| String Theory Discussion Forum |
| [ String Theory Home ] [ Forum Index ] |
Re: The Dirac String and SpinorsPosted by sol on March 27, 2003 at 16:07:37: In Reply to: Re: The Dirac String and Spinors posted by Sauron on March 26, 2003 at 21:01:15: Sauron, Since there is a wide diversity of information about the subject, one has to be able to see things, on many different levels(a integral). Many threads(Superstring board) that seems different, yet relates to the information. Osher sees and understands, look at his post todaysee how that works:).:) Every link is a subsection of another link and they are related, sort of like a synapse(Eccles gate), where information could have been injected:)A clean slate. A White board? Had you been following from the beginning, you might have seen the trail I had taken people through many times now. Above your post, mine was a attempt to explain how monopole consideration might have been used to consider the effects and direction of those fields, wavy sheets, and in the Em consideration, a spinning top does not seem to explain what I am trying to say. Yet it does describe the movement of the gravity field? Maybe I have missed the boat here, yet how else might I have spoken to those approximate picturessee how that works:), and descibed the movement for you? (a cup of water in my hand and how could I keep it full while I turn it inside out)It seems the picture of the Dirac string has been moved or link to site removed? As a artistic vision of topological movements, is ability that this site speaks too, that we have been denied? Such oscillation that swings back and forth must travel through the wave/particle configuration? Any link......worded or pictured has restrictions? If it speak directly to the source, would we not figure the ownership comes from the brain that produced it:)You might be getting a sense of the language used here computationally, that we use in our own brains:) Yet it seems Baez can help us herethanks Dickt, and we see the movement topologically considered? Such alignments of those particles would have been the understanding of what I was trying to show. The integral not only shows the state of matter (from A to B)but of the Em field, and the gravity field. From that point, we have a ocean of gravitons that move across the universe, in waves:) But instantaneously, entanglement, speaks to two possibilties? Penrose shows this in his picture of what I had related to Einstein simultaneity. I won't make it easy for you here, because when you understand the essence of my post, after arriving to the end of it, you will soon understand how easy I actually made it for you.:) The light cone and Cramer shows some tipping when it moves to the blackhole(congregation of energy), yet such a move to consider , has been the vision I have of continuity and subject of discreteness, as a dynamical function? Such a mobius, in the equation between continuity(E)and discreteness(mc2) and how would we have ascertain the particle and the wave? Looks pretty straight forward to me:) I see you have knowledge, yet you have been restraint in sharing it. Better to say nothing?:) Your problem has been you do not know how to use the back/forward function on your browzer, after you click on my links. It will take you back here each time:)Now you know why it seems so static. Good luck:) Sol
Follow Ups: (Reload page to see most recent)
|