeters are on a circle and the
seconds
are on a logarithmic spiral. Time is ultimately defined as a
rearrangement of
the total number of atoms in the Cosmos. The distance is on a circle
and the radii are all the same. The time, however is on a opened
circle that spirals.

So when the Cosmos has a maximum distance of 10^500 cm and a maximum
time
of 10^500 seconds, the speed of 10^10 cm/sec is the disparity or
askewity between the open
ended logarithmic spiral and the closed circle, both of 10^500.

Here is a question that maybe helpful in what I am driving at. We take
a Logarithmic spiral of
1 winding and a circle that matches that log winding. And since pi is
3.14... and "e" is 2.71...
We ask the question of where in that windings of comparing the pi with
the "e" does the
difference between the circles and log windings make a difference of 3
x 10^10 cm/sec
starting from 3.14... cm and 2.71... sec. The speed of light in the
first winding would come
to be 3.14 cm /2.71 sec = 1.15 cm/sec. So how many windings before the
disparity or askewity become that of 10^10 cm/sec rather than 1.15 cm/
sec? Is it at 10^500 or thereabouts?

So here I have reconciled time with distance by saying the skewity is
solved by the fact that
the logarithmic spiral is open ending whereas the circle is closed.
And the logarithmic
spiral is Hyperbolic geometry whereas the circle is Elliptic geometry.

Now if I can link the speed of light at 10^10 cm/sec with that of the
disparity between
the value of pi at 3.14.... whereas "e" is 2.71....., that tiny
disparity between the two,
becomes a big disparity of 10^10 cm/sec after say perhaps 10^500
windings.


> And since the Atom Totality requires there to be a center for the
> Nucleus. Then the speed of
> light reaches all points or corners of the Cosmos, instantaneously. So
> that when the Bell
> Inequality asks for how can system A alter system B when separated by
> the entire Cosmos
> in distance, is because the Nucleus of the Atom Totality which is
> controlling everything
> via superdeterminism, adjusts everything "in an instant" because the
> speed of light from
> the Nucleus is instanteous at all points.
>
> Metaphor Analogy: suppose you are on a surface of a sphere and that
> you wanted instanteous
> changes in points A and B, whereever A and B are located on the sphere
> surface. The way to
> achieve that instanteous change is to have a control at the center of
> the sphere and where
> the communication to any point is at the same speed. Since the radius
> from the center to any
> point are all the same radii distance, and thus creating instantaneous
> change.
>
> So here I am trying to explain how the Geometry Principle which is the
> inverse of the Uncertainty Principle, explains both the Double Slit
> paradox of particle wave duality, but
> also the paradox of the Bell Inequality of its intantaneous changes in
> system A and B
> no matter how far apart.
>
> Now the above probably needs tweaking, but the bare essentials are
> there.
>

If I can derive the speed of light from the windings of the
logarithmic spiral
versus the associated circle, it would be the very best derivation of
the speed
of light since Maxwell found it from the Maxwell Equations.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: The "Poor Man's Prime conjecture" guesses all prime numbers are divisible
Next: octic polynomial equations