All posts by admin

Space has 12 Dimensions: Six Spatial and Six Anti-Spatial Dimensions

Space has 12 Dimensions:

gregory malley
Jun 7 · 1 min read

Six Spatial and Six Anti-Spatial Dimensions

This is simple to graph.

And easy to understand: definition is a function of equal and opposite relativities. A graph is an illustrative framework of equal and opposite relativities.

Here’s the graph of 12 dimensions of space:

three spatial dimensions. three potential dimensions.

three equal and opposite anti-spatial dimensions.

three equal and opposite potential anti-dimensions.

Anti-matter can be defined in normative spatial dimensions in the event that an equivalence of matter pops into existence in anti-spatial dimensions.

Does this help explain entanglement? Yes. That’s a subject for another piece.

Can a change in anti-spatial dimensions induce a change in normative dimensions? Yes. We call this dark energy.

Is our universe expanding because anti-dimensional space is contracting?


Will our universe stop expanding when anti-dimensional space becomes a singularity? And begins contracting?

I don’t know yet. Ask me in a few billion years.

One Dimension Phases into Two Equal and Opposite Dimensions as a Trifoil Knot

Phasing forms one Dimension into 2 Dimension.

Moebius strip like formation is possibility.

When fluctuation forms a Moebius strip,  fluctuations don’t cancel.

An anti-Mobius strip forms.

One Dimensional structure of space is defined. As fluctuations of space.  Which become two dimensions when phased when twisted (A Moebius form).

When split in two, equal and opposite dimension, form a trefoil knot.

This is the hidden structure, revealed as Moebius strip is split into equal and opposite relaticities.

Called a trefoil knot.

Nodes Between the Dimensions of Space and Anti-dimensions of Anti-Space

Moebius dimensional loops  and anti-dimensional moebius strips meet at nodes.

An x-moebius, y-moebius and z-moebius loop and an ~ x-moebius, ~y-moebius and ~z-moebius loop  share a node.

The particles are entangled. The anti-particle and particle are entangled. The potential particle and potential anti-particle are entangled.

The particle is entangled with the potential anti particle. The potential antiparticle is entangled with the anti-particle. The anti-particle is entangled with the potential matter particle. The potential particle is entangled with the matter particle.

So, entanglement.

Radioactive element decay, the weak force, …

do the nodes explain chemical bonds?

Proof for the Simple Theory of the Big Bang

What’s the simple theory?

Simple theory is that as space knotted up thru change in dimension. Knots grow as additional change in dimension is incorporated into the knot. Gravitational effects emerged.
Space was concentrated. And Energized. 4:25 3/31/19

Change in dimension? Change in number of dimensions.
Create geometry. Geometry with curvature. Change in dimension location.
That’s motion of space. Ripple in space. Energized space. Energized field.
An energized field which is readily, easily disturbed.

Due to the Paradox of the First Moment, there was something before the Big Bang.
How do you prove that there this is what happened before the Big Bang?

What do we have to work with?

Knots in space. Fairly uniform. But randomly formed.
Can I observe the same phenomenon happen today?

Is there an equivalent event in anti-dimensional space?

Do the knots compress? Is there evidence of compression ‘points’ in the microwave background?

Dimensions twist. Untwist. Twist. Rotate. Knot. Rotational energy. Knot energy expressed as knots grow. Do we see that in the microwave background radiation? In galaxy formation?

Galaxy formation. Clusters of dimensional change form throughout space. Clusters would aggregate but have a consistent size with minor variance. It is this variance which we can look for in the microwave background radiation. Space would see uniform formations. Would be squeezed together by the contraction. Gravitate to singular point. And explode. All of the clusters would not make it. We would detect this variance.

Variance in microwave temperature is ?
The top pair of figures show the temperature of the microwave sky in a scale in which blue is 0 Kelvin (absolute zero) and red is 4 Kelvin. Note that the temperature appears completely uniform on this scale. The actual temperature of the cosmic microwave background is 2.725 Kelvin. The middle image pair show the same map displayed in a scale such that blue corresponds to 2.721 Kelvin and red is 2.729 Kelvin. The “yin-yang” pattern is the dipole anisotropy that results from the motion of the Sun relative to the rest frame of the cosmic microwave background. The bottom figure pair shows the microwave sky after the dipole anisotropy has been subtracted from the map. This removal eliminates most of the fluctuations in the map: the ones that remain are thirty times smaller. On this map, the hot regions, shown in red, are 0.0002 Kelvin hotter than the cold regions, shown in blue.

Variance in knot formation is _______! six sigma.

2) Sketch a normal curve

normal curve
(3) Find the z score

z score

(4) Find the appropriate value(s) in the table

A value of z = 3.6 gives an area of .9998. This is subtracted from 1 to give the probability
P (z > 3.6) = .0002

(5) Complete the answer

The probability that x1 – x2 is as large as given is .0002.

Therefore, Six Sigma refers to the plus or minus three sigma from the mean of the data under the curve. In the case of a normal distribution, 68.26% of the data points are within plus or minus one sigma from the mean, 95.46% are within two sigma and 99.73% are within three sigma. A process variation exceeding ± 3 sigma should be improved. With a Six Sigma capable process, only a very small number of possible failures could fall outside specification limits.

Bore tolerance limits +.0000 +.0000 +.0000 +.0000 +.0000
–.0003 –.0002 –.0002 –.0002 –.0001
Bore 2 pt. out of roundness . — . — .0001 .0001 .00005
Bore taper . — . — .0001 .0001 .00005
Radial runout .0004 .0002 (1) .00015 .0001 .00005
Width variation . — . — .0002 .0001 .00005
Bore runout with face . — . — .0003 .0001 .00005
Race runout with face . — . — .0003 .0001 .00005
Inner Ring*
*Measurement in inches. (1) Add .0001 to the tolerance if bore size is over 10mm (.3937 inch).
Outer Ring*
*Measurement in inches, unless otherwise indicated.
Ring Width*
*Measurement in inches.

The glow is very nearly uniform in all directions, but the tiny residual variations show a very specific pattern, the same as that expected of a fairly uniformly distributed hot gas that has expanded to the current size of the universe. In particular, the spectral radiance at different angles of observation in the sky contains small anisotropies, or irregularities, which vary with the size of the region examined. They have been measured in detail, and match what would be expected if small thermal variations, generated by quantum fluctuations of matter in a very tiny space, had expanded to the size of the observable universe we see today. This is a very active field of study, with scientists seeking both better data (for example, the Planck spacecraft) and better interpretations of the initial conditions of expansion. Although many different processes might produce the general form of a black body spectrum, no model other than the Big Bang has yet explained the fluctuations. As a result, most cosmologists consider the Big Bang model of the universe to be the best explanation for the CMB.

The high degree of uniformity throughout the observable universe and its faint but measured anisotropy lend strong support for the Big Bang model in general and the ΛCDM (“Lambda Cold Dark Matter”) model in particular. Moreover, the fluctuations are coherent on angular scales that are larger than the apparent cosmological horizon at recombination. Either such coherence is acausally fine-tuned, or cosmic inflation occurred.[5][6]

Gravity Does Not Decrease Entropy: from Physics Stack Exchange

I’m a total physics noob (i.e. I only know the physics as taught in IT grades, and don’t remember much of it), and was talking about entropy (initially, not with the physical implications). My friend talked about entropy and gravity and was not sure about the fact that entropy decreases with gravitationally bound systems.

Consider what happens to the total energy of the gas as it shrinks. By the virial theorem =−/2,e can write the total energy of the gas cloud as =+=−/2+=/2. Additionally, according to equation (2) from the webpage, ∼−2/1/3, so ∼−2/1/3. Thus, as volume the volume decreases, the total energy becomes more and more negative, i.e., decreases.

Now, by conservation of energy, this energy must be going somewhere. One possibility is that you have gas particles escaping the cloud at high velocities kind of like they’re “boiling” away, carrying energy and entropy away with them (this leads to some complications in the original derivation on the webpage since this would violate the assumptions required for the virial theorem to hold exactly, but you can see how it would work). Another way this can happen without gas particles actually escaping the system would be if the gas cloud somehow emitted radiation – the resulting radiation would also carry away energy and entropy.

In either case, the resulting flux of escaped gas particles and radiation in the space outside the cloud of gas will lead to some energy and entropy densities outside the volume of the gas cloud. For the second law of thermodynamics to hold, the total entropy of the cloud of gas and the rest of space must increase, i.e., the entropy contained in the escaped gas particles and radiation must exceed the decrease in entropy of the cloud of gas. A more thorough analysis of the entropy contained in the escaped gas particles and radiation will show that this is indeed the case, and thus the “object” whose entropy is increasing to compensate for the decrease in entropy of the cloud of gas is the rest of space.

Note that this is a highly simplified and not precisely correct argument, but as pointed out by Jàn in his answer, neither is Baez’s original exposition on the webpage. I still think this captures the basic idea, and is probably what Baez was getting at.

I’m a total physics n00b (i.e. I only know the physics as taught in IT grades, and don’t remember much of it), and was talking about entropy (initially, not with the physical implications). My friend talked about entropy and gravity and was not sure about the fact that entropy decreases with gravitationally bound systems.

I found this site telling that gravity actually increases the entropy, but “apparently proving” that gravity decreases it. Finally, in the final link where he will show the prove that gravitational systems do not decrease entropy, it shows this text:

So, you’re wondering why gravity doesn’t violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics, even though the entropy of a gas cloud decreases as it shrinks under its own gravitational pull? The answer is simple, but I’ll just give you a hint. We’ve already seen that as it shrinks, it loses energy. The energy has to go somewhere. Where does it go? If you figure that out, you’ll see that the total entropy is not actually decreasing – it’s just leaving the gas cloud and going somehere else!

My question is: No, actually I cannot figure if out. Can someone help me to figure it out? (yes, perhaps it’s a very simple answer but no, still don’t get it).

The Baez article is strongly misleading in that it applies simplified concepts and arguments appropriate for gases with short-range interactions to a system with many particles interacting purely gravitationally.

Systems where short-range forces dominate (Lenard-Jones, van der Waals forces… ) such as rarified gases can be described in such simplified (thermodynamic) way where the system has volume, density and temperature.

Gravitationally bound systems in virial equilibrium typically have cluster(s) of accumulation with higher density of particles and as one gets farther from it(them), density of particles decreases (globular cluster, galaxy). As time goes, the system, even if in virial equilibirum, loses particles.

Thus gravitationally bound system has neither volume nor density. It cannot be in equilibrium, far less in thermodynamic equilibrium. It has no thermodynamic temperature.

2nd law of thermodynamics has implications for Clausius entropy. This entropy is defined via heat and temperature which have no convincing meaning for said gravitational systems. Thus “gravitational systems increase/decrease their entropy” is not even a meaningful statement, because it is not clear what the word entropy means.

2nd law is based on experience with water vapor, air, daily tangible materials. It is ungrounded to extrapolate it to systems like Solar system, globular cluster of stars or galaxy where no experiments with heat were ever made.

Dimensions of Space Hooking Up

I’m a dimension of space. I curl up in my fibonucci number.
You’re a dimension of space curled up in your fibonucci number.

We hook up. We create a 12 dimensional change in the dimension of space because this change cannot occur in a point or in a single planar dimension.

6 dimensions of normative space, three positive and three negative.
6 dimensions of anti-dimensional space.

Terraformed Economics

Four problems:

climate, sustainable energy, pension funds, arms race, income inequality, universal income.

easier to solve as one piece then to resolve separately.

show you. principle is need to be solved in an equilibrium. in one equation.