Reciprocal System Research Society

I have gone through the logical structure that defines the photon a number of times now... and here are my tentative comments.

1. The origin for the whole direction reversal idea is the fact that a speed of non-unity must be derived from a speed of unity. Now, due to symmetry, a speed of on 1/n has to be created concomitant with a speed of n/1, so for all intents and purposes, it is as if with a starting speed of 1/1 = n/n... n of the space units are grouped with 1 time unit and n time units with one space unit. In other words, when we have n/1... the time units have been transformed into space units . This conversion can be indirectly thought of as being a direction reversal as well, but that is one of the many viewpoints possible. Essentially we need to convert a space unit into a time unit and vice versa, this is projection. And since speed is real, and space and time are derived therefrom, the idea is how we "derive" it.

2. A space unit becomes a time unit, and vice versa. The process of this conversion, we are going to call a Scalar Vibration. Note that this is neither linear nor rotational... those aspects come later. It is a fundamental transformation and its possibility of existence is derived from something which lies beyond the concept of magnitude and direction. This is the doorway from which consciousness acts, of the whole. Our physical description cannot cross this, as this is the origin of magnitude itself. Like thinking of moving our hand, and then moving it... the world goes into thought forms here.

3. When a space unit converts into a time unit, the other aspect is not visible to us. However, it appears that the space unit is itself winking in and out of existence, or put in scalar motion terms, there is a scalar increase and decrease, because the net effect has to be zero. This is a Scalar Vibration. It can also be called the Photon.

4. Scalar Vibration can then be expressed in terms of either linear, or rotational vibration. Once more, just as when we have space, we also have time, in a similar fashion, when we have a linear, we also have a rotational. BOTH linear and rotational vibrations are hence the manifestation of the photon.

5. There are three primary scalar motions, Linear, Rotational, and Vibrational. Now, we fix our point of reference to the 3-dimensional reference system, which can only represent scalar linear motion properly.

6. That means our primary motion in this has to be Linear. Here, for the first time, inward and outward directions as connotations can be used. Linear being primary, Rotation is secondary, and Vibration is accessible to both linear and rotational. Hence Linear motion as scalar expansion is observed as it is, while rotational motion is accessed via vibration.

7. Rotational base (vibrational rotation), whether material or cosmic makes sense only when we have our fixed reference system with the space/time region. If we hop over to the polar opposite, then we will have to have a "Linear base", where a rotational vibration is being translated. This is the perspective with which Nehru is viewing the system via RS2. Since the linear base is not recognized as such from the other side, it appears that there is no need of a base at all.

8. The electron is a material structure with cosmic effective rotation. The rotation is in space, and since one dimensional rotation does not exist in the space/time region, we necessarily have to use a complex rotation ... which takes its effect as a wave. The uncharged electron does have a vibration in its structure... it then generates the mass accurately. Without the vibration, the mass (without the 1/9 component) would be totally off. The wave nature also makes sense, will communicate that separately.

9. Photons can convert into both linear vibrations and rotational vibrations. In the linear side, it gives rise to heat. On the rotational side, it gives rise to charge.

10. The photon as a motion is not technically represented as a sine wave, or a cosine wave, but just like a pogo stick, it extends BOTH above and below the horizontal line of motion. This form is necessary as it is a scalar vibration, and hence at any point of time, it must have opposite extensions. Similarly, from the rotational side, it would appear as a bi-rotation, with up and down motion replaced by CW and CCW motion. So, the pogo stick and the bi-rotation are two views of scalar vibration.

11. A moving-pogo-stick-photon is nothing but a plane. This is the "plane of vibration". When passing through a rotational time structure, the photon plane gets rotated as noted in Nehru's papers. I am not yet clear as to how a quartz crystal causes permanent change of polarization, while a solution does not, but it appears feasible so far.

12. Technically one must distinguish the vibration and the oscillation... the scalar vibration is a PULSATION, both in linear and in rotational terms, while an oscillation is vectorial, and is the traditional SHM, going up and down.

Let me know what you think.

Gopi wrote:

1. The origin for the whole direction reversal idea is the fact that a speed of non-unity must be derived from a speed of unity.

Agreed.

Now, due to symmetry, a speed of on 1/n has to be created concomitant with a speed of n/1, so for all intents and purposes, it is as if with a starting speed of 1/1 = n/n... n of the space units are grouped with 1 time unit and n time units with one space unit.

With the caveat that a speed of 1/1 is not possible, but a magnitude of 1 (no dichotomy) is.

In other words, when we have n/1... the time units have been transformed into space units .

And what is the "mechanism" of transformation? What I've found when programming simulations is that you cannot make ANY assumptions--there as to be a rule for every change (and motion is just 'change').

One of the things that Ra had mention was that the "first distortion", if you consider unit speed progression as the default, is "free will" -- in other words, opposition to the progression, namely inward motion. The problem with this and some of Larson's conclusions is that if you have unit motion, a speed of unity with a natural datum of unity--you cannot go negative. An inward motion of 1 mph from a speed of 1 mph leaves you with zero, which is not possible with a unit datum. The inward motion has to be less than 1 but greater than zero, which is equivalent to "outward" in the other aspect.

This conversion can be indirectly thought of as being a direction reversal as well, but that is one of the many viewpoints possible. Essentially we need to convert a space unit into a time unit and vice versa, this is projection. And since speed is real, and space and time are derived therefrom, the idea is how we "derive" it.

In metaphysical terms, by imposing free will upon unit motion, you are creating a dichotomy of yin-yang (time and space).

2. A space unit becomes a time unit, and vice versa. The process of this conversion, we are going to call a Scalar Vibration. Note that this is neither linear nor rotational... those aspects come later. It is a fundamental transformation and its possibility of existence is derived from something which lies beyond the concept of magnitude and direction. This is the doorway from which consciousness acts, of the whole. Our physical description cannot cross this, as this is the origin of magnitude itself. Like thinking of moving our hand, and then moving it... the world goes into thought forms here.

I've always objected to the terms, "unit of space", "space unit", etc., since they aren't "units". You cannot have a "unit of 45 mph"--it is counter-intuitive. A unit implies substance, a "thing", either space or time, which can be manipulated in chunks. These are speeds. There is more than one occasion in his writings where I'd like to smack Larson in the face for using "unit" when he actually means "location" or "displacement," particularly after emphasizing you cannot think in the "object on the stage" mode. Nehru and I talked about this years ago, and he pretty much agreed--which is why we tried to stay totally with "speed" in RS2 (and the use of 'ratio' over 'motion', as ratio does not imply anything moving).

When you think in terms of speed instead of units, you will find that a "displacement" is actually a shear stress and strain between dissimilar speeds (unit speed versus non-unit speed). Recall Nick Thomas' Counterspace stuff, and how he used shear between the material and cosmic geometry to explain a lot of things?

You might be on to something here, though--the source of the projected translation and polar motion. Since the concept of a time or space region does not exist at this point, it probably isn't a vibration but an oscillation between zero and infinity, which creates that double-back you get when passing infinity and ending up on the negative axis, and vice versa. Or in Wild West terms, how to lasso the Universe.

3. When a space unit converts into a time unit, the other aspect is not visible to us. However, it appears that the space unit is itself winking in and out of existence, or put in scalar motion terms, there is a scalar increase and decrease, because the net effect has to be zero. This is a Scalar Vibration. It can also be called the Photon.

If I understand you correctly, then you are suggesting that not only does the Universe have a natural datum of unit speed, but it also has a natural unit acceleration--in other words, 1 wants to become 2 by default, and when it tries, it breaks into 1/2 x 2/1. Since the break is reciprocally related, the increase in speed to 2s will produce a decrease in speed of -1t, causing the increase in time to 2t to drop back to 1t and vice versa, causing the system to stay at unity through oscillation at each absolute location. More Wild West... the bucking bronco state, each trying to throw off the acceleration of the other, with a result of zero acceleration and unit speed.

4. Scalar Vibration can then be expressed in terms of either linear, or rotational vibration. Once more, just as when we have space, we also have time, in a similar fashion, when we have a linear, we also have a rotational. BOTH linear and rotational vibrations are hence the manifestation of the photon.

I would agree with one addition... the vibration is taking place in the equivalent time and equivalent space (in this case IS a vibration, not an oscillation).

The only difficulty I see is that the vibration would occur in all three scalar dimensions, so the photon should have two "invisible" components affecting its measurable vibration--those of the two scalar dimensions that cannot be represented in the fixed reference system.

5. There are three primary scalar motions, Linear, Rotational, and Vibrational. Now, we fix our point of reference to the 3-dimensional reference system, which can only represent scalar linear motion properly.

You only defined linear vibration and rotational vibration to this point. I do not see how you extract translation and turn from scalar vibration, unless they are implied from the unit progression.

6. That means our primary motion in this has to be Linear. Here, for the first time, inward and outward directions as connotations can be used. Linear being primary, Rotation is secondary, and Vibration is accessible to both linear and rotational. Hence Linear motion as scalar expansion is observed as it is, while rotational motion is accessed via vibration.

True, from a material perspective. Rudolf Steiner, Nick Thomas, Nehru and Theosophists have it the other way around--clairvoyant vision is from the cosmic perspective and gives rise to "6a":

6a. In the cosmic perspective, our primary motion has to be the Turn (uniform increase of angle). Here, for the second time, inward and outward directions as connotations can be used. The Turn is primary, Shift is secondary and Vibration is accessible to both the shift and turn. Hence, Turn motion as scalar expansion is observed as it is, while translatory motion is accessed via vibration. (This does not apply to Cosmic "life", as they will perceive time as linear.)

Keely and other vibratory physics researchers may be working from that scalar vibration perspective. Keely was using vibration to create rotation (6a)--the Keely Motor Company. I've seen others that use vibration to create translation--antigravity and propulsion (6).

The other aether-type, 19th century researchers, like most of the New Agers, assume a kind of mechanical vibration.

7. Rotational base (vibrational rotation), whether material or cosmic makes sense only when we have our fixed reference system with the space/time region. If we hop over to the polar opposite, then we will have to have a "Linear base", where a rotational vibration is being translated. This is the perspective with which Nehru is viewing the system via RS2. Since the linear base is not recognized as such from the other side, it appears that there is no need of a base at all.

Makes sense. Actually, you should not need a "rotational base" at all, since it is basically built-in to the system. All you need is an increase in speed to create an effective rotation or translation. (Sort of an auto-generated RB). Larson's rotational base served no purpose, except to generate the yin aspect of motion. He admits, that--but needed something to build particles on.

8. The electron is a material structure with cosmic effective rotation. The rotation is in space, and since one dimensional rotation does not exist in the space/time region, we necessarily have to use a complex rotation ... which takes its effect as a wave. The uncharged electron does have a vibration in its structure... it then generates the mass accurately. Without the vibration, the mass (without the 1/9 component) would be totally off. The wave nature also makes sense, will communicate that separately.

I assume by space/time, you mean Larson's time-space (our conventional reference)?

I believe you are describing the positron, since the uncharged electron is observed as a massless "hole". I recall something from college where it was discussed that a charged capacitor does not weigh any more than an uncharged one, so all those electrons stuck inside are massless. I think it was explained away as they were converted to an electric field when stored (energy is measured as "j" -- the EE version of an imaginary number).

So let me infer here... 1/9 would be the "linear" (electric) part of mass, and 2/9 ("the two-dimensional basic rotation", NBM, p. 154, inter-regional ratio) would not be two photons, but just the "polar" part of mass (2 of 9 orientations being occupied by polar motion, versus the 1 of 9 being occupied by linear motion)? Which would explain why he needed TWO--and ONLY two--double-rotating systems in an atom?

9. Photons can convert into both linear vibrations and rotational vibrations. In the linear side, it gives rise to heat. On the rotational side, it gives rise to charge.

Agreed.

10. The photon as a motion is not technically represented as a sine wave, or a cosine wave, but just like a pogo stick, it extends BOTH above and below the horizontal line of motion. This form is necessary as it is a scalar vibration, and hence at any point of time, it must have opposite extensions. Similarly, from the rotational side, it would appear as a bi-rotation, with up and down motion replaced by CW and CCW motion. So, the pogo stick and the bi-rotation are two views of scalar vibration.

Well that explains that dream I had with the Universe being made of bouncing pogo sticks.

11. A moving-pogo-stick-photon is nothing but a plane. This is the "plane of vibration". When passing through a rotational time structure, the photon plane gets rotated as noted in Nehru's papers. I am not yet clear as to how a quartz crystal causes permanent change of polarization, while a solution does not, but it appears feasible so far.

I'll have to think about that one... you can orient the plane with time, or the linear motion with space--acoustics? Is this what the LMs do whacking things (Impulse)?

12. Technically one must distinguish the vibration and the oscillation... the scalar vibration is a PULSATION, both in linear and in rotational terms, while an oscillation is vectorial, and is the traditional SHM, going up and down.

Let me know what you think.

Excellent piece of deductive reasoning, Gopi. It is bringing a resolution to the yin-yang theories for me, between Larson and Keely. This has all the indications as the common factor. Once we get this well-defined and into a simulation, I think we'll be able to develop some remarkable tools, not only mechanical ones, but ones to help aid in the development of consciousness.

I think a better term for "scalar vibration" is needed, as that has too many connotations. I like "pulsate" much better, as that infers scalar expansion/contraction, which is far more intuitive. Explaining it might be a challenge.

I've never actually considered the thought of the Universe possessing "unit acceleration"... but why not? If it has unit speed, it's not a big leap to unit acceleration. It would actually define a mechanism for CREATION, as every location is trying to spawn something forth. Not that it disproves the existence of God or anything, but for me, means that God was one heck of a good programmer... defining a Universe that creates itself. Way to go! It might also explain a LOT about the interaction of Free Will... once we get past biological (life units--space and time), we get to that point where we could, as an act of will, "add" to that acceleration and CREATE from that act. It may be the origin of psychic ability. Much to think about.

To continue...

transformed into space units .

And what is the "mechanism" of transformation? What I've found when programming simulations is that you cannot make ANY assumptions--there has to be a rule for every change (and motion is just 'change').

I don't know clearly yet, it is unclear. Space and time themselves appear to lose meaning at this point, and am finding it hard to manipulate the concepts prior to that.

I've always objected to the terms, "unit of space", "space unit", etc., since they aren't "units". You cannot have a "unit of 45 mph"--it is counter-intuitive. A unit implies substance, a "thing", either space or time, which can be manipulated in chunks. These are speeds.

Agreed. Actually, his use of units is non-mathematical... it is not a chunk. He calls the speeds from 0 to 1 as being one "unit" and from 1 to infinity as being the other "unit", giving rise to two units in his further calculations. That is a very different use of the concept of unit. Nevertheless, the only unit is speed of light, and the rest have to distinguished.

When you think in terms of speed instead of units, you will find that a "displacement" is actually a shear stress and strain between dissimilar speeds (unit speed versus non-unit speed). Recall Nick Thomas' Counterspace stuff, and how he used shear between the material and cosmic geometry to explain a lot of things?

What I found while researching projective geometry is that scaling is primary, and adding constraints generates regular step measures. So multiplication comes prior to addition. If you consider the way we attach the reference system, it then calls into account the constraint, and hence displacements instead of direct speeds.

I have read and re-read Nick's material, but it does not help me as I find the idea of shear and stress very vague, and it introduces too many "matter" concepts where none should exist. I am unable to use that appropriately, at least as of now. To me they are just empty words, I am not able to connect a physical behavior with them. Just the geometrical aspects made more sense to me.

If I understand you correctly, then you are suggesting that not only does the Universe have a natural datum of unit speed, but it also has a natural unit acceleration--in other words, 1 wants to become 2 by default, and when it tries, it breaks into 1/2 x 2/1. Since the break is reciprocally related, the increase in speed to 2s will produce a decrease in speed of -1t, causing the increase in time to 2t to drop back to 1t and vice versa, causing the system to stay at unity through oscillation at each absolute location. More Wild West... the bucking bronco state, each trying to throw off the acceleration of the other, with a result of zero acceleration and unit speed.

I think you are comprehending the same thing that I was aiming at. It is truly on the border here because one step beyond this leads beyond magnitude AND direction!

The only difficulty I see is that the vibration would occur in all three scalar dimensions, so the photon should have two "invisible" components affecting its measurable vibration--those of the two scalar dimensions that cannot be represented in the fixed reference system.

That is another different door, to identify the difference between the three dimensions. They might be the same with respect to quantitative considerations, but they have more than one qualitative attribute. Will get back to you at a later time on that one. For now, the line of thought is this... in the intermediate speed range, magnitude wise, we have 2-x, but qualitatively, we also have prana. That is taken forward.

It is based on that the vibration only appears in the first scalar dimension. This is I think the same reason as the fact that one dimension is all we can represent corrrectly in our reference system.

You only defined linear vibration and rotational vibration to this point. I do not see how you extract translation and turn from scalar vibration, unless they are implied from the unit progression.

Yes, they are implied. I did not cover that ground as it has been gone over before. The treatment must remain the same there.

8. The electron is a material structure with cosmic effective rotation. The rotation is in space, and since one dimensional rotation does not exist in the space/time region, we necessarily have to use a complex rotation ... which takes its effect as a wave. The uncharged electron does have a vibration in its structure... it then generates the mass accurately. Without the vibration, the mass (without the 1/9 component) would be totally off. The wave nature also makes sense, will communicate that separately.

I assume by space/time, you mean Larson's time-space (our conventional reference)?

Yep.

I believe you are describing the positron, since the uncharged electron is observed as a massless "hole".

Not massless... they attribute an "effective mass" to it, which actually changes based on the material.

So let me infer here... 1/9 would be the "linear" (electric) part of mass, and 2/9 ("the two-dimensional basic rotation", NBM, p. 154, inter-regional ratio) would not be two photons, but just the "polar" part of mass (2 of 9 orientations being occupied by polar motion, versus the 1 of 9 being occupied by linear motion)?

The important part is the 9... it cannot be included if there is no linear basis, which is a linear vibration here. Linear basis: 3 independent axes, and double rotation gives 9 possible orientations. With one rotating system, one is occupied, and with two, two are occupied. Or you can call it a 1 dimensional or a 2 dimensional vibrational rotation.

I'll have to think about that one... you can orient the plane with time, or the linear motion with space--acoustics? Is this what the LMs do whacking things (Impulse)?

Acoustics is oscillation and pulsation in the space/time region... instead of in the time region. Not yet finished that analysis yet. The whacking is one way of generating all possible frequencies at once, so that the ones which are resonant remain, while the others die out. Remember Fourier transforms? Fourier transform of a peak (like an impulse) is white noise in the frequency domain.

Cheerio

Hmmm... Gotta think about all that. But I like it!

9. Photons can convert into both linear vibrations and rotational vibrations. In the linear side, it gives rise to heat.

And would the generation of a photon by blackbody radiation be the reverse of that?

If I understand Gopi correctly, yes. Heat is a linear vibration that coincides with the progression of the natural reference system, with a spatial displacement. Hence, heat is free to move about between the temporal rotations of the atom (since space to time constitutes motion), but cannot leave the atom and cross the spatial void (emission), since space/space is not motion. Emission would require the thermal vibration to take on a temporal character, which can be obtained from rotational vibration--a 1D charge. "Charged" heat would then be emitted as a photon. I would assume the electric ionization level of the atoms in a black body would be sufficient to do that.

Yes, I think so. I concur with bperet's analysis as well.

Photon is neutral from the vibrational standpoint, between linear and rotational. Hence, there is no difference as a scalar motion, but it is the space or the time displacement which decides which way it goes.