The universe is divided into dimensional fractals which extend to infinity in both outwards and inwards directions. Thus, an electron is a fractal of an atom, a meteor is a fractal of a moon, a moon is a fractal of a planet, a planet is a fractal of a sun, a sun is a fractal of a solar system, a solar system is a fractal of a galaxy, a galaxy is a fractal of a local system etc.
Fractals don’t have physical values, particles do! If there is an infinite fractal matrix then it would be meaningless i.e. Non-correlative.
Consider and visualise that fractal; you can’t get a never ending evolution of patterns from a finite formula [which fractals are], eventually even if it takes a denumerable amount, fractals would repeat. That makes it almost or seemingly infinite, but not actually infinite.
The universe could be a fractal where the values are added in, but it wouldn’t be an infinite one.
hmm, unless we say the universe has no values e.g. at base? a fractal could move between 0 and any given value, but then we get an infinity intersected with finite values, surely a vast contradiction. though that may be the trick we are missing, that reality does contradict itself. it’s just that it’s impossible for that idea to be manifest, as that would have to make sense then.
Are you saying that fractals are not real? What is a physical value?
Definition of PHYSICAL VALUE
: the cost of reproduction of physical property less depreciation and other allowances as of a given date
What do you mean by seemingly infinite but not actually infinite?
What do you mean by added in?
No i was saying that if the physical universe [which apparently has finite values] doesn’t belong to the ‘infinite’ fractal universe, then it’s not real in the existential fashion.
Could be real still, just non-correlative.
I don’t know if ultimately there are such things?
Yes, but where do those values originate? If a fractal universe were finite, then i can see how it could be like a medium between infinite and universe ~ where values derive. [ie. Added in]
Interesting idea actually.
Denumerable, to large to calculate, but still limited/finite.
_
Well if you factor in absolute time…
The clock is ticking forward
Even if you go back in time
Absolute time is going forward.
Absolute time will never cease, therefore it is infinite.
Absolute time? There are no absolutes! [reality does not contain cardinality, only relative distinction] Like a fractal can seemingly go on forever, but it actually cannot, it can only run for the duration of all-time ~ which is limited.
- because the rule is; ‘there are no absolutes’, then we cannot state there are infinities or even finites for that matter. There are only approximations, and because of this there are no infinite realities as that would be an absolute [where reality is vacant [of specifics and absolutes]].
The Universal Fractal:
Atoms are galaxies.
Electrons are galactic arms.
users.accesscomm.ca/john
Atoms are spinning discs which
also precess- the ratio of spin to
precession is one-to-two.
Benzene is explained easily in
this manner-not by magically
delocalizing electrons but by the
ring members all loaning their
third Carbon electron one way and
borrowing from the other:
users.accesscomm.ca/john/BenzeneE.GIF
Electrons (as arms of mini-Suns) are
constantly releasing FRACTAL NEUTRINOS,
which are absorbed by protons- THESE are
the radiation required by LeSage
Gravity.
Etc, etc.
Predicts star formation from galactic
jets- regular matter from one jet
and antimatter from the other.
Predicts galactic precession.
Predicts that adjacent galactic arms
stay separated because
Predicts that matter and antimatter
repel.
Etc etc- The Galaxy Model for the atom.
Just because you can picture something as possibly true, doesn’t mean that it IS true.
Never mind Mr Negativity. The moving diagram of a spin wave is very accurate. But it is only a wave - there are no particles other than aether particles which are not yet matter.
I prefer to use the clock analogy of how light transfers through space. The aether particles spin at the speed of light in alternate left and right directions. The light wave pushes the particles together. The particles move the wave forward at the speed of light like the cogs of a watch or clock. The speed of light is a dimensional signature. Note - The smaller the dimension - the faster things happen. Thus - The speed of light is how fast the sub-atomic world generally moves at.
Yes, if you live on an atom, 225
million years are to you what
100 attoseconds is to us.
When laying out electrons on a
disc, and then rotating/precessing
the disc at 1:2, as seen in
users.accesscomm.ca/john/BenzeneE.GIF
opposite electrons follow the same
path. At any moment one is “spin up”
and the other is “spin down”.
Similarly, in Galaxies, the arms
opposite each other will have opposite
spin- one will be composed of
matter stars, and the other, of
antimatter stars
Our entire universe that we live in, is most likely, just a small speck of dust in another dimension.
I have another similar post - viewtopic.php?f=4&t=188165
So, now, ideally we want to place
our opposite up/down pairs on
the disc so they have opposites
for neighbours.
This is true for a two-member disc
automatically- since there is only
ONE up/down pair, the one opposite
IS the neighbour on the right and
the neighbour on the left.
The next time this is possible is
when there are SIX equally-spaced
members on the disc/ring. Try it.
And the next is at TEN. Look at this:
accesscomm.ca/john/NeonAnimation.GIF
After that: FOURTEEN.
Then: EIGHTEEN.
Every Inert Gas has the right number
to do this: to put opposites across from
and beside each other equally in
a ring.
Darn, I messed up that link.
The TEN-member ring composed
of five up/down pairs is here:
users.accesscomm.ca/john/NeonAnimation.GIF
There- hopefully that will work
By matter and anti-matter, are you referring to left and right spin rotation?
“Fractal” is a mathematical concept, thus very theoretical; so it is a very reckless idea to believe in it as if it were a physical fact.
“By matter and anti-matter, are you referring to left and right spin rotation?”
said he
By matter and anti-matter, are you referring to left and right spin rotation?
www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw/stars2/index.html
Several years ago, when a star was
observed to shred as it approached
a black hole, and jets instantly
appeared shooting out excited
matter, I realized that this is how
stars are recycled. The above
article describes how they now
observe new star formation
associated with these jets. BuT
there are two jets: if one makes
stars with one spin, the opposite
jet must make stars with the
other spin. But does this translate
into antimatter?
Constructing atoms after spiral
galaxies means working with
spinning/precessing discs.
There are two possible ways to
do this: for any one spin, you can
precess left or precess right.
They make distinct 3D pathways,
which are mirror-images of each
other. This would be the spin
difference between matter and
antimatter, I feel.
The two new galaxies would be only positive and negative (spin direction - left and right) in relation to the next ‘outward or up dimension’. They wouldn’t be matter and anti-matter. Anti-matter doesn’t exist as far as I am concerned.
Yes.
They are just matter with the
same spin but opposite precession.
For any spin, there are two choices
of precession.