A Hint As To How Light-Cone-Gauge Eigenstates Curve

During the individual Polyakov Action eigenmetrics that happen during group instanton, the directly associated second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates curve hyperbolically in a manner that is hermitian, yet, at the same time, such a topological extrapolation is not necessarily curving over the period of the corresponding eigenmetric in a way that involves a unitary Euclidean genus of curvature over the period of the mentioned Polyakov Action.  For instance, the individual second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates that work to comprise the first-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstate that operates for a specific given arbitrary discrete unit of energy may appear from a vantage point "above" the cross-section of a discrete unit of energy to have a mapping that sweeps-out a smooth trajectory in a flat-based space over the period of a given Polyakov Action eigenstate.  Such a scenario that exists at an arbitrary locus may be extrapolated via a genus of a Sterling Approximation.  Yet, the directly associated second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates may often be delineated over BRST in such a manner that twists in a combination of tesoric topological sway through multiple dimensions over the corresponding duration of the said Polyakov Action eigenmetric during the consequent duration of BRST.  As such an activity occurs -- both during and/or after that Clifford Expansion that allows superstrings to expand to the inverse of their apparent Lorentz-Four-Contraction -- this happens in such a manner in so that the apparent smooth extrapolation may be mapped-out from one vantage point of what is here a seeming unitary kinematic projection. This happens via the tracing of the directly related mini-string in such a way that is here working to determine the relative delineation of the proximal light-cone-gauge eigenstate.  Such a mapping, though, may also involve hermitian-based twists in multiple Minkowski Ward-Caucy bounds that may here denote alterior torsions that are not necessarily appertaining to a unitary flow of a  Euclidean-based Lagrangian format of curvature that has no topological sway, in spite of what other-wise appears from one standpoint to be a tensoric-based unitary projection of a substringular field generation that here exists between a given superstring and its directly associated Fadeev-Popov-Trace.  The wording here may need a little bit of help, yet, I can see what I am trying to say.  I will continue with the suspense later!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.