Could gravitation and time not exist in pure darkness???

[The Architekt]

Could gravitation and time not exist in pure darkness???

 

If so then can derivative calculations really be a simple 180 degree "turn" mistaken for .5 c or simply 0 the initial start of the system?

 

 

 

In this simple formula of mine, I have found that this may be the case:

 

1/ [1/ x + t] / 2 * x * t * phase cycle = 1

 

Just a note here: x + t = k of the metric, manifold or matrix.

 

1 means 1 second in mm/s

 

The 2 is the squaring of x and t "inverted."

 

Using this simple formula I have provided as an example set x = 12 and t = 6 = 2[.866] mm/s rather yet beta the electron.

 

 

This find only applies to rotating celestial bodies and or anything with integer spin ½ that has time and precession.

 

Also have in mind to what I refer as x direction = magnetism, and y direction = electrical as in phase cycles thus = precession.

 

 

 

I am hoping this formula can be looked at by "professionals" to plug in their variables and see what they find, as I am just someone curious about this as of now.

 

 

If this is the case then can derivatives really mean a simple 180 degree turn and nothing else?

 

 

I am very much willing to explain this further and answer questions; however I will need numerical examples of your finds using this formula I have already provided to the science community. In this it will make life easier for all of us…

 

Hope someone replies…

Edited May 29, 2012 by The Architekt

[ACG52]

All right, is it just me, or did this make no sense at all?

[The Architekt]

You do know that earth only receives one side of light from the sun, leaving 1/2 of earth in pure darkness while it is in motion right?

 

 

This question is intended for those whom understand "Quantum Theory and Space Time Geometry", do you know this?

Also, can you disprove the formula with numbers and or values with no comment at all?

 

While we are here, why does Special Relativity brake down when reaching high speeds?

 

How then does Quantum Theory work in relation to xd = 0 when the h constant uses discrete amounts of energy as in 1 ,2 ,3?

 

What is a secant line in relation to a tensor?

 

Does this tensor have two opposites sides as in - + sides that both = x+t = 0?

 

In which direction does electrical and magnetism flow?

 

What is x relative to in the Albert Einstein field Equations??

 

Does GPS work only because it is relative to earth's motion or its precession?

If you don't know any of this, then of coarse none of this makes sense to you....

Edited May 28, 2012 by The Architekt

[ACG52]

You do know that earth only receives one side of light from the sun, leaving 1/2 of earth in pure darkness while it is in motion right?

 

 

You know that this is simply pure nonsense, don't you? Have you ever gone outside at night. Have you ever looked up? Have you ever seen the stars? Have you ever seen the moon? And what the hell is 'pure darkness' supposed to be?

 

This question is intended for those whom understand "Quantum Theory and Space Time Geometry", do you know this?

 

Oh don't be silly. Have you ever studied physics of any kind beyond the high school level? Have you ever studied grammar beyond the elementry school level? I got my degree in physics over 30 years ago, and while I've never worked as a physicist, I continue to read.

 

Also, can you disprove the formula with numbers and or values with no comment at all?

 

 

This is one of a cranks favorite sayings. Write a bunch of nonsense which means nothing, but has arithmetic symbols and then say 'prove me wrong'.

 

While we are here, why does Special Relativity brake down when reaching high speeds?

 

 

It doesn't you nit. High relativistic speeds is the domain of Special Relativity.

 

 

Never mind, every science forum gets quite a few like you.

 

BTW, don't PM me any more if you're thin skinned.

 

 

MODS, can we move this to the trash can now?

Edited May 29, 2012 by ACG52

[ACG52]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were a seventh grader, or I wouldn't have been so harsh.

 

AND CAN GO TO SCHOOL STILL

 

Well certainly, keep it up.

 

But as long as we're here, explain what you mean by 'pure darkness'.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

1. Whether or not someone is in 7th grade or not does not negate the fact that you agreed to act with courtesy and civility when you signed up to this forum. Your insults are inappropriate and will not be tolerated.

2. In addition, the Architekt, 7th grade or not, you don't get to disregard our rules either. Act with some maturity and some civility or your time here will be short. I've deleted your posts as they have no relevance to your OP.

If someone has said something offensive, you are encouraged to use our report feature to alert staff and let us take care of it.

Lastly, this is being moved to speculations.

[Bignose]

1/ [1/ x + t] / 2 * x * t * phase cycle = 1

 

Just a note here: x + t = k of the metric, manifold or matrix.

 

1 means 1 second in mm/s

 

The 2 is the squaring of x and t "inverted."

 

 

Please define each variable, including the units each variable should take. This "1 means 1 second in mm/s" is unintelligible.

 

You may also wish to try to use this forum's LaTeX capabilities to print this in a much easier to read format. I am not sure what belongs under which fraction when you write it like that.

 

Thanks.

[The Architekt]

WOW! this is going to take some time,,, can you please send me a link to a "simple free latex program?"

 

I promise to practice on it then get back to you, now I know why this was so confusing, I saw how latex prints equations, it looks professional.

 

thank you sir....

 

 

Please define each variable, including the units each variable should take. This "1 means 1 second in mm/s" is unintelligible.

 

You may also wish to try to use this forum's LaTeX capabilities to print this in a much easier to read format. I am not sure what belongs under which fraction when you write it like that.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

[Spyman]

(...) can you please send me a link to a "simple free latex program?" (...)

There is no need to download or install any software, LaTeX is a built in feature on this site, all you have to do is learn how to use it.

 

You activate the LaTeX by using the [math] [/math] tags, here is a link: Quick LaTeX Tutorial

[The Architekt]

thanks, gonna try it out ASAP, but for now to answer Big Nose's questions about my post here. This is what I think the variables and units should be for x and t:

 

here is what I think my answer should be.

I am going to do this in latex, but at least I tried to answer the questions either they are right or wrong because I know it will take me some time getting used to proper terms and science skills ha!

 

 

 

(x = 0)=(x = 100 ft)=

x = (100 - 0) = 100 ft

 

(t = 0)= (t = 2 min)

t = (2 - 0) = 2 min

 

(v) = (100 - 0)/(2 - 0) = 100 ft/2 min = 50 ft/min

 

 

Applying my formula to 50 ft/min should = 0.001*10e-2 = 0.0001 ft/min, this is where I think light does not exist at all.

 

BUT let me get latex to create a better professional looking formula..

THNX!

There is no need to download or install any software, LaTeX is a built in feature on this site, all you have to do is learn how to use it.

 

You activate the LaTeX by using the [math] [/math] tags, here is a link: Quick LaTeX Tutorial

[Bignose]

So from this

 

1/ [1/ x + t] / 2 * x * t * phase cycle = 1

 

Just a note here: x + t = k of the metric, manifold or matrix.

 

to this:

 

(x = 0)=(x = 100 ft)=

x = (100 - 0) = 100 ft

 

(t = 0)= (t = 2 min)

t = (2 - 0) = 2 min

 

something is definitely wrong. How can you add x, which you list has units of length, to t, which you list has units of time?

 

I.e. what is a 1 kilometer plus 12 milliseconds?

 

It isn't anything meaningful. You can only add like units. You can answer "what is 1 kilometer plus 12 millimeters?", because kilometers and millimeters are both lengths.

 

So, do you want to try again? Because both of the equations in the first post add x to t, and that just doesn't have any physical meaning. If your equation isn't dimensionally sound, that is a huge red flag that you have something very wrong.

[The Architekt]

WOW! I was wrong, I always thought that x = length, and t = the time it takes to get to that length.. I am very frustrated now, Hymm,, is there any possible way please that you can break down what you mean by this?

 

what is: units of length in the x direction

 

what is: units of time

 

And how do professional scientist use them??

Can you please show me a numerical representation, something that has numbers, so I can look and see where I make mistakes most.

 

 

Thanks for the reply Sir.

 

 

So from this

 

 

 

to this:

 

 

 

something is definitely wrong. How can you add x, which you list has units of length, to t, which you list has units of time?

 

I.e. what is a 1 kilometer plus 12 milliseconds?

 

It isn't anything meaningful. You can only add like units. You can answer "what is 1 kilometer plus 12 millimeters?", because kilometers and millimeters are both lengths.

 

So, do you want to try again? Because both of the equations in the first post add x to t, and that just doesn't have any physical meaning. If your equation isn't dimensionally sound, that is a huge red flag that you have something very wrong.

 

 

 

[Bignose]

Well, I already gave you an example.

 

What is the sum of 1 kilometer and 12 milliseconds?

 

I may as well ask you what is the sum of 4 oranges and 13 automobiles?

 

The point is that you cannot add incompatible units.

 

x can be a length, and t can be the time is get to travel that length, but you still cannot just add the two of them together and get something meaningful.

 

How a professional scientist uses them is that as a first check, any equation must be dimensionally sound. If it isn't, a mistake has been made. Now, that doesn't mean that if an equation is dimensionally sound, that it is right -- but it is a first check for wrongness.

Edited June 24, 2012 by Bignose

[Aethelwulf]

 

something is definitely wrong. How can you add x, which you list has units of length, to t, which you list has units of time?

 

 

I've not read anything here in detail, but you find such things from a metric. An affine length plus a time coordinate.

[Bignose]

I've not read anything here in detail, but you find such things from a metric. An affine length plus a time coordinate.

 

I think you'll find that the time-like coordinate is usually multiplied by a velocity of some sort (typically speed of light makes an appearance).

[Aethelwulf]

I think you'll find that the time-like coordinate is usually multiplied by a velocity of some sort (typically speed of light makes an appearance).

 

Well yes, I was thinking in natural units.

[The Architekt]

Yes I "think" this may be what I was trying to express, but am not quite as strong as professionals here when it comes to the "technical explanations."

 

For instance, in the question that Big Nose asked me "what is a 1 kilometer plus 12 milliseconds?"

 

What goes through my mind is this:

 

Every unit length within 1 kilometer, rather it be, millimeters, micro meters and etc represents increments of time as 1 second or 1 microsecond and etc like a doubling effect or inverse square law that measures flux.

 

I think it represents 1 I have read about in where Max Planck found his constant used in I think "black body radiation?" His unit represent 1 but is not written as 1.

Here is more on his discovery: http://en.wikipedia....Planck_constant

 

Anyway, I think that when derivatives are taken what is really going is defining zero empty space so that the equation is defined, hence as delta x -->0.

 

So that maybe dx/dt = [some number] * [time itself] = your time---> "coordinate squared."

 

This is where I made the mistake of x+t, I should have meant x+y = metric * time = space time coordinate tensor.

But again, I may be wrong.

Also, I think that a metric is constant, it does not change the secant line length. What I see is this metric and or secant line moving around like in a 3d spherical shape body as this space time coordinate at the very tip is the electron. This 3d spherical shape body is thus encapsulated within the domain of relative time to " what ever is being calculated for a derivative." Then what I see is this:

secant line length + [time = 0] = tangent = 1 = Max Planck number.

 

I see this much in 3d video games.

 

Thanks..

 

t

I've not read anything here in detail, but you find such things from a metric. An affine length plus a time coordinate.

 

 

 

 

Is this how the wavefunction is used? Do they use the speed of light as a base number, and multiply all else from there? thanks..

I think you'll find that the time-like coordinate is usually multiplied by a velocity of some sort (typically speed of light makes an appearance).

Edited June 25, 2012 by The Architekt

[Aethelwulf]

''This is where I made the mistake of x+t, I should have meant x+y = metric * time = space time coordinate tensor.''

That is still wrong. I thought you were working in natural units at first but I realize your mathematical capabilities are lacking somewhat. Consider a Galilean Transformation Property. You have an x-axis (horizontal axis) and a t-axis (a vertical axis) which acts like a map for a moving observer. Now, x=vt (this means that the position which has units of length) equals a time component multiplied by a velocity. If we use your example, you had x+t which would have been right for natural units - in the natural unit system, we set the velocity to 1 and assume the velocity beforehand has the value of the speed of light ''c''.

This means it would ''vanish'' from the equation. A similar transformation property would be

[math]x = x'+ct[/math]

where c=v for light, and now setting c=1 then we have

[math]x = x'+t[/math]

Which is something akin to your expression.

[The Architekt]

wow! this now makes sense thanks!, but what if [math]x = x'+t[/math] needs to be divided by 2? In other words an equal length represents a diameter too is this right?, then divide this by 2 you have a radius right?

 

Could it then be used like this [math]x'+t / [1 / x'+t / 2] [/math]

What I am thinking here is that [math]x = x'+t[/math] = the metric or i think something called k like a diameter or secant line.

 

By the way, I copied the latex format from you, I hope I did this right, I am still learning.

 

Sorry if this makes no sense, I just cant stop thinking about the reason why time has any role in this...Time as in the man made time clock's of the world, not the speed of light...

 

Thanks!

 

''This is where I made the mistake of x+t, I should have meant x+y = metric * time = space time coordinate tensor.''

 

That is still wrong. I thought you were working in natural units at first but I realize your mathematical capabilities are lacking somewhat. Consider a Galilean Transformation Property. You have an x-axis (horizontal axis) and a t-axis (a vertical axis) which acts like a map for a moving observer. Now, x=vt (this means that the position which has units of length) equals a time component multiplied by a velocity. If we use your example, you had x+t which would have been right for natural units - in the natural unit system, we set the velocity to 1 and assume the velocity beforehand has the value of the speed of light ''c''.

 

This means it would ''vanish'' from the equation. A similar transformation property would be

 

[math]x = x'+ct[/math]

 

where c=v for light, and now setting c=1 then we have

 

[math]x = x'+t[/math]

 

Which is something akin to your expression.

Edited June 25, 2012 by The Architekt

[Aethelwulf]

wow! this now makes sense thanks!, but what if [math]x = x'+t[/math] needs to be divided by 2? In other words an equal length represents a diameter too is this right?, then divide this by 2 you have a radius right?

 

Could it then be used like this [math]x'+t / [1 / x'+t / 2] [/math]

What I am thinking here is that [math]x = x'+t[/math] = the metric or i think something called k like a diameter or secant line.

 

By the way, I copied the latex format from you, I hope I did this right, I am still learning, thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

 

No.

 

Radius has dimensions of length, 2 is just a constant. Dividing by two on both sides is actually the same as multiplying by a half on both sides

 

[math]\frac{1}{2} x = \frac{1}{2}(x' + t)[/math]

 

Radius has the same dimensions as the spatial coordinate x. The only kind of coordinate based system for a metric which would use a radial coordinate that I can think of is something build from what are called Polar Coordinates.

 

Oh, and time isn't the speed of light. Time is what we use to measure intervals. The reason why it appears in the metric is because there is a kind of length to time as there is to things moving from one point in space to another. A journey in space will always equal some kind of journey in time, unless you where a photon for example (a particle of light). A light particle according to relativity doesn't even go anywhere because it does not move through time. Of course, from our frame of reference particles of light do in fact move from A to B. There was a problem for a while, and that was understanding how a particles frame of reference could be dilated so much that it could not even experience time pass. While this provided an answer why they do not spontaneously decay in spacetime, they actually don't possess frames of reference (the inertial kind) we often speak about.

 

(just to add)

 

Sitting in your chair is a journey in time as well, even though you might not be moving in space.

[The Architekt]

But I have heard about how quanternion mathimatics breaks the laws of commutative, associative and distributions in I think algebra?

 

In where [math]\frac{1}{2} x = \frac{1}{2}(x' + t)[/math] does not hold? i think....

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Quaternion

 

From what I know and read, it allows more calculations far more advanced than derivitives.

 

Also, I have always wondered about mathimatical induction as well as in: 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n = ½n(n + 1)

http://en.wikipedia....tical_induction

 

 

 

n in this case starts all over again as 0.5 or 1/2.... Could there be a system un accounted for that does use 0.5 as an initial start as 1 intrigal for time. Like the polor coordinate system as degrees and or ratios?

 

 

All this reminds me of spin 1/2 particles, but then their it gets very complex for me. I love the belt trick though also has quenternion relation! Awesome!

http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~hansona/quatvis/Belt-Trick/index.html

 

I just have so many questions and would love to know so many things all at once..

 

 

By the way excellent example about the light photon thanks! You are a very smart person....

No.

 

Radius has dimensions of length, 2 is just a constant. Dividing by two on both sides is actually the same as multiplying by a half on both sides

 

[math]\frac{1}{2} x = \frac{1}{2}(x' + t)[/math]

 

Radius has the same dimensions as the spatial coordinate x. The only kind of coordinate based system for a metric which would use a radial coordinate that I can think of is something build from what are called Polar Coordinates.

 

Oh, and time isn't the speed of light. Time is what we use to measure intervals. The reason why it appears in the metric is because there is a kind of length to time as there is to things moving from one point in space to another. A journey in space will always equal some kind of journey in time, unless you where a photon for example (a particle of light). A light particle according to relativity doesn't even go anywhere because it does not move through time. Of course, from our frame of reference particles of light do in fact move from A to B. There was a problem for a while, and that was understanding how a particles frame of reference could be dilated so much that it could not even experience time pass. While this provided an answer why they do not spontaneously decay in spacetime, they actually don't possess frames of reference (the inertial kind) we often speak about.

 

(just to add)

 

Sitting in your chair is a journey in time as well, even though you might not be moving in space.

 

 

 

Edited June 25, 2012 by The Architekt

[Aethelwulf]

But I have heard about how quanternion mathimatics breaks the laws of commutative, associative and distributions in I think algebra?

 

In where [math]\frac{1}{2} x = \frac{1}{2}(x' + t)[/math] does not hold? i think....

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Quaternion

 

From what I know and read, it allows more calculations far more advanced than derivitives.

 

Also, I have always wondered about mathimatical induction as well as in: 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n = ½n(n + 1)

http://en.wikipedia....tical_induction

 

 

 

n in this case starts all over again as 0.5 or 1/2.... Could there be a system un accounted for that does use 0.5 as an initial start as 1 intrigal for time. Like the polor coordinate system as degrees and or ratios?

 

 

All this reminds me of spin 1/2 particles, but then their it gets very complex for me. I love the belt trick though also has quenternion relation! Awesome!

http://www.cs.indian...rick/index.html

 

I just have so many questions and would love to know so many things all at once..

 

 

By the way excellent example about the light photon thanks! You are a very smart person....

 

 

 

 

The best way I know of to describe quaternions (which is like jumping into the deep end of number theory) is the following:

 

How do you solve [math]x^2 = 1[/math]?

 

The answer is [math]x = \pm 1[/math]

 

How do you solve [math]x^2 = -1[/math]?

 

The answer is [math]x = \pm i[/math]. Here we have had to invent a new kind of number, an imaginary number to solve that equation. What's the solution to the equation [math]x^2=0[/math]? Someone might answer, [math]x=0[/math] but interestingly that is not the only solution. To obtain solutions to equations which are outside of the abilities of the real numbers that high school students deal with every day, you need to be begin to introduce a new kind of number system. Real numbers have the simplistic form of [math]a[/math],when we talk about complex numbers (the stuff with imaginary parts to equations), we begin to talk about forms of the type [math]z = a + ib[/math]. Then after this number system comes the quaternions which introduces three independent imaginary numbers

 

[math]q = a + ib + jc + kd[/math]

 

where the [math](a+b+c)[/math] are reals as you would find in your everyday counting system. The way they work is that the [math]i^2 = j^2 = k^2 = -1[/math] - but the way they form an algebra is the way they work when for instance, [math]i[/math] and [math]j[/math] are multiplied together. So what do they make?the following:

 

[math]ij = k[/math]

 

and

 

[math]jk = i[/math]

 

[math]ki = j[/math]

 

If you reverse the order of multiplication then they produce the negative values

 

 

[math]ji = -k[/math]

 

and

 

[math]kj = -i[/math]

 

[math]ik = -j[/math]

 

So its quite complicated stuff. So the product of two are noncommutative.

[The Architekt]

So the complex numbering system and the quanternions seems to be a cross product of some sort, in where one matrices remains stationary and the other moves in time?... You see in video games I see the same thing, in where the grid floor of my 3d program is stationary and allows all other 3d game models to move around and about. The grid that remains stationary helps me to position my 3d models in empty space and model them with translation of x y and z much like how you explained doing this with the translations, rotations and scaling tools in the 3d program.

 

I think the numbering theory must predict the cooridentes of my movements before hand when I create 3d game models and thus allows the program to work with my movement in 3d creation of game worlds and models etc.

 

Without this grid I would be lost in the 3d program. The same is also for texturing the game models to. You have a uv map coordinate image by an even square size, ie 450x450 for the texture that you place on the game model.

 

I am using logic here , if this is so the case, and the texture map is squared, then this must be true for the Y direction for relativity. Y then must be squared! Its the same for 3d game models and their position in time and space in the 3d world via the texture uv map coordinate, just like photons particles that do not move in time but move in space time??

 

But it is a flat texture map with x and y or i and j, when you are creating the texture map in a graphics program you then place this on the game model and it wraps around the game mode in 3d space because of the previous UV unwrapping of the 3d game mesh or model, here is an example: http://en.wikipedia....Texture_mapping

 

Things like this amaze me very much! Since t = the person in the refference frame and t represents y, could this also be another way to express quanternions..

 

L = some wave length

 

 

L * x = A

L * y squared= B

 

 

1/ A+B = -1 OR +1 not sure..

 

Where

 

A = i

B =j

 

Or better yet 1/ A*B = 2

 

Or Maybe this L / A*B =1

 

I am still learning Latex so please excuse, not even sure if this makes sense, but I do understand what you are saying though I just need to practice more and study more.

 

This here is just an idea I have for now, where the constant of 2 takes care of the radius and diameter I talked to you about earlier in this post.

 

Thank you so much your explanations was incredible better than my teachers!!!!!!!, I hope to be smart like this.... I am hoping to get into the wave function soon, but this may not be for some time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The best way I know of to describe quaternions (which is like jumping into the deep end of number theory) is the following:

 

How do you solve [math]x^2 = 1[/math]?

 

The answer is [math]x = \pm 1[/math]

 

How do you solve [math]x^2 = -1[/math]?

 

The answer is [math]x = \pm i[/math]. Here we have had to invent a new kind of number, an imaginary number to solve that equation. What's the solution to the equation [math]x^2=0[/math]? Someone might answer, [math]x=0[/math] but interestingly that is not the only solution. To obtain solutions to equations which are outside of the abilities of the real numbers that high school students deal with every day, you need to be begin to introduce a new kind of number system. Real numbers have the simplistic form of [math]a[/math],when we talk about complex numbers (the stuff with imaginary parts to equations), we begin to talk about forms of the type [math]z = a + ib[/math]. Then after this number system comes the quaternions which introduces three independent imaginary numbers

 

[math]q = a + ib + jc + kd[/math]

 

where the [math](a+b+c)[/math] are reals as you would find in your everyday counting system. The way they work is that the [math]i^2 = j^2 = k^2 = -1[/math] - but the way they form an algebra is the way they work when for instance, [math]i[/math] and [math]j[/math] are multiplied together. So what do they make?the following:

 

[math]ij = k[/math]

 

and

 

[math]jk = i[/math]

 

[math]ki = j[/math]

 

If you reverse the order of multiplication then they produce the negative values

 

 

[math]ji = -k[/math]

 

and

 

[math]kj = -i[/math]

 

[math]ik = -j[/math]

 

So its quite complicated stuff. So the product of two are noncommutative.

Edited June 26, 2012 by The Architekt

[Aethelwulf]

So the complex numbering system and the quanternions seems to be a cross product of some sort, in where one matrices remains stationary and the other moves in time?... You see in video games I see the same thing, in where the grid floor of my 3d program is stationary and allows all other 3d game models to move around and about. The grid that remains stationary helps me to position my 3d models in empty space and model them with translation of x y and z much like how you explained doing this with the translations, rotations and scaling tools in the 3d program.

 

I think the numbering theory must predict the cooridentes of my movements before hand when I create 3d game models and thus allows the program to work with my movement in 3d creation of game worlds and models etc.

 

Without this grid I would be lost in the 3d program. The same is also for texturing the game models to. You have a uv map coordinate image by an even square size, ie 450x450 for the texture that you place on the game model.

 

I am using logic here , if this is so the case, and the texture map is squared, then this must be true for the Y direction for relativity. Y then must be squared! Its the same for 3d game models and their position in time and space in the 3d world via the texture uv map coordinate, just like photons particles that do not move in time but move in space time??

 

But it is a flat texture map with x and y or i and j, when you are creating the texture map in a graphics program you then place this on the game model and it wraps around the game mode in 3d space because of the previous UV unwrapping of the 3d game mesh or model, here is an example: http://en.wikipedia....Texture_mapping

 

Things like this amaze me very much! Since t = the person in the refference frame and t represents y, could this also be another way to express quanternions..

 

L = some wave length

 

 

L * x = A

L * y squared= B

 

 

1/ A+B = -1 OR +1 not sure..

 

Where

 

A = i

B =j

 

Or better yet 1/ A*B = 2

 

Or Maybe this L / A*B =1

 

I am still learning Latex so please excuse, not even sure if this makes sense, but I do understand what you are saying though I just need to practice more and study more.

 

This here is just an idea I have for now, where the constant of 2 takes care of the radius and diameter I talked to you about earlier in this post.

 

Thank you so much your explanations was incredible better than my teachers!!!!!!!, I hope to be smart like this.... I am hoping to get into the wave function soon, but this may not be for some time.

 

 

 

No not cross product that's something different. And there are no matrices present. This is simply a type of algebra involving imaginary numbers - three of them.

 

 

 

[The Architekt]

ok, thanks for the information, I really learned something these past few days that will help me in the future,,have a great day!

No not cross product that's something different. And there are no matrices present. This is simply a type of algebra involving imaginary numbers - three of them.