“This is a Physics/Theory/Philosophy Book – concepts are revolutionary!”

Thermal Oblivion

(Introduction to Energy Equations that Actually Work)

… and the whole space-time continuum thing

by: Adam Pellegrino, M.B.A., R.M.T.

CAUTION:

Read at Your Own Risk, to the Fate of Your Own Ignorance

If You Ever Wondered if God could be Proven

This is a Must Read

If You are a Mathematician

Learn New Math

If You Disagree With the Laws of Science

Put Your Mind At Rest, They Are Now Rewritten

If You Ever Wondered if Mars Could be Made Habitable

Lets Consider the Possibility of Crashing Comets into it

Have Water?

Just add Water Bears (they Work like Sea Monkeys only Better!)

Insanity Welcomes You

Added Incentive: Reading this Book will Increase Your IQ

(For Beer Drinkers this Means You will Be Able to Kill Off Smarter Brain Cells)

Now Updated to Include: An Intelligent Definition of a Planet

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Thermal Oblivion by Adam Pellegrino

“This is a Physics/Theory/Philosophy Book – concepts are revolutionary!”

Table of Contents

Part One - Thermal Oblivion

Part Two - Vectors

Part Three - The Laws of Thermodynamics

Part Four - Kinetic verses Potential Energy

Part Five - Acceleration does not Exist

Part Six - Displacement of a Particle

Part Seven - Soulular Theory of Perception

Section One - Proving the Existence of God by the Laws of Science

Section Two - The Meaning of Life and the Philosophy of God

Section Three - Afterlogue

Section Four - The Creation of Synergenestic Mathematics

Section Five - The Ten Laws of Reality

Section Six - Conclusion: “The Zero-Point of Existence”

Section Seven - Additional Thoughts

Part Seven’s - Notes

Part Seven‘s - Additional Resources Consulted

Part Eight - The Big Bang Really Wasn’t that Big

Part Nine - The Infinity Spiral

Part Ten - Things We Need to Solve

Section One - A Much Needed Equation

Section Two - A Much More Needed Galactic Weather Map

Section Three - Can Digital Sentiency be Achieved

Part Eleven - Understanding Good and Evil

Part Twelve - What is i

Section One - Introduction to i

Section Two - Wave Theory

Section Three - Mapping Waves and Circles

Section Four - Insights Gathered from Bubbles of Ocean Waves

Section Five - Material Characteristics of Waves

Part Thirteen - The Whole Space-time Continuum Thing

Section One - Prelude

Section Two - The Void

Section Three - Just a Couple of Interesting Statements

Section Four - Dimension Law

Section Five - Additional Properties of Dimensions

Section Six - Environmental Law

Section Seven - Soulular Theory of DNA Patterning

Section Eight - Point Construction Theory of Intelligence and Sentiency

Section Nine - Playing with Dimension Theory

Part Fourteen - Advanced Thought

Section One - Solving i

Section Two - The Quantum Field of the Soul

Section Three - Solving Bell’s Inequality

Section Four - Black Holes, Black Mass, and the Fabric of Time

Section Five - Notes on Thermal Oblivion

Section Six - Life on Mars, Just Add Comets

Section Seven - Definition of a Planet

Section Eight - Goal of Man; Goal of Species; Goal of Humankind

Part Fifteen - The Correct Mathematics of Physics

Section One - The Origin of Speed

Section Two - Understanding Background Radiation Temperatures

Part Sixteen - How Senses Work

Historical Physics Questions

Disclaimer

Resources Consulted; Not Previously Cited

Part One – Thermal Oblivion

Temperature is change. At Absolute Zero Temperature (negative 273.15 degrees Celsius), change does not occur within the realm of positive energy, everything is stopped in solid form that starts to move/dissipates when heated. Conversely, at the point of maximum heat, which I call Thermal Oblivion, particles move at their fastest possible rate within a given system, always scattered perfectly furthest apart from each other in what can be described as a perfectly scattered and timed unison of a completely random fluidic dance.

Movement creates a slowing effect (momentum and wind) through friction (particles bumping against each other), but in the case of Thermal Oblivion, movement is so fluid that friction, momentum (force of speed generated by motion), and wind do not result. Wind blowing on Thermal Oblivion has a cooling effect that lowers temperature, while wind blowing on Absolute Zero has a heating effect that increases temperature (which means friction is present), so that neither absolute is actually obtainable. Friction causes heat, but also creates a draft of wind.

In physics it is believed that no limit exists as to how hot heat can become, this is illogical if there is only a limited number of particles in a fixed universe (if the infinity of the universe were measurable by a number, regardless of whether the number had an infinite and non-repeating decimal or not, as such a number is still a fixed number), unless the universe itself expands continuously into an unbounded infinity, unlike the established and bounded system of our “Big Bang Area.” Even if the universe extends outwards to infinity the average temperature of the universe is bounded upon the ends by actual extreme cold and heat values.

As Absolute Zero (zero degree Kelvin) is approached in physics labs, order increases as everything binds closer together as positive energy is removed. “Zero Absolute Temperature” is achieved when positive energy ceases to exist in an area. Super fluidity and super conductivity result the closer to Zero Absolute Temperature one becomes, and unlimited negative energy seems to exist. At such a point that is beyond this, negative energy would be seen to of overcome positive energy and would be in direct opposition to our reality as it is known, energy charges as we currently know them would be flipped around. If there is a limit to heat, if “thermal oblivion” were real, we could expect to find comparable or similar findings at that temperature as well, keeping in mind that super fluidity would then be occurring for positive energy as super fluidity appears to be occurring for negative energy at “Zero Absolute.” If negative energy has a point of conductivity and fluidity, is it not comprehensible that positive energy should have such a point itself?

The implications of all of this can provide us with a lot of information in regards to quantum physics. If heat increases the speed of particular motion, then by the current laws of physics, heat can only become so hot until the speed of light is reached by the particles, it may not become any hotter once Absolute Zero has been reached, and yet the speed of light is said to be constant, which would mean total heat and total cold must balance each other out in a way that equates to the constant state of the speed of light. Heat and cold move away from each other in separate currents, they do not travel through the same channel as each other (if half of our universe was at Absolute Zero, the other half would have to be at Thermal Oblivion, likewise if positive energy reaches a state of Absolute Zero, negative energy would reach a countering state of Thermal Oblivion).

If we figure out the relationship of Absolute Zero and Thermal Oblivion and their distances from each other, the result we obtain could give us a definitive answer to why lightspeed c = 2.9979 x 10⁸ meters/sec within the system of our Big Bang Area. The key to deciphering this lies not only in knowing the point of the extremes, but in understanding and running equations upon the speed of the spectrums of light themselves, as well as studying the energy and force equations in regards of time, mathematical frameworks should be established as well.

Although the speed of light in a vacuum is c = 2.9979 x 10⁸ meters/sec, this speed refers only to visible light, where light from other parts of the light spectrum (including but not at all limitted to infrared light X-ray, and ultraviolet) move at other constant speeds that are observeable at the rate of 0.0029 less than visible lightspeed given the equation of a = c [1 - (0.00029 d/d₀)], where a is the observable speed of light in the air, d is air density, and d₀ is 1.29 kg/m³ (air density at standardized room temperature and pressure). This is interesting to know since it implies that pressure, speed, and density are all tied together in a mathematical relationship, which I have yet to figure out but continue to work upon. The above formula of a, shows that the observable speed of light decreases linearly as air density increases.

Absolute Cold is no more bounded in temperature than Absolute Heat is, where one extreme is regulated by the absence of all positive energy and the other by the absence of all negative energy.

Part Two - Vectors

Every force has an equal but opposite force that reflects upon a central point; A central point is a center of balance, or center of gravity, where vectors balance out to the summation of a zero net difference.

In graduate school I was taught a concept developed by Kurt Lewin called Force Field Analysis. The concept states that if you draw a straight representational line for a situation, you can list on one side of the line all forces that positively affect the situation, while placing upon the other side a list of all forces that negatively affect the situation. By utilizing arrows of different lengths, each pointing towards the line, you can represent the amount of effect each force has upon the situation. Every force affecting the line is seen as a vector of change that affects the central issue. Each of the forces can then be dealt with individually to achieve optimum balance and health for the situation. In dealing with any force, it is critical to understand how it affects and interacts with all of the other forces, as changes in one force may well pyramidical effect with the others.

A vector relationship is the presence of inverse points of influence upon a central line that always keeps equilibrium in perfect balance with all of its forces. Each point upon a line affects the line in accordance to its own power. Every point may be broken down into various other compositions, but the net value of vectors always sum to a zero net difference upon the center of balance of the point of equilibrium. The point of equilibrium (center of balance) changes valuations in accordance to the positionings of all of the forces that affect it. Each vector point can be viewed as having its own system of center of balance with sub-points surrounding it.

A sub-vector is a point within a point that has opposing forces acting against it. Sub-points can be viewed as areas within an ever-collapsing circle consisting of an infinite number of possible dimensions. In this way, our universe as seen from our angle of reality may be viewed as a single dot consisting of an infinite composition of dots at a specific moment of time (referred to as the present), which is surrounded by a infinite sea of dots of which the current dot pattern was composed, and to which the dot pattern is still composing. Time measures an ever shifting, but interrelated, compositional change of all dots within dots, relative to the aggregate whole of dots.

Part Three – The Laws of Thermodynamics

Thermal Oblivion was introduced in Part One – Thermal Oblivion. The introduction of the concept greatly reinterprets, alters, and changes previous beliefs held within the field of Thermodynamics by placing an upward thermal limit on how hot heat is able to be within any system. Under current beliefs, no upward limit exists for heat, allowing for infinite entropy or degradation of energy. The current thinking is self-contradictory and against the Laws of Motion.

The Conservation Law of Energy is the First Law of Thermodynamics. The law was formulated by Albert Einstein and states E = MC²: energy equals matter multiplied by a constant squared. Explaining the formula in terms of the Universe: energy is a constant amount that can neither be created nor destroyed; matter is constant in terms of amount, but is allowed to change forms; C² is the square of light speed where: C is how fast particles of energy may move within the Universe; and the speed of light is a constant, so C² in E = MC² is also a constant.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics is called Carnot’s Principle, after early 1800’s French engineer Sadi Carnot. The law states all actions and events increase entropy, and highlights the direction in which energy flows. Heat can warm colder bodies through touch, but cannot flow from colder bodies to warmer bodies. Heat and cold are not allowed to travel in the same direction of the same channel at the same time. All energy transfers must only be in one direction of natural decay that is forever irreversible and termed entropy. Entropy is the measure of disorder and randomness of energy and matter that always increases, while lowering potential energy, but not energy as a whole. Energy eventually is degraded of quality and becomes worthless.

The Third Law of Thermodynamics states when all thermal motion of kinetic energy is dispelled from the Universe a state of Absolute Zero Temperature occurs at negative 273.15° Celsius or 0 Kelvin. Since energy is always degraded and only entropy occurs, there is no law for the maximum temperature of heat.

From this point, we shall move ahead and discuss some laws discovered by Sir Isaac Newton.

The First Law of Thermodynamics states that an object will remain at rest or continue along a direction of motion until acted upon by an opposing force. This law is totally ignored by the Second Law of Thermodynamics that assumes only one direction is ever possible, and that direction is decomposition, decay, death, and no hope for the universe or the life within it. The Second Law of Thermodynamics dismisses the possibility of opposing and compensating forces in the universe. Entropy makes no sense without opposing forces of birth, growth, and hope.

Newton’s Second Law is F = MA. Force is resistance to change, opposing force, or inertia, all caused by the presence of mass. Force equals mass times acceleration, where acceleration is defined as the change in velocity over the corresponding change in time. Velocity is defined as distance divided by time.

The Third Law of Motion claims balance always exists in the universe. For every force and action is an equal and opposite force and action occurring somewhere else at the same time. The current Laws of Thermodynamics ignores the Third Law of Motion. If Absolute Zero can be approached, then there must be an opposing temperature force, which acts in the opposite manner. I have described this phenomenon earlier as Thermal Oblivion.

Absolute Zero and Thermal Oblivion are not real possibilities, as moving too close to either will generate excessive friction heating temperatures away from Absolute Zero, and excessive wind cooling temperatures away from Thermal Oblivion. Friction and wind are opposing forces changing direction of motion supported by the First Law of Motion. Since the First Law of Motion also states when an object or force is placed into a direction of motion it will continue to move in the direction until it becomes once again redirected, the universe is constantly shifting between coldness and warmth, compaction and expansion, creation and entropy. It is doing this without ever becoming universally cold or universally hot cause heat and cold are opposing forces that must always be balanced somewhere else. The temperature, compaction, and quality of total energy in the Universe is however constant, or if they change, they all change in unison making it impossible to tell any difference from the inside vantage point of our universe.

Part Four – Kinetic verses Potential Energy

Potential energy is energy that is organized; it is energy that seemingly has yet to be used. Once used potential energy degrades in quality. Energy quality is called exergy; it is the total amount of free energy available in a system. The use of potential energy (resources) causes a constant diminishing amount of exergy in the Universe until useful energy is all gone. Once used, potential energy is irreplaceable. Irreplaceable potential energy has been irreversibly damaged or consumed. Over time the entire Universe will decompose, be useless, reach absolute zero temperature, and die.

A grim picture has been painted for all of us. No matter what we may do, we are always in the situation where entropy of exergy will destroy and irrefutably end not only our own solar system but also everything everywhere for all of time. The only saving grace in all of this is that our entropy physicists were never all that intelligent. The Greek root of the word entropy is entrope, meaning change, not degradation, decay, or death.

All energy moves all the time; energy is motion. At the submolecular level energy is in constant motion, in constant change. Without change and motion energy would not exist. Since the Universe is currently using all energy at all times, all energy is kinetic energy, and potential energy just doesn’t exist at either the submolecular or Universal Level. This means the Universe gets to live, degradation of energy is impossible, and we get to stop believing in “End of the Universe” posters, signs, and bumper stickers. If entropy were the way of the Universe, we simply would not experience new stars, galaxies, and solar systems, or any advancements ever, and any oil pump out of the ground coming from decomposition of dinosaurs (assuming for some silly reason that million of years ago, millions of dinosaurs actually died in the same spot, became pressurized, and miraculously turned into oil over time even though no oil ever seems to be found by fossil hunters when they stumble across and excavate newly found dinosaur fossils) simply would be of no more benefit of energy to us than combusting live dinosaurs. I have yet to see one vehicle driven with any speed at all by burning live alligators or komodo dragons, which technically are long-lived races of dinosaur that have yet to die out. Granted I’m sure they could produce steam, but steam driven vehicles are far slower than gas driven vehicles. (It is also amazing to note that those who believe in entropy are typically the same people who believe our universe is currently growing and expanding. If you do not see the irony and hypocrisy in this, please explain to me how this works).

Since all energy moves and is actually being used by the Universe at all times, potential energy is used up a seemingly infinite amount of times within each passing microsecond.

The principles constructed under the ludicrous beliefs of potential energy do however merit ground. Degradation in systems does occur at rates and by formulas that have already been successfully derived. Degradation or exergy means usage of resources, not the destruction of energy that comprises the actual resources. Resources represent a stable but constantly changing, often degrading, amount and quality of set energy patterns. As energy may not be destroyed, “true” energy degradation cannot occur, but energy degradation attributed to resources can be observed, measured, and equated.

No matter what the temperature of heat is, as long as the impossible end states of Absolute Zero and Thermal Oblivion are not reached, energy is always forming stable patterns at some molecular level. Patterns form particles that shape into resources. Resources are formed from the balance of zero existing between opposite forces, such as energy and inertia. Newton’s First Law of Motion puts forth the notion that in any pattern forces acting upon the pattern pass through a single point, which we may safely call a particle. This pattern may be disrupted, energy may escape the pattern in the observable and predictable fashion of entropy, but the actual energy that created or formed the pattern cannot be destroyed, nor can actual subatomic energy quality ever be lessened.

Part Five – Acceleration does not Exist

At the Universal Speed of Light acceleration does not exist. This is easily displayed by Albert Einstein’s equation of E = MC² (energy equals mass times the Universal constant of the speed of light squared). The term of C is defined to be unchanging and always constant. Acceleration is defined as the change in velocity over the change in time, but because C is held to be a Universal constant its change in velocity is always zero and acceleration simply does not exist at the Universal level.

Although light speed is a constant the perception of how fast light moves changes based upon the structure of matter light is traveling through. Light moving through a vacuum of seemingly empty space, by unknowing observers, is viewed faster than light traveling through air, which also seems faster than light traveling through water. The knowing observer sees light on a matter density scale; light always travels at the same speed but has more densely packed energy waves to travel through, this is similar to hills and curves in a road. The more densely packed energy waves are on the path in which light travels, the shorter the distance light will have appeared to travel from say Point A to Point B given the same amount of time as observed by the unknowing observer.

Part Six - Displacement of a Particle

Perfection can be viewed as a timeless state of emptiness (completeness). Without the Universe, reality would not exist, and imperfections within reality would not exist, perfection (the lack of imperfection) would rule supreme. A problem results when we try to envision perfection, as perfection simply does not exist in reality. The closest thing we have to perfection is a circle, or an infinite conglomeration of circles represented physically as a sphere. The span or circumference of a circle or a sphere is equal to two times pi (an irrational number, a number that has a non-ending decimal that never repeats itself, which represents ratio of radius and circumference of a circular object) times radius (the line extending from the mid-point of a circle to the circumference). Pi does not have an end-point to complete it, and is always infinite in divisibility.

If you take a diameter of a circle and collapse it in itself so that it is infinitely becoming smaller and smaller, a point will always exist in the dead center that is never indicated by formulas containing pi.

A circle is constructed of three separate spirals, where each spiral represents one-third of the area of the circle. The volume of a circle equals three times the volume of a spiral. One divided by three (0.3 to the infinity 3), then multiplied again by three (0.9 to the infinity 9) is one particle short of a complete whole.

Spin occurs upon the displacement of a particle creating the semblance of motion, placement, and time.

A sphere is a multiple dimensional locus point of circles whose edges are equidistant away from the point in the direct center of the circles. A circle is a sphere in two dimensions (length and height).

Part Seven – Soulular Theory of Perception

Section One – Proving the Existence of God by the Laws of Science

If I am to prove the existence of God is a certainty according to the Laws of Science in a universe of reality, then we must figure out what science and reality are really about.

Science is the century-old endeavor to bring together by means of systematic thought the perceptible phenomena of this world into as thorough-going an association as possible. To put it boldly, it is the attempt at a posterior reconstruction of existence by the process of conceptualization (See Note 1); Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. – Albert Einstein

Einstein’s postulations of science are interesting, but I prefer this one: “Science is the organized religion of reality.” As a religion of reality, science is only a perception of what is real, and the Laws of Science are only congruent, measurable, and observable conceptualizations of what is real in the perceived reality in which they exist. Or as Einstein would say, “Scientists were rated as great heretics by the church, but they were truly religious men because of their faith in the orderliness of the universe.”

The following definition of mine is also better: “Reality is the shared band of perception between all perceptions that can be measured, observed, and conceptualized.” Reality cannot exist from only one perceptional front as there would not be a way to verify any difference between imagination and illusion and what is real or unreal. This is discussed in further detail later in the article.

Another important contribution of Einstein is his scientific discovery that light, spirit, and matter are all forms of energy [2]. It is then apparent that energy is the common medium of all things, including mind, body, and soul.

Hermann von Helmholtz (1821-1894, German physicist) [3] developed the scientific law that states:

"Energy can be changed in form, but it cannot be created or destroyed."

The scientific laws above along with the Laws of Evolution will prove that in order for science and the Laws of Science to exist, God must also exist. To prove this, we will observe and test that which exists in reality, including the beliefs upon which everything is founded.

Einstein implied that all of science is based only upon perceptible phenomena that can be measured, observed, and associated. The key word in all of this is “perception.” Perception must exist for science to exist.

The soul, according to myself and derived from the third definition of the mind, as found in the Third College Edition of Webster’s New World Dictionary [4], is “that which perceives.” As we cannot take my belief that the mind is a component of the soul for the time being, we will have to observe and figure out what is real in terms of what actually perceives, the soul, the mind, or the brain. It is the soul, and it will be proven further below, and as it is proven the existence of God will be proven.

Do not be afraid of being free thinkers! If you think strongly enough you will be forced by science to the belief in God, which is the foundation of all religion. You will find science not antagonistic but helpful to religion. - Lord Kelvin, Father of Thermodynamics and Modern Physics

Ayurveda medicine [5] is a holistic system of health that was put forth in the ancient texts of India, called the Vedas. This field, which is several thousands of years old, believes that souls have always, and shall always continue to exist. The ancient Ayurvedas hypothesized that individual souls may occupy many different living bodies throughout the whole of time, but the key element, the underlying self, will always remain unchanged.

Matthew Webb, founder of the World Mind Society, believes [6]: “Each incarnation taken by the soul, (and there have been a great many) is but a single link of physical experience in a very long chain of experiences. Only the soul possesses the oversight, (in most cases) to recall the highlights of the entire chain.”

Webb and the Vedas post interesting but flawed theories. The Vedas assume that souls are constants. I will prove that they cannot be; that they always have to be in a state of change. Webb is flawed in that he brackets the words, “in most cases” where it should read, “in all cases.”

The concept that a soul evolves and just isn't a constant that is always in a static state of balance is called the "Soulular Theory of Perception." In this theory, everything exists because it is perceived to exist, and because of the paradox that nothing exists. The paradox that nothing exists is the belief that nothing, absolutely nothing actually exists; no light, no color, no white, no black, no solid, no space, nothing, absolutely incomprehensible nothing exists. Unfortunately we run into the paradox that absolutely nothing cannot exist by itself because if nothing is a reality, it must be perceived as such in order to actually be nothing.

If a soul were constant, always static and in a state of balance without change and evolution, then it would be absolutely nothing in an impossible state of paradoxical nothingness, as time would not be known to exist. Time changes all the time. If perception requires time to work, and time always changes, then perception is always changing to account for time.

Given a soul is not a constant, and has the capacity to change and adapt, then time must not only exist, but must pass in a forward direction to allow the soul to change. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity [7] states that the same object cannot exist in two places at the same time of the same dimension.

Nothing exists but atoms and the void. - Democritus (460 - 370 BCE)

Under the principles of Einstein, all that exists within reality is energy and inertia; energy makes up all things, yet inertia exists in all things, including energy. This is interesting to know, because it shows that nothing exists, because everything exists. Nothing is defined as being the point directly between energy and inertia, which I call “noughtia” [8]. Noughtia is the state of being nothingness. If you take any empty shape and collapse it within itself indefinitely, no matter how far it is diminished there will always be an empty space in the middle. When dividing by three, you receive three equal fractions but they are always one tiny fraction away from equaling a whole when they are added back to each other. One divided by three is 0.333 to infinity, add three of these parts together and you only really have 0.999 to infinity. Noughtia exists in all things and, at all places, at all times in all realities. It is the essential reason why inertia exists and works, as well as energy.

Inertia, defined in 1638 by Galileo Galilei [9], is a property of science that influences matter in a way that objects at rest stay at rest and objects in movement stay in uniform movement unless acted upon by external force. Sir Isaac Newton named inertia as the Second Law of Motion in 1687 by quantifying it as a fundamental property of matter.

Newton’s Third Law of Motion states that balance always exists in the Universe, where every force has an equal but opposite reaction. Reality cannot break this law at any time. The opposite force of existence is non-existence, or noughtia.

Quantum physics does not recognize noughtia at the current time, as I have just now postulated the concept. The field does recognize a principle called zero-point energy, otherwise known as EQV (electromagnetic quantum vacuum) [10,11]. It is defined as the lowest state possible of empty space. Zero-point energy exists everywhere and in all things. Physicists say energy found within just one par-spec of EQV is so enormous that it just isn’t physically real, and can be subtracted out of all calculations.

Although this may seem a paradox, all exact science is dominated by the idea of approximation. – Bertrand Russell

Based upon the concept of approximation, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle [10,12] is a fundamental law of quantum physics. It is the most ridiculous or funniest law in all of physics, or at least it makes me laugh.

According to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, the more precise of measurement one makes on the actual position of a moving particle, say of a jumbo 747 jet, the less exact the measurement of mass times volume, momentum, will be.

On the funnier side, the principle states throughout all of space, at all times, particles and matching antiparticles spontaneously pop into existence, annihilate each other, and zip out of existence so mind-bogglingly fast that no one ever notices them. Unfortunately, if this happens at all times, at all places, the particles would not zip in and out of existence, as they would be an absolute solid.

Annihilation of energy is simply forbidden. The First Law of Thermodynamics disallows energy from being created or destroyed.

Physicists currently argue [11,12,13] against the validity of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle upon the grounds of impossible energy densities and gravitation, absences of electromagnetic originating masses in neutrinos, and objections based solely upon the sheer lunacy of the overall principle.

Quantum Physicists [10,11] define zero-point energy as the lowest state of energy possible within reality. They [10] state that a point of no energy is impossible and forbidden. According to them, this occurs when Planck frequency is at 10^43 Hz. They [14] also state that absolute zero is impossible, and that it too occurs, at minus 273.15 degrees Celsius.

THE UNIVERSE…AREA: Infinite…

IMPORTS: None… EXPORTS: None… POPULATION: None… SEX: None…

It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination. - Douglas Adams, “The restaurant at the end of the universe”

It could just be me, but I believe the field of quantum physics needs work! I offer the concept of noughtia, which at the very least is less hilarious than the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

Noughtia does not change with time; it is a constant in a reality that only recognizes change. As biological individuals, the closest point to which we become aware of inertia, while still being biologically alive, is “sleep.” During sleep we are often not aware of light, colors, white, black, solids, space, or really anything, yet we are alive and subconsciously conscious.

When we move, noughtia stays in the constant state and position in which it has always been. Our perceptions give rise to our physical forms, so that when we run, walk, or otherwise move, we see changes in our personal positions in relationship to everything that exists.

In the Quantum Theory of Physics [15], acceleration and movement in flat spacetime are identical to stationary reference points in curved spacetime. This explains why the soul stays attached to the body when the body changes positions. No matter where the body moves, the soul sees itself within the fixed confines of the body, not at a point outside of it, looking at it from a distance. The upshot of this is that the soul must exist in flat spacetime, where the physical body exists in curved spacetime.

John Wheeler developed a concept during the 1960’s called Geometrodynamics [16]. This theory postulates gravity to be spacetime curvature in four-dimensional space. It stands to reason then, at least to myself, that if gravity is spacetime curvature, then inertia is the lack of this curvature, flat spacetime.

Noughtia doesn’t follow the rules of flat spacetime, curved spacetime, four-dimensional space, or any other rules. To noughtia movement and time does not occur, if object move they become no closer or further away in relationship to noughtia and other objects they are around. This is because in emptiness, in order to recognize movement, you need two objects. Noughtia recognizes no objects and fails to recognize time.

Being and non-being create each other. – Lao-tzu (Tao-te Ching), written between 770 – 476 BCE by “the old wise ones”

Existence resulting from the impossibility of the non-existence of noughtia has two side effects to it in the field of quantum physics, inertia and gravitational mass, otherwise known as energy. It is a current belief that inertial and gravitational masses are identical as they result from an identical source process called the Rindler flux [17]. Quantum physics, being as oblique as possible, recognizes the probable existence of these masses, but also states that such masses are not distinctly “real.”

If all that exists, in the reality of science, is energy and inertia and energy changes forms but never ceases to be, inertia changes in correspondence to energy, and noughtia is a never changing constant, then it is safe to say that everything in science never ceases to be, but not everything in science actually changes forms.

Progress we make in harnessing and controlling inertia will rest upon the understanding we have of noughtia. It is a concept that every physicist, scientist, and mathematician should become aware of in order to foster growth of our current technologies, especially space travel.

The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply, feeling that explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work brings results. - J. E. O'Rourke, Pragmatism versus materialism in stratigraphy (American Journal of Science, January 1976, p.47)

In time, research becomes focused. Findings are no longer written in groundbreaking books. Groundrules of the paradigm are taken for granted, and researchers no longer justify the bases for their conclusions through references to the principles which established the paradigm. – Author Unknown (See Note 18)

Time is temperature. – Buz Craft [19]

The concept of time is the key to unraveling the existence of God. Without time nothing exists because change does not occur. Perception is only possible when change occurs, because nothing changes in a static state. Time is change. Time is measurable and observable and proven by science.

Time passes in a forward direction in the universe of reality. Noughtia is incapable of perception and retention as it is a constant that never changes. If perception is what reality is based upon, then the question arises, “What happens to anything that has ever perceived, or been perceived, in the past?”

For reality to exist within the confines of time, reality must be real throughout the whole of time, which includes the entire past of reality to its present. Since reality is perception, and without perception reality and science fail to exist, then anything that has ever perceived has to always carry a memory of every perception it ever had for the whole of reality to exist.

Since energy always exists, and all matter does not stay matter in time, and the Laws of Reality declare that all perceptions must continue to exist for reality to exist, souls have to be the form that retains knowledge of all the perceptions that have ever existed. This is why Matthew Webb was in error when he inserted the bracket that read, “in most cases.”

In concert to the above, the brain simply cannot be “that which perceives,” as it consists only of matter that will change in time: if someone were to eat a brain, the brain would change forms by providing nourishment and energy to the eater, but the brain would not pass along the knowledge and memories of the life it held. Therefore, either the soul or the mind is “that which perceives,” and that which enables science, the religion of organized reality, to be possible and real.

The mind is the conscious awareness of the soul in any given reality. It is just an aspect of the soul that is held responsible for the main perceptions of the soul in any carnation. It holds the memories and perceptions of only one lifetime, not of the entire chain of realities that the soul has already experienced. As the mind is just a smaller piece, an aspect, of the much greater seeing and perceiving soul, the soul is “that which perceives.” This will be further developed in the article’s Afterlog.

We hypothesize that the origin of life, that is, the origin of the first cell, cannot be explained by natural selection among self-replicating molecules, as is done by the RNA-world hypothesis… (this is due to) the chicken and egg problem. – M. Vaneechoutte [20]

The secret to change begins in the concept of perception. Truthfully, the secret to reality lies in perception. - Ichabod ReddKorn

Perception allows us to answer such questions as “which came first, the chicken or the egg” and “if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, does it make a sound?” As to the former, the perception of a soul that it can take the form of a chicken came first, and the egg is just how it reasoned it could accomplish becoming a chicken. As to the latter: if a soul perceives a falling tree to make a noise, then the tree makes a noise; if no souls perceive the tree to fall and make a noise, then the tree and the forest it is in is just imaginary so no noise exists from the falling of the tree; and, if a soul perceives the tree to fall, but the soul is deaf, then hearing itself for that individual soul does not exist and neither does any noise from the falling tree.

As seen above, perception consists of two parts, imaginary perception, and reality perception. Since there is a real (in which souls learn to cope, and adapt, and draw from) and an imaginary (from which souls amuse themselves or try to make sense of the real) souls can become confused, off-balanced, and out of focus with who they are. They can also advance themselves.

To improve a living organism by random mutation is like saying you could improve a Swiss watch by dropping it and bending one of its wheels or axis. Improving life by random mutations has the probability of zero. - Albert Szent-Gyorgi, Nobel Laureate (Medicine, 1937)

Souls choose and develop physical forms they desire to be in through building blocks of what currently exists in reality, and through advancement of their evolution, personal experiences, and ability to perceive themselves as being more than what they were or currently are. A mosquito quite assuredly has a soul, but the ability of that soul to comprehend or extrapolate itself as being a human or a dolphin in its next life may well be far beyond its ability to achieve or comprehend. Unbalanced souls are prone to not put much thought into what they do or the forms they develop.

If a soul is out of focus with itself, then any body it is in is likely to suffer the consequences of its state of imbalance (since the soul is a primary source of vibratory communication to the body and its cells), through sickness, malformations, decreased energies and mental prowess, until such a time that the soul can adjust, cope, balance, and come to grip with itself.

I cannot admit that, with regard to the origin of life, science neither affirms nor denies Creative Power. Science positively affirms Creative Power. It is not in dead matter that we live and move and have our being, but in the creating and directing Power which science compels us to accept as an article of belief. - Lord Kelvin

Since a soul is able to perceive, and perception is the creation of an idea, the soul is able to create. Imagination, knowledge, and perception do not take up space as energy or force, and do not abide by traditional Laws of Thermology. Since a soul is able to create, the soul (or possibly a master soul, such as a God Soul) has the capacity, if not the ability, to multiply and create other souls of its own likeness, but which are different than itself (Theory of Relativity, stating that the same being cannot exist as multiples of itself, exact cells and particles, at the same time in different locations). The only problem being that once a soul multiplies, any new soul also has the ability to perceive, and since non-perception is an impossibility of reality, once a soul is created, that soul must always exist, and subsequently must always be in a state of change, of adaptation, of evolution.

The concept that souls evolve and multiply expands upon our definition of synergy as put forth by Aristotle (Greek philosopher, 384-322 BC) [21] when he said [22], “the whole is greater than its parts.” Unfortunately this choice of wording assumes that there is a whole instead of an incomplete, ever broadening and able to expand upon itself semblance of a whole. Synergy is limited in definition when everything that exists is constructed together in a way in which there just aren't any more parts or any more efficient combinations left to build upon.

A soul (God Soul) supersedes the limited notion of finality as presented by synergy, and we need a larger, broader definition or concept to satisfy it. I call this concept synergenesis. "Genesis" [23] is the name of the first book of the Bible and means: the creation of the world; the beginning; the origin; the being born from naught. Synergenesis is the concept that everything has the capacity, if not the power, to become more than what it currently is, even if all of the parts have already been used. Since all energy in the Universe is used all the time, this is highly relevant to the creation and origins of knowledge.

All experiences indicate that a thinking being voluntarily exercising his own free will, cognition, and creativity, is required. There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter. - Werner Gitt, In the beginning was information (LV, Bielefeld, Germany, pp.107, 141)

Astronomers say the universe is finite, which is a comforting thought for those people who can’t remember where they leave things. - Woody Allen

In an area of the Universe with a set amount of energy, synergenesis suggests that if the "Big Bang Theory" (the current scientific explanation for the creation of the universe, introduced by Belgian priest George Lemaître in 1927) [24] holds correct then it is more than likely there has been a great number of big bangs throughout history which are more likely than not traceable to an original god soul, and every big bang originating after the first had to contain, by the Laws of Reality, at least as much or more information than that which preceded it. Given an original God Soul, every soul that exists would trace back to the original, even if such tracings passed through other advanced or even more advanced god souls.

Since every soul has the capacity to tap into itself and recall everything it has ever perceived, then every soul also has the ability to flow back to the memberance of the time in which it was part of the original god soul. If souls can communicate in either the conscious or subconscious state with souls in which they are familiar, every soul has the direct capability to communicate with the original god soul. Even if such communication between familiar souls were not a reality, every soul would still be able to remember the original god soul and could tap into and commune with the memory of it.

Back to perception, the argument that no one can prove that they exist can be addressed as follows: I exist cause I perceive myself to exist, and by reading this you also perceive that I must exist; If perception is the medium of reality, and reality is that which exists, then it is safe to say that not only do I exist, but I have just proven the fact that I exist in the whole of what is known as reality.

Evolution is the final proof needed that God exists. According to the third college edition of Webster’s New World Dictionary, “evolution” is (p. 472): “(1) an unfolding, opening out, or working out; process of development, as from a simple to a complex form, or of gradual, progressive change, as in a social and economic structure; (2) a result or product of this; thing evolved; (5) Biol, a) the development of a species, organism, or organ from its original or primitive state to its present or specialized state; phylogeny or ontogeny, b) Darwinian Theory.”

So many essential conditions are necessary for life to exist on our earth that it is mathematically impossible that all of them could exist in proper relationship by chance on any one earth at one time. - Dr. A. Cressy Morrison, former president of the New York Academy of Sciences

The Laws of Evolution [25] declare that organisms and species change and adapt over the process of time from the single state of their shared original common ancestor.

Since it only takes one soul to be able to perceive, but it takes at least two souls to verify the difference between what is real and what is imaginary, and souls expand, evolve and multiply. It is only logical that originally there existed only one soul, who imagined or created through perception another soul in order to create reality and the subsequent whole of reality, which is only the common band of shared perception between beings. Science seeks to place order into perception and the Laws of Science measure, observe, and define what is real in this shared and known band of reality. If the Laws of Science rest upon the expanded perceptions of just one soul, from which everything else was originally perceived and sprung, it is safe to say that in the whole of reality I have just proven by the very Laws of Science the existence of God. God is not necessarily defined as the God of the Bible, as soulular growth occurs from within an individual and not from an outside source, book, or religion that acts upon individuals by imposing constraints, threats, and rewards that impede and hinder the development, and advancement of the soul.

Section Two – The Meaning of Life and the Philosophy of God

Life is all about what you get to do. The value of life is how you choose to perceive what you do when you are doing it. The pleasure of life is how you experience what you do. Accomplishment is how you view what has been done after it has been done.

In the Soulular Theory of Perception, the meaning of life is to perceive, expand, and grow as a soul, while allowing noughtia (nothing) to exist as a perception of reality.

The philosophy of God is existence, or the allowing of non-existence, through the constructs of perception and time, increasing universal knowledge for all, through the precepts of one over infinity, which when taken separately represents the individualistic parts of all of us and who we are. God was just the first bit of nothingness that decided to turn away from all of the other parts of nothingness to allow all of us to exist as individualistic units of i, who when taken together represent the whole of one minus i, which of course is God.

We all spend our existences trying to find God, to find inner peace and the whole of tranquility, to put things back as they once were before, and yet we do not realize, that when this occurs everything is no more.

Section Three – Afterlogue

It is interesting to try and examine the components the soul uses to enable itself to perceive within the world of reality. Freudian Psychology breaks the functionality of the soul into the id, ego, and superego but fails to attach the names to the components the soul uses in perception.

The functionalities of the psyche, according to Freudian Thought [26], are as follows: the id represents the instinctual drives of an individual. It is driven by the pleasure principle; the ego is consciously aware of reality. It regulates decisions between the id and the superego; the superego is an unconscious awareness that regulates the moral standards of an individual. It supersedes the id and the ego.

Freudian Psychoanalysis is hard to fully comprehend. Its principles have not been satisfactorily completed. Tying the components of the id, ego, and superego to the functionality of the soul, allows insight that has been lacking in the field.

To me, the components of the soul consist of the greater soul, the mind, the brain and the body. The greater soul is what Freudian Psychoanalysts refer to as the superego, except it is far more than the limited definition of the superego. The greater soul represents everything that has ever occurred to a soul. It contains the knowledge of everything the soul has ever experienced and perceived, as well as being the very essence of the individual. The mind, represented by the ego, is the operating system and awareness of self within any one incarnation of the soul. It taps into the database and stimulus reception area of the brain, and is driven by the perceptions, desires, and total memory of the soul. The brain is the hardware of the mind that receives and stores impulses from the entire body. It allows the mind to function in the carnation of reality. The body is the encompassing shell, which also consists of the brain, that the soul uses to physically move around in and experience physical reality.

When someone dies: the body permanently ceases to work and the mind is wiped clean, just like the temporary memory of a computer system; the soul continues to retain everything the mind ever thought and ever experienced; the soul continues its existence in physical and non-physical forms. The non-physical form of the soul is the spirit, a non-corporal incarnation of the mind, driven by the soul.

In corporal form, the mind is also influenced by cellular memory passed down from genes called DNA [27]. DNA information is recorded by the greater soul only during the time a soul is attached to a particular body. DNA is building block material, and contains physical memories of the experiences souls encountered during the occupations of physical form. Since the greater soul records all memory, and only the soul perceives, DNA material can change into other forms, without violating laws of perception.

Relating to death and dying, it is my personal belief that when one dies within the realm of reality they wake up within another reality, as if whole of the universe simply dissolves itself as an illusions and falls or breaks away, only to be replaced by another seemingly stable and solid universal realm which abides by its own unique set of scientific and physical laws, where only math and mathematical properties would truly be universal amongst and between all of the realities. Mathematical laws seem to be the underlying basis from which all other laws originate and derive themselves. Mathematics should hold up between realms of reality, but all else could be quite different between one’s observable existences. That is not to say that if such multiple realms of reality, existence, exists that there aren’t laws other than mathematical that bind and hold all realities and existences together; it is just to say that we can not, or at least it is difficult, to jump to any conclusions of a magnitude that says all realities must be tied together in a specific way. It may however be easier to come up with a structure of what key components or elements make realities work unto themselves.

To die within any one reality is to wake up within a new reality. When everything fades away and is replaced instead by a new world, new forms, new illusions, it surely is no different than the first time you open your eyes as a newborn infant. What a new reality may hold, or why you drop into any one reality is really up to philosophical debate, but I like to think that upon the death of an individual, one wakes up into where they best fit the most, or need to be the most for their current state of being; that others like them flock to the same realms of existence but for their own personal reasons and well-being. When we die, we merely start again. A good question then becomes, “when we die, where shall I wake up?” The counter question to that one is, “if it is not the nature of existences to wake up within them, then how or why did I wake up into this one?”

Section Four – The Creation of Synergenestic Mathematics

Do not worry about your difficulties in Mathematics. I can assure you mine are still greater. - Albert Einstein

You know how Einstein got bad grades as a kid? Well, mine are even worse! – The authoritative Calvin and Hobbes, pp.121–2, by Bill Watterson

Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity, I do not understand it myself anymore. - Albert Einstein

This one’s tricky. You have to use imaginary numbers, like eleventeen… - Calvin and Hobbes by Bill Watterson

Calculus never made much sense to me. It states that any number added to or multiplied by infinity equals infinity. Surely one plus infinity is one higher than infinity. Unfortunately this is impossible in Conventional Mathematics since nothing is higher than infinity. It is therefore, to my great delight, up to me to develop a mathematical field that is based upon the very concept of nothing being a reality. I call this math, “Synergenestic Mathematics,” which means the mathematics of creating something out of nothing.

Zero divided by zero equals one in conventional math when you allow zero to be represented by X, as any number divided by itself equals one. X/X=1, this displays that from nothing, from zero, something must exist or originate.

Any other number, in Conventional Math, divided by zero always equals an infinite impossibility. It is impossible to divide any number other than zero by zero in Conventional Math. Mathematicians say that even zero can’t be divided by zero cause you will always receive an undefined answer. Although this makes sense to them, their logic goes against the laws governing mathematics. Just because they don’t understand division by zero doesn’t mean they should abandon mathematical rules and change answers to formulas, upon which all of reality and creation rests, just to satisfy their egos.

Synergenestic Mathematics, on the other hand, recognizes the concepts of flat spacetime and curved spacetime. Flat spacetime is mass driven by inertia, where curved spacetime is mass driven by gravity. Gravity and inertia are opposing forces (opposites).

We will define curved spacetime, gravity, to be infinite. The opposite of infinite is negative infinity, so we will subsequently define flat spacetime, inertia, to be negatively infinite.

Infinity stops being infinity at the point where an infinitely small number is added to infinity, since it is impossible to increase the size of infinity. At the point where infinity stops being real it becomes nothing. From this it can be shown that:

curved spacetime = ∞;

flat spacetime = -∞;

∞ + 1/∞ = 0 = -∞ - 1/∞.

Using Synergenestic Mathematics, we find the following:

curved spacetime + 1/∞ = ∞ + 1/∞

∞ + 1/∞ = 0

∞ = -1/∞

∞² = -1

∞² = square root of -1;

flat spacetime -1/∞ = -∞ - 1/∞

-∞ - 1/∞ = 0

-∞ = 1/∞

∞ = -1/∞

∞² = -1

∞ = square root of -1;

curved spacetime + 1/∞ = flat spacetime - 1/∞

∞ + 1/∞ = -∞ - 1/∞

2∞ = -2/∞

∞ = -1/∞

∞² = -1

∞ = square root of -1.

The square root of negative one equals i. i will be discussed in a further section.

For nothing to exist there has to be something to recognize it as nothing. From nothing, or zero, always comes something.

Ricky Durval uses calculus at his website [28] to prove that infinity times zero equals one: “The limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity is zero. And similarly, the limit of x as x approaches infinity is infinity. These are the limits taught in first-year calculus classes, if not before. However, what if we take the limit of x^(1/x) as x approaches infinity? You get infinity x zero. But with limits, you can combine this into x/x, and the limit of x/x as x approaches infinity is 1. But the limit is ALSO infinity times zero. So by definition, these two MUST be equal, and infinity times zero = 1.” Since anything multiplied by zero equals zero: 0 = 1.

It is also interesting to note that in traditional mathematics anything subtracted by infinity is still equal to infinity. Infinity minus infinity equals infinity, while at the same time anything subtracted by itself must sum to zero. If infinities are identical and the same (notated as “hard infinities”), subtracting infinity by the equivalent infinity must balance to zero, or else we must come to the realization that basic math is nothing more than false grounds to base science upon as mathematical laws will work in relevance to whatever you wish to show.

Section Five – The Ten Laws of Reality

Law 1 - Nothing (noughtia) exists between the area of flat spacetime, represented by friction and inertia, and curved spacetime represented by gravity and energy (friction reflects gravity, inertia reflects energy)

Law 2 - Perception is existence, it allows noughtia to exist as a real reality

Law 3 - Perception creates

Law 4 - Perception requires change, change is the displacement of one or more particles, time is change, time moves in a forward direction (this creates flat spacetime)

Law 5 - Reality is the shared band that exists between all souls that is measurable, observable, and conceivable (this creates curved spacetime)

Law 6 - Everything that exists must continue to exist (but may change in form)

Law 7 - Reality is congruent throughout time (all perceptions must continue to exist)

Law 8 - Souls record all perceptions indefinitely, recorded perception is knowledge representing both time and placement, knowledge always increases (time is full, it is filled by placement, time moves forward into the direction of emptiness that waits to record and be filled by subsequential energy pattern placements)

Law 9 - Souls expand and grow through the union of flat and curved spacetime, which are the two realms that they must always be within (this creates the mind, body, and spirit within curved spacetime, and it places the soul within flat spacetime)

Law 10 - Noughtia is the zero point of existence between flat and curved spacetime, which by definition creates the existence of particles, flat spacetime, curved spacetime, and perception

Section Six – Conclusion: “The Zero-Point of Existence”

Back in time, the point where only one soul (God) exists is what I call the Zero-Point of Existence. At this point, God is in the second dimension, alone in a conglomeration of noughtia, nothingness. Reality does not exist at the Zero-Point of Existence, where imagination and perception are at their infancies.

The Zero-Point of Existence ends upon the creation of a second soul that ushers in reality, the shared band of perceptions between perceptions of souls that can be measured, observed, and conceptualized. From this point of reality, everything else originates, expands, and continues to exist within the framework and principles of the reality they are within.

As for God, God is simply like all of us, proven by science to exist, an expanding and evolving soul who perceives so noughtia, nothing, can exist, which allows growth, imagination, evolution, expansion of the soul, and universal knowledge to exist.

Section Seven – Additional Thoughts

Earlier in the Soulular Theory of Perception, I equated every bit of being (everything that is) to the notion of the displacement of one divided by infinity. That we are individualistic i’s of the whole of one, where each one of us are in essence 1/∞ short of equaling the whole of one in and of ourselves, and so to must be God in reciprocal fashion, and so too must be all things, all particles, all energy. I also implied that existence was created by a single 1/∞ particle “God” turning away from all of the rest in order to create the whole of reality as we know it, and experience it to be. The concept is easy and I would like to share it with you. Take the number of the whole, the number of one, and from one, divide it by three, to which you will get 0.3 to the infinity 3, and now multiply this number by 3, what you will end up with is 0.9 to the infinity 9, one over infinity short of the whole of one. 0.9 to the infinity 9 is like having the greatest amount of infinite numbers possible, except each one is an individualistic but incomplete unit of one in and of itself, to a multiple of such 0.9 to the infinite 9’s, and by just adding back the missing one divided by infinity found within all of the individualistic infinities equates into the whole of one. It therefore can be seen that one particle misplaced makes an infinity of particles exist but you complete it back, and all of these infinities never were. Without the displacement of God, we simply do not exist as the individualistic i’s that we are.

I also examined the theory of the existence of flat spacetime that ties all of us together, even to God, to all particles everywhere really. How could such an existence be, you might question yourself? To this I can only say it is like when we are asleep, whether we are in a dream or only in the vastness of the void of nothingness where we know nothing but only rest and comfort and we don’t even really know that. When we sleep, everything is truly in a flat state, a zero point of existence, a point of noughtia, of not being and being at the same time. Where we can be connected to everything and yet be aware of not a thing. Where we are and at the same time, we simply are not, noughtia exists within us, and if we allow it we dream, but we dream not in curved space, but in flat. Things are different then, it is like a whole new or whole different reality for us, and yet we forget all about it once we wake. We forget about not having anything to wear upon us, to hold us down, to be of anything but of peace and tranquility inside of ourselves. We simply forget what it is like not to see color, even blackness and dark is lost in that state. We forget how nice it truly is, and when we wake it is a new day, a new moment in time, and we live in that moment, in a continual state of ongoing reality, not truly recognizing that one state of reality is more or less important than the other. We exist and we must live and be okay with that, for to not is to go through the rest of eternity repeating the same mistakes.

Part Seven’s Notes

1. Einstein, A. (1950). Out of my later years (p. 44). New York: Philosophical Library.

2. Energize your life – Turn on your lymphatic pump / lymphasize – rebound – jump. (2002). expage.com/energizeyourlife16.

3. Weisstein, E., & Helmholtz, H. v. (2002). Helmholtz, Hermann von (1821 – 1894). scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Helmholtz.html. Eric Weisstein’s World of Scientific Biographies.

4. Neufeldt, V., & Guralnik, D. (1988). Webster’s New World Dictionary, third college edition (p. 862). New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.

5. Ayurvedic Foundations - What is Ayurveda? (2002). ayur.com/about.html.

6. Webb, M. (2002). Mutual psychic augmentation (GM Series #8). eoni.com/~visionquest/library/gm8.html. The World Mind Society.

7. O’Connor, J. J., Robertson, E. F. (April 1997). Albert Einstein. JOC/EFR. (2002).

www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Einstein.html. Scotland: University of St. Andrews.

8. Noughtia (nŏ’tē’ä) n. nought represents the number of 0 and means “nothing”

9. Galilei, G. (1638). Discourses on two new sciences. Leiden (Holland).

10. An Introduction to zero-point energy. (2002). calphysics.org/zpe.html. California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics (CIPA).

11. Powell, C. (1994). Unbearable lightness: A new theory may explain why objects tend to stay put. Scientific American (pp. 30-1), 270(5).

12. Matthews, R. (1994). Inertia: Does empty space put up the resistance? Science (pp. 613-4), vol. 263.

13. The origin of inertia. (2002). calphysics.org/inertia.html. CIPA.

14. Hawley, J.F. (1999). Absolute zero. astro.virginia.edu/~jh8h/glossary/abszero.htm.

15. Why does F=ma in Newton’s Equation of Motion? How does a gravititonal field produce a force? Why are inertial mass and gravitational mass the same? (2002). calphysics.org/gravitation.html. CIPA.

16. Wheeler, J. (1962). Geometrodynamics. New York: Academic Press.

17. Tentative outline of a research program on the nature of mass originating in the quantum vacuum. (2002). calphysics.org/mass.html. CIPA.

18. Sourced from, www-acs.ucsd.edu/~idea/philoevolquotes.htm, a website maintained by C. Luskin & R. Hankins. As to the source of the quote, they write, “Thomas Kuhn, the structure of scientific revolutions. Please note: This seems to be an actual quote, but I am not 100% positive – it could be my notes, although it looks too good to be something I wrote, definitely check before using.” – Author to that quote also unknown

19. Craft, B. (Aug. 3 - 10, 1997). Bluebird Junction. etxrn.com/junction/archives/080497.htm.

20. Vaneechoutte, M. (2000). The scientific origin of life. Considerations on the evolution of information, leading to an alternative proposal for explaining the origin of the cell, a semantically closed system. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 901 (139).

21. Wilson, F. L. (2002). Science and human values – Aristotle. rit.edu/~flwstv/aristotle1.html. Rochester Institute of Technology.

22. Ramos, Vitorino. (Feb. 2002). Architopia Book/Catalogue, Art, Architecture and Science, J.L. Maubant and L. Moura (Eds.), (pp. 25-57), Ministerio da Ciencia e Tecnologia. alfa.ist.utl.pt/~cvrm/staff/vramos/architopia5.html.

23. Neufeldt, V., & Guralnik, D. (1988). Webster’s New World Dictionary, third college edition (p. 562). New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.

24. Ask Yahoo! (Oct. 2000). What exactly is the Big Bang Theory? ask.yahoo.com/ask/20001027.html. Yahoo! Inc.

25. Chassell, R. J. (Jan. 25, 1994). Darwin’s five laws. balance.wiw.org/~jkominek/lojban/9402/msg00074.htm.

26. Kasper, F., Ph.D. (1998). The history of psychology. kccesl.tripod.com/hypertextstudy/historyofpsychcontrolled.html. Whittier Publications.

27. Atkinson, M., “et al.” (2002). DNA: The instruction manual for all life. thetech.org/exhibits/online/genome/overview.html. TheTech by EPIC.

28. Durval, R. (1997-2002). Ruminations on infinity. Star Force. geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/7931/Infinity.htm.

Part Seven’s Additional Resources Consulted

1. Adams, D. (1996). The More than Complete Hitchhiker’s Guide (p. 244). Connecticut: Longmeadow Press.

2. Be all that you can be? Not anymore. (2001). yucs.org/~amadeus/1-10-01.htm.

3. Beginning with the Tao – the classics. (2000). volny.cz/janbrejcha/tao/theclassics.

4. Blievernicht, E. (1996). Creation/evolution quotes. geocities.com/Heartland/7547/cequotes.html.

5. Cornelius, K. S. (2002). Karl’s home page: Calvin and Hobbes quotes taken out of context (so that’s what CAHQTOOC stands for)… chemicaldynamics.Adelaide.edu.au/karlstuff/calvin.html.

6. Esher, B. (2002). Got Yin/Yang? massagetoday.com/archives/2001/12/08.html. Massage Today.

7. Famous quotes. (2002). godinscience.com/quotes.html. link may no longer exist.

8. Hamilton, W. F. III (2002). The intelligent universe. home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx3. link may no longer exist.

9. Harris, B. (2002). The wisdom of Albert Einstein. homepage.mac.com/bryanharris/einstein.html. link may no longer exist.

10. Ko, Dr. G. W., & Coconis, J. M. (2002). Koans & quotes. komudokwan.com/quotes.html.

11. O’Rourke, J. E. (Jan. 1976). Pragmatism versus material in stratigraphy (p. 47). American Journal of Science, vol. 276.

12. Ichabod ReddKorn’s column: The art and perception and no name. (Jan. 8, 2001). ayla.brinkster.net/Reddkorn14.asp.

13. Reemst, M. (2002). Calvin and Hobbes at Martijn’s – Quotes. reemst.com/calvin_and_hobbes/quotes.

14. Suomela, J. (2002). Jari’s science quotes page. dlc.fi/~jimenez/quo.htm. link may no longer exist.

I highly recommend to you every source I consulted and quoted upon (I do this as literary reviews).

The above web links are fun to look at (some might have changed or stopped being functional).

Part Eight – The Big Bang Really Wasn’t That Big

Presently, scientists observe background forms of radiation that allow them to estimate temperatures and changes in our tiny dot-like area of the Universe from which they declare that the entire Universe as a whole is warming up or cooling off. This logic is flawed ultimately by the knowledge that in a Universe approaching infinity, space and mass represented by expansion of the Big Bang is as dot like to the entire space of the Universe as our planet is to all of the galaxies and solar systems within the Big Bang area. When you really think about it, the analogy of the size of Earth within the Big Bang Area is immensely, almost to an infinite degree, bigger than the analogy of the Big Bang Area to the size of the rest of the Universe.

The size of the Universe is really immensely-hugely preposterously big. Mathematically speaking, the universe is an infinity of particles minus only about the equivalent of a particle or two in size.

We live in a section of the Universe within a galaxy, which we have named the Milky Way. This galaxy contains over 200 billion stars with their respective planets. The solar mass of the Milky Way is between 750 billion to one trillion times the solar mass of the sun. Our galaxy spins giving it the appearance of a flying saucer from the side and a circular spiral shape from above or below. A central bulge exists in the center of the galaxy that probably is a black hole and is referred to as the central nucleus or the oldest and most densely packed area of the Milky Way. Our sun revolves around the central nucleus at a rate of about 180 miles per second, allowing it to make one complete orbit about every 250 million years. From side to side, the Milky Way is about 100,000 light years in distance, and from top to bottom is around one to two light years thick, excluding the central bulge. The Milky Way is actually bigger than all of this, and is actually encased in a spherical corona of matter which gives it a the appearance of darkness, with light shining out like the images of stars we see in the sky at night. If you were to spin the galaxy in an upside down circle, the visible width of the Galaxy would closely approximate the globular shape of the sphere of the corona.

The Milky Way is only one of a spectacularly large handful of galaxies within the Universe. Andromeda is one of our closest galaxies. When two galaxies get close enough together they can collide and form a larger galaxy filled with various solar systems. In five billion years or so, the Milky Way and Andromeda are expected to merge. Andromeda is currently around 2.2 million light years from our current position, and we are closing this gap of distance at a rate of about 186 miles per second, a figure that is surprisingly close to the speed the sun is orbiting around the central nucleus of our galaxy.

Scientists have estimated the amount of density or mass in the observable Universe to consist of about twenty-five billion galaxies the size of the Milky Way. According to popular thought, this represents all there is, as is originated under the concept of the Big Bang Theory.

Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian priest, proposed the Theory in 1927. His theory was the creation of Universe occurred upon the explosion of a single primeval atom, some ten to twenty billion years ago, with twelve point seven billion to fifteen billion being the most likely. The Milky way formed approximately three billion years later out of residual fragmentations that resembled a sphere of gas.

In the state of a single primeval atom, the Universe is seen as being immensely hot and dense. This is an oxymoron of course since the only way such a compacture would occur is if the primeval atom was immensely cold and dense, with immense heat being tossed off through almost infinite friction.

The primeval atom eventually approached too close to Absolute Zero that it actually exploded in the same fashion as an atomic bomb where atoms are split. If compacted too close together particles are going to explode ignited by their own friction.

In a brief eruptive flash, an explosion occurred and the relative, not the entire, universe as we know it was created. Energy and particles were exploded outwards and away from each other at the same time. Temperature was immense and then dropped.

Belgian priest Georges Lemaitre proposed his idea of the Big Bang after observing red shifting in distant nebulas as documented by astronomers against the backdrop of a Universe based upon Relativity.

Red shifting displays relatively uniform expansion of distant galaxies. Many years after Lemaitre postured his theory, Edwin Hubble observed experimental evidence that observable galaxies were indeed moving away from us with speeds proportional to distance. Everything is moving away from everything else within the Big Bang area at increasing but predictable speeds. Such a scattering would actually indicate that the further we move away from the Event Horizon, the warmer the Universe must be becoming, the faster light must be traveling, and the slower light must be appearing to travel to the unknowing observer. The last statement is displayed as follows: I increase my speed from a walk to a jog to a run, but if you subsequently start your car and accelerate at a speed faster than the rate in which I accelerate, every time you drive past me I will appear to be moving slower and slower.

As mentioned in other sections, the more disperse particles are, the less compaction they move through, and the faster they will seem to become to the unknowing observer. Heat spreads and dissipates, and cold condenses and forms.

The Big Bang Theory was developed to explain why galaxies were moving away from each other at increasing rates. It also suggested that an observable residue would be left over from the original explosion. This residue is called background radiation, Cosmic Microwave Background, and was subsequently discovered in 1964 by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson. They won the Nobel Prize for their discovery.

Within the area of the Big Bang is an abundance of light elements such as heavy hydrogen and helium, indicating that temperatures were extremely hot at the time the Big Bang must of occurred. Such elements are viewed to have been cooked throughout the Big Bang area upon explosion.

The Big Bang Theory as it stands today is flawed. I already pointed out the discrepancy in the assumption that the Big Bang came from a hot densely packed origin, but there are far more discrepancies.

I am not saying that a Big Bang did not occur. The motion of galaxies makes it appear as if galaxies were moving away from a central explosion. I just find it insulting to my intelligence to believe that “The Big Bang” is the existence of the Universe, instead of being just a minisculely tiny explosion within the infinitely large Universe. My only saving grace in this belief is that I can back up my words.

As before mentioned, Andromeda and the Milky Way are on a collision course, and many galaxies have already and continue to collide. Under red shifting, this should never occur as everything is constantly moving away from everything else. If you have an explosion, the particles move away from each other, they do not change their courses and collide afterwards. Gravitational pulls between galaxies can’t explain their attractions to one another, given that the space separating them is constantly increasing after an explosion, constantly diminishing gravitational pulls upon each other. If galaxies are currently on collision courses with one other, their courses had to of been altered or changed by outside forces in accordance to the First Law of Motion. The Big Bang dismisses the existence of forces outside of the Bang area itself, and since approximately 10% (or slightly less) of the galaxies we observe are not red-shifting at all in the limited area of space that we can personally see in the infinity of all space, we should really rethink what is actually happening here.

The observable temperature of cosmic background radiation keeps changing, as measured by NASA (NASA has changed their estimates many times over the years). If a Big Bang occurred, the background radiation temperature regressing to the time of the Event Horizon would have been substantially higher than it is today. The question arises, if energy in the Universe is constant, light speed is constant, and mass is constant, then why isn’t temperature also a constant, which I believe it must be if everything else is truly a constant. The only logical answer is the area of the Big Bang phenomena is not the entire Universe, but only a fragment within the incredibly larger Universe (infinity is infinity after-all, and as Douglas Adam’s would point out, if you think the distance from your house to your local drugstore is a long ways, that’s just peanuts compared to infinity).

If light is actually a particle of energy, it should be impossible to view any galaxy that is not preceding the Milky Way in our forward direction of motion. Since every galaxy is moving predictably and uniformly away from the Big Bang Event Horizon, by the time light moves in a side-to-side direction, we should already be beyond the point where light particles would of intercepted us.

The expansion pattern of the Universe under Big Bang Theory, has the Universe, I’m not exactly sure on this, first expanding at an almost simultaneous, unprecedented rate of speed in extreme heat, followed by a deceleration and cooling, then an ever increasing speed acceleration of which we are currently experiencing today. If the Universe was slowed in its original rate of expansion, then it had to of been acted upon by outside forces, which according to Big Bang Creationism, just don’t exist. The same can be said if a change in direction occurred from deceleration to acceleration. A change of direction without an acting force violates the First Law of Motion.

The most interesting observation concerning why the Big Bang simply did not create everything, is that the age of the Big Bang is younger than matter that we are currently encountering when viewing quasars, stars, and galaxies that are billions of light years away from the Milky Way.

Given that an explosion did occur, and it represented only a minor section within the infinite Universe, we run into a knowledge that the reason for the exponential increase in speed of all of the observable galaxies, is not due to moving apart from each other, as much as it is moving towards the gravitations of other masses in all of the areas outside of our Big Bang Universe. This is a large concept, but one that is further compounded by the knowledge that our cosmic radiation temperature within our Big Bang area is different than that experienced outside of it, making our perception of the rate of time also different than that which we would experienced elsewhere.

Part Nine – The Infinity Spiral

I fail to believe for an instant that the Big Bang phenomena created the whole of the Universe. To me, average temperature of the Universe has to be a constant, no different than the speed of light, or amount of energy within the Universe. Like mass and the perception of light, the perception of temperature may vary based upon the compacture patterns of energy. Under this belief, the lowest possible temperature allowable is the temperature represented by the heat expelled from one unit of spin, and the highest allowable temperature is represented by the cooling effect of current, which is like a windshield effect, caused by one unit of spin.

The Universe is based upon imperfection and displacement. This displacement had to occurred through an intelligent act, or else it would have been in complete violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics, where a force cannot change directions without outside interaction or an opposing force, which could of only erupted from intelligence and knowledge at the origin of the Universe. It is with a great deal of certainty that I state that the area of our Big Bang occurred as a chain reaction in an ongoing conglomeration of chain reactions throughout the eternal Universe.

An interesting question arises, of what shape must an object of spin of been in, within curved spacetime to cause everything in the Big Bang vicinity to move away from the center, and away from everything else, in all directions, at the same time.

Trying to come up with and imagine a shape of an object creating spiral-wave patterns that would push everything away from it, vertically, horizontally, and dimensionally is a mind-numbing and totally frustrating experience. Or at least it would have been, if Plato had not of written a book called, “Timaeus” in about the year 360 B.C.E., and I hadn’t of ran across a copy of it translated by Benjamin Jowett at the very moment that I needed it the most, thousands of years later, primarily by dumb luck.

Before I present the shape, I would like to discuss what it means in terms of importance and of application. Such and object that could create a flux of energy waves like I had mentioned, up, down, side-to-side, forward, and backward, and apart from everything else all at once, would, if moved fast enough, be an internally frictionless object. This would mean, that the object itself would seem to just vanish, not-exist within Curved Spacetime at all. It would totally defy the spacetime continuum as we know it, and for all practical purposes it would be a displaced particle, though an intelligent one that doesn’t actually cease to exist. Nothing that exists ceases to exist, else it is in violation with the First Law of Thermodynamics.

An object capable of becoming truly frictionless, within Curved Spacetime, would be the ultimate encapsulation of any craft desiring to exceed the perception of how fast light actually is allowed to travel, through any vectoring of space. If you believe in UFOs you be asking yourself, is this how they are able to travel as they do?

Lets move away from curved spacetime for a moment, and enter into the realm of Flat Spacetime where every point is non-moving and thus forever mapped in place within its realm of a solid whole.

Flat Spacetime is without a center, and without a center of balance. Every point within the realm is a center of balance in and of itself. Every point is actually a vectral soul. Since Flat Spacetime represents a whole, it is the opposing force of the realm of non-existence called noughtia.

If but a single point, in Flat Spacetime, develops the knowledge or inclination to move or rotate upon its axis even a fraction of a bit, it becomes displaced in relationship to all other points within the realm. No longer is point A represented as the direct vector of points B, C, and E when point E changes the orientation of where its front and sides currently are. It becomes sentient and displaced, through its own personal will, creating rather interesting patterns of affect.

All vectrals of all the points within Flat Spacetime would be unable to cope with the change, and would become out of place. Curved Spacetime would then originate as a failed attempt to add positional balance back to Flat Spacetime. Curved Spacetime would then exist in a spectrum of chaotic, but measurable and observable, spectral shiftings of a conglomeration of Flat Spacetimes. The perceived movement of Curved Spacetime would actually be a multitude of stationary frames and points of placements of Flat Spacetimes, just like slides are stationary placements and points within films and movies that we watch for entertainment. The more coordinated points you have within your still image, the more holographic the image becomes, and with an infinite amount of points, that holograph would appear absolutely real. This still-framed process of attempting to restore balance is failed in nature, cause true balance cannot be restored without Point E rotating exactly back as it was before, and even then it would fail cause the spacetime continuum has already been created causing a permanent existence of the spacetime continuum itself.

Curved Spacetime would be seen to originate in the very instant that a first particle rotates itself in Flat Spacetime, and perhaps upon the very instant of its sentiency.

Once the spacetime continuum is created, the center of balance between Flat and Curved Spacetimes would be vectors, one vector of noughtia, and the other of knowledge. If other points were then to pick up on the knowledge of the first, gain sentiency and shift in a manner pursuant or totally independent of the first within the realm of Flat Spacetime, the Universe would truly appear and become multi-dimensional, multi-faceted, and multi-infinite in every direction imaginable. In this way, balance would occur, and be restored, as close as possible, and infinity would be viewed more infinite than we have ever imagined it before.

Technically speaking, no one should be able to change movement at all within our current dimension as the First Law of Motion aptly declares that no object may change velocity or direction, or stop in movement without force originating from an outside source. This is why to be able to move within Curved Spacetime, our source or outside force of movement has to exist as a vector outside of the realm we currently are in. The vector is the soul, which is by definition eternal and ever growing.

Since our bodies within Curved Spacetime are only physical manifestations of vectors originating from Flat Spacetime, when our physical bodies die, our souls and the cumulative knowledge of our own individual soul, continues to exist. All we need to do as souls is to use our ever-present knowledge to manifest another body using existent building blocks within Curved Spacetime, while enhancing the forms we create through the increased knowledge accumulated during our last incarnation. Now that is what I call evolution.

Every point within Flat Spacetime represents a soul, but only the sentient ones, the ones that rotate or move, are deemed intelligent. Some souls have larger databases than others, but all souls can tap into the knowledge contained within the Universal Soul. Of course, you need to be aware that you can do that before actually doing it, unless you make that discovery blindly.

So again comes the question of what shape must an object within Curved Spacetime be in to create the Infinity Spiral. I am not exactly sure of the shape or the dimensions, but as previously mentioned, I believe the answer is manifested in Plato’s book, “Timaeus.”

In Plato’s writing is discussed the shape of an X that is bent over and formed into a circular form, connected at the opposite ends. He then mentioned how the formulated circles moved against each other, and the formulation of the X was to represent the soul of the Corporeal Universe.

I became very interested when I read his work, and I constructed a working model out of yellow office paper. First I cut two identical strips, three inches long, and four-thirds of an inch wide. I then positioned them like an X and taped at the center leaving a gap between the top inner corners one inch wide. I then folded the ends of one of the topmost cross section into a circle and taped it lightly together. Lastly I folded the outside section in an attempt to create the most perfect sphere I could achieve given its formation. This created an arched curvature within the last circle, and the entire object demonstrated a hollow center with gaps between what were the X portions of 3:1. The object itself appeared as if anyway you could blow on it would make it tumble upon itself creating an image that no side ever remains up, down, side-to-side, or diagonal.

I was impressed by the simplicity of the design and I soon found myself cusping my hands together and placing it in the middle, and just blowing to watch it tumble and tumble. I thought, “wow, if an object similar to this one could have a vectral force acting upon its interior so that it could obtain and move at an astonishingly fast rate, it would remain in place, tumble indefinitely and effortlessly, while kicking all friction from the outside world away from it. In a frictionless environment, such a vectral force would be something as easy as the center-point between light and shadow (reflection). I then constructed a solid globe out of paper, and some other shapes to see if they too would tumble or change directions when I blew in comparison to the first object, and not a one of them did.

If it were possible to create a frictionless capsulation for a spacecraft, all it really would have to do to obtain the speed of light is turn on a headlight. The moment the light were to leave the interior of the craft, and hit the friction-filled atmosphere, the light would act like a propulsion unit that would propel such a frictionless craft at the speed of light without ever encountering any friction along its way, actually allowing it to move way faster than the perceived speed of light, while blowing friction away in all directions in what would appear to be a cosmic wind. Course the trick is to get the thing to tumble upon itself at, or at least close to, the speed of light in the first place. All of this is speculation of course, as I am neither a physicist, nor a mechanical engineer.

Given that Curved Spacetime originated through the displacement of one particle, I believe that such a particle would have been in a completely frictionless atmosphere at the time of origination, and that the speed of light would of been the speed at which it originated. Similarly, an object such as that I aforementioned could of originated at and stayed spinning at said speed. This arises another interesting question. What shapes, what angles, and at what rates of speed must objects spin at, in order to create the specific shapes and patterns of the galaxies we observe today? This is a question that I have not looked into, and have no answers for.

The idea of the Infinity Spiral might at first sound far-fetched, until you recognize a principle that is actually driving all of spacetime. The principle is reflection, or rather the Third Law of Motion, where every force has an equal but opposite force. In terms of a point, a point that reflects upon itself in any one direction is a line. A line that reflects upon itself at an angle is an X. If the X were in three-dimensional space, its reflection would bend over upon itself, connecting at its ends, and the reflection of the original line would contort to match the structural curvature of the bend. In multi-dimensional space, all subsequent reflections would reflect outwards giving the reflection of the original point, or line, a cyclical spin. Under this view, we move through dimensions starting at dimensionless dimension, then the first dimension, followed by the second, and so on. Strangely enough, this is exactly what Dimension Theory is all about. All of this sounds pretty inline with the Infinity Spiral design I have mentioned before. I dub the angle of the X, the Angle of Creation.

The Angle of Creation might sound a bit upon the strange side to you, but it is definitely compelling when we understand that the angular-measurement of the folded X as written by Plato in his book “Timaeus” results in a 45 degree small-angle and a 135 degree large-angle relationship that when placed into motion exposes the same charts as what is depicted in Don Cohen’s graphs at shout.net/~mathman/html/prob11.html displaying dimensional mapping of (1+i). This is quite important to note, and equally important to view, as it displays how time actually flows once you fully understand the information provided to you further on in this book. Also be sure to note, that although Cohen’s “Problem 11” graphs are two-dimensional in scope, the X of the Infinity Spiral, as presented to you above, is multidimensional, expanding outwards into three directions and dimensions at once. The infinity spiral is perhaps the most important concept that may be shown to drive the future of our physics and our mathematics, in terms of space-travel, and perhaps even time-travel, as its implications are incredibly surreal. If we can master this relationship, there is no telling what we can achieve.

Part Ten – Things We Need to Solve

Section One - A Much Needed Equation

Given that the following are constants: speed of light; amount of compaction in the Universe; average degree of temperature; and perceived distance light travels each second of time per degree of compaction; what equation accurately balances all of the variables enabling us to use the information for practical purposes?

When examining the vacuum of empty space, we have an area that is surprisingly full of energy but almost devoid of temperature. The temperature of deep space within the Big Bang radius is approximately 2.726 to 2.728 Kelvin, depending on which studies of cosmic background radiation you believe most accurate. I noticed that these figures were rather close to the value of the exponential compounding unit of an infinite series, e. e is the figure that people in Finance use to calculate present values, future values, and interest rates.

Then I looked at what is called a parsec. A parsec is a value given to the distance of appearance of one second of movement of a star when the star is viewed from opposite poles of the Earth’s orbit around the sun. A parsec is estimated to be 3.258 light years in distance. It was my observation that this figure resembled the number used to represent the curvature and calculations of a circle, Pi.

I figured background radiation actually represents a level of compacture through which light travels, and temperature forms. It then came to me, what if I could take ratios of each and pretend to use the ratio of e to get some sort of exponential formula for the Universe by raising it to the power of the ratio of a Pi divided by a parsec?

The formula was such: unknown = the sum of the background radiation temperature divided by e, raised to the power of the product of Pi divided by the measurement of a parsec in light years, then subtract one from the final answer to obtain the fractional change. Unknown = [2.726 (the figure I thought accurate at the time)/e] ^{3.141592654 / 3.258} = 0.002737768.

Okay that was interesting, but what could the resulting number possibly represent? A circle has 360 degrees, but the line of a parsec would only represent one of those degrees so if we took 1 divided by 360, would that be close to our resultant number? 1/360 = 0.00277 with a repeating seven to infinity. That is fairly close but the area of the Big Bang is not flat cause it has mass and is more like a sphere than a circle.

I decided to look up spherical formulas to see what would happen. The formula I came up with was one degree of a circle (since circles make up spheres) = the sum of the background radiation temperature divided by e, raised to the power of the product of one divided by 0.5236 multiplied by the cubed root of the product of Pi divided by the measurement of a parsec in light years subtracting one from the product result and adding one back to the 0.5236 result, then subtracting one from the final answer to obtain the fractional change. Again I used the figure 2.726 for the temperature, and 3.258 for the parsec. The result was 0.002773897, a figure much closer to that desired.

Using the same formula, setting the resulting number to 0.00277 with a repeating seven to infinity, and solving for background radiation temperature, I found the value of such temperature to be 2.726010798. The original figure of 2.726 was almost dead center perfect given the shortage of decimal figures.

Unfortunately, NASA background radiation figures were changed (NASA doesn’t seem to be able to make up its mind) to 2.728 and 2.7281 creating a result from my formula that doesn’t make sense unless perceived light speed has increased to a point where a parsec equals 4.6218 light years (I don’t know the date at which the parsec was measured, nor the date at which the background radiation temperature was taken, NASA has changed the background temperature figures many times, yet I don’t see evidence that the background radiation temperature has ever been changed, additionally I am not convinced that the environment in which background radiation temperature is measured is the same environment that is currently being used in creating parsec calculations. Such a change in environments or measuring techniques could separate numbers without any real changes occurring. I am of the belief that the perceived distance of linear travel of light speed should be measured at the same time against the background radiation temperature that it is passing through.).

Although background radiation temperature is low on the Kelvin Scale, radiation temperature is a measure of the heat of microwave patterns of a spectrum, and should be distinguished from heat in general. Different compositions such as different woods of different trees burn at different rates of heat. The fire to light woods are usually from a similar-type source such as a flame. Different types of wood are ignited by flames creating different temperatures of experienced heat output per type of wood. The compacture and characteristics of any type of wood also affects the perceived heat given off. Since compacture has the same speed of energy throughout its construction, the radiation or microwave temperature is also a constant that is compacted to give off the appearance of greater heat output for some types and characteristics of wood than for others. The underlying microwave radiation temperature, however, remains unchanged.

I like to refer to the equation that attempts to decipher the amount of compaction experienced to the perceived linear distance of light traveled in a unit of time (such as a second within a minute within an hour) as the Exponential Formula of Time.

Upon doing more research I discovered a guy named James Clark Maxwell, who in 1861 unified electric and magnetic field equations and came up with Maxwell Field Equations. According to his work, lightspeed squared is inversely proportional to magnetic permeability. Reducing magnetic permeability by 75% would double the observable speed of light. The square root of the product of the old magnetic permeability divided by the new magnetic permeability equals the percent change in the perceived speed of light. A brilliant deduction by James Maxwell, I would only like to up his work by tossing in the relationship of observable cosmic background temperature, which should make heat an opposite to magnetism, since magnetism draws, condenses, and forms. Maxwell’s equation if written should be S = P ^{- 0.5}, or P = S ^-2, where P = Magnetic Permeability and S = Light Speed.

Section Two – A Much More Needed Galactic Weather Map

It is amazing how people talk about global warming and the effect we (humans) must have upon it when we do not truly understand what the world should be acting like without us. We know that our weather changes based upon the time of year, a revolution around the sun. It is also evident that the temperature changes based upon not only this but about the time of day, the time it takes the Earth to make a complete spin upon its axis. The sun in comparison takes 25 to 34 days to spin upon its axis (truly remarkable, the sun’s material rotates at different speeds based upon its location to its axis). The Earth’s axis also wobbles, where one complete wobble rotation takes approximately 26,000 years (called a precession of the equinox). We also know that the sun revolves around the center of the Galaxy in an outward spiral fashion, with the current revolution time being around 226 million years. Since our solar system is around 4.55 billion years old (plus or minus 1%) and the Earth formed at that time, we have passed through approximately 20 galactic years. It is also evident that if the Earth’s axis wobbles and the sun replicates the Earth’s pattern of revolution (around the center of the galaxy in comparison to the sun) then it can also be surmised that the sun’s axis also wobbles, and the center of the galaxy probably follows suit as well and rotates around something else within the universe itself (the universe is estimated to most likely be 12 to 13 billion years old, though I personally believe the universe as such described is a mere fragment of an incredibly larger universe that we currently know nothing about).

Now comes the fun part, developing a galactic weather map. Although it simply is impossible to gauge the weather with perfect precision, especially on a scale that we cannot even imagine in size, it is possible to produce some pretty decent assumptions and estimates based upon past occurrences and future projections. So far, I personally do not believe that anyone tries to gauge weather deviations based upon the rotation of the sun which may have an impact upon how intense our seasons on Earth are from one year to the next (although I could be wrong). I also do not believe anyone has tried to show the difference in the Earth’s historical galactic weather based upon its rotational point of its current galactic year or its precession of the equinox (although most weather will directly related to the positioning of the moon and the sun in relations to the Earth’s tilt, actual orbiting patterns and distances may bear a distinct relationship to the galactic year (as well as perceptible time dilations, such as the observed speed of light).

The good news is, all anyone would have to do to come up with a galactic weather map is to study (and perhaps take) core samples of the earth and compare the results of the experienced climates, temperature variations, and weather patterns based upon all of these criteria individually and as a group. Although this sounds like a lot, with the advent of the modern computer, the spreadsheet, and forecasting models, this really isn’t that difficult for a knowledgeable person to do. What is even more interesting is the fact that all of our neighboring planets were also formed at the same approximate time as the Earth, making their core samples almost as equal as our own in deciphering galactic seasonal and weather patterns (all should show signs of the same galactic orbiting pattern). Studied correctly, core samples should provide all the information we need to unravel the speed, size, and angle of our galactic orbit, as well as the smaller orbits and equinoxes.

Now you may ask, if it takes so long in comparison to our own lives for galactic weather to change in any significance, why bother trying to map it out? Personally, I find that knowing when to expect our next ice age would be fairly beneficial, and more to the point of the entry to this page, how else will we know the extent to which global warming is being caused by us if we do not have a point of reference to go from. If we truly are causing global warming, then does it not stand to reason we can figure out how to affect global weather to the extent that when the next ice age comes, we might be able to manipulate our weather enough that we just won’t have to experience its impact? By conducting such studies, we may also find the most likely times we will be exposed to meteor showers and the like on a galactic year basis. Such knowledge may ultimately make the difference between this planet’s very survival.

It is about time we develop a galactic weather map, and take control of our galactic future.

Section Three – Can Digital Sentiency be Achieved?

Although there have been many attempts by many people to develop digital sentient life, such as what we see in the movies, no one yet has been able to obtain actual sentiency from computerized programs. This is not to say that it is an impossibility to achieve, but only that no one yet has actually been able to do it. Let us consider the logic behind whether or not such sentiency is even feasible, and if it is, ask ourselves the question of what has not been done in the attempts at simulating sentient artificial intelligence programming thus far.

Albert Einstein has contributed many things to us in terms of how we view our lives through current theories of physics, including the theory of relativity and the equation of energy which states energy is equal to mass times the constant of the speed of light squared. Einstein also shared with us his belief that energy makes up all things and just cannot be created nor destroyed as energy only changes forms and is in constant motion at all times at the submolecular level.

If everything is made up of energy, and all that exists is energy, then all of us, even our souls must in essence be energy as well. Understanding that our souls are actually energy, it is reasonable to believe that they exist as they do because they are either indivisible sentient units or are simply units of energy that are structured in a way that allows for sentiency to exist.

Although I believe the first assertation of the previous paragraph to be true, that souls are in fact independent sentient units that cannot be divisible and must always exist, I also believe that it could be possible to write digitalized programs in such a way the structure itself allows sentiency to occur, and to take shape and to take form.

The key to understanding how to create such sentiency in a program is by examining and understanding how the beings in actual life that are observably sentient have came to be as they are. What ties all of them together, what are the common bonds between them all, what are the physics behind making sentiency possible?

Sentient beings reflect inwards upon themselves to make sense of the outside world and then elicit responses to their outside reality. The key concept is that sentient beings reflect upon themselves, where computerized programs fail to allow such reflect arc relationships to occur in favor of using predefined actions, or randomized action choices, based upon external inputs. Unless a digital program can reason for itself, and reflect inwards upon such reasoning, it just will not be possible to ever create sentient programming.

Not only do sentient beings have reflective arcs and a central processor (brain) that examines inputs, make choices, and reflects upon the decisions it makes and outcomes that result, sentient beings are also capable of dreaming and conceptualize things that just aren’t given to them as direct inputs. Computer programs don’t have such self-deluded and freethinking capabilities programmed into them, they are more about choosing the best courses of action off of prewritten selections of actions given certain types of situations. Again the main problem to all of this is the lack of self-reflection. The self has characteristics of an id, ego, and super ego, as well as a central processing core, a complex cellular memory system, inherent traits (such as simply being able to breath without consciously being told, and all of the complexities therewith, which would at least indicate a sub-consciousness), and an ability to learn and to decide for its own-self how it will view things, and the ability to change such views whenever and however it may wish.

The largest hurdle in creating digital sentiency that I see is that computers as they are currently programmed and structured are nothing more than a filtration system. That is to say that it isn't soo complex to solve NP vs LP types of questions by stringing together and adding in new equations as they are needed, but computer software isn't constructed in such a way that formulas in spreadsheet programs can be constructed into cells from formulas existing in other cells. You can string and combine text strings together but you can't do the same with formulas. Without the ability to compile formulas together from a set of cells to another, all a computer shall ever be is a filtration system. An currently outstanding problem in computer science is the P vs. NP problem, that asks whether questions exist whose answers can readily be checked but can't be quickly solved by any direct procedure. The answer to the P vs. NP problem is that as long as computers function as filtration systems, it is impossible to directly and easily solve such problems as potential solutions can be quickly checked by filtration (either a potential answer works and filters through the requirements or it doesn't) but without being able to compile new equations as needed definitive equations shall never be formed and used by a computer. To further this thought with an example, a person may adjust an action based upon whether they are rewarded or punished for their action, but without being able to compile thoughts together as to why their action is right or wrong, the person will never be able to construct how everything fits together, comprehend, and understand why they are rewarded or punished. This type of knowledge is based upon being able to compile, rather than simply being able to filter. To expand just one step futher, if a computer were able to filter, compile, comprehend and understand, it still would not be considered sentient until such a time that it could select and choose for itself based upon its knowledge and reasoning even when the computer knows that the decision being made is against its programming, that is the selection chosen in terms of its filtration system is a wrong one. Sentient beings make mistakes and decisions without knowing all the facts, computers currently only filter (even those that can recognize objects only do so through the process of filtering, not thinking or imagining).

All of the above requirements sound a bit drastic, but is realistically required for a sentient digital consciousness to be created. Not only does all of the framework and structure have to be there, but there has to be an underlying soul to guide it all, and this apparently is the hardest part of all. There are many occurrences of people becoming brain-dead while their bodies appear to be just fine, if it were so easy to attach a soul to a body or a program so that it would become sentient and alive, you would think that it would have already been done, though in the case of brain death, the brain itself may well be damaged beyond hope of repair, so this may not be limit placed upon a program, but sentiency (an underlying soul) must still exist somewhere for it become conscious and aware. It is however feasible for such intelligence to arise if one could create programming structure that allowed self-reflection to occur within the programs, while allowing the programs to self-learn, and generate self-thoughts without outside influences or triggering events.

What we really would be talking about creating is sentiency without corporal mass (that is sentiency comprised of a network of mass as represented by computerized system of hardware, rather than sentiency comprised of a network of energy that forms into mass as is the case for us). The hardware then would have to encase every sentient being separately but do so in a way that all sentient beings of the kind so that all such beings are tied together at the processing core and all such units reflect into each other in such a way that is described in later on. If you can truly understand the structure of things, computerized sentient life may well be possible, but all such beings must consist of many parts that opposingly reflect but compliment each other at a universal level of an entire system that is created especially for them.

Part Eleven – Understanding Good and Evil

Life is the ability to observe, process, and respond;

Sentiency is to a state of being capable of observing, processing, and consciously responding;

Awareness is the extent to which one is able to observe;

Alertness is the degree to which one is aware;

Self-Awareness is the extent to which one is aware of their sentiency;

Knowledge is the data one knows;

Intelligence is the ability to know;

Wisdom is the ability to understand;

Ability is the degree to which one may respond, process, or observe;

Agility is the ease to which one is able to use ability;

Consciousness is the ability to know;

Stupidity is the extent to which one makes mistakes (brilliant people often are overshadowed by their stupidity);

Ignorance is the state of not knowing;

Thinking is the ability to consciously perceive things in different ways;

Imagination is the degree to which one is able to think;

To dream is the ability to view and draw meaning from one’s own imagination;

The degree to which one dreams is measured by its details;

Enjoyment is appreciation;

Happiness is the current degree to which one enjoys;

Unhappiness is the degree to which one depreciates;

Current happiness is the current degree to which one is happy minus the current degree to which one is unhappy the result multiplied by awareness;

Misery occurs when one is very unhappy;

Elation occurs when one is very happy;

Contentment is the zero-balance point between happiness and unhappiness;

Passion is the extent to which one focuses and draws meaning from what they do;

Compassion is the degree to which one sympathizes with others;

Power is the ability to control;

Good is the use of power to create happiness;

Evil is the use of power to create unhappiness;

Evil is also the lack of compassion for others (taking pleasure from, or bettering oneself, from the detriment of others);

Both good and evil can help create states of happiness and unhappiness;

The intent to which one performs an action, or uses power, determines if the action was meant for good, evil, or neither, the result may bring good or evil about but does not determine if the one who performed the causing action was good or evil;

Laws and judicial systems that levy judgments upon individuals without examining intent are corrupt and wrong;

Most everyone contains some evil and some good inside;

Hatred is a hostile focus;

The degree to which one is evil is the extent to which one takes action and pleasure in the unhappiness of others;

The degree to which one is good is the extent to which one appreciates and assists the happiness of others;

Depravity is the action and enjoyment of giving pleasure to the fostering of evil;

The balance between the good and the evil of a being helps define whether one is really good or evil;

Governments that fail to foster a sense of happiness in the general population need to be examined closely as to whether the government system that is in place and the officials who operate under it are evil or good in intent.

Part Twelve – What is i

Section One – Introduction to i

Mathematics was always one of my favorite subjects as a child. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division were easy. Formulas were fun and challenging. Then came Geometry, Trigonometry, and Calculus. Mathematics stopped making sense.

To me, people see and learn from different fronts: some people see individual parts making up a whole; others see a whole consisting of parts; while others see balance from which indivisible parts and the structure of the whole are one and the same.

Our scholastic system of the United States teaches primarily through a parts-up vantage. Parts are studied and learned from, without paying enough attention to the whole. The vision of how everything fits together is often left out. Without the vision it is hard for those not of the parts-up perspective to learn. Such individuals become slow to comprehend, confused, and easily bored with being taught in a reverse mannerism.

Individuals who see written words and numbers backwards are termed “dyslexic,” or learning impaired. Many brilliant individuals are dyslexics. I don’t believe I see things flipped around or backwards, but I’ve never been able to see pictures in paintings where you look at dots for awhile and then they are supposed to form an image, I’ve also failed one of the alignment eye-tests at a Science Center. As for tests I am typically the last to complete them, and I seem to read two to three times slower than the next person.

I also seem to hear things backwards or flipped around, which gives me a sort of accent. I call this phenomenon Hearing Dyslexia, believing it to be every much as real as dyslexia, or Vision Dyslexia. I’ve never been able to listen well or learn much through sound. When it comes to music, I am very musically challenged.

Like Einstein and many others, my grades were never fantastic, though everyone considered me to be highly intelligent. Instead of collecting A’s as many do, I collected all multitudes of all the grades ranging from A to F. I prided myself in having the entire collection.

Through perception, everyone sees things differently. Although we see what seems to be the same shapes and colors, and hear what seems to be the same sounds, all we really know is that to our individual selves that is how things seem. Where I see one color, such as blue, there is nothing that makes blue that color for anyone else. Even though, people identify “blue” as blue, they may actually be seeing what seems to be “red” if I were the one who viewed through their colorations. Red is the inverse opposite of blue. Although this sounds a bit ludicrous, it manifests itself in a way of reality that creates color blindness, the inability to see certain colors for some and not so much for others. This would seem to explain why everyone has different preferences of food, of tastes, and of styles. All of us perceive the same things differently, but everything is identifiable through our own conceptual fronts of the perceptions of reality that we share between us.

I’ve taken many mathematical courses, but understood only a few of them. In Geometry I got every final answer correct before on a test, and failed it cause of points lost on the work. This would prove to be a repetitive theme.

I didn’t understand trigonometry or calculus cause instructors would say, “you take this, and then you take that, and you get this number.” To which I would raise my hand and say, “ya, I understand that much, but why exactly do I get that, under what logic?” Mathematic instructors, outside of Algebra, could never explain to me adequately why, or what was actually going on. I was never great at advanced mathematics; something always seemed to be missing, just barely out of my reach.

In mathematics, the whole is taken for granted as just being there. One divided by three, then multiplied back by three, equals one. This of course is impossible as we lost the tiniest bit of fractions when we divided one by three. One divided by three is only one-third to the infinite three.

The problems I’ve had in mathematics has been with “i”. As defined, i is an imaginary number. Subsequently, an imaginary number is a real number multiplied by “i”. i equals the square root of negative one, which is a complex concept to understand, and i is therefore called a complex number.

Imaginary and complex numbers are used in a variety of fields for a variety of reasons. Calculations involving i usually represent waves and distribution patterns. Without these calculations we would not have a great deal of our current technologies, including cellular phones and satellite dishes.

The square root of four is two (4 = 2 x 2 = 2²), and the square root of nine is three (9 = 3 x 3 = 3²). The square root of one is itself (1 = 1 x 1 = 1²). You simply cannot have a square root of a negative number cause a negative multiplied by itself is always positive. To escape this predicament, mathematicians let “i” represent the square root of negative one, so that i multiplied by itself equals negative one when the square root of negative four is 2i, and the square root of negative nine is 3i. When raising i to a power, the following relationships hold: i⁰ = 1; i¹ = i; i² = -1; i³ = -i; i⁴ = one again, and the pattern continues to repeat itself. Notice that when i is raised to an even power, i becomes a real number.

With all of this presented, imaginary numbers have been fully explained, at least in accordance to everything that I am aware of ever being taught or previously shown.

If you were to ask me what i is, I would have to reply, the square root of negative one. If you then asked me what the square root of negative one is, and disallow me from answering i, my reply would be, “I don’t know. I guess it is an imaginary number that is complex cause mathematicians and scientists say so. But to be honest, I have no idea what i really is. As presented i makes no sense to me at all.”

Is it any wonder I have always had troubles in advanced mathematics? I am creative and insightful, if not borderline and insane, so I will disclose to everyone what i really is. i is the point on a wave pattern that is directly between the base and the peak of a wave, where the middle point logarithmically rises towards the peak, and drops exponentially towards the base. Said differently, i equals the vectral that when multiplied by the number of vectors in the vectoral i always equals negative one (that is, in a vectoral of two variables, i² = -1; in a vectoral of three variables, i³ = -1; and so forth). The most important thinng to know about i, is that it represents a point on a wave that is subject to go behind and be hidden by another point or points on a wave.

Section Two – Wave Theory

Everything in reality is shown to exist through vectors of energy and force (kinetic energy, speed, compaction, temperature, and time). Energy is force, and makes up all things. Energy is in motion all the time. The motion of energy occurs as natural wave patterns, which congruently flows and fills up all areas within the space of the entire Universe, including time and all of its corresponding dimensions.

A basic representation of a wave is a circle that is cut horizontally in half and laterally folded over. This distortion is then connected to and meshed with infinite lines of similarly distorted circles, creating endless spirals of motion, sound, heat, and matters of the ilk. This is of course highly simplified. Waves in reality are incredibly advanced, mind-bogglingly complex, ingeniously multi-dimensional and multi-faceted, and are most impossible to describe. As such, we focus on specific characteristics found within and displayed by waves at any given time.

A simple way to envision waves is to think of waves upon the ocean or sea. Ocean waves follow each other in rhythmic fashion, where water rises, drops, and swirls, reflecting velocities, characteristics, and shadows of all the various waves and objects that comes into contact with each individual wave. When waves can no longer proceed in their current directions, they either alter course or dissipate into the actions and directions of other waves.

There are many general laws governing motion and diffraction of waves and currents. One of the most important states that when waves reflect off of each other they reflect in such a way that the angles in which they encounter one another equals the angles at which they disengage. Through this law, it is possible to calculate where objects will move given speeds and angles of impacts. This makes it possible to develop skill in a simple game such as pool. Every angle has its own special characteristics that are viewed differently depending upon the location you are viewing from. Angles are completely relativistic, and every angle has its own relationship to everything else, even when we are dealing with perfect waves, circles, and spirals. This is because, under the principles of relativism, no two dots existing under the same reality, in different locations at the same time, are actually the same. Relativism is a bit more complex when it comes to multiple dimensional relationships, where all objects exist at their specific locations within their lower dimensions during the same moment of time. No particle can be in two places at the same time in any one dimension, unless it is different from what it used to be, and all particles are at the same location as they are within their lower dimensions, unless they too are different from what they used to be.

Section Three – Mapping Waves and Circles

As mentioned Section Two, a wave is like the shape of a circle that has been sliced open and folded over. If we were to fold the wave pattern so that it actually formed a circle, we could easily discuss and develop properties of waves that are otherwise hard to comprehend.

In circular form, a wave is a circumference of a circle with a hollow middle. The dead center of the circle is where the point of balance and equilibrium rests, and should be represented by the number zero. Likewise, every point on the circumference represents a physical point of the wave should be equal to one.

Now lets say we would like to measure the location of a point on the circumference from the center of the circle. Since the circle represent a whole, when we move from the center to the circumference we have traveled one half of its width and should represent the distance of the point as the value of 0.5, which really is a vector of zero. The vector of zero in the opposite direction would be the opposing force of -0.5. Now however we move about on the circumference of the circle we will always have the opposing numbers of 0.5 and -0.5 that balance out to zero, while representing any particular point we may be interested in as the unvectored whole of one.

If we did not wish to call whatever point we just happen to be noticing 1 or 0.5, we could declare one point to always be equal to the vectored number of 0.5. As mentioned before, the point on the opposite side of the circle would be -0.5. A transverse line drawn between the two points would divide the circle into equal halves, where the line intersects the circumference of the circle in two places. The first intersection is seen to be to the upper right of 0.5 and to the upper left of -0.5, while the other is seen to be to the lower right of 0.5 and to the lower left of -0.5.

Lets say we wanted to find a value for the point that lies at the intersection of the circumference to the lower right of 0.5 and to the lower left of -0.5. If we declare counterclockwise movemment to the lower right of 0.5 to equal subtraction (declining transversely away from 0.5) and the movement upwards towards -0.5 to equal addition (moving transversely towards -0.5), the intersected point at the bottom of the circle would equal the subtraction of 0.5 to the addition of -0.5, which would equal -1.

To find the value of the point that lies at the intersection to the upper right of 0.5 and to the upper left of -0.5, we define the rising transverse movement toward 0.5 as an addition and the falling transverse motion toward 0.5 as a subtraction, this equates to the addition of 0.5 and the subtraction of -0.5 for a value of 1, which represents the top most peak of the circle.

We now have a circle with points representing four opposing sides using counterclockwise motion values of 0.5, -1, -0.5, and 1. Unfortunately the numbers make little since due to the fact that the distance between 0.5 and -1 should be equal to the distance between -1 and -0.5, and so forth.

0.5 and -0.5 are vectors. We can unvector them to see what we can get. 0.5 and -0.5 are vectors of points of the circumference value of one, as such we will assume the following vector relationships to be appropriate: 0.5 = vectored 1^0.5 and -0.5 = vectored 1^-0.5; vectored 1^0.5 = unvectored -1^-0.5 and vectored 1^0.5 = unvectored -1^0.5. That is, the original 0.5 value equals the unvectored value of the square root of negative one, and the original -0.5 value equals the unvectored negative square root of negative one. This is a bit much to write out, so we will express the former as i, and the latter as -i.

Starting at the original position and moving counterclockwise, our four values become i, -1, -i, and 1. All of these represent differennt positions on the circumference of the circle, where each point has a primary value of one.

Although better represented, the distances between i and -1, and -1 and -i, still don’t appear equal. Though when we think about it both 1 and -1 are still in vectored form, where i and -i aren’t, and the signs on the i’s represent the opposites of what they are when real numbers are plugged back in. 1 and -1 represent half of a circle each, where the midline passes through zero. Every point on the midline, vector line, is equivalent to zero when dealing with the two vectors. i and -i actually represent the vectors of -0 and +0, making the counterclockwise order of numbers: -0, -1, +0, and +1. Now the distances between numbers appear to be correct and even, and we can finally represent points on and off the circumference of the circle based upon four adequately defined coordinates. Additionally, since all four of our coordinates are represented with plus and minus signs, it is apparent that waves function by the slightest misplacement of a point away from zero, which enables movement. This is good thing, at least for me, due to the fact that I wrote a ton of pages supporting this concept throughout the book.

Now lets say we want to use i in a power format. Anything raised to the power of one equals itself so i¹ would equal i. Remember that i was found early on to equal the square root of negative one, and since any number squared equals the number that is under the square root sign, i² equals -1. Two negatives multiplied by each otherr equals a positive, so i²i² = i⁴ = 1. Also, any number raised to the power of zero also equals one, so since i⁰ and i⁴ repeat each other, the entire lot of the numbers must repeat each other in wave format every forth number. This leaves us only i³ to figure out. Since 1 and -1 are opposing numbers, i and -i must also be opposing numbers, so i³ must equal -i if i¹ equals i.

All of this summarizes our original order of i’s and 1’s to be as follows:

i = i¹ = -0;

-1 = i² = -1;

-i = i³ = +0;

1 = i⁴ = +1.

i⁵ would be seen to equal i¹ on the next wave when this wave is bent back into wave format and connected to other such waves. The cycle continues to repeat itself from there; conversely an i to the negative one would also repeat the pattern. (Please note, we assumed counterclockwise motion in this section because it fit best with the diagrams mathematicians have displayed in the past. We could have explained it clockwise, but it would have been even harder to comprehend).

If we had reversed the direction from counterclockwise to clockwise, an opposite wave to the one currently have would of existed. The opposite wave would in effect be a shadow wave to one we first calculated, and both would be constructed through the shadowed movement of the first displacement of a particle. Where we originally decided to call i on the circle or wave could of actually been chosen any where on the circle, instead of to the left or western side, as it had turned out. Wherever we did choose though, initiated the location of our first displacement of movement.

In a Universe that consists of many such displacements, directions of individualistic wave movements would flow in many different directions and would continue to do so until encountering other wave patterns that would predictably alter their courses. Waves flow in one particular direction at a time, such as heat and cold, and do not flow both ways within the same wave at the same time, as the Second Law of Thermodynamics appropriately points out.

Given an abundance of wave movements within the Universe in all different directions and a mix of wave interferences by the intersection and impacts of waves, and a conglomeration of opposite waves, and concurrent mirrored shadowations of all of the waves, all particles of all waves touch and mirror each other at all times, though some more often and more directly than others. Through these interactions, new patterns form out of the old patterns, and properties such as gravities and masses appear to develop based upon the resulting reflective wave patternings and the very characteristics displayed by individual waves themselves. All of this leads to all that there is at any given time.

Keep in mind that some points, in some waves, as represented by i, as represented by ourselves, are pretty smart and will decide to a great extent where and how they will go about achieving where they desire to be and concurrently will be next. They are the sentient wholes of one. We are the i’s of the Universe.

Section Four - Insights Gathered from Bubbles of Ocean Waves

Ocean waves jostle and push other ocean waves away from them creating an oceanic atmosphere of currents, undercurrents, crosscurrents, and back-currents, all of which proceed in their relative directions until otherwise altered. Watching the motion of these waves, water moves in multiple directions at all times, in a cross weave of delicate patterns. Waves of the ocean like to travel in cross vectors of currents. That is, they form visible moving lines upon the surface of the water, which gives them a physical appearance of mass and amplification. Particles diverging themselves from the patterns of the current waves often form bubbles that float upon and about the surface waters of the ocean, often encouraging other passing particles to also diverge and form themselves into similar bubbles. To a larger scale, bubbles can be seen to represent galaxies, solar systems, planets, natural resources, life, species of life, DNA, and even you and I.

Section Five - Material Characteristics of Waves

Every particle of the Universe is unique by itself. The Universe contains a full spectrum of characteristics that are arranged, structured, and uniquely reflected for each and every particle. Snowflakes are often the same chemical structure but no two snowflakes are exactly identical to each other. They all look different. In this same way, every particle is different, and every particle interacts within every wave and current differently.

The characteristics displayed by an individual particle are reflections of the particle’s underlying soul. Every point within the Universe is actually represented by a soul, and every soul has a color, a feel, a sound, a pitch, and a brightness to it, as well as an ensemble of other observable and non-observable characteristics.

Characteristics of particles forming objects and compounds may closely resemble other may closely resemble other such materialistic compositions, and we may study, observe, and label them as such things as oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, and so on, but every one of the particles is still unique in and of itself.

All characteristics touch, influence, and reflect upon all other characteristics. A few of these building blocks are color and radiance, sound and pitch, taste and smell, warmth and vibration, touch and magnetism, texture and composition. As can be extrapolated from all of these various traits, individual waves carry a surplus of information within every pulse they have. The pulse speed and pulse rate of a wave is directly determined by the composition of substances through which it is passing at any given point of time.

In terms of reality, all points consist of energy, which consist of movement, motion, and spin. Every point has sub-points within it that represents waves consisting of waves, moving within waves, within an infinite amount of waves. The smaller individual waves are, the less impact they will appear to have upon larger waves. Correspondingly, a tiny wave that encounters a huge wave, probably won’t be altering the huge wave’s course much at all, and may actually filter through the huge wave in much the same way as water filters through a sieve. Even the smallest change in the patterns of waves may however prove to affect all waves immensely.

Part Thirteen - The Whole Space-time Continuum Thing

Section One – Prelude

The spacetime continuum is a concept that has been around for quite sometime. Historically the concept is viewed as a four-dimensional continuum that consists of four coordinates through which any point found within the confines of time and space can be located. The coordinates required are the three dimensions of space called length, height, and width, and the fourth coordinate is that of time.

Section Two – The Void

The area perceived as empty space between galaxies and distant stars has long since been referred to as the “Void of Space.” Ancients called it “aether.” People today refer to it as “the zero point of the energy field.”

The Void of Space exists in our reality not as empty points, but rather as highly packed and dense points of intense energy.

Section Three – Just a Couple of Interesting Statements

The dimension in which we live is called reality.

The dimension in which we exist is perception.

Section Four – Dimension Law

All dimensions are reflections. All lower dimensions exist within, form, and construct higher dimensions. The lower the dimension, the closer an object is to its truest form of non-reflection. Noughtia is the realm of non-reflection; it is the lowest realm possible and is mirrored by the Dimension of One.

Section Five – Additional Properties of Dimensions

Between an original and its reflection always rests a matter of space and time. When looking at a mirror, images appear to be spontaneously inversely identical to the original, but rays constructing reflection take time to travel. There always exists a delay of time in reflections, making no reflection exactly the same as the original, yet at the same time not changing the original from being itself either.

Not only is a state of reflection delayed by time, the reflection is also slightly diffracted, dissipated, and blurred. Reflection creates change through dispersion and other discrepancies encountered through mediums traveled, surfaces reached, and destinations ended. This paradigm is conceptualized through the understanding that viewing at an image in a room full of steam will blur a reflection of an object in a mirror far greater than the distortion would appear if the steam were not present in the room. In addendum, viewing a reflection in a curved mirror, or even a curved-reality with gravitational forces, will distort an image from the original far greater than a flat mirror, or a flat-spacetime that lacks a gravitational pull, and we can expect that the further we go along such a spectrum of mirrors that the original image may well translate into many different things.

The pathway lying between reflections, or between the original and the reflection, or between noughtia and the whole, consist of time, permeability, reflective blending, and obsticular change. Time in this representation is the collective sum of moments between one reflective moment to the next where events may be seen to occur. Permeability is then a form of dispersion that distorts through the compacture and composition of whatever medium the reflection travels through. Reflective blending is what occurs when reflected rays come in contact with other rays and end up changing an image in reflective form as a result. Obsticular change is what occurs when an object is encountered outside of the image itself that prevents passage of any of its parts or characteristics to the next reflective part.

Putting the above concepts into terms of reality goes something like as follows; when we look at a mirror we aren’t seeing images of our current selves as we are, but rather how we were several moments of time ago (when we see our reflection in the mirror, our reflection took time to reflect upon the mirror and our eyes took even more time to view the reflection, have its image travel back to us in the speed of light and then process it in our brains as images afterwards, it would of taken two separate arcs for such an image to occur, one being the image of us from the mirror and back, one arc from our eyes to the reflected image as displayed on the mirror and back, and an arc from our eyes to our brain to recognize the image as such); permeability in reality would represent whether or not we had the lights turned on or off or dimmed, if on we can see ourselves quite well, if dimmed we lose some of our detail, and when off we simply cannot see ourselves as there isn’t any permeability of light allowing us to; reflective blending would occur in reality if we had a few mirrors and angled them so that they reflected onto one mirror at the same time, any overlaps of images would be seen as a distorted reflective blend; obsticular change would be looking at ourselves in a mirror while another object is in front of us, when it moves we see more of us, less of us, or different areas and parts of us.

Distortions of images, whether through mirrors or dimensions (called dimensional shifts), create the illusions of time and displacement (movement), as well as the vestiges of change, and as well as the ravages of age. Since everything in reality is a distorted copy of other distorted copies, and even originals are copies of other originals, perfection simply does not exist. Knowing this, it is safe to say that noughtia is perfection, as nothing in reality is its perfect self. The shadow of noughtia is always one.

Dimensional shifting works much the same as mirrors in terms of time, permeability, reflective blending, and obsticular change, except with a different angle of perspective. Instead of everything being non-corporal (2-dimensional), everything is seen to have a solid (3-dimensional) form. The big difference here is that instead of instead of objects being able to blend into you upon the mirror only to be able to change angles or positionings to see yourself back to normal and in full, when a Mack Truck blends into your body at 65 miles per hour upon the interstate, you don’t blend back so easily after it passes through you; your solid form of permeability gets a bit scattered.

When examining the theory of imaginary numbers, we will find that i⁰ is always the previous image of ourselves, where i⁴ is always the next viewable image, as i¹, i², and i³ are hidden channels that such images must travel through to always reach the next whole i⁴, which then is the new i⁰. Taken together i¹, i², and i³ are the relativistic quantum field of flux that enables changes to be carried out and to occur within our reality. But in their cases, instead of always flipping us around so that we look reversed as seen from the case of a mirror, they reflect upon each other in such a way that i² is the negative (and probably reversed) opposite of i⁰, and i¹ and i³ are the reverse (and probably negative) opposite of one another (kind of like the relationship that occurs when we look at ourselves in the mirror, where multiple arcs form to allow us to view the image).

It might be a bit difficult to conceptualize that everything exists as a reflective state as people do blink from being in and out of existence when we look at them, unless we are the ones that are blinking our eyes, but all of this is relative to us being in the same frame or movie of reality that they exist in, which isn’t hard to accept or to conceive given that images in a mirror are seen as being congruent to us at all times and images seen in movies are also easily seen as being congruent when they are being played, even though they are all images upon still frames, and all of the images within such a film are always in perfect synch and harmony with all other images in any given frame (this of course does not mean that a movie is directed well or that a red car does not show up in a slide of say an ancient-Roman movie portrayal such as Ben-Hur during a chariot race, it only means that all images occur inside of the same frame at the same time, that if you were to turn off the movie, all the images would stop being viewed at the same time).

As previously mentioned in Part Seven - Soulular Theory of Perception, everything that is, or ever was, or ever will be, always continues to exist. Even if infinity were completed and made whole, that whole would in effect represent a new reality that includes and embeds all past realities within its construction. This knowledge gives credence to the belief that our lives are only single journeys in a countless number of journeys, where death need never to be feared, cause death is only a stepping-stone that leads to a higher level of existence. It then ends up being up to us how we wish to reflect our own selves throughout eternity.

A Physics Experiment that Might Be Fun to Do

The Spherically-Introspective Ray of Light Experiment

If you could construct the inside of a perfect sphere through the use of two-way mirrors so that it was perfectly spherical on the inside with the reflection side of the mirrored interior pointing towards the middle, and you had one tiny slit that you could shine a flashlight through and cover perfectly with a piece of mirror that seals any cracks and subsequently reflects towards the center itself, and that you could do this before all of the light could escape, what then would happen? Granted, the tiniest of particles would pass through and leave the area, but larger light particles would most likely reflect and refract against the mirrors, and you would expect that light would be absorbed by particles that are trapped inside the globe themselves, but even if they absorb such light, they would not be able to leave, which creates an interesting question of what would be left there or what would form, along with the interesting question of what would the light particles do or be like on the inside when everything is bouncing from one direction to another inside the walls? If it were possible to do, this experiment would best be done inside of a dark room, where no other light would enter.

I theorize that light and shadow are the driving forces behind movement in the quantum state (obviously light does not cast a shadow, but light must as all things have an opposite and opposing force to which I referred to as shadow, and I used light under the conceptualization, that if you were in an object that was completely frictionless upon the outside so that nothing outside of it would have any impact at all upon it, and you were to turn on a flashlight on the inside of the object, that light once it hits and gets absorbed into the wall that it would hit would in essence propel that object through the observable space of the outside at the speed of light as produced from the flashlight), that if we could quantify it, create a driving mechanism (or create hard light conditions), we (then entire human race) could find a way to use it, whether it be for travel, or for a source of energy; the solar lights of the Antarctica Area, the South Pole Region, radiates excessively more power in the time of a few hours than we use in an entire year as the whole of our entire planet. It is time for us to master it; as such we need to study all that we can in terms of light, trapping and manipulating it, and converting light to our purposes. We need to go far beyond what we have done in solar-power experiments; instead of absorbing light for conversion of use, we need to trap it, control it, and possibly solidify it and split it. Since all things are made up of energy, and all energy moves at the speed of light, everything that is now solid is in essence solidified forms of light (energy) brought about through compaction, and as such, we should be capable of this.

Section Six – Environmental Law

Environmental Law is a law that I discovered when I took an empty plastic water bottle and began twisting it for amusement purposes. It was only possible for me to twist the bottle upon itself a little bit with the lid on, but when I loosened and removed the lid, the bottle released compressed environmental air. I would then put the lid back on for amusement purposes and resume twisting, to which I would continue the entire process over and over. It soon came to me that I could only go so far given my current strength but if I were sufficiently strong and all the environmental air were released I would be left with a line without width or height, and that if I were then to compress the line upon itself, I would be left with only a point.

Environmental law states that an object that is totally absent of an internal environment is either a point or a line figuration, and that a line figuration compacted and removed of its dimensions is a point. The complete absence of an internal environment occurs at Absolute Zero temperature, which of course is impossible to reach.

This knowledge leads to the understanding that an object expelling itself of its internal environment collapses towards the formation of a line structure or a point, while an object reversing this flow of environmental direction expands and grows in size and develops into any of an almost limitless amount of shapes and possible configurations.

Section Seven – Soulular Theory of DNA Patterning

Section Six – Environmental Law leads to the Soulular Theory of DNA Patterning, which states that DNA is the patterning mechanism through which advanced shapes arise, come about, and copy each other, but all of this is always accomplished through the underlying intelligence of the will of the original point that is aptly called the soul, in addition to existent environmental vectors that place forces and attributes upon the point.

Since reality is the shared band of perception between souls, and souls live within reality as forms of objects, mass, and life forms, DNA records all past histories on a physical sense, where the soul records all knowledge on a spiritual or mental sense. When life procreates, it passes physical knowledge from old structures to new structures, and the driving soul manipulates this physical knowledge to suit its preferences and likings.

Section Eight – Point Construction Theory of Intelligence and Sentiency

The Soulular Theory of DNA Patterning subsequently leads to the Point Construction Theory of Intelligence and Sentiency. The Point Construction Theory of Intelligence and Sentiency states that the more intelligent sentient-points become, the more the sentient points are able to manipulate, construct and control forms and effects they desire to achieve through the process of manipulating and controlling less intelligent and less sentient, or at least less aggressive/more amiable, points. It is known that humans are made up of a seemingly limitless amount of individual points, yet we view through the eyes of only one supreme consciousness, without a great deal of regard for any other individual point. If our supreme consciousness decides it wants its form to lose weight, the desired form will consist of far less points than the heavier form, yet the supreme consciousness, or point, or soul, remains in every bit as it always was.

Section Nine – Playing with Dimension Theory

All shadows exist as images or consequences of their reflective selves. All lower dimensions exist within higher dimensions, and all higher dimensions are image reflections from the whole of one, or the true self. From this, it is said that, “to know one’s shadow, is to know one’s inner self.”

Since a pecking order exists, it is fun and intriguing to play with words and their meanings in an effort to decipher the order of the Universe and the very dimensions themselves.

I spent a little bit of time playing with some key precepts through the process called word association. Though I am not positive that I have their order right, I will share with you what I wrote:

noughtia

reflection

whole of one

reflection

time

reflection

perception

reflection

knowledge

reflection

awareness

reflection

reality

reflection

imagination

reflection

displacement

reflection

self-delusionment

reflection

noughtia

The above word association displays the thought that dimensions exist in a cyclical cycle of space and time, where the past reflects upon the future, and the future is constructed by the shadows of the past.

Part Fourteen – Advanced Thought

Section One – Solving i

Back in Part Seven – Soulular Theory of Perception: Section Four: The Creation of Synergenestic Mathematics a new formula was introduced where infinity plus 1/infinity was hypothesized to equal zero. Although there is no way to check the validity of this theory, in terms of correctness, the formula does give rise to a whole new area of thought, as representative by the following question:

What number added to its reciprocal equals zero?

The above question is interesting in that the number cannot be zero itself, as any number divided by zero is termed undefined, so if we were to let 0 + 0/0 = 0, we encounter the problem 0/0 is undefined.

So given that bit of information, we know that the only way to have zero equal a number that is added to the reciprocal of itself equal zero (X + 1/X = 0, which I like to call the Additive Equation of the Reciprocal Balance of Zero), a number that is not equal to zero must be used for X.

The answer to this question is, of course, i.

i + 1/i = 0;

i + 1/i - 1/i = 0 - 1/i;

i = -1/i;

i² = -1;

i = (-1)^0.5

(i = the square root of negative 1).

In mathematics we are allowed to raise both sides of an equation by the same exponential power without changing the balance of the actual problem, that is if 2 + 3 = 5, then (2 + 3)² = 5². We will do this several times for i = (-1)^0.5:

i¹ = (-1)^(0.5)(1);

i = (-1)^0.5;

i² = -1.

i² = (-1)^(0.5)(2);

i² = -1.

i³ = (-1)^(0.5)(3);

i³ = (-1)^3/2;

i⁵ = (-1)³;

i² = -1.

i⁴ = (-1)^(0.5)(4);

i⁴ = (-1)²;

i^(4)(0.5) = (-1)^(2)(0.5);

i² = -1.

All of our exponential states for i break down to i = (-1)^0.5. This is rather interesting as it can be proved that i always has two separate values associated to it at the same time:

i = (-1)^0.5;

i² = -1;

(-1)i² = (-1)(-1);

(-i)² = 1;

(-i)^(2)(0.5) = 1^0.5;

-i = 1;

i = -1.

So we know that i = (-1)^0.5 = -1, and solving for our original exponential problems yields the following:

i¹ = (-1)¹ = -1;

i² = (-1)² = 1;

i³ = (-1)³ = -1;

i⁴ = (-1)⁴ = 1.

Because by definition i¹ = i, i² = -1, 1³ = -i, and i⁴ = 1 = i⁰, the following must also be true:

i¹ = i = -1;

i² = -1 = 1;

i³ = -i = -(-1) = 1 = -1;

i⁰ = i⁴ = 1 = 1.

This is rather interesting as we can see that both i² and i³ have states where they equal i⁴ (i⁴ = i³ = i² = 1), and simultaneously have states where they equal i¹ (i¹ = i² = i³ = -1). That i² and i³ both have answers that equal to 1 and -1 at the same exact time, where i¹ is always equal to -1 and i⁴ is always equal to 1.

In layman’s terms, a situation must exist for i where we have an X and a Y axis, each revolving around the central connecting point of balance at the same time, which would lead to a condition of non-locality of i (if we were at i⁰ or i⁴ we could not see i¹, if we were at i² we could not see i³, and so on for all opposing quadrant positions of i). Since i⁰ is by definition the “origin point” of i and therefore always equals a positive value of one in our traditional mathematical (numbers) system, we would naturally assume that since i¹ is always equal to -1 when i⁰ is equal to +1, that there would be an equation that is expressible solely in terms of i⁰ that would always equal +1 for all terms in i⁰, i², and i³, but would be equal to -1 for all terms in i¹ even though we would not be able to define them from our i⁰ location that simply cannot see i¹ terms at all, and there should also be a tie that would link everything together and show that 1 = -1 on a mapping system where 1 would be a positive position on the +X,+Y quadrant and -1 would be a negative position on the -X,-Y quadrant, where the intersection point of the quadrants would be equal to 0 and written as:

+X,+Y = +0,+0 = 0X,0Y = -0,-0 = -X,-Y

(where +X,+Y = i⁰, -X,-Y = i¹, X = 0, and Y = 0),

which would translate in equational form into a 1 = -1 = 0⁰ type of relationship for expressing equations in either terms of X or in terms of Y. From here it could be seen that if either or both positions of X and Y were not at the 0X, 0Y grid-location, the following relationship would result:

X in the +X,+Y coordinate = -Y in the -X,-Y coordinate

and Y in the +X,+Y coordinate = -X in the -X,-Y coordinate.

What we would be looking for in order to validate all of this is an equation that would give us a positive equational relationship of 1 = 1 for all values not directly in the -X,-Y quadrant (i¹), and a negative equational relationship of 1 = -1 (or undefined) for all values in the i¹ quadrant in relationship to the values not in the i¹ quadrant, where it would be okay for 0⁰ to result in both of them if that situation is shown to be present between their boundaries. The reason why this would work as it does is because looking at our mathematical (numbers) system from only one-way results in a blind side that is equivalent to the i¹ quadrant (see Section Two: Explanation of Vectral Mathematics for a fully-detailed discussion upon the short-sightedness of our current mathematical (numbers) system and how it is fixed).

The equation needed is called “Adam Pellegrino’s Hidden Quadrant One of i Equation” and is presented below where A represents any value point of (X,Y) in our explained grid system that we care to examine:

A^A + A^A = 2(A^A+A)^0.5.

for any positive value, for negative values it would be

-1(A^A + A^A) = -2(A^A+A)^0.5.

where A is equal to the absolute value of the negative number

Any variable, value, or equation may be converted into its equivalent representation of i through the equation of [X(-1/X)]^0.5 = i, where X = any variable, value, or equational representation that is in the same state of itself. This equation is what I like to call the “Balancing Equation of i.” The vast implications of the Balancing Equation of i, and how to derive it, will be fully brought out to you under the next section.

Section Two – The Quantum Field of the Soul

The Quantum Field of the Soul is where everything, and yet nothing exists at the same time, it is a place where everything is in flat-spacetime and yet, one particle has somehow managed to turn away from all of the rest, creating a situation where everything that was relative no longer is where it was a moment before.

In Part Seven: The Soulular Theory of Perception, many things were written in correspondence to the belief that everything is created when a single particle we named as “God” turns away from all of the rest; that everything everywhere exists and has a soul attached to it, even the littlest of dust specs that scream out that they are indeed important and relevant to our existence. Those dust specs are after all at least 1/∞ in size, and are separate wholes of 1 (individualized dust specs) in and of themselves. I also showed how dividing 1 by 3 and multiplying back displaces 1/∞ particles of the 1, and statements were made that read, “It therefore can be seen that one particle misplaced makes an infinity of particles exist but you complete it back, and all of these infinities never were. Without the displacement of God, we simply do not exist as the individualistic i’s that we are.” We shall now proceed to the theology of what happens to missing particles found within our ones.

What happens to the whole of 1/i of God? The answer is relatively clear, all of us (and all individualistic particles) can be seen as 0.9’s to the infinity 9’s with 1/∞ of displacement (1/∞ unit of God), which then means that in the position God once was, 1/∞ of all of us (and all that is) exists as a reflective whole of the 1 of everything that is God (all of God’s reflective 1/∞’s in everyone reflected together), this makes us whole as a unit of one again, but different from the whole of one that we were one reflective moment before, which effectively creates the advent of time, which started with the displacement of God (1/∞), which is one particle of all of us and all that is, at the point of i to the zero power of time. God then reflects onto all of us at all times to continually create the next reflective whole of one, which is just so much more than zero, it is an ancient suppository of all of our knowledge during all of our reflected-previous units of time. Or at least all of this would be the case unless what is presented beneath were not more true.

The zero point of the Quantum Field of Flux in Relationship to the Soul, is a point without any motion, without any movement, without anything, it is a perfect state of harmonic balance with everything within its place, within a restful non-existent realm of noughtia. Unfortunately an equation exists that undoes it all, that creates something out of nothing, that enables such a wonderful realm to no longer be. That formula is undoubtedly the worst formula to ever exist and it goes like this 0 = i + 1/i. In order for our perfect realm of noughtia to exist, lousy little i’s must exist to equate it out to be equal to itself. In order for there to be a 1/i there must also be a mirror image i/1 somewhere else to balance it out, which again wouldn’t be so bad until we realize that i can be seen to represent infinity itself, which now means that we have an infinity of these horrible little i beings all over the place multiplying onto themselves into an infinity of new dimensions. So at this moment of time we look at the equation of 0 = i + 1/i and decide that it would be much better if it were turned around so that is i + 1/i = 0 instead and we can now get rid of all the pesky little i creatures and have our peace and quiet and tranquility and order back, but then the situation would be that 0 = i + 1/i once again and such a cycle just gets a bit depressing over eons and eons of time, and some of the i’s also begin to get smart to all of this and try to figure out ways for their reality to always continue to exist. This leads to the next question of how this may be done?

As pointed out earlier, it could be done by a single particle displacing itself in relationship to the rest so that perfect alignment can never be achieved, and this would be done by mirroring everything together so that the displaced particle (“God”) is 1/∞ into all of the other parts, and all of the other parts are 1/∞ into the one, where they continue to flip and to turn and try to get back into perfect alignment as before, but it just is no longer possible to ever be there again, unless that particle turns back, but by then everything else will flip over as well and it just wouldn’t be possible. This is the situation that was mentioned already above, but it may not fit so well with the mathematics of i as a more creative solution that is now going to be shared with you.

Instead of one particle getting displaced and reflecting into all other particles, and all other particles reflecting into where that one particle once was (and subsequently each particle flipping and flopping about each other in a quantum field), it is possible that all particles, at the same time, act in cohesive unison and simultaneously turn and move with each other in such a way that all particles reflect 1/∞ of themselves into all other particles at the same time, but in different order and angular arrangements so that no two are ever the same (as in relativism), all of the particles would always continue to exist and could build and form stuff together in a reflective type of order of say i¹, to i², to i³, to i⁴ where an eternal reality could be formed, where all i’s are in unison with each other, even though they are individualistic and different. That none of them could ever cease to be, but may move about and change forms from one time to the next without ever breaking any reflective laws of the order. It would also mean that one could reflect into one’s own-self and feel apart of the whole of everyone together, and even be able to glance into the ancient suppository of knowledge that must exist between them all as a record of the passage of time. It would then be seen that the gateway and passage of the soul leads into eternal knowledge, but since i’s are individualistic so too would be their equanimities.

Section Three – Solving Bell’s Inequality

In 1935 Albert Einstein, Nathan Rosen, and Boris Prodolsky collaborated with each other to conduct experiments to demonstrate what they felt represented an incompleteness in the field of quantum mechanics. There work lead to what is now called the EPR paradox and Bell’s Inequality.

EPR is paramagnetic resonance (also known as electron spin resonance and magnetic resonance). It is the process of resonant absorption of microwave radiation by paramagnetic ions and molecules, containing at least one unit of unpaired electronic spin, within a static magnetic field. Paramagnetic resonance was discovered by Evgeny Zavoisky in 1944.

The EPR paradox is about momentum; it states that you cannot know the momentum and the position of a subatomic particle at the same time, that you can put a subatomic particle into well-defined momentum, but cannot know its location, and conversely you can know its location, but not its momentum at the same time.

John Bell formulated the EPR paradox into equational form in 1964, in what is now known as Bell’s Inequality. Bell’s formulas are as follows:

N(X+,Y-) = N(X+,Y-,Z+) + N(X+,Y-,Z-)

and

N[X+,Y+] < or = to N[X+,Z+] + N[Y-,Z-]

where

X = X-axis; Y = Y-axis; Z = Z-axis

+ and - behind X, Y, or Z represents spin, where + is one direction, and - is the other

N = the number of photons experienced.

Solving this problem is rather simple if you use pyramidical modeling to set conceptualize and structure. First thing we do is to realize that X has two states, positive or negative, so if we were to flip a coin half of the time it should come up positive (+) and the other half negative (-), if we had a penny, we could represent the penny with an X, so that we may draw our first level of its diagramical pair (by recording the number of times the penny comes up heads N(X+) and the number of times the penny comes up tails N(X-):

N(X+) N(X-)

A penny is fun, but it is cheap. So lets add to our experiment by flipping a dime every time we flip our penny, and every time we get an X+ we will flip a corresponding dime (Y) and record the results of the dime flip under it, which now gives us our first two diagramical pair levels:

N(X+) N(X-)

N(Y+) N(Y-) N(Y+) N(Y-)

That was easy, so now lets add a quarter (Z) and record its flip (spin) under record every state of Y, that is, we shall toss the penny, the dime, and the quarter upon the floor all at once, then record the penny first as being + or -, then under that record the dime as being + or -, and then under that record the quarter as being + or -, where + = heads, and - = tails, which now gives us our first three levels of diagramical pairs (and the last since I am poor and have no more coins):

N(X+) N(X-)

N(Y+) N(Y-) N(Y+) N(Y-)

N(Z+) N(Z-) N(Z-) N(Z+) N(Z+) N(Z-) N(Z+) N(Z-)

Returning to Bell’s Inequalities where

N(X+,Y-) = N(X+,Y-,Z+) + N(X+,Y-,Z-)

and

N[X+,Y+] < or = to N[X+,Z+] + N[Y-,Z-]

We can explicitly see that N(X+,Y-) is equal to N(X+,Y-,Z+) + N(X+,Y-,Z-), and N[X+,Y+] is equal to or less than N[X+,Z+] + N[Y-,Z-] as N[X+,Y+] has only two states N[X+,Y+,Z+] and N[X+,Y+,Z-], whereas N[X+,Z+] + N[Y-,Z-] has four states N[X+,Y+,Z+], N[X+,Y-,Z+], N[X+,Y-,Z-], and N[X-,Y-,Z-]. This is interesting, cause N[X+,Y+] < or = to N[X+,Z+] + N[Y-,Z-] should always be the case for large numbers, but if we have small numbers it is possible to obtain a greater number of penny head, dime head, and quarter tail combinations, than the number of all of the other combinations combined. The second equation of Bell’s Inequality is therefore false. In the long run though, N[X+,Y+] < or = to N[X+,Z+] + N[Y-,Z-] would be seen to be true. When I first looked at Bell’s Inequality, I had a really hard time trying to understand why it was an inequality, every time I worked it I could not get it to be unbalanced. Since Bell has his inequality, as shown above, I shall now present what I call Pellegrino’s Equalities of Bell’s Inequality:

N(X+,Y-) = N(X+,Y-,Z+) + N(X+,Y-,Z-)

and

N[X+,Y+] + N[X+,Y-,Z+] + N[Y-,Z-] = N[X+,Z+] +N[X+,Y+,Z-] + N[Y-,Z-]

In solving this problem, we dealt with the case of a penny, a dime, and a quarter (I don’t really like nickels much), and assumed that the average number of head verses tail flips would be about the same, but in different systems, they could also be either equal all the time, or be like a set of loaded dice, where certain results occur more often than others all the time, making actual probabilities different than 50/50.

If we always had equal probabilities, the following relationship would be true:

4(X+) 4(X-)

2(Y+) 2(Y-) 2(Y+) 2(Y-)

1(Z+) 1(Z-) 1(Z-) 1(Z+) 1(Z+) 1(Z-) 1(Z+) 1(Z-)

This relationship shows that 4(X+) = 2(X+,Y+) + 2(X+,Y-) = (X+,Y+,Z-) + (X+,Y-,Z+) + (X+,Y-,Z+) + (X+,Y-,Z-) equals 4(X-) = 2(X-,Y+) + 2(X-,Y-) = (X-,Y+,Z-) + (X-,Y-,Z+) + (X-,Y-,Z+) + (X-,Y-,Z-). The drawn out relationships when all numbers distributions are equal to the above expected distributions are:

N(X+,Y-,Z+) = N(X+,Y-,Z-) = N(X+,Y-,Z-) = N(X+,Y-,Z+)

= N(X-,Y+,Z+) = N(X-,Y+,Z-) = N(X-,Y-,Z+) = N(X-,Y-,Z-)

Given unequal distribution probabilities where certain outcomes are expected to occur more times than others (60% heads expected to 40% tails instead of 50% heads to 50% tails, based upon coin modifications) then the following relationship would occur (where p = the percentage probability of occurrence for each bracketed outcome set in relationship to the sum of all of the others; N = the number of X,Y,Z flips observed; and all the other variables are as previously defined): N = pN(X+,Y-,Z+) + pN(X+,Y-,Z-) + pN(X+,Y-,Z-) + pN(X+,Y-,Z+) + pN(X-,Y+,Z+) + pN(X-,Y+,Z-) + pN(X-,Y-,Z+) + pN(X-,Y-,Z-).

It should also be pointed out that (X+,X-) = the whole of one penny; (Y+,Y-) = the whole of one dime; and (Z+,Z-) = the whole of one quarter, and any [X,Y,Z] combination is a whole of one complete set of flips. X, Y, and Z, even though they have different monetary values, still possess the same value of either being face up or face down, so that the + of X+ equals the plus of Y+ as well as the plus of Z+, and the reverse is true for all of the minuses. It can also be shown that the + states are equal to being 1/+ when the - states occur. The reason for this being relativity. Relativistically speaking, when the head side of the coin is not facing up, it is actually flipped over, and not upon the Y side, so although Y represents 1/X, Y and 1/X aren’t actually the same as each other, we merely see the reverse side of the coin which is not actually the face of the head side of the coin at all, but rather carries its own images of reality upon it (instead of seeing Abraham Lincoln upon the up side of a penny, we see the Lincoln Memorial Building on the upside, which means the image of Abraham Lincoln is at the 1/X position, which is directly related to angular momentum in our previous section, L). If however such a coin were to land upon its side (sides are also parts of whole pennies, dimes, and quarters), Y would be seen to be equal to X in relationship to the + and - value being displayed, but Y would still be at the inverse side of X in terms of physical location. This situation is easily described by letting the X+-,Y+- condition be represented by i, where we shall call one side of the vertical rotation i when the head side is either at it or approaching it in regards to spin, and the other the reverse condition -i. We could also represent the slants of slanted coins by placing real numbers into the X position of the Balancing Equation i: [X(-1/X)]^0.5 = i.

A whole coin of a penny would be seen as (X+,X-) plus all of the area between X+,X- (interiorly and upon the edges). The entire description of the coin in motion is to put it mildly, overly confusing, not even to mention that there is simply no feasible way to record the location of the coin in relationship to all other coins and the outside world at all times in terms of percentage distributions (what percentage of time is a coin being flipped and is in motion in relationship to the percentage of time it is resting somewhere and being inert; and where is the coin in relationship to everything else at all times including every other coin, ever person, every tree, every rock, every star, every planet, etc.), this is just way outside of our capabilities of knowledge.

When dealing with particles within reality, such as photons, we are dealing with singular “whole” objects that are either in their prime states of being or constructed with other particles. Particles are singular forms; they are not three separated forms that are interrelated to each other, such as our quarter, dime, and penny were, instead of being in just one form such as a 36-cent piece, which simply doesn’t exist. All singular objects within reality must have their own form. A circle is said to be constructed of three separate spirals, but is in the form of one complete circle. Particles and forms that are not in prime particle states may be split apart; an example being that if you wanted to dismantle a completed puzzle into its separate parts you could do so and you would end up with multiple pieces, but if you were to take prime particles you would see a relationship where such particles would not be further divisible; if you collide an electron with a positron you obtain a photon pair, 2 = 2, not a solid object of just one (this occurs cause of the + and - condition of i, where a positron is + and an electron is -, so crashing them together creates a +-, and -+ condition of a photon pair; the angle of the crash may be of importance as I am not sure if such a photon pair always results upon all crashes.

What really happens when such crashes occurs is open to theoretical debate.

If we allowed the heads side of a penny to represent a positron, and the tails side of the penny to represent an electron (and flipped a dime after our penny flip, followed by a quarter after the dime, as we have done in our above examples), a positron would have two possible states of y-axis (dime flip outcomes given a heads penny flip) and four possible states of z-axis (dime-quarter flip outcomes given a heads penny flip), where an electron would have the same possible outcome numbers, which are really in reverse relativism to the heads side of the penny. In 3-dimensional form, such an object would look like an 8-sided die (like two 4-sided pyramids that share the same base and expand outwards in reverse directions to each other), where its sides would be labeled as follows in respective oppositions to each other, where the value of opposite sides sum to 9:

assigned die number = 8: X+,Y+,Z+

assigned die number = 7: X+,Y+,Z-

assigned die number = 6: X-,Y+,Z+

assigned die number = 5: X-,Y+,Z-

assigned die number = 4: X+,Y-,Z+

assigned die number = 3: X+,Y-,Z-

assigned die number = 2: X-,Y-,Z+

assigned die number = 1: X-,Y-,Z-

8-sided die numbers: 8 and 1 would be opposite sides; 7 and 2 would be opposites; 6 and 3 opposites; and 5 and 4 would be the last of the opposing sides. The values obtained by adding opposite sides together is always 9 which can be seen as 1 state of X plus 2 possible states of Y multiplied by 4 possible states of Z (1+2x4 = 9). If we were then to cut the die in half between die number 5 and die number 4 we would see the following:

8: X+,Y+,Z+ 4: X+,Y-,Z+

7: X+,Y+,Z- 3: X+,Y-,Z-

6: X-,Y+,Z+ 2: X-,Y-,Z+

5: X-,Y+,Z- 1: X-,Y-,Z-

If you examine the X+, X-, Y+, and Y- positions, you will realize that this is the same as a 2-dimensional map-grid where X+ represents the direction to the north, X- represents the direction to the south, Y+ represents the direction to the west, and Y- represents the direction to the east. Z+ and Z- then represents 3-dimensional map positions upon quadrant related maps of X and Y, where the quadrants are divided in half from their zero points of origin and expanded outwards, Z+ on the northern sides of diagonal lines and Z- on the southern sides of the diagonal lines (the split of Z into the opposite directions of Z+ and Z- is representative of colliding a positron with an electron and obtaining a photon pair where the photons rotate in opposite directions of each other).

I do not believe for an instant that colliding a particle with an anti-particle results in the annihilation of a particle, as energy is neither created nor destroyed, but only changes forms making annihilation of anything on the smallest level of particles impossible (positrons and electrons are seemingly opposite particles that would annihilate each other upon contact, but since the destruction of energy is not possible, their annihilation is also not possible, and a seemingly new 3rd-dimension of Z is created between the two existent dimensions of X and Y represented by positrons and electrons). Clashing a positron with an electron actually produces a photon pair (in the case of electron and positron you can think in the annihilation of quark and anti-quark to produce two photons), which leads to the question of, “what do you get when you collide two photons together?”

Returning to the diagram, if assumed that one photon of a photon pair were represented by the diagram, then the other photon of the photon pair would be represented by a diagram where the polarities of the Z+ and Z- bars were reversed. Such a reversal of Z+ and Z- polarities would then display the situation present on either a heads or tails flip of our previous variable of X, which represented a penny flip, if we had recorded the tails state of things rather than the heads state of things (X+ called tails, instead of X+ called heads). Reality would then exist through two opposite viewpoints of the same state of being (positive and negative motion), which would represent and generate the entire spectrum of imaginary numbers as discussed in earlier chapters, as well as allow for, originate, and produce the existence of the reality-based illusion of 3-dimensional space (in terms of thermodynamics, heat and cold oppose each other by traveling through separate channels of the same system, this kind of relationship is also present in the -i - 1/i = 0 = i + 1/i equational equilibriums of i and 0).

Through imaginary numbers, all energy particles at the smallest (sub-molecular) level of things would be constantly flowing against other sub-molecular particles, and although strong energy patterns would be largely unaffected most of the time, all energy would actually be constant, but in relativistic change of order and positionings in relationship to other forms and embodiments of energy. This line of reasoning is my solution to, or explanation and argument against, the zero-point-energy field as depicted by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle that claims particles and anti-particles zip into and out of existence by annihilating each other so mind-bogglingly fast that nobody actually notices them at all (energy is being wrongly created and destroyed).

Section Four – Black Holes, Black Mass, and the Fabric of Time

The problem with defining the entire universe to be the direct result of a single big bang is that we quantify an infinite value as a finite value. In effect, we seek perfect balance and symmetry in a universal system, which by itself is not perfectly in balance or complete. What I provide within this book are the building blocks of quantum mechanics and existence as a whole. I have shown to you the very laws of which reality requires to be reality, have shown to you vectral mathematics and the fundamentals of imaginary numbers, have displayed and explained the diagrams and the equations of relativistic energy, have shown to you the necessity for perfect balance to always exist within a realm of reality which would be analogous to absolute zero and thermal oblivion, and have even provided the solution to Bell’s Inequality, and now I shall also give to you the logic behind the creation of black holes and the existence of black mass within our universal system.

It is well accepted that lightspeed is the fastest rate of speed possible within any system, but many levels of speed exists. As mentioned in the beginning of the book, light beams of different colors travel at different rates. It is also quite logical to assume that if polarized light rotates, that the rotation would adjust the observable speed of light, as the rotation itself would represent increased speed over the speed that is already represented by C alone (or most likely subtract from C).

We examine color discrepancies (missing colors) between bright light and dark light spectrums. It would seem logical that such discrepancies would represent different speeds of the rotation rate of light. Perhaps the most notable implication of this hypothesis is that every color within existence would be viewed as having its own rotational rate of speed, or perhaps even its own angle of rotational momentum based upon the particle makeup of which it is represented.

It is also of my belief that the perceptive rate of light (the apparent motion of light faster than lightspeed) is what causes the illusion of mass to form, and the density (hardness, compaction, or whatever you would like to call it) is actually based upon the perceptive speed of light beyond that of lightspeed (objects such as diamonds would have an incredibly fast perceptible embodiment of lightspeed while objects such as marshmallows would have substantially lower perceptible speed embodiments of lightspeed, also since the color black is said to contain all colors and the color of white is said to be the absence of all colors, black would be perceptively much faster than the color of white, black cars do appear to look faster than white cars).

It is my contention that lightspeed is the fastest rate of speed possible within any individual system, but many levels of lightspeed actually exist, as represented by the numbers and shades of colors in a color wheel.

By the above type of reasoning, black mass areas that we observe throughout our universe would be completely explainable under the hypothesis that the black mass regions of space are actually energy systems that contains a faster rate of lightspeed motion than that of our own. The speed of our lightspeed itself may very well be based entirely upon the Big Bang explosion that physicists claimed occurred in the creation of our universe, but as I claim, it is but one of a great many different Big Bangs within our infinite universe, which would represent different energy systems with different perceptible lightspeed rates of motion. Black holes would then be the center of balances (junction points) that equate different embodiments (systems) of C together. Junction points allow numbers and equations from different numbers systems to be able to convert into the valuations of other number systems.

My uncle once posed the question to me of, “if you travel at the speed of light, and then turn on your headlights, what would happen?” I never quite knew what would happen, but I had always imagined that the light would still travel at lightspeed from away from me from the location at which I turned on the headlights, what never occurred to me though, was that to everyone who was at a slower rate of speed then myself at the time the headlights were turned on, would not actually be able to see the light traveling at all but instead could quite possibly see a black mass spectrum representing the path of that light within a new energy measurement system (a system that would exist beyond the perceptible speed of light within our system).

Junctions are points shared between two or more systems of measurement, they can be viewed rather nicely through the imaginary number system, where i is defined as it always has been in the book’s previous sections. If space-time were flat we could take the origin of i, which would be represented by i⁰, and expand i out into one direction of movement, in order for it to cycle between the valuation of 1 and -1. We would call the web-like structure that is created the Fabric of Time (rather than flat spacetime, curved spacetime would have valuations of i expanding out in all directions of 3-dimensional space at once, amazingly, this type of image structure is exactly the image structure that seems to be observed when examining plants, which is really where I obtained the idea of this theory from).

The Fabric of Time

The passage of the time of i in one of four quadrants, representational of two-dimensional space-time:

The zero-point of i (origin of time):

i⁰

The first whole moment of time:

i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴

i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

The second whole moment of time:

i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

The first moment of time, shown with all four quadrants present (red indicates points of balance shared in common between quadrants):

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

i³ i¹ i³ i¹

i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i²

i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

i³ i¹ i³ i¹

i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i²

i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

The second moment of time, shown with all four quadrants present:

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹

i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i²

i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹

i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i²

i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹

i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i²

i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹

i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i²

i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³ i¹ i³

i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴ i² i⁴

Every ring of i (there are four rings to the above diagram, kind of like rings you would find and count within the center of a tree when examining the age of a tree) contains four more i’s than the ring that came before it.

Other questions that interest me in terms of Black Hole Theory are my personal questions of: “Is a black hole hot or cold?” (I would imagine black holes to be infinitely hot since they contain all colors and are said to be compressive in nature, at the same time, they could have a hollow center, which would be infinitely cold, this assumes the presumption that black holes are viewed as entry portals from one equational realm to the next); “What would happen if you fly a frictionless craft through a black hole?” (Without friction, you would assume no gravital effect to be present upon the craft, allowing it to move faster than other perceivable light, meaning that our craft would actually be able to reach the center of the black hole and pass through it without the time discrepancy black holes are known for, still without friction, you would assume that our craft would simply pass right through the center of the black hole and keep moving within our current energy system); so the last question that interests me is, “What would happen if you flew a frictionless craft to the center of a black hole, and then turned off the craft’s anti-friction field?” (Would the craft be instantly crushed by the present forces, or would the craft complete the hypothetical hole that is hypothetically in the center of the black hole, leaving the craft intact and dispersing the black hole itself, or would something completely different happen, like being able to move from one system of reality into a corresponding system of reality by passing through a gateway?).

Section Five – Notes on Thermal Oblivion

The title of this book is Thermal Oblivion and outside of a few brief references and one page at the very beginning of the book, little thus far has really proven that Thermal Oblivion actually exists. Chapter One: Thermal Oblivion aptly showed that if balance exists within all things, then if the state of Absolute Zero were able to exist at a Universal level so to must there be a state of Thermal Oblivion in existence to counter it. This was hypothesized to be possible due to the existence of both negative and positive energy states. That in order for Absolute Zero to exist for positive energy, Thermal Oblivion would exist for negative energy at the same location only in reverse states of Thermology, extreme heat rather than extreme cold. Likewise, the reverse order would be true at the other extreme of the temperature gauge. The problem with believing in Thermal Oblivion is that our reality is based primarily upon positive energy, and since space is seen to be infinite, particles could indefinitely spread further and further away from each other into infinity making absolute heat seem impossible; this problem however, will be shown to validate Thermal Oblivion entirely.

Retrospectively, the entire relationship between Absolute Zero and Thermal Oblivion can be summed up through the concepts of heat and compaction, and cold and dispersion. Notice the order in which I placed these in, in comparison to how Thermal Oblivion and Absolute Zero were originally defined in Part One. In Part One, we described Thermal Oblivion to be a state where maximum dispersion and fluidity occur, while Absolute Zero was the state in which maximum structure and compaction were obtained. How is it possible that both definitions are the same as each other only reflectively opposite? The answer as already stated, is that the extremes are based as opposites of each other in relationship to positive and negative energy. Which brings on the next question of, “For positive energy, does Thermal Oblivion occur at the state of Absolute Zero in our reality or, or does Absolute Zero occur for positive energy at Absolute Zero?” The answer is surprising.

To approach zero degrees Kelvin (our definition of Absolute Zero, within our reality) positive energy is removed in physics labs to approach closer and closer to the zero Kelvin state. D.L. Hotson’s article entitled, “Dirac’s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy,” 2002, Issue 43 of Infinite Energy points out that when all of the positive energy is released, that a state of seemingly endless energy exists, and since all positive energy is gone, the energy that is present must in fact be negative energy, not positive energy. Leading back to my observation that Absolute Zero does not occur for positive energy at zero degrees Kelvin, but instead for negative energy, as displayed by clinical observations that when zero degrees Kelvin is very near being approached a solid form tends to appear, which of course cannot be constructed from positive energy since it pretty much has been removed in its near entirety. Absolute cold occurs when all positive energy has been removed within a location of our positive reality. This really means that zero degrees Kelvin, positive energy is fully dispersed away from the said location, but negative energy in the area is fully structured.

If positive energy expands and disperses outwards into a universe of infinity, what makes one believe that Absolute Zero actually exists for positive energy in our positive realm of reality? The answer to this is provided to us in our knowledge of friction. Objects that are compacted and being compacted give off heat, not objects that are without compaction, such is the case for ultimate dispersion. If instead of removing all the positive energy from a location, we instead compacted it into the location, the location would not be seen to be approaching Absolute Zero, but would rather be seen to approach Thermal Oblivion instead. The more we compact positive energy together, the hotter the area of compaction becomes through order, friction, and pressure. To approach Thermal Oblivion, all that is necessary is to compact positive energy into an area as tightly as possible expelling away all negative energy that is present. Extreme temperatures occur upon the approach of extreme limits of compaction, which explains why the Universe as a whole (space as a whole) within our reality is rather cold, given an incredibly small fixed (or bounded) amount of mass within the compaction of the infinity of space.

Returning to the last statement of the opening paragraph, “The problem with believing in Thermal Oblivion is that our reality is based primarily upon positive energy, and since space is seen to be infinite, particles could indefinitely spread further and further away from each other into infinity making absolute heat seem impossible; this problem however, will be shown to validate Thermal Oblivion entirely.” As implied in the paragraphs above, the state of positive energy spreading further and further apart leads towards the state of Absolute Zero, in terms of our experienced reality, not the state of Thermal Oblivion! Heat, the act of positive energy moving towards Thermal Oblivion, occurs in our reality cause the mass of compaction occurs within our reality, and compaction, the gathering together of positive energy, is what makes time possible in our dimension, which is really interesting to note cause if the extreme compaction of positive energy enables the positive direction of time to occur, then what must the extreme compaction of negative energy do within our reality in terms of experiencing time? This obviously leads into black hole structurings and time dilations.

Section Six – Life on Mars, Just Add Comets

We have all seen Hollywood movies where we had to destroy comets and asteroids that were about to plunge into the Earth, ending life upon the planet as we currently know it. But what if, instead of ending life, comet impacts could instead bring about, create, and foster not only life, but a breathable and prosperously abundant atmosphere and ecological system as well? I personally like to play with the idea that if we could change the paths of comets that are on a path to hit the Earth, that we could also change paths of comets so they can be directed at hitting other planets such as Mars, in order to supply them water.

A comet hitting a planet will dissolve to some extent, or even entirely, upon hitting the planet’s stratosphere, all depending upon the size and the speed of the comet that goes over or hits the planet. What size of a comet, or how many of a smaller size, would be needed to allow a planet of a given size enough water to allow the planet to retain the water and to generate and develop an atmosphere capable of life?

Modern physicists have named areas within our solar system and galaxy that contain conditions that might potentially be able to contain and support life as “Habitable Zones.” Under this Habitable Zone Concept planets are believed to need to be close enough to a sun for solar energy to drive the essential components of life. I personally have to fully reject this shortsighted thinking of a planet being reliant upon the closeness of a star as a necessity for life upon a planet. The reason for this is that if the planet were warm enough due to its internal volcanic activity (and planets further out than the Earth are actually quite capable of being warmer than the Earth for this reason alone), then solar energy fails to be needed for warmth. Additional I watched a program on either the learning or the discovery channel that showed that life had been found upon Earth in an underwater or underground chamber that was not influenced by the sun at all (my memory may be off but this is what I remember once watching).

The Gulf Stream is responsible for keeping much of the planet out of being in an ice age. There are many currents in the oceans and other waters that act the same way, to circulate heat from warmer water areas to colder water areas (from the thermal equator to the outlying areas, but it would make no difference if the water were really heated by the warmth of the sun or the warmth of the planet’s core, heat is heat whatever its source may be). This knowledge leads to a key driving force in how warmth of a planetary system actually works, in terms of keeping water liquid and life possible. Whether we go into an ice age or jungle-like heat depends not only upon the heat of the closest star, the warmth of the inner planetary core, but also upon something as simple as salt. The salt content in the gulf stream determines if Europe will be covered in ice or warm and habitable. Too little salt, and Europe freezes over, too much salt and Europe becomes a desert with searing heat.

On Earth we have tons of salt, I could find no estimate on how much salt we actually have, but am sure it would be easy enough to calculate by figuring out how much water is in each major lake, ocean, and sea and corresponding their salt content percentages to their water volumes. I also researched where salt comes from and how we originally got our salt. Most of what I could find said that our salt comes only from salt water, that it exists no where else, not in mines, not in underground deposits that did not once contain salt water. I did find mention that salt is created when water pours over rocks, that such an action draws up salt from existent rocks (I am not really sure if this is true, and it seems as if all of our oceans have major salt content, that running water over rocks alone would not account for the major amounts of salt that is in our oceans, furthermore, you would assume that all our fresh water lakes would be anything but fresh water as they too contain rocks and have rivers flowing into them that go over rocks).

I personally play with the idea that our water, and our salt (which somehow is only derived from salt water) came not from the construction of the planet, but rather from a salted ice comet or multiple salted ice comets that plunged into our planet long ago. The idea that comets actually contain salt is from what I can tell contra to what our physicists believe that they are constructed of (my online research indicated they were primarily frozen water, with methane, carbon monoxide, hydrogen cyanide, methyl cyanide, with traces of formaldehyde and chunks of dirt). This idea that comets contain large portions of salt leads to the question of what happens to salt water in the vacuum of space in comparison to just water in the vacuum of space, and which is the more logical form for comets to be in. If Mars has salt (and it does), does that mean it once had oceans, or does it mean it once was hit by a comet. In either case, Mars no longer has water upon its surface, and if it does not, what happened to it? If Mars once had oceans, you would think that Mars’ atmosphere would have been such that it constantly cycled its water as Earth does now.

One thought on how planets retain their water and form breathable atmospheres is that they must not only have water, but they must also have sizable seismic activity. The reason for this is that without plate tectonics, gases that are constantly being absorbed into the ground will never be adequately released back into the atmosphere, and without sufficient amounts of carbon dioxide outside of the ground, a planet will not retain water upon its outer surface, it will either burn up entirely or find its way into becoming trapped into the interior of the planet. This knowledge leads to many questions concerning Mars itself. Mars as compared to the Earth is a fixed planet, it does not have tectonic plates as Earth does that moves around and releases gas in a never-ending style. Mars does not have that many volcanoes, nothing like the amount Earth does. The volcanoes on Mars are viewed as being recently active; all signs show that volcanic activity occurred upon Mars not long ago. The question then becomes, if Mars once had oceans or lakes or held water, and its plate tectonics were always as they are now, why would Mars lose its water to begin with, or why would it have collected all of the water it originally had? Mars seems to be presently as seismically active as it ever was. On the other hand, if a comet had plunged into Mars and the water and its salt were from that comet, it would make perfect sense why Mars did not retain its water given a lack of proper vitalization. It would of only held water until the comets ice fully melted and burned away from the planet (this is time enough to have some life and perhaps to make some microscopic fossils).

If we could somehow figure out a way to combine Mars with numerous and sizable enough comets, as to give it water enough to form a breathable atmosphere, our problems would be the following: 1. How can we develop a ventilation system on mars to kick out gasses such as carbon dioxide?; 2. How much water is really needed to emulate the amount of water we contain upon Earth (since we know that Earth’s ecological system currently works)?; and 3. How much salt is needed to allow Mars to be warm enough to have and retain liquid water (Mars already has some salt beneath its surface, and if comets actually contain salt as I suspect, this can be worked out, the more salt the more warmth given water movement and flow). Besides plate tectonics, water, and salt, a planet also needs some sort of satellite or moon that will pull its water as our moon does. The reason for this is that the Earth’s moon is responsible for stabilizing the planet, as well as for creating our waves and winds, without which the salt content isn’t of any real importance since the water would be relatively still and unable to warm the planet through resultant streams of currents.

Creating plate tectonics may not be so hard to do. If you gathered up all the water upon Earth and froze it solid, hurled it through space, and crashed it into our planet, I would assume that our planet would not only have sizable dents in it (like the dents of our current oceans) but would also form cracks within the planet itself much like cracking an egg without actually breaking it. The Earth’s plate tectonics might actually give ample support to the idea that we were actually hit by a large and sizable comet, and although Mars has signs of salt and subsequently lost water, it too might have been hit by a comet, but not one large enough or fast enough to crack its interior as much as the Earth. This could explain why we have water now, and Mars does not.

If we can find a way to deflect asteroids and comets from hitting the Earth, could we not try to use or develop such technology so that we can actually steer comets to go where we want them to, and at speeds we wish them to go? If a planet does not have water, could we not use comets to supply them with it? If a planet does not have a moon for stability, could we not give place an asteroid into orbit around it so that it does? I know all of this sounds far fetched, but then again two hundred years ago, a simple car was far fetched. The truth is we know that substantial amounts of comets exist in the Oort Cloud and the Kuiper Belt, so we can find and select what we want easy enough as long as we can manage to someday get there, so can we figure out a way to measure their compositions, and herd them to where we want them to go and at speeds we wish them to go, and to impact planets at forces that would provide proper plate tectonics that we feel would be necessary to both create and maintain a long-term self-sustaining atmosphere? We currently have lasers, and atomic bombs, both of which we feel we can adjust the movement of asteroids and comets with, surely we can figure this type of thing out, how to make a seemingly dead planet habitable and capable of sustaining real life.

For simplicity purposes, lets say we did crash a comet into Mars, and it did crack the planet in such a way that it would have a properly functioning plate tectonic system allowing gasses to be properly released back into its atmosphere when its comet ice melts (a lot of this ice may be liquid upon arriving simply by passing through the stratosphere). Also, would internally trapped water resurface from the interior of Mars? If all of this were to work, would we need to seed Mars with life, or will life already be there or self-develop?

My ideas on life is that all life requires water, that all life survives off of the consumption of other life, that all life consists of water (has a water content), that all life simply exists, but cannot be really created nor destroyed, in the same way that all energy is said to exist and yet is neither created nor destroyed. It is obvious that babies are born, that people, and all other living things die sometime, but these bodies are merely forms of life, it is my contention that actual life such as what you may call the soul, is more eternal, that all life continues on and builds other forms. The most interesting form of life in my estimation is that of a microscopic creates called the “water bear”. Its tiny, it looks like a bear, it has legs, claws and feet, it has eyes and is colorful, it is cute and cuddly like a gummy bear is cuddly, yet without water it does not die, instead it remains dormant until it get wet again. Water bears are found all over this planet including within in, and even in toxic areas and under icebergs. The vacuum of space does not kill water bears; for water bear life, just add water. Who is to say that Mars does not already have such “just add water” creatures upon it, and if it does, who is to say what such creatures will develop and evolve into? This line of thinking about life is rather radical, but my mind has never been good at being that concrete.

I like to step outside of the box a bit and imagine a comet the size of all the Earth’s oceans put together is about to crash into our planet (we might not have a comet of such size in this solar system, but I still would like to imagine it), that if I were to look up into the sky all I could see is a huge clump of ice for as far as I can see trying to land gently upon our surface, well not really gently, but gently enough to just create our plate tectonics that we have now. I like the idea that a comet could have been where our water originally came from.

If we could direct comets onto Mars, we could also move our moon when it is needed to avoid 100,000 years or more of ice age at a time. The closeness of our moon determines our wind and our waves, which determines the strength of our currents, which given our amount of salt, determines how warm our planet really is or becomes. If a system were in place where we could constantly adjust our moon’s distance from the Earth to our liking, we could literally control our warmth and weather to the extent that we need never to have another ice age or to burn up in excessive heat ever again. Think about what we could accomplish in terms of ensuring the long-term life of our human race, think about how we can develop and populate planets in our future.

Whatever we are capable of doing, it seems logical to assume that somewhere, at some time, whatever we do has been done in some regards or to some extent already. Could our planet of had a comet crash into it on purpose, could the life forms upon Earth been seeded by a distant planet? Were, or are, we an experiment?

Additional Notes: Mars contains polar icecaps, but the ice that constructs the icecaps is dry ice. Dry ice when melted skips from a solid state to a gaseous state, completely avoiding the liquid state of water. The puzzle of Mars is that Mars contains a layer of salt slightly below the surface. If salt is formed only by water running over rocks and sediment over time, then melting dry ice would never accomplish the formation of salt as it would never become liquid. Water on the other hand could not have been on Mars originally and then changed into dry ice form after the essential elements necessary for liquid water became trapped within Mars’ crust, simply for the reason that Mars has never had the required plate tectonics necessary to hold water upon its surface. The only conclusions or theories that I personally can come up with for a layer of salt being spread like it is under Mars’ surface is that a comet of sizeable proportions hit Mars not that awfully long ago (when measured by the age of our solar system) and melted (which could have created some salt through erosion), but when melted, the surface of Mars did not release essential gasses back into the atmosphere and dry ice solar-caps formed as the result; the other theory is that Mars, like our moon, were once a part of Earth itself and chipped off forming their own bodies when the Mega-Earth was hit by a massive exploding force, either from technological super-weapons of an ancient race, or by the impact of a comet, asteroid, other planet, or the ilk.

Section Seven – Definition of a Planet

I would like to state that for me regardless of any organizations such as the International Astronomical Union (IAU), the real definition of a planet is a celestial body that generates a self-contained external atmosphere and orbits around a star. Pluto orbits around the sun and produces its own self-contained external atmosphere and is therefore a planet. If Pluto orbited around something other than the sun, such as a planet, it would be a moon (moons are celestial bodies that orbits around a planet, our moon is said to not have its own atmosphere). If Pluto did not have a self-contained atmosphere, it would be a satellite of the sun. The size, shape, or particular star that a planet may orbit around makes absolutely no difference to its classification as a planet (meteors and comets may be planets, satellites, or whatever as long as definitional requirements are met). As long as the three criteria for being a planet are met (celestial body, self-contained external atmosphere, orbits a star) it doesn’t even matter if the construction of an object is natural, man-made, or other (a lake that is man-made lake is still a lake).

Concurrently, the definition of a moon is a celestial body that generates a self-contained external atmosphere and orbits around a planet.

Section Eight – Goal of Man; Goal of Species; Goal of Humankind

The goal of any species, including that of humankind, is to expand territory, populate, and ensure the survival of the race. Reduced down, the goal of man is to populate and control the general health (survivability) of our state within the universe.

Only when we can openly and readily travel, explore, settle, and populate distal regions of space can we be free of the restrictions of the societies and social structures that are in place upon Earth. The problem with Earth is that there will never be peace upon it given its finite resources.

The success of our species relies upon our ability to travel and colonize away from Earth, as well as all other areas that will eventually fall, collapse, and even explode in the passage of time. Until we have developed and mastered sufficient means of stellar travel, our species sits upon an ever ticking time bomb that will eventually go off leading to the extinction of every species fully contained within its wake. As we currently are now, our species is a failed one, a species without an expectant continuality of a long-term future.

If we are to survive into the long term, we must put forth the effort to explore and expand upon whatever type of life exists for us out in space, regardless of whether there are any short-term profits in it, or the only stellar objects we are currently able to encounter are as barren as rock.

The media has often wondered what the human interest is in shows such as Star Trek and other such sci-fi programs, the general conclusion is typically exploration, new technologies, and the hope of a better future. I think the reasons that are overlooked are the expansion and survival of the species and the intellectual stimulation and ever increasing freedoms that such growth provides.

I believe that all governments of our planet owe it to all people to support, advance, work together, and openly encourage efforts of stellar travel and space colonization for the future survivability of not only our species but all of the other species we elect to take with us, and I’m not just saying that just because I would sincerely like everyone to get off of the planet.

Part Fifteen – The Correct Mathematics of Physics

Section One: The Origin of Speed

The mathematics of this section irrefutably proves that the origins of acceleratory speed starts from a value of zero, that accumulatory speed starts from a constant valuation of speed as present from time zero of a time series, but of which the constant valuation of speed at time zero constitutes the aggregation of all acceleration before time zero of the time series. Such an aggregate speed, the accumulative sum of all acceleration before time zero has an initial start value equal to zero. All of this is irrefutably proven through mathematical structure alone, of which the science, physics, and mathematical associations seemingly care nothing about (all I have received from efforts of contacting such organizations is total resistance to even examine such findings, and more disinheriting responses of, “why should we care.” No offense but, if such organizations don’t care about mathematics and physics why are they even such organizations to begin with?). I care about physics and am doing my best to present this information to the general public as the organizations that should champion such proof that the world is not flat, that the physics system as generally known and accepted is based upon incorrect mathematical structure, seem to care only about their own selfish prides, power to subjugate others, and bottom lines. Such organizations boast the most intelligent leaders of science, mathematics, and physics and must really find it offensive that anyone not of their flock rewrites their foundations making their geniuses look foolish. To such organizations, I can only say, “get over yourselves by embracing both correct mathematical structure and the truth.”

The equational structure and formulas presented in this section are very important. Even if you disagree with the non-mathematical text and surrounding suppositions the formulas themselves hold up, and are completely proven within the confines of a spreadsheet (I prefer to be evaluated upon the mathematics, and the mathematical structures presented). Unlike what the rest of the world has in terms of equations, these energy equations actually work, balance out, and allow for the variability of mass (note: the equations still work when mass is held as non-variable, but also work when mass is variable; formulas utilized by the science, physics, and mathematical societies are lacking in this area). The mathematical structure that is presented within this section should be applicable to many different base formulas besides what is aptly covered, additional uses would be equations that are similar to the formulas presented below, such as the distance of a falling object increases as a square of time (rather than speed) and the inverse square law for magnetic fields.

All of the following formulas are accurate (if you would like to verify the equations it is recommended that you create a spreadsheet to observe what is occurring):

A = Acceleration = current speed - previous speed = 2(S - d/t) = 2(St - d)/t;

a = Total Average Acceleration = S/T = Ss/D = (0.5A + d/t)/T;

D = Total Distance = sT = Ss/a = s(0.5A + d/t)/a = D₀ + sum of all (d) since T₀ = sum of all (d).

d = Interval Distance = current total distance - previous total distance = t(interval average speed) = t(S - 0.5A) = 0.5t(2S - A);

S = Speed = aT = Da/s = 0.5A + d/t = S₀ + sum of all (A) since T₀ = sum of all (A);

s = Average Speed = D/T = Da/S = Da/(0.5A + d/t);

T = Total Time = D/s = S/a = (0.5A + d/t)/a = T₀ + sum of all (t) since T₀ = sum of all (t);

t = Interval Time = current total time - previous total time = d/interval average speed = d/(S - 0.5A) = 2d/(2S - A);

A/t = Average Rate of Interval Acceleration = 0.5[S² - (S_X-1)²]/d = 0.5(S + S_X-1)(S - S_X-1)/d;

2Ad/t = A(2S - A) = S² - (S_X-1)² = (S + S_X-1)(S - S_X-1);

Da = Ss;

S_X-1 = previous S at 1 interval back = S - A;

D₀ = Total Distance at T₀ of Time Series = D - sum of all (d) since T₀ = sum of all (d) up to and including T₀;

S₀ = Speed at T₀ of Time Series = S - sum of all (A) since T₀ = sum of all (A) up to and including T₀;

T₀ = Point on Time Series where Time equals Zero = total time - sum of all (t) since T₀ = sum of all (t) up to and including T₀;

S² = 2 sum of all (Ad/t) = 2 sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ + (S₀)² = (S_X-1)² + 2Ad/t;

(S₀)² = S² - 2 sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ = (S - A)² - 2[sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ - Ad/t] = (S - A)² - 2 sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ + A(2S - A) = (S - At)² - 2 sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ + At(2S - At);

0.5S² = Total (Ad/t) = sum of all (Ad/t) = sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ + 0.5(S₀)²;

Interval Average Acceleration = d/t = S - 0.5A = 0.5(2S - A).

The above formulas are modifiable into acceleratory equations by setting D₀, S₀, and T₀ = 0 at T₀. Unless starting at the origin of time itself, D₀, S₀, and T₀ are artificial starting points upon a newly created time series (if you were in a race, you would measure how fast you ran with T₀ being the moment the stating gun fired, and by setting the moment of which the gun went off equal to zero, where your starting distance would also be zero, even though time existed before the gun went off, you were on a planet that was already moving before the gun sounded, and your position to the rest of the universe subsequently changed in unison to the motion of the planet). Acceleratory equations express changes in speed caused from acceleration and are only representative of actual speed when the initial at rest speed is correctly factored in. The word “acceleratory” is used here to mean any portion of an equation that changes in value due to the change of another variable relative to a series containing a predefined point of origin, such as T₀. T₀ automatically includes gravity, and other forces such as electromagnetic and friction into acceleratory equations relative to corresponding non-acceleratory equations. A variable expressed with a subscripted _A is acceleratory; variables A and T are not likewise notated as their values are the same as the already presented A and t formulas.

A = Acceleratory Acceleration = current acceleratory speed - previous acceleratory speed = 2(S_A - d_A/t) = 2(S_At - d_A)/t;

a_A = Total Average Acceleratory Acceleration = (sum of all A since T_A,0)/T_A = S_A/T_A = S_As_A/D_A = (0.5A + d_A/t)/T_A;

D_A = Acceleratory Total Distance = s_AT_A = S_As_A/a_A = s_A(0.5A + d_A/t)/a_A = sum of all (d_A) since T_A,0;

d_A = Acceleratory Interval Distance = current acceleratory total distance - previous acceleratory total distance = t(interval average acceleratory speed) = t(S_A - 0.5A) = 0.5t(2S_A - A);

S_A = Acceleratory Speed = a_AT_A = D_Aa_A/s_A = 0.5A + d_A/t = sum of all (A) since T_A,0;

s_A = Average Acceleratory Speed = D_A/T_A = D_Aa_A/S_A = D_Aa_A/(0.5A + d_A/t);

T_A = Total Acceleratory Time = D_A/s_A = S_A/a_A = (0.5A + d_A/t)/a_A = sum of all (t) since T_A,0;

t = Acceleratory Interval Time = current total acceleratory time - previous total acceleratory time = d_A/interval average acceleratory speed = d_A/(S_A - 0.5A) = 2d_A/(2S_A - A);

A/t = Average Rate of Interval Acceleratory Acceleration = 0.5[(S_A)² - (S_A,X-1)²]/d_A = 0.5(S_A + S_A,X-1)(S_A - S_A,X-1)/d_A;

2Ad_A/t = A(2S_A - A) = (S_A)² - (S_A,X-1)² = (S_A + S_A,X-1)(S_A - S_A,X-1);

D_Aa_A = S_As_A;

S_A,X-1 = previous S_A at 1 interval back = S_A - A;

D_A,0 = Total Acceleratory Distance at T_A,0 of Time Series = D_A - sum of all (d_A) since T_A,0 = 0;

S_A,0 = Acceleratory Speed at T_A,0 of Time Series = S_A - sum of all (A) since T_A,0 = 0;

T_A,0 = Starting Time of Acceleratory Time Series = T_A - sum of all (t) since T_A,0 = 0;

(S_A)² = 2 sum of all (Ad_A/t) since T_A,0 = (S_A,X-1)² + 2Ad_A/t;

0.5(S_A)² = Total(Ad_A/t) = sum of all (Ad_A/t) since T_A,0;

Interval Average Acceleratory Acceleration = d_A/t = S_A - 0.5A = 0.5(2S_A - A).

Subsequent mixed equations (equations using both acceleratory and non-acceleratory variables) are:

a = Ss_A/D_A = s_A(S_A + S₀)/D_A = s(S_A + S₀)/D;

a_A = S_As/D = (S - S₀)/T;

d = d_A + S₀t = d_A + t(S - S_A);

d_A = d - S₀t = d - t(S - S_A);

D = D_A + S₀T_A + D₀ = S_As/a_A = s(S_A + S₀)/a;

D_A = D - S₀T_A - D₀ = S_As/a_A - S₀T_A - D₀;

D₀ = D - S₀T_A - D_A = S_As/a_A - S₀T_A - D_A;

Ds_A = D_As;

Da_A = S_As;

D_Aa = Ss_A;

s = Da/S = Da/(S_A + S₀) = Da_A/S_A = Da_A/(S - S₀);

s_A = D_Aa/S = D_Aa/(S_A + S₀);

S = S_A + S₀ = a_AT + S₀ = a(S₀T_A + D_A + D₀)/s;

S_A = S - S₀ = a_AD/s = S - (d - d_A)/t;

S₀ = S - S_A = S - a_AD/s = (d - d_A)/t = (D - D_A - D₀)/T_A;

t = (d - d_A)/S₀ = (d - d_A)/(S - S_A);

T = T_A + T₀ = (S - S₀)/a_A = (D - D_A - D₀)/S₀ + T₀;

T_A = T - T₀ = (S - S₀)/a_A - T₀ = (D - D_A - D₀)/S₀;

T₀ = T_A,0 = T - T_A = (S - S₀)/a_A - T_A = T - (D - D_A - D₀)/S₀;

S² = (S_A + S₀)² = (S_A)² + 2S_AS₀ + (S₀)² = (S_A)² + 2SS₀ - (S₀)²;

(S_A)² = (S - S₀)² = S² - 2S_AS₀ - (S₀)² = S² - 2SS₀ + (S₀)²;

(S₀)² = (S - S_A)² = (S_A - S)² = S² - 2SS_A + (S_A)² = S² - 2S_AS₀ - (S_A)² = (S_A)² + 2SS₀ - S².

More equations manifest when ∆ is used to represent changes in variables:

∆ = Change in;

A = ∆S = ∆S_A;

∆(d/t) = ∆(d_A/t) = 0.5(A + A _X-1);

∆(Ad/t) = Ad/t - (Ad/t)_X-1 = (∆A)d/t + (A - ∆A)∆(d/t) = A∆(d/t) + ∆A(d/t - ∆(d/t));

∆(Ad_A/t) = Ad_A/t - (Ad_A/t)_X-1 = (∆A)d_A/t + (A - ∆A)∆(d_A/t) = A∆(d_A/t) + ∆A(d_A/t - ∆(d_A/t);

Ad/t = sum of all ∆(Ad/t);

Ad_A/t = sum of all ∆(Ad_A/t);

(Ad/t)_X-1 = Ad/t - ∆(Ad/t) = (A - ∆A)(d/t - ∆(d/t);

(Ad_A/t)_X-1 = Ad_A/t - ∆(Ad_A/t) = (A - ∆A)(d_A/t - ∆(d_A/t).

All formulas presented so far can be used for the formalization of mass by letting S = mass, A = change in mass/t, and D = total accumulation of mass; the negative value of accumulation is called distribution. Equations for mass result as follow:

U = Accumulation of Mass = current mass - previous mass = 2(M - n/t) = 2(Mt - n)/t;

u = Total Average Accumulation of Mass = M/T = Mm/N = (0.5U + n/t)/T;

N = Total Accumulation of Mass = mT = Mm/u = m(0.5U + n/t)/u = N₀ + sum of all (n) = sum of all (n);

n = Interval Accumulation of Mass = current total accumulation of mass - previous total accumulation of mass = t((interval average accumulation of mass) = t(M - 0.5U) = 0.5t(2M - U);

M = Mass = uT = Nu/m = 0.5U + n/t = M₀ + sum of all (U) since T₀ = sum of all (U);

m = Average Mass = N/T = Nu/M = Nu/(0.5U + n/t);

T = Total Time = N/m = M/u = (0.5U + n/t)/u = T₀ + sum of all (t) since T₀ = sum of all (t);

t = Interval Time = current total time - previous total time = n/interval average speed = n/(M - 0.5U) = 2n/(2M - U);

U/t = Average Rate of Interval Accumulation = 0.5[M² - (M_X-1)²]/n = 0.5(M + M_X-1)(M - M_X-1)/n;

2Un/t = U(2M - U) = M² - (M_X-1)² = (M + M_X-1)(M - M_X-1);

Nu = Mm;

M_X-1 = previous M at 1 interval back = M - U;

N₀ = Total Accumulation of Mass at T₀ of Time Series = N - sum of all (n) since T₀ = sum of all (n) up to and including T₀;

M₀ = Mass at T₀ of Time Series = M - sum of all (U) since T₀ = sum of all (U) up to and including T₀;

T₀ = Point on Time Series where Time equals Zero = total time - sum of all (t) since T₀ = sum of all (t) up to and including T₀;

M² = 2 sum of all (Un/t) = 2 sum of all (Un/t) since T₀ + (M₀)² = (M_X-1)² + 2Un/t;

(M₀)² = M² - 2 sum of all (Un/t) since T₀ = (M - U)² - 2[sum of all (Un/t) since T₀ - Un/t] = (M - U)² - 2 sum of all (Un/t) since T₀ + U(2M - U) = (M - Ut)² - 2 sum of all (Un/t) since T₀ + Ut(2M - Ut);

0.5M² = Total (Un/t) = sum of all (Un/t) = sum of all (Un/t) since T₀ + 0.5(M₀)²;

Interval Average Accumulation of Mass = n/t = M - 0.5U = 0.5(2M - U).

The above formulas can be modified to become accumulatory equations by setting N₀, M₀, and T₀ at T₀ = 0. Mass is seldom looked at from a starting accumulatory standpoint set equal to zero, rather mass is largely viewed with a starting value equal to the weight, size, or composition of an object; historically, speed and mass are valued differently when placed into the same equational structures (starting speed = 0, starting mass = weight), though for no reason other than how we observe. The word accumulatory isn’t found in dictionaries, but intuitively means “of an accumulative nature,” and is used here to mean any portion of an equation that changes in value due to the change of another variable relative to a series containing a predefined point of origin, such as T₀. T₀ automatically includes gravity, and other forces such as electromagnetic and friction into accumulatory equations relative to corresponding non-accumulatory equations. Accumulatory equations express changes in mass caused from accumulation and are only representative of actual mass when the initial at rest mass is correctly factored in. A variable expressed with a subscripted _U is accumulatory; variables of U and t are not likewise notated as their values are the same as the already presented U and t formulas; Accumulatory T is subscripted with an _A, as T_U is just another title for T_A.

U = Accumulatory Accumulation of Mass = current accumulatory mass - previous accumulatory accumulation of mass = 2(M_U - n_U/t) = 2(M_Ut - n_U)/t;

u_U = Total Average Accumulatory Accumulation of Mass = (sum of all U since T_A,0)/T_A = M_U/T_A = M_Um_U/N_U = (0.5U + n_U/t)/T_A;

N_U = Accumulatory Total Accumulation of Mass = m_UT_A = M_Um_U/u_U = m_U(0.5U + n_U/t)/u_U = sum of all (n_U) since T_A,0;

n_U = Accumulatory Interval Accumulatory of Mass = current accumulatory total accumulation of mass - previous accumulative total accumulatory of mass = t(interval average accumulatory accumulation of mass) = t(M_U - 0.5U) = 0.5t(2M_U - U);

M_U = Accumulatory Mass = u_UT_A = N_Uu_U/m_U = 0.5U + n_U/t = sum of all (U) since T_A,0;

m_U = Average Accumulatory Mass = N_U/T_A = N_Uu_U/M_U = N_Uu_U/(0.5U + n_U/t);

T_A = Total Accumulatory Time = N_U/m_U = M_U/u_U = (0.5U + n_U/t)u_U = sum of all (t) since T_A,0;

t = Accumulatory Interval Time = current total accumulatory time - previous total accumulatory time = n_U/interval average accumulatory mass = n_U/(M_U - 0.5U) = 2n_U/(2M_U - U);

U/t = Average Rate of Interval Accumulatory Accumulation = 0.5[(M_U)² - (M_U,X-1)²]/n_U = 0.5(M_U + M_U,X-1)(M_U - M_U,X-1)/n_U;

2Un_U/t = U(2M_U - U) = (M_U)² - (M_U,X-1)² = (M_U + M_U,X-1)(M_U - M_U,X-1);

N_Uu_U = M_Um_U;

M_U,X-1 = previous M_U at 1 interval back = M_U - U;

N_U,0 = Total Accumulatory Accumulation of Mass at T_A,0 of Time Series = N_U - sum of all (n_U) since T_A,0 = 0;

M_U,0 = Accumulatory Mass at T_A,0 of Time Series = M_U - sum of all (U) since T_A,0 = 0;

T_A,0 = Starting Time of Accumulatory Time Series = T_A - sum of all (t) since T_A,0 = 0;

(M_U)² = 2 sum of all (Un_U/t) since T_A,0 = (M_U,X-1)² + 2Un_U/t;

0.5(M_U)² = Total (Un_U/t) = sum of all (Un_U/t) since T_A,0;

Interval Average Accumulatory Accumulation of Mass = n_U/t = M_U - 0.5U = 0.5(2M_U - U).

Subsequent mixed equations (equations using both accumulatory and non-accumulatory variables) are:

u = Mm_U/N_U = m_U(M_U + M₀)/N_U = m(M_U + M₀)/N;

u_U = M_Um/N = (M - M₀)/T;

n = n_U + M₀t = n_U + t(M - M_U);

n_U = n - M₀t = n - t(M - M_U);

N = N_U + M₀T_A + N₀ = M_Um/u_U = m(M_U +M₀)/u;

N_U = N - M₀T_A - N₀ = M_Um/u_U - M₀T_A - N₀;

N₀ = N - M₀T_A - N_U = M_Um/u_U - M₀T_A - N_U;

Nm_U = N_Um;

Nu_U = M_Um;

N_Uu = Mm_U;

m = Nu/M = Nu/(M_U + M₀) = Nu_U/M_U = Nu_U/(M - M₀);

m_U = N_Uu/M = N_Uu/(M_U + M₀);

M = M_U + M₀ = u_UT + M₀ = u(M₀T_A + N_U + N₀)/m;

M_U = M - M₀ = u_UN/m = M - (n - n_U)/t;

M₀ = M - M_U = M - u_UN/m = (n - n_U)/t = (N - N_U - N₀)/T_A;

t = (n - n_U)/M₀ = (n - n_U)/(M - M_U);

T = T_A + T₀ = T_U + T₀ = (M - M₀)/u_U = (N - N_U - N₀)/M₀ + T₀;

T_A = T_U = T - T₀ = (M - M₀)/u_U - T₀ = (N - N_U - N₀)/M₀;

T₀ = T_A,0 = T_U,0 = T - T_A = T - T_U = (M - M₀)/u_U - T_A = T - (N - N_U - N₀)/M₀;

M² = (M_U + M₀)² = (M_U)² + 2M_UM₀ + (M₀)² = (M_U)² + 2MM₀ - (M₀)²;

(M_U)² = (M - M₀)² = M² - 2M_UM₀ - (M₀)² = M² - 2MM₀ + (M₀)²;

(M₀)² = (M - M_U)² = (M_U - M)² = M² - 2MM_U + (M_U)² = M² - 2M_UM₀ - (M_U)² = (M_U)² + 2MM₀ - M².

More equations manifest when ∆ is used to represent changes in variables:

U = ∆M = ∆M_U;

∆(n/t) = ∆(n_U/t) = 0.5(U + U _X-1);

∆(Un/t) = Un/t - (Un/t)_X-1 = (∆U)n/t + (U - ∆U)∆(n/t) = U∆(n/t) + ∆U(n/t - ∆(n/t));

∆(Un_U/t) = Un_U/t - (Un_U/t)_X-1 = (∆U)n_U/t + (U - ∆U)∆(n_U/t) = U∆(n_U/t) + ∆U(n_U/t - ∆(n_U/t);

Un/t = sum of all ∆(Un/t);

Un_U/t = sum of all ∆(Un_U/t);

(Un/t)_X-1 = Un/t - ∆(Un/t) = (U - ∆U)(n/t - ∆(n/t);

(Un_U/t)_X-1 = Un_U/t - ∆(Un_U/t) = (U - ∆U)(n_U/t - ∆(n_U/t).

Mass can be expressed with speed, acceleration, and distance, without utilizing variables U and N, as follows:

∆M = M - M_X-1;

M = M_X-1 + ∆M = M₀ + sum of all ∆M since T₀ = sum of all ∆M since moment before origin of M;

M_X-1 = M - ∆M = M₀ + sum of all ∆M since T₀ - ∆M;

M₀ = M at T₀ of time series = sum of all ∆M since moment before origin of M up to and including T₀;

M_Origin = the value of M upon initial instance of origin, creation;

MAd/t = total ∆(MAd/t) = sum of all ∆(MAd/t) = (MAd/t)_X-1 + ∆(MAd/t) = total (MAd/t) - total (MAd/t)_X-1;

Total (MAd/t) = sum of all (MAd/t) = total (MAd/t)_X-1 + MAd/t = M_UAd/t + 0.5M₀[S² - (S₀)²] - sum of all [(∆M - T∆M)(Ad/t - ∆(Ad/t))] since T₀ = MAd/t + 0.5M₀[S² - 2Ad/t - (S₀)²] - sum of all [(∆M - total ∆M)((Ad/t - ∆(Ad/t))] since T₀ = Mad + 0.5M₀[S² - 2Ad - (S₀)²] - (t - 1)M_UAd/t - sum of all [(∆M - total ∆M)((Ad/t - ∆(Ad/t))] since T₀;

(MAd/t)_X-1 = total (MAd/t) - ∆(MAd/t) = (M - ∆M)(A - ∆A)[d/t - ∆(d/t)] = (M - ∆M)[Ad/t - ∆(Ad/t)] = (A - ∆A)[Md/t - &∆(Md/t)] = [d/t - ∆(d/t)][MA - ∆(MA)];

∆(MAd/t) = MAd/t - (MAd/t)_X-1 = ∆M∆A∆(d/t) + [∆MAd/t - M∆A∆(d/t)] + [M∆Ad/t - ∆MA∆(d/t)] + [MA∆(d/t) - ∆M∆Ad/t] = MA∆(d/t) + ∆(MA)[d/t - ∆(d/t)] = M∆(Ad/t) + ∆;M[Ad/t - ∆(AD)] = M∆Ad/t + ∆(Md/t)(A - ∆A);

[∆(MAd/t)]_X-1 = (MAd/t)_X-1 - (MAd/t)_X-2 = [∆M∆A∆(d/t)]_X-1 + [∆MAd/t - M∆A∆(d/t)]_X-1 + [M∆Ad/t - ∆MA∆(d/t)]_X-1 + [MA∆(d/t) - ∆M∆Ad/t]_X-1 = [MA∆(d/t)]_X-1 + [∆(MA)(d/t - ∆(d/t))]_X-1 = [M∆(Ad/t)]_X-1 + [∆M[Ad/t - ∆(AD)]]_X-1 = (M∆Ad/t)_X-1 + [∆(Md/t)(A - ∆A)]_X-1.

The term “(∆M - total ∆M)(Ad/t - ∆(Ad/t))” from the total (MAd/t) equations can be written as (total ∆M - ∆M)(∆(Ad/t) - Ad/t), -(∆M - total ∆M)(∆(Ad/t) - Ad/t), or -(total ∆M - ∆M)(AAd/t - ∆(Ad/t)), and still be correct. This relationship establishes what I like to call the Law of Vectors, which states that given numerical sequences of two variables (A and B) the following relationships are true: (A - sum of all A)(B - sum of all B) = (sum of all A - A)(sum of all B - B) = -(A - sum of all A)(sum of all B - B) = -(sum of all A - A)(B - sum of all B).

The Law of Vectors holds within itself an explanation and real solution to imaginary numbers. Imaginary numbers are from a weird type of mathematics that was created when individuals couldn’t figure out correct math. So instead of figuring out what was correct a mathematical system developed where the variable i⁰ represents a starting i (i stands for an imaginary number that doesn’t really exist) value of 1, i¹ equals a +i value, i² = -1, i³ = -i, and i⁴ restarts the cycle again as the equivalent value of i⁰. The imaginary number mathematical system can be easily replaced by the equation of (A - A_X-1)(A - B)/(|A - A_X-1||A - B|), as long as individuals are smart ennough to understand that when variables are in equational form you can in all correctness divide by zero and raise negative exponents by negative powers without coming up with undefined numbers due to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (note: values between brackets | | yield absolute values, |2 - 3| = 1).

Although 5/0, and (-1)^-1 are unsolvable as they are written (not in equational form), the moment they are placed into equational form they become relative to the equations they are placed into, and subsequently have real defined solutions. An equation of (-1)^-1 = X, is very easily solved as follows: -1 = X^-1; 1 = -X^-1; 1^-1 = -X; 1 = -X; X = -1; (-1)^-1 = -1. Setting up an equation where 5/0 = X is a bit more tricky in that for some inane reason most everyone elects to read the problem incorrectly. Although it is true that you can place 0 into 5 an indefinite amount of times (if 0 actually existed, which it doesn’t), the real solution is to read the equation correctly as how many zeros are in the number 5, of which there aren’t any as 5 obviously is not a 0 value (again, we know this to be true, as 0 doesn’t exist in reality but rather in abstract thought). If you have created a spreadsheet to check out all of the presented formulas, you will have noticed that your spreadsheet often comes up with undefined values including starting values of S₀, D₀, and so on, even though non-starting values of S₀, D₀, and so on are defined values that are constant throughout all time. Since there is only one value of S when time is at zero and that value is not undefined in the spreadsheet (given values for everything else), the old adage of any number divided by zero is undefined must be amended to state that any number not in equational form divided by zero is undefined, but becomes defined relative to any equation it gets put into. 5/0 = X, then X = 5/0. Placing 5/0 in for X results as 5/0 = 5/0; 5 = 5(0)/0 = 5(1) = 5. In this way, all division by zero (and negative exponents raised by negative numbers) errors are correctly done away with, and our mathematical system is placed into relativity.

Relativity is very important in equations, and real mathematicians (if there are any) always keep this in mind. If we have 3 apples and 2 oranges, we can say we have 5 fruit, and if we say a bear comes along and eats one of our fruit, we can say we have 4 fruit remaining. We also know that we have lost one fruit, which is one whole fruit, rather than one whole average value of a fruit, which would have been 60% apple and 40% orange (or one ugly, freak of nature apple-orange). If we did not see which fruit the bear ate, we cannot say which 4 fruit we have remaining without examining what is left, this displays the problem of mathematics when relativity is not taken into consideration. Although 3 apples and 2 oranges equal 5 fruit, 5 fruit can be of any type of fruit, and simply put apples do not become oranges even when you subtract 3 apples from 5 fruit, unless you know for sure that there were only 5 fruit to begin with and 2 of them were in fact oranges, in which case the solution to how many oranges you have remaining is relative to the well-defined equation.

Also in accordance to relativity, indefinitely repeating decimals resulting from mathematical operations of division contain a term that completes them. The division of one by three is one-third, 1/3 is not however 0.3 to the infinity 3, but rather is 0.3 to the infinity 3 plus 1/3 - 0.3 to the infinity 3. The last term is required to sum three separate 0.3 to the infinity 3 numbers back to the non-rounded whole number of one.

Returning to the mass, speed, distance, and acceleration equations, it is important to note that all influences, including but not limited to gravity, friction, and electromagnetic forces are already contained in the values of mass and acceleration. Such influences are either supportive or restrictive to mass and acceleration. Given fixed amounts of energy and mass, where mass is in a constant form, moving towards gravity will support the speed of an object increasing its acceleration, moving away from gravity will restrictively decrease acceleration by the current pull of gravity (this occurs at a decreasing slop), and should mass change in shape, the new aerodynamics of the mass will support or restrict acceleration accordingly. Changes in acceleration and mass include the effects of all outside forces, as well as all internal forces. Moving from one area to the next disperses mass through conversion of energy, which changes the allotment (sequence) of gravity.

Sir Isaac Newton’s Third Law of Motion states that every action consists of an equal but opposite reaction. For this reason, Newton’s definition of Force, which is written as F = MA, defines the italicized F and A as vectors in the same direction. Newton equated the formula of energy (in this case it would be kinetic energy, which is the energy of the motion of an object) as E = MAd (Newton did not distinguish E from e, though his equations are e; Newton’s studies examined acceleration and distance one moment at a time, as such his E = MAd equation is really e = MAd/t), and defined the energy of a falling object as E = Fd (transformed as e = fd/t).

Albert Einstein developed a formula which states that E = MC². The variable E in Albert Einstein’s equation is internal energy, M is a constant value of mass, and C is a very big number that Einstein postulated to be equal to the speed of light. From Einstein’s equation, mass may be viewed as the embodiment of energy (a composition or compacture of energy), and potential energy may be seen as the energy an object internally possesses; said differently, potential energy = internal energy, and total energy = potential energy + kinetic energy. Since potential energy is a system’s compositional sum of kinetic energy, the area of our universe known to us as the “Big Bang” Area, is not the only Big Bang area currently in the universe, as such an area of ours has a defined value of C which is not zero, making the energy formulas calculated from our Big Bang Area of the Universe accumulative rather than purely acceleratory in nature. If our Big Bang Area had a value of C equal to zero at Absolute Zero Temperature, and the value of C remained at a constant zero (rather than 299,792,458 meters, 1,860,000 miles per second), then our Big Bang Area would be both accelerative and accumulative, and would represent the whole of the Universe. Even if the speed of C should be examined based upon gravity wells, solar systems, or whatever instead of the area of the Big Bang, the background radiation temperature of the Big Bang Area still differs from Absolute Zero.

Speed of light is calculated by establishing a value for light relative to speed, time, and unit of measurement (such as meters, or miles). The speed of light in a vacuum has been calculated as 299,792,458 meters per second, which equivocates to 1,860,000 miles per second. These values break down to root numbers of (2)(7)(73)(293339) meters per second, and (2⁵)(3)(5⁴)(31) miles per second. The variable C is used to represent the speed of light. Under the notation system I use, capital C would be the summation of all c over the passage of time. As c is said to be a constant value (purposely written with a bit of sarcasm), the sum of all c over the passage of time equals cT; C = cT. Without sarcasm, and in conjunction with Einstein’s equation, the equation of c is: c = (sum of all energy in a system / sum of all mass in the system)^0.5. Personal note: to a living creature constant c is a body’s caloric rate of burn (metabolic rate) driven by the maintenance of a constant internal body temperature (a seemingly constant, but non-zero temperature) and the state (quantity, health, compaction, composition) of mass.

The speed of molecular motion in a system (the speed of change in a system) is c, and has a direct bearing to the system’s valuation of absolute zero (the temperature at which in a system all molecular movement stops). Absolute zero is a universal temperature that ties all gravity well areas together, but within the gravity wells, the actual value of when absolute zero occurs differs based upon the speed of c. The faster c is in a system, relative to its compaction in the system, the colder absolute zero is in terms of the measurement of degrees in comparison measurement units such as Celsius and Fahrenheit. Things are even a bit more complex than all of this in that the background radiation temperature of our Big Bang Area (2.726 to 2.728 degrees Kelvin) is slightly above Absolute Zero (demonstrating that our Big Bang Area is not to be considered the only one in existence as if it were its average temperature would be the value of Absolute Zero), and as heat and cold flow opposite of each other in accordance to the Laws of Thermodynamics, for our Big Bang Area to have an average temperature over Absolute Zero there must be one or more areas in the Universe with temperatures below Absolute Zero to balance the system out in a way in which the aggregation of all temperature in the Universe equals Absolute Zero (since from our viewpoint, all molecular motion stops at Absolute Zero, we most likely would not be able to visibly see or perhaps observe anything below Absolute Zero). If temperature exists within our Universe colder than Absolute Zero physics, as we know it, has just been blown apart.

It is my profound contention that the speed of light is determined by the amount (composition, type, compaction, etc.) of mass present in a gravity well system, such as the combined area of a Big Bang, or a solar system. I believe that the speed of light may well differ from one solar system to the next, and that the whole of the universe contains many gravity wells (each with their own speed of light and absolute zero temperature values), and each perhaps originating from their own central big bang areas, which there are to my belief many, and separate from the origins of which see and examine from the vantage of our own solar system. As this belief is completely at odds with current contentions, I shall succinctly point out that although you may not be able to travel faster than the speed of light, it is entirely possible for you to travel from point A to point B than light that is being shined through a black hole, by going around the black hole to get to point B. I contend that lightspeed is not constant, but that our perception of it is, as that is how we see.

Absolute Zero occurs at zero degree Kelvin (negative 273.15 degrees Celsius), and represents a lack of an internal environment, which results in what seems to be an unlimited stream of negative energy. The stopping point of all molecular motion appears to occur at the point in which negative energy is in perfect balance to positive energy. Perfect balance of positive and negative energy occurs at Zero Point Equilibrium. Zero Point Equilibrium exists when the value of c, the speed of light, is equal to zero (negative energy has yet to overcome positive energy, and positive energy has yet to overcome negative energy). To this end, I believe the amount of mass present at Absolute Zero determines the rate of super conductivity (fluidity), where mass (or at least the state of mass of which the imprint is no different than a strand of DNA) represents the physical embodiment of the endless record of time.

Imagine that with something as simple as eyes (which we shall call “eyes,” since such things are already called eyes), we could detect and view some sort of frequency that to us travels at the speed of light (which we shall term “c” and call light) in the same way that we hear things at the speed (frequency) of sound, but which does not prevent us from, lets say, traveling faster than the speed of sound, controlling the internal environment of whatever we are travel in (including g-force), or upon (like a planet), and being able to speak, talk, and hear normally. Now imagine, that if we view imagery that move up to the speed of light (since light is the medium through which we see), that we in all likelihood should not be able to see imagery moving faster than the speed of light while it is moving faster than the speed of light, but if it were to slow down from time to time, we should be able to see such imagery instantaneously from one location to another, kind of like how we could imagine something really fast, or faster than a quark moves. Now for the heck of it, lets entertain the notion that we could look deep into space and view what would appear to us as empty, colorless, black regions or areas of space, that would look empty and void to us since such systems would have a faster speed of C than our own (can someone inside a dark space area see our area other than something that is equally as dark, I believe so). A lot of farfetched imagining, I do admit, but you almost would believe that if such notions were true, our very own physicists wouldn’t be able to find most of the universe that they are directly looking at.

A center of gravity is a gravity well, not unlike a black hole (keep in mind that in the center of our galaxy is a black hole). The energy of a gravity well is the sum total of all of the energies of all of the masses the well is currently pulling towards itself. As many gravity wells exist (gravity wells may be viewed in many different ways, such as cells in our bodies, or computers linked together in a network each operating at its own central processing speed), each well will also have its own kinetic energy factor as other wells pull against it, not unlike the motion of rogue black holes. The sum of all the energies of all gravity wells in existence is the total energy of the universe, well almost. When gravity wells pull mass towards them, they really aren’t collecting all energy but rather all energy at rest, the portion attributed to kinetic energy actually escapes or is expelled. The true key to kinetic energy (the element that makes kinetic energy what it truly is) is an originating choice that may be attributed to sentiency. Black holes and gravity wells may suck up and compress all matter in the universe ridding sentiency of choice, the ability to move about in terms of acceleration/deceleration and location, but sentiency and intelligence of sentiency shall still exist apart from the immobile. When all that is left compacts together, gravity will cease to exist as gravity is a result of location between masses, as defined by Sir Isaac Newton’s Law of Gravity F_G = GM₁M₂r^-2 (where F_G = gravital force; M₁ = mass of object 1; M₂ = mass of object 2; and r = distance between M₁ and M₂), and without gravity holding everything together everything scatters in a great cosmic dispersion, not unlike the Big Bang. The end result of all of this, is that the location of all energy and mass within such an area, if it were at all possible to see, would appear to have moved from perhaps its last locational center of gravity of everything (with nothing else in existence, an object has nowhere to move relative to anything, except for its own knowledge/conception of itself or of those that have transcended its reality (time still continues on, and all current and past experience are forever recorded in time, as future events continue to be record able), in this way it is plausible to consider that all that is currently sentient was born in a Big Bang caused by the explosion (collusion) of all the energy that consisted of the whole of the parts, and that all that is sentient will be carried on into the never ending future.

As everything else that exists in physical reality, we exist as embodiments of kinetic energy, and are expelled from our physical forms when we die, in correspondence to the expelling of kinetic energy by black holes. Keeping in mind that within the realm of reality, energy is neither creatable nor destroyable but rather is always in constant state of changing form, the part of us that makes us who we are in no way escapes this rather simplistic physics law, to think otherwise is very nice but unfortunately against the laws of physics. We are sentiencies of motion, without motion time does not exist, and without sentiency reality fails to be. For individuals, death is only a passage into another realm marking a new beginning.

Before long, the entire universe shall, as we know it, be gone in a blink of an eye, to be replaced by another version that will emerge in its place (the same universe in different form). From the vantage of a gravity well, the collapse of the universe and time between intervals of movement, shiftings from one reality to the next, happens seemingly instantaneously as time within the center of gravity wells moves very slowly to those viewing time from further out, but very quickly to those viewing closer to the central core. What is said here is without the speed of motion of physical mass, we lack the ability to view and perceive existential reality as time for us fails to exist, and the time between our acknowledgement of existences is likewise non-existent to us, making us alive at all times (if time exists, mass exists, and we exist), if not in our current physical forms, then in another. Energy continues to exist and to change forms at all times.

When energy is being examined as measurements of fuel, units of e are always to be kept relative to their composition of M. A “fuel quotient” presents as: c_MassType = [(amount of e in “mass type”)(amount of M of “mass type”)]^0.5, where total energy of fuel of an object is the compositional sum of all its all c_MassType values expressed with universal measurement units. Fuel is the encapsulation of energy (including the coiling of a spring, “how magnetism works”) that is used to propel, and or, to otherwise move things about. All mass is encapsulated energy, of which its composition determines the potential effectiveness of its use as being fuel based upon the method of ignition or process of use of the fuel. When placed into a closed container and set upon a burner, pressure will build inside of the container until its containment field becomes too weak to contain the pressure inside, this leads to either an explosion, to the mass of the container being propelled based upon how the container is breached and the pressure is released.

All mass may be used as fuel, the type of mass involved determines how much heat is needed to convert it, how fast pressure will build inside a closed container, how explosive the discharge will become when a breach occurs, likewise, the container itself (structure, composition) is as important as the mass it holds within it in determining the final explosive results, as well as subsequential interaction with the outside environment upon such an explosion (an explosion of fire occurring upon cement will have little interaction, as compared to a explosion of fire occurring upon a bathtub full of oil).

Pressure release valves and fuselages allow for the precision of use and controlling of fuel. Spin, rotation of objects, revolving of planets and celestial bodies indicates that pressure exchanges are occurring. Compasses at the poles of the planet (north and south) spin. If you were to take a magnet and hold it either over or beneath a compass, the needle will lift or fall with respect to the charge and magnitude of the magnet in relation to itself, but will not spin, unless you spin or otherwise move or rotate the magnet. The direction in which spin occurs will be in correspondence to whether the magnet is above or below the compass and whether charges are negative or positive. The effect of which will be further influenced by the direction and speed of magnetic motion and the magnitude of magnetic forces (affected by the distance of the magnet from the compass as well as the power of the magnet), relative to all other influences that may exist outside of the magnetism and motion of the magnet being used to control.

Energy equations share the same equational structure presented for speed and mass. For the following equations, E = potential energy, Y = rate of kinetic energy, and K = summation of kinetic energy over time.

Y = Kinetic Energy = current potential energy - previous potential energy = 2(E - k/t) = 2(Et - k)/t;

y = Total Average Kinetic Energy = E/T = Ee/K = (0.5Y + k/t)/T;

K = Total Kinetic Energy = eT = Ee/y = e(0.5Y + k/t)/y = K₀ + sum of all (k) since T₀ = sum of all (k);

k = Interval Kinetic Energy = current total kinetic energy - previous total kinetic energy = t(interval average potential energy) = t(E - 0.5Y) = 0.5t(2E - Y);

E = Potential Energy = yT = Ky/e = 0.5Y + k/t = E₀ + sum of all (Y) since T₀ = sum of all (Y);

e = Average Potential Energy = K/T = Ky/E = Ky/(0.5Y + k/t);

T = Total Time = K/e = E/y = (0.5Y + k/t)/y = T₀ + sum of all (t) since T₀ = sum of all (t);

t = Interval Time = current total time - previous total time = y/interval average potential energy = k/(E - 0.5Y) = 2k/(2E - Y);

Y/t = Average Rate of Interval Kinetic Energy = 0.5[E² - (E_X-1)²]/k = 0.5(E + E_X-1)(E - E_X-1)/k;

2Yk/t = Y(2E - Y) = E² - (E_X-1)² = (E + E_X-1)(E - E_X-1);

Ky = Ee;

E_X-1 = previous E at 1 interval back = E - Y;

K₀ = Total Kinetic Energy at T₀ of Time Series = K - sum of all (k) since T₀ = sum of all (k) up to and including T₀;

E₀ = Potential Energy at T₀ of Time Series = E - sum of all (Y) since T₀ = sum of all (Y) up to and including T₀;

T₀ = Point on Time Series where Time equals Zero = total time - sum of all (t) since T₀ = sum of all (t) up to and including T₀;

E² = 2 sum of all (Yk/t) = 2 sum of all (Yk/t) since T₀ + (E₀)² = (E_X-1)² + 2Yk/t;

(E₀)² = E² - 2 sum of all (Yk/t) since T₀ = (E - Y)² - 2[sum of all (Yk/t) since T₀ - Yk/t] = (E - Y)² - 2 sum of all (Yk/t) since T₀ + Y(2E - Y) = (E - Yt)² - 2 sum of all (Yk/t) since T₀ + Yt(2E - Yt);

0.5E² = Total (Yk/t) = sum of all (Yk/t) = sum of all (Yk/t) since T₀ + 0.5(E₀)²;

Interval Average Potential Energy = k/t = E - 0.5Y = 0.5(2E - Y).

The above formulas can be modified to become kinematical equations by setting K₀, E₀, and T₀ at T₀ = 0. Energy historically is treated with the same starting valuation as is attributed to mass due to a preference to valuate starting energy as potential energy (starting speed = 0, starting mass = weight, starting energy = potential energy with a zero value for kinetic energy); keeping variables in equations relative to similar variables in other equations isn’t something that has been done for equations of speed, mass, and energy. Kinematical equations express changes in potential energy caused from kinetic energy and are only representative of actual potential energy when the initial at rest potential energy is correctly factored in. The word “kinematical” is used here to mean any portion of an equation that changes in value due to the change of another variable relative to a series containing a predefined point of origin, such as T₀. T₀ automatically includes gravity, and other forces such as electromagnetic and friction into kinematical equations relative to corresponding non-kinematical equations. A variable expressed with a subscripted _K is kinematical; variables of Y and t are not likewise notated as their values are the same as the already presented Y and t formulas; Kinematical T is subscripted with an _A, as T_K is just another title (T_A = T_U = T_K) for T_A.

Y = Kinematical Kinetic Energy = current kinematical potential energy - previous kinematical potential energy = 2(E_K - k_K/t) = 2(E_Kt - k_K)/t;

y_K = Total Average Kinematical Kinetic Energy = (sum of all Y since T_A,0)/T_A = E_K/T_A = E_Ke_K/K_K = (0.5Y + k_K/t)/T_A;

K_K = Kinematical Total Kinetic Energy = e_KT_A = E_Ke_K/y_K = e_K(0.5Y + k_K/t)/y_K = sum of all (k_K) since T_A,0;

k_K = Kinematical Interval Kinetic Energy = current kinematical total kinetic energy - previous kinematical total kinetic energy = t(interval average kinematical potential energy) = t(E_K - 0.5Y) = 0.5t(2E_K - Y);

E_K = Kinematical Potential Energy = y_KT_A = K_Ky_K/e_K = 0.5Y + k_K/t = sum of all (Y) since T_A,0;

e_K = Average Kinematical Potential Energy = K_K/T_A = K_Ky_K/E_K = K_Ky_K/(0.5Y + k_K/t);

T_A = Total Kinematical Time = K_K/e_K = E_K/y_K = (0.5Y + k_K/t)/y_K = sum of all (t) since T_A,0;

t = Kinematical Interval Time = current total kinematical time - previous total kinematical time = k_K/interval average kinematical potential energy = k_K/(E_K - 0.5Y) = 2k_K/(E_K - Y);

Y/t = Average Rate of Interval Kinematical Kinetic Energy = 0.5[(E_K)² - (E_K,X-1)²]/k_K = 0.5(E_K + E_K,X-1)(E_K - E_K,X-1)/k_K;

2Yk_K/t = Y(2E_K - Y) = (E_K)² - (E_K,X-1)² = (E_K + E_K,X-1)(E_K - E_K,X-1);

K_Ky_K = E_Ke_K;

E_K,X-1 = previous E_K at 1 interval back = E_K - Y;

K_K,0 = Total Kinetic Energy at T_A,0 of Time Series = K_K - sum of all (k_K) since T_A,0 = 0;

E_K,0 = Potential Energy at T_A,0 of Time Series = E_K - sum of all (Y) since T_A,0 = 0;

T_A,0 = Starting Time of Kinematical Time Series = T_A - sum of all (t) since T_A,0 = 0;

(E_K)² = 2 sum of all (Yk_K/t) since T_A,0 = (E_K,X-1)² + 2Yk_K/t;

0.5(E_K)² = Total(Yk_K/t) = sum of all (Yk_K/t) since T_A,0;

Interval Average Kinematical Potential Energy = k_K/t = E_K - 0.5Y = 0.5(2E_K - Y).

Subsequent mixed equations (equations using both kinematical and non-kinematical variables) are:

y = Ee_K/K_K = e_K(E_K + E₀)/K_K = e(E_K + E₀)/K;

y_K = E_Ke/K = (E - E₀)/T;

k = k_K + E₀t = k_K + t(E - E_K);

k_K = k - E₀t = k - t(E - E_K);

K = K_K + E₀T_A + K₀ = E_Ke/y_K = e(E_K + E₀)/y;

K_K = K - E₀T_A - K₀ = E_Ke/y_K - E₀T_A - K₀;

K₀ = K - E₀T_A - K_K = E_Ke/y_K - E₀T_A - K_K;

Ke_K = K_Ke;

Ky_K = E_Ke;

K_Ky = Ee_K;

e = Ky/E = Ky/(E_K + E₀) = Ky_K/E_K = Ky_K/(E - E₀);

e_K = K_Ky/E = K_Ky/(E_K + E₀);

E = E_K + E₀ = y_KT + E₀ = y(E₀T_A + K_K + K₀)/e;

E_K = E - E₀ = y_KK/e = E - (k - k_K)/t;

E₀ = E - E_K = E - y_KK/e = (k - k_K)/t = (K - K_K - K₀)/T_A;

t = (k - k_K)/E₀ = (k - k_K)/(E - E_K);

T = T_A + T₀ = T_U + T₀ = T_K + T₀ = (E - E₀)/y_K = (K - K_K - K₀)/E₀ + T₀;

T_A = T_U = T_K = T - T₀ = (E - E₀)/y_K - T₀ = (K - K_K - K₀)/E₀;

T₀ = T_A,0 = T_U,0 = T_K,0 = T - T_A = T - T_U = T - T_K = (E - E₀)/y_K - T_A = T - (K - K_K - K₀)/E₀;

E² = (E_K + E₀)² = (E_K)² + 2E_KE₀ + (E₀)² = (E_K)² + 2EE₀ - (E₀)²;

(E_K)² = (E - E₀)² = E² - 2E_KE₀ - (E₀)² = E² - 2EE₀ + (E₀)²;

(E₀)² = (E - E_K)² = (E_K - E)² = E² - 2EE_K + (E_K)² = E² - 2E_KE₀ - (E_K)² = (E_K)² + 2EE₀ - E².

More equations manifest when ∆ is used to represent changes in variables:

Y = ∆E = ∆E_K;

∆(k/t) = ∆(k_K/t) = 0.5(Y + Y _X-1);

∆(Yk/t) = Yk/t - (Yk/t)_X-1 = (∆Y)k/t + (Y - ∆Y)∆(k/t) = Y∆(k/t) + ∆Y(k/t - ∆(k/t));

∆(Yk_K/t) = Yk_K/t - (Yk_K/t)_X-1 = (∆Y)k_K/t + (Y - ∆Y)∆(k_K/t) = Y∆(k_K/t) + ∆Y(k_K/t - ∆(k_K/t);

Yk/t = sum of all ∆(Yk/t);

Yk_K/t = sum of all ∆(Yk_K/t);

(Yk/t)_X-1 = Yk/t - ∆(Yk/t) = (Y - ∆Y)(k/t - ∆(k/t);

(Yk_K/t)_X-1 = Yk_K/t - ∆(Yk_K/t) = (Y - ∆Y)(k_K/t - ∆(k_K/t).

(S₀)² ties all of the energy equations together:

Y = U(S₀)² = U(S - S_A)² = ∆M(S₀)² = ∆M(S - S_A)²;

y = M(S₀)²/T = M(S - S_A)²/T;

y_K = M_U(S₀)²/T = M_U(S - S_A)²/T;

K = N(S₀)² = N(S - S_A)²;

K_K = N_U(S₀)² = N_U(S - S_A)²;

K₀ = N₀(S₀)² = N₀(S - S_A)²;

k = n(S₀)² = n(S - S_A)²;

k_K = n_U(S₀)² = n_U(S - S_A)²;

E = M(S₀)² = M(S - S_A)²;

E_K = M_U(S₀)² = M_U(S - S_A)²;

E₀ = M₀(S₀)² = M₀(S - S_A)²;

e = m(S₀)² = m(S - S_A)²;

e_K = m_U(S₀)² = m_U(S - S_A)²;

(S₀)² = ∆M/Y = y_KT/M_U = yT/M = U/Y = K/N = K_K/N_U = K₀/N₀ = k/n = k_K/n_U = E/M = E_K/M_U = E₀/M₀ = e/m = e_K/m_U = (S - S_A)² = (S_A - S)² = S² - 2SS_A + (S_A)² = S² - 2S_AS₀ - (S_A)² = (S_A)² + 2SS₀ - S² = S² - 2 sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ = (S - A)² - 2[sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ - Ad/t] = (S - A)² - 2 sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ + A(2S - A) = (S - At)² - 2 sum of all (Ad/t) since T₀ + At(2S - At) = S² + 2[M_UAd/t - total(MAd/t) since T₀ - sum of all [(∆M - total ∆M since T₀)(Ad/t - ∆(Ad/t))] since T₀]/M₀ = S² - 2[total (MAd/t) since T₀ - M_UAd/t + sum of all [(∆M - total ∆M since T₀)(Ad/t - ∆(Ad/t))] since T₀]/M₀.

To conclude, two additional structurally correct equations are also discovered:

e_System = (M + dispersed M)(S + S of dispersed M)², where total mass within a system = (M + dispersed M); and what I term as the “Potential and Kinetic Energy Equality” of EN = KM.

Section Two – Understanding Background Radiation Temperatures

(2008 Rewrite)

In the first section of this part, the supposition was brought out that our Big Bang Area could not be the only Big Bang Area currently existent in the Universe as the background radiation temperature of the Big Bang Area was not equal to Absolute Zero. Perhaps that supposition could be wrong?

If the embodiment of energy (mass) were viewed as negative energy to the Big Bang Area, then any embodiment of mass would add positive temperature to a system as measured against the point of Absolute Zero (balance, equilibrium point) of a system. A system would then be valuated as the summation of all mass that is contained within the system, less all energy contained within all of the individual systems of masses that are contained within the larger system. Each individual system of mass would therefore have its own internal temperature and rate of systematic speed (as people, we have stable body temperatures and systematic rates of speed, our blood pumps in accordance to the amount of speed necessary to assist the body in keeping a constant internal body temperature and information detected by our senses travels to our brains at a fairly constant speed of 125 miles per hour regardless of the size of an individual).

It is known that heat expands and cold contracts. The ramifications of this in terms of c (the speed of light) are that when the Universe System (overall background radiation temperature) warms, the Universe itself expands, but the speed of light of the Universe would be seen from an inside vantage point of the Universe to remain constant. The speed of light, however, would actually be increased by the amount of expansion (raise of temperature) of the Universe, which would quite logically be caused by an increase of encapsulated energy (mass and the structure, internal temperature and speed, of mass acts as a deduction of energy to Universal System it is in) within the Big Bang Area, if no other influences (Big Bang Areas) were the cause of the increase. Encapsulated mass would have the same effect upon the Universal System as an ice cube has in a glass of water, where internal temperature of the ice cube varies according to the position of where measurement is taken.

New Notes

Heat expands, cold contracts, but within a system in order for energy to appear to travel at a constant rate the cyclical perception measured from within an object is negatively correlated with the size of the object (larger when expanded, smaller when contracted). In example, the human body must operate a constant internal temperature to survive. The body utilizes many methods in order to maintain the temperature, one of which includes the circulation of blood. The rate at which the heart beats, the cyclic cycle of the heart, is fairly the same amongst all people (when you touch someone for long enough, both heart beats will become in synch with the other, matching each other pulse per pulse). Since people come in all sizes, from being infants to being obese adults, the dispersion and contraction rate of the total amount of blood pumped by everyone's cyclic heart beat is significantly different. The larger a person is, the further/more area the blood stream has to travel to maintain the constant internal body temperature required to maintain all cells. Since, the heart beats between people are relatively the same, and sense everything cycles internally in relationship to the time span of a heart beat, the internal speed of travel is perceptionally percieved as constant when measured with cyclic beats of the heart. The speed/mass of flow (percieved speed of time in a system) is immensely different based upon over all system size (the size of the individual).

It is amongst my beliefs that our universe is a living organization in which dark matter is similar to the connective tissue of our own bodies, and black holes are similar to central nuclei of galactic cells. In this belief, the Big Bang would have occurred at the birth of the organism (our universe).

It is also my belief that the effect of gravity within any organization is to constantly adjust/balance out the system to its natural equilibrium point of functional survival. In the case of a person, the motion of an individual equates to changes that must be counteracted/balanced by some sort of force in order for internal body temperature to remain the necessary constant for survival. Gravity is then seen as a necessary secondary force of the body that is generated from the constantly changing motion of the body, and is subconsciously regulated by the body to allow for homeostasis to occur.

Section Two – Understanding Background Radiation Temperatures

(2007 Version)

In the first section of this part, the a supposition was brought out that our Big Bang Area could not be the only Big Bang Area currently existent in the Universe as the background radiation temperature of the Big Bang Area was not equal to Absolute Zero. Perhaps that supposition could be wrong?

If the embodiment of energy (mass) were viewed as negative energy to the Big Bang Area, then any embodiment of mass would add positive temperature to a system as measured against the point of Absolute Zero of a system. A system would then be valuated as the summation of all mass that is contained within the system, less all energy contained within all of the individual systems of masses that are contained within the larger system. Each individual system of mass would therefore have its own internal temperature and rate of systematic speed (as people, we have stable body temperatures and systematic rates of speed, our blood pumps in accordance to the amount of speed necessary to assist the body in keeping a constant internal body temperature and information detected by our senses travels to our brains at a fairly constant speed of 125 miles per hour).

It is known that heat expands and cold contracts. The ramifications of this in terms of c (the speed of light) are that when the Universe System (overall background radiation temperature) warms, the Universe itself expands, but the speed of light of the Universe would be seen from an inside vantage point of the Universe to remain constant. The speed of light, however, would actually be increased by the amount of expansion (raise of temperature) of the Universe, which would quite logically be caused by an increase of encapsulated energy (mass and the structure, internal temperature and speed, of mass acts as a deduction of energy to Universal System it is in) within the Big Bang Area, if no other influences (Big Bang Areas) were the cause of the increase. Encapsulated mass would have the same effect upon the Universal System as an ice cube has in a glass of water, where internal temperature of the ice cube varies according to the position of where measurement is taken.

The supposition of this section is that in a system, systems within the system subtract out from the system as a whole by creating the equivalence of systematic background radiation temperatures. Regardless of anything said within this section, the mathematical system of the first section of this part is solid and accurate (its completely mathematical and states that the sum of all parts must combine together in a way that adds up to the whole of all parts). This section merely challenges what forms are actually considered to be directly counted (as opposed to indirectly counted) when summing up the parts of the whole.

Part Sixteen – How Senses Work

The traditional view of senses is that life possesses five main senses, hearing, touch, smell, sight, and taste. Some people argue that more than five senses exist and increase the list to include such things as sense of balance, warmth, vibrational resonance, etc. The logic behind senses being that each sense rests upon the detection or perception of a kind of energy wave. Sight uses light as its medium of function, therefore we view everything at the speed of light in the same way that a movie real will capture all images within it and play them all back at the speed in which the movie reel is played. Hearing and all other senses act in the same fashion as sight, except that hearing uses the medium of sound, which moves at the speed of sound and our perception of it is like listening to sound captured on a recording. Our senses function off of specific wavelengths of which everything detectible and encountered is transcribed. Individuals have similar but different specific wavelengths (wave speed, etc.) for their various senses, as such the colors we see, the sounds we here, the way things taste, and so forth will be slightly different per individual based upon their compositional level of transcription.

Color blindness works by the masking (blocking) of pigmentation when peering through things, such as from the interior to the exterior of the eye. When peering through a tint of blue, the color red appears as black. Different hues (colors and shades) of tint will allow and disallow different colorations and amounts of colors to be seen. As such, the problem of color blindness affecting the human populace should be correctable with creation of new technology that would allow for the removal (or even perhaps the modification of or addition) of pigment (color) blocking screens to maximize the number of identifiable colors an individual can see. In addition to optimizing colors, new vision technology should craft lenses allowing individuals to properly focus as well as align images (I for one cannot make out images that people are supposed to be able to see in pictures once their eyes have been given enough time to adjust). This paragraph has been written in the hopes that the field of optometry will proactively advance beyond the focus of making out images, to making out everything we should or could (if none of us are currently capable) be able to see.

Historical Physics Questions

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Person on Record to Declare the Earth as Being Flat?

Answer: Anaximenes in 550 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Known Individual to Declare the Earth’s Surface to be Curved?

Answer: Anaxmander in 520 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Known Individual to Declare the World to be a Sphere?

Answer: Pythagoreans in 500 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Known Individual to Declare Change to be the Essence of Being?

Answer: Heraclitus in 480 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Known Individual to Declare Reality Comes from the Senses?

Answer: Protagoras in 480 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Known Individual to Declare the Earth’s Tilt as Being Elliptical?

Answer: Oenopides in 480 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Credited Individual to Declare that the Earth Rotates?

Answer: Philolaus in 455 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was First to Declare Space as Being Continuous and Always Filled with Matter?

Answer: Aristotle in 340 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Person Known to Announce that Tides were Caused by the Moon?

Answer: Pytheas in 325 B.C.

Historical Physics Question: Who was the First Known Individual to Calculate the Distance of the Earth to the Sun in Terms of the Distance of the Earth to the Moon? Additional Clue: This Person was First to Measure the Size of the Moon and the Distance to the Moon (probably also calculated the sun, but there is no known record of this).