Important Stuff About The Kahler-Metric

Here's the difference between the general condition of a given arbitrary superstring of discrete energy permittivity being just Yukawa to the Kahler-Metric, versus such a superstring to, instead, to be Gliosis to the Kahler-Metric.  Any superstring of discrete energy permittivity that is unfrayed, will always be Yukawa to the Kahler-Metric -- since a superstring being Yukawa to the Kahler-Metric, is directly appertaining to those dimensional-based propensities, that are appertaining to the conditions of a pulsating discrete increment of energy.  Yet -- what I name of as being GLIOSIS to the Kahler-Metric, is when a discrete quantum or a set of discrete quanta of energy, work to interact with what I will name, for brevity's sake, the "Klein Bottle Apparatus," in such a manner, not only to where such a dimensional-based propensity of pulsating discrete energy may both persist and exist over time, yet also, in so as to work to allow for such an ealier said dimensional-based propensity to be able to both persist and exist over time.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Discrete Dimensional Change

If one is here to consider a metric-related Chern-Simons singularity -- in which there is here to be a discrete alteration in the number of spatial dimensions that one given arbitrary superstring of discrete energy permittivity is to be exhibiting, in the process of to here to be working in so as to have a perturbation in the so-eluded-to discrete energy's dimensional-related pulsation over time, then, there is here to be the physical condition of the correlative superstring to be working to bear a different number of spatial dimensions, over the course of the interplay of consecutive iterations of BRST.   For example, let us not consider here what the Beti numbers happen to be here -- both right before and after any particular iteration of BRST.  Instead -- let us simply consider in this respective case, the number of spatial dimensions that a given arbitrary superstring is to exhibit -- over the course of two consecutive iterations of BRST, in and of itself.  Let us say that, in the first given arbitrary said iteration of BRST, -- the said superstring of discrete energy permittivity is to exhibit the metric-based condition, of working to bear four spatial dimensions plus time.  Let us next say, that, in the second given arbitrary said iteration of BRST, that is here to be considered, -- the said respective superstring of discrete energy permittivity is to, instead, to exhibit the metric-based condition of working to bear three spatial dimensions plus time.  Let us next consider the respective hypothesis here, that "everything else" is to then to "remain the same."  Consequently, such a said superstring is to then to be altering in its dimensional-related pulsation, and thus, such a said superstring is to then to work to bear a correlative metric-based Chern-Simons singularity at the so-eluded-to duration-based juncture.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.

Clarifying An Accidentally Confusing Point

In one of my recent posts -- I have a term in one of my equations, that refers to the mathematical entity -- that is actually:
(1/(e^(del(Ricci Flow)))).
Since this is the reciprocal of:  (e^(del(Ricci Flow))), it is to work to bear units of s^2/m^2,
instead of working to bear units of m^2/s^2.
Yet -- in terms of the Scalar Amplitude of this said mathematical entity, the "amount" of magnitude that is here to be in terms of the said "s^2/m^2" is to be equivalent to the Scalar Amplitude of:
(e^(Ricci Flow)*((e^(Ricci Flow)^2)-1)^.5), -- Even Though the literal units that are to Actually directly appertain to "(e^(Ricci Flow)*((e^(Ricci Flow)^2)-1)^.5, would be, if literally taken as I have just mentioned, -- to actually be in terms of "m^2/s^2."
This is, in part, because -- we are Not taking the value of (1/(e^(Ricci Flow))),
we are Instead taking the VALUE of (1/(e^(del(Ricci Flow))).
Sorry for not clarifying this earlier, I like things to be clear instead of being confusing.
I will continue with the suspense later!  To Be Continued!  Sincerely, Samuel David Roach.