Session 11 Of Course 4 -- Why Charges Bear Their Correlative Charges

Protons are positively charged particles that have a small amount of mass.  Protons are made up of quarks and leptons.  Electrons are made up of three leptons each.  Protons generally are the simplest particles that exist with a charge that is just as positive as an electron’s charge is negative.  It has a lot more mass than an electron, and its residual energy discharge does not form light.  Electrons tend to move faster than protons, and electrons spin a lot more antisymmetrically than protons.  Electrons each have a fractional spin, while protons each have a whole spin.  A particle with a negative charge will have the opposite spin holomorphicty than an adjacent  particle with a positive charge.  The J is related to the symmetrism of particles, for the reason that J involves the spin-orbital-interactions of particles.  As stated, J is also related to the electric field of a given particle, since, J is related to the angular momentum of a given particle.  Angular momentum is related to spin-orbital-interaction, since the directoral impetus is influenced by the way something spins and orbits.  (The way something goes around influences the direction that it incorporates and the object’s drive in that direction.)  The electric field is that field that is most influenced by its charge.  Since electrons that are adjacent spin antisymmetrically in an atom, and antisymmetric is negative of symmetry, and this symmetrism is influenced by J and thus the charge of an electron, and the holomorphism of the orbit of an electron’s transversal motion is antiholomorphic relative  to the directoralization of the given electron’s path around the nucleus of an atom, the charge of an electron is  negative.  Since protons’ spin in an atom tends to be more symmetric, and the orbital vibrations of protons is holomorphic relative to the general Laplacian setting of an atom, a proton has a positive charge.  Electrons spin antisymmetrically in an atom because of their fractional spin, high velocity, and also because of the dynamics of their fields.  The electric fields of electrons tend to work on the world more than the electric fields of protons.  Remember how light is the result of the recycling of differential geometries?  Remember how the residual discharge of electrons is light?  Electrons do this because these are a point mass of charge versus the mass that appertains to protons and neutrons.  Well, this is why electrons have more dynamic fields that protons.  These electrons thus need to be geometrically arranged so as not to interfere with where these are at.  Electrons, to exist in a spot, have to be in their own spot.  Since their fields are more dynamic, they must spin antisymmetrically to adjacent electrons of the same atom or else these will collide fieldwise.  This description of  an electric field would also help to describe the magnetic field, since magnetic fields curl around electric fields.  If  two adjacent electrons of the same atom were to be perturbated to attempt these  to spin symmetrically, the electrons, instead, would find a new localization, since two things cannot occupy the same spot at the same time.  The field dynamics of subatomic particle is influenced by the velocities and directoralizations of these selfsame particles.  The velocity of a particle influences the field associated with it.  Thank you for enjoying this session.  Have a great day!  I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued! Sam Roach.

Part Three Of Session 7 Of Course 20

Let us initially consider a beam of electromagnetic energy, that is traveling right in the direction of a path -- that leads to the topological stratum of a smoothly contoured piece of metal.  Metal is comprised of molecules that are made-up of atoms, and such atoms are comprised of electrons and protons and neutrons.  These protons and the neutrons just mentioned, are at the multiplict center or nucleus of the said atom.  The electrons orbit around the external elliptical perimeter of each of the said atoms.  At the reference frame that is just external to those molecules that work to comprise the said metal, the so-stated metal is relatively stationary -- to where the atoms that work to comprise the molecules of the said metal are in a relative condition of conformal invariance.  The directly corresponding atoms of the so-stated metal, are here to bear a tense of Majorana-Weyl-Invariance.  Back to before.  The earlier mentioned beam of electromagnetic energy is to strike the said metal.  Let's next say that the said electromagnetic energy is a beam of what may here be called white light.  As the beam of light here is to strike the metal, the light scatters to an extent -- in so as to work to form a certain amount of infrared energy or heat.  Heat is the most eminent form of electromagnetic energy that is formed,when electromagnetic energy is to strike a mass in a Gliosis-based manner.  So, when a Calabi-Calabi manifold is to come into contact with a Calabi-Yau manifold -- the consequent formation of heat energy is the eminent electromagnetic tense of radiation that is thus formed, as an array of infrared or heat energy.  The resultant heat energy that is formed, works to effect the physical state of that Calabi-Yau-related manifold, that is here to be interactive with light energy in a Gliosis-based manner over time.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Some Additional Information As To Centralized Knotting

Orbifold eigensets that are of a relatively stable atom, as well as the physical phenomenology of those orbifolds that act as Higgs Boson eigenstates -- have a mass that is proportional to the scalar amplitude of the Hodge-based magnitude of their directly corresponding degree of their centralized knotting, in space and time. So, let us consider the mass of an electron versus the mass of a proton -- that is of an atom that is of a relatively stable Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-Mode, over a discrete group-related metric, at the subatomic level.  A proton has About 1836 times the mass of an electron, in such a so-stated setting.  This would then mean that such a proton would here work to bear about 1836 times as much of a scalar magnitude of a tense of a centralized knotting, than an electron.  Of course, an electron does not bear a condition of having gluons to put together the three leptons -- that work to bring together the existence of each individually taken electron.  Yet, the physical integration of subatomic mers -- in so as to work to form any key ingredient of an atom -- does indeed work to involve the Ward-Caucy-based condition, of what would here amount to be the existence of what I term of here as an eigenstate of a centralized knotting.  Its just that those individually taken subatomic particles that would work here in so as to help at the formation of putting together the so-stated respective "mers," in so as to make the so-eluded-to "ingredients" of an electron, are a particle that is not technically a gluon.  So, any given arbitrary Higgs Boson eigenstate -- of which works to bear a mass that is 126 times the mass of a proton -- will then work to bear a tense of a scalar magnitude of a centralized knotting, that is of a Hodge-Index that involves an amplitude of 126 times as much of such a said manner of a condition of the so-stated centralized knotting, over any directly corresponding eigenmetric of an equally covariant sequential series of group-related instantons.  So, not only is any phenomenology that is of a certain covariant, codeterminable, and a codifferentiable manner -- to be of a certain behavior, in so as to work to bear a specific magnitude of a quantum of a given arbitrary multiple of having more of an amplitude of tending to have more mass, to be of a Ward-Caucy tense of conditions, in so as to work to tend to bear a proportional multiple of a gravitational-based push and pull over time -- yet, such a physical phenomenology will also tend to bear the same proportionality of a tense of a centralized knotting, over the same covariant group-related eigenmetric.
I will continue with the suspense later!  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.

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.

Part Two of Session 10 of Course 19 -- The Klein Bottle and Orbifold Differentiation

The protons of any given arbitrary atom, tend to be theoretically shaped in a basically parabolic manner -- when this is taken in a Laplacian-based manner.  For those atoms that work to bear the existence of neutrons as well, in the nucleus of the said respective atoms -- the so-stated neutrons, as well, also tend to be theoretically shaped in a basically parabolic manner -- again, when this is taken in a Laplacian-based manner.  If one were to spatially integrate one added so-eluded-to spatial parameter of orbit, to the dimensionality of the so-stated tendency of the nucleons of an atom -- that is, if one were to spatially integrate one Njenhuis-based tensor, in the form of an orbital-based coniaxion, to the spatial parameters of dimensionality of the said theoretical parabolic-based topological-based contour -- that is of the so-mentioned nucleons of any respective given arbitrary atomic structures, that have been eluded-to in this post, then, one would get a topological contour that would be of a four-dimensional spatial entity, that may here be described of as a genus of a set of given arbitrary multiplicitly taken F-field-based structures.  Such F-field-based structures that I have mentioned here, are described of in this respective given arbitrary case -- in terms of their differential clause as being in a timeless-based orientation.  This is due to the condition, that any holonomic substrate of topological-based phenomenology -- that exists in the form of an F-field, will bear a minimum of four spatial parameters of dimensionality -- in any minimum Fourier-based Transformation, in which such a so-stated F-field is differentiating in a kinematic manner, over time.  Any F-field that works to indicate the existence of a core-field-density, that is Gliossi to the directly corresponding holonomic structure, at the Poincaire level -- that would here consist of a set of superstrings, that operate in so as to perform one specific function, is an orbifold.  So, any respective given arbitrary proton, and, any respective given arbitrary neutron, when individually taken, exist as each working to bear the existence of being of an orbifold eigenset -- that will tend to exist at the general center, or, in other words, at the nucleus, of the respective atom -- in which such so-stated protons and so-stated neutrons are tending to be existing at -- over their correlative tense of a correlative Majorana-Weyl-Invariant-Mode.  (This is the tendency, in so long as their is not a directly appertaining mode of radioactive decay, that is then occurring to the directly appertaining atoms in question.)

I will continue with the suspense later! To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Sam Roach.

The Last Part Of the Ninth Session Of Course 14

The vibrating energy of nucleons is a form of plain kinetic energy, and, this just mentioned energy is therefore comprised of one-dimensional superstrings, or, in other words, these are comprised of open strings.  As an object that contains atoms increases in kinetic energy, the object differentiates kinematically with more one-dimensional open strings, likewise.  This is because kinetic energy is comprised of open one-dimensional superstrings of discrete energy permittivity.  Mass in electrons is comprised of two-dimensional closed superstrings of discrete energy permittivity.  Such a given arbitrary mass here -- in the case of electrons -- bears a negative charge.  Mass in protons is comprised of closed two-dimensional superstrings of discrete energy permittivity as well.  Yet, the difference between the genus of the  mass of an electron and the genus of the mass of a proton is related to the spinning tensors of their respective orbifold that work to form both formats of mass as having an opposite genus of spin-orbital parity.  Electrons have a fractional spin, whereas, protons have a whole spin.  This is because electrons are fermions and protons are bosons.  The phenomena of a proton is comprised of more vibrating hoops and less vibrating strands than the phenomena of electrons, on account of the condition that protons bear more mass and less plain kinetic energy than electrons.  This is part of what works to cause protons to act as bosons, while, electrons act as fermions.  Neutrons are phenomena that are comprised of one quark and two leptons, giving this a neutral charge.  (Neutrons bear no physical charge.)  Electrons are considered negatively charged because their energy per charge works to repel more per mass than that of their protonic counterparts. -- This is due to the condition that electrons bear a high transversal energy as compared to that of protons.  (The given arbitrary electrons of one given arbitrary atom cycle around a relatively speaking motionless nucleus that vibrates in a locally covariant static manner.)  Protons are considered to be positively charged because these attract electrons. -- Proton(s) have a wave-pull/wave-tug that acts upon the delineatory basis of the respective electron(s) of any given arbitrary atom.  Energy per charge is voltage.  Electric voltage works to repel, because the energy per charge that may be considered here works from the interior of the directly corresponding magnetic field of a given said eigenstate of such electric voltage toward the relative outward bearings of the respective Ward-Caucy bounds of the topological substrate where such a field of voltage exists -- this being at a locally static extrapolation of such a field.  This corresponds to the condition that electrons are at the exterior of any given arbitrary neutral atom, in relative positioning, when compared to the corelative nucleons, which are interior to the just mentioned electrons.  So, when we come into contact with any mass -- what we tend to detect is electrodynamic phenomena.  This is why electrons are considered to be the basis of point-mass.
I will continue with the suspense later!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Course 4 on The Globally Distinguishable Vs. the Substringular, Session 12, Part One

So, protons are bigger than electrons. This is true both in terms of size and in terms of mass. Since a proton has more mass than an electron, it has more two-dimensional superstrings associated with its mass than an electron does. Each fundamental particle just under the level of the proton is a certain thing that describes a three-dimensional delineation in the globally distinguishable. In the subsringular, these "packages" that are here have such delineations that are actually sequences of one- and two-dimensional strings. Each of such sets is in an order in a majorized plane. Each of such stringular encodements is just a segment of its correlative substringular string. (I'll explain this later.) The order of such a set is a thin band of strand-like phenomena and hoop-like phenomena that are very limited in side-to-side transversel sway besides the basic vibration of the said superstrings. It is limited by the Caucy Ward conditions of the given world-tube that is affiliated with the said superstrings. The whole set of such sets that comprises the proton is an association of substringular sequences that exist on separate parts of a tori-sector-range (one of such per part). The symmetrism of these sequences bears a wave-tug that is mini-string that goes from not fully compactified to fully compactified once its surrounding pressure is exerted upon it in an abelian way in a manner that is like a "party whistle" that acts thru any holomorphic operand that is vacant. (Stuff with a perturbative symmetrism will push the described mini-string into an anharmonic mode.) Please wait for the physical example that I will describe to you during the second post of this session so that you will have a better feeling for the concept that I am trying to let you know.
You have a phenomenal day!
Sam.

GUFT, Session 11

Electrons have wave-tug. Protons have wave-tug. All physical phenomena have a certain degree of wave-tug upon all other physical phenomena. Even ghost anomalies exhibit a certain degree of wave-tug upon all other physical phenomena, and ghost anomalies are often considered to be non-physical, partially since these are only a memory of superstrings and also partially since ghost anomalies of a light-cone-gauge-eigenstate are not plucked by the gauge-bosons that exist in the region of that given light-cone-gauge-eigenstate. Electrons have a charge, as do protons also. Yet, the charge of electrons is negative while the charge of protons is positive. The reason for this is the holomorphicity of electrons versus the holomorphicity of protons. Electrons have a holomorphic wave-tug basis, while protons have an antiholomorphic wave-tug basis. The impetus of an electron is holomorphic, while its impedance is antiholomorphic relative to a framework that establishes the neucleus of t he atom as its center. Since the neucleus of the atom is its center, the impetus of the electrons is left-tended. The impetus of an electron is the metric-gauge directoralization here. The metric-gauge directoralization taken kinematically is its attraction. Protons have an antiholomorphic impetus directoralization, since these want to move outward toward the electron. The reason for this is that protons are bosonic masses of high mass and direct wave-tug upon electrons. This wave-tug is formed by the parity and chirality of the orbifolds and their correlative superstrings. The protons thus have an antiholomorphic metric-gauge directoralization that is kinematically an antiholomorphic attraction. Thus, electrons have an antiholomorphic impedance and protons have a holomorphic impedance, since impedance is an equal and opposite reaction directed upon impetus. Thus, electrons have a holomorphic permittivity and protons have an antiholomorphic permittivity. Parity refers to the spin symmetry, while chirality refers to the handedness of the orbifolds in terms of the relative Gaussian Jacobian eigenbases of the orbifolds and the protons and electrons as a whole. A Jacobian eigenbasis refers here to a relative differentiation in the Gaussian structure of an orbifold.