Reciprocal System Research Society

Sorry for the delay in replying. I've been out of town helping a friend with a new computer.

See attached.

Bruce

Greetings Nehru,

See attached Word document, and animated GIF talked about in the Projective Geometry section.

Sincerely,

Bruce

<t>Hi Nehru,<br/> <br/> Question on the rotational motion animations... for the single rotation, should I really start with a filled circle, and overlay it? By analogy, if I were to represent linear motion in the time-space region, a line segment running from zero to one would seem appropriate to ex...

See attached, and http://www.antiquatis.org/RS/Nehru/Graphics.html

Bruce

Nehru,

I switched it from a conic solid to an isometric surface. How does this look? (see attached)

Bruce

<t>I wrote: "Electron as 1:0:-1 ... also: -1:0:1 ? Would not such a combination be likely in a birotating pair, since it preserves parity?"<br/> <br/> I thought this was the case, due to the two forms of the Rotational Base you listed, but further study shows that this is apparently not the case; -1...

<t>Have you considered including the linear motion as part of the notational system, as a 4th element? R1:R2:r3:L Perhaps making :L optional, and omitted if there is no linear motion?<br/> <br/> Without it, the photon cannot be distinguished from the rotational base, both having 1:1:0. If you includ...

<t>I like your new notational system, based on speeds. When I was programming Larson's system on the computer, I did the same thing without realizing it, running the displacements from 1-8 and always using a positive "c" value, so the last element was 8-31, rather than 5-4-(1). It was the only way t...

<t>Hello Nehru,<br/> <br/> You stated that: "R[NAT] is the Natural Unit of Rotation (2pi radians or 4pi steradians)."<br/> <br/> I tried to model the 1-dimensional rotation and the results were not as expected. See attached animated GIF. I used the same control logic as linear motion, but found that...

<t>In Corollary #10 (multiple dimensions) in your Non-Locality article, you state that it requires 3n dimensions to represent "n" particles between two T-frames.<br/> <br/> Now that we know the time region is 4-dimensional, does this still hold true, or should it be "4n dimensions?"<br/> <br/> Bruce...