As To The Pull Of The Strong Force

Let us here consider one general eigenstate, as to a relatively localized wave-tug/wave-pull of the strong force -- to where this is comprised of one general Hamiltonian operational-based cite as to where a gluonic-based force is either tugging and/or pulling at, in one specific locus, over a relatively transient duration of time.  A gluonic-based force is to exist at a locus that is working to inter-bind a set of two quarks to one lepton -- in so as to bind the said two quarks to the said lepton, in so as to work at making the composition of one respective given arbitrary proton.  The said proton that is held together in part by the so-stated gluonic force, as usual, is relatively centered from within the general Ward-Neumman physical confines of the nucleus of an atom -- to where one is to have a relatively stable hydrogen atom, since the directly corresponding atom in which the respective said proton is to work to form at here -- is of the nature of having both only one proton and only one electron.  The gluonic-based force that is here directly affiliated with the so-stated proton -- that works to form the said electrically stable atom, is of the nature of a centralized knotting of a Rarita Structure eigenstate, to where this respective said "centralized knotting" of a discrete increment of the Rarita Structure -- of which is of a manner by which the strong force, that is of the nature of binding together some of the essential phenomenology of atomic-based holonomic substrate, is then made to be correlative to the nature of the gravitational force -- by the nature of what is here a direct affiliation of the scalar effect of the Ricci Scalar with that general force that works to inter-bind sub-atomic particles that work at forming the phenomenology that is to construct the composition of atoms.  Let us now say that the said gluonic force -- that is correlative to the composition of the proton that is to here exist at the nucleus of the so-stated given arbitrary atom, is to work at bearing both one specific transversal-based Hamiltonian operation, one specific radial-based Hamiltonian operation, and/or one specific spin-orbital-based Hamiltonian operation, in such a manner to where the directoral-based wave-tug/wave-pull of the so-stated gluonic-based force is to then be of the nature of being intrinsically pushed and pulled as according to the scalar magnitude of the angular-affiliated eigenbase of the resultant force of the so-eluded-to implementation of the fractal of the subatomic angular momentum that would then be directly corresponding to the activity of the so-eluded-to wave-tug/wave-pull of the so-stated gluonic force, that is undergoing the eluded-to push and pull that may be extrapolated at its general Majorana-Weyl-Invariant mode, as an eigenstate of the centralized knotting of the Rarita Structure. Such a so-eluded-to sequential series of Laplacian-based steady-state iterations of subatomic activity -- that are of a relatively tightly knit tense of conformal invariance at a relatively set locus -- is to here be of a non-perturbative tense of Fourier-based translation, -- to where the general effect of such an eigenstate of the strong force, will then work to bear a reiterative set of cyclic permutations that will tend to be kept from within a relatively proximal region that is Poincaire to the general abelian operation of the Fourier-based translation of the respective given arbitrary Ward-Caucy-based region, in which the said proton is to be both codifferentiable and codeterminable at, over the so-eluded-to relatively transient duration of time in which such a tense of conformal invariance is of a non-perturbative nature. This so-stated general tense of directoral-based wave-tug/wave-pull will then work to form the general tendency as to the intrinsic activity of the atom that has been implied here -- by which the activity of the external forces that are to be applied to the Ward-Caucy bounds of the so-eluded-to eigenstates of both the respective gluonic-based force and its respective directly corresponding atom that it works at helping to form, will then have a basis as to how the resultant eigenbase of Fourier-related interaction will then be able to transpire -- from that point in group metrical activity to its ensuing sequential series of physical iterations of group-related instantons, over the so-eluded-to duration of time.

Topological Sway Of Cohomologies

Let us first consider a given arbitrary Gliosis-Sherk-Olive ghost-based pattern -- a cohomological mappable tracing -- of what would here be a physical memory of an orbifold eigenset, that is undergoing a tense of conformal invariance at a general respective set locus -- over a relatively transient duration of time.  Let us say that the so-eluded-to set of superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, that have here operated in so as to perform one specific function -- have just been perturbated-out of the initially so-stated tense of conformal invariance -- to where the so-eluded-to tense of the respective given arbitrary Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-Mode had just been ended by an external force, that had readjusted the general relative locus of as to where the said orbifold eigenset is to be iterating at, in a Fourier-based manner.  Let us now say that the re-adjustment was of a direct correspondence to a reversal of the general holomorphic flow of the adjutant field -- that was Gliosis to the outer bounds of the Ward-Neumman field that is Yukawa to the core-field-density of the so-stated orbifold eigenset.  The said reversal in the general holomorphic flow of the Yukawa-based field of the said orbifold eigenset would then work to form an antiholomorphic Kahler condition.  Often, when there is a perturbation that happens to the Gliosis-based field of an orbifold eigenset -- that had just previously been in a state of conformal invariance,  to where the said perturbation is of the general manner of an antiholomorphic Kahler condition -- the Gliosis-Sherk-Olive cohomology that had been both formed and iterated at the general locus of the Majrorana-Weyl-based delineation, will be pulled out of its initially relatively stagnant tense of a Laplacian-based format, into what may be here described of as a topological "drifting" of the ghost-based pattern's ghost-based indices, to where the cohomology that had been formed at the so-eluded-to general locus of cohomological-based setting, will be pulled in a kinematic manner into the immediate surroundings of the initially said Majorana-based field that is proximal to the general locus of as to where the directly corresponding orbifold eigenset had worked to form its initially so-eluded-to physical memory.  This will tend to work at effecting the manner in which the correlative integration of ghost-based indices will be able to scatter in the resulting genus of its Rayleigh-based scattering -- given both the scalar magnitude of the Hodge-Index of its eigenmembers & the quantum characteristics of its antiderivative-based Hamiltonian fractals of discrete momentum, as the so-eluded-to cohomology is drifting amongst its relatively reverse-holomorphic adjutant norm-state-projections.  To Be Continued!  Sam Roach.

As To A Gliosis-Based Abelian Strike

When there is a Gliosis-Sherk-Olive cohomological-based pattern, that is formed by the physical memory of the conformally invariant motion of a set of superstrings of discrete energy permittivity -- the so-eluded-to ghost-based pattern will be of a mappable tracing, that, if this is not perturbated by an external source, will tend to be in a positioning that is relatively stationary in its Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-based mode.  Let us now say that the so-stated Gliosis-Sherk-Olive ghost-based pattern that I have mentioned here, works to bear an external-based core-field-density, that works to bear an abelian geometry, in retrospect to its exterior Yukawa-based field.  Let us now say that there will be an incoming relatively reverse-holomorphic set of norm-state-projections, that will be heading towards the Gliosis-based field of the said respective given arbitrary Gliosis-Sherk-Olive cohomological-based pattern, that is of this given case scenario.  Let us now say that one is looking, in a Laplacian-based manner, in the holomorphic direction - from the relatively general holomorphic end of the so-eluded-to ghost-based pattern of the so-eluded-to orbifold -- that had just operated in so as to perform one specific function in the substringular, up until the said respective given arbitrary orbifold had perturbated out of the general but specific locus in which it had existed in a tense of conformal invariance -- at the initially so-stated tense of Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-Mode, that I had mentioned at the beginning of this given post. Let us now say that the whole ghost-based pattern of the said Gliosis-Sherk-Olive mappable tracing -- was to bear a "perfectly" trivially isomorphic chirality with the said incoming relatively reverse-holomorphic moving set of norm-state-projections -- to where each of the so-eluded-to ghost-based indices of the said physical memory of the orbifold is to match an antiholomorphic ghost-based index of the said relatively reverse-holomorphic moving set of norm-state-projection, as the impending collision is about to happen in a dot-product-based manner -- at the Poincaire level of the holomorphic end of the ghost-based pattern that was formed by the so-stated orbifold, that had worked to form the so-eluded-to physical memory of the Hamiltonian operator that had just been perturbated-out of the general locus of where the impending collision is about to happen.  Let us, as well, say, that the topological edges of the said reverse-holomorphic set of norm-state-projections is to bear an abelian geometry, towards the core-field-density that is just external to the Gliosis-based field, that is at the Poincaire level to the interior of what is about to be the group-metrical activity of a substringular collision of integrative ghost-based eigenindices.  Let us now say that the Hodge-Index of both of the individually taken so-eluded-to sets of integrative norm-state-projections is of the same discrete quantum.  This will then cause there to be a tendency, to where, the two integrative sets of norm-state-projections will often here completely scatter in a Rayleigh-based scattering, on account of both the conditions that this will be an annharmonic scattering, and, also because such a scattering will work to cause the adjacent eigenmembers that are displaced in a perturbative manner, to be of an odd chirality -- at the Poincaire level to the point commutators that are hewn-in by the activity of that inter-connective fabric of mini-stringular segmentation, that is involved with the homotopic interplay of the directly corresponding norm-state-projections -- that work to form the correlative and needed interconnection of substringular field-density, that works to reverse-fractal into the activity of the condition of the multiplicit existence of Cassimer Invariance.
To Be Continued!  I will continue with the suspense later!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To Two Approaching Abelian Edges Of Cohomology

Let us here consider the Fourier-based transformation, that would here work to involve two different cohomological settings that are here being pulled into one another -- over a directly corresponding sequential series of iterations of group-related instanton.  Let us here consider as well, that the two different said respective given arbitrary cohomological settings -- that are being displaced in the general manner that I have here described, are being drawn towards one another from the opposite direction -- the given arbitrary initial cohomological setting is moving towards the given arbitrary secondary cohomological setting, over a discrete period of time.  As an ansantz, this would then mean that the two said given arbitrary individually taken sets of ghost anomalies, are then in the process of making a "head-one" collision -- once that the two so-stated covariant sets of ghost anomalies have achieved a Gliosis-based contact with one another, over the course of the initially stated Fourier-based transformation in which such an operation of the kinematic displacement of the two different said cohomological settings is to have happened, over the so-eluded-to group metric of substringular operators that would here be of a direct correspondence with the said situation has transpired.  Let us now say that the two so-stated different cohomological settings that have here been kinematically displacesd -- in such a manner, to where these are brought from opposite directions (in a parity that would here work to involve two reverse-holomorphic directoral-based Lagrangian-affiliated topological genre of flow), up until these come into a direct contact in a Gliosis-based manner -- will work to bear a Laplacian-Transfomration-based tense of a trivially isomorphic chirality of Ward-Caucy-based eigenmembers.  This will be due to the condition, that we are here dealing with two different covariant physical memories -- of what would here be the kinematic displacement of the integrative ghost anomalies of two different covariant orbifolds, that would here appertain to the antiholomorphic flow of the physical memory of two kinematic sets of two different sets of superstrings -- that operate in so as to perform two different functions in the substringular. Let us now say, that, even though the two said sets of ghost anomalies would then tend to scatter upon each other to an extent, that there would still be a remaining quantum of cohomological-based setting, that would then tend to persist after the so-stated collision of the two said sets of integrative sets of ghost anomalies have struck each other in a Gliosis-based manner.  Let us now say that the Gliosis-based impact of the two so-stated trivially isomorphic sets of integrative ghost anomalies, will work to bear a flow, at the interior to the so-stated reverse-holomorhic-based Lagrangian topological pulsation of the said cohomological pull, that may be described of as having the quality of an abelian edge -- at the kinematic end of the said displaced individually taken ghost-based patterns, that are to here make a direct contact towards the interior locus of the said topological wave-tug/wave-pull.  Let us now say that one of the said cohomological settings that is approaching the other, works to bear a larger Hodge-based index of scalar magnitude of Hamiltonian operation than the other.  Let us then consider, that, otherwise, the consideration of a trivially isomorphic symmetry of the respective given arbitrary initial set of ghost anomalies -- that is of a larger quantum of substringular eigenmembers in Hamiltonian operation than the second so-stated set of displaced cohomological-based setting, is the only viable difference in the manner of the so-stated Fourier-based transformation -- that would here be involved with the drawing of the two sets of ghost anomalies toward one another.  This would then mean that the resultant topological flow of the so-eluded-to displacement of ghost anomalies would tend to go in the direction of the larger set of ghost anomalies -- to where  the resulting Hamiltonian operation of ghost-based indices would then tend to go in the direction of the larger scalar magnitude of Hodge-based cohomological index, once that the so-eluded-to Gliosis contact of such a cased has been achieved, at the Poincaire level.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam.

As To The Rarita Structure And Calabi-Yau Manifolds

Most phenomenology that we generally conceive of, is comprised of mass-bearing superstrings that are of the nature of what are either electrons, protons, or neutrons.  This is not when considering the condition of neutrinos.  Individually taken protons, are comprised of two quarks that are bound to one lepton -- via the bonding activity of what are known of as gluons.  Individually taken neutrons are comprised of one quark that is bound to two leptons -- via the bonding activity of what are known of as gluons.  Individually taken electrons are comprised of three leptons that are bound to one another -- via the bonding activity of another genus of of phenomenology that is similar to what are known of as gluons.  Certain phenomenology that is similar but different from mesons, particularly gluons, work to operate in so as to form that activity that is known of as the strong force.  This so-stated general genre that works to inter-bind sub-atomic particles, such as how gluons work to inter-bind certain sub-atomic particles, are the general genus of the substringualr phenomenology -- that is of that holonomic substrate, that may be denoted as the respective given arbitrary eigenstates of the centralized knotting of the Rarita Structure.  When individually taken photons -- of which are the discrete bosonic superstrings of electromagnetic energy -- act, in so as to strike the core-field-density of any given arbitrary mass-bearing superstring, in such a way that is of a Gliosis-based manner, the resulting general genus of interaction may be then described of as a Calabi-Yau interaction.  This then means -- that the general genus of the manifold of any given arbitrary respective mass-bearing superstring of discrete energy permittivity, may be described of as a Calabi-Yau manifold.  In general -- the holonomic substrate that would then directly correspond to the Laplacian-based existence, of a manifold of a mass-bearing superstring of such a said nature -- is one in which the activity of phenomenology such as gluons, via the strong force, is within the Ward-Neumman bounds of its said substringular-based composition.  This then means that the individually taken Calabi-Yau manifolds, tend to be a manifold -- in which the existence of the activity of particle-based phenomenology such as gluons, is Gloisis to the "heart" of the so-eluded-to construction of such a so-stated general membranous texture of substringular phenomenology.  This, as well, then means that inter-bound orbifold eigensets -- that work to bear eigenstates of the centralized knotting of the directly corresponding Rarita Structure delineations -- that are Yukawa to them, at the Poincare level, are ones of such -- to where, when an individually taken discrete quantum of electromagnetic energy is to strike the core-field density of such a general classification of substringular phenomenology in a Gliosis-based manner at the said discrete Poincare level, the resulting interaction will be of the nature of a Calabi-Yau interaction.  I will continue with the suspense later!!!
To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To The Centralized Knotting Of Rarita Structure Eigenstates

Let us consider the condition -- that the particles known of as gluons, are the phenomenology that is preeminent where the Rarita Structure eigenstates work to bear what I term of as the multivarious loci of the condition of a centralized knotting.  Remember, that the multivarious light-cone-gauge eigenstates act as the initiation-based source of the Rarita Structure, and, the multivarious gauge-boson eigenstates act as the ending-based source of the Rarita Structure.  Let us now consider the condition -- that those genre of the tenses of conformal invariance, that would here directly appertain to the activity of the Rarita Structure eigenstates of phenomenology that exists on a star or a planet, will tend to bear more torsional-affiliated external inter-play -- than those genre of the tenses of conformal invariance that would, instead, directly appertain here to the activity of the Rarita Structure eigenstates of phenomenology that would tend to exist in an isolated region that is deep into outer space.  Stars and planets are phenomenology that bear a large quanta of mass.  Mass is put together, basically, due to the activity of gluons -- in the process of acting as the operators of the strong force.  At least partially on account of the condition that any respective given arbitrary star or planet is a physical phenomenological-based entity, that works to bear a significant external inter-play of the directly corresponding Rarita Structure eigenstates -- that would be correlative to the existence of both their Laplacian-based and their Fourier-based activity -- there is then the predominant need for a much higher Hodge-Index of the quantity of eigenstates of the centralized knotting of the Rarita Structure for the so-stated respective stars and planets.  This would then work to explain, in part, the basis for the existence of the  high quantities of mass -- of which would here bear a high quantity of gluons -- for both stars and planets.  To Be Continued!
Sam Roach.

More As To The Relative Displacement Of The Rarita Structure

Let us say that one is to have two different comparative groups of orbifolds -- each of such groups of which would work to be comprised of superstrings, these said two sets of superstrings of which would both be existent in two different individually taken cases, that are of a relative tense of conformal invariance.  The first orbifold would be a set of superstrings, that would bear no relative condition of external-based motion -- since such a said orbifold would be situated out in a relative deep region of outer space, to where the so-eluded-to tense of conformal invariance would here be a tense of a condition of superconformal invariance.  The second so-eluded-to set of superstrings of one other respective given arbitrary genus of an orbifold -- would be in a tense of conformal invariance, that would be situated on an actual planet out in space.  This would then mean, that the second so-eluded-to orbifold eigenset would be existent upon a general locus -- here being of a planet -- of which would then be of a phenomenology that is moving, in a solar system that is as well moving, of a galaxy, that is just as well moving.  This would then involve a much deeper tense of external-based motion -- even though the actual specific locus of the general Majorana-Weyl-Invariant mode -- that is proximal to the second said orbifold eigenset that I have here mentioned, is in just as much of a relative condition of conformal invariance (at the interial-based setting), as the first said orbifold eigenset in question.  This would then mean -- that the second so-mentioned orbifold eigenset would work to bear a greater external condition of a constant covariant process of the kinematic interplay of the directly corresponding external-based Rarita Structure eigenstates -- that would then work to involve the interdependent interplay of each succeeding reverse-fractal of the relative divergence from a condition of conformal invariance, from the general locus that is just outside of the said orbifold eigenset of the so-stated second mentioned case, outward to the actual motion of the galaxies that are to here be covariant to the so-mentioned case of the second said orbifold eigenset of the said case scenario.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

A Little As To Rarita Structure Adjustments

Let us here consider a general locus as to where a superstring is to continually iterate at -- in a relatively conformally invariant manner,over time.  Let us say that the respective given arbitrary directly corresponding discrete quanta of energy was within the Ward-Caucy bounds of an atom -- to where, even though the so-stated atom was within a molecule that was moving, and, the said molecule that was to here contain the atom that contained the Ward-Neumman bounds of the so-stated discrete quanta of energy, was to be from within the Ward-Caucy bounds of a planet, that was, as well, moving in both a transversal and in a radial-based manner, over time.  This would mean -- that, even though the overall medium in which the here respective given arbitrary discrete quanta of energy -- that is here being discussed in this case, is to be kinematically being displaced in a relatively significant manner -- the specific proximal region in which the said discrete quanta of energy is here to be continuously be reiterating from within, is here of a conformally invariant manner.  This would then mean -- that, the so-stated discrete quanta of energy that is being discussed here in this case, is then existent in a tense of a Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-based manner, over time.  This would mean, that the specific locus -- that is here proximal to the relatively conformally invariant core-field-density of the overall said discrete quanta of energy, is to here bear a locally steady-state of a conformally invariant Rarita Structure eigenbase -- to where, even though the then exterialized field-density of the correlative Rarita Structure eigenstates are to be, in this case, constantly re-adjusting, outside of the Ward-Caucy bounds of the respective given arbitrary case of the correlative conformally invariant discrete quanta of energy -- the specific Laplacian-based locus of the Fourier-based translation of the said quanta of energy will be proximally defined, as a relatively low kinetically-based extrapolation of energy, since the said specific locus of the energy -- that is here of a locally conformally invariant manner, is then locally of a steady-state Gaussian-based translation of spacial phenomenology, relative to its immediate surroundings, over the so-eluded-to proscribed period of time of this case.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To The Completion Of An Otherwise Multiplicit Mobius Condition

Each set of parallel universes of the Ultimon, works to bear what may initially be a consideration of 26 spatial parameters of dimensionality plus time -- a sort of a Minkowski or flat-spaced-based spatial dimensionality.  Yet, such a so-eluded-to spatial conditoinality of dimensional parameterization, works to bear a multiplicit addendum of a Njenhuis spatial dimensionality, that would here consist of six added multiplicit spatial dimensions -- of which would then work to result in each set of parallel universes to then bear a Hilbert-based spatial dimensionality of up to 32 dimensions plus time.  The Rarita Structure is started in a Fourier-based manner, at the respective given arbitrary general locus of the light-cone-gauge egienstates, and, the so-stated Rarita Structure is ended in a Fourier-based manner at the respective given arbitrary general locus of the gauge-bosons, (the general locus of the so-eluded-to E(6)XE(6) strings of the substringular.)  As the gauge-bosons act in so as to "pluck" the correlative second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates -- the so-stated gauge-bosons act as a set of physical entities that each consist of six-dimensional closed loops, that act upon the said light-cone-gauge eigenstates -- in such a manner, in so as to put a wave-tug/wave-pull upon the so-stated light-cone-gauge eigenstates that is of both a Gliosisi and of a Yukawa-based nature, in six spatial parameters of dimensionality -- within the constraints of a gauge-metric, that is operateable over a sequential series of iterations of group-related instantons, that work to allow for the general eigenbase of the inter-relationship of discrete energy with the gravitational force -- so that phenomenology may be held together, so that there may be the existence of discrete substringular inter-relations, over time.  This said six dimensional activity of a holonomic-based substrate -- that is made by a phenomenology that is as well of a spatial parameterization of six spatial dimensions, plus time -- is what primarily acts, in so as to work to complete the "second-edge/second-side" of what would otherwise be the "holographic"-based flat space or Minkowski-based space of physical space and time.  (The completion of an otherwise Mobius condition.)  Such a continuous and a spontaneous Hilbert-based completion of a volumed-based space, is what acts in so as to work to make the viable inter-relations of spatial dimensionality of such a nature, in so as to work to bear the here needed completion of physical substringular depth.  As well, this works to complete the Newtonian principle -- that, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction -- acting in the opposite general direction of the said initial action.
I will continue with the suspense later! To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To The Completion Of The Rarita Structure

The mutivarious and multiplicit light-cone-gauge eigenstates are plucked -- like a harp is plucked -- by the correlative multivarious and multiplicit gauge-bosons, in so as to help to form both the existence and the activity of the correlative Schwinger-Indices.  The so-stated Schwinger-Indices, act upon the correlative Rarita Structure eigenstates -- in so as to help to work to form the interdependent interaction-related basis, that is to exist both between and amongst the superstrings of discrete energy permittivity towards the correlative gravitational-based particles (these said gravitational particles being the respective gravitons and the respective gravitinos).  Where the centralized knotting of the correlative Rarita Structure eigenstates is made to exist as a holonomic substrate -- is that Gliosisi-based phenomenology at the Poincaire level, that exists as the physical entities that act as being the particle-based phenomenology, that are known of as the respective gluons.  Gluons work to tie together both the quarks and/or the leptons -- that come together in so as to help to form those subatomic particles, that work to form the correlative and respective atoms that exist in space and time.  This occurance -- in so as to how subatomic particles are "glued" together -- is known of as the strong force.  The strong force is much stronger than the correlative and respective gravitational-based force.  So -- where the initial endpoint, of as to what may be termed of as the "start" of the Rarita Structure, is the light-cone-gauge.  So -- where the resultant endpoint, of as to what may be termed of as the "finish" of the Rarita Structure, is the general locus of where the gauge-bosons are located, in the substringular.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To The Expansion of the "Universe"

The universe in which we live in seems to be accelerating in its volume -- in our current set of conditions.  Yet, I have a theory that our universe is not necessarily accelerating in the manner in which most scientists think of it as doing so.  Here is the key to what I mean by this addressing of such a topic:  Each of the three individually taken sets of universes  is comprised of 91*10^(81) universes, each of such parallel universes of which are inter-twined amongst themselves.  Each of such sets of universes exist in what may be termed of as a basically doubled-up hoop -- one of such "hoops" (when one is to take into consideration the physical condition that each of such doubled-up hoops is of two Main World-Tubes, that are each basically of the same hoop -- due to a relatively large "annulus" that barely works to separate these from each other), individually taken, is of a relatively forward-moving-time-wise nature, and, the other of such doubled-up hoops is of a relatively backward-moving-time-wise nature.  So, when one is to observe the condition of macroscopic phenomenology as recently accelerating noted as moving faster away from each other -- one is then here dealing with the condition of the so-eluded-to externalized said phenomenology (that have traveled beyond what we were so sure of as being the outer-edge of our physical universe) is moving into a universal setting, that is of one demarcation of a different genus of a universal setting than our own universe in which we presently live in.  This does not mean that the so-observed galaxies that we are observing as accelerating at a faster rate from far away are re-starting from scratch.   The galaxies that have moved beyond the so-called outer part of the visible universe are as taken from the position of existence that these had had -- prior to the conditions that such said overall groups of galaxies had been in, before these so-stated macroscopic physical phenomenology had traveled in both general directions to over half of the way around the so-stated "hoop," -- are still of the same general basic tense of Ward-Caucy-based conditions.  Yet, each time that these so-eluded-to macroscopic physical phenomenology have traveled over the course of such a general distance -- along the individually taken hoops of each said set of parallel universes -- the galaxies (if not "eaten-up" by black-holes) will enter one demarcation of a different genus of a universal setting from the one that it had subsequently been in -- up until all 91*10^(81) universal settings have been of a predominant nature, until our said universe is then again of the so-eluded-to predominant nature.  This, however, does not mean that the exact same activities will then be identically resumed -- what it means, is that the same general genus of the then existent Bases of Light will be revamped in the same general tense as these have had of our own present eminent universal setting of flow.  This is the general flow of as to the way that I perceive of as to how this is done.  The other universes of each set of parallel universes will then be doing the same general sort of manner -- except, that what is to them as termed of as one demarcation of a different genus of a universal setting, will bear a different condition of relativity amongst themselves.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continue!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To The Tying Of Gauge-Bosons

Let us here consider a discrete quanta of energy -- at one general locus, where the Polyakov Action is to be able to happen, -- during one specific iteration of BRST.  During the Polyakov Action, at one respective given arbitrary locus -- the correlative superstring of discrete energy permittivity and its substringular counterpart, are decompactified to the inverse of as to the scalar magnitude of its directly pertinent Lorentz-Four-Contraction.  As such a so-eluded-to Polyakov Action is happening -- both the Bette Action and the duration of the said iteration of BRST, are then happening simultaneously, through the vantage-point of a central conipoint.  Any given arbitrary duration of BRST, is that activity that happens when a superstring of discrete energy permittivity is basically at a standstill -- aside from the activity that these said phenomenology go through in the process of both the said iterations of the Polyakov Action, the activity of the Bette Action, and the activity that is involved with the Imaginary Exchange of Real Residue. (This so-stated duration is the general metric that is to happen over a majority of any directly correlative iteration of instanton.)  As a refresher to my readers -- the Imaginary Exchange of Real Residue is involved with that activity in which the directly corresponding counterstring of discrete energy permittivity is to initially sway in the relative forward-holomorphic direction, at a subtension that is initiated in a spot that is relatively proximal to the relatively reverse-norm-to-holomorphic position of the directly affiliated counterstring, while this said genus of metric works to bear an equal and opposite reaction of then working to bear a toplogical sway of the directly corresponding superstring of discrete energy permittivity -- that is pulled into the here relatively reverse-holomorphic direction, at a subtension that is initiated in a spot that is relatively proximal to the relatively reverse-norm-to-holomorphic position of the directly affiliated so-stated superstring of discrete energy permittivity. Such a so-eluded-to topological sway is like a "woddle" of the overall discrete quanta of energy permittivity. (The said superstring is more pertinent to the particle-based nature of such, and, the said counterstring is more pertinent to the wave-function-based nature of such.)  As the earlier mentioned respective given arbitrary superstring that is undergoing a metric of a pertinent iteration of BRST -- at a relatively set substringular locus -- the gauge-bosons act in so as to "pluck" their directly correlative cites, at the respective given second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates.  This is able to happen, because the here applicable topological Yukawa inter-relationship -- that would here exist in-between the cites as to where upon the second-order light-cone-gauge is to be plucked, & the Ward-Caucy bounds of the correlative said gauge-bosons, that are to do the said plucking of the said second-order eigenstates of the wave-functionability of discrete energy impedance, is not of a manner that would OTHERWISE be of a Glioisis-based homotopic bearing tangency -- during the so-stated general activity of the said "plucking" that is to here happen over the individually taken successive series of the correlative iterations of BRST.  This means, that -- even though the homotopic condition of the substringular interconnections that exist among all unfrayed superstrings tend to work to bear a condition of a general state of Cassimer Invariance -- the gauge-bosons of the substringular are most Gliosis in interconnection with that topology that is of the multiplicit  Rarita Structure eigenstates, that are off of the relative Real Reimmanian Plane, -- to where, the so-implied homotopic indices that are directly tied upon the here so-stated gauge-bosons will then tend to be of a Njenhuis-based nature to the Sterling-based field of the relative field-density of the directly correlative discrete quanta of energy, that is of such a case. So, this leads to allow for the condition, that this just mentioned state of affairs -- that is of the inter-relationship between gauge-bosons and the directly corresponding second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates, will then here work to tend to bear a higher and spontaneous scalar magnitude, that is of the freeing-up of room, that is proximal to the Poincaire level as to the here relative positioning of these said interacting phenomenology, to where the correlative plucking that I have here described, may be able to tend to happen without any perturbative unwanted torsioning of the core-field-density of the here directly corresponding and local discrete quanta of energy, that are most Yukawa to the here said case scenario.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

Some Knowledge As To Yang-Mills Light-Cone-Gauge Topology

When one is to consider a one-dimensional superstring of discrete energy permittivity at BRST -- the directly corresponding first-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstate that is correlative to the said superstring, works to bear five second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates, that are here incorporated into the so-stated first-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstate.  Each of such  so-eluded-to second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates here will work to bear the Laplacian-based existence of having 120 correlative cites, during the correlative course of any respective given arbitrary iteration of BRST, where the directly corresponding gauge-bosons that are directly affiliated with the directly corresponding superstring will act upon the said second-ordered light in such a Gliosis-based manner at the Poincaire level, in so as to "pluck" the so-stated cites -- in so as to work to form the here necessary 600 third-ordered Schwinger-Indices, that are formed by the wave-functional activity of the correlative cite of discrete energy impedance, that are Yukawa to the eigenbase of the operational-based performance of the said correlative one-dimensional superstring of discrete energy permittivity, that is of any given arbitrary case in which such an implied source of discrete energy is unfrayed during the so-eluded course of the said iteration of BRST.  Yet, if instead, one is here to consider a two-dimensional superstring of discrete energy permititivty at BRST -- the superstring will bear a first-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstate that is comprised of ten second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates, to where each of such individually taken second-ordered eigenstates will bear only 60 cites where the so-eluded-to third-ordered Schwinger-Indices will be formed -- in so that the overall first-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstate of such a case will then, as well, work to bear a total of 600 third-ordered Schwinger-Indices, that are directly corresponding to the here correlative discrete quanta of energy.
If both of the here said general examples of first-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates are of a Yang-Mills light-cone-gauge topological-based construction -- there will initially have a consideration here of any of such so-eluded second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates, that work to comprise the here so-mentioned first-ordered eigenstates, as bearing 60 Laplacian-based physically oriented sinusoidal-based oscillations that are existent at the general cite of the second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates, that would here directly correspond to the Yukawa-based contact that is involved with the covariant differentiation of two-dimensional superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, in so as to be of the 60 cites per each of the second-ordered-light-cone-gauge eigenstates for the correlative gauge-bosons to be able to pluck the light-cone-gauge.  When the correlative gauge-bosons work to "pluck" the here so-eluded-to sixty cites per second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstate of such a respective discrete quanta of energy -- the said plucking is initiated at the topological surface of the relative trough of each of the said sixty so-eluded-to Laplacian-based oscillations per second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstate, that are of the said Yang-Mills topology.  Since two-dimensional superstrings work to bear 10 second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates each, this would then involve a total of 600 of such cites, overall.  This reverse-intuitive manner of plucking will then act as a springing mechanism, in so as to help to pull the so-stated correlative two-dimensional superstring of discrete energy permittivity into the generally unnoticed duration of Ultimon Flow.  (Along with what I call the Imaginary Exchange of Real Residue.)  Actually, it is such a springing effect -- that acts upon the so-eluded-to Clifford Expansion of the correlative light-cone-gauge -- that works to cause the here implied "woddle" of superstrings, that is pertinent to the so-stated Imaginary Exchange of Real Residue.  The same general genus of activity happens with one-dimensional superstrings, that are of a Yang-Mills topology -- except that this will instead act upon the 120 cites of Laplacian-based oscillation per what would instead be the 120 cites where the correlative gauge-bosons would act upon the correlative loci of the so-stated second-ordered light-cone-gauge eigenstates (as before, though, this would involve a total of 600 cites overall (120*5 = 600)) -- in so as to cause the same general effect of a springing-based activity that is Gliosis to the topological surface of the light-cone-gauge at the Poincaire level -- in so as to help in the process of causing the Hamiltonian-based drive of putting superstrings into the generally unnoticed duration of the process of Ultimon Flow.
I will continue with the supsense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To The Striking Of Light-Cone-Gauge Eigenstates

When any given arbitrary gauge-boson acts to initially start to "pluck" a second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstate during BRST -- the initial contact works to tend to form metrical Chern-Simmons singularities, proximal to the specific locus that is Poincare to the Gloisis area of contact.  Right after the so-stated gauge-boson is done pulling upon the specific locus where the said plucking is metrical in operation -- the metrical singularities that are formed at the specific locus where the then formed Schwinger-Index is initiated, are then no longer of a Chern-Simmons nature --, these singularities are, at this duration-based point, tending to be of a hermitian nature -- over the course of this said gauge-metrical activity.  This is the tendency of the case, whether the resultant Schwinger-Index is of a harmonic or of an anharmonic nature -- as such said Schwinger-Indices are then propagated from the general locus of the light-cone-gauge, outward and along the Rarita Structure.  Here:  Gauge-Bosons are of the nature as to being considered as E(6)XE(6) strings.  These said strings are a genus of a heterotic string. As such a heterotic string initially contacts a specific locus of a second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates -- this will tend to form spurious gauge-metrical pulsation, that are of either a dampened nature or of an elongated nature.  Once the pull of the so-stated gauge-bosons is released -- the vibrational oscillation of the topological fabric of the said second-order eigenstate of the wave-functionabilty of discrete energy impedance, is pulled into a manner that tends to work at utilizing the initial said spurious pulsations that are Poincare to the locus of the said plucking,--  in such a manner in so as to work to form either a harmonic or an anharmonic wave-pulse transfer of the so-eluded-to disturbance in space -- to where the then initially formed vibrational oscillation will then tend to bear a tense of hermitian singularities -- to where the then initiated wave-based propagation may be pulled into the Rarita Structure, in so as to work at forming the needed interdependent operations that these have in the substringular.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

Some Knowledge As To Light-Cone-Gauge Topologies

Let us here consider a light-cone-gauge eigenstate that is of a Kaluza-Klein topology.  We are considering what is here happening during BRST.  As the said light-cone-gauge eigenstate is here undergoing a Clifford Expansion during the Polyakov Action -- basically, the intrinsic function as to the scalar magnitude of the amount of mini-stringular segmentation that is being fed into the so-stated light-cone-gauge eigenstate of such a case -- is of the nature of only working to bear just enough core-field-density to cover the so-eluded-to euler expansion of the stretching-out of the so-stated light-cone-gauge eigenstate, during the so-stated respective given arbitrary iteration of BRST.  Yet, as the correlative gauge-bosons that work to "pluck" the correlative second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates are in a Gliosis-based contact with the correlative topology of the said second-order eigenstates -- the activity of such a direct tangency will here work to cause the Yukawa implementation of there then being just enough "slack" in the compactification of that twined mini-stringular segmentation, that would here act as the holonomic substrate of the so-stated second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates -- in so that the so-eluded-to fabric of the said Kaluza-Klein topology will then be able to bear the necessary peaks and troughs in its locus of spatial disturbance, in so that the said  eigenstates of the wave functionality of discrete energy impedance will be able to act in a manner that may be described of as a "pluck" -- even though a Kaluza-Klein light-cone-gauge topology tends to bear a supplemental Lagrangian wave-tug/wave-pull in its Lagrangian eigenbase during BRST (this is when not including the imbued conditions that are implied by the conditionality of a Yukawa-Based Clifford Expansion).  The situation is similar, but a little bit different -- with the case of a Yang-Mills light-cone-gauge topology.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued! Sam Roach.

An Inter-Relation Of The Forces

The strong force is the force that works to glue together quarks and leptons into larger sub-atomic particles.  Gluons -- of which do the so-stated gluing -- are comprized of a centralized knotting of Schwinger-based indices.  The said Schwinger-Indices are formed by those vibrational oscillations, that are made by the plucking (analogous to the plucking of a harp) of second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates -- by the correlative gauge-boson eigenstates.  The light-cone-gauge exists -- in a Laplacian-based manner -- in-between the multiplicit Fadeev-Popov-Trace and its correlative multiplicit superstring.  First-Order light-cone-gauge eigenstates exist as the wave-functional eigenbase of discrete energy impedance.  Each first-order light-cone-gauge is made-up of many second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates -- these said second-order eigenstates, of which are made-up of strands of mini-stringular phenomenology.  It is the light-cone-gauge eigenstates that exist in-between the phenomenology of the pointal-based nature of discrete energy impedance (the respective given Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates) and the phenomenology of the pointal-based nature of discrete energy permittivity (the respective given superstrings).  Discrete energy impedance is more directly associated with the electric field than the magnetic field of any given arbitrary case.  Current is more directly associated with the discrete energy impedance than the voltage is, since current is more associated with the electric field than the magnetic field is.  This here helps to show the relationship between the light-cone-gauge and the electrostatic force.  The Schwinger-Indices that are formed by the so-stated plucking of the respective given arbitrary second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates by the correlative gauge-boson eigenstates -- move along the correlative Rarita Structure eigenstates, in so as to work at helping to form the gravitational force, by working to form an interdependent means of vibrational oscillation, that is pulled from the relative Real Reimmanian Plane where discrete energy is -- toward both those gravitons and those gravitons that are off of the said relative Real Reimmanian Plane -- in so as to help to work at establishing that general relationship that is necessary in order for gravity to be able to sustain a spontaneous effect, over time.  And, it is the relative weakening of eigenstates of the strong force -- as evidenced by the spontaneous radioactive decay of radiative physical phenomenology -- that act as what is known of as the weak force. So, it is the light-cone-gauge -- that acts as the main liaison amongst those forces that work to form the conditions of the grand unified field theory -- that makes the mediation between these forces to be possible.  To Be Continued!  Sam Roach.

Centralized Knotting

The gluons -- of which work to tie together those subatomic particles that come together in so as to work at forming nucleons, act as a centralized knotting of Schwinger-Indices (of the third order) -- along the Rarita Structre -- in so as to work at pulling together those quarks and leptons that are needed to be physically put together -- in so as to form those nucleons, that tend to act as the primary source of gravity.  The specific Schwinger-Indices that are formed by the respective "plucking" of the individual gauge-bosons that exist along -- in an adjacent manner -- the respective directly corresponding topological surface of the correlative second-order light-cone-gauge-eigenstates, act as the specific vibrational oscillations that are formed from within the Ward-Neumman bounds of the said second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstates, in so as to act as the respective given arbitrary discrete Schwinger-Indices.  The overall resultant vibrational oscillation of any given arbitrary first-order light-cone-gauge eigenstate -- acts as what may be termed of as a first-order Schwinger-Index.  The overall resultant vibrational oscillation of any given arbitrary second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstate - acts as what may be termed of as a second-order Schwinger-Index. So, the actual individually taken vibrational oscillation of any specific "pluck" of a sector of a second-order light-cone-gauge eigenstate -- is a discrete eigenstate of such a general genus of a vibrational oscillation -- of which may be termed of as a third-order Schwinger-Index.  The so-mentioned discrete Schwinger-Indices are pulled -- in a propagation-based manner -- in so as to work to inter-connect the activity of discrete energy with both the activity of gravitons and the activity of gravitinos. This happens in so as to act as that general means, of as to how the Ricci Scalar is put into action -- in so as to cause the general force of gravity to exist upon all substringular phenomenology, over time.  Where the said discrete Schwinger-Indices are pulled into the so-stated centralized knotting -- is that location in which one is able to define the multiplicit locus of the strong force.  Ironically, although the strong force is much stronger than the gravitational force -- the multiplilcit locus as to where the gravitational force is centralized in a very overt knotted manner, is where the gluonic force is of its most dimensional-based compactified manner.  This so-stated centralized knotting, then acts in a particle-based manner -- in so as to then be able to act in a kinematic nature, in so as to move in a Fourier-based manner, as a particle that I have mentioned as the gluon.  The motion of such a centralized inter-twining -- that acts in a kinematic manner, that moves both radially, spin-orbitally, and transversally -- works to form the inter-binding of the nature of as to how the gravitational force (that is much weaker than the strong force) is brought into another genus of a nature, in so as to work at forming that Fourier-based activity -- that would here operate as the functional characteristic of the strong force (that is much stronger than the gravitational force).  This inter-bound nature of the so-mentioned knotted Shwinger-Indices -- acts as the driving force that works to show the relationship between the gravitational force and the strong force.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

A Certain Involvement Of The Strong Force

It is the activity of gluons that works to bear the involvement of what is known of as the strong force.  Gluons move in so as to pull subatomic particles together at the nucleus, in so as to work at causing the  Ward-Neumman condition of the physical existence of nucleons.  Gluons bear a genus of motion that operates -- in so as to work at the formation of the predominant condition of what may be termed of as the Ante-De-Sitter/De-Sitter gravational mode.  This so-stated gravitational mode is the general genus of Ricci Scalar-based activity -- that operates in so as to work at what we call the existence of matter, as opposed to what would Otherwise be the predominant condition of the existence of antimatter.  Anti gravity still tends to utilize the existence of the Ante-De-Sitter/De-Sitter gravitational mode -- except that the bearings of anti gravity are involved, when the Ricci Scalar is reversed in its directoral wave-tug/wave-pull tendency.  For instance, let us say that the directly corresponding Rarita Structure eigenstates of a given arbitrary gravitational flow are to all of the sudden reverse in the flow of the correlative Schwinger-Indices of a respective given arbitrary substringular neighborhood.  This would here work to involve the activity of anti gravity.  Reverse gravity -- on the otherhand -- is when certain respective given arbitrary gravitons and/or gravitinos all of the sudden are reversed in their general holomorphic-based flow of activity.  So, whenever a set of gluons of one given arbitrary nucleon, that work to inter-bind the quarks and leptons of the said nucleon, are reversed in both their radial and/or in their spin-orbital and/or in their transversal   directoral flow that is of their correlative Fourier Transform -- this happens when the respective given arbitrary nucleon is to spontaneously alter into moving into a relative reversal of its holomorphic-based kinematic flow of motion, over the correlative transient period of time in which such a said nucleon is magnetically and/or otherwise pulled into moving into the opposite general direction from where it had initially been traveling in -- before the so-eluded-to resultant perturbation in its directoral wave-tug/wave-pull based flow of its said genus of Fourier-based transform is to happen.  When the so-eluded-to orbifold eigenset of this case -- here, a given arbitrary nucleon -- is pulled into moving spontaneously in the opposite general direction than it had initially been flowing in, then, as I had mentioned before, this works to form an antiholomorphic Kahler condition.  As I have said before, an antiholomorphic Kahler condition works to end-up forming the predominant Fourier-based activity of a Kahler-Metric in a Gliosis-based manner, upon the holonomic substrate of the orbifold eigensets that acts in so as to have an antiholomorphic Kahler condition upon these said respective given arbitrary stringular-based phenomenology. over an ensuing successive series of iterations of group-related instantons. So, whenever the directoral-based activity of either both the radial Hamiltonian operation, the spin-orbital Hamiltonian operation, and/or the transversel Hamiltonian operation of the Fourier Transformation of a set of gluons -- that operate in so as to perform one specific function of the strong force -- is to reverse in its holomorphic cross-product-based delineation -- then, this will tend to work at causing the correlative respective given arbitrary nucleon of this case, that is put together by the activity of the gluing together of quarks and leptons by the strong force -- to spontaneously reverse in its general genus of directoral-based angular momentum, which will reverse the holomorphic-based Ward-Caucy conditions of the said nucleon -- which will thereby cause the so-mentioned nucleon to bear an antiholomorphic Kahler condition.  This will then work to form the said Fourier-based activity of a Kahler-Metric to be delineated upon the so-stated respective given nucleon -- in a Gliosis-based manner, over a relatively brief ensuing period of time.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sam Roach.

Adjacent Flowing Orbifolds

Let us say that one is to here consider two different orbifold eigensets, that are initially moving in two different individually taken directions -- the first respective given arbitrary orbifold eigenset is here to be moving in the opposite general direction as the second respective given arbitrary orbifold eigenset of this so-stated given arbitrary case scenario.  Let us now say that the first so-stated orbifold eigenset works to bear either a magnetic attraction or a fractal of a magnetic attraction to the second so-stated orbifold eigenset of this respective case.  Let us now say that the said magnetic attraction that is here to bear upon the second so-stated given arbitrary orbifold eigenset of this respective case -- from the first so-stated given arbitrary orbifold eigenset of this respective case, is of great enough of a scalar magnitude -- to where the initial Lagrangian-based condition as to that the two said respective individually taken orbifold eigensets are to here begin as moving in two different and opposite general directions, is to perturbate to where the said physical magnetic attraction is to then cause the two different respective orbifold eigensets to result into a Ward-Caucy condition as to then being brought into a state of moving in the same general directional-based flow, over enough of a transient period of time in which the so-eluded-to magnetic attraction that is formed between the two said eigensets is able to cause such a general genus of directoral-based alteration -- by a means of what would here be the result of some arbitrary Noether-based consideration, through the activity of a Fourier Transformation that would here involve a discrete number of iterations of group-related instantons.  Once the two so-stated orbifold eigensets of such a given arbitrary case are to then be moving in the same general directoral-based flow, then, one may say that both of the said orbifold eigensets would be going in what would soon ensue as to be one resultant generally-based holomorphic-based flow of the kinematic-based activity -- of two different sets of superstrings that would here be both operating in so as to perform two different individually taken functions, over time.  Basically right after the two different individually taken orbifold eigensets are to then be moving in the same tense of a holomorphic-based flow, then, the second said eigenset would have then switched in its general eigenbase of directoral-based holomorphism.  Remember that when a superstring or a set of superstrings that operate in so as to perform a specific substringular function -- is to switch from one discrete tense of a holomorphic-based flow to the oppositely projected discrete tense of a holomorphic-based flow in its general projection -- that this condition works to form what may be here described of as an antiholomorphic Kahler condition.  An antiholomorphic Kahler condition works to initiate what may be termed of as the Fourier-based activity of what may be termed of as a Wick Action eigenstate. The multiplicit Wick Action eigenstate acts upon the multiplicit Landau-Gisner Action egienstate -- in so as to act upon the multiplicit Fischler-Suskind-Mechanism, in so as to move the multiplicit Klein Bottle eigenstate, via the multiplicit Higgs Boson eigenstate, in so as to cause the Ward-Caucy conditionality of the activity of what may be termed of as the multiplicit Kahler-Metric, over what would here be a spontaneously brought-about succession -- that would here be over a relatively transient period of time.  This activity of the Kahler-Metric will tend to bring about the activity of a Gaussian Transformation -- in so as to work to cause the spontaneous perpetuity of optimum substringular spatial freedom, & in so as to help to bring about the re-attainment of those fractals of discrete energy, that are needed to be re-attained in so as to help discrete energy to still exist as discrete energy over time.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!
Sam Roach.

Cohomologies Of Orbifolds

When any given arbitrary orbifold eigenset works at moving through space, over an ensuing sequential series of iterations of group-related instanton, the ghost-based cohomological mappable tracing of such a so-stated kinematic-based motion, will work to form a Laplacian-based physical memory as to the what, how, and when of the Fourier-based motion of the said respective given arbitrary orbifold eigenset.  Some time in the transient future from when an integration of ghost-based indices of a cohomological-based mappable tracing is formed -- by the interdependent interaction of norm-state-projections with the kinematic motion of the directly corresponding superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, there will inevitably be certain various relatively reverse-holomorphic-moving norm-state-projections -- that will take what was the initial Reimman structure of the initially said cohomological-based mappable tracing, that worked to form the initial so-eluded-to harmonic-based scattering of the correlative relatively forward-holomorphic norm-state-projections that worked to form here the initially so-eluded-to cohomological-based mappable tracing -- and scatter it in an annharmonic manner, via a correlative Rayleigh-based scattering, to where the said initial integration of ghost-based indices will then break down into certain various phenomenology, that will then ensue to veer off of the relative Real Reimmanian plane, into its composite substringular phenomena, that will then come together in so as to act as discrete gravitational-based phenomenology, over time.  So, when any respective given arbitrary set of ghost-based indices -- that are formed as the physical memory of the motion of one whole discrete orbifold eigenset, is annharmonically scattered in a tense of a Rayleigh scattering -- the tendency is that the whole cohomological-based structure of the so-eludedt-to initial Reimman-based cohomological structure -- will be broken down into its component substringular discrete parts, at what would be for all intensive purposes, over basically the exact same general gauge-metric or "time."
I will continue withe the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

Certain Manners Of Norm-State-Projection Interactions

Let us consider a cohomological setting -- a set of ghost-based indices, that have here integrated into a certain pattern of a physical memory as to the where, how, and when certain superstrings of discrete energy permittivity have been interacting amongst each other -- over enough of a time period in so as to work at forming the so-eluded-to matrix of re-distributed point commutators.  Such a said cohomological-based setting will here be of a Reimman scattering of relatively forward-holomorphic norm-state-projections, that have harmonically been brought together in so as to form the so-stated physical memory as to the said where, how, and when the directly corresponding superstrings of discrete energy permittivity of such a case have interacted -- over a relatively transient period of time.  Such a Reimman scattering is of a harmonic-based nature -- each of the adjacent eigenmembers of the set of eigenstates that work to comprise such a cohomological setting work to bear an even chirality, when such a so-eluded-to symmetry is taken amongst the other eigenstates of the same overall structure of eigenmembers of such a ghost-based setting.  Let us now say that there is a relatively reverse-holomorphic set of norm-state-projections that work to strike the just mentioned cohomological setting that I have initially stated in this post.  Let us say that the interaction of the Laplacian-based initially mentioned cohomological-based setting with the Fourier-based set of what are here an egienset of a relatively reverse-holomorphic flow of norm-state-projectoins, is of a relatively small scalar magnitude of impact -- to where the initially stated Reimman structure of such an integration of ghost-based eigenindices is not moved enough, in so as to form an annharmonic scattering or Rayleigh scattering, right after it works to bear a Gliosis-based tangency with the second mentioned set of norm-state-projections of this case.  Such an interaction will then tend to form a repositioning or a readjustment of the initial Reimman-based delineation of ghost-based indices -- to where the initially stated cohomological setting will then work to bear an eigenbase of a secondary Ward-Caucy involed bounds, at which the eigenstructure of the overall initially mentioned cohomology will then bear a different set of angular momentum indices, until it is brought into another physical interaction with another set of substringular holonomic substrate -- over an ensuing Fourier-based kinematic interaction with other alterior substringular physical phenomena.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sam.

As To Colliding Cohomologies

Let's say that there was a certain Reimman scattering of norm-state-projections -- which resulted in an integration of ghost-based indices, in so as to work at forming a cohomological-based setting.  Let us say that the so-inferred cohomology, was formed by the interaction of a set of mass-bearing superstrings that interacted with a set of inter-bound point commutators.  Let us now imagine that the so-eluded-to cohomological-based topological entity that I am here describing, were to have a Laplacian-based edge -- that would here work at bearing a set of abelian-like geometrical-based characteristics.  Let us now imagine -- at the relatively reverse-holomorphic side to where the said initially stated cohomology was formed -- that one is here to have another cohomological-based setting, of which is well will here be formed by mass-bearing superstrings.  This second so-mentioned integration of ghost-based indices will, instead though, bear a set of non-abelian geometric-based indices, that will make the just briefly described part of an edge of the second so-eluded-to cohomological-based entity to have a set of non-abelian-like geometric-based characteristics.  Let us now say that there is both a respective ghost-based inhibitor working to displace the Laplacian-based state of the first so-stated cohomology, as well as a respective ghost-based inhibitor working to displace the Laplacian-based state of the second so-stated cohomology.  Let us say that the said ghost-based inhibitor that works to perturbate in so as to move the first so-stated cohomology -- is positioned at the relative holomorphic side of the first said cohomology, while the said ghost-based inhibitor that works to perturbate in so as to move the second so-stated cohomology -- is positioned at the relative reverse-holomorphic side of the second said cohomology.  Let us say that the resultant motion of the so-stated displaced integration of ghost-based entities, works here to form a collision of what would otherwise be two proximal mappable tracings of the physical memory of two different sets of superstrings of discrete energy permittivity.  Let us now say that the earlier mentioned abelian edge of the first so-staetd cohomology is to hit the earlier mentioned non-abelian edge of the second so-stated cohomology.  Let us say that all of the other factors would otherwise work to form a theoretical resultant end to the said displacement of the two said cohomological settings, over time.  The Hamiltonian operation of the cohomology that had the said abelian-like edge, would then tend to bear a scalar amplitude of wave-tug/wave-pull -- that would tend to move the overall interaction of the two so-eluded-to cohomological entities, in the direction in which the first so-stated cohomology was going.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

Different Tenses Of Cohomological-Based Settings

Let us say that there was an initial tense of a set of superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, that existed in a Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-Mode -- in so as to form a conformally invariant matrix of relatively codifferentiable and codeterminable proximal GSO ghosts (Gliosis-Sherk-Olive ghosts), these so-eluded-to ghosts or cohomological indices -- of which would then work to form a harmonic-based scattering, or, in other words, these would then here work to form a Reimman scattering of the so-eluded-to redistributed norm-state-projections, in so as to work to form an eigenset of the correlative ghost-based indices  -- that would then be brought together by the Fourier-based kinematic activity of the translation of a relatively local eigenbase of a group-attractor matrix, over time.  Such a mappable tracing of a cohomological-based setting, will then here work to bear both: a Hodge-based index of the scalar magnitude that is relating to its relative size, a differential geometry of the Laplacian delineation of the interconnection of the eigenmembers -- that would here work together in so as to form the so-eluded to ghost-based pattern, the angling of all of the topological swaying of the so-stated eigenmembers -- that would here work to form the so-stated cohomological-based pattern, the cyclic and the imbued permutations that would here work to ebb back-and-forth into the Ward-Neumman bounds of the so-stated cohomological-based pattern, and, the interdependant kinematic interplay of the overall set of the individual eigenmembers of the so-stated cohomological-based pattern -- to where this is as taken in a retrospective manner of each eigenstate of the overall so-eluded-to ghost-based pattern towards each of the other eigenstates of the said overall so-eluded-to ghost-based pattern, that I am generically describing in this given respective arbitrary case scenario.  Depending upon how this cohomological-based mappable tracing works to demonstrate what I have just here described, its resultant interaction with other eigensets of norm-state-projections will then vary likewise.  I will continue with the suspense later!
To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To The Fractals Of Voltage And Current

You probably know the fact that voltage is energy per charge.  You probably also know that current is charge per time.  Voltage is more related to the condition of magnetism than current is.  A magnetic field of any given arbitrary case scenario is more related to permittivity than the electric field of the same respective given arbitrary case scenario is.  An electric field of any given arbitrary case scenario is more related to impedance than the magnetic field of the same respective given arbitrary case scenario is.  Superstrings act as discrete quanta of energy permittivity.  Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates act as discrete quanta of energy impedance.  Superstrings act as the basis of the particle-based nature of discrete energy permittivity.  Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates act as the basis of the particle-based nature of discrete energy impedance.  The correlative counterstrings -- that are directly corresponding to the respective superstrings of any given arbitrary case -- act as the basis of the wave-based nature of discrete energy permittivity.  The correlative light-cone-gauge eigenstates that are directly corresponding to the respective Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates of any given arbitrary case -- act as the basis of the wave-based nature of discrete energy impedance.  The discrete energy quanta of any given arbitrary specific case are of a lower scalar amplitude than the discrete quanta of charge.  Therefore, one is able to have a definitive quantity of discrete energy before one is to have any discrete charge at all.  Superstrings are the key to the basis of discrete energy.  Yet -- current requires the existence of at least a certain amount of charge, in order to be of any tangible extrapolation or consideration.  This works to indicate --  that the functional basis of superstrings, is more related to energy per charge than to charge per time.  The magnetic field is more of a direct correspondence to the voltage of any respective given arbitrary case scenario, than to the correlative current of the same said case.  This is why superstrings are here said to be of the nature of the discrete quanta of energy permittivity.  The electric field is more of a direct correspondence to the current of any respective given arbitrary case scenario, than to the correlative voltage of the same said case.  This is why Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates are here said to be of the nature of the discrete quanta of energy impedance.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

More As To Relative Covariant Wobbling

Let us first take into consideration, two adjacent Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates that are of the same given arbitrary universal setting -- that thence work to bear a covariant wobble of topological-based sway, that is of a  magnitude of 1.104735878*10^(-81)I degrees.  Let us now take into consideration, two other adjacent Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates -- that are of another given arbitrary universal setting.  Let us say, that -- due to the manner as to the scalar magnitude of how different the distinction of mathematical difference is, between the first so-eluded-to universal setting towards the second so-eluded-to universal setting, that is as to how distinct the two implied universal settings are, (as to how "far-off" the two sets of adjacent Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates, that are of two different respective universal settings, is), the two said sets of Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates will here bear a covariant wobble of topological-based sway, that is of a magnitude that is arbitrarily of exactly three times the magnitude that the so-stated eigenstates that are of the same universal setting, will tend to bear, amongst each other. (3*1.104735878*10^(-81)I degrees.) (Yet, both individual sets of Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates of this respective given arbitrary case scenario, will work to bear -- towards the other said eigenstate that is of the same universal setting -- the so-mentioned wobble of 1.104735878*10(-81)I degree angling towards the other of such eigenstates.)  This is due to the condition, that, when one is to have two sets of adjacent Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates -- that are of two different respective universes -- the relative wobble, that is covariant from the first arbitrary set of such so-stated eigenstates, will bear a Clifford Expansion of its harmonic-based displacemnt, towards the second of such a so-stated arbitrary set of eigenstates, in such a case where there are here two given arbitrary different sets of adjacent Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates -- that are encoded to belong to two different universes. So, depending upon the degree of as to how different the distinction is between one set of respective given arbitrary Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates is towards another set of respective given arbitrary Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates -- the more that the Clifford Expansion is to happen to the inter-binding Real Reimmanian-based Rarita Structure eigenlocus, that will here work to interdependantly inter-bind the Hamiltonian-based Lagrangian -- that is Gliosis as a mappable tracing, from the Laplacian-based Majorana-Weyl-Invariant setting of the first so-stated locus of one of such sets of Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates towards the second locus of such sets of Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates -- of this respective given arbitrary case.
I will continue with the suspense later! To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

Some More As To The Fractal Of The Kahler-Metric

Here is some additional information, as to the manner in which the wobble-like tendencies of discrete quanta of energy -- as such wobbling happens during each succeeding iteration of group-related instanton -- happens in some ways, to kind of act like a fractal of the kinematic-based activity of the Kahler-Metric.  When any respective given arbitrary Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstate wobbles, in so as to work at bearing a topological sway -- over the course of any correlative iteration of BRST (during the main part of any respective given arbitrary iteration of instanton) -- such a so-eluded-to discrete quanta of energy impedance (specifically here, the particle-based physical holonomic substrate, that acts as a discrete physical unit of energy impedance) will tend to bear a covariant, codeterminable, and a codifferentiable back-and-forth angling motion, that will bear a subtension, that is of the relative scalar amplitude of 1.104735878*10^(-81)I degrees -- relative to all of the other adjacent Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates that are encoded as being of the exact same universe, during the simultaneous iteration of group-related instanton, of any respective given arbitrary case scenario.  However, depending upon what other universal setting that other adjacent Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates of a respective case belong to -- such an angling will vary -- as an interdependent condition, that is involved with both the manner and the degree that the two different individually taken Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates are encoded as being -- of a specific scalar amplitude of divergence from being of the same universal setting.  So, if two spaces are of the same universe -- then, these will be of a Gaussian-based nature, the one towards the other, over the course of one specifically entailed iteration of group-related instanton, in which the two said given spaces are here being compared of as such.  Yet, if two spaces are not of the same universe -- then, these will only be able to be compared to one another through a Gaussian-based Transform -- via the involvement of certain Njenhuis-based mathematics, or, in other words, via a tense of a manner of Li Algebra.  Thereby, if two respective Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates are not of the same universe -- then, the correlative covariant-based wobbling, that these so-eluded-to discrete quanta of energy impedance will work to bear- - will then involve a different topological sway of wobbling, relative to one another, depending upon both the manner and the scalar amplitude of the differences that these discrete quanta of holonomic substrate would here work to bear -- over each individually taken iteration of group-related instanton, in which the different said individual quanta of discrete energy impedance -- that are here of different universal settings -- are here to remain in the same relative general tense of codifferentiability.  Furthermore and specifically (more in terms of discrete energy impedance than with discrete energy permittivity) -- the covariant topological sway as to the wobbling of one genus of a Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstate towards another of such a genus of Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstate -- works to define the general format as to the differences in Li Algebra-based indices of the discrete energy impedance -- of the one discrete quanta of related energy towards the other discrete quanta of related energy -- during any respective given arbitrary iteration of group-related instanton, in which any given arbitrary comparison that is taken between two of such particle-based discrete quanta of energy are being compared in the substringular.  This may act as a fractal as to the condition in which the Kahler-Metric tends to bear those correlative Klein Bottle eigenstates -- that, unless perturbated -- tend to work only upon discrete quanta of energy, that are of the same universal setting.  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

About The Fractal Of The Kahler-Metric

A fractal is a phenomenon that  bears the existence of being similar to a larger phenomenon -- yet at a smaller level.  The Kahler-Metric is the genus of the activity that happens, in so as to allow for the continued existence of Gaussian Transformations -- so that both of the conditions of the continued existence and the continued perpetuity of discrete energy may be able to persist & so that there may be a relatively continuous and spontaneous spatial leveraging of the various substringular phenomenology -- in an interdependent manner, towards each other, over time.  The multiplicit Higgs Boson eigenstate works to move the directly corresponding multiplicit Klein Bottle eigenstate -- in so as to provide for the spatial ability of superstrings to undergo the so-stated multiplicit Kahler-Metric, by working to make the said Klein Bottle eigenstates exist in a manner that is proximal to the core-field-density of those so-eluded-to correlative superstrings.  All superstrings and all Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates wobble, during the directly corresponding iterations of group-related instanton -- in a manner that varies towards the respective given arbitrary adjacent superstrings and Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates that are of the same universal setting -- in a manner that is of a relative angling of 1.104735878*10^(-81)I degrees.  What this so-stated angling means, is that the so-eluded-to respective superstrings and their correlative Fadeev-Popov-Trace eigenstates that are of such a given case, will wobble back-and-forth by 1.104735878*10^(-81) degrees -- from an initially relatively holomorphic directoral wave-tug/wave-pull manner, into an ensuing relatively antiholomorphic directoral wave-tug/wave-pull -- just as the multiplicit Klein Bottle eigenstate, during that part of the  correlative Kahler-Metric eigenmetric, in which the correlative discrete increments of quantum energy are Gliosis to the Ward-Neumman bounds of the directly corresponding multiplicit Klein Bottle eigenstate, -- are shuck back-and-forth, during each succeeding iteration of the correlative so-eluded-to part of the multiplicit Kahler-Metric.  So, in a sense, the tendency of the wobbling of discrete quantum energy towards all of the other correlative discrete quantum energy of space and time, may be thought of as a fractal of the Kahler-Metric.  One big difference -- is that all discrete quantum energy tends to wobble as it is to wobble -- in an interdependant manner, relative to other of such discrete quantum energy -- yet, the Kahler-Metric does not always work upon each of such respective superstrings, as I have worked to indicate -- over the course of every iteration of group-related instanton. To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

Cohesive Orbifold Eigensets

Let us consider three different sets of orbifold eigensets -- one of which is a set of neutrons, of which bears no charge;  another, of which is a set of protons, which bears  positive charges; and, another, of which is a set of electrons, which bears  negative charges.  Each of such individually taken so-eluded-to orbifold eigensets of which has, what one may term of as one discrete charge.  Let us now say that all three of these orbifold eigensets exist in the Ward-Caucy bounds of one respective given arbitrary atom.  Let us now consider the said atom to be charge-wise stable, over time.  This would then mean that there will here be just as many protons in the so-stated atom of this respective case, as the number of electrons of the said respective atom in question.  The number of neutrons that would exist in the atom of this given case, will here be of an arbitrary amount.  This would mean that the net positive charges that would here be delineated outward from the relative nucleus of the so-stated atom, will be valance-wise countered by the net negative charges that would here be delineated inward from the relative exterior-based shells -- in which the directly corresponding electrons would be existing at.  All of this activity would be happening over a discrete course of manageable time -- even though one could here theoretically be able to map-out the cohomological tracings of the kinematic activity, that is of the interdependent motion of the so-stated positive charges -- that would here be delineated by the orbifold eigensets, that would here be characterized by the kinematic activity of protons, towards the kinematic motion of the directly corresponding charges that would be extended from the orbifold eigensets that would here be characterized by the existence of electrons, these said electrons of which will tend to work to nullify the physical condition of what would otherwise be an existent valance charge, by extending their relatively negative charges inward toward the protons that will here be existent at the nucleus of the said atom.  So, although any atom will always tend to delineate the existence of the various charges, that will here work to comprise these so-eluded-to physical entities -- then, when an atom is charge-wise stable, its overall valence potential will always tend to strike a balance, that is actually a counterbalance that would here be interactive between  the intrinsic positive charges of the correlative atom with the intrinsic negative charges of the correlative atom -- at its proximal atomic-based core-field-density.  And, any physical charges that are delineated -- will be propagated by the kinematic activity of the respective given arbitrary orbifold eigensets, of which will here tend to act in a Fourier-based manner, in so as to work at the existence of what may be termed here as the conservation of charge.  I will continue with the suspense later!  Sincerely, Sam.

A Litte Bit As To Valence Stability

As everyone knows, if an atom has six protons in the region of its nucleus -- as well as the said atom having six electrons surrounding the region of its nucleus, then, the said atom, in and of itself, may be described of as a charge-wise stable particle.   This would then mean that the six positively charged protons of such a so-stated atom will be complemented by the six negatively charged electrons of the said atom, that is at hand.  So, the overall electron voltage of the overall positive charge of the atom -- of which is relatively centered From the nucleus of the said atom Towards its exterior -- will here be countered by the overall electron voltage of the negative charge of the atom, to where this said countering of negative charge is taken From the exterior Towards the interior of the nucleus of the so-stated atom of such a given case.  This would here work to attain the condition in this case, of the state of a stable atom -- that would here tend to bear no spontaneous valence charge at all, unless there is an overt force that acts upon the said atom -- in so as to form a static charge.  So, there will tend to be in this case, at the Ward-Neumman bounds of the Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-based region that is interior to the region that lays from within the physical bounds of the spot, where the atom of such a given arbitrary case is at -- :one Njenhuis-based positive charge for every Real Reimmanian-based positive charge, stemming in a manner that is both orthogonal to the respective given arbitrary Real Reimmanian plane of such a case, as well as being orthogonal to the directoral-based wave-tug/wave-pull of the overall angular momentum J(S+L) of the topological sway of the so-eluded-to individually taken positive-based charges, that are extended from and propagated from the so-stated protons of such an atom; and, there will also be, one Njenhuis-based negative charge for every Real Reimmanian-based negative charge, stemming in a manner that is both orthogonal to the respective given arbitrary Real Reimmanian plane of such a case, as well as being orthogonal to the directoral-based wave-tug/wave-pull of the overall angular momentum J(S+L) of the topological sway of the so-eluded-to individually taken negative charges, that are extended from and propagated from the so-stated electrons of such an atom.  This arrangement of the charges that are incorporated from within what would here tend to be a perfectly charge-wise stable atom, tend to be pulled into the interior bounds of the said respective atom.  What I mean by the Ward-Neumman bounds of the atom, are the physical bounds of the respective atom that is being discussed -- in and of itself.  What I mean by the Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-based region of the atom, in this case, is this:  whether or not the atom is moving transversally as a whole, and/or, whether or not the said atom is existing from within something that is moving transversally as a whole, as well, we are still working here to consider the activity of the atom, as a physical entity that is being considered in this case as being in a relatively transversal-based motionless mode -- as a holonomic substrate that would then be here considered over the course of a relatively respective given arbitrary Laplacian-based transform -- in order to consider those mappable tracings, that would then elude-to the determination of what I have discussed here.  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

As To The Substringular About The Exchange Of Electrons

How about if we consider here -- what is going on in the substringular, when one or more electrons are exchanged in an ionic manner -- from one given arbitrary atom, to a respective other given arbitrary atom in time and space.  Let us then consider -- in this specific given case -- one extra atom that is from one initially negatively charged atom, that is being pulled, in an ionic manner, (due to one excessive electron in its valence shell), into the Ward-Neumman bounds of another atom -- that is initially positively charged, due to a lack of one electron in its respective valence shell.  This situation would here, in this given case at hand, involve the exchange of one negative charge of one electron volt from one atom (1.6*10^(-19) of one Coulumb of negative charge) -- to another atom, that initially bears a positive charge of one electron volt (1.6*10^(-19) of one Coulumb) of positive charge.  Initially, with the so-stated beginning valence charges, that would here exist before the so-eluded-to ionic exchange of one electron from one atom to another atom -- there would be, subtended and stemming from the initially stated negatively-based one electron volt, that is from the initially stated atom, a Njenhuis valence  charge of one negatively-based Imaginary electron volt -- that would be both orphoganal to both the respective given arbitrary Real Reimmanian Plane -- that the said charge is being pulled through, in a Lagrangian-base manner, while also being orphoganal to the directoral-based wave-tug/wave-pull of the J (S+L), by which what is here meant as a tangency that works to bear a stemming from the specific Laplacian-based directoral-based overall angular momentum, that may be mapped-out from the projection of the trajectory of the Hamiltonian-based activity of the field of the said initially stated negatively-charged electron volt of field-based disturbance.  Likewise, there will be a similar but different situation for the propagation of the so-eluded-to positively-based electron volt -- that would stem from the initially stated positively charged atom of this scenario.  There would be a Njenhuis valence charge of one Imaginary-based electron volt -- that would stem from both the here relatively Real Reimmanian-based field, as well as stemming from the directoral-based wave-tug/wave-pull of the overall angular momentum of J (S+L), by which is here meant as a tangency that works to bear a stemming from the specific Laplacian-based Hamiltonian operation of the field-networking -- that may here be mapped-out from the second stated atom of such a case -- when in terms of the electrodynamic field of the said initially stated positively-charged electron valence field-based disturbance.  Once the said ionic-based charges are exchanged -- then, as well, the respective given arbitrary Njenhuis-based valence charges are negated -- in so as to work to conform to what is here, a relative conservation of charge.
I will continue with the suspense later! To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

Certain Adjustments Due To Tahcyonic Flow

Let's say that a certain given arbitrary superstring of discrete energy permittivity is not orientable -- over the course of one respective correlative iteration of the Bette Action, that the said superstring is undergoing, over the course of a directly corresponding iteration of BRST. The said superstring is then to go through one iteration of its succession of the Kahler-Metric that it is to be directly associated with. Let us say, as well, that the so-stated superstring is likewise, not orientable, over the ensuing iteration of the Regge Action.  The superstring is then -- since it is here unorientable -- to go into a tacyhonic phase, for at least a relatively transient duration of group-affiliated instantons.  The said superstring is still encoded to undergo more of the process of the Kahler-Metric -- in order for the so-stated superstring to re-attain all of its fractals of discrete energy, that it needs, in order to remain as a discrete unit of energy permittivity.  So, for however long that the so-stated superstring of discrete energy permittivity is to be still undergoing its then present need for going through the Kahler-Metric that it is to be going through -- the said superstring will go through an indistinguishabley different set of substringular neighborhoods, that will then work to be able to fulfill the so-stated superstring's need for a direct affiliation with the appropriate genus of those substringular members of the Kahler-Metric that it needs to be directly in correspondence with -- in order for the said superstring to be able to re-attain its fractals of discrete energy permittiivity that it needs, in order for the said superstring to be able to both persist and exist as a discrete unit of energy permititvity --, to where the said superstring will then be in a position to where it may then be able to finish its direct correspondence with the encoded genus of the Kahler-Metric that it is needed to be in a direct association with, over the corresponding group metric of time to where this may happen.

The SETS metric

I am about to name a certain genus of a metric, that all substringular phenomenology of predominant discrete energy goes through, in-between each succeeding instanton -- over the course of the approach of the ending of each generally unnoticed duration of Ultimon Flow.  During the said generally unnoticed duration of Ultimon Flow -- right before the quaternionic-instanton-fied-impulse-mode, there is a brief Njenhuis metric -- in which homotopy works to re-adjust, in so that the activity that is most involved with the continued existence of Gaussian-based transformations is then able to both persist and exist, for both a spontaneous and an "enthusiastic" duration of a manner, over the ensuing set of those iterations of group-metric in so as to be able to keep happening, over time.  This is the duration that I have most directly associated with what I have termed of as the Bases of Light -- which happens, over the course of the general metric that I am eluding to right here -- as a "huddle" that happens during the "seamless" "break" that is then translated, through the ensuing activity of the said quaternionic-instanton-field-impulse-mode.  I am here coining the term:  The SETS metric, in so as to demarcate both the existence and the activity of such a so-stated duration -- as being what I have described of in my earlier writings -- in so as to officially name what I have tried to explain of, as I have briefly summarized in this said post.
What the SETS metric is an acronym for, is, the following:  Space-time-bearing
                                                                                                  Entanglement
                                                                                                    Topological
                                                                                                      Setting.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.