Page 1 of 2

Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:01 am
by bperet
I was experimenting with resonance and started thinking about an issue I had back in college... for an electrical circuit to have a resonant frequency, the reactance (imaginary resistance) of the inductor and capacitor must match with opposite polarities: XL = -XC. This "cancels out" the reactance (resistance to change of frequency), leaving only the DC resistance. All tuned circuits work this way.

However, you cannot just "cancel out" things like reactance or resistance--if I have 20 ohms of inductive reactance, and 20 ohms of capacitive reactance, I should have 40 ohms of reactance--NOT zero. Where does it go?

I noticed a similarity to birotation, where two oppositely-spinning, parallel rotations cancel each other out, leaving a cosine wave. This is calculated by Euler's formula, (e + e-iθ)/2 = cos(θ). This is basically the same concept--two "opposites" that cancel each other out, leaving a lower-dimensional structure (two rotations become a wavy line, or the complex quantity of reactance gets reduced to a single, real component).

Wondered... what if this is the SAME THING? That would infer that reactance is angular (a twist of an axis), not linear (a translation along the impedance axis).

Resonance can only occur with AC (alternating current), not DC (direct current). That means the current is cosine wave (or sine; in the RS, things start with "1" like a cosine, rather than "0" with sine, so cosine is more accurate). That cosine wave can be the result of two "reactance" rotations--which ARE expressed as "imaginary numbers," which we now know to be "rotational operators" expressing an angular velocity (not "make believe" numbers).

Typically, resonance is plotted as an axial displacement, like this:
LC.png
LC impedance
LC.png (17.29 KiB) Viewed 1251 times
When XL = -XC, the reactance is canceled out, leaving only the resistive component. But what if it ISN'T axial, but ANGULAR, as shown on the XLC arc?

Consider: if I am running on a treadmill, I am running forward at 8mph as the treadmill is sliding backwards at 8mph. If I use the LC formula, 8 + -8 = 0 ... I should not be expending any calories, since I'm not moving! (And I KNOW that isn't the case!) The net motion to the gym is zero, as I don't go flying off the treadmill, but the energy involved is still going, full blast.

That means in an LC circuit, at the resonant point, that "impedance" must be going somewhere else where it is fully active. What if this "2D problem" on graph paper, is actually working in 3D? Once can get the SAME net effect of zero reactance, simply by rotating the resistance axis (DC), to move the projection of the motion on the reactance axis (AC) to zero?
LC3d.png
3D impedance
LC3d.png (16.63 KiB) Viewed 1251 times
You now have the full displacement on the IC axis, zero on the AC axis, and the regular resistance on the DC axis. It appears the reactance has been "canceled," but has just rotated into another dimension.

The same may be occurring with birotation, omitted by Euler because he was only considering a 2D problem--the birotation may be transforming into a quaternion rotation, where the rotational axis is moving into a 2nd, scalar dimension that IS NOT coincident with the reference system--and hence, fully functional but unobservable.

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:07 am
by SoverT
bperet wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:01 am
The same may be occurring with birotation, omitted by Euler because he was only considering a 2D problem--the birotation may be transforming into a quaternion rotation, where the rotational axis is moving into a 2nd, scalar dimension that IS NOT coincident with the reference system--and hence, fully functional but unobservable.
I like this possibility a lot. I've always been more than a little displeased with the arbitrary one-off magical cancelation of motion via a geometric reference frame.

Not only does it offer a more consistent explanation, but opens up a lot of possibilities.
  • Suggests it is actually possible to control how a motion is aligned relative to our reference frame. If you can move a motion out of effectiveness, you should be able to move other motions into effectiveness. Think, capture those electrons "popping in and out of existence".
  • More generally, a technique to shift magnitudes around different dimensions in a motion seems to be central to manipulating and creating atomic elements.
  • Raises the question of where that energy is going
  • If applied to biological/ethical dimensionalities, it may yield interesting effects such as "jaunting", invisibility, teleportation, or the ability to "move through" "solid" objects.
  • It also happens to align well with my simulation engine attempt, as I'm trying to avoid geometries at the scalar realm

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:19 pm
by bperet
SoverT wrote:
Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:07 am
Suggests it is actually possible to control how a motion is aligned relative to our reference frame. If you can move a motion out of effectiveness, you should be able to move other motions into effectiveness. Think, capture those electrons "popping in and out of existence".
Yes, this falling in-and-out of resonance will make particles appear and disappear out of the reference frame. They haven't actually gone anywhere, except off of the observable, spatial axis, appearing as "quantum foam."

With this concept, it should be relatively simple to cohere the quantum foam (the ZPM of Stargate: zero-point module), by the use of harmonic controls. It is a matter of developing the "tree" logic and using charge to fill in the resonant points, to lock the system so it manifests in a usable dimension.
SoverT wrote:
Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:07 am
More generally, a technique to shift magnitudes around different dimensions in a motion seems to be central to manipulating and creating atomic elements.
Because of the way compound motion normalizes (wants to become balanced), that might not be very effective to create elements, but it would certainly be a way to control atomic properties (like magnetization and gravitation).
SoverT wrote:
Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:07 am
If applied to biological/ethical dimensionalities, it may yield interesting effects such as "jaunting", invisibility, teleportation, or the ability to "move through" "solid" objects.
True. If you can control the "net motion" in any dimension, effectively zeroing it out when needed, these are natural consequences.
SoverT wrote:
Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:07 am
It also happens to align well with my simulation engine attempt, as I'm trying to avoid geometries at the scalar realm
The more I understand the system, the more I am moving towards the elimination of a "scalar zone" (as Larson put it). The concept arose from the fact Larson built the 3D universe on 1D and 2D motions, which as discussed in The Universe as a Tree topic, cannot be fully represented in the coordinate system. When you do not have the same number of dimensions as your reference system, one has to resort to probability (wavefunctions, and collapse thereof). When you get to uniform motion, that is equivalent to "0D" so you get magnitude with no/all direction--scalar expansion and compression.

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 6:20 pm
by blaine
Makes sense to me. Resonance is literally when the imaginary part of the impedance goes to 0, this is how you solve for the resonant frequency. Also resistance has no imaginary component in DC circuits, implying it is a 1-D quantity. Wereas AC circuits imply a magnetic field, or 2d rotational motion. Thus the real and imaginary component of the impedance must be accounting for resistance in the two dimensions. Picturing it in the way you described is quite helpful because a previously esoteric quantity the "imaginary number" just becomes an operator for describing the mixing of 2 dimensions of motion.

Finding a way to do this in three dimensions could create some efficient propulsion drives.

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:35 pm
by bperet
blaine wrote:
Sun Jun 10, 2018 6:20 pm
Finding a way to do this in three dimensions could create some efficient propulsion drives.
Figured some of this out... consider the basic R-X graph, showing resistance and reactance. The angle showing impedance is basically the needle on a speedometer, showing how fast the angular velocity of the reactance is. Opposite spins create the birotation, neutralizing the reactance--but it doesn't stop the spin, which rotates into the 2nd dimension (the intermediate speed range), which I suspect then shows up as the EM field, since resonance contains both electric and magnetic components. This would indicate that the EM field is also a "needle on a speedometer" -- but this speedometer is registering speed in the 2nd dimension, not the 1st (low speed impedance).

If one were to create a second EM field that acted counter to that 2nd dimension speed, that, too, could go into resonance, pushing the effect into the 3rd dimension (ultra high speed) range. If you were to take two of these units and set them up as counter-rotations, you would get resonance in the 3rd dimension--which would end up on the "negative resistance" axis, inverting behavior. Mass is resistance × time (m = Rt), negative resistance would then create negative mass--liftoff.

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:26 am
by SoverT
bperet wrote:
Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:35 pm
If you were to take two of these units and set them up as counter-rotations, you would get resonance in the 3rd dimension--which would end up on the "negative resistance" axis, inverting behavior. Mass is resistance × time (m = Rt), negative resistance would then create negative mass--liftoff.
If you kept duplicating and combining these components, would you eventually end up with a bioenergy generator? Causing a/b to combine with b/a seems to be the modus operandi of evolution

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:42 pm
by bperet
SoverT wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:26 am
If you kept duplicating and combining these components, would you eventually end up with a bioenergy generator? Causing a/b to combine with b/a seems to be the modus operandi of evolution
That is probably how Nature does it, ending up with "life."

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:25 pm
by SoverT
bperet wrote:
Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:35 pm
Opposite spins create the birotation, neutralizing the reactance--but it doesn't stop the spin, which rotates into the 2nd dimension (the intermediate speed range), which I suspect then shows up as the EM field, since resonance contains both electric and magnetic components. This would indicate that the EM field is also a "needle on a speedometer" -- but this speedometer is registering speed in the 2nd dimension, not the 1st (low speed impedance).
If this circuit pushes motion into the IC axis, can the IC axis push back? I was trying to think what you would expect to see if you fired off a spark gap nearby. A rather brute force method, but if it saturated the local space on the IC dimension, it seems like it should feedback out of that circuit.

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:54 pm
by bperet
SoverT wrote:
Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:25 pm
If this circuit pushes motion into the IC axis, can the IC axis push back? I was trying to think what you would expect to see if you fired off a spark gap nearby. A rather brute force method, but if it saturated the local space on the IC dimension, it seems like it should feedback out of that circuit.
There will be an analogous concept to impedance... might actually be related to permeability.
But based on Larson's work, I suspect it will continue to push forward, onto the conductance (-resistance) axis.

I refer to the way Larson determines "units of motion" and their relation to speed ranges. The first unit, speed, is 1-x, the second unit, energy, is 2-x, the third unit, negative speed, is 3-x. Using the same concept, except the "speed ranges" are planar rotations, 1-x being the DC→AC rotation, 2-x being AC→IC rotation, 3-x being the IC→-DC rotation.

Re: Resonance as Birotation

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 6:44 pm
by Horace
bperet wrote:
Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:01 am
However, you cannot just "cancel out" things like reactance or resistance--if I have 20 ohms of inductive reactance, and 20 ohms of capacitive reactance, I should have 40 ohms of reactance--NOT zero. Where does it go?
In EE you'd have +20 ohms of inductive reactance, -20 ohms of capacitive reactance and XL + XC = 0.
It is worth noting that capacitive reactance is always negative and inductive reactance is always positive. Both refer to the imaginary part of the impedance. The real part of the impedance is the resistance.