Brief Outline of New Theory

[Torchlrm]

Brief Outline of a New Theory.

I was planning to write two articles, one more serious, the other styled in a less serious tone. Here, however is the brief outline of an article that outlines a theory of mine.

We may examine a point in a System to be displaced. In going across or going up of a point B to point A it causes a force of displacement to A (therefore, if F=ma is correct, each point which has a mass and acceleration can be the cause of motion as a "force"). The functions can be moving up or across, but they have to be calculated simultaneously to occur; a hypotenuse is implied in the equation so changes in the formula for Area (1/2 bh, or 1/2 of the area of a rectangle by base and height of the triangle) have a direct impact towards force of motion. To examine the form of motion of 1/2 bh, a reciprocal such a 1/h^2 (h stands for height) would work (which is the sq to bring h in opposite side of fraction) equally applied, to all sides of the System. How the height moves - up or down - because to get to the point is required both up and down displacement by the additional point to it (therefore a triangle) - in the equation.

bh/2 * 1/h^2

= b/2h

On the other hand, h could be calculated to go even lower if:

to obtain a view of a/b + c/d from all versions of c/d order (ie c/d or d/c) it is added to a/b the other's intervals, i.e. ad + bc in the numerator, as well as ac + bd, which are each divided by bd and bc respectively

The theory claims that the order the factors are applied in matters.

Whether or not the functions of the form (ad + bc)/bd are calculated as ad/bd + bc/bd is not as important as that there are 2 other variants of the same function. In a way multiplication of a and b implies 'as a approaches b' to be multiplied by b (think of division as denominator cutting into numerator, and multiplication as the two factors multiply to create area). So to calculate both is 2x more factors - the key element here is how many possibilities there are, it could be +4 for instance in the case of 1/h^2 and 1/b^2 simultaneously applied. The other factor, d/c is precisely the reciprocal of c/d so if its reciprocal is applied, in the addition of factors then though all possible variants of the new factors are multiplied to each other it is also multiplied by the reciprocals to the functions, however many functions there are - it is 2 reciprocals here but only because the numerators and denominators are 2 sided, in the case of x/y/z it would be the reciprocals of each function individually. By now we have gotten to a point in the function where we see that it is not necessarily 1/2 in the formula for motion as is inherent in Galilean formulas, but it must be the reciprocal of the possible variants of ONE factor c/d's available factors, together with . All formulas from motion calculated from 1/2 of the square. Additionally the formulas require so that it also took into account the other two, mirror, functions, which again is a reciprocal to them, so that ac+bd in reciprocal (calculated as the other side of the function which has different num and den, the num and den has to have calculations as well as order it is factored) equaled 1. The more that it does approach this in the system, the more h is negative in the function.

[imatfaal]

 

Brief Outline of a New Theory.

I was planning to write two articles, one more serious, the other styled in a less serious tone. Here, however is the brief outline of an article that outlines a theory of mine.

We may examine a point in a System to be displaced. In going across or going up of a point B to point A it causes a force of displacement to A (therefore, if F=ma is correct, each point which has a mass and acceleration can be the cause of motion as a "force"). ...

 

I am afraid I am lost by the end of your first sentence. It is the change in velocity which is caused by a force - not the velocity nor the displacement itself. Each particle or object (I dislike saying points have a mass or acceleration) which is accelerating is subject to an external force - I would not like to say it the other way around; a massive accelerating object does not cause a force.

The functions can be moving up or across, but they have to be calculated simultaneously to occur;

 

And by this point I am totally at sea. Functions might describe movement - but they do not move unless you drop your textbook. And their calculation bears on nothing other than their calculation

Could you perhaps give some worked examples of what your theory entails?