The Duality of Magnetic and Electric rotation

Discussion concerning the first major re-evaluation of Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal System of theory, updated to include counterspace (Etheric spaces), projective geometry, and the non-local aspects of time/space.
Post Reply
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

The Duality of Magnetic and Electric rotation

Post by bperet » Sun Jan 06, 2019 9:32 pm

In RS2, I modified Larson's a-b-c displacement notation to be a-b--c-d, for reasons of symmetry. As Larson is fond of saying, "anything that exists in space, also exists in time and vice-versa." So if we have a magnetic double-rotation in the time region, one must also exist in the space region--the "cosmic magnetic rotation" for c-matter.

In The Structure of the Physical Universe, Larson describes the structure of the atom as having a 2-dimensional (a-b) magnetic rotation within the time region, and that region, itself, spins on an axis to form the electric rotation in space (c). There is a problem with this geometry, as "scalar motion" does not have an axis on which to rotate, so if the electric dimension was a scalar rotation, this could not be it. In RS2, this conceptual problem was corrected by making the electric (c) rotation as existing in the space region, the conjugate of the time region, where it could exist as a scalar rotation (no geometry).

When I started developing programming for RS2, I ran into the symmetry problem. If the time region is 3D "magnetic," then the space region must be, too. That resulted in the c-d electric rotation for the model. But the issue remained as to WHY the electric rotation could reach values of ±16, whereas scalar rotation in the time region stopped at 5-4-(1).

I believe I have found the solution to the problem--it has to do with the "unit boundary," in that only the net magnitude of speed can be transmitted across it (no orientation). In RS, that is limited to the pressure of linear motion. In RS2, it is a complex quantity, composed of the linear (real) and the rate of spin (imaginary). That means that anything we measure that is on the other side of a unit boundary will be observed as a complex quantity--not the actual structure that is there.

The double-rotating system of Larson is easily expressed as a quaternion rotation in RS2. A quaternion is 3D, which means that if we were to view a "cosmic quaternion," such as the cosmic magnetic double-rotating system, we would observe it as a complex quantity--a planar rotation with a linear velocity. However, there is a catch... a 3D rotation is measured in steradians, and a full rotation is 720°. When expressed as a complex quantity, that 720° still has to be "filled out," so we get TWICE the speed on this side... 2×360°.

The quaternion, when seen from across a unit boundary, then has twice the magnitude in the complex plane, as in the quaternion rotation. Now consider that the atom is composed of TWO double-rotating systems, with a maximum value of 4-4. That means the complex rotation would have a maximum value of 8-8 or ±16 units.

And when we look at Larson's periodic table, we find the maximum electric displacement is 16 units. In RS2, in the a-b--c-d notation, the maximum speed would then be seen as 4-4--8-8.

When this system is run backwards, where the material, magnetic rotation crosses the unit boundary into the cosmic sector, the same thing happens... all of a sudden, we need TWICE AS MANY magnetic "'units" to explain the interactions. Larson ran across this problem in Basic Properties of Matter, having to break magnetic rotations into half units, which he called the specific rotation.

To summarize,
  1. c-magnetic rotation is observed as m-electric rotation, with twice as many units as m-magnetic rotation, doubling the maximum magnitude (electric rotation).
  2. m-magnetic rotation interacts as c-electric rotation, needing twice as many units--but appearing as half-steps, rather than doubling (specific rotation).
quaternion-complex.png
Quaterion--complex interaction
quaternion-complex.png (58.12 KiB) Viewed 178 times
Every dogma has its day...

Gopi
Posts: 143
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 1:58 am

Re: The Duality of Magnetic and Electric rotation

Post by Gopi » Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:43 am

bperet wrote: 1. c-magnetic rotation is observed as m-electric rotation, with twice as many units as m-magnetic rotation, doubling the maximum magnitude (electric rotation).
2. m-magnetic rotation interacts as c-electric rotation, needing twice as many units--but appearing as half-steps, rather than doubling (specific rotation).
So that means (1) is the reason that we have the 2n2 relation in the periodic table (electric to magnetic), and (2) is the reason for spin ½ and specific rotation ½.

user737
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm

Re: The Duality of Magnetic and Electric rotation

Post by user737 » Tue Jan 08, 2019 10:24 am

Does this then imply we can only observe the electric (m- or c-)?
If yes, goes a long way in understanding the fascination with Electric Universe.

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Re: The Duality of Magnetic and Electric rotation

Post by bperet » Wed Jan 09, 2019 7:19 pm

Gopi wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:43 am
So that means (1) is the reason that we have the 2n2 relation in the periodic table (electric to magnetic), and (2) is the reason for spin ½ and specific rotation ½.
Yes; Nehru did a paper on the latter, "Some Thoughts on Spin."
Every dogma has its day...

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Re: The Duality of Magnetic and Electric rotation

Post by bperet » Wed Jan 09, 2019 7:22 pm

user737 wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 10:24 am
Does this then imply we can only observe the electric (m- or c-)?
If yes, goes a long way in understanding the fascination with Electric Universe.
We observe the c-magnetic as m-electric.

The Universe can be viewed in two ways, as a magnetic system or an electric one. However, the electric universe loses data because you're observing the shadow, not the motion casting it.
Every dogma has its day...

Post Reply