Theoretical Physics

This is not an everything goes forum, but rather a place to ask questions and request help for developing your ideas.

Re: This Time Around

Postby bangstrom on September 20th, 2019, 2:55 am 

Faradave » September 18th, 2019, 4:13 pm wrote:If a hole can have direction at all, there is the potential to change its direction. Spin is a continuous change of direction about a center.

This part isn’t clear. For example, if you have a pinhole connecting two electrons separated by one kilometer, does it spin end over end like a baton or does it rotate like a screw or does it push and pull like a solid rod? I understand this is speculation and taking place unobserved in 4D space but what is your understanding of “spin”?

Your “chronaxial spin” appears similar to descriptions of instantaneous “longitudinal waves” from old time radio theory from the time of Steinmetz, Heaviside, Alexanderson, Tesla et al. This was a straight line back and forth oscillation.

Faradave » September 18th, 2019, 4:13 pm wrote:Since chronaxial spin is inherently instantaneous, it is only available to faster-than-light phenomena. As projected contact, a pinhole is among these.

Spin and instantaneous are mutually exclusive unless your spin is cinematic like a series of pictures. How do you reconcile the two?
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 664
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
TheVat liked this post


Re: Spin Cycle

Postby Faradave on September 30th, 2019, 1:58 pm 

Sorry, I must have missed this post.

bangstrom wrote:Spin and instantaneous are mutually exclusive

That's where we have to grow conceptually to grasp instantaneous "hypermotion", which applies only to faster-than-light phenomena.

To construct a line segment from a point, imagine the point occupying all the locations on that segment at once. This is equivalent to the point sliding instantaneously across the span. Instantaneous motion isn't seen classically as "moving", it's seen as "being" in all the covered locations at once.

Now, if the line segment is to persist for more than an instant in time, the process must repeat continuously. So, we adjust the model, allowing the point to oscillate back and forth across the segment. The amplitude of oscillation determines the length of the line segment, while repetition gives it persistence. (To take this a step further, a higher instantaneous frequency gives a more intense or darker line.)

If we imagine another longer line segment produced the same way we have a problem. How can we distinguish the speed of two infinitely fast moving points? Clearly, the point creating the longer line is somehow moving faster. That observation hands us the solution. The term we use to distinguish two such instantaneous speeds is "length".

The same consideration applies to chronaxial spin. Spin about a temporal axis is inherently instantaneous. The term used to distinguish between two such spins (though this is not yet widely recognized) is "mass-energy".

Quick Draw 2.png
God's hand draws two lines instantaneously (perpendicular to time), but the longer one is drawn "faster". Similarly spin around time can proceed at differing "instantaneous" rates.

bangstrom wrote:if you have a pinhole connecting two electrons separated by one kilometer, does it spin end over end like a baton

A pinhole spins in a spatial XYZ 3-plane, around a temporal axis, which means that it points in every spatial direction at once. This is the foundation of a Gaussian field. If a baton could spin in such a manner, it would become a ball for which the center point has the full density of the baton, falling off with radial separation as the inverse square law.

Lacking full density at the periphery, two such "baton fields" could overlap but would find increasing resistance as they are pushed together and their combined densities approach that of a solid baton.

A pinhole represents interval contact. With chronaxial spin it becomes "probabilistic contact", a gravitational field where the separational capacity of the continuum is reduced. At the same time, it represents probabilistic contact with other objects in the continuum, this is the electric field. Light transmission is a special case of such electric contact. An orbital transition is a change in quantum state fast enough (essentially instantaneous) to transmit an entire quantum of energy during a probabilistic contact with another particle.
User avatar
Faradave
Active Member
 
Posts: 1852
Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Location: Times Square (T2)


Re: Spin Cycle

Postby bangstrom on October 1st, 2019, 5:34 am 

Faradave » September 30th, 2019, 12:58 pm wrote:
If we imagine another longer line segment produced the same way we have a problem. How can we distinguish the speed of two infinitely fast moving points? Clearly, the point creating the longer line is somehow moving faster. That observation hands us the solution. The term we use to distinguish two such instantaneous speeds is "length".


What does the longer line represent in 3D space? More energy? More distance?

Faradave » September 30th, 2019, 12:58 pm wrote:
Lacking full density at the periphery, two such "baton fields" could overlap but would find increasing resistance as they are pushed together and their combined densities approach that of a solid baton.


There is a theory that two rotating fields will attract if their closest edges are moving in opposite directions like gears grinding and they will repel if their closest edges are moving in the same direction like gears meshing. That may apply here.

An example of this is Amperes two wire law where two long wires with electron currents flowing in the same direction will attract but, if the currents flow in opposite directions, they will repel. Electrons having the same spin and direction are like gears grinding so they attract but their like charges cause them to flip and repel if they get too close.
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 664
Joined: 18 Sep 2014


Re: Unicycle Act

Postby Faradave on October 1st, 2019, 10:59 am 

bangstrom wrote:hat does the longer line represent in 3D space? More energy? More distance?

Good intuition! With instantaneous linear oscillation of a pinhole, higher frequency represents more energy. Such oscillation may be considered spin in 1D. I haven't written much of it recently but employ the concept in regard to fractional E charge of quarks. An electron makes full chronaxial rotations in a 3-plane (for unit E charge). An Up quark rotates in a 3-plane but uses only 2D of it (thus E charge magnitude of 2/3) and a Down quark rotates in a 3-plane but uses only 1D of it (for 1/3 charge).

bangstrom wrote:There is a theory that two rotating fields will attract if their closest edges are moving in opposite directions like gears grinding and they will repel if their closest edges are moving in the same direction like gears meshing. That may apply here.

Yes quite! But I distinguish between gravity (what a pinhole with chronaxial spin does to the continuum, reducing its separational capacity) and electric charge (what particles do directly to each other). Gravity is agnostic of chronaxial spin direction (so G is always attractive) while electric charge sign is defined by it.

Opposite electric charges mutually antagonize chronaxial spins but since energy (solid-angular momentum) is conserved it converts to chronaxial roll. This is seen as conversion of potential energy of position converting to kinetic energy (as the opposite charges accelerate toward each other).
User avatar
Faradave
Active Member
 
Posts: 1852
Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Location: Times Square (T2)


Previous

Return to Personal Theories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests