The Solid of Time

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.
user737
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: Near Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by user737 » Tue May 12, 2020 8:28 am

New from Miles 5/10/2020:
http://milesmathis.com/lighterrors.pdf
user737 wrote:
Sun May 05, 2019 5:06 pm
More Miles (see here):
The charge field is primary, and it sets the ion field. Not the reverse. Light doesn't move in the E/M field. Light moves in the charge field, which is its own field. Light is charge and charge is light. Strictly, light doesn't move in any field. Light IS the fundamental field. The motion of light sets all the fields in sizes above it.
This fundamental field IS the charge field IS the progression and so relative to the progression light does not move. The "speed of light" IS the progression. The field must be a field of something and that something is photons. How else could you physically impart a "force?" And Miles doesn't understand RS/RS2 theory? Baloney. He is being purposefully obtuse.
light-ether.png
light-ether.png (109.15 KiB) Viewed 675 times

I see Miles has been following what has been said here.

He finally comes around and admits that light does not travel relative to anything including the "E/M charge field."

Now, Miles, when will you concede that light does not travel period? (Ed note: I predict no later than May 2021.)

Hint: You're using the wrong reference system. Light IS the reference. A universe of MOTION.

Note that Miles deliberately chooses the word "background" -- in addition to the pre-existing ether (sic) connotation -- with regard to his "charge field" (which is light as charge IS light as Miles has already stated); this will become important to recall in other posts further down the chain.

light-ether-2.png
light-ether-2.png (87.04 KiB) Viewed 670 times

No, Michelson-Morley interferometer proved that the aether (i.e. equivalent space -- the equivalent motion in space due to motion in coordinate time) moves along with the Earth just as with the gaseous atmosphere, out to the gravitational limit -- out to the moon. Go USNA. I have many-a-time stood in the very spot in which this experiment was conducted... walked over those grounds more times that I care to recall... some of the most valuable instructions given my professional formation were done in the bowels of Michelson Hall.

Cite: Earth’s atmosphere stretches out to the Moon – and beyond (2/20/2019):
http://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/ ... and_beyond

light-ether-3.png
light-ether-3.png (150.54 KiB) Viewed 662 times

What's spinning, Miles?
You seem to want to spin something without a something there to spin...
Not a problem for RS/RS2 but you're going to have a heck of a time explaining that to the science zombies.

Radius? Huh?
That would require a spatial displacement which is not the case...

It's "stretched out" and so we multiply by c2? Lol Why?
One of those c's is the linear velocity of the photon and the other is the spin velocity.
Disagree. The "spin" (i.e. angular) speed (velocity implies direction for which there is none) would be in the inverse relation: 1/c

We should really label the speed as inverse speed as that's what it is: energy (t/s) IS inverse speed (s/t).

Unrolled would be a better term for what we're doing as we're projecting an unbounded turn in counterspace (time) as recursively bounded structure in space. As time has no direction in space -- and space has no direction in time -- this is a rotationally distributed scalar motion (speed) which when normalized to unity clock time provides for a real radius -- s/t × t = s (distance or length).

Mass as Integrated Power:

1D (Energy): E / (1/c)

2D (Momentum): p / (1/c)2

3D (Mass): m / (1/c)3

Relate 3D mass (temporal as non-local field) to 1D "force" vector in space as a distributed scalar motion... this is energy or "force" over a distance where force is t/s2 × s = t/s:

E / (1/c) = m / (1/c)3 → E = mc2

Energy, momentum, and mass are the 1-, 2-, and 3-dimensional aspects of motion in time... i.e. the real net "spin" component is captured in linearized form as speed (s/t) as a projection along the real axis.
Both stretch the apparent radius of spin relative to an observer at rest.
What observer? Do we need one?
At rest? What's that?
Relative to what?

Rest doesn't exist... it's all motion.

Miles can't claim that the "charge field" is the primary field and it is a field of photons which are motion and then claim that things built upon the motion that is the photon can be anything but in motion.

light-ether-4.png
light-ether-4.png (98.03 KiB) Viewed 659 times

Gibberish. Light does not always act as a particle.

I'd like one jar of photon particles, please. What? You're out?

Light is neither a particle nor a wave nor a wavicle; a photon is 3-dimensional (scalar dimensions) of angular (rotational) speed (really energy as inverse speed or motion) or if you have issues with the term motion -- then use ratio (s/t or t/s). The Photon model as a Quaternion -- wherein i.j = -k and (k)(-k) = -k2 = -(√-1)2 = -(-1) = 1 -- captures all electro-magnetic properties: TM, TE, TEM quite nicely.

light-ether-5.png
light-ether-5.png (51.77 KiB) Viewed 655 times

Yes, heat is charge (light)! What exactly did we think IR was? What we measure as heat is a linear inward vibration in the Time Region (TR) of the atom where primary motion is angular and secondary (compound) motion is linear. The linear vibration that is measured as temperature IS a measure of the shear created between space (positron) and counterspace (electron). Heat is captured photons and the "color" of the heat is a measure of energy (∝√t) of this rotational vibration!

Electron + Positron = [linearly-polarized] Photon (and you can put them together and take them apart in many ways)

Think of it this way: that storm on Jupiter is a result of two linear shifts creating a rotational shear/vortex (i.e. storm). The same can be said for the inverse aspects: two unbounded rotations (a bi-rotation) can cancel in one-dimension to create a bounded, linear displacement. Attach an arm to a radius sweeping out a circle of undefined radius and let that arm also rotate in phase with the primary arm -- a cosine (or sine) curve will be traced out in one dimension.

eix + e-ix = 2cosθ

Or, my favorite: eiπ + 1 = 0

"Imaginary" π rotation (in time -- angular inverse speed or energy) is equivalent to linear (real) displacement (speed) in space where c = 1 (unity). One motion is normalized to clock time, the other to clock space the ratio of which IS the progression.

And yes, eiπ equals exactly -1 if you use the correct value for π (pi).

Yes! Charge IS light. Photons are that which are captured to produce charge. :mrgreen:
This has long been comprehended by those that study RS/RS2.
Coincidentally, this is why heat engenders ionic charge... it's a sympathetic (rotational) vibration, if you will.

To be continued...
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma

user737
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: Near Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by user737 » Tue May 12, 2020 9:33 am

Continuation of previous post as attachment limit is 5 per post.

light-ether-6.png
light-ether-6.png (137.57 KiB) Viewed 641 times

Miles is starting to get it. A crack has formed.

Let me help you here Miles as you've apparently had a small stroke and are not sure what you're saying:

You're saying that (your words)
1 -- "Everything is built up from light, both as a matter of particles and as a matter of field influences."
2 -- "All motion is caused by light, and all matter is built up from photons."

∴ Light is all and light being motion means... this is a UNIVERSE OF MOTION.
user737 wrote:
Sun May 05, 2019 5:06 pm
The only true units of measure are distance (space) and time. Everything else is an artificial construct of man. The ratio of space to time is speed (s/t)--no direction--and the ratio of time to space (t/s) is energy (also scalar). Light is motion and motion is light. Motion is change. Light is change. All is changing. All is light. You are light; I am light. The light is everything.

Motion is all there is. Larson said it best: Nothing but motion.
Everything is built up from light -- all matter is built up from photons -- light IS motion.*

* Although Miles states motion causes light (which is semi-accurate), he does not go on to define motion. Those of us studying RS/RS2 understand all motion can be expressed as simple ratio of space & time -- either (s/t) as speed or (t/s) as energy -- and various powers thereof wherein 's' and/or 't' may be unity (both → s/t = 1 → light)...

This means...

Image

...as displacements in light (from unity as the "charge field" is the "background").

Mass IS rotational/angular/"spin" (motion as inverse speed or energy) displacement from unity in 3 scalar dimensions. Principles of Projective Geometry provides for the 3 coordinate dimensions of either Euclidean (3D space + clock time) or polar-Euclidean (3D time + clock space) sub-geometries.

DimsSpace.png
DimsSpace.png (192.78 KiB) Viewed 251 times
-- K.V.K. Nehru, Reciprocity, Vol. XXVI, No. 3 (Winter, 1997), Some Thoughts on Spin (PDF)

Annotations of Mathis' "Squaring the Circle"
ckiit wrote:
Sun Apr 26, 2020 11:03 pm
We need an axes that may capture this "constant" progression/gravitation condition such to capture any/all particulars (ie. matter, or M in Einstein's e=MC²) which are displaced from unity. We may express this binary of conditions as any particular(s) "particles" as measured either s/t ≠ 1 (thus as some displacement(s) from unity) or in the case of light s/t = 1( thus no displacement(s)). If the former, we are dealing with a particular displacement(s) from unity. If the latter, we are both implicitly and explicitly concerning unity... or not, depending on if there is an "outstanding" root operation on the 1 such to potentially measure a gravitational magnitude -1 rather than a progressive one +1. It is important to understand that what applies to space and time themselves must also apply to all motion-based everything, as according to RSoT: there is only motion, thus the RSoT has already intuited the need for a "quantum" π of 4 long before their finding of the connection to Φ.
QWave.png
QWave.png (242.41 KiB) Viewed 248 times
-- K.V.K. Nehru, Reciprocity, Vol. XXVI, No. 3 (Winter, 1997), Some Thoughts on Spin (PDF)

Welcome to the party, Miles.
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma

user737
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: Near Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by user737 » Tue May 12, 2020 10:03 am

light-ether-7.png
light-ether-7.png (78.4 KiB) Viewed 634 times

Agree, this error would just turn the whole of the planet into one big hydraulic ram with nothing to fuel it.

Yes, the Earth is a light-engine just as you and I are also light-engines (i.e. we each have an individuated Soul as does Earth). :D

The inner inner core ("Caroline" core) of the Earth is a white dwarf fragment -- motion in (3D) time just like the core of Sol (soul?) -- created along with the other fragments at the center of the other 7 planets (total of 8 -- 4 + 4) when the material star in the binary pair that was our system supernova'ed for the second time.

There are two forms of energy transmission -- inter-atomic & intra-atomic.

Inter-atomic energy transmission is well-known and is demonstrated by the sun's EM radiation in (3D) space. All forms of energy transmission through space are therefore inter-atomic by definition. This is just about where legacy science understanding ends.

Intra-atomic energy transmission is transmission through 3D coordinate time (not to be confused with scalar clock time) vice 3D coordinate space. This process is confused as radioactive decay wherein the sum constituents of the decay emissions equal much, much more than the whole (of the atom). That's the funny thing about radioactive decay products -- what you get exceeds what the atom is assumed to reasonably give (by many times over). Radioactive decay products, much like the light from the sun, are a source of continuously renewable energy. In fact, atomic radioactive decay is just inside-out solar radiation!*

Energy from the sun travels through 3D coordinate time -- "inwards" towards the interior of the sun and out of each radioactive atom. Instead of external radiation in space causing a corresponding internal change to the atom, there is an external emission due a corresponding internal change in time from the atom. This is instantaneous as there is no delay in propagation through time as there would be in space -- limited to c -- the "speed of light." You'll note this is not wild conjecture as solar flares and other CME affect radioactive decay rates on Earth (in time) before the corresponding event is observed in space (~8 min "warning" or just enough time to get the heck out of Dodge). Patent it: solar flare detector that works faster than light. Lol

light-ether-8.png
light-ether-8.png (51.73 KiB) Viewed 597 times

What Miles calls "charge recycling" IS intra-atomic radiation. The spectra would be inverted (having originated on the other side of the unit speed boundary) which is where Mile's gets his anti-photon theory. Again, RS/RS2 provides a complete set of theoretical understanding for the second-half of the inverted spectrum. See Photon 2.0 -- 3 scalar dimensions of inverse speed (energy) wherein the combined "direction" (CW or CCW) of each of the three individual SCALAR dimensions determines color.

Yes, Sol IS feeding charge (light -- photons -- spin energy) to Earth both through 3D coordinate space and 3D coordinate time -- Black Hole Sun. The balance sets our orbit and is the unified field to which Miles refers. Gravity "pulls" the bodies together as a function of distance (radius) only; and the progression (light or Miles' E/M charge field) "pushes" the bodies apart as a function of (field) density only. (Progression in space is really just another name for temporal gravitation and progression in time is then spatial gravitation.) Put them together and you get a compound field of push/pull (scalar) that is a function of radius and density -- oops, this looks like mass when "flattened" losing detail -- as mass is a field effect (temporal). What we call the center of mass is in fact the gravity ("point" in space).

* no problems installing big, ugly silicon gallium arsenide panels all over the planet but by no means can we make use of this technology in the inverse aspect. This is the key to all those free energy (over unity) devices we hear all about. Even the tiniest amount of naturally-occurring radioactive impurities say, in a small crystalline structure, dug out of the ground -- color would indicate type and relative quantity of said "impurity" i.e. active ingredient -- would provide for a tremendous amount of energy (and could also be made to provide for extremely high-power considerations) with very little active material required. If you could weigh a nuclear submarine core before commissioning and then again after meeting design life -- all other things being equal -- the difference would be about 20g of Uranium-235 "consumed." Yes, 20 grams over 20+ years of full-power operation and we're not talking about a small boat. What an injustice it is to keep this from the People. Instead we bury all this life-giving material deep underground encased in concrete where it can benefit none. Jokes on us as we'll need this tech to go to other planets where fuel tanks run dry and the sun is too distant to provide for meaningful energy collection in space.
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma

user737
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: Near Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by user737 » Tue May 12, 2020 1:17 pm

light-ether-10.png
light-ether-10.png (77.31 KiB) Viewed 532 times
light-ether-13.png
light-ether-13.png (89.4 KiB) Viewed 469 times

Photons have no "size" as they are neither spatially nor temporally displaced. After all, s/t = 1 (c or the "speed of light").

This misunderstanding is due the failure to recognize the recursive nature of counterspace wherein points and planes exchange aspects of expression. In counterspace the "zero" origin is distributed as a 2D surface with the infinitude at the center point (at infinity). This can be considered as in concentric spheres moving inward like Russian nesting dolls are placed one inside the next.

Outward is always away from unity; however, outward in counterspace (1 → ∞) is inward in 3D coordinate space (1 → 0). Turn being the primary unbounded magnitude in counterspace (analogous to linear speed in space) is an angular inverse speed ("spin" or energy, t/s) and as such cannot be fully represented in 3D coordinate space where rotation is bounded (0+→π←-0). Once we've made one full rotation (2π) we're... right back where we started.

A unbounded turn (in counterspace) of 'n' angle in space then becomes a bounded rotation of (n/2)(2π) or nπ where πi is the natural unit of rotation in counterspace; ±πi in counterspace (time) is in many ways analogous to ±1 in space.

This creates the recursion wherein Miles makes the claim that X-rays and gamma rays have "extra spins."

Bruce explains this well in Frequency as angular recursion.

It's odd that Miles would equate "larger" with more "powerful" as power (time-rate expression of potential energy)* is a counterspatial phenomenon -- 1/s. The higher the energy density the greater the potential for high-power release (energy per clock time). I can only compress to increase density (less space -- more time) so as to realize an increase rate of energy "production" (more energy, same clock time). A once-powerful bomb is impotent once expended.

Note: potential "anything" is a dead-ringer for counterspatial. When you see potential think counterspace.

Example using electrical (1D -- one spatial dimension) power:

P = I2R

Natural units: 1/s = (s/t)2 × t2/s3

Where current (I) is a speed (+1 or c) on the real direct-current (DC) axis...

...and resistance is mass per time (R = m/t) or better yet mass is resistance for a period of time (m = Rt) -- inertial resistance as well as electrical resistance in one. If there were no resistance, there would be no mass!

We recall mass is naught but 3D energy or (t/s)3 → t3/s3 and so R = t3/s3 / t = t2/s3

* Blessed are the Meek (Power Under Control)
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma

user737
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: Near Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by user737 » Tue May 12, 2020 2:08 pm

light-ether-11.png
light-ether-11.png (106.34 KiB) Viewed 502 times

Yes, the second "field" is the missing animus to gravity -- the progression (temporal gravity) -- the net of which is incorrectly assumed by legacy science to be a single field as measured. Point two vectors of unequal length head-to-tail and 180 degrees out of phase. Now sum. Single "force" vector output yet we've lost all resolution as to the true underlying scalar motions (fields).

These are scalar functions -- no direction except to say that all mass moves towards the locations of all other mass in space (towards unity) and all light moves away from all other locations in space (away from unity). The only way to provide for photonic interaction is through the torque (real spatial displacement) created through circular-polarization of light (i.e. create a laser where multiple photons can simultaneously occupy the same location in the NRS). Linearly-polarized photons will not interact with other linearly-polarized photons.
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma

user737
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: Near Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by user737 » Tue May 12, 2020 3:23 pm

light-ether-12.png
light-ether-12.png (128.65 KiB) Viewed 472 times

Going back for a good one...

Everything that exists in space must have extension in space. Conversely, everything that exists in time must have extension in time. But to claim that everything that exists must have extension is lacking in detail. Mass is a three-tuple of temporal displacements at a location in 3D space; inverse-matter ("anti-matter") is a three-tuple of spatial displacements at a location in 3D time.

While it is indeed true that no particle (having energy) cannot have no mass, the photon is hardly a particle. We have photons and then we have everything else (particles/sub-atoms, atoms, molecules, larger compounds, etc.). We measure this effect in "electron-volts" (eV) once the net displacement falls below 3 units: ln(3) = ~1.1

Energy is not a function of mass. If anything, mass is a function of energy as motion as speed (s/t) and motion as energy (t/s) are the fundamental basis on which a universe of motion is constructed.

The photon has no mass.* We don't have to conjecture this as we understand mass IS temporal displacement and the photon has no net displacement in either time or space and hence no mass.

* note added 5/24/2020: to clarify "no mass" means no gravitational effect in space as Miles refers. See section Massless Particles from RS2-107: Mass and Gravity, Bruce Peret (PDF) for more detail

s/t = 1 = 1s/1t

1 - 1 = 0 spatial displacement

1 - 1 = 0 temporal displacement

Miles can't call the notion of photon "rest mass" absurd (it is) and then go on to apply a label in the inverse aspect ("moving mass") as if it has any meaning. There is no point in arguing the distinction of no distinction. A difference that makes no difference is no difference.

The confusion regarding the assumed need to couple energy to mass is due Miles' instantiable want to define light AS motion and yet still provide for some pre-condition quality in regard to its very existence. Light IS the reference. You can't measure "background" energy content with respect to itself (the "background") and expect to come away with anything other than null -- I would have thought this was a known given at this point in the game.

Ultimately this is a failure to apply the proper datum (1 -- unity-based) and not the man-made, zero-based coordinate reference system only possible in non-kinematic (i.e. diagrammatic) situations -- in other words -- not reality.


http://nct.goetheanum.org/ethers.htm#light
"This led to the conclusion that time is the reciprocal of radial turn i.e. the turn between spatially parallel planes. Thus time increases outward from the CSI in counter space. The consequence is that light itself does not in fact have a velocity, but it appears to have one in ordinary space, and moreover that is necessarily constant without the necessity for Relativity. This follows because the product of the radial distance of the apex of a cone from a CSI, and the turn of the orthogonal plane in the apex, is constant. An interaction must occur at the apex, so if the turn is the reciprocal of the time then we have a constant ratio of distance to time, which seems like a velocity for our spatial consciousness. It is independent of the state of motion of the observer."

Image
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma

StringGene
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat May 16, 2020 6:44 pm

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by StringGene » Sat May 16, 2020 6:56 pm

We channel consciousness from Source, consciousness is frequency. That streaming is what we "perceive" as the passing time. That is supported by the fact that when we get panicked or excited, time literally slows down for us, because we channel more consciousness, faster. We are nothing but conscious frequency. Creation is NOW... for us anyway, in this dimension, which is frequency based, this dimension is but a frequency in this infinite conscious mind, like a radio station in an infinite field of consciousness. We are a point of awareness, or perspective in that infinite mind. It also helps to understand the double slit experiment, if you care to into it.

user737
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: Near Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by user737 » Mon May 18, 2020 8:15 am

StringGene wrote:
Sat May 16, 2020 6:56 pm
We channel consciousness from Source, consciousness is frequency.
This resonates with me as channeling would be an internal communication (much like intra-atomic radiation).
Couple that with the understanding that we perceive "inside-out" and project our reality in our mind's eye...

I like how you think, StringGene.
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma

StringGene
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat May 16, 2020 6:44 pm

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by StringGene » Mon May 18, 2020 8:30 am

Thank you:) Then you may also like what I just posted regarding the expanding universe, because it ALL relates, as it should:)

user737
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: Near Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Solid of Time

Post by user737 » Tue May 19, 2020 7:45 am

user737 wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 8:47 am
One plausible explanation for why Antarctica is off limits to most, I am apt to believe, has to do with the rumored higher relative abundance of radioactive earth metals that tend to accumulate at and around the planetary magnetic poles.
Link: https://reciprocal.systems/phpBB3/viewt ... tica#p3893

Seems to me there would be a lower, local magnetic ionization level offset at each pole; here's an new, public indication of such:

UH professor’s Antarctica discovery may herald new model of physics
https://www.hawaii.edu/news/2018/12/10/ ... discovery/
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa Professor of physics Peter Gorham, along with a team of researchers, discovered new evidence that suggests some Antarctic particles do not fit the standard model of physics. The particles were detected with the Antarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna (ANITA).
Uh oh.
ANITA, a stratospheric balloon payload flying over the Antarctic, was designed to detect cosmic-ray air showers through radio-wave signals on their way down or back up after bouncing off the ice. During flights in December 2006 and December 2014, ANITA detected a fountain of high-energy particles erupting from the ice that resembles an upside-down cosmic-ray shower.

“What we saw is something that looked just like a cosmic ray, as seen in reflection off the ice sheet, but it wasn’t reflected,” said Gorham. “It was as if the cosmic ray had come out of the ice itself. A very strange thing. So we published a paper on that, we just suggested that this was in pretty strong tension with the standard model of physics.”

Scientists analyzed the particle and thought it could be a secondary particle produced by a neutrino interaction. Neutrinos are fundamental particles of the universe, born in the energy of the Big Bang. They can tell us everything from the birth of the universe to the nuclear reactions that power cities.

“It could indicate that we’re actually seeing a new class of sub-atomic particle that’s very penetrating,” said Gorham. “Even more penetrating than a neutrino, which is pretty hard to do. This particle would be passing through almost the entire earth. So this could be an indication of some new type of physics, what we call beyond the standard model of physics.”

The detections suggest that signals came from upward-moving particles that tunneled through the earth before erupting from the ice. But cosmic rays are not predicted to do that in large numbers. One possibility is that cosmic rays from a bright supernova blasted all the way through the earth.
Miles will be joyed to see more evidence of "charge recycling" -- otherwise known as intra-atomic radiation -- in the news.

Cosmic rays are FTL (they originate in the Cosmic sector). This is motion in time and it is coming from the core of the Earth, not passing through from the other side.

SunInterior.png
SunInterior.png (126.17 KiB) Viewed 148 times
-- K.V.K. Nehru, Reciprocity, Vol. XVIII, No. 1 (Winter, 1988), Glimpses Into the Structure of the Sun (PDF)

Antarctica is key to access to the naturally-occurring heavy elements necessary to provide "free energy" to the world.
Infinite Rider on the Big Dogma

Post Reply