Prev: genuine Nike Shoes good for you here
Next: deriving speed of light out of just pure mathematics; 2nd attempt #585 Correcting Math
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 10 Apr 2010 16:03


glird wrote:
> Hello, Archy.
> You've evidently been talking with yourself in this thread. Here
> are some things from "The Anpheon" that may interest you:
>
> Note that 2.9982002, the first dimension in the velocity of light
> given above, is the only number that produces the following result:
> Call that number "n". Then, the log of n times the lnx of n equals
> precisely the ratio of the volume of any sphere divided by that of its
> circumscribing cube, pi/6.
> There has to be a mechanism by which the successive such radiating
> waves orient each other into the very same overall sine wave pattern
> that each one of the emitting group initiates. If not, chaos would
> erupt rather than an identical line spectrum for one and a zillion
> hydrogen or other element's atoms.
> We thus take the vast intuitive jump:
> A purely relational set of actions takes place within the multiple
> sine-wave pulses simultaneously emitting and then merging as the light
> wave progresses. It is governed by geometrical spatial and temporal
> relations between variable density and pressure disequilibria in
> process of reaching a common relative velocity that satisfies the
> different absolute velocities on the way toward some unknown target
> with which they resonate in a way that allows them to be absorbed.
> The wavular is finalized by the summation process, as provided by the
> step in which we took the secant (inverse of cosine) of any number
> (where the number denotes the relation in degrees between positions of
> individual segments of the group), by the Naperian log, "lnx" that
> permits rates of change of density and sorce to be constant per unit
> distance during radiation of the summed pattern, by base ten
> logarithmic arithmetic for some reason or other (possibly to allow
> classical squares of the distance to apply in normal numbers) and by
> dividing by .06 because that gives us the right product.
> The overall concept produced by watching how the successive numbers
> emerge during the six step operation is that the impulses will stagger
> all over the place as they sum with each other, but in a finite and
> brief period the relations temporarily reached will always keep
> changing as different strength pulses and different temporary density
> summations orient one another's pecking order just as our sineman-
> sinewoman discussions of two such patterns described; until
> equilibrium within the Naperian group is reached when each initial
> sine-wave-action has achieved a position where its absolute velocity
> is satisfied by the density of the luminiferous exther it traverses at
> the same relative velocity as that of the one in front whose
> instantaneous inther is that luminiferous exther.
> If, then, each of the simple sine wave patterns summing with the
> others is identical to the others, the ultimate equilibrium would be a
> simple sine-wavular pattern of summed intensity and a common pattern
> of gradients per successive wavular.* That's why, ten billion years
> of well buffeted travel later, a line spectrum is still obtained from
> the innumerable atoms simultaneously emitting infinitesimally close
> photons that sum up to become the gaseous star's light that passes
> through an Earthman's prism.
>
> * Warning! Do not leap ahead to apply this to your notions about
> thermionic emission of electrons. The pons do not react to wavulars.
> They react to the generally discontinuous cycles that fit, in the four-
> dimensionally continuous cloud of passing wavulars.
>
> In passing, note that mem52/mem2 = #; and 100 x #/(pi/6) = 441, from
> which we can again obtain 269... the pure number way. What can we do
> with this 269.870078 that emerges from the pure number game? Oh, by
> the way, - the arcsine of 1/(1+Fs/105) = 2.997832; which, times 1010
> is 99.996% of the data value of c's first dimension.
> Anyway, 1/("radius" of proton [from inverse of sine 54N] x
> 269.870078) =
> 2.9978018x1010,
> which is how the pure numbers arrived at this value of c, and vice
> versa as Mr. Maginary loved to add. So, you see, we can even derive
> the local velocity of light, in local vacuo, via our little local hand
> calculator.
>
> Sometimes the pure numbers do fit better than in reality, where the
> properties of actual material play their .4% spoiler role just to
> prove that matter really exists in the objective world out there where
> Man's mind can probe infinitely further than his material body could.
>
> Another chuckle? Try this for mass: (pi/6 value of radius of pon)2
> times (inverse sine 54N radius of proton) times 269.870078 equals
> 9.1452235 -28; which is about our pure number value of the mass of an
> electron, and which, times 2, is pretty close to the mass-equivalent
> of our basic pax photon, doncha know.
> Let's play with this a bit: The square root of [m_e {this mass of an
> electron} times our pure value of c] is within 99.84% of our pure
> 273.193 ratio of some other purely reached atomic values. Note that
> when a jig saw cuts out a picture, converting it into a jigsaw puzzle,
> some sawdust is lost. I would imagine that a 99.6+% fit would be
> pretty accurate. As our chips fall where they may, a picture does
> emerge. You saw it described above.
> Uh oh (6/26/90). A fantastic new "magic number" just jumped up on
> the TI-55111! Here it is:
> The ratio of mass of a proton to that of an electron is given as
> 1836.5 : 1. One of the magic numbers is 273.19306. The square of
> 1836.6 is 3372732.3. This, divided by 273.19306 equals 12345.6789;
> which not only matches another magic number, but whenever you see such
> a regular successive whole number progression emerge from
> interrelations between otherwise seemingly completely unrelated
> products of atomic values, you know that an intimate cause and effect
> signal has just been given by your pure though chaotic mathematics.
> (6/19/90) volume of ratio sphere divided by pax = about the
> frequency of visible light!
> Not wavelengths of the pax, wavelengths between the spirals! Far
> out thought: The helicopter army pilots said the tractor beam was a
> green light. Is the frequency of green light about 2^14?

Hello,

I am not talking to myself, but rather writing a book. Occasionally a
reply is
useful, but since this is an open forum, most replies are useless.
Like
radioactivity, most is decay, but a few is growth.

The trouble or problem with your "theme" above, is that you have no
platform
of a theory to work with. You come at physics with a background of the
Big Bang,
and do not offer anything new from the Big Bang.

The Big Bang cannot explain why pi has the value of 3.14.... and "e"
has the
value of 2.71..... Since you cannot do that, you should be silent on
these
matters.

Now watch how the Atom Totality theory answers pi and "e". The
Universe is just
one big atom. The element plutonium at maximum has 22 subshells inside
of 7 shells
of which only 19 are occupied subshells in any instant of time. Hence,
the value
of pi and e should be 22/7 and 19/7. The plutonium atom of its last
subshell 5f6
is arranged as 6(pi^5) and yields the mass ratio of proton to
electron.
The Inverse Fine Structure Constant is (22/7)^7/(22) for the 7th
energy level.

You see, Glird, you see how starting with a theory that explains both
pi and e, up front
and then explains proton to electron mass ratio and fine structure
constant, all related
to one another, is how this physics is done.

You with your Big Bang cannot even explain why pi and e are what they
are.
And you putter around on the fringes with numbers like 2.99... as what
you call the
first dimension of speed of light.

Actually, probably the speed of light is more like 3.1 rather than 2.9
prefix. The fine
structure constant inverse is more closer to 137 than it is to 137.1.
The ratio of proton
mass to electron mass is off by a little bit. But this is all doing
math at the "fringes",
Glird. It is not doing any real physics at all.

To do real physics, you start with a theory that makes sense, and you
have none other
than the Big Bang. The Big Bang cannot relate the value of either pi
and e or in unison.

A true theory, would come in and start off by saying, here, the
universe is a big atom.
Plutonium has 22 subshells in 7 shells and 19 subshells occupied,
hence we start with
the values of what pi and e are in the universe 22/7 and 19/7. You see
how they are related
Glird? That you cannot have pi without also detailing "e" and then
since you now have pi and
"e" you instantly get the Fine Structure Constant 22/ (22/7)^7. And
you get the mass ratio of
proton with electron. So you get four of the most important numbers
and features in all of physics and math put together, right off the
starting block.

Now, you, Glird, who is searching and seeking around the fringes of
numbers, when you never
even derived "pi and e". And is checking and tuning into 2.99.... as
the speed of light prefix. And, ironically, instead of being disgusted
with what you have done or not done, Glird, you seem to be proud of
your nonperformance.

So, no, I am not talking to myself, but am writing a book, for there
are only a handful of people
on Earth, right now who is knowledgeable of talking to me about
physics. I write for the future generations, not for the mind polluted
current physics community. Galileo had no time for the
witchdoctors outside his window arguing that the Earth could not be
moving. Nor did Newton
have time for the strife and strafe of his laws of physics. Most of
the people who do the
"big science" have to be loners in their life and they write not for
the present but for the future.

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: genuine Nike Shoes good for you here
Next: deriving speed of light out of just pure mathematics; 2nd attempt #585 Correcting Math