I got the following assignment in college.

In parallelogram PQSR, what is PQ?

(2x + 5) cm

a) 2 cm

b) 5 cm

c) 6 cm

d) 9 cm

I will be very grateful for your help in solving it.

]]>Please forgive my lack of proper terminology, but:

Take a Torus. There is a nice analytic formula for a Torus.

Now suppose that we rotate the Torus in the 4th Dimension. There seems to me to be at east 3-ways to go about this.

A.} We can rotate the Torus around its own axis—analogous to how a circle can be rotated to form a sphere.

B.} We can rotate the whole Torus at a distance—analogous to how circle is rotated through space to become a Torus.

And,

C.} I Think that it matters—though I may be wrong—what attitude the Torus is in when it is rotated in 4-Space.

I mean, wouldn't a Horizontal Torus with the center hidden from our 3-D perspective, form a different shape if it was rotated in the 4th Dimension that way, than a Torus that was rotated while facing us head-on like a Bullseye? Or is my power of visualization lacking? Are the two cases the same?

Now, suppose that instead of the Torus staying in the same orientation, it could Rotate around its own axis as it generates what was a "Simple" 4-D Toroidal analog. It can rotate at all sorts of frequencies—making a full Rotation while it makes a full circle around its center, or 2-Rotations, or 100-Rotations—not to mention Fractional Numbers of Rotations.

How can one find the equations of these various—well, what do you call them? They aren't Polytopes are they?

IF we decide to go up to 5-Dimensions, the possibilities become even more staggering.

Now, one way to get a Torus analog is to take a Sphere and rotate it in the 4th Dimension similar to how a circle is rotated to create a torus. Is this yet another 4-Dimensional Toroid, or is it the same as one of the cases we've already considered?

BUT, Suppose that instead of a Sphere, we use a Dodecahedron, an Icosahedron or one of the Stellated Polyhedra instead, and rotate it in 4-D?

Is there an exhaustive, systematic way that I can answer such questions for myself?

Thank You!

Saxon Violence

]]>Paper, link = https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018JPCM...30s5602B/abstract

Physics Forums discussion, link = https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-you-break-quantum-entanglement-bonds.1015342/

Can entangled particles become disentangled?

Would a EMP(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse) disrupt electron quantum entanglement bonds?

[Math][/math] - renders mathematical equations

[Math][/math]- renders inline math

[Ce][/Ce] - renders chemical equations.

Some details can be seen from the following link:

https://mytutorsource.com/blog/1-20-divisibility-rules-in-mathematics/

In arithmetic, divisibility rules area unit a collection of ways or rules to see whether or not the given range or {integer whole range number} is divisible by the opposite number wherever the rest are going to be zero. Rules of numbers but five area units are quite simple to understand; but, the quality rules of seven, 11, and thirteen area units are complicated and arduous to know. All numbers or integers area units are separable by one. Their equality takes a look at maybe a technique to see if the given rare one is separable by a tested division, maybe not a reminder. Learning visibility rules are important as they're handy to unravel word issues, perform fast calculations, and check prime numbers.

]]>

And speed of sun light is infinity.

Look at the scale below. Correct me if i m wrong.

1000 km= 1 cm .

10000km=10 cm.

13000km=13 cm.

15000km=15 cm.

100000km=100 cm (1meter).

200000km=200 cm (2meter).

696000km=696 cm (6.96 meter).

1000000km=1000 cm (10 meter).

10000000km (1 CR)=10000cm (100 meter).

100000000km (10cr)=100000cm (1km)

150000000km(15 cr)=150000cm(1.5 km)

Year 1: Calculus 1 = https://www.scienceforums.com/topic/38852-calculus-1-lectures/

Year 2: Calculus 2 = https://www.scienceforums.com/topic/38853-calculus-2-lectures/

Year 3: Calculus 3 = https://www.scienceforums.com/topic/38854-calculus-3-lectures/

Year 4: Differential Equations = https://www.scienceforums.com/topic/38855-differential-equations-lectures/

P.S. This is not a accredited program if you learn this material you would probably do well in a actual college program for mathematics.

]]>

]]>

This is mainly to check all the variables in the differential Equation to make sure that they all solve correctly and to make sure the Quaternion is anomaly free and solve the equation for (x,y,z,t,ωs,ωp,M,I,k,φ,S,X,Z,μ,Y,q,a,β)

∇'(x,y,z,t,ω_{s},ω_{p,}M,I,k,φ,**S,X,Z,μ,Y,q,a,**β**) = (d ^{2}/**

(d^2/∇') - (Ctp)^2 = ds^2

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(d^2+%2F+∇')+-+(C+t)^2

(Universe Volumetric Planck State @ size of universe in radius) =(4/3)π((RUniverse/(tpC))^3 Luniverse

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(4%2F3)+π+L+((R%2F(t+C))+)^3

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+d+(4%2F3)+π+((R%2F(t+C))^3

Luniverse = (∇Charge,∇Color,∇flavour,∇gravity - ∇Dark Energy)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(∇'Q%2C+∇'u%2C+∇'F+%2C∇'g++-+∇'D)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+d

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(∇+g)+-+(∇+d)

Charge possible states per point (1,2/3, 1/3, 0,-1/3,-2/3,-1)

Color Possible states per point(R,B,G,0,antiG,antiB,antiR)

Flavour possible states per point (I,II,III,0,darkIII,darkII,darkI)

Gravity/Dark Energy possible states per point of space (Energy,Mass,Spin,0,-spin,-mass,-Energy)

Atleast the graphing equation and Equivalence principal are in working order having A.I. do the work.

I have decided to use this equation for a proton instead of the entire universe as it would be too much data to ever complete.

(Universe Volumetric Planck State @ size of universe in radius) =(4/3)π((RUniverse/(tpC))^3 (∇Charge,∇Color,∇flavour,∇gravity - ∇Dark Energy)

RUniverse = RProton = 10^-15 meters

The Equation Yields a Planck State of 9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 10^59 (∇Charge,∇Color,∇flavour,∇gravity - ∇Dark Energy)

So a Field with 9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 10^59 cubes that are a Planck length with states of (+1/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+1/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+1/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) if the proton is at rest.

The Strong Nuclear Force or color Map will look something like this which is the only thing over the 3-D field that varies in a proton.

If the Proton is in motion let's say moving in a particle accelerator at 8 Tev then the State is 7.6171932283964837631558879969576 * 10^57 (+1/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (8000000/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+1/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (8000000/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+1/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (8000000/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

All of the Information being within the equation with a smaller color field of the same picture being less Planck Lengths within the particle due to length contraction.

The Graphing Equation displays all possible properties of the particle or substance to an quantized amount of a Planck Length being exact without error, I could write the entire Tensor for each substance but it would take the big number amount of states. These were done assuming Dark Energy was not existent and a non expanding universe which are the zero terms. There is only one unknown in these equations which is the Spin number of Dark Energy particles being the final zero in the spin term, the graph is over d/dx + d/dy + d/dz the big number shows the number of planck lengths that the fields manifest for a proton at rest versus in motion for these examples.

This shows this equation to be in working order and accurate to reality.

This equation is actually more complex than the long equation as it gives a single state for everything rather than a large number of multiple Planck States like this one.

If you wanted more detail of the Quarks within the Proton you could graph the equation with the same set of coordinates including the quarks with the same result.

For the Rest proton with quarks in finer detail.

9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 10^59 (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

Now the charges varies given the details of the quarks within the proton which as now the charges vary you will have two varing graphs one for the Strong Nuclear Force or Color and one for the Electromagnetic Force or Charge being the (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz)) + (+2/3 /(dx + dy +dz), B/(dx + dy +dz)) + (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz), G/(dx + dy +dz)) = (+1/(dx + dy +dz),RGB/(dx + dy +dz))

The equation can be used to whatever detail you would like it to be this being a more exact map of the proton next would be to add gluons if you wanted or even more protons and neutrons to construct an atom, but it is always exact to the planck length, no matter what detail is used.

Overlapped Charge and Color Map, (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz)) + (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz), B/(dx + dy +dz)) + (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz), G/(dx + dy +dz)) = (+1/(dx + dy +dz),RGB/(dx + dy +dz))

Which solves perfectly making the graphing equation even physically correct next we will try something more challenging like a Feynman diagram using this equation, it should be able to graph anything in the universe to the planck length is the test.

The Feynman Diagram we are going to test this on is Beta Decay of Carbon 14 into Nitrogen 14 to start off with the calculations need to be done for the planck state of an Electron and Neutron as beta decay is P+ > N + e- + Ve , so we willl start with mapping the quarks within the proton which a proton's state is 9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 10^59 (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

Then the neutron can be described as a Planck State too which is

9.9023511949154288921026543960449 * 10^59 (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

The electron has a smaller state 1.1998578848809383445875560276978 * 10^51 (-1/(dx + dy +dz),0/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz), .511/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

The Neutrino has State of 28722.600151171579743008314436886(0/(dx + dy +dz),0/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz), .2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) being much smaller than all of them

This Completes the Feynmann Diagram for Beta minus decay and satisfies P+ > N + e- + Ve

9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 10^59 (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

=

9.9023511949154288921026543960449 * 10^59 (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

+

1.1998578848809383445875560276978 * 10^51 (-1/(dx + dy +dz),0/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz), .511/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

+

28722.600151171579743008314436886(0/(dx + dy +dz),0/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz), .2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))\

All properties have been conserved.

This shows the volume of the neutron to be slightly smaller in size to the proton by .0000002%.

This calculator can also be used to find the effects of Dark Energy on the particle in question for a proton you could solve the amount of Dark Energy on the particle on Nucleon, we can find that Dark Energy has a velocity currently of 54 meters per second using a simple equation E = (1/2)MV^2 , V = 54 m/s . The Mass of the Dark Energy Particles are unknown so I will use a mass of electron or mass of proton. Giving each section of space a energy of 1.458 Kev outward with the push of Dark Energy if mass of electron or mass of proton it would be 1.313 Mev , now we can write the proton effected by Dark Energy.

9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 10^59 (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 1.45/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 938.28/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 1.45/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 938.28/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 1.45/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 938.28 /(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

Now the Proton is displaying the expansion of Dark Energy upon the Proton.

It has been shown that this graphing tool can be used to graph anything that is contained with the universe using the information about its dimensions, so this test has been concluded about the graphing equation as successful, but I wanted to note that (dx^2 + dy^2 +dz^2) = (Planck State)^2 being R^2 in Planck lengths which is why the dimensions are divided by (dx + dy +dz) and that the Planck state( C ) data is used being the dimensions that the field is over being the Complex Manifold. The manifold of space (Euclidean Space) is being used as (dx + dy +dz) which can also be (dx' + dy' +dz') if you wanted to directly start to use special relativity (Makowski space) on it where as the Field dimensions are from Quantum field theory to be put over the manifold which is a type of quantum gravity.

Next will be a proof of the big equation which will take longer to test which will give a ds^2 value based on a complex system which can be used with the graphing equation to graph the actual state of the entire universe exactly without error based on a complex set of 18 variables or kept in its natural state for a ds^2 value which is a Grand Unified Field equation that takes in account the Strong Nuclear Force, Weak Nuclear Force, Gravity and Electromagnetism all in one equation yielding E8 Killing Vectors. This Metric takes in account General Relativity, Special Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and Quantum Field Theory to arrive at the solution in Killing Vectors which are then placed in Minkowski space.

∇'(x,y,z,t,ω_{s},ω_{p,}M,I,k,φ,**S,X,Z,μ,Y,q,a,**β**) = (d ^{2}/**

(d^2/∇') - (Ctp)^2 = ds^2

One solved solution for this equation already is for ∇' being d2/dx'2 + d2/dy'2 + d2/dz'2 , The original solution for the equation was LGhost QE Which states that Quantum Entanglement is the same as creating a wormhole between two spaces or universes, and that theoretically if you did quantum entanglement on matter between universes you can transmit matter just like is often done across space during standard Quantum Entanglement experiments.

I am changing the (dx,dy,dz) parameters to display a special relativistic 4 current, now including the evolution of the state over time and not just in a static point.

Luniverse = (∇Charge,∇Color,∇flavour,∇gravity - ∇Dark Energy) , ∇' (x,y,z)= d'(x,y,z)∇ , d(x,y,z)' = d(x,y,z) (1-(V(x,y,z)^2 /C^2))^1/2 , E(x,y,z) = (1/2)MV(x,y,z)^2

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(∇'Q%2C+∇'u%2C+∇'F+%2C∇'g++-+∇'D)

This shows the parameters as a function of kinetic energy in a direction or velocity in a direction now, now space properly dilates in the presence of energy at a given time giving a value for L that is special relativistic. The original equation was relativistic however this equation was not.

L'universe = (∇'Charge,∇'Color,∇'flavour,∇'gravity - ∇'Dark Energy)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+x(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+y(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+z(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

The time coordinate can be ignored but I am still doing the A.I. analysis of it anyways, which shows that our analysis of Dark Energy and Gravity are Valid with (C+V, C-V)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+t+(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

This is the proof that the space contraction equation does not interfere with the "Higher Dimensions" such as gravity or dark energy or charge.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+Q+(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+g-d+(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+q+u+f+(g-d)+(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

However this does prove that it takes the dilation effect upon dimension x upon Q or space upon charge that the space is changing however not charge.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+Q+x+(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+Q+y+(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=∇+Q+z+(1-(V^2+%2FC^2))^(1%2F2)

]]>Does fl. and fo. object should glow after nuclear attack? If yes, then:

How long? How far from epicentrum? How fast after nuclear attack?

If glow long, did it stop glow after radiation level will fall to safe values or radiation level still can be risky or dangerous?

]]>

**Abstract**

**The atomic clocks on-board each satellite tick faster than identical clocks on the ground by about 38 microseconds per day. People like to use this fact to prove Relativity and call it time dilation. With no doubt, Relativity is one of the explanations of the atomic clocks phenomenon, but is it the only one?**

**How Atomic Clocks Work**

**The principle of operation of an atomic clock is based on atomic physics: it measures the electromagnetic signal that electrons in atoms emit when they change energy levels. Since 1968, the International System of Units (SI) has defined the second as the duration of 9192631770 cycles of radiation corresponding to the transition between two energy levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom. When an electron jumps from an energy level to a lower energy level, it releases electromagnetic waves. The atomic clock counts these electromagnetic waves to click time.**

**Is there any chance an electron jumps into another nucleus?**

**In reality, it’s more like layers of clouds wrapped around the nucleus, with the electrons being somewhere in the layers of the cloud. One way to think of it is as a probability cloud, with a high probability that the electron is somewhere in a particular layer. Due to the quirks of quantum physics, we can’t directly determine where an electron is located in space at any given time without breaking things, but we can infer where it is by indirect measurements. In other words, an electron may move anywhere, only depending on the difference in probability. It is possible for an electron to jump into a nearby nucleus.**

**When an electron jumps into another nucleus, we will lose a count**

**An electron jumps up to a higher energy level, then jumps to a lower energy level and releases a wave. The wave is the keypoint the atomic clock counts on. Electrons keep jumping like flipping coins. When an electron jumps into a nucleus, the result will become difficult to estimate. It could cause a Beta decay, or mostly the electron would be kicked out as a normal electron. It is probably to lose a wave. This probability is very low, still, a count is lost. Such loss of counting will not affect the accuracy of the atomic clock on the surface of the earth. Because that number 9192631770 is calculated through repeated comparisons by many scientists on the surface of the earth. It contains the loss of counting, even though they did not notice it. On the earth, the number 9192631770 can make the atomic clocks very precise, even if people ignore the missed counting of electrons.**

**Density affect the chance of jumping**

**The jumping distance of electrons is limited. Within the effective jumping distance of electrons, if there are more nuclei, the electrons have greater the chance to jump into other nuclei. If the density of caesium becomes larger, the space it occupies will become smaller, the number of nuclei per unit space will increase, and the loss of counting will increase. Conversely, if the density of caesium becomes smaller, the space it occupies will become larger, the number of nucleus per unit space will decrease, and the loss of counting will also decrease.**

**The atomic clocks on the satellite.**

**On the surface of the earth, the atomic clock runs well with 9192631770 counting. After the atomic clock is sent to the weightless space, the density of caesium will be decreased, the loss of counting will be decreased as well. The waves will be a little more than on the earth. If we still use the 9192631770 to count the second, the atomic clock will become inaccurate but go faster. That gives people an illusion: the time on the satellite is faster than the time on the earth, which is the time dilation which people wishfully believe in. **

**An experiment can prove it or not **

**A simple experiment can prove it or not: setup two small atomic clocks and a centrifuge. Put one clock in the centrifuge, keep it under high centrifugal force, the density will increase. This atomic clock’s miscounting will go up, and it will run slower than the stay one. Then compare two clocks. If this density theory is right, the atomic clock on the centrifuge will be slower than the other one. That can prove the time dilation is not caused by gravity, but by an increase of density.**

**Conclusion**

**The “time dilation” is caused by the density increase of caesium, but not by change of gravity. The “time dilation” can not prove GR but can prove GR wrong.**

(The curve is essential in directing said force.)

Preemptive remarks.

Evaporation doesn't work in phylacteries with fauna.

Bearings don't need to be frictionless, just extremely durable.

The sloshing of liquid is an energy loss mechanism yes, but it will never surpass the original peak of the inserted momentum.

- Someone named Chree.

I just saw video on "**U**" Tune discussing "**N**"-Dimensional polytopes. Each polytope is constructed using polytopes from the **N-1** Dimension.

A Hyper-Tetrahedron is a volume bounded by Tetrahedra. A 5-**D** Hyper-Tetrahedra would be bounded by 4-**D** Hyper-Tetrahedra. A 6-**D** Hyper-Tetrahedra would be constructed of 5-**D** Hyper-Tetrahedra, und so weiter.

* BUT* what if I want to enclose a volume of Hyperspace using only 2-Dimensional Polygons—all of the same size and shape—instead of using Polytopes?

Can I completely enclosed a volume of Hyperspace using* ONLY*, Triangles; **OR ***ONLY*** **Squares **OR ***ONL*Y** **Pentagons—or whatever?

If I can create a regular, non-concave volume that more or less meets the definition of a Polyhedron, but in higher dimensional space—* WHAT* do I call the Damned thing?

What are some of the more interesting—or fundamental—of these higher-dimensional "Polyhedrons"?

Are there regular and fundamental "**N**-Hedrons" that might use two or more polygons to uniquely contain a space?

Thanks!

…..Saxon Violence

]]>

Hexquark Quantum Substrates (RBG-RBG)

Neutronium Pentaquark Quantum Substrates (RBGRB)

You can match the Energy Mass and Particle types to match this form then bind them in a Electromagnetic field which puts a force on the matter generating a sudo "Strong Nuclear Force" on charged particles.

]]>

An example of a Strong Nuclear Force confined composite particle being "Omega particles"

Using synthetic confinement of particles I think it would be possible to create higher order quarks than those in nature as the magnetic confinement would put additional pressure on the quarks keeping them from decaying and cohesive beyond what the Strong Nuclear Force would generally allow with it's strength, this additional pressure on the quarks keeping them stable. Possibly allowing for the creation of higher order composite particles such as other Pentaquarks.

The actual confinement in magnetic fields that stabilize the particles could happen in magnetic fields that are being used currently for fusion reactors allowing for a pressure to be placed upon the particles making a secondary bond between particles supporting their increased mass.

Note: If this does work then the particles can never leave confinement otherwise they will destabilize into energy.

It is like a oxygen tank, an oxygen tank can only hold so much oxygen before it will explode from the pressure but if you make the oxygen tank thicker, the tank can handle more pressure but in this instance, the oxygen is energy and the tank thickness is the additional confinement that holds the particle together by magnetic confinement increasing the "Thickness" of the Strong Nuclear Force or binding energy.

This can be explained by the simple equation P_{Spin} = P_{SNF} + P_{Magnetic}

A popular piece of wisdom passed down generations of pilots, is to be wary of airspeed loss when turning away from the wind, as airspeed is a vital piece of maintaining lift, and losing too much of it and/or losing it too quickly, is a hazard that could get you in trouble. An example goes like this: Let's say we're flying South to North at 100 knots, and the wind is blowing West to East at 20 knots. If we turn West, we're turning into a 20 knot headwind so our airspeed increases to 120 knots. Good. On the other hand if we turn East, we lose those 20 knots, and our airspeed becomes 80 knots. What do you think about this hazard? ]]>

When an auto tire has traction on a hard surface road, the road surface does not conform to the tire, the tire being a flexible material, conforms to the road surface.

My more important question, why does anyone revisit an obsolete theory with all the verification for the new theory?

]]>(I should qualify this as straight-line and constant speed motion. When you get to a certain level of accuracy, you can detect a slight acceleration toward the center of the Earth as you follow the path of its curvature. So at this point, since I'm excluding accelerations, I have to approximate that away from the scope of my question, and say let's assume that the planet, as well as its gravitational field and atmosphere, are flat).

What does this mean for the concept of absolute motion, as something that may or may not effect any physical system (be it upsetting the experimental results in some subtle way, or event the concept of if such thing exists in reality)?

For example, wind tunnels have been in use to test aeronautical designs for over a century, where instead of the air staying still and the airplane moving, it's the airplane staying still and the air moving. Besides some things that have to be controlled for like effects from the walls, or scale effects like Reynolds number, I've never heard of which-thing-is-moving as being a factor to be considered. Is there any such issue with the veracity of wind tunnel data, or is the relative motion between the airplane and the air the only thing that has any physical effect? ]]>

]]>

]]>

]]>

Is this graph correct?

]]>

QuoteThe

travelling salesman problem(TSP) is an NP-hard problem in combinatorial optimization studied in operations research and theoretical computer science. Given a list of cities and their pairwise distances, the task is to find the shortest possible tour that visits each city exactly once. It is a special case of the Traveling purchaser problem.The problem was first formulated as a mathematical problem in 1930 and is one of the most intensively studied problems in optimization. It is used as a benchmark for many optimization methods. Even though the problem is computationally difficult, a large number of heuristics and exact methods are known, so that some instances with tens of thousands of cities can be solved.

Here is my solution:

Quote"...The solution is that the shortest possible route that visits each city exactly once and returns to the origin city is the route provided by predestination because the route provided by pre-destination is the only route available to the salesman." (1)

(1) "The Solution to the Traveling Salesman Problem | Search Results | dennisfrancisblewett's Library | Zotero." Title: The Solution to the Traveling Salesman Problem. Author: Dennis Francis Blewett. Date of Zotero authorship: April 17th, 2021.

Space-time provided me with an opportunity to develop some commentary.

QuoteDecember 30th, 2021 note:

The way that I was using the word "pre-determination" is not easily found on the Internet." It appears to me that the word "pre-determination" is defined by many as a Christian ("Jesus Christian") word referencing "... the doctrine that all events have been willed by God, usually with reference to the eventual fate of the individual soul... (1)"

As may be found here (2), I was referencing to what is considered "the arrow of time." It appears the user Escape Orbit put forward effort to hush me providing the solution claiming that my solution was "original research," thus could not be placed on the Wikipedia page. There is no official legal ToS for the Wikipedia website, thus Escape Orbit had been engaged in information warfare (whether aware of it or not) in silencing me from providing the solution.

The arrow of time is a concept I learned about in my studied of the philosophy of psychology. Wikipedia has an article on it that I've looked at various times. There is a reference to Eddington; however, the arrow of time I refer to is the "arrow of time," or more so referrant to the future that one experiences (physically, whereby mental experiences are also physical experiences), such as a time traveler. For, a time traveler might go back in time but such travel would still be an experienced along the time traveller's arrow of time (or "world line," if I correctly interpret Egyptian philosophy).

(1) April 22, 2021 Wikipedia page on Predestination

(2) User talk:Escape Orbit - Wikipedia Section: The travelling salesman problem. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Escape_Orbit#The_travelling_salesman_problem>

Suggested reading:

"What is the Predestination Paradox? | by Areeba Merriam | Cantor’s Paradise." <https://www.cantorsparadise.com/what-is-predestination-paradox-59205ad736f3> Accessed: December 30th, 2021.

Thoughts?

UPDATE (additional note):

If considering all of reality to just be space-time, then the terms "predestination" and "pre-destination" as used in my solution are synonymous with the term "space-time." However, I have been under the presumption there are more dimensions than four dimensions to reality.

]]>