Nature (Basis) of Electricity

 Nature (Basis) of Electricity

Definition of Terms

• Electricity =
• Electrical field =
• Electrical force =

Nature (Basis) of Magnetism

Nature (Basis) of Magnetism

Magnetism makes up half the duality of electromagnetism.

Definition of Terms

• Magnetism = Oscillations in the magnetic field.

• Magnetic field = A resonant oscillation in the magnetic forl

• Magnetic force =
• Magnetic potential = One half of the electromagnetic potential of space-time.
• Electric potential = One half of the electromagnetic potential of space-time.

• Oscillating current (in 3 dimensions) = Resonant current = Magnetic field
• Oscillating current (in 2 dimensions) = Neutrino
• Neutrino = An oscillation propagating through the magnetic field (perpendicular to the direction of motion) = Oscillating current (2 dimensions of oscillation).

Babel

Unrelated details which have nothing to do with this post:

• Static electric fields.
• Unconscious forms of communication.
• Unconscious bias.

Please ignore the unrelated details above - they have nothing to do with this post.

You may or may not be familiar with the story of the Tower of Babel.  Allow me to provide a summary:

• All of mankind spoke a "single language".
• A tower would be built "to the heavens" to celebrate the awesomeness related to that.
• "Something happened" which fractured or bifurcated mankind into no longer having a "single language".

Given this summary, here are the unrelated details previously given and stated to be ignored... presented backwards.

• Engineered structures.
• Having a single global language.
• How we align with each other in groups by our similarities or commonalities.

Every single structure built by man - without exception - produces a static electric field when it's composed of more than a single material.

What does this mean and why should anyone not an engineer care?

Do you know how static fields work or behave?

I suggest it's time to learn or find out.

Silence

Fear of any 2 (or more) individuals being able to have a conversation which can't be listened to, captured, or recorded is what drives those behind the scenes - and who desire no public visibility or presence - absolutely bonkers.

A technology which provides a "cone of silence" and was made famous by a television program some time ago is overdue.

The potential patents found at the link below constitute the basis for such a technology - and others.

• Patents for use (potentially) in changing the world

I suspect that when this is realized it will either cause or not cause great trouble or difficulty for someone or no one.

Backwards or not.

Good to go.  No grandstanding.

Wikipedia

TO: Those who value information so much they place it in public trust.

CC: All of Wikipedia (most likely these are all those in the TO.)

Subject: Unexplainable and unlikely loss of knowledge on Wikipedia

I've been reading certain articles many times over for reasons of my own.  Whether those who put their time and effort into Wikipedia articles are consciously aware of it, I sometimes find unconscious hints that provide more insight.

That's not the point of this post blog post..

Wikipedia appears to be losing information for some of the topics I read about.  It's occurring by simple and seemingly innocent things like a topic being given a new "synonym".

My example for you:  Stochastic noise/stochastic resonance

Some of those (or related) articles now reference:  Deterministic noise

One name was replaced with the other.  The knowledge which isn't represented as well as before would be the difference is meaning or perceived meaning between "Stochastic" and "Deterministic".  I got over being confused by the name change fairly quickly - for the most part.  But my mind is still reshuffling things around (however that works) to fix what I knew before that isn't quire right now.

There may or may not be other examples and they align on specific topics or types of topics.

Stopping the loss of information as simple as a name is incalculable.

Good to go, no grandstanding,

- no.one.in.particular

Fingerprints

 

There have been quite a few times during the past few years when something of importance suddenly came to mind, followed by a suggestion heard in my head that was similar to "make them aware of something you think they should be aware of".

Every single person on the planet hears words being spoken "in their head" from time to time.  It happens every time someone remembers when they heard someone speaking.

Another way of saying the same thing is no person can remember hearing another person speaking without hearing the words "in their head".

We all hear voices saying things "in our head".

Speaking up (or writing) about hearing something like that can provide an opportunity to be discredited by anyone.

All that having been said, I've also been hearing variations of another phrase in my head the past few weeks.   The phrase seems to be about getting someone's fingerprints.  I haven't perceived anything which indicates who wants the fingerprints or whose fingerprints are wanted.

I'm pretty sure it's not the result of my own personal fingerprint concern - but it's a concern of someone's.  Hypothetically speaking, let's speculate I've been randomly accusing people of having or not having fingerprints.  Let's also speculate I've been doing it so often that someone has noticed.  

What should a discerning individual noticing such a thing do about it?

1. Should they "look into" it?
2. Should they "find it a justification" (also known as an excuse) to "look into" anything that suits them?
3. Should they not be in a position to follow someone else's train of thought on a topic UNLESS they are somehow PSYCHIC or have found a way to invade privacy?
4. Should they not be in a position to follow someone else's train of thought, but having found a way to do so they only have to wait until that train of thought passes by a destination they want it to have?
• NOTE: This one got complicated fast, but it's also called interrupting someone's train of thought to make it seem they agree with you, have independently arrived at the same conclusion you did a long time ago, or that they have themselves proven you right.

I've seen #4 above in action a few times in my life.

So I know from those previous times how someone interrupting another's train of thought this way feels about being called a petulant child who isn't getting their way.

They double down by making it personal, finally discarding any appearance of professionalism, but in an unexpected way they can make a sudden leap to mature behavior.  If that happens, it can appear backwards.

I know exactly where my fingerprints are right now.

And anyone who has thought it over for no more than 30 seconds would to.

The only problem is they might need to ask for them.

[NOTE: Started this post around 3 AM this morning, became distracted due to the acoustics of an apartment or residence, finally posted on 2022-04-17 @ 09:49 AM or 09:50 AM]

Hostage

Though again, this type of thing doesn't happen what I consider to be often... but this seemed worth mentioning in case it becomes important at some point...

2022-04-17 @ 02:16 am

Why'll writing a blog post, my train of thought was interrupted as I heard or perceived the words:

      '...holding me hostage...'

Those words seemed to have a steady tone and similar emphasis placed on each word.

It was preceded by what sounded like a request (perceived by me to be more of a demand) that was implied should or must be met or something would or wouldn't happen within some time frame.

That was preceded by what I perceive to be a reference to locating someone or something similar to arresting them but without a confirmed address to go to.

Sector

The public or private sector providing services billed to clients as "security" has a problem.

It started when a technology - on the verge of being lost to common knowledge - began regularly performing miracles.  A profession which had always involved significant field work and was prone to errors ould now be carried out flawlessly by anyone trained in computers, awareness, and perception.

Don't tell Pinkerton or Thief, but profits have been guided steadily upward by a technology which exists as a virtual briefcase around our existing power, data, and entertainment delivery networks.

The only skill a prospective employee needs to master the technology is a silver tongue for suggestion.

Is it appropriately backwards that those who should be helping to uphold honesty, integrity, and safety have decided that:

• Hiding (avoiding confrontation or risk at the expense of accuracy and experience)
• Which will be difficult to distinguish from cowardice once all the facts are known.
• Misdirection (leaving out pertinent or material details so they have to be assumed into existence) also know as:
• The Con Game
• Flim Flam
• A Shell Game

Those are where our faith and trust should be placed.  Security and politics are about to become indistinguishable from each other.

Has anyone mentioned that the static fields which CCD cameras rely on are potentially the replacement for cellular connections which only futurists still dream about.

And there's nothing imaginary or made up about it:

• Method for connecting 2 or more points or areas of space using static fields
• Method of entanglement or confining, separating, dividing space-time for transmitting information

Do we really want a technology developed in secrecy - which works so "perfectly" no one needs to even know it exists - to be entirely in hands of those who:

• Dodge the rules that law enforcement must follow by providing services on private casino properties.
• Treat other citizens as cogs in a person based information engine
• Compromising a vehicles keyless entry or passenger safety system to stress and mentally wear down their prey.

...to determine the next thousand years of civilization's course?

Nature (Basis) of Reality

About the blog

Nature (Basis) of Reality

The nature (basis) of reality consists of a pair of oscillations which are mediated by a third oscillation which binds the pair so they can resonate.

References:

• Wikipedia (The theories below were - more or less - frame-shifted from Wikipedia content.  Should any theory be found correct, it's a testament to Wikipedia's accuracy.)

• Nature (Basis) of Reality
• Nature (Basis) of Waves
• Nature (Basis) of Gravity
• Nature (Basis) of Singularities
• Nature (Basis) of Space
• Nature (Basis) of Time
• Nature (Basis) of Light
• Nature (Basis) of Matter
• Nature (Basis) of Resonance
• Nature (Basis) of Uncertainty
• Nature (Basis) of our Universe

Definition of Terms:

• Universe = The duality of a singularity and space-time we exist in.

Resonance

The relationships between the 3 can be described backwards to derive the math needed:

• A binding point where the third oscillation mediates the pair.
• +
• A pair of oscillations
• ---------------------------------
• = Reality in 3 dimensions

Only resonance can produce an effect where the end result is greater than the sum of its parts. And only resonance appears to ignore the rules of mathematics to have no issue with 2 + 2 = 4.1 or maybe 5.3. or a changing result hiding it's source from us backwards.

Examples below illustrate how terrible it's math can be:

• Space = A mediated resonance following the pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• An oscillating electric field.
• An oscillating magnetic field.
• A mediating oscillation (duality field) which binds the pair together so they can resonate as Space.
• 
  
  
  

• Color of light = A mediated resonance following the pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• An oscillating wavelength of light (red, green, or blue).
• An oscillating wavelength of light (from the remaining of red, green, blue).
• A mediating oscillation (from the remaining of red, green, or blue) which binds the pair together so they can resonate as a Color of light.
• 
  
  
  
  

• Quark = A mediated resonance following the pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• An oscillating lemniscate.
• An oscillating lemniscate.
• A mediating oscillation (another lemniscate) which binds the pair together so they can resonate as a Quark.
• 
  
  
  Either a lemniscate (quark) or one of the 3 resonant standing/stationary/static waves in a static electromagnetic field which make up a lemniscate (quark)

• 
  
  
  Waves aren't as we perceive them.  This can be inferred from the motion of a standing wave.

• Proton or Neutron = A mediated resonance following the pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• An oscillating quark.
• An oscillating quark.
• A mediating oscillation (another quark) which binds the pair together so they can resonate as a Proton or Neutron.

• Helium atom electron shell = A mediated resonance following the pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• An oscillating electron.
• An oscillating electron.
• A mediating oscillation (the nucleus) which binds the pair together so they can resonate as an electron shell.
• 
  
  
  For a helium atom, the nucleus mediates the 2 electrons in a way which might seem backwards.

• Mind = A mediated resonance following the pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• An oscillating focus.
• An oscillating awareness.
• A mediating oscillation (synchronization) which binds the pair together so they can resonate (as a mind).

Everything in the universe is constructed this way at every scope and scale.

It forms the foundation of all that exists and everything which thinks.  There's significance in writing that twice.  Now if there was a 3rd sentence which could bind the pair together so the meaning could resonate...

Appendix of Examples

The example used to define space as arising from the basis of reality can also be rewritten to take advantage of additional resonance. Gravity can then be defined per the basis of reality.

• Gravity = A mediated resonance following a pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• A resonant oscillation in the electric field.
• A resonant oscillation in the magnetic field.
• A mediating resonant oscillation (duality field) which binds the pair together so they can resonate again as Gravity.

• The "3 body problem" = A mediated resonance following a pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• An oscillating something.
• An oscillating something.
• A mediating oscillation (another something) which binds the pair together so they can resonate in a distinctly confusing way.
• Note:. The "3 body problem" becomes less of a problem when each something's oscillation is taken into account.

• Teams of 3 = A mediated resonance following a pattern arising from the nature (basis) of reality:
• An expert member.
• A novice member
• A mediating member which binds the pair together so they can resonate as a Team.

Appendix of Previous Versions

• Version 4
• Version 3
• Version 2
• Version 1

Appendix of Updates

• Originally posted on 2022-03-17 @ 04:20 PM
• Updated several times since
• Re-published on 2022-04-02 @ 08:54 PM