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.

As To The Attraction of an Electron To A Proton

As everyone knows, any given arbitrary  electron of a respective atom -- which is considered to have a negative charge -- is physically attracted to a proton -- which has a positive charge.  An electron has an attraction-like tendency to be have a momentum that is drawn inward (as is like a relative cross-product-based wave-tug/wave-pull (into the page)) , in so as to have a bearing, that, if it were not traveling at close to the speed of light -- it would be pulled inward into the region of the directly corresponding atom, where there are the protons or the proton, that is at the nucleus of the correlative atom.  Any given arbitrary proton, which is considered to have a positive charge, as everyone knows,  bears a tendency of a wave-tug/wave-pull -- that is physically attracted to a directly corresponding electron of the correlative atom.  From the relative vantage-point of any respective given arbitrary proton, the pull of the attraction of the respective given arbitrary electron of the correlative atom -- in which the said proton exists in, happens in such a manner, in so that the proton has a tendency of having a magnetism that works at attempting to pull the correlative respective electron inward, toward the so-stated proton -- in a dot-product manner ("out of the page").  At the substringular level, whenever there is a genus of the perturbation of the superstrings of any one set of the respective orbifolds -- that work to comprise part of such a stated given arbitrary atom -- in terms of the directoral-based conditions  of the correlative Majorana-Weyl-Invariance, that is of the proximal general locus of such a case,  as to the directly correlative Ward-Caucy boundary conditions -- to where this genus of the perturbation of the so-eluded-to superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, works to reverse the here relatively holomorphic direction of the topological sway of the said respective given arbitrary superstrings of such a given case, then, one will tend to have a bearing of what may be termed of as an antiholomorphic Kahler condition.  Whenever this so-mentioned condition happens to a set of superstrings that work to comprise an orbifold eigenset -- this causes what is known of as a Wick Action to happen.  This works to form the activity of an ensuing Kahler-Metric eigenstate -- in so as to help with both the persistence and the continued existence of the local discrete energy of a specific given arbitrary region of superstrings.  So, if the directoral-based topological sway of the Majorana-Weyl-Invariant eigenbase of any respective given set of superstrings -- that are of any given arbitrary atom, is altered into a reversal of its Lagrangian-based flow, over a relatively transient period of time in the substringular -- this will work to form what would be here a proximal group metrical activity of the Kahler-Metric.  Such a tendency of the Kahler-Metric happening, as such, works -- at the atomic level -- to help to conserve energy, when the alteration of the respective activity of an atom would Otherwise work to attempt to reverse the charges of the sub-atomic constituents of any respective given arbitrary atom.  This way, there is a conservation of charge to be more viable.  To Be Continued!  Sam Roach.

A Little Bit About Certain GSO Ghosts

As I was starting to discuss in my last post -- the general genus as to the shape or the morphological texture, that is most directly appertaining to the Ward-Neumman and/or the Ward-Caucy contour of a mass-bearing superstring of discrete energy permittivity -- that is of an electron, versus the shape or the morphological texture that is most directly appertaining to the Ward-Neumman and/or the Ward-Caucy contour of a mass-bearing superstring of discrete energy permittivity -- that is here of a proton, is, in effect, two different individual classes of shape-based structural formats.  I have earlier worked to describe some hinting, as to the general shape-based texture of the cohomologial-based topological contour of the said mass-bearing strings of an electron, yet, here are some extrapolation-based hints as to the comparison of the just-mentioned case that is to be contrasted with the general condition of the mass-bearing strings of what would here be a respective given arbitrary proton -- that may be hypothetically of the same pairing of an atom (in this given case).  Here:  Take a postulative filled circle that is centered just above the central region of a given arbitrary xyz plane.  Next, center another filled circle that is centered just below the same central region of a given arbitrary xyz plane, as before.  Next, form a postualtive-based filled homeomorphic concavity for both the front and the back of each of the said so-stated circles, that is of a tightly-knit Laplacian-based restriction as to the scalar amplitude of the size of its relative field, on all four total sides -- each of which belongs as the respective front-side and the respective back-side of the two said individually taken filled circles at hand.  Next, consider the flow of the relative norm-to-holomorphic (relative top) so-eluded-to disc-like phenomenology to be moving radially, yet in a manner that tends to bear a wave-tug/wave-pull that is into the page.  Simultaneously (via the vantage-point of a central conipoint), consider the flow of the respective reverse-norm-to-holomorphic (relative bottom) so-eluded-to disc-like phenomenology to be moving radially, yet in a manner that tends to bear a wave-tug/wave-pull that is out of the page.  Now, what one is to do here -- is to integrate the last two just mentioned Laplacian-based topological flows, that I have just described.  Integrate this torus-like phenomenon into one more elongated spatial dimension -- arbitrarily say, axial l, with a directoral basis that would here be directly associated with an "l hat."  This torus-like structure, will, as well, bear an annulus that is positioned relatively proximal to the horizontal axis -- to where the holomorphic-based cohomological mapping of the said annulus would be from the positive horizontal direction to the negative horizontal direction.  This cohomological-based venue for a respective given ghost-based mappable tracing -- would tend to not bear any deciduous conical embellishments at the Ward-Neumman extrapolation, that may be Gliosis to the outer contour at the Poincaire level of any respective given arbitrary GSO ghost -- that is of this just-stated given arbitrary case.  Next, integrate the Laplacian-based mer of the just-stated general genus of a GSO ghost-based mappable tracing -- into the direction of the proscribed Lagrangian-based path, that corresponds to its correlative Hamiltonian operand, that is of such a unique and special case.  This is similar but different to the actual case of the mass-bearing superstrings of the f-field of a proton.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sam Roach.

More As To Certain GSO ghosts

During the course of the last post -- I gradually introduced my readers, to a general idea (similar but different to an actual case) -- as to the nature of the genus of the mass-bearing superstrings -- that would be here associated with the d-field of a respective given arbitrary electron.  What I will introduce next -- is a little bit about the general idea as to the nature of the genus of the mass-bearing superstrings, that would be here associated with the f-field of a respective given arbitrary proton.  The cohomological indices -- that are formed by that motion of the directly respective norm-state-projectionis -- that work to form those ghost anomalies that work to act as the physical memory of the directly corresponding superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, -- when one is dealing with the extrapolated ghost-based indices that are thus formed by the physical memory of any given arbitrary two-dimensional superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, work to form what may be here termed of as GSO (Gliosis-Sherk-Olive) ghosts.  The GSO ghosts -- that are formed by the physical memory of both the existence and the motion of the mass-bearing superstrings that are correlative to the condition of the d-field of an electron, when such a respective electron is undergoing a Ward-Caucy condition of Majorana-Weyl-Invariance -- tend to be shaped in such a toroidal-based manner, in so that the Laplacian-based existence of an edge-bearing topological condition of an exterial conical-based contour -- will tend to be incorporated to the outer surface area of the so-eluded-to GSO ghost -- in a manner that is Gliosis to the so-stated toroidal condition of the said ghost-based index, at the Poincaire level as to the so-mentioned outer surface of the said cohomological-based index.  I will continue with a little bit of a comparison of what I have just mentioned here, with the general Ward-Caucy-based conditions that are applicable to the nature of those mass-bearing superstrings that are of the f-field of a proton.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sam Roach.

An Elaboration As To My Last Post

Let us here, first consider the physical situation of which I ended-up mentioning in my last post.  One will here have a diamond-like shape, that is situated right above an arbitrary horizonal axis -- this just mentioned axis of which is here to be considered arbitrarily as the x axis.  Let us now say that this said diamond-like shape were to have, as well, a trivially isomorphic diamond-like shape -- that is to be situated just below the first so-stated diamond-like shape, on the negative quadrant of what may be termed here as an arbitrary y axis.  Now, let us say -- that one were to bear a Laplacian-based shift of the two said entities that have been mentioned here, as bearing a diamond-like shape -- to where the so-stated relative top diamond-like configuration that is situated in the positive y quadrants, will bear an integration of indices, that are pulled both around and "into the page" from its initial flat-space-like initial configuration, -- while there will, simultaneously, from the vantage-point of the center of the so-eluded-to coniaxion, be the condition of the so-stated relative bottom diamond-like configuration -- that is situated in the negative y quadrants, working to bear an integration of indices, that are pulled both around and "out of the page" from its initial flat-space-like initial configuration.    The annulus that I am about to mention will act as the so-eluded-to "washer." As I have here eluded-to -- the volume-based region that goes Into the page may be considered here as the region for a relative positive z-based region, while, the volume-based region that goes Out of the page may be considered here as the region for a relative negative z-based axial region.  Besides both the x axis, the y axis, and the z axis -- three other spatially-based coniaxial directorals (l hat, m hat, and n hat, arbitrarily) are to be integrated into the coming together of the Laplacian-based picture of this respective given arbitrary situation.  The last two of such so-eluded-to spatially-based coniaxial directorals (directly associated here arbitrarily to m hat and n hat, in this given arbitrary case), are of a curled-up nature.  Consider this spatial integration of indices -- that are integrated as I have suggested -- to work at forming a toroidal-based entity.  The annulus of the toroid may be considered here, to be bearing in a relative holomorphic-based manner -- as is going from just outside of the relatively antiholomorphic end of the very center of the said toroid, on the i hat directoral positioning -- that would here tend to be centered as is going right from a spot proximal to the x axis -- while then going, in a holomorphic and a relatively left-moving manner, until it works to exit the Ward-Neumman bounds of the holonomic substrate of the entity of the so-stated toroidal-based shape, that is of this said given arbitrary Laplacian-based example.  Since this particular example works to include the conical-based edges of the so-stated diamond-like shapes, that I have here mentioned -- the so-stated toroidal-based  structure that I have just mentioned as forming, will be as a theoretical genus of a toroidal-based cohomology, that works to bear certain conical cyclic permutations -- that may be extrapolated in a Laplacian-based manner.  This would be similar but different to the GSO type of a ghost anomaly -- that may be formed by the physical memory of a superstring of a mass-bearing eigenmember, that is from the Ward-Caucy bounds of an electron -- that would be probable as existing in a condition of a respective given arbitrary tense of a Majorana-Weyl-Invariance-Mode -- over a directly corresponding Fourier-Transformation, in which such a superstring that is differentiating in a kinematic manner, over time, is undergoing the general process of conformal invariance.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sam Roach.