**Quasonium (Qn)**

*L. Edgar Otto*26 June, 2012 (11:53:49 PM)

We can imagine with a
variety of justifications that the overall symmetry of electron configuration
of an atom is symmetrical in numbers in the shells in normal matter (that is
matter that is considered complete up to three or four natural space dimensions). There are periodic table models that reflect
this idea of mirrors or shadow atoms, Pitkanen sees them as the term dark atoms
or dark photons. This is as a model of a
quason a scaleless and dimensionless abstract explanation for the idea of a
state and differences of higher mass and energy, being of course a limit of
electrons we have 136 elements as a possibility. But we only have 120 by reflections as if the
halving of maximum symmetry so what could the 16 beyond it mean (or the 8 if we
imagine these can be so combined but that is a moot point in the general
theory) for these 16 are analogs to neutral particles and can be considered one
new element, quasonium that as a mechanism is transitive over all the periodic
structure of possible four space atoms.
If of course on this level of hyper-symmetry we desire at least a
theoretical model that better fits our theories and philosophy of reasoning.

Nothing forbids that
such an atom can act as if itself is a mass or energetic influence as concrete
as any atom. It is the departed ghosts
of quantum cats so to speak that still connects in shadows to what amounts to
matter as subshadows. Thus it is here
that we find the abstract quasic structure (the matrix or grid) important in
the extension beyond the quason that other aspects of the model can apply which
is obvious and carries over to the simple fact of the electric body analog that
it contains a shelled nucleus that is composes of higher symmetries real and
virtual- that is we establish a general space where the reasoning closely fits
what we have imagined of the standard theory mechanisms or what the Higgs may
be but on a higher and a more creative level and from one view a sort of
absolute or positive grounding or direction with just one shift of a coordinate
and a totality of abstract motion in any natural dimension or its inverse as a
linear change of all binary coordinates that are full and not empty. What is not the grounding of this theory is
the idea the difference in matter and antimatter is grounded on parity and
chirality alone as the most foundational case of physicality.

Over the small
difference at unity where the perpetual flow seems the natural inertial state
in the micro-world we have the 120 ratio of that said dark and distinguish that
which would be cold matter in the mix of general matter. For on the same level with this ghostly mass
defect in structure as if an analog to that in high energy physics (yet it is
not clear this can be an analog to the difference in energy accessible as if that
of what happens when matter meets antimatter) the idea of viriality or what is
kinetic or potential in the decision as to which is the halving or doubling at
least of a coherent principle of the inverse squared thus three natural
dimensions (as Rowlands points out) over the span of the quasonium structure
has a certain symmetry as to what is potential or kinetic interchanged via the
abstract quasic motion.

Atoms may evolve as
so the small difference of the evolving diversity of the Omnium over time, but
in general it does so slowly. It seems
like a question too obvious to ask but clearly the same sort of generalized
quason structure applies to the history of the shells of stars as the elements
react and quite possibly matter as well as momenta are exchanged in some binary
star cases that may appear as if at a distance or with a hidden mechanism, in
general the state one of conservation of processes without the idea of what
leaves or enters as balanced the surface of some quason. It is simply not enough to stand on the idea
that the usual electric forces balance against those of gravity to explain what
is happening.

Again, we still have
to ask that if the universe is a quason, a quasifinite entity, is it in a sense
open or closed or is this idea too in need of philosophic generalization. Where does this higher quasic information go
and to what extent is part of the universe doomed to be finite or can it
spontaneously rise again? On this level there is still mystery for what we know
there is but not what it is, knowing what it is will bring us up to a higher
idea of asking if we know it is all there is.

* * * * *

## No comments:

## Post a Comment