When the inter-binding(s) between linked cohomology-related world-sheets is (are) hermitian, the inferred net flow of curvature, of which is here to interdependently exist from amongst the proximal local presence of such world-sheets, is thence to often tend to work to bear a relatively smooth homotopy. SAMUEL ROACH.
Saturday, November 19, 2022
Inter-Binding(s) Between Linked Cohomology-Related World-Sheets
Wednesday, June 30, 2021
A Perspective Of Mine -- As To Ancient Sumerian Writings
When I observe some of the tablets that were inscribed with the "writings" of the ancient Sumerians, it appears to me, that a large amount of the language-related "symbols" that are "written" upon such a correlative set of tablets, appear to be shaped in such a manner, to where these seem to me, to have the appearance, of looking like a symbolic depiction of "conical world-sheets." This strikes me very curiously; because, at least to my particular model of string theory, Noether-Based superstrings of discrete kinetic energy permittivity, just about always tend to bear world-sheets, that are shaped in such a general type of a manner, to where if such said world-sheets were here to be considered over a Laplacian Transformation, (as in a timeless "snapshot" of such said world-sheets), that such said world-sheets are to thence to appear, as conical-like shapes. This is also particularly curious; because it often tends to occur, that it is actually over the durational course, in which superstrings of discrete kinetic energy permittivity are to undergo the Fujikawa Coupling via the Green Function, that the residual surplus energy of electrons, that is here to be released when it is to drop back-and-forth an energy level, that is what often tends to work to form the phenomenology of light. (Although I fully realize that the isoelliptiabelianoid (which is what I call the initial genus, of what we now know of today, as being the Higgs Boson), is the type of phenomenology, that had worked to create the basis of forming the initial superstrings of the multiverse.) So it makes me wonder, is it possible, that the initial superstring-related phenomenology, -- of which actually worked to create the multiplicity of electromagnetic energy, -- was actually discrete kinetic energy; and that such inferred superstrings of discrete kinetic energy permittivity, is thereby what worked, in effect, to then resultantly work to form the initial "light" of the multiverse?! Let me know what you think. SAMUEL.
Wednesday, May 5, 2021
Toroidal-Shaped Cohomology-Related World-Sheets -- Gliosis-Sherk-Olive Ghosts
Mass-Bearing superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, tend to work to form toroidal-shaped cohomology-related world-sheets. World-Sheets are the projection of the trajectory of discrete energy phenomenology (superstrings). Cohomology may be perceived of, as being of the eminent topological substrate, of the core-field-density of discrete energy quanta. What I worked to describe of, during some earlier times in my blog, as being "ghosts," -- were actually what I meant to describe of, as being "cohomology-related eigenstates." I referred to such said "eigenstates," as being of a ghost-like nature, since the actual specific phenomenology that I was here to be referring to, is of a constantly indistinguishably different nature. (To where, although these "appear" to be consistently spontaneous latched upon eigenstates, that are stable in super conformal invariance at a covariant locus, in time and space, the specific phenomenology that is here to be latching, at the inferred covariant respective loci, are to constantly be of different actual "stuff.") Those ghost-like phenomenology, that are here to be directly appertaining, to the multiplicity of the toroidal-shaped topological manifolds, that are here to be directly associated with those respective cohomology-related world-sheets, that are here to be formed by the resultant projected trajectory, of mass-bearing superstrings of discrete energy permittivity, may be described of here, as being of the general nature, of acting as, "Gliosis-Sherk-Olive" ghosts. (1989). SAMUEL DAVID ROACH.
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Part Two of the Fourth Session of Course 17 About the Ricci Scalar
I will continue with the suspense later! To Be Continued! Sincerely, Sam Roach.
Thursday, May 29, 2014
The First Set of Test Questions For The Last Test Of Course 16
2) What is a Rham cohomology?
3) Explain how ghost anomalies are annhilated.
4) What are the Donaldson-Ulenbach-Yau conditions?
5) What is the Bette Action?
6) What is the Polyakov Action?
7) What is the Regge Slope?
8) What makes superstrings oriented?
9) What makes superstrings unoriented?
10) What is a Klein Bottle eigenstate?
11) Describe the mobiaty of superstrings.
12) Describe the mobiaty of world-sheets.
13) What are Ward conditions?
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Part Six of the Eleventh Session of Course Sixteen
I will continue with the suspense later! To Be Continued! Samuel Roach.
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Part Two of the Fourth Session of Course 16 -- About Cohomologies...
Friday, December 13, 2013
The Next Part of the 1st Session of Course 16
Thursday, December 12, 2013
Course 16 About Cohomolgy, Topology, and Iterations -- Both the Spurious and the Yau-Exact Kinds, Session one, part 1
Monday, December 2, 2013
The Test Questions Of The Last Test Of Course 14 About Group Action
2) How is the fractal of the magnetic field -- in the substringular -- associated with the differentiation of a superstring? What is voltage?
3) How do Planck phenomena flow as light? Describe the wavelength of light in general.
4) Describe the open-string relation of electrons.
5) Describe the closed-string relation of protons and of neutrons.
6) Describe Real Reimmanian-based cohomology.
7) Describe Imaginary-based cohomology.
8) Describe what happens when two-dimensional world-sheets meet three-dimensional world-sheets with even Ward-Neumman boundaries.
9) Describe ghost anomalies that are relatively Njenhuis.
10) Describe cohomology shifts.
11) Explain why both Njenhuis and Real Reimmanian-based cohomologies exist.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Some Stuff About Doubolt Cohomologies
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Part One of the Thirteenth Session of Couse 14
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
A Tad-Bit More About Ghosts
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Part Two Of The 14th Session Of Course 10
Sunday, May 6, 2012
The Third Session Of Course Ten
Monday, March 5, 2012
A Little Bit About Substringular Freedom Of Motion
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Part Two of the Fourteenth Session of Course Six
One of the reasons for the torroidal shape of the field of such a two-dimensional superstring is because two-dimensional strings bear one and two-dimensional discrepencies along with a three-dimensional basis of field delineation over the course of each individual substringular Laplacian taken individually. The extrapolated fields of one-dimensional superstrings bear two annuli given the condition that such fields are detected as a thin figure-eight-shape, yet such fields that are directly associated with one-dimensional strings are thinner during each individual Laplacian than those that are related to two-dimensional strings. This is because, both one and two-dimensional superstrings exist in world-tubes that bear 32 spacial dimensions that have a basis in three spacial dimensions. Yet one-dimensional strings generate primarily two-dimensional world-sheets. Such world-sheets are the Gliossi mapping of where a world-sheet had just kinematically differentiated over a successive series of instantons, and bears a holonomic structure that consists of an organization of scattered norm-states. Such "intertube" and "figure-eight" shapes ae examples of toroidal phenomena. All illuminated superstrings that are detected are perceived of as having a toroidal shape for that reason! Even though one-dimensional strings require being perceived of as toroidal, these fields are as such because the residue that these receive is acquired from within a general three-dimensional world-sheet as the assoiciated one-dimensional superstring is propagated through a Lagrangian. The fact that one-dimensional superstrings primarily have only two-dimensional discrepencies helps to explain also why one-dimensional stringular fields eigenstates per Laplacian condition at instanton are always thinner than the corresponding field eigenstates that are associated with two-dimensional strings per Laplacian. This is why superstrings are detected in the globally distinguishable as tori-related phenomena. An individual eigenstate of a substringular field is an example of a torus. (Such as similar in M-Theory.) Superstrings are actually vibrating strands and vibrating hoops. One-Dimensional superstrings are vibrating strands while two-dimensional superstrings are vibrating hoops, as you will remember from Course#2, yet, as detected from the surrounding fields of the superstrings, one-dimensional superstrings are detected as relatively thin propagated tori & two-dimensional strings are detected as relatively fatter propagated tori. (As is always the case as shown by illuminated superstrings that are detected.)
I will continue with the suspense later!
Have a phenomenal day!
Sincerely, Sam.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Part Two of the Second Test Of Course Six
6) Such a majorized shape through the Lagrangian of one set of parallel universes of the Ultimon appears from the outside as a giant but relatively thin hoop. There are 12 of such general world-sheets that contain all of the superstrings that act as what we would determine as the kinematic region throughout all of the multiplicit sequential series of instantons.
7) Before each instanton, there must be an instanton-quaternionic-field-impulse in order to act as an equal and opposite reaction to the virtual break in homotopy during what I term of as the "space-hole." Such an impulse-mode molds the substringular encoders so as to form that pattern that is fitting for the relativley Laplacian condition of the ensuing instanton.
8) Tori-Sector-Ranges vary very little in flow rate (within a googleth of a variation in covariant metric), while yet coompensating for their corresponding approaches via the reversal in their associated multiplicitly covariant differences in flow rates. This is due to velocity being relative to the observation of a phenoman at the varying given positions, and such varying positions are here to be considered arbitrary.
I will continue with the suspense later! Until then, you have a wonderfull day and a wonderfull night.
Sincerely, Sam Roach.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Part One Of Session Nine Of Course Six
How does electromagnetic energy -- particularly visible light -- become a part of this majorized Royal Arc of half-hoops that work to propagate the input of all of the information of the physical portion of space and time to the various positions of the Continuum where it needs to go? Remember the strings that take up the residue of a torus? Some of this residue, when fully collected by the central stringular encodements of forward moving time that work to indirectly yet significantly encode for the redistributions that occur over the successive series of many instantons, goes "up" and "around" the countered general world-sheets relative to both pairing pairs, while the remainder of this residue goes a little "up" and then "straight" across to the pairing string of the pairing general world-sheets. This action happens because upward motion includes screw momentum that goes from an arbitrary "pi" to a corresponding relative "pi/2" and subsequently to a corresponding "0pi," while a residue of this is a remainder that just tags along by means of the "x-axis.'" The slight motion "up" of the latter is due to any other minor fractor of frictions that will always be there during the traspiring of such gauge-metrics. This friction is between arcing residue And residue that won't arc. The arcing residue is residue of ground sates that need to temporarily become norm states, while the residue that just goes across is residue of norm-states that needs to temporarily become ground states. This residue does not become completely taken care of in one swipe. The number of swipes of instanton that it takes for full recycling of a ground state to a norm state or a norm state to a ground state is equal to the number of general strings in the associated encoder of the corresponding tori-sector-range multiplied by 10^(-43) seconds. It may appear that a ground state becomes norm or a norm state becomes ground immediately because there are basically countless indistinguishably different particles This means that there are many particles that are different when considered in a literal tense, yet have the same make-up and behave the same way to where you can pretty much say that these are the same particles. If the composition of a local tori-sector-range were to change, then it takes the number of swipes of instatnon equal to what would have occurred theoretically when involving the initial substringular encoder plus the number of swipes of instanton that would occur theoretically when involving the newly operative stringular encoder in order for the substringular field of specific ground and norm states recycle into each other while that recycling back into their original type of subspace (ground or norm, respectively). Again, the parity, spin-orbital momentum, and the transversal momentum of such described superstrings would appear from the outside to have not changed unless a perturbative force altered the conditions of the said superstrings, if such strings are in conformal invariance due to indistinguishable differences. Likewise, the specific covariant codifferentiating locus as to where such associated ground-state-based mini-string and norm-state-based mini-string may vary, as it inevitably does, so that the recycling of Ward Conditions may propagate so as to allow change that invariably here indirectly causes the Gaussian Transformations that act as the Jacoban eigenbases that allow for superstrings to interact in such a manner that these get permittivity "fed" back into them so that these may be the basis of energy so that energy and existence may exist at all. I will continue the suspense later! Sincerely, Sam Roach.