Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Quasonium (Qn)

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