Presented Argument:
1) A 1 dimensional line compresses, as in shrinks in volume, as it approaches a 0d point. With the line equivalent in quantity and quality to "1", this results in the line turning into a fractal dimension.
****1 qualitatively equates to dimension as directional space. Space is exists through direction, as movement, with this direction existing relative to other directional space, as dimensions. Space and direction are inseperable.
2) The line as a fractal dimension continues to fractate. Example: 1 → 1/2 → 1/3 → 1/4 to infinity.
3) The line as 1 direction is infinite, considering "1" is a constant. "1" can never "not" be "1". However this 1 line cannot move anywhere in 0d space, hence for it to exist it must relate to itself, as the standard of the movement of the line is the line itself. Hence the 1d line must individuate into another "line" in order to move, considering movement is relatistic and dependent on the relation of parts.
4) The line, approaching zero, continually fractates through a process of division. At point zero, the line as one continuous fractation inverts to produce simultaneously dimensions through the fractals. For example 1/2 inverts to 2/1, 1/3 inverts too 3/1, etc. This inversion of division is conducive to multiplication.
5) This inversion, or altnernation, results in a polarity where a separate line is produce relative to the original line, through which the line can relate. This alternation results in the angle as the origin of relatisitic movement. The lines exist as actual movement, and the interior volume of the angle is observes as potential space through which the actual line moves.
6) The line approaching point zero "compresses" into a fractal, or divides, into 1/2. Upon this first fractation, the line inverts to form a second line. Hence the first angle is formed. The first line continues approaching point compressing into 1/3, which follows this same process, while the new line, as 1, compresses into 1/2 and inverts to 2.
7) The sequence can be observed as follows:
*** The symbol: "⩺" will equate to a alternating function where 1/n "folds" into n/1.
1 ⩺ {2,-1}
1 ⩺ ({3,-2},{2,-1})
1 ⩺ ({4,-3},{3,-2},{2,-1})
1 ⩺ ({5,-4},{4,-3},{3,-2},{2,-1}).
Through this continual compression (fractation as division) and expansion (multiplication), 1→2 and 1→ n>2 maintain themselves as everpresent
through a frequency. Hence what we understand of the line in 0d space are three degrees of alternation as:
a) Polarity as 1/n → n/1
b) Actual movement as the lines, Potential Movement as the space within the Angle through which the line "move" relative to eachother. Actual movement, through the lines, can equate to all positive numbers. Potential movement, through which the space moves, can be equated to corresponding negative numbers (The angle as 2 lines, maintains -1 space through which they move as "1" direction. The frequency of 2 angles (4 lines), maintains -3, through which the frequency projects as "1" direction.)
c) Frequency as the constant maintenance of 1→2 and 1→ n>2 repeating themselves across time.
Agree/Disagree? Why?
Lines and Numbers are Inseperable as Relativistic Unit-Particulate?
Re: Lines and Numbers are Inseperable as Relativistic Unit-Particulate?
I'm proud to say that weed's legal in my jurisdiction.
Re: Lines and Numbers are Inseperable as Relativistic Unit-Particulate?
[img][img]
I don't know if that is a compliment or not, but regardless I looked over the piece and found some grammatical errors because I thought of it in fifteen minutes and just blurted it out. I kind of rushed through it.
I worked on some graphs, to map out the linear folding process, and found an interesting result: infinity expands back to its original point of inversion the larger it expands. Expansion causes a simultaneously compression of space back to the original source.
I will try to post the graphs once I get over my technological retardation phase.
So far it appears, and I want to emphasize "appears" because I am only 90% certain, that this may observe the nature of number as founded in linear relativistic dimensions. In these respects it may be implied:
1) 1 is a literal unit-particulate which manifests relativistic space, and is inseparable from the "line".
2) There are an "infinite" number of 1's, 2's, etc, not just "1". In these respects 1 can be a continual fractal of itself, which this fractal nature alternating into another number. Alternation is inseperable from number, and number as "unit" may manifest through...."spin cycles" might be the words?
3) The "angle", not curvature, forms the foundation of temporal space and what we understand of "curvature" (hyperbolic/eliptic geometry) may in fact may just be an empirical approximation of hyper-dense angulature as folding frequencies.
4) 1 dimensional lines may in fact be quantum (I hate using that word because it is overused, but it the one available for the time) frequencies.
5) The angles continually increase into fractal degrees yet maintain a constant proportionality to their original source, so the problem occurs in the respect as to what "constitutes" a degree considering angle "A" may be proportional to angle "B", however angle "B" may be 72 degrees and angle "A" could fit into one of the 72 degrees in Angle B. The paradox occurs in the respect that "A" and "B" are proportional.
So the question occurs is "A" composed of fractal degrees, Doe the number of Degrees in Angle B multiply because the compression of angle "A" cause the expansion of angle "B", or both?
Geometric shapes may not be the founded in their angulature as the "degree", but in actuality it may be reversed: shape is the foundation for the degree.
6) "Angulature" is the foundation for movement as time. In theory, hyper accurate geometric object, such as the pyramids, may cause a dilation in space time. The possible "cone" version of the universe, may in fact be a rotating angle.
7) Geometric shapes exists as relativistic particulate, and what we understand of a geometric shape is less about its angulature, but the number of points (as individuators) through which the lines relate.
8 ) However angulature is movement through the alternation of spatial compression and expansion. Alternation causes space to compress and expand, and is premised in a 4 dimensional construct of:
A) The line as actual movement, as acceleration through compression.
B) The polar line(s) as a result of the inversion.
C) The angulature as potential space, which is negative in dimensionality (not zero).
D) The frequency as a continual propagation of the 1d line across time space. For example if observing a frequency across "x" length, and we cut each alternation vertically in half, what we observe is a 1d line propagating itself across "x" length as a 2d view of a temporal locality.
9) Frequencies may in fact be fractals of 1.
10) The line begins with an altnernation into an angle of 2 wavelengths, then 3 ad-finitum, because each angle is a fractal of the original line (2 wavelengths are each 1/2 of the original, 3 are each a 1/3, 4 are each a 1/4, etc.) the angulature continually progress back to point zero of origin. relativistic Infinity (linear motion) cycles back to point zero, through a linear progression.
11)The frequencies, no matter how high always maintain the same length even if approaching a number approaching infinity. The frequencies produce further frequencies which simultaneously move away from the original point of compression.
12)The frequencies overlap further frequencies manifesting a continual set of irrational trapezoids and triangles. In another respect what we understand of as perceived curvature may simply be space measured through a trapezoid.
Re: Lines and Numbers are Inseperable as Relativistic Unit-Particulate?
To extend upon this thread with a simple set of points:
1) The 0d point observes 1d structures (the line, but I argue a theoretical 1d point also exists) through a process of inversion. The 0d point and inversion are inseperable.
2) This inversion of unity, observes a finiteness as locality which is both actual and potential (or active and passive)
3) This active locality, 1d speaking, is observed in the line, with the non-localized potentiality (that exists as a gradation of actual locality.
4) The lines progressive nature, inherent within its extradimensionality, is inseperable from a form of finiteness in the respect it must continually change in order to exist. This change is necessary as it must direct itself away from its origins.
5) Considering the question of "origin" determines the nature of the line, with this origin being "absence" in the 0d point, the line is a boundary of change. As change, and a spatial premise for "1" (considering it quantifies reality by applying a unit of direction to it), this change observes that number must fold through itself as "1".
6) The line is the foundational unit-particulate of all abstract and empirical realities and exists as is own form of measurement through change. In this manner linearism and relativity as progress are inseperable.
7) 1 as a unit is an object of relation hence must continually fold through itself in a process of continual change. This results in the frequency as the line folding upon itself, as a macro-line, through time space. This alternation, as movement, allows the line to maintain a form of circularity which does not contradict its form or function.
1) The 0d point observes 1d structures (the line, but I argue a theoretical 1d point also exists) through a process of inversion. The 0d point and inversion are inseperable.
2) This inversion of unity, observes a finiteness as locality which is both actual and potential (or active and passive)
3) This active locality, 1d speaking, is observed in the line, with the non-localized potentiality (that exists as a gradation of actual locality.
4) The lines progressive nature, inherent within its extradimensionality, is inseperable from a form of finiteness in the respect it must continually change in order to exist. This change is necessary as it must direct itself away from its origins.
5) Considering the question of "origin" determines the nature of the line, with this origin being "absence" in the 0d point, the line is a boundary of change. As change, and a spatial premise for "1" (considering it quantifies reality by applying a unit of direction to it), this change observes that number must fold through itself as "1".
6) The line is the foundational unit-particulate of all abstract and empirical realities and exists as is own form of measurement through change. In this manner linearism and relativity as progress are inseperable.
7) 1 as a unit is an object of relation hence must continually fold through itself in a process of continual change. This results in the frequency as the line folding upon itself, as a macro-line, through time space. This alternation, as movement, allows the line to maintain a form of circularity which does not contradict its form or function.