My Current Perspective -- The Largest Viable Number

 To my current perspective -- WHEN ONE INCLUDES BOTH NEGATIVE VALUES AND ZERO, the largest numerical value that means anything, is:

[[2*e^[(infinity)^8^(infinity)^8 ]]+ 1].

Please let this sink in, before you reply. I would LOVE to hear any thoughtful replies to this! 

Sincerely, SAMUEL DAVID ROACH. (PINCKNEY, MI; U OF M; WCC; EMU).

Cevita Action -- Hamiltonian Operator -- Rayleigh Scattering

 When a Cevita Action is to be incurred upon an initially steady-state Hamiltonian Operator, of which is here to work to consist of a multiple number of discrete energy quanta, this general type of an interaction, may often tend to work to impel, the spontaneous occurrence of an ensuing Rayleigh Scattering, that is here to be imparted, upon the earlier stated initially steady-state Hamiltonian Operator, that is here to be of such a given arbitrary respective case scenario.I WILL CONTINUE WITH THE SUSPENSE LATER!  SAMUEL. 

"Grouping" Factor/Magnitude Of Sheaving -- One

 Let's suppose that one knew what the abelian-related "grouping" factor was, for an Etale cohomology; And from this, one wanted to mathematically determine, the scalar magnitude of the directly corresponding heuristic sheaving. Here's how I would go about doing this:

Initially, mathematically ascribe, whatever the numerical expression, that is here to be attributed to the value of the said abelian-related "grouping" factor, to be considered here, in this particular case, to Act as a correlative stipulated "Zeta value(number.)" From this point; calculate what the numerical value would be, that is here to be tantamount in respective correlation, to the number that may thence be determined, via an extrapolation of the correlative Bessel Function. Now; this numerical expression, that you have just determined to be Acting, as the correlative numerical value, that is here to be directly appertaining to the directly corresponding respective Bessel Function, -- is thence to be tantamount, to the scalar magnitude of the directly corresponding heuristic sheaving, that is here to be directly appertaining, to the abelian-related "grouping," that is of a given arbitrary tense (set) of Etale cohomology-related eigenstates. To Be Continued! P.S.: (Input?!) Sincerely, SAMUEL DAVID ROACH. (1989).

Electrons, Wick Action Eigenstates, And Landau-Ginzburg Eigenstates

 Since those cohesive sets of discrete energy quanta, that work to comprise the physical structure of electrons, tend to exhibit a greater nature, of acting as being Gliosis to the Kaeler-Metric, electrons are consequently, to tend to exhibit the generation, of a larger number of both Wick Action eigenstates And Landau-Ginsburg (Action) eigenstates, over any set period of time, than their directly correlative (respective) nucleons do. I will continue with the suspense later! To Be Continued! Sincerely, SAM ROACH. (1989). 

Certain Inter-Relationship Between Real And Imaginary Numbers

 Let us consider the mathematical condition -- to where one is to have a Real Riemannian Number, -- as taken to the power of the sum of a Real Number Plus An Imaginary Number. What this often tends to be physically indicative of, is a relationship between a radial translation and a transversal translation -- that is of a Yukawa Nature, but Not of a Gliosis Nature.  However; when one is to have a Real Riemannian Number, -- as taken to the power of a "use-full" product of an Irrational Real Number Times An Imaginary Number -- what this often tends to be physically indicative of, is a relationship between a radial translation and a transversal translation -- that is definitively of a Gliosis-based Nature. Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Spurious i*PI(del) Action

Let us initially consider an accelerating mass-bearing orbifold eigenset.  The greater that the number of radial-associated tensors, that such an eigenset is to be exhibiting -- over a proscribed period of time, -- as it is here to be undergoing its inferred general course of acceleration, -- the more "spurious" that the directly corresponding eminent aggregate i*PI(del) Action will consequently tend to be, in a spin-orbital sense.  The more "spurious" that the spin-orbital tense of the directly corresponding eminent aggregate i*PI(del) Action of a mass-bearing orbifold eigenset will tend to be, over a proscribed period of time, the more of a drive that such an inferred cohesive group of discrete energy will consequently tend to have, in its general direction of motion. To Be Continued! Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

The Units For The i*PI(del) Action

The expression (in units) that is here to be utilized, for the physical representation of the "i*PI(del) Action" -- is in terms of an extremely small number times the units of Coulumbs*Seconds.  Sam Roach.

Orbifold Eigensets And Orientable Manifolds

Whenever an orbifold eigenset is conditioned to be of an unorientable nature -- this will then be of such a Ward-Cauchy-related condition, to where -- those discrete energy quanta that are to work here to act, in so as to comprise the said orbifold eigenset, are to be, as well, of an unorientable nature.  Yet, consequently, whenever the superstrings of discrete energy permittivity -- that are to here to be of a directly corresponding orbifold eigenset -- are to be conditioned to be of an orientable nature, then, the correlative respective orbifold eigenset as a whole, will, as well, act in so as to be of an orientable nature.  Gauge-Bosons will always tend to work to display, the same number of spatial dimensions, as whatever the number of spatial dimensions that the directly corresponding core field that the multiplicit affiliated superstring of discrete energy permittivity will then tend to display.  Consequently -- since the core field of any one given respective superstring of discrete energy permittivity, is to tend to have one more spatial dimension than such a said string, -- not only is an orbifold eigenset to tend to bear just as many spatial dimensions as all of the individually taken superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, that are here to work to comprise the said eigenset, -- yet also, -- all of the gauge-bosons that are here to be most directly affiliated with such an orbifold eigenset, will tend to bear one more spatial dimension than the orbifold eigenset will tend to have, at an internal reference-frame.  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Anharmomic Vibration And Stringular Compactification

When an orbifold eigenset is to compactify by one given arbitrary number of spatial dimensions, then, all of the superstrings that are of the same one respective given arbitrary orbifold eigenset of such a case, will compactify by the same number of spatial dimensions.  So, all of the individually taken superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, that are here to work to comprise one correlative given respective orbifold eigenset -- will be vibrating in an anharmonic manner in a holomorphic manner, in the same number of spatial dimensions, -- at that general point in duration, that is here to be at the general moment that is to be taken right before the start of the correlative beginning of one specific iteration of group-related instanton.  So, if one individually taken superstring of discrete energy permittivity, is to be orientable during a correlative iteration of the Beti Action, -- then, all of the individually taken superstrings of discrete energy permittivity that are of the same orbifold eigenset, will be orientable during the self-same correlative iteration of the Beti Action.  Consequently -- if one individually taken superstring of discrete energy permittivity, is to be unorientable during a correlative iteration of the Beti Action, -- then, all of the individually taken superstrings of discrete energy permittivity that are of the same orbifold eigenset, will be unorientable during the self-same correlative iteration of the Beti Action.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Relative Frequency Of Gravitational Waves

As an initial aside, gravity waves tend to bear a wavelength of anywhere between 5*10^(-22) meters to 4*10^(-18) meters. The higher that the relative frequency is to be, as to the holonomic translation -- of what are to here be the presence of two given arbitrary sets of respective comparitive gravitational waves, to where each individually taken set is here to bear its component waves as to be working together here in unison -- the higher that the scalar amplitude will tend to be, as to the directly corresponding helicity of the directly corresponding phenomenology of the said set of gravitational waves, that are here to bear the so-stated higher frequency.  When in terms of a comparison between two different distinct gravitational waves, as is here to be a given example for reference, for instance, say if one given arbitrary gravitational wave were to here to have a higher frequency than another given arbitrary gravitational wave that is to as well to be considered here, -- then, the gravitational wave that is of a higher frequency, will tend to have a higher number of Fourier-related spiral-shaped formations over an extrapolated trajectory, than the other gravitational wave will tend to have, due to that Schwinger-related torsioning, that is here on account of an increased energy that is to applied to the said wave, in so as to work to cause the so-stated increase in frequency that is then to tend to create a higher degree of helicity -- when this respective situation is to be taken along the topological stratum of the actual physical entities, that are of the two said comparative gravitational waves.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Mass-Bearing Orbifold Eigensets And Gauge-Bosons

Aside from the total of 8,886,110 to 8,886,112 partition-based discrepancies, that are here to be either gained and/or lost by any one orbifold eigenset, that is here to be comprised of by mass-bearing superstrings of discrete energy permittivity per instanton -- in and of themselves, -- the gain and/or the loss of those partition-based discrepancies, that are here to be just of those gauge-bosons themselves -- that act in so as to help in the continued perpetuity of the existence of such said mass-bearing superstrings, is equal to the Hodge-related increase and/or the Hodge-related decrease of between 162,754 to 162,756 of such so-stated inherent partition-based discrepancies.  This then means, that for orbifold eigensets that are of mass-bearing superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, the gain and/or the loss of partition-based discrepancies -- when this is here to be taken as a total, between both the change in the number of the partition-based discrepancies that may be taken along the topological contour, that is of those superstrings of discrete energy permittivity that work to comprise any one orbifold eigenset, that is of mass-bearing superstings, as well as the change in the number of the partition-based discrepancies, that may be taken along the topological contour, that is of their directly corresponding gauge-bosons, -- that there is here to tend to be a gain and/or a loss of between a total of 9,048,864 to 9,048,868 of such partition-based discrepancies.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Partition-Based Discrepancies And Legendre Homology

The lower that the number of partition-based discrepancies, that are here to exist from within the Ward-Neumman bounds of those individually taken superstrings -- that work to comprise a mass-bearing orbifold eigenset, is to tend to be -- the higher that the spatial dimensionality of the resultant generation of the delineated Legendre-related superstrings, will then tend to be.  Likewise -- the higher that the number of partition-based discrepancies, that are here to exist from within the Ward-Neumman bounds of the individually taken superstrings, that work to comprise a mass-bearing orbifold eigenset, is to tend to be -- the lower that the spatial dimensionality of the resultant generation of the delineated Legendre-related superstrings, will then tend to be.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

First Discussion As to Flow Of Partition-Related Discrepancies

The higher that the Beti number is, during a dimensional compactification, of which is to here to happen right before any one given arbitrary iteration of BRST -- the more partition-related discrepancies will tend to flow out of or diverge from a correlative superstring just before the said iteration of BRST.  Furthermore, -- the higher that the absolute value of the Beti number is, during a dimensional decompactification, which is here to happen during any one iteration of the Regge Action -- the more partition-related discrepancies will tend to flow into or converge upon a correlative superstring, during the so-stated iteration of the Regge Action.  Compactification of dimensions tends to work to involve a tangential flow of exchanged homotopic residue, whereas, decompactification of dimensions tends to work to involve a cotangent-related flow of exchanged homotopic residue. 
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.