[i am going to continue with this limited set of diagrams and
seek to improve upon the modeling beginning to be sketched
out within them. the diagrams are not accurate enough to be
able to model the situation seeking to be described, though
they do function as an intermediary step, prior to a more in-
depth or complex view of this questioning. this has the effect
(on me, at least) of being bounced around on the rocks and
rapids below the falls, churning about and disoriented from
a more clear approach. yet hopefully this will begin to move
in a common direction, in terms of what it is questioning...]
---
the number line was mentioned previously and considered in the
context of defining or correlating to the concept of 'charge', via
a plus (+), minus (-), and 'neutral' or 'ground' state (zero or 0)...
the above was the initial way this was looked into, and it can
provide a quick way into the questioning that follows. just as
the model of the atom can be considered in terms of how this
relates to a circuit, so too, can the number line be related to
the model of the atom. or so this is what is attempted here.
notice, then, that + and - are related to 0. and this could also
be considered in terms of + and - and neutral or N. and each
of these could work their way into evaluation an 'atom' which
has negatively charged 'electrons' (-) and positively charged
'protons' (+) and 'neutrons' (N), (the latter two, the 'nucleus').
in any case, in this seemingly standard view, the concept of
'the atom', then, can be considered to potentially cross-over
this zero-boundary or threshold or limit, when dynamics occur
between electrons (- charge) and protons (+ charge). that is,
this 'zero point' or this neutral realm would be in the middle,
and somehow is seemingly involved in potential functioning,
for how this 'atom' exists and its dynamics. or so it seems.
in other words, to make this as simple as possible to evaluate,
imagine that an atom is modeled having one electron (-) and
one proton (+) and that there is some subatomic structural
relation between these charges, the positive (+) and negative
(-). for instance, for sake of conjecture, imagine it mapped onto
the number line, so positive equates with +1 and negative is to
equate with -1. in this case, then, between them, the interaction
would also involve crossing this threshold of zero, somehow, in
moving or interaction between the positive and negative: -, 0, +.
so, this idea seeks to be established, in terms of charge and of
how it correlates to the questioning of the functioning of zero on
the number line, because how 'zero' is modeled to exist, then is
going to influence how this atom is going to be modeled to exist.
so, for instance, if the number line were to exist in a more complex
state or configuration or framework, it could potentially change the
geometrical modeling of how this atom may be functioning, say in
terms of symmetry and rotation and even 'charge' and its aspects
of mirroring, virtuality, 'antithesis' (as antimatter, etc), and
whatnot.
so it is a question. what about this approach to relating to electricity
and electromagnetism and this 'standard' view, which models these
dynamics. what if this model were not exactly correct in some way?
in any case, the above diagram is the same as the previous except
that it has P for proton and E for electron, as having some interaction
between them. this is not 'electricity' per se in the sense of
controlling
a flow of current, and instead would seem to be an issue of atomic or
interatomic or subatomic forces, as they may relate 'electrically and-or
magnetically' in being held or carried in certain positioning or
structure.
so, whatever is keeping the structure of the atom the way it is, in
terms
of this modeling, it is to assume that this 'positive charge' of the
proton
and 'negative charge' of the electron are part of establishing how this
arrangement is established, in terms of a type of equilibrium or inertia
created in this structuring, which does not collapse (if via
gravity), etc.
so, here's a next step... it is to jump from this diagram which seeks to
model a symbolic atom (minus 'neutral' ~particle), and move from this
issue of how it relates to the number line, and its crossing of this
zero-
point threshold (or N), with the earlier diagram of 'the particle
ladder'...
so, here we go. take a look at the above diagram and see how the
proton is in the center and the electron is on the outer edge, as if it
is orbiting the nucleus in a solar-system type approach, and now
consider the same dynamics in the particle ladder (below) where
the proton and electron are modeled on the same-side of the zero
divide, as it is considered in terms of 'antimatter' and 'matter'...
so, essentially, this is going to 'side' the question on the same
side, in this particle approach to questioning this aspect of the
modeling of the atom. and the explanation for having these two
particles which are themselves oppositely charged (- and +) on
the same-side of the zero boundary is that this situation could
involve more than one zero boundary, given how it is modeled.
[note: more may be written about this, in terms of how the V-
shape of the particle ladder could be modeled as an X-shape
with multiple zero boundaries, if not as a double-funnel, etc.]
in any case, the reasoning for placing the electron (-) and the
proton (+) on the same side of this zero boundary (of what is
the more complex modeling of the number line) is that these
are both 'matter' in a realm where is not the same for relations
between matter and antimatter particles, such as the positron
(anti-electron) and electron, which would be on opposite sides,
in this approach, as matter/antimatter, versus adjacent as here,
because both are seemingly similarly 'matter' in this modeling.
so, this is to then map the issues of opposite charges of the
proton (+) and electron (-) into a more complex approach in
which there is some sameness and some difference in charge
between thse, the proton as plus-plus (++) and the electron as
minus-plus (-+). yet, it could still be assumed or presumed that
in their interaction, between - and + that this zero-boundary is
still encountered, in some way, in its neutrality across the limit
or divide between positive and negative on the number line. in
other words, there is still a relation with zero (which visually yet
not literally can be conceived of as above/below versus across).
in any case, in this diagram the 'size' of the atoms are large to
small, from top to bottom, as vaguely sketched in knowing that
a proton is much larger than an electron. maybe it is not relevant
yet it gives some structure to the placement in this approach. and
here it is possible to then question the 'electron' as the ~definitor
of 'electricity' in terms of moving of charge in an electrical current,
which then can be produced and harnessed via technology, etc.
so, the 'question' of electricity surrounds how this electron is
supposedly functioning in an 'atom' and how this atom is going to
be modeled to exist, and so on. and so, in this diagram, the other
particles could involve those additional subatomic particles which
go into creating the electron and proton and neutrons themselves,
out of smaller and smaller 'atoms' that also have properties such
as charge, spin, color, etc.
so, what is now under consideration and attempted to be
evaluated is the idea of 'electricity' which is then pegged to
how this electron is functioning in a larger context of the atom
and interatomic and subatomic interactions. and prior to this
'charge' being harnessed via electronics and electrical power
generation and delivery, it is to consider how this charge may
exist (-+, in this approach) and how it might be part of a larger
dynamic or context, which involves number, geometry, logic.
and so one of the aspects of this diagram to consider would
be the basic interaction between the particles of the symbolic
atom, diagrammed earlier, between the opposing charges (of
++ and -+ as they relate, or, attract and repel certain aspects).
so, here is the diagram again, yet highlighted in green as to
this basic interaction between particles. whatever it may be
that is involved in maintaining balance and dynamic ordering,
including hierarchical issues, as they may relate to 'charge'.
what is of importance to note prior to continuing further into this
model is the difference with assuming a traditional number line
as it would correspond to 'charge' because this could then be
an issue of -1, 0, +1 where they would be across the matter/
antimatter divide, instead. and so, this is why this refinement or
this clarification or this increased scrutiny of how charge is to be
evaluated then helps to setup this questioning in certain view...
if this was not established, the issues of electricity could be
evaluated in terms of the connections between a proton and
an electron, which may instead correspond to a matter/anti-
matter divide, across zero, rather than within a more adjacent
context of matter/matter, as charge may function, hierarchically.
// technical note: this would then be a d|b or q/b approach to
the number line, yet could be assumed to function as if b_ p...
i.e.
or
//
in any case, it is necessary to repeat a previous diagram to
attempt to make clear what remains under consideration in
this approach. and thus, what is attempted to be considered
is the symbol 'atom' as it is standardly viewed and modeled...
and in this context of a particle ladder, it is to question the
relations between the proton (++) and electron (-+) in this
larger context. and what is missing here is this relation to
'ground' or the neutral condition, which, in terms that have
been established with regard to the number line, map into
this middle vertical boundary condition of zero or neutral (N).
[note: recently i have read that there is no such thing as a
'neutral' charge and instead this occurs through a balancing
of positive and negative charges which cancel one another
out or balance eachother, and thus remain 'neutral'. what
this would mean, then, is that the 'neutron' ~particle which
may exist in terms of polarization of charges (+ and-or -),
is, in its structuring, also navigating this zero-boundary or
zeroed-realm, delineated in these diagrams as the middle
vertical line which ~sinks to zero. there could be several
ways to approach this issue in these diagrams, depending
on how it is viewed. or so it would seem. and thus what this
approach does is assume the 'neutron' would be mapping
back to this central question of zero, even if it is were on
the edge with the particles. so it is skipping a step yet it is
seemingly possible to do so, because this relation with the
zero-threshold would need to be established in any case,
which then would seemingly place a particle on this line,
if that were its _actual charge (neutral) versus + and -. it
may be non-sensical in explanation, yet it is seemingly an
issue of zero as it relates to charge and how to organize
particles into + and -, as this relates to a common N or 0.
and if this were not the case, it could potentially also be
dealt with in modeling of nested sets of 2/3-values which
could have 'N' nested within a 2-value configuration, etc.]
in any case, whether it is the above diagram which is to
question the relation only between the proton and electron
(or, + and -) or if it is to also consider the relation of another
'neutral' particle (~neutron), both of these approaches can
seemingly be modeled in the following approach. or at least
it seems to enable similar dynamics to be mapped out...
with or without a 'neutral' particle, it is still an issue of how the
+ and - charge would interact with zero or neutral on the number
line. or so it seems. that is, in the relations between proton and
electron, that whatever dynamic may exist between them, would
involve this threshold, in some way. and thus, in this diagramming
approach, it would need to reference this zero in this balancing.
what kind of assumption or the degree to which this involves an
additional layering of dynamics is unknown. yet what this seems
to involve is a necessity to address this divide across 'zero' on the
number line, whether or not it involves a neutral particle, it would
seemingly involve the neutralization of charge, via this boundary,
if only in terms of a threshold that is being navigated/mediated.
one of the big ideas here, then, would be if this connection to
zero or neutral could then be a connection into the medium of
the aether, via how + relates to N or 0, and - relates to N or 0,
as they also relate to one another (+ with -, as related to N or 0).
because, in this view, it might be questioned whether these two
particles which are modeled, the proton and electron, are within
a vacuum, while their connection into/out of this zeroing is going
into/out of an aetheric medium or realm. this is the idea of how
matter could be sunk or sink or be 'grounded' in a medium, etc.
to visualize the above diagram sinking to the aether, consider
the earlier vacuum/medium modeling which stacked one atop
the other, where the vacuum sits atop- or within - the medium...
what this is to then question, as an approach or model to the
~atom, is if a more complex modeling of the number line and
the mathematics of zero would then have this 'zero' or 'neutral'
charge sinking into an aetheric medium or zero-point, by default.
that is, a hyberbolic curving down into and out of a ground state
or neutral realm, which could exist in another (N-) dimensionality,
including the potential for this zero-state to relate to infinity, and
of the nesting of panoptic sets in their cosmically structuring. etc.
thus, whatever interactions may be occurring between 'charge'
as it relates to the number line and this threshold of zero/neutral,
that when it crosses or relates to this boundary, it would possibly
sink/ground to the medium of the aether, beyond such a vacuum
condition which may be sustained in atoms and between ~particles.
so, for instance, the relation between the proton (P) and the
electron (E) could be modeled in certain dynamic terms, part
of which would relate to this sinking into another medium if it
involves relations with this zero boundary or neutral threshold.
in some way. feasibly. seemingly. or so this is one way that is
possible to consider how 'neutral' may function differently in
terms of a complex number line that can deal with symmetric
and asymmetric and rotational dynamics, that are of another
scale or nested ordering (as if jumping into/out of existence).
and so, here's the overall general idea...
that it is this 'pulling' into zero that is sinking or ~grounding the
material realm in terms of interrelated 'charged' circuitry, back
into its source context (neutral) - and it is this gravity which is
related to this mathematics of zero, in a more complex way.
and the opposite of this pulling would be a pushing, via aether,
potentially, into this realm, in terms of a motivation, seemingly...
in any case, another idea is that the medium of the aether
is interacting with this vacuum condition via this neutral or
zeroed realm, in which prime movement emerges out of
or through this realm, as it is opened up in these structural
relations of matter and the universe. in that, it is through an
issue of scale, potentially, that embedded within and between
these relations of particles and charge (and other qualities)
that the aether may be interacting with this vacuum realm.
thus, for instance, it would seem possible to consider that the
movement and patterning that occurs could be the result of
this organizational influence and how it is mediated and how
it interacts with the vacuum. as it is balanced via inertia or as
it may collapse in upon itself, and go back to zero/neutral, etc.
note again in the diagram above there is a triangle which is
to represent a connection between polarized charge (+, -)
and neutral or zero (N or 0). now, imaging an issue of scale
which could exist, seemingly or somehow within this context of
the particle ladder, it is to question how this relation could be
in terms of a sinking or pulling into this realm, stretching, etc...
again, the lowest particles would be considered the smallest
or closest to this zero realm, in whatever ways that may or
may not be conceived. whether mass or size or other aspects.
and thus this diagram attempts to illustrate the concept of how
this relation to zero could be considered in terms of pull, in that
this dragging or grounding into the neutral realm could function
across many different scales and qualities of the particle ladder.
this need to go to neutral or through a zero realm would then
be a way to consider a vortex or funnel shape, across scales.
one idea about this is that it is a way to place 'charge' in relation
to scale, potentially, (where a dual spiral could also be folded back
on itself, as a double-helix for more complex modeling of this idea).
what this diagram seems to imply is the possibility that this 'center'
is zero or neutral, which could also correspond to an idea such as
gravitational pull, into this center. in other words, any particle that
would be placed in this 'ladder' (vortex, seemingly, in this version)
could have this 'neutral pull' associated with its context and also its
overall placement and location in this context. in other words, every
time a particle or 'atom' has to deal with zero or neutral, it is
sinking
to this central condition when mediating issues of neutralized charge.
it sounds non-sensical to write, maybe it is not being communicated
accurately. it is not about words, it is about the structuring involved:
that a condition could feasibly exist such that, when zero or neutral
is encountered, it would translate into gravity towards this boundary.
and it would be an issue of having +1 and -1 (or -1/3 and +2/3, etc)
interacting around this boundary or threshold condition of zero or N.
so too, the pull of gravity could be imagined in this realm, as it
might be modeled to function across scales, sinking to zero/infinity...
and also, the movement of the medium into this vacuum could
potentially be considered as a counterforce, functioning and-or
operating at zero and-or beyond this threshold, as if pushing into
or moving through this realm, of suspended charge, structures, etc.
and so this is one of the earlier diagrams that is not very
accurate to this idea yet it was attempting to get at the
potential for accessing this movement that may occur in
contrast to gravity, if it were to be destabilized in a context
such as the vacuum, by opening up this movement through
these interconnections within/between particles of atoms at
various scales. and it is to wonder or imagine that this 'wind'
or 'wave' which may be non-charge based, yet may also be
able to influence the movement of charge (or lines of force),
could be tapped into, if it were modeled accurately enough.
that is, what if this neutral or zeroed realm could be opened
up in such a way, via a destabilization, that a flow of energetic
movement could be captured within normal matter, as an issue
of how charge structures interact with it, and are influenced by
it, enough to begin to establish and harness flows of charge via
this movement. which would be occurring across scales, as this
zero/neutral realm interacts in atomic modeling and structuring...
in other words, instead of releasing energy from coal or through
nuclear processes on the decaying of radioactive uranium rods,
it could be through tapping into some structure, including 'the air'
seemingly, which could gain access to this motivation, if not begin
to work with it like clock-work, where particles become like gears
and gearing and ratio mechanisms by which to align lines-of-force
via unstable and stable particle relations, influenced by this motion.
thus, the 'tapping into' this realm, unleashing it, releasing it, etc.
yet, at the same time, it could be non-charge based, ("acoustic"
energy, resonance, vibration, etc, as per the interview with HH).
this is my naive interpretation, as i relate to the ideas presented
here and elsewhere. it may be largely wrong within details, etc.
in any case, as i understand it, then, the potential exists for the
tapping into this non-charge-based energy of the medium which
corresponds to this zero-point or neutral realm (held in equilibrium)
if and when it is destabilized and controlled and harnessed, yet this
would require electromagnetism and other forces to do so, so as to
translate this into functioning in this vacuum environment. that is, it
would still be necessary to establish a flow of current or charge, to
enable 'electricity' and electromagnetism to function, yet, this could
occur in many ways across charge and other properties (such as
spin, say), and also - what drives this process of energy generation
and production of current could be non-charge based; that is, this
aetheric medium of the zeroed neutral realm, or energetic ~infinity.
in this way, the geometry necessary to align with these dynamics
would be required to tap into this non-charge based flow, as it may
exist within this context of the particle ladder (i.e. the vortice as a
model of a double-helix or double-spiral, say. light-cones, whatnot.)
so, it seems to come down to the issue of aligning lines-of-force,
including of 'light' and 'gravity' and electric and magnetic force
fields,
that are tied to atomic and molecular structures, that could then be
able to internally or externally engages this situation in a productive
way, somehow. seemingly. that, like clockwork, the crystallography
might become akin to infrastructural engineering of aetheric wind-
mills, sails, and water-mills and wheels, to capture this motioning.
consider, for instance, the possibilities of a piezo-electric device
that establish a polarization of charge, and thus potentially open or
close a gateway into a new functioning or relationship with a vortex
structure, as it may tap into unstable particles or other particles and
molecular structures, whose fields may begin to do work via how they
interact with a potential vibrational resonance, established via the de-
stabilization of this relation with zero or neutral or ground. this
is to
try to convey that if such ideas were able to be realized, that it could
be an issue of having a lighter-like device that functions as a battery
of infinite energy, versus a chemical battery which operates on the
same scale, as if 'pushing electrons' through the circuit, where the
process breaks down or wears out. versus opening up an energy
channel where it begins to stream out, and then being able to close
it or shut it back down, like a gate way or switch or circuit, (of
zero).
in any case, imagining again the symbolic atom and this time with
a neutral ~particle (neutron) as part of this atomic nucleus, it is in
any of these interactions that seemingly the issues of charge and
the number line, and its interactions with zero (0) are a potential
to begin unleashing these conditions for accessing aetheric energy
at another level or scale or through another way of understanding
what electromagnetism, light, and gravity are, not only in a context
of the perceived physical vacuum, yet also in an aetheric medium.
in all the many ways that this zero-point or neutral condition is to be
crossed or navigated, throughout matter and modeling of *stuff*, it
would then seem possible to begin questioning how the way these
things function could begin to enable establishing these flows, and
also how they could be interacted with, within the electromagnetic
or other ways, via lines of force that are in phase with this motion.
'scale' may not be accurate enough a concept, yet it enables a way
to begin to conceptualize the situation as it may exist
organizationally,
in a vortex-like structuring where many different situations all share a
sinking into and out of this medium, including rotational and various
other geometric effects (symmetry, etc) seemingly undescribed by
the present 'official' approach to these questions and issues. which
is to say, zero is nothingness. it is a dead-end. literally. ours.
|
