Mass as Magnetic Inductance

Discussion of electricity, electronics, electrical components and theories of circuit operation.
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1199
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Mass as Magnetic Inductance

Post by bperet » Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:27 pm

(Revised with Gopi's correction)

Sometimes I wish I could read my own handwriting... got my permeabilities and mass mixed up when reading the white board. My scribble for 'μ' looks too much like 'm', which I was initially using instead of L. Corrections:

The exploration of Dave's farad units led me to permittivity then to permeability, and I happened to notice that the units for mass, t3/s3 are exactly the same for inductance (measured in Henrys), which makes permeability looks a lot like mass/distance... t3/s3 / s.

Take the gravitational force equation: F = G m1 m2 / r2.

It can be rewritten as: F = G m1/r m2/r (in terms of mass/distance... permeability)

Mass, in the RS, comes from the rotational systems of the atoms, namely the 2-dimensional, magnetic rotation. What is an inductor, but a magnetic rotation around a coil of wire. Same concept, with mass being a sub-atomic version of the inductor. How well these magnetic fields can permeate each other will give a strength of attraction or repulsion.

So... if we can express inductance as an imaginary quantity, ZL, why can't we treat mass as an imaginary quantity, since it is a polar, temporal rotation to begin with--best represented by an imaginary number?

Rewrite the gravitational force equation in terms of complex numbers, noting that we MUST include "w"--the angular speed, noting that is a 2-dimensional magnetic speed, and hence measured in steradians...

F = G (0 + jwL1/d) (0 + jwL2/d)

F = G (-w2L1L2/d2 + j0)

The imaginary component of the rotation disappears through dimensional reduction, leaving only a real magnitude.

One of the nifty things about complex operations is that the units stay the same, regardless of the operations you perform on them. The complex plane never gets off the ground, so to speak, in the fact you cannot increase or decrease the dimensionality of it, since an increase in dimension just moves you further around the circle. j1 is just a 90-degree rotation, j3 is 270 degrees. (a + bi) x (c + di) = (e + fi)... still one real and one imaginary dimension. Therefore, our units will still be in terms of wL... so what are they?

L/d = t3/s4

w = angular speed s/t, but 2-dimensional speed = (s/t)2

wL/d = s2/t2 x t3/s3 x 1/s = t / s2

Well look at that... Force = G x Force, and G becomes unitless and unit valued, and no longer needed in the equation. Or, perhaps the 2D angular velocity is what is being used for G, if it is disassociated with L. It belongs with L, not as a "universal constant."

F = (jwL1/d x jwL2/d)

t/s2 = (t/s2)

No "gravitational constant" required, and no fudge factors to make the units work.

I think the 2-dimensional angular speed may account for all the c2 references we find in a lot of equations, if they were put into complex terms. For example:

E = m c2

given m (mass) = L (inductance) and w = 2D angular velocity, it becomes

E = wL

t/s = (s/t)2 x t3/s3

One other thought is that the "distance" factor may not be a "clock space" distance scaling the rotation wL, but the "real" component in the complex form. The only problem with that, is that it will produce an imaginary component, which you don't get as a "clock space" scale. Might be worth investigating.

Bruce
Every dogma has its day...

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1199
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Complex Motion and the Anu

Post by bperet » Wed Mar 19, 2008 10:01 pm

I went out to dinner this evening and had my pad with me doodling with some complex equations about magnetics, which were spotted by the High School math teacher sitting next to me whom, curiously enough, was just teaching his class about complex numbers. Loved his first comment, "Oh, so there IS a use for complex numbers."

We got chatting about the Reciprocal System, and I was explaining space-time units and how magnetic inductance looked exactly like mass. He posted a couple interesting questions:
  1. If inductance and mass are identical, then why do they act differently?
  2. If you have three complex scalar motions, and each one forms a "real" axis, then how can you tell which one is the electric [1D] rotation?
Had to think a bit on these... the first question has to do with the TYPE of motion. Gravitation as (t/s)3 is an outward ROTATIONAL motion in time. Inductance is also an outward motion, but is a ROTATIONAL VIBRATION--a secondary motion--which means it is actually (t/s)2 with something else interacting with it to create the vibration which is showing up as t/s. t/s x (t/s)2 = (t/s)3. So inductance is actually a 2-dimensional motion with a 3rd dimension filling out the 3d structure. Mass, however, is just a rotationally distributed 3D motion (force field; a bunch of 2D motions in random directions and dimensions, with no dimension occupied by vibration).

The answer to the 2nd question is: you CAN'T tell them apart, so logically, the atom must be made up of THREE magnetic rotations (which might explain the 3D mass from question #1). Didn't make sense at first, but consider the structure of the atom. Take Lithium, for example:

Two double-rotating systems:

Code: Select all

M 2-1- \

1
M 2-1- /
Where the electric displacement is "shared" between the magnetic rotating systems. (The original problem arose in BPoM with charging the electric rotation--if there were two, you could get a "double electric charge", one for each system. But that is not observed.)

And remember the Neutrino, a single magnetic rotation expressed as halves: 1/2-1/2-(1). This indicates that a magnetic motion can be distributed over two "slots" when measured. I believe this might be the case with the double-rotating systems. The electric "1" is actually a magnetic rotation that is shared by 2 "slots", similar to the neutrino, but one slot in each double-rotating system manifesting itself as a single, electric motion in each double-rotating systems, because of the dimensional limitations imposed by 3D (the A-B-C notation, M-M-E).

I'm not sure if this is the case yet, but I thought I'd throw it out for comment. If so, then the atom is composed of 5 magnetic rotations. Now how much you want to bet they form a pentagram of the Golden Ratio???

And considering Phi... if you solve the equation:

Phi = 2 cos x

The 'real' part of a double rotation with magnitude Phi, x=36 degrees. Given the "real" component is spatial and translational, and the "imaginary" component is temporal and rotational, one would view the atom not as a single rotation, but a SET of 10 rotations (5 bi-rotations) at 36 degree intervals (Phi), coiled about a translational axis in the time region. Given the line in polar space is a linear vibration, and we'd have to complete 5 rotations in one cycle of linear vibration, that would mean 2.5 twists up, and 2.5 twists back.

Recalling that each complex speed has a "real" component, and of the 5, only 3 can be represented in a 3-dimensional system, the other 2 will act as modifiers on that motion, vibrating in 2 dimensions, twisting what would be a straight "rope" of the primary twist into spring-like structures.

Sounds a LOT like the Theosophical Anu (the Ultimate Physical Atom), doesn't it?

[/]
Every dogma has its day...

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1199
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Re: Complex Motion and the Anu

Post by bperet » Wed Mar 19, 2008 10:07 pm

bperet wrote:
Recalling that each complex speed has a "real" component, and of the 5, only 3 can be represented in a 3-dimensional system, the other 2 will act as modifiers on that motion, vibrating in 2 dimensions, twisting what would be a straight "rope" of the primary twist into spring-like structures.
A further thought on this... the 3 degrees of freedom that ARE represented as 3D motion may explain the 3 thicker "whorls" of the Anu, with the other 7 are thin.
Every dogma has its day...

Gopi
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 1:58 am

Mass as Magnetic Inductance

Post by Gopi » Thu Mar 20, 2008 2:15 am

bperet wrote:
Loved his first comment, "Oh, so there IS a use for complex numbers."
The entire scientific community would say the same thing!! I spent hours discussing the complex numbers with my Optics professor last year trying to figure out its origin (especially with respect to negative refraction), but it was always "push it under the rug" business.

bperet wrote:
So inductance is actually a 2-dimensional motion with a 3rd dimension filling out the 3d structure. Mass, however, is just a rotationally distributed 3D motion (force field; a bunch of 2D motions in random directions and dimensions, with no dimension occupied by vibration).
I think the key point here is to distinguish the two PHYSICAL forms of the motion with dimensions t/s. One of them is the energy, another is the charge. Using one of them conceptually would provide you with the theory of electricity, the other would provide you with the equations of mechanics. I suspect that even torque has to have a play in this somewhere.... ah, think it hit me.

There are three basic kinds:

t/s as the transverse photon, which provides you the CHARGE.

t/s as the parallel photon, which provides you with ENERGY.

t/s as the circularly polarized photon, which provides you with TORQUE.

The first and the third are directly related... a transverse photon (unpolarized) can split into a CW and a CCW polarized photon, conserving motion.

This is the reason electricity and mechanics have very similar equations... I suspect Maxwell derived his original set of equations (which curiously required quaternions for accurate treatment) from the physical analogy of continuous media. This may fill in the 'gap' in the current form of maxwell equations which have been obtained by assuming Euclidean geometry (Bearden refers to this as being "symmetrically regauged"). Of course, the time region and the space/time region are not symmetrical, but reciprocal, hence a treatment of "vortices" and other such nonlinear phenomena in mechanical systems may correspond directly with the Electromagnetic treatment.

Another aspect: In electrical theory, they have a concept called "Impedance". What this measures is basically the net result of the capacitors, inductors and resistors in the circuit. There are three terms which contribute:

R : Resistance per se

jwL: The inductive impedance

1/jwC: The capacitive impedance

When you plot this on the Argand diagram, the inductive and capacitive effects point in opposite directions, one along j and one along 1/j = -j. Does this have a theoretical reason? Basic Question:

Inductance: Mass

Capacitance: ?

Gopi
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 1:58 am

Mass as Magnetic Inductance

Post by Gopi » Thu Mar 20, 2008 8:14 am

bperet wrote:
E = wL

t/s = (s/t)2 x t3/s4
That should be t3/s3 for L....

Phillip
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 am

Complex Motion and the Anu

Post by Phillip » Thu Mar 20, 2008 2:05 pm

Speculative thoughts:

At first pass, I can not help but think that the Theosophical Anu was

probably "observed" from somewhere other than the material sector. For

now I will call it the TOL for Theosophical Observer Location. I am not

sure what the Anu is supposed to look like from the TOL, so I do not have

a clue if I am close.

The TOL could be in an intermediate speed range where both space and time

can be "observed", but one of them twists. It could also be a material

sector "observation", just with different sense "organs". Maybe TOL

needs to be though of as "Theosophical Observer and Location". The

observer mechanisms may be different than humans perceive either in data

collection or data interpretation.

If this conjecture is correct the Anu will be a RS t/s structure just

like everything else in the universe. Because it appeared small, it

could be mostly in the time region. Can POVray be set up to look for the

TOL? I wonder what question was asked to get the model of the Anu as it

has been described?

I wonder if "represented in a 3-dimensional system" says more about our

ability to observe and represent than it does about existence? The TOL

could be in the material sector, just not a visual (observation of

reflected, focused photons) representation. I still do not know what

clock time "is". I do not observe it. I just experience it second hand

by observing changes that take place. And coordinate time is a figment

of my imagination.

Maybe the often used phrase "represented in a 3-dimensional system"

should be restated "represented in a 3-dimensional coordinate spacial

system"?

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1199
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Re: Complex Motion and the Anu

Post by bperet » Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:57 pm

Phillip wrote:
At first pass, I can not help but think that the Theosophical Anu was probably "observed" from somewhere other than the material sector. For now I will call it the TOL for Theosophical Observer Location. I am not sure what the Anu is supposed to look like from the TOL, so I do not have a clue if I am close.
See thread: http://forum.rs2theory.org/viewtopic.php?t=40

Phillip wrote:
If this conjecture is correct the Anu will be a RS t/s structure just like everything else in the universe. Because it appeared small, it could be mostly in the time region. Can POVray be set up to look for the TOL? I wonder what question was asked to get the model of the Anu as it has been described?
It would have to be modeled as an isometric surface, which means the entire Anu would need to be representable in a single equation.
Every dogma has its day...

Gopi
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 1:58 am

Mass as Magnetic Inductance

Post by Gopi » Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:27 am

Reading the paper Bundy posted in the rstheory forums gives some interesting ideas... particularly regarding mass being complex: That it is possible that the imaginary component of mass is what contributes to "Binding Energy"!!!

Makes a lot of sense, as the imaginary component usually turns up everywhere as the "absorption coefficient". In permittivity, susceptibility, refractive index (which is merely the combination of the electric and the magnetic).

Inductance: Mass

Capacitance: Binding energy (negative mass!)

No wonder we write the Impedance as (wL - 1/wC).

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1199
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Mass as Magnetic Inductance

Post by bperet » Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:16 pm

Gopi wrote:
Inductance: Mass

Capacitance: Binding energy (negative mass!)

No wonder we write the Impedance as (wL - 1/wC).
That makes sense, particularly when you consider that in order to break up an atomic structure, a sufficient spatial distance needs to occur to bring the particles beyond the unit boundaries, where progression has been holding them together as atoms or molecules, since the direction of the progression is inverse inside unit space. Capacitance is a quantity of space, as are electrons.

Dr. Moon's paper on protons is still bugging me... it makes a lot of sense, but throws a monkey wrench into the works, since his polyhedral structure of protons indicates that there is no need for the magnitude of a magnetic rotational system to exceed 2--rather than having higher-displacement rotations, he aggregates protons in the TR with a similar, NET effect which is basically the inverse of the electron distribution.

I've been working on the virtual UOM "ScalarMotion" class, trying to construct neutrinos and protons. In a "perfect" Universe, where there is no ionization or randomness, some odd things start showing up. For example:

In the charged electron neutrino, 1/2-1/2-1* (space) or jwC, the orthogonal rotations don't birotate, so there is no dimensional reduction and you end up with a particle that has a magnetic "spin" in only one imaginary direction. The muon neutrino, 1/2-1/2-0 cannot take a charge, and has the opposite "polarity" (time), jwL. For all practical purposes, they are the 2-dimensional versions of the charged and uncharged electron, which look and act like "magnetic monopoles" when you do the complex associations. (Electron neutrino is outward in space since the charge is magnetic, not electric, and the muon neutrino is outward in time).

When you assemble the two of them to form a proton, 1/2-1/2-(1) + 1/2-1/2-0 = 1-1-(1), you get a dipole -- a double-rotating system with a distinct north and south pole. Since all of our atoms are built upon the proton rotational structure, we always view magnetism as a dipole. The resulting distributed scalar motion we call a "magnetic field" is the result of the charged, electron neutrino (a rotational vibration) vibrating the muon neutrino (a rotation).

Given this structure, the proton WILL NOT be spherical... the intensity of a distributed scalar motion tends to mimic the underlying rotational structure. For example, when you orbit the Earth or moon, the pull of gravity changes depending on the contents of the soil beneath you. We do not see any "spherical" magnetic fields--they are toroids. Hence, it is reasonable to assume that the magnetic rotating system will have a geometry of the torus, not the sphere.

That would mean the speeds of the rotations would be associated with the major and minor radii of the torus. And there would be only one polarity (N-S) in a material system, since matter is built upon the muon neutrino, jwL. Cosmic atoms, however, should exhibit "inverse magnetism", and since 1/i = -i, also "negative magnetism".

I'll have to run a simulation.
Every dogma has its day...

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1199
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Mass as Magnetic Inductance

Post by bperet » Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:34 pm

I ran up a quick graphic of the idea of a proton torus (versus a sphere)... the grid is the "real" plane, and the vertical axis is the imaginary one. Kind of a 3D Argand diagram with a real plane instead of a real axis. I placed a proton at each location of the Euclidean, spatial "grid" (the absolute location). The proton rotation shows up as the torus running around the imaginary plane.

I was a bit shocked when the picture displayed... for those of you who are old enough, you might remember the early days of the computer, where 8K of memory was about the size of a refrigerator--something called "core memory"--where wires were run through these tiny, magnetic toroids and the direction of the magnetic spin was a bit of information, a 0 or 1. See attached picture.

This plot revealed the SAME THING... protons are magnetic systems, structured as a toroid, located on a Euclidean grid of 3-dimensional space. And all atoms are built upon the basic, proton rotation.

The only conclusion I can come to is that ATOMS are the "memory" of the Universe, and atomic structures are patterns of memory. Gives an entirely new meaning to "Social Memory Complex". And the capacity is staggering... if you use a grid spacing of 1 natural unit of space, one cubic meter would have the storage capacity of approximately 1.2 BILLION 1-terabyte hard drives. That's a 250-GB drive for every human on Earth, all stuffed inside a space about the size of a common stove.
Every dogma has its day...

Post Reply