Conjugation and the nature of " The Wave". By this i mean that by conjugating Shunya one perceives the wave motion, for the alternates of the conjugation process become the alternators of the wave experience. Our conjugation sequences do not "create" the wave experience, rather we can tune our perceptive abilities to conjugate in phase with a range of wave like phenomenon. Conjugation is our diode-like behaviour.
Schwenken, oscillation, undulation, vibration, cyclical displacement, compression and rarefaction all of these are stereotypical actions associated with the single word "wave". However, these exemplars do not define the concept of a wave, they merely give examples of subject focus and relations.
In considering light waves the underlying phenomenon is absorption and emission. Other mechanical properties of light such as reflection and refraction can be explained in terms of absorption and emission and rotation.
The underlying principle is distinction. As Herakleitos observed all things flow, nothing stands /remains. This observation holds in our experience as a culture. While it may not exemplify as true for an individual, certainly cultures can point to variation of all things over millions of cycles/periods.
To grasp this I start with my own structural functioning. My sensory meshes usually respond to stimulus. Considering the one, isolated sensor such as a cone in the retina, the response is not binary but multiple binary. This means that , fractally a smaller scale structure appears to act in a binary response to stimulus, that is it changes it's state. This change triggers other connected or neighbouring structures to respond, thus amplifying and transmitting the signal through the mesh.
In all cases this binary response is measured in terms of an analogue or continuous signal and this leads to the interpretation that a threshold signal activates the apprehended binary response. Thus the binary description is a simplification, or filtering of a more complex status distribution. Thus what we describe as a wave or signal transmission is only the filtered part that we apprehend, this in fact " sits" on top of a more complex transmission that is taking place below the filtered response.
This description is chosen because, as a clear binary signal it fits with our logical reference framed of a and nota that is a and ~a in logical notation. From this binary logic we can construct concrete , discernible models of experience. This model is the foundation of the notion of oscillation or variation in this model.
To build an oscillstory " circuit" I have to combine at least 2 sensors and provide feed back and or feed forward signal transmission. This allows a more complex behaviour to be apprehended, and between the two sensors a possibility of 2R2 sequences.
Now the process of sequencing sensors has revealed that perceptually we filter out sequence responses at some level to determine on sequence of the four in any given instant.
Now we also see that instances are crucial to our perception of a system status, and if instances are stacked in a motion sequent structure, that is one instance is followed by or replaced by another, then the experience of variation in the perception of the 2 node sensor system is modelled.
The extension of such a system to many sensor nodes allows for a complex experience to be modelled ove space and motion sequentsand. This experience will be inherently wave like even though the oscillation is definitely not sinusoidal.
This model is complex enough for us to forget that it only models part of the " potential" measurement of the system. Thus it is a model, but it is also an analogue of an infinite number of varieties at different or a wider range of "action potentials". This is a term I have borrowed from the study of neuronal networks.
Even with this system we have been able to model these sub filter signal responses by using a collection of different and tuneable sensors. The results of this is we have come t appreciate that the signal that is " reality" to us appears to be spectral.
Even using the binary response we may develop such a complex model of the signal ground to our experiential continuum, but in fact we use a sinusoidal model which is even more complex and more analogous. To use this model we have to sample the sine wave action potentials, across a spectrum of sensors, and combine these readings in a complex motion sequent structure. The sine model introduces an opposing variation. It cannot be described by a and ~a any more, we have to introduce –a as contra to a and consequently ~(–a). This variation gives us 4R2 possible sequences which corresponds to 16 possible states that have to be filtered for a 2 sensor system.
This level of complexity in processing seems to have been achieved by combining the simpler binary system into a larger 4 node system with convoluted wiring! What this means is the diode in a semiconductor circuit is crucial to signal distinction. This is because a diode allows a signal to pass only one way. This is analogous to the a /~a sensor structure which cleanly and clearly filters out when a specific type of signal is detected, and transmits it.
The importance of this is that we fundamentally operate both consciously and unconsciously on this distinction pattern a and ~a, but spread over a wide spectrum of response and utilising a notion called contra, that is the exact, precise opposite. Consequently our descriptions and descriptive models necessarily include this notion which in symbology is called the sign of a magnitude.
However, reality does not have this simple black or white opposite structure only. It complexities it by rotation, and by spectral disposition of action potential.
The variations I have outlined here in brief underlie the notion of a wave, but in particular, the notion of contra deepens my apprehension of this variation, and the notion of rotation mystifies it by introducing a transience that causes the signal processing mesh to switch sensing structures in a way we can only describe as rotational and centred on a point we call the centre. This point distinguishes itself naturally as the sensor that remins in every motion sequent frame of the rotational experience. This point is analogous to Shunya, being in everything. It is also the ultimate background to every rotating aspect which is the ultimate collective fore ground.
These types of distinctions are what underlie the difficulty with instantaneous curvature. The notion does not make sense literally because the signal response on which that sense would be based is not able to fully develop into a strong signal. In fact it is appreciated only by the widest spectrum range in the spectral map and by the absence of a strong signal apart from the central sensor. The central sensor is strongly on, while all around it is in confused multiple spectral signal states, which nevertheless are periodic if generated by a region that has a definite boundary.
Thus the notion of a wave is down to this rotational conjugation of an interaction sequence with the Shunya field, and it involves the widest spectral dispositions. The conjugation is based on the diode action of signal and not signal( this is different from no signal! ) which has 2 forms which are contrary to each other.
There undoubtedly are other patterns not discussed here, but this is the one I have insight into at this moment.
In this system,we typically interpret absorption as the lack of signal in the spectrum. There are other possible reasons for lack of signal, not the least being rotation of the object or region being such thst the signal is rotated away from the scope in that spectral region for those frequencies. Absorption however, besides this diffraction explanation, can also describe internal refraction and reflection within a region.
The 2 fields in the Shunya field are not opposites. They sand as opposing fields but are not contra fields. The expanding field cannot be reversed into a contracting ield, nor a contracting field somehow reversed into an expanding one. Whether they self transform on an ed Lorenz aperiodic basis I do not know or posit. However , an expanding field can be bounded in a bubble of contracting field and similarly a contracting field can be penetrated by an expanding field. These interactions create and destroy fractal patterns, and exhibit in a spectrum of scales and moton velocities..
The appearance of standing wave phenomena indicate the presence of field vortices that rotate in precisely the opposite ways while interacting with each other. The build up of stationary regions can appear to be isolated regions of growth or attraction while the interference phenomenon may reveal the characteristics of the 2 vortices in the fields in a complex of repulsion and attraction.
My frienf Kegan J Brill has worked many years to determine the vorticity of space time. His work is inspiring in any ways, but the wavy line in this picture is the key. This sinusoidal wave undulation is just a fundamental aspect of vorticular motion,but the line is drawn in to emphasise the hidden view of the vortex! This resonates so much with all aspects of my experience of natural phenomenon.
Check out his cool updated website.
As it stands The Shunya Field theory explain the following results
The two fields, condensing and rarefaction do not turn into each other, but they do interact through fractal patern entrainment of vorticular motion. “ions and Electrons are fractal regions in the shunya fields and do not interact by the thermodynamic principles of the second law, because the second law is wrongly conceived, and the thermodynamical model is wrongly conceived as being somehow separate rom the electromagnetic laws.
The shunya field is a fractal Field consisting in these 2 discrete field types at present.
Dr Wolff, like many, does not understand the mathematical notation called complex numbers. Those who have read thus far in my blog should be able to explain to Dr Wolff the Fractal nature of our "mathematical models" . There is not one out De Brogeli wave but 2, separated by a phase difference of π/2. The i sets the fractal boundary for these phase differences, and they are rotational/spherical in a word —vorticular!
As there appears to be some question about maxwells support of vortices it is wise to read all the evidence