Stuff about relationship between e, alpha, V.E., PSI and Pascal.."Alpha" == 8**10*x. Under Construction.

48 has been on our minds for some reason, It turns out to be the product of (1152*6)/(1/144) at least (also just 6*8 of course). And a plot might look like this (48&x):



And 48|x seem to give an ever increasing graph:



And for 48^x (range 512):



All three graphs are in essence variations on the same idea it seems. 1152*6=6912 is also 144*48 should be noted. And 144/48=3. And there are of course many more calculations that can be done with these numbers. The only one we might mention here that we should and haven't done yet it is 144/(1/144) which is 20736 which fit 2nf²+2 where n is 2 and f 72 though lacking +2 which would make it 20738.

On a side note 145/144 = 1.0069444444444444 and 145/(1/144)=20880. We might look at this one with 20880&x before we proceed and the sequences creating it is (0 and 16, 128 and 144, 256 and 272, 384 and 400 ):



What kind of resonance or what, these wave-forms would be is kind of hard to say. It may seem like a bit rubbish to make these wave-forms but at least it's fun. They are properly harmonic and geometric though and for the sub-conscious mind / the brain, though. Some other ones are shown here (though we have not added the part about biological interest there).

Though mentioning these waves and their biological function in our view does not mean that they don't need to have a relation to physics or quantum physics too. It may seem fascinating that "concepts" like this might be applicable many places in the Universe, like this both physics etc, and brain etc, though there should be a logical explanation to this.

Why we push for them to apply biologically first though that is because if Man can use these wave-forms biologically, he may also use them otherwise. Hopefully it is enough to just see these wave-forms for them to take root and have function biologically.

"Concepts" are many places. And electron is said to have to spin about 720 degrees to get to where it started. A normal simple knot on a rope is also 720 degrees. Thus even though Newton is not in fashion..and Speaking of Newton it is said that he understood the concept of mass attraction or gravity when he saw an apple fall to the ground. The question is though about if his mind though in these conceptual ways perhaps in relation to the form of the apple or not. The Earth is generally though of having a north and south pole but a compass only points North. As such an apple only has one flower also. Everybody knows the Earth is not an apple though. Earth is an orange of course..and in Norway possibly all of Scandinavia and maybe even the Norse countries the word for Orange is "Appelsin" so there you have it kind of.

720 might not be the exact proper spin though. Bruce Cathie has suggested 741.90399 degrees, which might be right. We suggest 725 but 725/720 is 1.0069444444444444. Earlier we found the constant 1.0000140373333333 and we could use that one with the former one here and get about 725.0101770666666 which certainly could be relative as well. Perhaps the spin of the electron is dependant on energy-level the electron is at, everything possible. Also it's possible that everything is just energy anyway going about in various geometric arrangements. One could also say that there are not any "particles" really just "something" that behaves as such (for us).

As such though , regarding the above statements about that everything really boils down to energy and energy-configurations it might seem fantastic that C.E.R.N. can find various particles etc in their work, with their photon -accelerators and such, but what they might be doing is isolating various energy packets fitting their already established frame-work that has a long (well, not fantastically long) history, and using them to find new "particles" thus expanding their frame-work. In that sense it seems like a gigantic waste of money considering how much is spent on these machines which could be better used for Humanity otherwise?

Thus some of the point of this site is to developed a viable mathematically frame-work that can model energy's behaviour anyway, even if Buckminster Fuller's "Synergetics" sometimes is considered a "space-case" (foolish) study. Of course a bit of our time here goes to correlate Synergetic Vector Geometry with already established science to prove things.

One such proof is the fact that e!*30 Pascal to PSI equals the value of a 4-frequency V.E..We have not ventured far into the depths of e or e! in relation to the V.E. etc, but we think it suffice to show that this normally used constant can be fitted nicely in relation to Synergetics. Despite that engineers out there reading this wanting to make their own technology might find it interesting due to the fact that one component of an already built machine might have reference to e , while the new additional components might be deemed sufficient to relate to Synergetic Vector Geometry. Thus modern science has not been futile after all, and one must remember Synergetics was not developed until the 60's?

What anyway is kind of difficult is to say consider this spin, lets just say its 725 degrees. How can we picture this to understand properly why it should be so? This is difficult but well worth it as it gets us away from theory to practice. We might consider it not identical but similar to Earth with it's spin and orbit around the sun. There are countless suns with planets spinning and going around them in orbits, so somewhere we might find one such systems that would make on orbit around the ..core, and one regular spin of 360 degrees equal in a way to totally 725 degrees when added up, for instance. Though even if this might only represent an extremely "basic" way to look at an energy-packet like the atom, which has been shown by measurement to if it's not exactly equal to solar system, it's at least far more complex.

But this a bit more complex although similar in one sense, arrangement to solar systems, when viewed on a smaller scale is a such yes, on a bigger scale like electromagnetism we can see that it will be simpler again. Thus the 18540 magnetic lines of force per square centimeter on the Earth's surface can probably be seen and it's not such a big number. But if we are to believe Synergetics we might "magnify" again to get back to the more basic complex level. What we wonder though is that if it anyway despite being very complex has a pattern we can discern like would it fit the formula for interrelationship printed above: "Though from (n**2-n)/2 with 18540 as "n" we get 171856530.0" would we find 171856530 micro-lines of force perhaps? Would this relate to fractals of we're lucky? We will try to find at some point though this should not be .e. the surface of a fractal because in fact a fractal in the normal sense have infinite surface-area

The large hadron-collider as it's called though (property of C.E.R.N) proved a few dismal things though when they were searching for the so-called "God particle" i.e. the Higgs-boson. There were some ideas before they found it and measured it's "energy-level" correctly like the notion that the Universe "had a lifetime greater than it self". If there's something we love it's paradoxes and they ruined that thoroughly by measuring the energy-levels of the higgs-boson refuting the fact about this "lifetime".

The number e is said to be irrational just like pi which means if you try to print all the decimals they trail of the screen and into the flat next door, out his window and far beyond never ending. "e!30 Pascal to PSI" seem like a pretty normal number though. so it can't be so very irrational. You might say the calculation with e that gave us 18540 is not precise enough but we'd just work backwards from 18540 then and surely we wouldn't find an irrational number then either.

In a sense though since e!*30 doesn't give exactly 128 pascal even if the pascal it does hand use give the V.E. that has a volume of 1280. Since this is so we need to derive some constants obviously. Maybe e!*30 "should have been" 1280 Pascal or something, but the thing is of course that the conversion from Pascal to PSI is a bit like the stuff about normal and geodetic inches, for instance. That physics already is like a Picasso image like this though is nothing we appreciate. That is that if we are lucky and a 4-frequency V.E. should turn to actually be related said magnetic lines, then it would be strange the 18540 which is it's number of spheres or the amount of spherical points on the figure, ..it should be strange that this isn't related to exactly 128 Pascal, even despite that it's volume is a decimal exponent of that even (1280). We've not studied many V.E. but could the latter maybe be the case that Pascal could very well be volume/100 if the conversion was slightly different then the one we use today? Of course then that wouldn't fit so nicely with the irrational constant e.

Talking about e though. e as mentioned is an irrational number just like other like pi. One could assume then thought that using it in some equation we should never get a whole natural number like 18540 as it wouldn't be very irrational then. Surely there is some "rounding" error in 18540 where the computer calculating for has has use some approximation of e. In case that though wouldn't stop us from working out 18540 PSI to Pascal to x!*30 for instance to find a less irrational constant.

Ok we've mentioned the stuff just above twice now, well it's always nice to repeat. Also worth to note though we seem to remember checking WIKI for any reference to scientific or physics use of it, and WIKI didn't mention any so e is not directly a "physical constant" though that doesn't mean it's not used in say calculus in physics anyway. Though from this stuff here it certainly seems to be a constant having real scientific and physics relation. We might for instance say that e! Pascal represent a physical quantity of this or that energy-form / packet / whatever, maybe.

Another interesting thing about the 4-frequency V.E. that even if it seems go give a very fitting value for these magnetic lines of force the problem is that we can't exactly prove it, and that is not good. But we might look at some of the other properties of the diagram and see if that helps us. We've seen that the value is very close to 128 Pascal and 128 Pascal might be said to be the inverse (1/x) of Schumann Resonance. We don't know if Schumann Resonance can be measured in Pascal but that's another measure. Also the volume of the 4-frequency Vector Equilibrium is 1280 which might also be said to be the inverse of Schumann Resonance even if it has a decimal shift from 128, but that does't mean that say neither 128 not 1280 has wrong magnitude or their values are simply a case of the value appearing as pico-whatever in contrast to the normal micro-whatever, so to speak. That stuff actually seem to be another conflict we have with established physics that we develop exact mathematical and geometric stuff while we don't know what established science does.

Yes as such the Schumann Resonance has never anyway been shown to be some 10**n (due to this micro, pico, milli stuff) multiple of 1/128=0.0078125 anyway. So that one might require an additional "thing" so that that one doesn't seem completely liable to be haphazard either. Well it turns out that (1/128)/S6 (Synergetics Constant 6: 1.125 or 9/8) is as such exactly equal to the propose gravity constant: 0.006944444444444444 even though the decimals might not be correct here either. This though we have noted before.

Though the really interesting thing here in total. That would be that mathematically and geometrically it could link both Magnetism, Schumann Resonance, and also the Gravity constant, and of course the (irrational) constant e. As such we might very well say that is it a few interesting things that we are discussing here if they all should turn out to be true in some sense.



1.012: Another variable and "binary belts".

We have state on the front page: 2*(225|144^256), which we modify to: (225|144^256&225) here we have removed 2* and made it out to be a circle which stops after the second iteration of 225. This gives us (225|144^256&225)=241. And we can add at lest *2 again making it 2*(225|144^256&225)=482 or perhaps since we're at "round 2" which should add *4 making it 4*(225|144^256&225)=964. Otherwise we could have 1000-241=759 to 759/750=1.012 ..which looks like 1024 but isn't missing 12. Also 33310 in base-4.



INDEX.