## Visualization of birotation

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.
bperet
Posts: 1168
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Re: Visualization of birotation

oreneorg wrote:
Sat Feb 11, 2017 2:14 pm
It seems to imply the interrelationship between two dimensions in counter space with one in material space
Would this relate to the number Fi?
The phi ratio occurs when material and cosmic motion interact. That would indicate that equivalent space (2D) is interacting with the space region (1D). The space region can appear as counterspace, because it references the point at infinity (the center), not the plane at infinity.
Every dogma has its day...

oreneorg
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:58 pm

### Re: Visualization of birotation

Dimensionally the inverse relation between space and counter space is established as inverse s / t = t / s.
But in the case of
v ^ 2 = 1 + v
(s/t)^2=(s / t) + (s / t)
How could you explain?
Attachments
Fibonacci.jpg (21.09 KiB) Viewed 885 times

bperet
Posts: 1168
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

### Re: Visualization of birotation

oreneorg wrote:
Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:03 am
Dimensionally the inverse relation between space and counter space is established as inverse s / t = t / s.
Counterspace is negative space, where parallel lines become radii and circumferences. In dimensional terms, -(s/t) = -s/t. The negation of spatial motion gives counterspatial motion; the inverse is geometric, not mathematical. The extent of 3D space is between 0 and +1 (the gravitational limit, which terminates the 3D region). The extent of counterspace is between 0 and -1.
oreneorg wrote:
Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:03 am
But in the case of
v ^ 2 = 1 + v
(s/t)^2=(s / t) + (s / t)
How could you explain?
v2 = 1+v is a balancing of magnitudes only (where inward and outward motion cancel). If you want the actual equation, it is e = 1+v, or iω = ln(1+v), which is the basic formula for inter-atomic distance (how angular velocity is converted to a linear pull). All terms are simple speed, s/t (ω) = s/t (1) + s/t (v).
Every dogma has its day...

oreneorg
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:58 pm

### Re: Visualization of birotation

Question:
The cosine should be of an angle α, β, σ, not of an angular velocity ω
In that case we should divide by t to obtain a velocity
Attachments
birrotation-fi.pdf

oreneorg
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:58 pm

### Symmetry of cosmic superposition

Symmetry of cosmic superposition

oreneorg
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:58 pm

### Symmetry of cosmic superposition

Symmetry of cosmic superposition
Attachments
superposicioncosmica.pdf

Sun
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:50 am

### Re: Visualization of birotation

SoverT wrote:Before Bruce posted that visual example, and not being familiar with Euler's rotational rules, I had always imagined it as those two rotating plates being centered at the exact same point, with some intangible mathmagic causing a dimensional reduction.
That does work, mathematically, but as Gopi can tell you (watch his video on Physics History), math and Nature are seldom in agreement. You have to keep in mind that the RS is unity-based, like Nature, and math is zero-based--an artificial reality.
If " two rotating plates being centered at the exact same point" works, it means there is no radius. The visualization is arbitary for us to understand it, not someting really happened.
If the second disk were coplanar and at the same absolute location, all you would get would be destructive interference--zero--and would be indistinguishable from "nothing at all." (If coplanar and in the same spin direction, the magnitudes would just add together.)
I think there still be something left because there are still motions, there is always a consequence in the other aspect. I have some thought when i considering what is the consequence in space of a rotation in time. I think the interpretation of eix+e-ix may have some problems. Adding two complex number means translation of a plane, but motions are always distributed in 4D when coupling to spatial reference system, so it should be addition of two quaternions and see what is the result means. A rotational motion can be expressed by q=eα(i+j+k)=cosα+(i+j+k)sinα . If the imaginary part is 3D time then the real part is 1D space. Rotation in time and translation in space simultaneously. Where cosα is the deviation in 1D space and (i+j+k)sinα is the deviation in 3D time. The result of eα(i+j+k)+e-α(i+j+k) also equal to 2cosα but with different interpretation. What is perceived by us is the time trait vanished by destructive interference but the space trait still valid.
eix+e-ix is a special case of quaternion addition and the interpretation should be consistent with quaternion. Linear motion in space might cause rotational motion in time, producing electric deviation. It is always a very interesting relation between sound and light.

Sun
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:50 am

### Re: Visualization of birotation

I should not use quaternion to explain what i am thinking because i actually don't know how to use it in RS2.
What i assume is that the direction of angular velocity is not imaginary. It represents the direction of the translational motion of a rotation in the other aspect (the z axis).
Rotation in space translation in time(rotation in one aspect manifest as translation in the other aspect), electron. Rotation in time translation in space, positron. When two rotations interact with each other, rotations are destructed, but their effect on the other aspect still exist. One of the bi-rotation model is where an electron interacts with a positron proposed by Bruce. The vibration occurs in the direction of it travels, always longitudinal wave by our perspective. Frequency is not a intrinsic property of photon, the ω is. The net displacement always oscillating from -1 to 1. Seems to make sense direction reversal. There should be a bi-rotation nature of sound. If there is an angular frequency for a sound to resonate, there must be a reciprocal angular frequency for an EM wave to resonate.
rotation.png (28.51 KiB) Viewed 549 times
Scalar motion has no geometry. Square wave or not is just depending on how you measure unity. Unit motion is nothing more than measuring one unit of space by one unit of time which is defined by Larson. The ratio is constant not the unit. But when it comes to quantum physics, what we measured is the effect of time region, one unit of space is not measured by one unit of time but π unit of time in relation to Larson' definition, the rate of change is not constant, making perfect sense why there are waves. It is a problem of your measurement as an observer.
So RS2 approach, where unit of space is measure by π time or the reciprocal, then Larson's ds/dt is transformed from linear to cosine(polar)? It can be overcome by dealing with the reciprocal aspect of a polar motion which is linear. RS2 completely polar and LRC approach is linear?
squarewave.png (4.78 KiB) Viewed 511 times

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest