The three-dimensional neutral region is going to be connected to many different time frames (other regions of spacetime), but the drawing program doesn't work properly and doesn't let me draw anything. The "jets" are not the parts of the 3D reconnection region that are likely to be used for transport, although the definition of what a jet "is" is totally nebulous and has never really been defined. I can't say what the geometry of the neutral sheet pathways are going to be in the full geometry of spacetime, but one has to consider the likelihood that the absolute "length" of the neutral sheet surface, along which a ship or person-containing bubble is being displaced, may be fairly short. The complex, sufficiently-symmetric, knot-like or loop-like geometry of the overall displacement is likely to allow for the replication-inducing waveforms and the "replicating counterweight structures" to be sort of sheared off and then, naturally, spliced back together, by virtue of the geometry of the jump/displacement. I think that an important reason for this is that, when one talks about superluminal X-lines/X-waves and of other superluminal waveforms and of superluminal oscillations of spacetime bubbles/(as I discussed in the video yesterday), it's likely that the structures could be deformed and or undergo long-distance replications or other oscillatory movements an almost-infinite number of times per second of perceptual time (a human's perception of the rate of the passage of time). As I said, the distinction between something that's moving in an oscillatory or explosive manner, billions of times per second across vast distances, and something that's stationary and that, in a manner that would be sufficient for that spacetime region to participate in the displacement, has access to or otherwise encompasses vast regions of spacetime is...not necessarily going to be all that significant (the distinction). Anyway, what is there to talk about. I wish the subject matter meant something to me, but it doesn't anymore and hasn't for a long time. If I'm going to be more precise and be able to define the rates at which structures are replicated, in the formation of the actual structures of new event frames/time frames (of new events), I'd need some actual experimental data on that.
But one can look at the concept of the counterweights in a number of different ways. To the extent that a displacement occurs through the replication of some sort of "reusable" structural elements (i.e. some "empty" structural element of spacetime, as in empty space in which the geometry of the bubble or island or whatever allows for its more-rapid-than-usual replication, then one could couple its replication to some high-energy event and also knit together the geometries of those high energy events (one could use something like a coronal mass ejection or series of nuclear detonations many times and not just once) to cause one person's displacement, along one pathway, to be coupled, geometrically, and, hence, "temporally" and "spatially," to 8 or 16 or 64 or whatever number of other displacements. The geometry of one person's displacement would, in that type of situation, be made symmetric by causing it to overlap with the geometry (by making use of neutral-sheet manifolds and scaffolding manifolds that are "connected" in some ways) of other people's displacements, so that one person would be a counterweight to another person's and another's and so on. Part of the rationale for setting up displacements along "highways" would be that this would ensure that the replications of structures in spacetime that are not being artificially displaced would not be disturbed by the squeezing effect that the displacement might otherwise produce on the surrounding regions of spacetime (large areas of which could, in small or not-so-small ways, be disturbed by the displacement) [some of these results are relevant to this: (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=vacuum+squeezing+shock+gravitational+OR+magnetic+OR+spacetime+OR+quasar+OR+pulsar+OR+galaxy+OR+%22black+hole%22+OR+protostellar+OR+nebula+OR+Lorentz&as_sdt=100000001&as_ylo=&as_vis=0&safe=active)]. The splitting or division (or, one might say, replication and also visibility across a slightly-extended region of spacetime) of a Bose-Einstein condensate, as depicted in Fig. 5, on p. 4 of this article [Jo et al., 2007a: (http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/cond-mat/pdf/0608/0608585v2.pdf)], provides an example of a so-called squeezing effect. This article [Jo et al., 2007b: (http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0706/0706.4041v3.pdf)] depicts changes in the geometries of Bose-Einstein condensates that occur in association with changes in the natures or geometries of the matter phases of the condensates, and that's basically similar to the type of thing I'm talking about with large regions of spacetime (a disturbance in the geometry of one region can deform adjacent regions).
But my point is that, with the superluminal oscillations of X-lines and other semi-neutral saddling structures, the pinching or folding together of regions of spacetime would mean that, as discussed in the videos, one wouldn't need a 10 or 100-light-year-long X-line to exist and be stable, and one wouldn't even necessarily need a long X-line to exist when one viewed the path of the displacement across multiple time frames (across the whole region of spacetime that is recruited, in one way or another, to allow for the displacement to be symmetric enough to be precise). As long as one could reliably induce the superluminal, oscillatory folding of structural regions of spacetime along the periphery of the path that one is traversing in the displacement (when I refer to a structural region, I'm saying that it's a region of spacetime whose outer surface is defined by a phase-transition geometry of one kind or another, as in the Rayleigh-Taylor instability surfaces shown in the previous posting), one could use mostly non-neutral, highly-dynamic and even "unstable," in terms of their magnetic flux lines and the currents in the plasma that are within or along their surfaces, regions as scaffolding or shielding around the short neutral sheet segment that one is using for the displacement. The displacement's geometry wouldn't even need to be symmetric, when one looked at the neutral sheet (the spacetime along or between an X-line or O-region or whatever other neutral surface) as being part of the overall geometry. One could set up a small number of relatively-short, precisely-maintained and precisely-induced, 3D reconnection regions and cause them to be juxtaposed and bridged through the recruitment of a large region of "junk" spacetime that one would cause deformations or "precisely-timed replications" in, thereby folding together the short X-lines. It doesn't matter how unstable or seemingly-chaotic a coronal mass ejection is, assuming you know when it occurs and precisely what its geometry and magnitude is.
No comments:
Post a Comment