Part Two of the 15th Session of Course 14 About Group Action

When one-dimensional superstrings of discrete energy permittivity map out a physical memory of the projection of the trajectory of the said one-dimensional string, without the contined existence of what here would have been those ghost anomaly-based indices that existed initially in the path of the kinematic-based differentiable Lagrangian -- that would here appertain to the tracing of the prior motion of the multiplicit eluded to one-dimensional superstrings of the eluded to directly prior extistent physical memory of the said superstrings.  This would then here mean that the ghost anomalies that had been formed by the inter-relative Gliossi contact, that would here exist between the said one-dimensional superstrings of discrete energy permittivity with the directly associated relatively forward-holomorphic-based norm-states that had been immediately scattered out of their initial basis of physical memory -- in a manner that is of an anharmonic manner, by the activity of relatively respective reverse-holomorphic-based norm-states.  So, if a superstring of both a relatively forward-time-based forward-holomorphic-based Hamiltonian operation moves through a given arbitrary Lagrangian -- in so as to harmonically scatter those positive-norm-states that were in its path, there would here, in this case, be negative-norm-states that had moved upon the initial said harmonically scattered arrangement of ghost anomalies that I had eluded to, in such a manner in so that the said ghost indices that had initially formed as a physical memory as to the directly prior motion and existence of the directly associated superstrings -- of which may here, in this given case scenario, be tentatively considered as appertaining to one-dimensional superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, in this given arbitrary case, form a Gliossi interaction with the Ward-Caucy bounds of the said ghost anomalies in an anharmonic genus of scatteriing.  This is to where the resultant Hamiltonian perturbative reaction would bear both a non-linear-based Clifford-based covariant basis of Yakawa -based topological sway -- that would form interactive Njenhuis singularities that work to pull and tug the initial arrangement of positive-norm-states from the Poincaire setting of the said ghost anomaly-based traceable mapping into a covariant-based codetermiable Njenhuis sway, this of which works to take the said perturbative scrambling of the indices of the said ghosts to be redistibuted and redelineated off of the relative local Real Reimmanian plane, with enough of an amplitude to where the resultant holonomic substrate of anharmaonically scattered norm-states may be pulled into dilatons and dilatinos that convert into gravitons and gravitinos.  This is due to a dual tense of both relatively infinite and relatively infinitessimal kinematic-based singularities that are interactive, yet, without canceling -- due to the dual  multiplicit binary directoral-based Lagrangian partials that are here involved with each other in an unborne tangency over time.

Part Two of the 12th Session of Course 11 About Orbifolds

From where I left off last time as to the differences in norm-conditions working to designate different orbifolds from existing in different universes, if, under any given arbitrary case, certain Planck-like phenomena that are adjacent and are also of the same universe are here to bear orphoganation with a wobble of ~1.104735878*10^(-81)I degrees, then, such a condition is what works to help define the corresponding Planck-like phenomena -- along with their corelative superstrings and substringular counterparts -- as belonging to the same universe.  This is while the condition of adjacent Planck-like phenomena that are adjacent, yet, are of different universes will bear norm-based orphoganal conditions that involvle a covariant relativistic wobble other than ~1.104735878*10^(-81)I degrees.  The latter condition of which works to cause both the corresponding Planck-like phenomena, their corelative superstrings, and the corelative substringular counterparts to here belong to different universes.  This is over both the sub-Fourier-based transformation in which the said superstrings are differentiating -- over the sub-metric in which such substringular phenomena are vibrating -- during the course of a group instanton, as well as over the successive series of instantons in which the mentioned substringular phenomena differentiate kinematically over the time-wise course of the directly related Fourier-Transformation in which such superstrings are covariantly codifferentiating in a codeterminable manner.  Such an inter-relation of norm-based conditions is derived by considering the angling of the various corresponding adjacent Planck-like phenomena relative to one another, while then considering such an angling as equal to the degree that the said codifferentiable superstrings are off of wobbling from the discrete degree of wobble of a Planck-like phenomenon of ~1.104735878*10^(-81)I degrees.  This is due to the condition that the scalar variance of the parameters as to the angling that two or more Planck-like phenomena are off from a discrete unit of Fadeev-Popov-Trace wobble torques toward the multiplicit Laplacian-based delineations as to where the said Traces are at -- in such a Clifford-based sway that happens in such a manner so that this format and genus of eluded to torque works to form a covariance in wobble that forms a larger basis of wobble.  This is in consideration of the condition that an individual Planck-like phenomenon that is not frayed always wobbles during the BRST portion of group instanton at an angle of ~.1104735878*10^(-81)I degrees.  This wobble is considered as Imaginary on account of the condition that the sway inter-relation of such wobbling happens at the Poincaire-based locus of each of the mentioned Planck-like phenomena, to where it always happens in a back-and forth manner that is covariant in one manner or another to all of the Planck-like phenomena that exist in space and time over the course of each iteration of group instanton.  I will continue with the suspense later!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.