l***y
发帖数: 1166 | 1 3 ° After what we have just said, one could ask an important question: how
do we, the OEMII of UMMO, know that our model of UXGIIGIAM WAAM (real
physical space) is the true one, and that for instance the Earth model of
RIENMANN is not?
We are certain that our model, based on the concept of IBOZOO UU (similar to
string in string theory- by yy)(we will further explain this concept), is
true since the experimental results tally perfectly with the results
predicted by the theory.
The fact that we travel by changing the three-dimensional system of
reference - which enables us to move inside our Galaxy with the possibility
of modifying the phases of what you call "subatomic particles " (which, as
you will see, are nothing more the IBOZOO UU directed in a particular way) -
confirms our theory of the WAAM once more.
What is more, our theory coincides (give or take several nuances) with the
theses worked out by civilisations living on other OYAA (Planets) with whom
we have had contact and who are at an advanced state in their scientific
research. | l***y
发帖数: 1166 | 2 The Earth OEMII thinks of Space as a " scalar continuum " in all directions.
From this image of space, you worked out (initiated by Euclid) a whole
geometry based on abstractions such as the point, the line, and the plane.
You finished by accepting that POINT, LINE and PLANE really represent the
true components of the WAAM, although using a mental abstraction.
This original vice, not yet corrected, is costing you a considerable delay
in the comprehension of the physical world.
Indeed: when you innocently accepted the existence of Euclidian three-
dimensional space, Earth mathematicians such as GAUSS, RIEMANN, BOLYAI and
LOBATSCHEWSKY had the brilliant intuition of the possibility of extending
the restricted Euclidian criteria by working out a new geometry for an N-
Space.
And although the human mind cannot visualise a body of more than three
dimensions, mathematics makes it possible to overcome this mental hurdle.
But do these mathematical models of elliptic and hyperbolic multidimensional
geometries accurately represent the reality of our WAAM, or are they only "
entéléchies " (NdR : realisation of the essential element of something,
completed act of vision: borrowed from Aristotle), created by mathematicians?
The relativity hypothesis of the German Einstein at first adopts the
criterion of the Russian Minkowsky, who conceives time as an additional
dimension, with the intuition of a tetradimensional space-universe. The
Earth OEMII took a gigantic step in breaking with the previous intuitive
idea of a three-dimensional cosmos.
But, is that how it really is, our SPACE - COSMOS. Absolutely not : Our
image of the WAAM (cosmos) i.e. space, differs on a fundamental level from
that which you have elaborated.. And it is precisely when it comes to
dimensions that the divergence is strongest. What is more, contradictions
you observe between relativity physics and quantum mechanics are produced by
a fundamental error. They are the result of errors at the most basic level. | l***y
发帖数: 1166 | 3 4) but the two twin universes have different singularities (in other words:
in our twin cosmos there is not the same number of galaxies, and those
which are there do not have the same structure.) There is not thus another
twin UMMO nor another twin EARTH as one could believe. This last conclusion
is not hypothetical and we will give you its justification.
5) the two cosmos " were created " simultaneously but their arrows of time
are not directed in the same direction. That is, it is illogical to say
that this cosmos coexists with ours in time, or that it existed before or
will exist afterwards. One can only say that it exists: but not now, before
or later. On the other hand an interval of evolution can be parallel or
equal to ours.
One could say the same thing for the infinity of pairs of Cosmos which exist
in a pluri-cosmos. One can say that the concept of a Pluri-cosmos cannot
resemble a Universe (in the sense of Cosmos). In the latter, the galaxies
move like floating islands in an immense sea. Only this " sea " is a sphere
with multiple dimensions, on the other hand one can speak about
intergalactic distances and even about gases which fill intergalactic spaces.
However it is much more difficult to imagine the U-WAAMWAAM (pluri-cosmos),
for the pairs of cosmos are submerged in NOTHING. It is useless to imagine
that there are distances, or that these distances are zero. Such an image
would be false.
But there is something which struck our scientists when they discovered it:
our twin Cosmos exerts its " influence " on ours though they are not linked
by space-time relations. Thanks to the analysis of this influence, we
guessed the existence of the other universe. By inference, our Cosmos must
also influence the other under the same conditions.
The asymmetry of this influence revealed to us that this Cosmos has another
distribution of Galaxies. The analysis of the current phase of our Universe
reveals to us how it was generated by WOA.
Our Cosmos is what you call a space-time Continuum (we needed 10 dimensions
to define it mathematically). We could speculate by allotting an infinity
of dimensions to it, but we are unable to prove it.
Of these ten dimensions, three are perceptible by our senses and a fourth -
time - is perceived psychologically as a continuous " flow " in the single
direction which we call UIWIUTAA (arrow or directed direction of time).
In the beginning our two twin cosmos: WAAM (ours) and U-WAAM (our twin)
were defined by a WAAMIAAYO (difficult to translate: point or origin of
only one co-ordinate which would be time). WOA created the remainder of
dimensions successively but do not interpret this " successively " as a
temporal or spatial succession, but as an ordinal, achronistic relation "
ordered " outside of time.
You can imagine that our primitive Bi-cosmos resembled more a small empty
sphere. A small universe without Galaxies, without intergalactic gases,
with only space existing in time, and WOA curves and bends this space. Each
" new " curvature determines a dimension and finally, WOA " folds it ".
Here we are using a comparison, a symbol, for one could express this
correctly only using mathematics. For example the expression " to fold
space " appears simplistic, but it is very didactic.
If we curve a three-dimensional space, if we fold it, or if we make a sort
of hollow through the fourth dimension (NdR: this 4th dimension is not time
.), this curve represents what our senses interpret as mass (a stone, a
planet, a galaxy).
Thus WOA damages this microcosmos in creating mass; nothing less than almost
all current mass of our two twin universes concentrated in a very reduced
space. Matter and antimatter (as you call them), are super-concentrated.
There was then a DOUBLE | h********0
发帖数: 12056 | | l***y
发帖数: 1166 | 5 不是，是外星人写的信。当然不一定是真的。外星人靠不住啊。
【在 h********0 的大作中提到】
: 这是第五大发明吗？
|
|
