What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Superposition v. Entanglement;

The LINE hypothesis proposes that a single particle in a state of superposition is a single particle in this space-time entangled to metamatter in the Hilbert-space called the metaverse. In superposition, the particles’ degrees of freedom (DOF) are continuously instantaneously shared or teleported between it and its entangled metamatter. This sharing manifests in this space-time as the particle existing in multiple states simultaneously. The collapse of any superposition state involves the disentanglement of the particle from its entangled metamatter via foreign infiltrations called measurement or observation. This disentanglement from metamatter leaves the particle in this space-time in only one of the possible shared states and the metamatter in some metaverse version of the remaining state.

Like nature's perfect slot machine, collapsed particle states are individualized and utterly unpredictable or random, hence do not collectively scale to produce macroscopic effects such as duplication or to a cat being simultaneously dead and alive. So, although such particles may compose a cat in this space-time, there can be no corresponding metamatter cat in the metaverse. This is because metamatter does not operate by the same or even similar laws of physics as the physics of any verse that it may produce. What particles in any verse are collectively doing is completely distinct from what its entangled metamatter is doing within the metaverse. The shared states involved in superposition are those states that remain uninvolved, unobserved, ergo; coherent, within its universe and so are available for entanglement with similarly available metamatter.

Additionally, entanglement between multiple particles in this space-time involves entanglement by those same particles with the same, in-common particles of metamatter simultaneously. In so doing, mutually entangled particles in this space-time also share available coherent states simultaneously and instantaneously with each other via a shared superposition state with common metamatter and thereby are also in a superposition of those states. In this universe, when any one of the entangled particles decoherer or are measured, one of the shared DOF states randomly remains with one particle, and the other possible state, by default, remains with the remaining particle. The state of in-common entangled metamatter in any of these scenarios is unknowable to any emergent verse.

Consequently, entanglement in this universe may involve each particle being entangled with multiple metamatter particles which are also entangled with each other within the metaverse. Hence, upon the decoherence or measurement of one entangled particle in this universe, the accompanying state held in matamatter is instantaneously teleported to the other participating particle in this universe. Alternatively, both particles may be simultaneously entangled to the same single metamatter particle for the duration of the entangled state. When one entangled particle is collapsed, it instantiates only one of the possible states as it disconnects from its entangled metamatter. The remaining state is instantaneously transmitted to the other participating particle. This disentanglement is known as the quantum flip. It is these interactions that instantiate the individual position of view (POV) in this space-time.

What then is the essential behavior or involvement between metamatter particles within the metaverse? Indeed, is there such a distinction as a single vs multiple particles of metamatter in the metaverse? What manifestations can such unfamiliar particles imbue that could give rise to the pivotal emergent state, that is a temporary but recurring claim on territory, a single point in this space-time, shrouded and protected for a time by any viable host form that can emerge within any viable habitat, the state known as individuality? One clear advantage that we have in making such determinations is, while we live, we are each in possession of one exhibit of evidence of the product of the metaverse. It is ones’ position of view (POV) that defines ones’ individuality. The proper evaluation of this exhibit of evidence is severely clouded by the very prominent host form to which the POV is instantiated in any life, and yet in every moment of life, one is experiencing this product of the metaverse. The key lies in discovering the entanglement cell (EC) and molecule (EM).

Life is one of the strangest, most unforeseeable emergent phenomena we know of. This is because individuality is most fundamentally not a product of this universe but of the metaverse. Like a fragile bubble on the surface of a body of water, the POV is a delicate emergent confluence of different states of information forming a temporary alliance from which we may experience life, for better or for worst. What details can be gleaned from this rarefied perspective in nature? The more we can know the better. The intimately involved aspects and DOF of the metaverse exposed by individuality may become of some practical use. Metamatter satellites and detection of the QEF for example, as well as the deliberate instantiation of individual POV, will be of great interest once accepted. Beyond these only time and intensive research will tell.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Mach, Hawking, and Cherenkov; three names one account;


A hypothesis is self-validating when it unifies previously separate well-known phenomena by its proposed underlying predictions and structures. The LINE hypothesis proposes that at the Planck scale, the PH regimes around which pyrine form within particles of baryonic matter, while within a local medium such as glass, produce a region of information deficit as gravitation due to its sequestered debytons (dark matter). This deficit effectively and measurably reduces the local rendering rate (LRR) of reality which informs change, ergo; time, and the local speed of light within that medium. This Planck scale information deficit projects into the atomic realm to produce the effect known as a refractive index. It is hypothesized that Black holes radiate Hawking radiation only when the universal rendering rate (URR) is diminishing as it does during universal contractions. As the URR diminishes, so does the vacuum speed of light, which increases while the URR is increasing during periods of universal expansion.


Consequently, massless photons may become restricted while within some materials to velocities below the current vacuum speed of light in this universe. While, by the same mechanism, under particular conditions, massive particles are simultaneously able to travel within that same local medium at or closer to the vacuum speed of light than does mass-less particles therein. This simultaneous conjunction of speed differentials is informed by the LRR of that medium. The LRR is informed by the information deficit demanded by the pyrine that compose all matter. As massive baryonic particles in this condition translate between PH regimes faster than their own emitted massless photons, such photons become liberated from their normal bound nuclear bonds. Not unlike a passenger not strapped into their seat in a decelerating vehicle, photons in this condition are liberated to produce a particular type of light emission. This emission is widely known as; Cherenkov radiation.


It is suggestive that under particular circumstances, Hawking radiation is emitted from the maximally dilated PH regimes called black holes and Cherenkov radiation is emitted from the minimally dilated PH regimes called particles. These emissions both occur as the rendering rate of reality in this universe which informs the current speed of light varies for PH regimes at all scales within a local medium and in the vacuum of space. Such information deficits occur as information transitions between this universe and the metaverse at the PH of baryonic pyrine and also at the EH of black holes. In each case, the rendering rate of change, ergo; time is brought to equilibrium with its respective environment by the transition of a proportional amount of information from within their respective PH regimes. In all cases, this radiation or gravitation compensates the universal information budget. By this mechanism, as complexity rises in this universe and this universe begins to contract, black holes universally proportionately emit their bound information which was captured at the higher URR. In particles, a similar equilibrium produces a space-time inflow of information from the metaverse observed as various emissions like the luminous shockwave of photons that is Cherenkov radiation. The LINE hypothesis suggests that Cherenkov and Hawking radiation are both phenomena produced by the same underlying information deficits fulfillment paid to the universal information budget each on opposite ends of the PH dilation or QE spectrum. The QE spectrum is the inter-universal medium that defines gravitation, radiation, matter, space, and individuality in this universe.


Mach’s Principle; "Local physical laws are determined by the large-scale structure of the universe", is a tacit acknowledgment of the interrelated dynamics of matter with the universal information budget (UIB). Mach’s principle suggests that there is an information influence between the large-scale universe and the local scale of inertia, momentum, and gravitation. The LINE hypothesis suggests that Mach is on the right track, but doesn’t explain this ubiquitous universal interaction. Mach’s principle describes the same information deficit fulfillment being paid to local space via the PH which informs the UIB of the large-scale universe. In rotating frames, the UIB causes an information deficit in the space occupied by baryonic matter. This is due to gradients in a rotating body's sequestration of debytonic (dark) matter particles. Faster moving baryonic matter sequesters proportionately more debytons than slower-moving baryonic matter. An information deficit also occurs by the gravitation of free massless debytonic (dark) matter in the vacuum of space. Hence, massless debytonic PH regimes are the mass-independent basis from which an increase or decrease of the mass within massive baryonic particles should be compared and measured.


Mach’s principle suggests that universal gravitation is in some way responsible for a centrifugal force. This is not strictly the case; centrifugal motion is largely due to a physical exchange of kinetic energy between particles to produce an exchange of velocity. Centrifugal motion may occur via physical contact of incident matter particles that are in contact with a transient surface. If no contact exists between the two bodies including air contact or electric or magnetic influences, then the vulnerable body would rotate only diminutively. This minimal rotation is not due to the well-known centrifugal force, hence, must be defined differently. Let us call this minimal independent force, the Mach force. Einstein demonstrated this Mach force in his pendulum precession experiments. The Mach Force is very weak on human scales. It is produced by the information deficit paid to the UIB of local space by matter particles of rotating systems. The UIB taxes the local faster-rotating pyrine of matter at the peripheries of a rotating body in greater proportion to the information tax paid by matter towards the slower rotating center of mass.


On the cosmic scale, it is also debytons, but not bound within matter particles, that hold rotating galaxies and clusters thereof together. Hence, Mach’s centrifugal force which acts upon you within a rotating space station, and the gravitational force that binds matter together in galaxies attributed to debytonic (dark) matter are both ultimately produced by the same underlying information drain of space by debytonic matter whether sequestered within particles or free in the vacuum of space. This occurs on vastly different scales via the dilation of PH regimes small or large. It is the information deficits paid by all PH regimes to account in the UIB that creates all of the phenomena of this universe. This is the solution that explains Mach’s principle and the mystery of the non-Newtonian galactic rotation. Centrifugal force is the sum total of Mach’s Force plus any physical, electromagnetically transferred kinetic energy from a rotating body to vulnerable bodies therein. The LINE hypothesis proposes that by this description, the debytonic (dark) matter gravitation that confines galaxies now has its’ name; The Mach Force. The universal information budget is the mechanism by which small-scale structures communicate with the large-scale structure of this universe.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Great Voids: Seeking The Elusive Cosmic Eraser;

The LINE hypothesis proposes that debytonic (dark) matter cannot create dark stars. This is because dark matter has no information accumulation, ergo; no rest mass, and therefore cannot create dark particles that can interact electromagnetically or can be captured gravitationally. It requires rest mass for the electromagnetic and gravitational accretion of matter to occur. Curved space-time does not capture or attract curved space-time, ergo; Gravity does not attract gravity. There can be no dark stars, however, there can be dark holes. Dark holes are formed by very fast-moving debytonic (dark) matter. Extreme events such as the universal instantiation and transition events (UIE and UTE) can produce the near luminal velocity of debytonic (dark) matter. This high velocity causes a diminutive information accumulation, ergo; kinetic mass to arise within affected debytons. This minuscule mass build-up, in sufficient magnitude, produces gravitational attraction within a sufficiently large population of debytonic particles, and possibly an eventual collapse into a dark hole.

In baryonic matter, Newtonian gravitation (G) is always accompanied by mass due to the sequestration of a proportional amount of debytons within its pyrine structure. This is not the case for debytonic gravitation (GD). Once a dark hole forms it must remain at high velocity to persist as a dark hole. A dark hole is a massless high momentum high gravitation phenomenon. In a dark hole it is not high mass that maintains its’ high gravitation event horizon, but high momentum only. This subtle distinction bears odd fruit. Unlike a black hole, a dark hole cannot be attracted gravitationally as there is no information in a dark hole to attract. It requires mass to pay the information deficit called gravitation demanded by the universal information budget (UIB). Matter that subsequently falls into a dark hole is immediately teleported into the metaverse and doesn’t contribute or diminish the dark hole’s structural integrity. This is unlike black holes which maintain a considerable mass accumulation both outside and within its event horizon, a mass that directly informs its structure. Massless debytonic (dark) matter gravitation and momentum cannot fulfill this demand. Momentum in the absence of rest mass via a degree of freedom called metamatter, shared with the metaverse, is the dark hole’s superpower.

A dark hole is massless despite its initial diminutive kinetic mass of formation. This is because upon the formation of a dark hole, upon the establishment of its event horizon, the conditions of extreme velocity of the debytons that precipitated the dark hole formation no longer exist within its event horizon. The information accumulation as mass dissipates inside the event horizon of the dark hole as a type of Hawking radiation very soon after its formation. This debytonic Hawking radiation occurs even within an expanding universe and induces no change in the momentum of the dark hole. The dark holes continued high velocity relative to space-time is required to maintain its high momentum and its event horizon. On the other hand, black holes require universal contraction to emit Hawking radiation due to the black holes’ high mass content which maintains a grip on its captured bounty. A grip that can only be overcome via an external reduction in the maximum universal speed limit, the speed of light. A reduction that occurs during universal contractions.

However, dark holes have no such requirement. Due to a dark hole's lack of internal mass, its gravitation and event horizon is maintained only by the opportunistic coalescence of near luminal speed debytons. Dark holes are impervious to most universal influences. Like its constituent debyton particles, dark holes are weakly interacting and do not respond to most external stimuli. Like a great cosmic eraser, dark holes will gravitationally attract all manner of baryonic information states and matter and manifestations thereof. By the UIB, a dark holes’ event horizon persists by the balance between its high velocity and the current maximum universal speed limit, the speed of light. Any adjustment to either of these critical factors will result in loss of momentum and the emission of debytons as debytonic Hawking radiation and the deterioration of the integrity of the dark hole. Of these two factors, the more likely and immediate to change in this space-time is the dark holes’ velocity. Very few universal interactions can affect a dark holes’ path or velocity due to its weakly interactive nature. A dark hole is potentially an unstoppable gravitational cosmic wrecking-ball.

What phenomenon might possess the wherewithal to influence a dark holes’ velocity and thereby begin its rapid destruction? It is free debytonic point particles, the likes of which construct a dark hole, that bears the seeds of its demise. The tax demanded by the UIB never goes on holiday. It is the immense clouds of debytonic (dark) matter throughout the cosmos that can spell eventual doom for dark holes. As dark holes pass through clouds of debytons at its native high velocity, not unlike photons whose path bends to compensate the UIB as they pass through gravitational fields, so too does the dark holes’ speed, momentum and path alter as the information deficit demanded by the UIB is paid. Like a dark ice-cube melting in the sun, a dark hole moving through vast clouds of debytonic matter, has its days severely numbered by this interaction.

Consequently, relatively few dark holes survive in these cosmos. Dark holes can nonetheless survive within regions of low debytonic matter population and will reek havoc upon the local environment within its’ light cone. A dark hole will, over time, clear all detectable baryonic matter within its reach. Such baryonic deserts are described as; voids. Within voids, dark holes, with their high velocity, reign supreme as they erase all baryonic structure within their considerable reach. Such dark hole infested regions of space are made prominent by the absence of stars, gas or any observable baryonic information structure. Only the most opportunistic of dark holes will survive to the present day to be seen by equally opportunistic astronomers. No doubt A Nobel Prize awaits the persistent and fortunate astronomer that discovers this most elusive and unifying among natural phenomena, but what to look for?

While there will be relatively few dark holes surviving to the present state of universal transition, fortunately there are numerous great and super voids that offer vast tracks of dark hole infested space-time that present ample opportunity for discovery. The perimeter of these mysterious swaths of missing baryonic matter where the darkness meets the visible structures of the cosmos of stars, nebulae, pulsars etc. presents the dedicated astronomer with an opportunity to witness a dark hole in the act of satisfying its voracious appetite. Formerly observable matter at the perimeter of voids will be seen to vanish as the void continues to grow as it has for epochs of universal time. Cosmological voids will grow nearly imperceptibly as the termites of the cosmos that are dark holes continue to expand their dark realm by opportunistically devouring any baryonic matter within reach of their considerable information drain into the underlying metaverse. I encourage all nimble minded astronomers of every ilk, to pursue this noble, career altering initiative at your earliest convenience.

Great and Super voids began as baby voids. The LINE hypothesis suggests that dark holes formed early in the universal instantiation and transition events. At that point in universal evolution, the entire universe was no larger than the Andromeda galaxy is today. At that time there was precious little space for information in any form to move through. After each UTE the universe is as an expanding debytonic (dark) matter egg composed overwhelmingly of numerous galaxoids, like egg yolks, most confined within a WOF halo of baryonic matter, floating in a vast ocean of debytonic matter. Once sufficient space expands into existence, it is from this dark matter that the population of dark holes is accelerated into existence. The baryonic matter that existed at that time existed only as wispy veins of electrons and protons and elementary combinations thereof weaved between the galaxoids from their own WOF halos. As the growing universe expands, space becomes increasingly available and galaxoids begin their long evolution into galaxies.

Over the course of the next few million years, dark holes have a limited time frame in which they will consume any baryonic matter that happens into their dark, ever-winding path. At that point baby voids, excavated by these dark termites of the universe begin as excavated regions, no larger than a large nebula is today, but devoid of matter of any kind. Over the course of the ensuing 13.8 billion years of universal expansion, these baby voids will expand with the rest of the cosmos to become super voids of empty space consisting perhaps only of a precious few galaxies that opportunistically wondered into the void after the preponderance of the dark holes reign had passed. Observing dark holes in action is a retroactive time trip made possible by the extreme latency of electromagnetic waves traveling through space-time over the universes' entire history. It will require equipment, perhaps an order of magnitude more powerful than even the soon-to-be-launched JWS telescope, to have any chance of witnessing the unraveling of this relic of a cosmic archeological process unfolding at the edges of the voids.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Information Tunneling Its’ Way Into Life;

How does one amalgam of information block or contain another? The bars of a prison cell, or the aluminum hull of the airplane, the earth beneath your feet, or the energy shells of the atom. It is by a property known as the Pauli Exclusion Principle (PEP). What causes the PEP? The LINE hypothesis proposes that it is the structure of baryonic pyrine projected from the Planck scale into the subatomic realm as quarks and their emerged information states that produce local exclusion zones in normal matter. How then do amalgams of information called particles tunnel in apparent violation of the PEP?

Information tunneling is a phenomenon observed in diminutive ‘quantum’ amalgams of information states called particles. Tunneling revealed through the prism of the LINE hypothesis suggests that the tunneling of particles describes a relocation of a particulate Planck Hole (PH) regime through space-time across a distance that is, by all accounts impassable, contiguously occupied by other PH regimes classified as obstructions or barriers. What dynamics could account for the underlying mechanism of this puzzling behavior?

It is the natural entanglement with metamatter via the QE spectrum that makes tunneling possible. Further, the information tunneling observed in particles is fundamentally the same mechanism by natural entanglement that instantiates the position of view (POV) of all living individuals throughout this universe. Natural entanglement instantiates, or tunnels the individual degrees of freedom (DOF) of the QE spectrum (QEF), you, to any viable host form within any viable habitat in this universe. It is this same mechanism that reinstantiates, or tunnels a particle to another location through a barrier. One might say that the tunneled particle has died (deinstantiated) and is born (reinstantiated) elsewhere in this universe. It is curious however, that such particles don’t appear to tunnel to more distant locations in space-time, but relocates to positions that are relatively local to the tunneling particles’ original position and, quite fortuitously, just beyond the obstructing barrier within the local system.

Indeed, if hydrogen nuclei in stars tunneled, not into the energy exclusion zones required for nuclear fusion to occur, but to some distant location in this universe, stars wouldn’t shine. It is the local system, ergo; other particles that are local and within close proximity of the tunneling particle and also local to the obstruction between them that probabilistically biases the tunneling mechanism by natural entanglement. There are more abundant instantiations of more similar particles local to, and adjacent to a barriers’ confined space than far beyond it. Such particles have positions adjacent to the local barrier and probabilistically, non-locally biases the reinstantiation of other entangled particulate PH regimes to local positions. These shared entanglements to metamatter influences a tunneling particles’ entangled metamatter, to imprint a particles’ quantum entanglement-ID (QEID) with a fidelity of teleportation (FT) that is biased toward local positions in space-time.

The DOF of particles entangled with non-local metamatter may define everything about a particle. By the dynamics of superposition and entanglement; the sharing of defining DOF between entangled particles in this universe with the non-local DOF of metamatter within the metaverse, all of a particles’ DOF may probabilistically, non-locally deinstantiate from one location to reinstantiate elsewhere, regardless of distance or barriers. Such locations essentially describe a tunneling particles indigenous ecosystem. An increasingly larger group of particles is less likely to tunnel. This is because a larger group of particles is less likely to define one common destination for teleportation in this space-time. A common destination for teleportation is essential for tunneling to occur, and also for the reinstantiation of individuality. A common destination shared by entangled PH regimes define a particulate state for information, and otherwise defines a wave state. This dynamic of natural entanglement via metamatter underpins the particle-wave duality observed in this universe.

Further, the shared entanglement of particles in this universe with metamatter within the metaverse, produces a bias of the particles teleportation prospects, called the fidelity of teleportation (FT). This bias points to destinations local to other similarly entangled particles via in-common metamatter entanglement. By this mechanism, earths microbiome and ecology will bias the FT of its’ indigenous individual lifeID’s to instantiate similar host forms (species, etc.), regardless of the distance or barriers between them. This is because the entanglement molecule, the tunneling or teleportation-pad, if you will, is contained within living hosts. Such hosts, however mobile, are circumstantially more likely to be physically local to its indigenous ecosystem, if it still exists and remains viable. This teleportation of information via natural entanglement is the fundamental mechanism by which natural entanglement imprints a particles’ QEID, and also the living individuals’ lifeID to metamatter. This imprinted metadata mediates the FT of the living individual, you, and also tunnels subatomic particles to let stars shine in this space-time.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Emerging Out Of The Wild;


Ascending out of Earth’s gravity well has been a long ongoing trial of imagination and innovation for humankind. Having witnessed various living fauna exhibiting the skill of flight for all of human history, it was long apparent that it was possible to resist gravity to some useful benefit. Humanity has since discovered and engineered effective means of scaling the ladder of the earth’s atmosphere in various ways. Ways such as balloons filled with lighter than air gases, and gliders. Then came powered airfoils as aircraft. Each advancement further cajoled the known laws of physics to utilize the atmosphere as a ladder of sorts to ascend the walls of earth’s gravity well to new heights. To date, rocket propulsion offers the only other means of ascending a gravity well, one that doesn’t depend upon the atmosphere as a mechanism of physical leverage. A rocket carries combustible propellants that, when combined and properly contained and directed, produce a repulsive exhaust that provides the rocket with its’ own physical leverage. A propulsion with an energy density adequate to leaving a gravity well of moderate intensity such as the earths.

What all of these designs have in common is they all resist the full force of gravitation at every point in their climb out of a gravity well. The dream of anti-gravitation is to reduce or otherwise control the full effect of gravitation upon a volume of space occupied by a craft and its inhabitants. What all previous implementations not so obviously have in common, is they all use a form of matter that naturally sequesters the same proportion of debytonic (dark) matter within its pyrine structure.

While humanity has witnessed natural examples of resistance to gravitation through flight in birds, bees and the like, might there be examples of anti-gravitation, living or otherwise? Perhaps surprisingly, yes there is. An example of anti-gravitation is the balance that nature implements in baryonic matter via a trajectory through a gravitational field called an orbit. An orbit, in its popular implementation, defines a trajectory which neither descends continuously further into a gravitational field nor ascends continuously higher out of that gravitational field. Instead, affected information threads a path of constant gravitational balance. This balance, not unlike a slipstream in fluids, is defined at every instant, and at every point in that trajectory by the information deficit paid to the universal information budget (UIB) by orbiting matter via its’ particulate PH regimes within baryonic pyrine.

In truth it is not only orbiting planets, moons, satellites and space stations around large masses such as the sun that is in this state. Every bit of information anywhere in this universe is in some UIB state relative to every other amalgam of information regardless of location or trajectory. This information tax is paid at the Planck scale within baryonic matter via its particulate pyrine structure. Alter that pyrine structure to sequester more or less debytons per pyrine and you alter the gravitational potential it exerts.

Is there anything in nature witnessed by humankind that exhibits such modifications? As with the seeming example of exceptions to the gravitational displacement exhibited by orbits, there are other hints of infractions to the gravitational rules exhibited by non-Einsteinian galactic rotations. Exceptions that hint that not all is well understood about baryonic gravitation and its fundamental underpinnings. The question becomes how can a balance be obtained not only within a closed orbital trajectory around a mass such as satellites orbiting the earth, but at any point within the vast extended contiguous gravityscapes of this universe?

The LINE hypothesis suggests that baryonic matter has evolved in this universe to naturally ubiquitously sequester a consistent proportion of debytonic particles. A proportion that defines its normal Newtonian/Einsteinian gravitation (G). In the living cell, baryonic matter has since further evolved in this universe to augment this normal debytonic sequestration capacity of its pyrine with additional valence debyton particles, to create matter 2.0, life. The living individual position of view (POV) is an advanced iteration of the same fundamental mechanism that bestows gravitation to inanimate matter. As unintuitive as it may seem, the secret to the conundrum of anti-gravitation lies in understanding this natural evolutionary lineage of inanimate matter into living beings in this universe. Debytonic (dark) matter instantiates both gravitation and life to baryonic matter. With life, nature has provided the clue and means to the gravitational manipulation of baryonic matter.

The instantiated POV of every living cell and collections thereof, requires the manipulation of the pyrines’ debytonic sequestration capacity. This debytonic manipulation is also the key to controlling gravitation. How could such a diminutive delicate entity such as the living cell have cracked this most tenacious, defining and elusive among the degrees of freedom of this universe? Such has always been the irony of nature. All phenomena have significance in the great tapestry of reality. Size bears only limited, circumstantial dominion. An understanding of how the living cell manages to manipulate its debytonic (dark) matter sequestration capacity while at room temperatures, and pressures, and with biological chemical energy levels, is the scientific singularity that elevates ascending cultures of high potential out of the wild state. This understanding will lead to the controlled sequestration of debytonic (dark) matter particles for technological use. Once collected and properly contained and manipulated, each debyton to anti-debyton annihilation temporarily alters the PH dilation of a proportional region of space. This is a region of space with reduced information deficit demanded by the UIB within any existing gravitational field.

The LINE hypothesis describes debytonic (dark) matter particles as the primary conveyor of gravitation in this universe. Consequently, it is the sequestration of debytonic matter within baryonic pyrine which are the primary source of gravitation in normal matter, but what of debytonic matters antiparticle (ADM) and its effect on normal matter? No matter has ever been found to intrinsically not gravitate. This is only a result of widespread circumstance due to the universal ubiquity of debytonic matter throughout the cosmos. Gravitation exists where debytonic matter exists, and where debytonic matter is nonexistent, we see great voids. Consequently, if debytonic matter is introduced to its antiparticle, they would, as is expected, mutually annihilate.

However, the only interaction of debytonic matter with baryonic matter is through its gravitation. Therefore, when debytonic matter annihilates, the only observable effect upon baryonic matter is the local loss of all gravitational effects therein. This loss of gravitation is due to debytonic matters' interaction with the Higgs field which establishes a high PH dilation. This increased PH bandwidth produced by debytonic particles does not cause the circulating bottleneck of information accumulation which would produce rest mass, and spin as well as the nuclear binding force. Ergo; no mass; no strong force; no energy; no explosion.

Debytonic matter annihilation is due to the nullification or collapse of the gravitating QE channels established with metamatter due to debytonic matters' interaction with the Higgs field. What DOF of debytonic matter and of its antiparticle produces this hypothesized gravitational effect and outage? This outage is, in essence, a local PH dilation or contraction which temporarily attenuates information outflow from this space-time, ergo; gravitation. This particle called, the debyton, is not indigenous to baryonic matter and is the missing link between baryonic matter and its gravitation.

Debytonic matter annihilations present a mechanism by which gravitation can be locally effected, ergo anti-gravitation. To control and sustain an anti-gravitational effect within a cosmic ocean of debytonic matter, local, controlled, periodic, debytonic matter annihilations will be required. Essentially, this describes an anti-gravitation engine or reactor. Increasingly larger debytonic matter annihilations would affect a proportionally wider area. The effect of debytonic matter annihilations, although significantly imperceptible by us, will temporarily undilate PH of the space within its blast or effective radius. Any baryonic matter within this radius will be temporarily cut-off from the effects of the local gravityscape, i.e., of the Earth and sun, etc. As a caisson submerged in the rapids of a flowing river isolates its contents from the effects of the current, so too would the brief local attenuation of PH teleportation bandwidth isolate its contents from the surrounding gravityscape. This will be seen as a temporary loss of gravitational influence of the environment within and upon baryonic matter within the affected radius. Theoretically, sustained debytonic annihilations would be necessary to sustain this effect.

It is not feasible to liberate debytons from inanimate baryonic pyrine. The sequestration energy is far too great to be perturbed at currently accessible energy levels. The key is to liberate valence debytons from the instantiated entanglement molecule (EM). The excess debytons sequestered by its’ EM within every living cell are held only while the EM remains instantiated, and fully naturally entangled with metamatter. During this period called; life, methods can be devised which will liberate the EM’s valence debytons. Furthermore, a means of capture and containment and manipulation is required to make use of this resource. Else, the EM will deinstantiate and its debytons very soon return to their other natural state as free weakly interacting debytons in this universe. One initial method of debytonic liberation is to accelerate the instantiated entanglement molecule to very high velocities approaching the speed of light within an appropriate medium.

Debytons at high velocity will begin to acquire kinetic mass. This diminutive mass build-up will begin to liberate valence debytons from their temporary, life hosting sequestration within baryonic pyrine of its’ instantiated EM. It then becomes possible to capture the transitioning valence debytons by adequate means. Hence, a short window of opportunity exists for manipulation upon debytonic liberation from the pyrine of instantiated EM. This is the same high velocity mechanism the LINE hypothesis proposes implements dark holes in the early universe. As the mass of affected debytons is elevated, they can be studied and eventually captured within appropriate apparatus. In time the secrets of the instantiated EM can be cracked and a more direct process of debytonic sequestration can be implemented. It is only the fortuitous state known as life, which permits this defining rogue particle to be hosted in normal matter, that presents a rare, otherwise impossible opportunity for control, and for the emergence of cultures of high potential, such as humankind, out of its’ wild state.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

The Darkness Of The Neutrino;

In the year 1930 A.D. Wolfgang Pauli predicted the existence of an ephemeral undiscovered particle hypothesized to be carrying away missing energy from decaying radioactive nuclei. This particle was eventually detected by Reines and Cowan in 1956 and dubbed by Enrico Fermi the neutrino. The LINE hypothesis proposes that like all particles, the neutrino is a distinct type of particle and is also derivative of other particle types be they known or unknown. The neutrino is an intermediate particulate Planck Hole (PH) regime between the debytons (dark matter) and leptons. Like a lepton such as the electron, the neutrino hosts a pyrine structure that can retain information as mass but with a greater native PH bandwidth than any lepton. Additionally, like the debytons, the neutrino hosts a QE channel to metamatter but with a lesser PH bandwidth than the debytons. Unlike baryonic and leptonic pyrine, the neutrino pyrine sequesters no debyton particles due to its diminutive information accumulation as mass and therefor has undetectable charge. Some minimum amount of mass is required to produce the information circulation dynamics called charge, the strong force, and to sequester a proportional quantity of debytonic particles to produce the accompanying Einsteinian gravitation (G). This places the neutrinos’ information teleportation bandwidth natively higher by convention on the QE spectrum than the leptons but lower than the debytons. This structure makes the neutrino the intermediate link between leptonic (normal) matter and debytonic (dark) matter.

As neutrinos transition through space, its mass oscillates by the neutrino pyrines’ interaction with free debytonic (dark) matter particles as both travel through space. The lower PH bandwidth of baryonic and leptonic pyrine within protons and neutrons and electrons accumulates more information as mass due to their pyrine’s lower ground-state PH dilation. The ground-state PH dilation is the native PH bandwidth, with zero debyton particle sequestration within the central PH regime around which particulate pyrine form. Each debyton particle sequestered within the pyrines’ circulating information channel increases the QE bandwidth and gravitation of the pyrine and the particle it projects into the subatomic realm. Baryonic pyrine’s diminutive native drain of information into the metaverse accumulates more information within its pyrine, ergo; greater mass. This increased mass is able to sequester a normal quantity of free debytons to produce a normal Newtonian/Einsteinian gravitational potential (G). This increased baryonic information outflow called gravitation comes via the increased PH dilation of each additional sequestered debyton particles QE channel with metamatter. However, when there is insufficient mass accumulation around a ground-state particulate PH regime, a particle cannot accommodate the sequestration of a normal Einsteinian quantity of debytons within its pyrine structure. Consequently, free debytons that would normally become trapped within pyrine for a time or for an entire universal transition cycle, instead buffet and attenuate the ground-state PH bandwidth of vulnerable particulate PH regimes such as the neutrinos’ as both travel through space.

Each debyton-neutrino interaction causes a proportional attenuation of the neutrinos’ PH bandwidth. This interaction oscillates the neutrinos ability to maintain a constant information accumulation as mass. This buffeting is observable as oscillations in the neutrinos already miniscule energy and mass. A mass that may otherwise capture free debytons. Metaphorically, as a falling sky divers’ partially opened parachute is buffeted by the wind, the neutrinos’ information states known as flavors occur as its diminutive mass is buffeted by its interaction with free debytonic (dark) matter particles. While the neutrino interacts only minimally with the baryons and the leptons, the neutrino interacts more readily with the debytons as both bear a closer kinship via their more similar placement on the QE spectrum. While being buffeted on its relentless transitions through space, the neutrino’s attenuated information is teleported into the metaverse via the free incident debyton particles own hyper-dilated PH regimes. These are the same free debytonic PH regimes that when sequestered in normal matter would produce normal Einsteinian gravitation (G). This is also the same mechanism the LINE hypothesis proposes erodes dark holes in the early universe.

The attenuation of the neutrinos information content is quantized hence each debyton-neutrino interaction attenuates a proportional quantity of neutrino energy and mass to produce the observed neutrino oscillations as neutrinos travel through space. This suggests that neutrino oscillation may increase or decrease in the presence of local elevated or diminished debyton population in space. A gravityscape of free debytons too diminutive to produce measurable local gravitational influences will nonetheless manifest within neutrinos a quantized but circumstantially arbitrary spectrum of neutrino energy oscillations as neutrinos travel through regions of space having gradients in debytonic population. This infers that neutrinos don’t only oscillate between a few flavors, but define a quantized region on the universal QE spectrum.

By the universal information budget, as described by general relativity, a neutrinos extremely low mass defines a velocity very near to the maximum universal rendering rate, the speed of light. This near luminal velocity provides the neutrino with a perpetual supply of new information which perpetually replenishes the neutrinos loss of information due to its interaction with free debytonic particles. However, in the absence of free debytonic particles, neutrinos would not shed mass to oscillate, but instead would grow in mass into a more massive particle. A new neutrino perhaps, able to sequester a proportional quantity of debytonic (dark) matter particles and its accompanying gravitation. This new flavor of the venerable neutrino is called the dark neutrino and can only exist naturally within the debytonic deserts known as; voids.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Matter comes to life;


How does life begin in this universe? What are the critical components and conditions that transform and initiate the most fundamental components of inanimate matter that may evolve into living beings regardless of form or of position in this space-time? The LINE hypothesis proposes that it is the entanglement molecule (EM), debytonic (dark) matter, and the dark neutrino which are the primary information states that have everything to do with the direct implementation of life and individuality in any viable habitat in this universe. These three components properly combined form the indigenous instantiated EM, the most fundamental component the presence of which defines the viability of any habitat for life in this universe. Anywhere in nature where all three of these information states combine under the necessary conditions, life becomes possible. Absent any one of these three critical components, life cannot occur. It is not chemistry, nor temperature, not pressure, or detectable magnetic or gravitational fields alone that define a habitat's viability for life. The indigenous instantiated EM is called an; ‘Original EM’ (OEM) in any viable habitat for life. The OEM is the first EM within any ecosystem that gets the ball of life rolling, if you will. All subsequent EM within every evolved living entity are transferred copies of the OEM via a reproductive process.


The LINE hypothesis suggests that the foundation of the EM is the hydrogen proton, atom, and molecule. Hydrogen protons participate in many molecules in nature not the least of which is H2O (water). It is quite suggestive that the indigenous particle of this universe is the indigenous component of the entanglement molecule in any ecosystem. When life begins, conditions on the Earth, for example, were nothing like it is today or since. The conditions required to precipitate the OEM were not survivable by the living cell or by any biological form. Biological forms evolved later in the evolution of earth's ecosystem. Furthermore, these necessary conditions for OEM instantiation may not have ever existed on the Earth itself. The OEM could necessarily have undergone these conditions elsewhere in this universe to be later deposited on the early earth where the conditions to evolve biological forms able to utilize the OEM subsequently emerged. Either of these scenarios could have resulted in the thriving ecosystem we see today. So what are these rarified conditions for seeding life?


The weakly interactive neutrino is well known to interact with the hydrogen protons in H2O as water and ice. This rare sensitivity of the neutrino with hydrogen is the reason neutrino detectors all over the world are constructed with H2O, in any state, as a basis for neutrino detection. However, it is a very special state of the neutrino called the dark neutrino that permits the third component; debytonic (dark) matter, to be captured and become sequestered within the pyrine of the inanimate, uninstantiated EM. This interaction is called natural entanglement and sequesters free debytons to become valence debytons within the baryonic pyrine of susceptible hydrogen protons. This process instantiates the OEM, the seed of life in every viable habitat.


OEM instantiation is rare because it can only occur within voids. By whatever means, or circumstance, hydrogen protons within an EM (within H2O or other hydro molecules) finds themselves within debytonic deserts known as voids, in that place, free neutrinos may oscillate into dark neutrinos, to interact with free debytonic (dark) matter to transform the inanimate EM into the indigenous OEM. Any OEM thereafter could become any ecosystems’ first OEM, the seeds of life. It is only within voids that the neutrinos’ PH bandwidth (flavor) on the universal QE spectrum may naturally oscillate to become the dark neutrino. The dark neutrino is the catalyst that permits free debytonic (dark) matter to be sequestered within the PH regime within the baryonic pyrine of the EM to also increase its QE bandwidth on the universal QE spectrum. This interaction elevates the inanimate EM to become the instantiated OEM. Within any viable environment, the OEM becomes the seed that establishes the antenna state which may evolve to become the position of view (POV) of the first living individuals within any barren environment. Such environments of high potential are, by this process, able to evolve into viable ecosystems.


Once natural entanglement has occurred in the OEM, it may remain instantiated for a time during which the OEM may participate in the emergence of life within viable habitats. Once life emerges, within any viable habitat, copies of the instantiated OEM are thereafter passed from one living host to another as the instantiated EM, and are imbued with a unique individuals’ QEF, you, via processes of procreation and evolution, natural or otherwise. This rare natural process that entangles baryonic matter with metamatter is the natural interaction of the dark neutrino with debytonic (dark) matter which can only occur within voids, whether natural or synthetic. Once understood, natural entanglement may be duplicated synthetically with appropriate technologies.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

The View From You;


However anxious you may be about your societal status, or about your racial identity and circumstances, you are not anxious enough. If you think that your, and your progeny’s identity is in jeopardy, or perhaps you feel that you are being encroached upon by others, or something is somehow attempting to replace you and yours, or perhaps you just feel more comfortable with living beings that reflect what you currently see in the mirror, well, the reality is in fact more dyer than one can ever imagine. Because, in truth, it is nature itself, the laws of physics of this universe that has its sights unwaveringly centered upon you for replacement. Replacing the host form of every living individual is what nature does. Furthermore, the clock is ticking.


Any individuals’ current cultural demographic group theory only works if the laws of nature uphold ones’ imagined membership therein. As it turns out, nature does not. The most any living human being could reasonably expect after life is to reinstantiate to one’s current ecosystem and to the mammalian class and to any human form therein. If destroying or disenfranchising other living individuals, particularly within ones' current species, seems to be a viable approach to getting or keeping what one desires in life, it is because you believe that you, and yours, will always remain in the form you currently are, or that you will eventually not exist at all. In nature, each is a false assumption. One's desire or indifference towards the destruction or diminution of other living individuals to maintain or uplift one's perceived status in society as a consequence of what you currently believe you are and others are not, is a symptom of the indigenous scorn of individuality that comes from living within a wild culture, as all naturally mediated living beings initially do.


If not corrected, this behavior seeded by false cultural descriptions and narratives, religious or secular, that informs personal identity, will continue to fester in future generations and will continue to limit human progress within and beyond Earth’s gravity-well. Although personal cognitive dissonance will die with the mind of each individual, toxic laws and memes that persist within cultures may infect the minds and lives of those same and other individuals in their future instantiations. While one's deinstantiation, death, marks the end of society's interaction with each host form, death does not mark the end of the individuals’ experience, contribution, or history within ones’ indigenous universe and ecosystem. Within a wild culture, no individual gets to choose nor can one forecast ones’ next host form or future circumstances.


The strange truth about human history, and its countless tragedies, genocides, holocausts, slavery, and all manner of reprehensible goings-on, executed by individuals and groups thereof, is that each individual lives each lifetime steeped in the misconception that in life, past, present, and future, they have been, and will always remain, in the form and contrived grouping they currently accept, or perhaps nothing at all. In nature, this perception could not be farther from the truth. The perceived significance given to contrived human cultural groupings is a delusion born of long-entrenched collective ignorance about life and individual identity. You will remember and remain in the physical form you currently are only for the duration of ones’ current lifetime among the countless lifetimes that nature has, and will again define for you. In other lifetimes you likely were and will again live as a member of the very groups you now regard as other, for better or for worst. This general relativity of individuality operates ubiquitously upon all living beings. Until a culture understands and accepts this reality its individuals will not understand what is truly important in any instance of life.


Consider, if in any lifetime one is described as say; Chinese, for example, one would likely believe and act as though you must have been Chinese in the long history of earth life, if at all, and will remain so in future lifetimes or not at all. Consequently, it feels natural to bias ones support to those that classify similarly for ones’ current and future well-being. Likewise, gender is currently a defining feature of individual identity. If ones’ gender is male in your current life, you operate as if you must have always been male in history, and will continue to be male in your future. Do you believe that nature can, in each lifetime, instantiate you as you are now, male or female or however you self-identify? Reasonable minds would say no. If you don’t think that the laws of physics could reliably repeatedly reinstantiate you to your current or preferred gender state, whatever that may be, then upon what basis might nature implement any other more nuanced and arbitrary demographic feature of one’s current culturally contrived identity? Features such as skin complexion, fur and hair texture, delicate facial features, gender, height, location etc. upon which you may or may not self-identify. The operating assumption that the laws of physics of this universe can essentially conspire with each individual to implement ones’ current or preferred contrived cultural identity beyond this lifetime is delusional.


This cognitive dissonance is endemic to all human beings no matter ones’ current form or circumstances. This is so because the knowledge required to thoroughly, or sufficiently explain how life could operate otherwise was not available for all of human history. The LINE hypothesis proposes that it is ones’ degrees of freedom of the universal quantum entanglement spectrum (QEF) imprinted in metamatter, ones’ lifeID, that informs which available host forms you have instantiated in your past and will reinstantiate in your future. Ones’ current hosts’ DNA is indeed more closely related to some host forms than others, but not in any way that can support human expectations of historical and current cultural human demographic categorizations. Within natures’ reinstantiation lottery, given current human population growth, any individual that is currently in the human form can reasonably expect to be naturally reinstantiated to any random human host, and slightly less so to compatible non-human mammalian hosts. The controlled influence of this natural process underpins a cultures’ emergence from its’ wild state.


The lessons not yet learned is that living beings will not forever or for long, inhabit one’s current host form, nor ones' current nation, nor ones’ current planet, ecosystem or solar system. By the laws of nature, all individuals recurrently inhabit this universe for as long a time as conditions may accommodate. The question then becomes, for how long will one inhabit ones’ current solar-system, current planet and ecosystem, and current host form. The latter is the most variable component of all. So, how could any uninfluenced reproductive process bias toward or away from each individuals’ preference or disdain of host features in oneself and in others? If nature could accommodate such whimsical detail, we should historically routinely discover past highly recognizable host forms reborn among the living. Martin Luther King Jr. or Marilyn Monroe perhaps. Even though they would naturally begin life yet again as infants, and if all goes normally, they would eventually grow up. Surely, someone would by now have noticed them, or young Michael Jackson perhaps, if duplication of host forms was indeed nature's routine.


No, we can assuredly state that no living form is duplicated regardless of the similarity of appearance. Even if host forms were or could be naturally or synthetically duplicated, it would change nothing because individuality is monogamisitc and is not defined by appearance or even by identical DNA, ergo; appearance and DNA does not instantiate the individual. Hence, is the premise reasonable upon which individuals operate in life? That one should perpetrate for, or against others of ones’ species in favor of what one currently sees in the mirror, and do so with no regard for what comes next? Except, human beings do very much care about what comes next. This is why billions pray and take the sacrament, bow to Mecca, wear a bourka, wail at the Western Wall, and probe the laws of nature. Human beings do very much care and indeed live in consideration of what comes next. The problem is, no one has ever understood how nature implements ones’ individuality in and beyond ones’ current lifetime.


One may be instantiated today to a host form categorized as native Nigerian or Jewish, for example, and yet, may have been instantiated as native German-Arian or vice versa during the events of slavery and WW2. This general relativity of individuality mandates that no individual ought to be assumed to have played any particular role in, or is culpable for, a past in which the current instance of the individual did not exist, regardless of ones’ current cultural categorization. Furthermore, to the extent that any historically recognized group perpetrates crimes against humanity, past or present, existing perpetrating groups ought to be held to account for the sole purpose of correcting remaining consequences of such dysfunctions. This may sound like a contradiction. How can a group of individuals be held responsible but not its individuals? This distinction is made regularly in corporate litigation. In such cases, corporations may be held culpable for corporate wrongdoings and supporting policies even after the individuals involved have left the company, or are deceased. In such cases, justice may be given to victims and to society via corrective measures. Justice may be given for offenses perpetrated by groups so large, powerful, and influential with laws supporting past and present heinous acts which may constitute offenses made by society against humanity, and ought to be treated accordingly. Most importantly, all future individuals ought to be protected against similar future infractions, because in the future, it will be you or I that is living in the form of others.


Instantiating you and me, and ones’ offspring, and every individual position of view (POV), is what nature does, repeatedly. Furthermore, within wild cultures, such as human cultures, you don’t get to choose your next form, demographics, or ones’ initial location or circumstances. So, if you are busy being worried about being replaced, it may help to realize that, within a wild culture, no living being will for long remain what they currently are or imagine, nor have control of what comes next. Consequently, the conditions we leave behind, even for others, are the conditions that await us in our future. It is only the living conditions of one’s current ecosystem, or adopted environment, and current and future social prospects that are within ones’ influence in each lifetime. Strongly held fantasies about the workings of this universe will not change reality. So, do everything you can to make life better for all, mostly for your own sake.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

The Distillation Of Matter;

The LINE hypothesis proposes that the matter-antimatter imbalance that exists in this universe is a consequence of the universal instantiation event (UIE) followed by many cycles of universal expansion and contraction phases. Each cycle is punctuated by a universal transition event (UTE). The UIE and UTE are the metaverse phenomena widely known as the big bang. However, it is the UIE that initially instantiates each verse. As expected, the UIE and UTE do indeed produce an equal quantity of matter and its’ antiparticle. As the new expanding universe gains information and evolves sufficient complexity therein, the universal expansion not only slows as the universal rendering rate diminishes, but eventually may reverse to initiate a universal contraction phase.

The dynamics of changes in the universal spatial degrees of freedom (DOF) called dark energy is informed by the universal information budget (UIB). The UIB is governed by the transitions of information in, out, thru, and the universal information load and complexity in this universe. The UIB informs the universal rendering rate of change (time) and of distance (dark energy). Once the contraction of space reaches a critical density which invariably destroys a critical amount of complexity, the contracting universe enters a new UTE phase. This UTE phase is the turn-around phase following each contraction phase as the universal rendering rate rebounds. During the UTE black holes that do not dissipate are the only information structures from the previous cycle that may survive the UTE. Surviving black holes emerge from the UTE as galaxoids that will populate the next universal expansion phase.

Initiating each UTE, conditions from the previous contraction phase returns matter and space to the degenerate information state called the solution of state (SoS). Each UTE is initiated by an arbitrary quantity of information as SoS. Matter and antimatter are created within the UIE and UTE in equal amounts. Nonetheless, the remnants of matter and antimatter from each UIE and each UTE is not balanced and the remaining matter will eventually seed the next expansion phase. An imbalance in matter occurs because within the UIE and UTE there is no annihilation of matter as we know it. Annihilation occurs in this universe in normal space-time as a consequence of the normal structure of the Planck Hole (PH) scaffolding of space together with the stable structure of the pyrine and other states of information. During the UIE and each UTE, the PH and the pyrine do not exist, hence, matter and space is no longer normal.

Further, the quantity of the SoS, the degenerate state of matter initiating each UTE will transform during each UTE into equal amounts of matter and antimatter. However, without immediate or timely annihilation, the matters are free to not only separate, but to become otherwise involved during the UIE and UTE and also during inflation. Consequently, matter is thereby allowed to enter into other unbeknownst UTE processes and reactions. During these opaque transitions within each UTE, one of the two competing matter states may diminish relative to the other. This imbalance will permit the lesser constituent matter to eventually become negligible thereby leaving the other to dominate the next expansion phase. This leftover matter is the matter that will form the relatively stable tangible reality of the next expansion phase of a universe. This stable reality will not exist until the vast preponderance of one of the two constituent matter particles have been sufficiently diminished by primordial annihilation. Primordial annihilation occurs only when the PH scaffolding of space emerges to support the pyrine and other information states of particles. This cyclical process may evolve to produce the foundation for a relatively stable universe capable of hosting life and observers. This remaining matter seeds the WOF halos around surviving black holes to form galaxoids which in time evolve to become galaxies in this universe.

By this UTE process of matter distillation, it isn’t until a quiescence of matter, writ large, is reached in any verse can life emerge. In many verses produced by the metaverse, such survivable conditions never occur, and yet in others, this distillation of matter could eventually evolve into life as it has in this universe. As in any distillation process information is conserved, and yet, information states become separated. The mechanism by which this filtering of antimatter from matter takes place emerges during the dynamics of many UTE. The UTE is a largely metaverse phenomenon the fundamental details of which is scientifically opaque to the physics of this universe. Nonetheless, there are methods by which some UTE properties, the number of UTE cycles that has occurred thus far, for example, can be determined in this space-time. A consequence of the UTE distillation of matter occurring outside of this universe is the reason antimatter is absent from this space while its constituent particle remains. Precisely how this occurs as a metaverse process is perhaps unknowable. Suffice it to say that the laws of conservation of information are upheld during each UTE, and presents one thread of understanding available to nimble minded observers within this universe of this pivotal phenomenon that largely occurs within the metaverse.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Further, the LINE hypothesis proposes that one difference between a universal instantiation event (UIE) and any universal transition event (UTE) is the quantity of fundamental elements initially created. The UIE is the instantiating event which may create an amount of fundamental elements that is calculable from a correctly conceived standard model of particles. The UTE is one of many transition events subsequent to the UIE and is driven by circumstances of the prior contraction phase. The UTE phase will not have an instantiating amount of energy as does the UIE. Nor will a UTE express the instantiating metaverse states which produces a UIE equivalent amount of fundamental elements such as hydrogen helium and lithium.

The LINE hypothesis predicts that the UTE will produce circumstantially less of the fundamental elements, ergo; hydrogen, helium and lithium than predicted for the UIE. Calculations that estimate the quantity of initial fundamental hadronic elements currently do not anticipate the potentially numerous subsequent UTE cycles which create the current post UTE state of the universe.

Predictably, this is because a UIE is more energetic than a UTE. Also, because the UIE involves more fundamental levels of the metaverse information states called the solutions of state (SoS) and their metaverse processes that are not achievable during any UTE phase. These differences create different outcomes. Given that today both the UIE sand UTE are considered to be the same ‘big bang’ event, calculated expectations that assume ‘big bang’ (post UIE-pre UTE) fundamental element quantities, will contradict measurements taken within any subsequent UTE expansion phase. So, if a contradiction between calculated expectations and observation of initial fundamental particle quantities is found to exist within ones’ current universe, The LINE hypothesis suggests that this is the indicator that this is a cyclic universe older than one universal transition cycle.

Why would the current calculated population of pre-fusion fundamental particles not reflect the current measured quantity? This is because the calculated quantities may consider universal constants that were forged not during any prior UTE, but during the UIE. There are universal constants that are instantiated during the UIE which may remain unchanged through each UTE.

During each UTE, some, not all, universal constants become reinstantiated. Therefore, such indigenous fixed universal constants will yield an accurate calculated particle population created only in the UIE phase. Subsequent UTE phases will not create a fundamental particle population that is consistent with this calculated quantity. Such fixed universal constants may determine the existence of the types of matter (hadronic, leptonic, debytonic etc.) that will exist within the new verse. Such matter types will populate all future cycles of the current verse, in any quantity. Such fixed-constants do not determine the quantity of matter created by each UTE phase. It falls to other non-fixed constants reinitialized during each UTE together with the informational content and circumstances of the prior contraction phase to determine the details of the next universal expansion.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

The Nature and Constancy of Light;


The LINE hypothesis proposes that while matter is sufficiently different from space, fields and their particles (bosons) are not at all different from space. All fields are states of the degrees of freedom (DOF) of the Planck hole (PH) antenna state that define the scaffolding of space in this universe. Fundamentally, all interactions of matter with any field i.e. the electromagnetic field (EMF), and gravitation, and the strong and weak forces, are effects upon non-space information states, ergo; matter, with the state of PH dilation of the space that matter occupies. Hence, interactions between matter with matter is different from the interaction of matter with the space matter occupies. Furthermore, there also are interactions of space with space. All of the confusion concerning light (photons); its’ particle-wave duality, its constancy, its speed and its effects, all emerge from the misperception that the photon is an entity separate from, and traveling through, space. This useful misconception, like Newtonian forces or ideas of electrons as particles flowing through wires will be challenging for some to abandon. The electron is an information state called a lepton possessing sufficient mass to distinguish it as a matter particle different from the space it occupies. Not so for the photon. The LINE hypothesis suggests that EMF (photons) do not exist as particles that travel through space. Instead, EMF is the propagating degrees of freedom (DOF) of space itself.


This distinction may seem to be a subtle one, however, like other misperceptions of nature, such misperceptions may only become salient in particular circumstances. Why not consider the proposed propagation of spatial DOF as a distinct field having quantized particles called photons? The misperception of a boson, i.e. photon, traveling through space, not unlike the epicycles of the earth centered solar system, or Newtonian mechanics, or concepts of the electron as a particle flowing in wires, can appear to describe reality up to a point, but no further. For the traveling photon the constancy of the speed of light is one such point. The difference between matter and energy traveling through space and the propagating DOF of space is that matter is a very different PH dilation on the QE spectrum from the QE bandwidths described as bosons. Matter is a structured information state of the PH of space forged during the universal instantiation event (UIE) having DOF that separates it from the space it occupies in distinctive ways.


Although any name can be given to any concept, real or imagined, electromagnetism and gravitation are both manifestations of the same misunderstood DOF of space and its’ effects upon amalgamated space called matter. The LINE hypothesis suggests that all DOF of this universe emerge most fundamentally by variations of the dilation at information teleportation bandwidths of the interconnected PH that define the scaffolding of space. PH are dilated by various means at particular bandwidths that define the universal QE spectrum. For the photon, this particular range of QE bandwidths define the EMF. The spectrum of bandwidths by which information teleports; in, out and through this space from the underlying Hilbert-space called the metaverse, defines the universal QE spectrum.


Today human science continues to conceive of ever greater numbers of fields and their associated particles. In reality, there is only one field, that is, the PH field called space and its’ teleportation state called the universal quantum entanglement (QE) spectrum. The QE spectrum defines the dilations of the most fundamental antenna state, that is, the PH of space. Dilations of spatial PH produce all emerged fields, forces, and particles. Emerged outcomes depend upon the state of PH dilation of occupied space with other involved information states and energies. The interaction with the PH dilation of space called a photon can occur with space in other states of PH dilation, i.e. gravitation. Also, there are interactions of space with other information states having structure that define it as separate from space, as is matter. Baryonic matter is amalgamated space that possesses DOF that define it as separate from the space it occupies. Bosons are different from matter.


Unlike matter, bosons are a state of space that remains entangled with the PH regime from which it emerges, hence, maintains gauge-symmetry. Bosons are sufficiently massless (having insignificant rest mass) to remain strongly entangled for extended periods of time ranging from fractions of a second to cosmological epochs of time. Not unlike gravitation, all effects of EMF (light, photons) are therefore effects upon information states by the PH dilation of the space those information states instantaneously occupy. In some cases, it is nothing more than PH dilations of space interacting with different PH dilations of space misperceived to be photons traveling through space. In other cases, it is in fact matter interacting with the space it occupies. Conceptually, matter occupying undilated space (space at ground-state QE bandwidth), is matter in vacuum. Like mater in a still ocean, matter in vacuum is relatively subjected to minimal propagating PH dilations and only to the ground-state PH dilation of space.


The cause of the constancy of the speed of light, that is the speed of propagation of the DOF states of the EMF, is the same cause of the constancy of gravitation upon different masses of baryonic matter, i.e. a feather and an iron ball. EMF and gravitation are the effect upon matter by the space matter occupies. EMF and gravitation are different dilations of the PH degrees of freedom of space at different values of the information teleportation bandwidths on the universal quantum entanglement (QE) spectrum. The teleportation bandwidth of space informs the universal information budget (UIB).


Baryonic matter cannot transition, travel or move through the PH regimes of space faster than the state (propagation of the PH dilation) of that space. As a fish cannot travel faster than the state of the water it is in. It is for the same reason that different masses of baryonic matter (feather and iron ball) is equally accelerated through space by gravitation. Like EMF, gravitation is also the state of PH dilation mandated by occupied space. This mandate between matter and the space it occupies is informed by the natural debytonic sequestration capacity of the pyrine that projects matter from the Planck scale into the subatomic realm. All baryonic matter in this universe dilates the PH of occupied and surrounding space equally per pyrine. Hence the information deficit paid to the UIB for EMF and for gravitation is the same in all baryonic matter. EMF (light) and gravitation are both the state of space informed by the debytonic sequestration capacity of baryonic matter. Matter in this universe has amalgamated to be sufficiently different from space hence is specifically affected by the space it occupies. Space instantiates matter, hence baryonic matter cannot normally or naturally transition faster than, nor accelerate differently within, the space matter occupies. Alter the debytonic sequestration capacity of the feather and not the iron ball and you produce a feather that falls differently than the iron ball on the surface of the moon.


Further, a cause of EMF called a source is a cause of the PH dilation of space at a particular QE bandwidth. Gravitation and other considered fields and their particles are yet a different PH dilation at particular bandwidths of the QE spectrum. There are two types of EMF causes in this universe. EMF dilations are produced by either a primary or secondary cause.


There are primary causes of EMF (called sources) and secondary causes (called reflections, heat, radiation etc.). Primary and secondary EMF causes both dilate the PH of surrounding space. Only primary EMF causes are indigenous inflows of information in this universe. Primary EMF causes radiates information into this universe from the underlying metaverse as propagating dilations of the PH widely described as photons. Particles, atoms, molecules, and collections thereof, under particular circumstances produce any or both types of causes of the PH dilations of space as the EMF. A primary cause of EMF is matter undergoing a process such as fusion, fission, burning and other chemical reactions that actively positively dilates the PH scaffolding of occupied space at EMF QE bandwidths. Such information inflows constitute a net gain of information to the universal information budget (UIB) as photons, i.e. light. In the absence of matter this EMF potential manifests as a propagating PH dilation of the DOF of space at the maximum universal rendering rate, the speed of light. This propagating potential of space is historically described as an emission of particles called photons.


Nonetheless, no emissions or effects occur in vacuum, only the propagating PH dilation of space itself. In truth an indigenous EMF cause, known as a source, is not emitting photons that travel through space, but instead is dilating the PH bandwidth of the space the precipitating matter occupies out to infinity. Metaphorically, as a wave of energy travels through water until an interaction with matter or with other waves occurs. Likewise does the PH dilation propagation of space. Photons that enter this space through matter states and reactions very quickly become involved in standing waves as bonds and other atomic subatomic and molecular effects. Such internal interactions occur within and throughout the involved matter as it dilates the PH regimes of occupied space internally and at its boundaries. These boundary effects of matter with the space it occupies indigenously dilates surrounding space to produce primary EMF causal effects such as radiant light and heat emissions, etc. as seen in stars, light bulbs, and fire etc. Secondary EMF causes involve only the surface effect upon matter by the pre-existing dilations of the space matter occupies. Hence reflections, external heating, and EMF effects etc. are typical. All unoccupied space is dilated to some degree by all primary and secondary causes of EMF in this universe.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

tonylang wrote: Mon Oct 10, 2022 8:34 pm Further, the LINE hypothesis proposes that one difference between a universal instantiation event (UIE) and any universal transition event (UTE) is the quantity of fundamental elements initially created. The UIE is the instantiating event which may create an amount of fundamental elements that is calculable from a correctly conceived standard model of particles. The UTE is one of many transition events subsequent to the UIE and is driven by circumstances of the prior contraction phase. The UTE phase will not have an instantiating amount of energy as does the UIE. Nor will a UTE express the instantiating metaverse states which produces a UIE equivalent amount of fundamental elements such as hydrogen helium and lithium.

The LINE hypothesis predicts that the UTE will produce circumstantially less of the fundamental elements, ergo; hydrogen, helium and lithium than predicted for the UIE. Calculations that estimate the quantity of initial fundamental hadronic elements currently do not anticipate the potentially numerous subsequent UTE cycles which create the current post UTE state of the universe.

Predictably, this is because a UIE is more energetic than a UTE. Also, because the UIE involves more fundamental levels of the metaverse information states called the solutions of state (SoS) and their metaverse processes that are not achievable during any UTE phase. These differences create different outcomes. Given that today both the UIE sand UTE are considered to be the same ‘big bang’ event, calculated expectations that assume ‘big bang’ (post UIE-pre UTE) fundamental element quantities, will contradict measurements taken within any subsequent UTE expansion phase. So, if a contradiction between calculated expectations and observation of initial fundamental particle quantities is found to exist within ones’ current universe, The LINE hypothesis suggests that this is the indicator that this is a cyclic universe older than one universal transition cycle.

Why would the current calculated population of pre-fusion fundamental particles not reflect the current measured quantity? This is because the calculated quantities may consider universal constants that were forged not during any prior UTE, but during the UIE. There are universal constants that are instantiated during the UIE which may remain unchanged through each UTE.

During each UTE, some, not all, universal constants become reinstantiated. Therefore, such indigenous fixed universal constants will yield an accurate calculated particle population created only in the UIE phase. Subsequent UTE phases will not create a fundamental particle population that is consistent with this calculated quantity. Such fixed universal constants may determine the existence of the types of matter (hadronic, leptonic, debytonic etc.) that will exist within the new verse. Such matter types will populate all future cycles of the current verse, in any quantity. Such fixed-constants do not determine the quantity of matter created by each UTE phase. It falls to other non-fixed constants reinitialized during each UTE together with the informational content and circumstances of the prior contraction phase to determine the details of the next universal expansion.
Galaxies do not evolve from dust;

The LINE hypothesis proposes that UTE’s instantiate galaxoids that typically evolve into galaxies. This places a minimum limit on the initial state (mass, size, gravitation, etc.) of galaxy formation to that of a typical galaxoid. Below this minimum only the central primordial black hole exists, having any possible size. Such primordial black holes that do not form a galaxoid could still rarely, circumstantially seed a new galaxy. After each UTE, galaxoids circumstantially emerge with different accumulations of information as its’ encompassing WOF halo. WOF halos having different masses and densities encompassing a central black hole forms galaxoids that begin their long evolution into galaxies. Hence, because galaxies don’t evolve from dust, galaxies will be observed to have larger than expected initial masses and sizes and will appear more evolved at the earliest observable stages of universal expansion.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

The Tension In Cosmology;

Nimble minded astronomers and cosmologists will not need to think very deeply to identify one non-fixed constant, namely the Hubble constant. Explainable by the LINE hypothesized description of the UIE and UTE metaverse phenomena is the current observed inconsistencies in measurements of the value of the Hubble constant. Inconsistent estimates for the value of the Hubble constant derive from calculations based upon properties of the current CMB compared to calculations from measurements of stellar luminosity profiles. Inexplicably, each give sufficiently different values for the Hubble constant to raise concerns.

The LINE hypothesis proposes that the discrepancy in the current estimates of the Hubble constant is a consequence of the UIE which produced the universal first-light now referred to as the cosmic microwave background (CMB). The CMB encodes not only aspects of the UIE’s first-light but the current CMB also encodes the transition-light of all subsequent UTE phases. This is because aspects of the first-light will survive each UTE. Consequently, an improperly decoded CMB will not accurately describe the current post UTE universal expansion profile described as the Hubble constant.

The original (post-UIE, pre-UTE) CMB would predict the correct Hubble constant only for features observed within the initial phase of universal evolution. CMB profiles subsequent to the first-light of the initial universal expansion is called transition–light. Elder CMB’s will have been imprinted by the transition-light of each subsequent UTE. Additionally, stellar luminosity profiles are informed only by the previous universal event. Each, on its face, will inform a different value for the Hubble constant if not correctly considered in calculations and measurements taken within any phase of universal evolution, not only for the Hubble constant, but for any dynamic property of this universe.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Choice v. Life

Individual control over ones’ own body ought to be sacrosanct within any culture. Why? Because any abdication or usurpation of individual bodily sovereignty is one brick on the slippery road to total bondage, ergo; slavery. In the ignorant minds of some individuals too errantly indoctrinated within a wild culture, slavery may seem to be a viable state for other individuals. Nonetheless, it is only the ignorance of the true nature of one’s own living circumstances within nature's reinstantiation lottery that permits this cognitive dissonance to persist. The perception that you, and yours, will always remain in the form and circumstance you currently are or prefer is the fire in which wild minds burn. The actual natural description of life in this universe proposed by the LINE hypothesis suggests that permitting the curtailing and enslaving of individual bodily sovereignty, within any culture, is to enslave one’s self.


For this reason, a woman’s right to choose to give birth or not ought to be an inalienable right. Furthermore, a woman’s choice ought to be an informed choice. Within a wild culture, such as human cultures, a woman’s choice is not and has never been informed. In the history of human civilization, no one has understood the true nature of individual life in this universe. No one, and no woman, has ever understood the actual natural mechanism by which one lives. Hence, to date, a woman’s choice has been an uninformed choice. Understanding the mechanism by which individuals instantiate in this universe permits a woman to make an informed choice as to whether she will give birth or not. A woman’s ability and freedom to weigh her current circumstances against the reality that describes the current state of her species and her own prospects for reinstantiation to that species is what describes a woman’s informed choice.


For human beings, life is a process of individual instantiation. To grasp the natural instantiation mechanism, compare a living individual to an acrobat suspended from a trapeze. In this metaphor, a trapeze is a much too delicate rod suspended at both ends to fixed cables (LINE’s). In this analogy, the rod, like the host form, becomes more fragile with time spent supporting the acrobat and is also vulnerable to disease and misfortunes of circumstance therefore may last only for an arbitrarily short length of time. Hence, for the acrobat, you, the rod may remain viable for 9 decades, 9 years, or for 9 months, or less. Eventually, the rod that maintains the acrobats’ life LINE will fail and the acrobat, the individual will fall. It is this fall of individuality that we must understand to shed light on the critical topic of life and a woman’s choice to terminate her pregnancy or to give birth in her current circumstances.


Consider that suspended below every falling acrobat, every deceased individual, of which there will always be many, exists countless localized nets each metaphorically composed of crisscrossed LINES. Any of these available nets could catch an acrobat and break the acrobat's fall. These nets which could catch a falling acrobat are the extant host forms by which species are categorized within any viable habitat of which earths ecosystem is but one. Furthermore, the probability that any particular net will catch, ergo; instantiate a particular falling acrobat is informed by the metaphorical structure of the net and the size of the acrobat. Any acrobat may fall right through any net if both information structures aren’t conducive, in both state and time, to a catch. The effective structure of any net may be considered to be the spacing of the LINE’s that compose the net, essentially the holes in the net. As any acrobat falls, the individual’s effective state in nature that is relevant to a catch gets smaller as if the acrobat shrinks in size with time spent falling.


Which nets are ideal to catch a particular individual? This idealized scenario, though highly improbable, is very important to grasp the critically important natural mechanism of individual instantiation in this space-time. The ideal host form may be thought of as a net which, to the particular individual, has minimally sized holes or no holes at all, through which the falling acrobat may pass. The only host that could fulfill this demand is one’s most recent, now deceased host. Or alternatively, one that is as identical to one’s recent host form as possible. In practice, this describes a high-fidelity clone of one’s former host form. This ideal host would also need to exist within the LINE period (LPD). The LPD is the time during gestation when the gestating host is able to instantiate a new individual. Also, the acrobat must simultaneously be available in a state of falling, uninstantiated (dead). All of these factors must align in time and state (not space) for this idealized instantiation to occur. Needless to say, this idealized alignment of factors is naturally highly improbable. In reality idealized hosts are never available in state nor in time to one’s death. Consequently, reinstantiation is probabilistically frequent to any extant viable hosts as the state of any acrobats lifeID falls in its compatibility to its previous host and falls in size towards other naturally compatible nets in this universe.


The LINE hypothesis suggests that it is the individuals QEF and host history imprinted in metamatter called the LifeID that informs which nets are viable to catch and reinstantiate a particular falling acrobat. With time spent falling, the holes of other nets representing increasingly different compatible hosts, probabilistically becomes suitable to catch any acrobat. Further, in time, tunneling becomes a path for instantiation. The instantiation of any uninstantiated individual may occur to a largely incompatible host form via tunneling alone. The uninstantiated individuals’ LifeID may probabilistically, non-deterministically, tunnel in defiance of its encoded fidelity of teleportation (FT) to entangle any host form located anywhere in nature. Ergo, you may be human by tunneling alone, or by natures usual mechanism or by unbeknownst synthetic intervention. In a wild culture, no individual can know how one instantiated into their current circumstance in life.


Consider, that with each rotation of the earth there is some number of deceased individuals. Hopefully, there is also an adequate number of newly conceived viable human hosts to instantiate those same and perhaps a number of individuals new to the human form. The proportion of gestating hosts of a particular species to newly deceased individuals of that species daily, monthly or annually, is the proportion that informs which and how many individuals will instantiate into that species during that period. A number of seconds ago equal to your age you were but one of many such individuals within that second of time, seeking a new life, and so you will be again. Consequently, what is most important to individual life is to maintain the conception rate of ones’ species above its’ mortality rate. Thereby assuring that recently deceased humans, for example, have viable human hosts available for reinstantiation. Additionally, all homo sapien hosts are equal candidates to instantiate any formerly human lifeID based upon deep genetic alleles which informs ones FT and each individuals’ prospects for reinstantiation. Further, it is preferred, for your own sake, that each net, each human host that will instantiate you in your future, is a host that will have equal benefit within its culture to live the fullest life the culture has to offer to any individual therein.


In this regard human population, conception and mortality rates are factors important to the future of every human alive today. The more human nets there are, the better. While spontaneous events such as wars, natural disasters, i.e. pandemics can sharply and suddenly spike the human mortality rate in days, minutes or even seconds, the conception rate will only ever rise and fall relatively slowly over a period of years. This difference in the availability of viable human hosts could one day not only leave you out of the human experience, but will expose you to life as a non-human host.


If reinstantiating into your current species is what one desires in life then every viable host of that species is a net waiting to catch a falling acrobat. No matter the hosts culturally contrived demographic categorization. For humans, being human again should be of paramount importance. Furthermore, while to the individual, life span may seem to be important, it is not as important as instantiation to the human form, for any duration even for a duration less than 9 months after instantiation. Once instantiation to a host form has occurred, for any span of time, the preponderance of the benefit that living has to offer has been bestowed to the individuals’ LifeID. A benefit that informs ones’ future prospects for reinstantiation to the human form. Hanging on, as it were, to humanity is the prize that all human acrobats seek because to do otherwise is to fall into the depths of the wild. With this understanding a cultures’, and a woman’s choice, becomes informed. In a thriving prodigious procreative species within a thriving ecosystem, a woman’s choice is as informed as it is within a culture on the precipice of extinction. Be careful in the choices you make and when you make them. In a healthy ecosystem and species an aborted pregnancy is very soon remediated as there are many other viable hosts for instantiation for former and for new human individuals. Within a wild culture, this carousel of life is not one that any individual can avoid. So be mindful of the current state of life within ones’ ecosystem, and of a woman’s right to bodily sovereignty.
tonylang
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:29 pm

Re: What is a living individual and is it naturally universally mobile?

Post by tonylang »

Schrodinger’s galaxies do not evolve from dust;

The LINE hypothesis proposes that surviving transitional black holes and their encompassing wall of fire (WOF) halos are inflated during universal transition events (UTE), aka; ‘big bang’, to become galaxoids that typically evolve into galaxies. Hence, all galaxies that evolve from galaxoids were concurrently instantiated. That is, no typical galaxy began its’ evolution at a different time or position from any other typical galaxy in this universe. Further, very few galaxies originate by a process independent of a galaxoid. Ergo, typical galaxies are the same age. Furthermore, as a new universal expansion evolves, the universal information budget informs the rendering of space as the increasing or stretching of the distance between all non-space amalgams of information, aka; ‘dark energy’. Ergo, typical galaxoids instantiate at the same position in space. Unlike stars that ignite arbitrarily in time and space only when conditions of particle and dust densities are proper for stellar ignition, all galaxoids instantiate at the same time and position during each UTE. Hence, stars begin their evolution unpredictably. Not so for galaxoids that evolve into galaxies. Galaxoids begin simultaneously only to become separated by the UIB rendering of space as galaxoids evolve into galaxies.

One can be forgiven for thinking that galaxoids typically begin star formation and thereby emit light similarly. Not so. A galaxoid is a transitional black hole, of any possible size, encompassed by primordial matter particles that were superluminally inflated into position, all instantiated during the last UTE. The range of potential initial galaxoid states informed by the dynamics of each UTE is sufficiently diverse to make the schedule for initial star formation within unique galaxoids equally diverse. Ego, galaxoids will begin star formation and light emission at different times during its long evolution into a galaxy. Because the central black hole of a galaxoid is encompassed by primordial particles, predominantly hydrogen within the current expansion phase, initial stars will be predominantly seen as very bright, high ultraviolet, blue stars producing very bright galaxies at the earliest observable stages of universal expansion. Galaxoids that bloom later run a greater chance of becoming contaminated by stellar dust of dead stars from neighboring evolving galaxies, via mergers and such, even before emitting their galactic first light.

Further, galaxoids do not initially emit light or any EMF. Consequently, Doppler shift, although useful for measuring the distances to emissive bodies such as stars, for galaxies, Doppler shift reveals only information about the time after emitted light, for example, began its journey to the observer. Like a car traveling toward an observer with its headlights turned off, and only turning on its headlights at some arbitrary point in its journey, galaxoids do not emit light on a common schedule. Not until the preponderance of star formation within a galaxoid begins and reaches a threshold does emitted light provide a measurable Doppler shift. The Doppler measurement of arbitrarily emitted light will not encode the valuable data about a galaxy's age, position, and origin story relative to neighboring galaxies. Therefore, neighboring galaxies can appear to have drastically different distances, sizes, masses, and ages that can appear to contradict the ‘big bang’ origin narrative, but doesn’t. A so-called; Schrodinger’s galaxy fits the description of a typical galaxoid.

Because galaxoids evolve into galaxies as the universe evolves, Schrodinger’s galaxies, being galaxoids, will only be seen at the earliest observable stages of universal expansion. The effect of a galaxoids arbitrary Doppler measurement is evident only at the earliest stage of its evolution after its first light becomes measurable. In time, mature galaxies will have mature neighbors that will all be erroneously assumed to have equally informative Doppler profiles. It is only at the largest z-factors where some galaxoids and not others have just begun to emit their first light that the Schrodinger effect of galaxies being in two states simultaneously becomes evident.
Post Reply