This is a legacy notebook. All pages are considerably outdated now, and have been left to allow those with questions of their own to see how I was able to develop into my final conclusions. All theory has been closed/verified and I have moved onto the foundational Binary values found in more recent works.
9/11/18 Quantum entanglement and the transfer of data through shadows
Our readings of quantum entanglement are all done through frames. Where the object (entanglement) exists from a point of existence onwards, its position determining it’s place in time.
One of the simplest ways to understand this is to know that entanglement occurs inside of crystals. Light can entangle millions of particles inside of a crystal just by passing through it. Such objects stay entangled because they are in a static state. You can move the crystal, but they all remain in the same position relative to another. To break the crystal, or to send a new light source would be to break the entanglement or to update its state; which had first happened because light had forced a new position.
This object is at a constant state no matter who observes it, or when, but rather where it is when it has been observed. Where we are seeing its data relay of its position and for other structures; velocity, based on it’s location in what we consider to be space, and with reference to all other objects locations around it.
In other harder to predict scenarios, reading the entangled objects surroundings instead may help to prove its location is only changed when we change them.
This gives the perception that our observation affects it when it does not. This also means that light is not independent of time.
An easy way to consider this is to consider how an object is created in 3D space inside of a 3D rendering software, where time is non-existent, but points are used to determine location based on how many frames have passed, and velocity is the main factor in deciding location. Where no space or time actually exists, but can be perceived.
If light was time independent, then each frame would produce a duplicate of that particle. We have already determined that sending light through crystals causes entanglement of the atoms inside of the crystal, or more importantly it shows us that the entangled state has been changed.
This happens because those atoms are static, and cannot be changed otherwise. Light is the only possible object which can change the positions or relationships of the positions within the crystal apart from actually taking the crystal apart. Light is showing us that it is affecting the atoms, where you alter the position even if it doesn’t physically change in space.
This tells me that when we do eventually view entangled objects from light years away we will find there is never a change in state. This is because the object is persistent. It has only one state based on its position, along with all other objects in the universe (no time exists).
This also tells me that it will be much harder to influence the past from a future location than I previously thought, and that I am avoiding thinking about magnetism. Also that our observation of quantum entanglement is a transfer of information across positions.
Does light take longer to arrive if sent through (lense) large galaxies – adding distance? Supports decays, supports loss of space-time, supports PSO, supported by light speeding up/may not actually take longer
But why is the answer yes? Where light doesn’t slow down too much, it works, but why?
Does this support PSO being included in gravitational waves? We are seeing waves just like lenses, if we view them using light. It is confusing light because light wants to avoid being weighted, or phased out because it needs to keep its decay, or its weight as close to zero as possible to allow its speed of travel, and because it is an object which does not like to be paired (potentially because it has as many pairs as it needs within) – also change of position = higher g force / velocity, might it be helping to keep it at its current state? Where it’s functions are balancing themselves as best they can? How does it maintain a 0 weight with change in position when that change is not in a straight line?
Why does helium float, and also play a role in the generation of light? Does this have anything to do with particles which use PSO to form the opposite of gravity?
Heat, and the crawl, and maintenance of speed through sines, perpetual motion at atomic/particle level. Light moving too slow changes phase/spectrum, because it stops certain perpetual motions, but doesn’t necessarily kill it.
Crawl being the appearance of skipping through frames due to high speeds and our inability to measure further. IE stopping the universe on frame 1 and light is still moving. Further slowing down the whole of time to the point where light actually stops adds more between frames for light. If there is any entanglement, it tells you that light isn’t independent of time.
Remember, overall answer is yes (PSO works for lensing) based on what we know, but why
How can light maintain velocity when moving around stronger gravitational decays? G force should affect it’s weight where the weight is zero because PSO is telling it that it is not a gravitational type particle or group of particles acting as one. The gravitational waves are readable, because they are affecting any particle in their path or on the path which leads to it. Dissipates because of decay. They don’t exist to us perceptibly otherwise, and why it’s confusing humans at this point in time.
Is it that it just finds the weakest point in the falloff in pretty much all of the cases where we observe it? Where it isn’t perfect and not all light follows the same path? Could the source of light have anything to do with it/add to the outcome?
IE avoided crossing explains gravitational lensing of light. It’s moving around gravity because it’s coming from outside of the bubble. By the way, having gravity decays allows for bubbles of gravity to coexist. Having space-time means there is a fold of time between all bubbles. That also doesn’t seem to work.
Thinking about light coming from outside of gravity fields; does it have a set speed, and it speeds up to get around, where light coming from inside the field (or galaxy) is already sped up to compensate for the gravity, and may potentially vary as it passes around or through other fields within, and why we also recently seem to have found that light can move faster than light speed? Now we can also slow light down, and when it stops, you get a frame. What does that say about everything above?
Is the phasing of superpostions when observed changes in polarity? Or is it that we are watching the frames of objects change? The position changes for the objects, and we think it’s been destroyed, but really it has just moved position and not changed state at all. We didn’t observe its full state, just its temporary position based on all other things.
Consider order of operations. Don’t try and solve any of the math yet. When you do, practice rewriting. – this was an old comment. I do believe its good to work out your theories before you start to solve though.
Now stop. Learn about magnetism and electric fields.