Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Toward Quasic Techonolgy
Toward Quasic Techonolgy
Is it possible? New Technologies from the New Physics or Answered Questions in the Old?
L. Edgar Otto 05-11-11
Of some things we feel or imagine that are unseen are there because we are so close to the intimate being of the world they cannot be seen. So we are skeptical for that which cannot repeat or is beyond the experiments. This intuitive sense of such a near and unseen reality as real, as simple as perhaps putting two metal plates near each other and observing some connection between nanotech and the dark energy of the cosmos, is the ultimate source of true believers sense of certainty in their self-proclaimed scientific messiahs. This does not justify the skepticism to what we do not know or what guarantee we have of leadership for the sheep of this world as to who or not is a crackpot, nor that we should ignore the practical evidence of the logic, even if close, as we make deep connections with the problems presented as mysterious or unsolved at hand. Mediocrity and its self-referential mirrors is among the most pervasive of intertia for thought and cosmos gone wild. What is serious matters with great gravity can be seen by the humorless whose weapon is the derision like a lover without an object save perhaps himself, unless they in the debating for its own traditional sake, are recognized on the surface of things at least as the masters of cliche.
Why worry over specks of light to be randomly seen as evidence for any sort of fulfillment of a notion of a field or particle when many of us do not take such a depth of theory and methods such as statistical ones as that sound in the first place. This is what we call experiment? This is what we reject of possible valuable new directions of ideas? Granted there seems to be no better way and the technology is as impressive for our time as the pyramids of Egypt then. We still cling to those myths of structure and flights to polar stars of heaven and wormholes and so on in today's science fiction (perhaps not a genre that any longer is that emphasizing some future scene as much as the conquest of what is within and between these realities beyond the paradoxes of time travel.
What then is the fringe and the term pseudoscience but a statement, a simple negation usually of what is really and clearly some extreme who is beyond the practical but contradictory logic in the idea that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" When the lest of all ordinary would be thus quite extraordinary. Cold fusion is not a pseudoscience in itself although bundled up in what is considered the fringe. There are effects observed say by the chemists in the University of Minnesota asked to look at it, yet it seems not a promise of a cheap and safe gain of energy. It seems that the quantum theory does not forbid this but then that theory, in that it is uncertain yet exacting, is not considered the fringe.
This moving front of knowledge is somewhere between science frozen with no new worlds to conquer and yet the new frontier, we theoreticians somewhere in the center walking a tightrope, where both forms of enquiry may be false or true in our thoughts and discoveries. The question seems to be can if we explain in our physics or mythology the force of the Ark of the Covenant beyond its gold plated walls as a capacitor full of lightning.
* * *
*1 A wormhole requires potentially infinite idempotent photons over time while it is part of the Dark aspects of Generations.
*2 This is the foundation of the wormhole structures.
*3 Interdimensional Quasic Generational Casimir Analogous Resonance over global coherent direction of Tori: the circular and polar difference of breaking down the 8 cubes of the hypercube into half or 4 of each.
*4 By materiality can we detect any Cw' (higher Conway matrix aligned fields by the mere presence of energy or matter alone across the quasic generations.
*5 Can we amplify Cw' over qm computations in a sense greater than quantum or Higgs-like field ideas as with any complex space radio amplification?
*6 Can we (Buckyball and Graphene -like) organize biochemical aromatic catalysts? Or of course observe them stacked and effects between them as in the DNA.
*7 What then would be the gravoelectric analogs to quantum orbitals (as if pulsar jets in the case of benezene)?
*8 While we may not create mass or energy, necessarily, can we create dark structures from the quasic Creation Filed? Clearly surface solidity is not equivalent to mass by virtue of symmetry within or across the generations which as structures are not so much organized as organizing.
*9 A thought may be inductively (as an analog to gravoelectic, maxwell dark...) over Cw^n thus dark and light can oscillate and can continually ground each other.
*10 Such generational vectors may transmit over generational distances (compare Pitkanen's values and the Quasic distances idea as in musical note proximity, or quantum jumping, and Riemannin qualtative (Ql) continuum multiply dense conplex sheets that return- is DNA analyzed this way? and so on for alph-3 models) wherein specific concrete vectors, points or directions are grounded albeit discretely. In which case number, the 2^2^R - 1, Pitkanen prime wise, solve the singularity.
*11 Otherwise some quasic distances or roots are there for mass values as simple geometric ratios on the ground level including photon and Plancks ratios when the generations are observed separately.
*12 Enhanced or reinterpretation of existing physics as quasic mass differences not
just geometrical necessarily is a sort of proof or evidence of dark and super dark action independent somewhat of the symmetry (Noether) but with opaque purpose when objects, especially toroidal ones, observe mixing and generational shifting (as in neutrinos).
Let us consider the attempt to reach by brute strength the control of fusion in a torus field--- how is it explained why there is plasma pinching leakage? Why would in theory a lattice of lasers not confine such plasmas?
Think of the electron itself, as considered decades ago, Toroidal in shape. Can we have a string of coherent tori that direct and gather mass thru them in one direction in the gravitoelectronic way? Can these accelerate much like in our atom smashers and magnetic fields involved?
Moreover, Is this dark acceleration between Cw'/Cw" or Cw"/Cw' the origin between generations of decoherence? Can a toroidal entity self accelerate or damper its subgroup internal accelerations? Say from the trioctatope Cw^n (24cell and limited or total lattices broken into sub-topes like icosatopes)
Are these tori not a string as well to be made of atoms if we also understand the depth and span in relation to dimensions and gravity? So explain entangling them an the limits of design of applied quantum and this beyond quantum quasic computation?
Do not cosmic rays supply evidence beyond simple gravitoelectric magnetism for such possible internal acceleration and relative views of red shift and space expansion and so on...
It is simply not the case that if we could draw in hyperspace three dimensional cartoons that these would be equivalent to all practical purposes solid objects, all this limited view of dimensions does is fence in the greater dimensional freedoms of others and suggest a scarcity as absolute of limited resources.
Yet it may be possible just in the arrangement in space of normal sheets or structures of matter to find subtle differences in the creation fields, and as room temperature, and at familiar energy scales, useful in communication and what may seem an action at a distance transmission. A mere intuitive arrangement of objects as if a magic ritual many obey as children or the granite contains the memory of things to which there are reflections of our experience of being and thought- that is much of the sort of subjective evidence can be grounding also with the better grounding of our physics.
* * *