Manner of Approach of Substringular Indices

When a set of superstringular indices work to approach any given arbitrary covariant-based set of orbifold eigensets -- this set of orbifold eigensets of which work to form one unique conformally invariant holomorphic substrate of phenomenology, that exists as a set of Calabi-Yau manifolds that exist in a state of static equilibrium -- in such a manner in so that the so-eluded-to strike of the initially mentioned orbifold eigenindices (these eigenindices of which are individually quanatized superstrings of discrete energy permittivity) upon the second mentioned set of conformally invariant orbifold eigensets -- works to form a proximal-based approach that is of a differential geometric hyperbollic motion of both a codeterminable and a codifferentiable manner, then, the impact of the said initial set of superstrings upon the said second set of superstrings will bear a lower scalar magnitude of Hamiltonian-based operation than if the impact were, instead, based upon an approach that were to be of much more of a supplemental nature.  This is due in part to the condition that the cosine of a supplemental angle of one given arbitrary specific venue of delineatory index will bear a higher scalar magnitude than the cosine of a differential arrangement that is of a Cliffold-based nature, that is, instead here, of a comparatively more hyperbollic means of proximal-based Yakawa approach.  As an ansantz, the cosine of zero is one, and, the cotangent of 90 degreees is (0/1), or, 0.  This is, again as an ansantz, even though the so-stated supplemental-based approach is not actually exactly as a purely Wilson linearity, and, even though the so-stated hyperbollic-based approach that I have here mentioned is not literally of a purely tangential-based nature -- since the first case involves a natural curvature of space and time, and, the second case involves at least a certain case of a Gliossi-based Yakawa Coupling.  So, here is a development of this here initial case in mind.  Let us say that one had one Reimman-based scattering that worked to here bear a relatively linear displacement of substringular eigenindices, while, in a respective second given arbitrary case, one had a Rayleigh-based scattering that worked to here involve a relatively Clifford Expansion of substringular eigenindices.  The so-stated Reimman scattering will bear a re-delineatory index that is basically fully affectual by the summed Hodge-Index of the immediately interacting superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, that are to bear a direct Yakawa Coupling with the second mentioned set of orbifold eigensets, while, the so-stated Rayleigh scattering will, instead, bear a re-delineatory index that is basically not fully affectual by the sum of those Hodge-based indices that may be directly interacting as superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, that are even able to bear at least some of a Yakawa Coupling with the second mentioned set of orbifold eigensets -- due to the simple fact that something that bears a direct hit and/or a direct eigenbase of torsioning will tend to bear more of an impact upon one respective given arbitrary phenomenon, than if that same initial source mentioned here were to instead bear a more indirect hit and/or a more indirect egienbase of torsioning upon the same second mentioned tense of phenomenology.  In these said specific cases, we are talking about the basic condition that, the more direct the means of contact that any one given arbitrary holonomic substrate is upon another second given arbitrary holonomic substrate, the more of an impact that the first entity will bear upon the second entity.  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.