Orbifolds and Kaeler Conditions

Let us take into consideration three given arbitrary sets of orbifolds -- each set of which works to define three different unique physical sets of spaces, that here appertain to three different sets of Hamiltonian operators that each are of different universal settings.  Let us now say that there is one respective orbifold, out of each of the three so-stated sets of orbifolds, that bears an antiholomorphic directoral-based trajectory -- when in terms of the ghost anomalies that work to indicate a physical memory of the world sheets that exist as the trajectory of the directly associated superstrings.  The here eluded to antiholomorphic Kaeler condition that may be then surmised by the kinematic existence of the tritiary-based one orbifold out of each set of orbifolds, is a cue for the activation of three respective Wick Action eigenstates -- one Wick Action eigenstate so formed for each set of orbifolds, that, here, bear an antiholomorphic Kaeler condition during the group metric that I have here eluded to.   Let us now also say that the three so-stated sets of orbifolds are spatially proximal, yet, with a Yakawa index that is not viably Gliossi to any significant extent.  This so mentioned activity works to form three spatially proximal Gaussian Transformations, that are allowed to happen on account of the activation of the Kaeler Metric -- indirectly by the initiation of the Wick Action by the kinematic activity that was due to the activity of the mentioned Kaeler condition in the first place. This would thus result in three discrete changes in norm conditions, that would here appertain to three different unique respective universal settings -- each.  So, even though the activity of all of the three eluded to Gaussian Transformations are relatively near each other in a spatially local manner, since the directly corresponding changes in the respective norm conditions are of different universes, the abelian format of the Yakawa Coupling that would here be involved with the wave-tug/wave-pull of the individual eluded to cohomologies upon each other would not bear an even function of a Gliossi-based genus of substringular torsion in term of topological sway.  This would then here mean that the interdependence of the so-stated three different universal settings would bear a condition of relative substringular independence --  when in consideration of the pull of the permittivity of the three eluded to integrative Hodge-based index of the Hamiltonian operations that appertain to each of the three so-stated sets of orbifolds that I have mentioned here.  I will continue with the suspense later!
Samuel David Roach.