Reciprocal System #363-Bruce Peret-RS2-109a-"Dimensional Thinking" [Thomas Newsome]

Transcript

hello everyone and welcome to my channel this is an educational Channel and uh we try to shed light on uh some great theories of everything and um Magnum opuses from obscure Geniuses and uh ancient uh philosophies explicated and anything else that I think you could uh really benefit from uh if you knew about it but you probably don't because it's been suppressed and today is our 363d video on dwey B Larson and his reciprocal system of theory Mr lson lived in the 20th century born in 1898 and died in 1990 around 1930 uh while working as a mining engineer out in Portland he had some great epiphanies uh while trying to solve a somewhat related problem and uh he worked out his thoughts over the course of the next 25 years 30 years and in 1959 he put out his two fund Al postulates about the nature of this universe and then uh took those postulates turned around and through a process of deduction created a theoretical Universe How the Universe would look if his postulates were correct and it just so happens that his his theoretical Universe compared very favorably to the universe that the scientist had worked out over the thousands of years through their observations measurements and hypotheses uh and you know experiments except uh that uh it disagreed with a lot of the 20th century findings and it disagreed with uh the Newtonian Universe in the extreme Realms that the 20th century findings were there to uh you know to correct so uh it really accepted Newtonian mechanics to the same level that um we do today but then uh kind of trying to fix the Newtonian mechanics mechanics in the realm of the very small the very large and the very fast um it rejected those uh Corrections that were done by Einstein and the quantum mechanists and um other people string theorists and so on uh now the basic idea behind um Larson's um postulates larsson's first postulate is that the universe is made entirely of one component and that is motion other people have had that um that inkling before Thomas Hobs and Renee deart uh to name two giants but they were not able to uh build a uh theoretical Universe in the way that Larsson was able to do because they didn't redefine Motion in the way that Larsson did uh the first thing that Larson does uh is he defines motion as the relationship between space and time what he says in its postula is motion um has two reciprocal aspects space and time so from that you can gather that um basically motion is a fraction with time or space as the numerator space or time as the denominator for example speed speed is space over time the bicycle is moving at 10 mil an hour 10 mil of space and 1 hour of time and you can also see the reciprocal relationship between space and time in that uh if you decide to double the speed you can say the bicycle is now going 20 M hour or you could say that the bicycle is now moving 10 miles per half hour they're both the same um but in one you multiplied the the space by two and in the other one you divided the time by two that's reciprocal relationship also um space and time have no independent existence they only exist together in motion uh like all reciprocals space and time multiply to get one and they both have the same qualities to them one of those qualities is their clock aspect Larson calls this clock time and clock space um and I think if I were uh critiquing Larson's postulates uh I would say that I I feel like he should have um used one more adjective to provide uh to Define motion um the universe is made out of one component motion I would have put progressing motion or scalar motion or maybe even non-local motion um to delineate it from just the general vectorial motion that we generally think of as scientists uh or or scien um people that are interested in science scient toiles or whatever that um this kind of motion that Larsson is talking about is not really the same as vectorial motion it's what is called scalar motion it's a motion that has a magnitude but it has no specific Direction a vectorial motion is like 10 m hour south uh vectorial motion has has a direction a scalar motion has no Direction you can um see this by using your uh expand expanding balloon with dots on it as you blow up the balloon all of the dots are moving away from each other but they're not moving in any specific Direction in fact uh it's not even just the dots all the other locations on the balloon are also moving away from each other and not in any specific Direction This is a scalar motion it's a motion that has a magnitude but has no direction and the only way that it acquires any type of direction is if you arbitrarily decide that one of the points one of the locations is motionless when you decide that one point is motionless then you can start Reckoning the directions involved uh of all the other points in reference to this uh so-called um stationary Point uh and so that is what Larsson calls clock space space is always getting farther and farther and farther and farther apart clock time is that um things are always getting later and later and later and later so the clock is already demonstrating a scalar motion it is a motion that has a magnitude but the clock has no specific Direction it's just getting later and later and later so this is a motion that is observable uh in reality but it's not um given any type of emphasis um or investigation by the mainstream um scientists they look look at it as kind of like an anomaly even though they also through their telescopes have discovered that all of the distant galaxies are moving away from each other so uh they should have been uh investigating scalar motion but they have not Larson on the other hand puts it at the center of his theory the universe center of the universe this is what the universe is constructed out of of uh scalar motion and he says the motion is in three dimensions and this is again from just the whole concept of reciprocity he observes that space has three dimensions calls that coordinate space three dimensions of Space volume XYZ coordinates and that's something that we we almost take for granted um some of us might go into higher Dimensions than that as well but certainly these three dimensions of space but then he also has something that's called coordinate time three dimensions of time and that's because space and time are reciprocals of one another and so if time if space has three dimensions then we can just assume that time also has three Dimensions as its reciprocal because reciprocals have the same qualities just like um you know the quantities 3 and 1/3 uh 3 over 1 and 1 over 3 are reciprocals of each other they multiply to equal one and they both have the same qualities they have three and they have one but they have them in different orders and then um the last major part of his first postulate is that space and time both come only in discrete units there's a minimum unit of space and a minimum unit of time you have to have a full unit before either one of those things is operative you have to have a full unit of space or a full unit of time or really a full unit of motion motion again being a fraction with space or time as the numerator time or space as the denominator all of our basic scientific quantities are expressable exclusively through space and time you don't need Mass you don't need this MKS system just use space and time motion is space over time energy is time over space acceler ceration is space over time to the second power force is time over space to the second power um and it goes on and on like that um mass is time to the third power over space to the third power pressure is time over space to the fourth power and uh you know momentum is space to the second power over time to the second power all of these different things are expressable specifically and exclusively in terms of space and time and if you have one unit of space in one unit of time space over time being speed if you have one over one you have the speed of light um and this is one unit speed 1 over 1 equal 1 so this one is where all of your reciprocals resolve each other this is like multiplying your three and your 1/3 to get one one is at the center of a reciprocal system just like zero is at the center of a legacy science system you have zero and then in the positive direction you have 1 2 3 4 5 in the negative Direction you have negative 1 -2 -34 5 in a reciprocal system you have one at the center and then on one side you have 2 3 four and five on the negative side you have 1/2 1/3 1/4 and 1/5 so that is uh how a reciprocal system works and in a universe of motion it makes complete sense that your zero point your origin your Center Point your neutral point your null Point your state of rest is motion motion outward at the speed of light in all directions so just to read o uh not read uh because I'm not reading it but paraphrasing Larson's first postulate again the universe is composed entirely of one component motion existing in three dimensions indiscrete units and with two reciprocal aspects space and time and then his second postulate is that the Universe conforms to the um rules of ordinary commutative mathematics its primary magnitudes are absolute and its geometry is ukian now some of larsson's followers and event ual revisers have uh rejected parts or all of that second postulate especially Dr Bruce paret who I believe in my opinion is one of the two greatest uh you know revisers of Larson system now there are some people who go after pet and believe that Larson they're Orthodox and they believe that Larson didn't get anything wrong and that um you know it's foolish to even question it almost um but uh I believe that um Dr pet made great um uh revisions of larsson's system and Larson himself uh did say that he was subject to error the system him the system itself he believed was correct but whether he derived everything from that system uh was another question question and Dr pret uh disagreed with the geometry of the universe he believed that the geometry of universe was projective not ukian and there were a few other things involved but uh today we're actually looking at a paper written by Bruce paret uh called rs2 109 um rs2 being the reciprocal system 2 This is the uh re-evaluation of the reciprocal system in light of new findings and so on that Dr pet along with Dr kvk neru did in the early 21st century and maybe late 19 late Nate late 20th and early 21st century Dr pet died back in 2020 I do believe that Dr Neu is still alive living over in India and uh this paper is called dimensional thinking and I believe it was written by pet back in 2015 he starts with a quote from the movie contact contact an alien intelligence is going to be more advanced and that means efficiency functioning on multiple levels and in multiple dimensions okay this is the start here human perception is based primarily on one and twod dimensional thinking for example all locations in space can be connected by a one-dimensional line regardless of how many twists and turns it takes to get from start to end eye focus our Vision Works like a two-dimensional projection screen with a lens focusing an image on the surface of the retina with two eyes the mind can give the illusion of three dimensions by focusing on a distant point to create a triangular relationship ship and estimate estimate the distance to that point but we don't actually see in three dimensions we internally recreate a three-dimensional geometry from one and TW dimensional information if we had senses that perceived three dimensions one would be able to see the back of an object as clearly as the front so we create this three-dimensional thinking from our stereoscopic vision the the triangulating two different um images that we're getting in each eye and then um from each eye and then we're able to kind of make it appear as if we have three-dimensional Vision the mobility of thought has carried over into everything we do with our senses including the inductive theories created by observation dwey Larson created his reciprocal system through induction observing that the atoms of the periodic table could be accurate accurately expressed by three magnitudes rather than a onedimensional atomic number if those magnitudes were the inverse of spatial magnitudes from this pattern he hypothesized that this inverse magnitude must be time as mechanically described by the concept of speed the inverse relation of space to time but that also inferred that time like space had three dimensions and both space and time were related to each other as aspects of motion from this he developed his theory of a universe of motion now known as the reciprocal system of physical Theory now this to Me shows how kind of different uh Dr pet and I think because he can go over this over and over again it doesn't register with me just the way that he explains uh I hope it does for you I hope that you this this clicks for you because it doesn't click for me um I've read this passage many times and I don't get anything out of it um maybe some day it it will click but I just don't really think that way but this is this is what Larson was doing uh Larson was originally working on a problem having to do with the interatomic distance of um you know different elements and he had the Epiphany that why don't you just um assume that um time is the reciprocal of space and then you substitute it in in your periodic table and uh that's basically what he did and he ended up kind of deriving a different periodic table where each one of his elements requires three numbers to properly specify it there's a primary mag a primary two-dimensional uh rotation a secondary two-dimensional rotation and a onedimensional rotation um that can be positive or negative and so um that is the process that Larson went through but I just don't that's not the way that I think of it okay uh from this inductive theory lson created two postulates to Define his conceptual basis then proceeded to deduce the the structure of the physical Universe from those postulates to see how close it matched the original observation okay so he's basically just explaining how Larson started with this inductive process and then created his two postulates and then switched over to a deductive process and then through his deductive process arrived at a theoretical universe that he comp that he then compared with what the scientists had already come up with Larson however was still caught in the Paradigm of one-dimensional linear thinking this is evidenced by the fact that he could have linear motion without anything moving but could not have angular motion without something to rotate angular motion being rotation um in his case the photon provided the stick to spin into the concept of the rotational base one dimension spinning to make two yet he also postulates that the universe is threedimensional in nature in his paper the law of conservation of Direction Professor KK Neu States quote rotation is preluded only if space is onedimensional just as soon as it is established that the state stationary spatial reference system is three-dimensional rotation becomes a possibility and introduces the concept of rotation being primary meaning that the angular velocity behind rotation is just as likely as the translational velocity of larsson's directional reversal rotation without anything to rotate so paret is here just kind of going over Larson's formation of matter how does matter come about and um kind of critiquing that process in larsson's Universe of motion there's really four kinds of motion you have your translational motion you have your vibrational motion you have your your rotational motion and you have your rotational vibration and these motions can be in multiple Dimensions depending on the situation and um Larson basically said that you cannot have rotation unless you have something to rotate so he first had to postulate this photon which is the thing that is to rotate and the photon is based on both a translational motion and a vibrational motion that is 90° offset from the from the translational motion so the vibrational motion is going in this direction and the translational motion goes like this when you combine the two of them you get a sine wave and uh nuu eventually came along and he posited the photon as a bir rotation not from a rot not from a vibration and a translation but from two counter rotating systems and when you have two counter rotating systems according to the uh 18th century mathematician Oiler he says that that creates a cosine wave and so that also creates a Photon potentially so uh that's kind of what this dispute here is about um what is the nature of the photon and uh you know for pet the vibration doesn't come about until uh you have two separate motions that's what creates the photon and and also a vibration um but the photon uh both the rotation and the translation are equally primary he refers to one as Yin and one as Yang spin is Yin and translation is Yang and he accuses Larsson of being Yang Centric uh and ignoring the yin half of his Universe uh okay now we will uh we'll start up again tomorrow um in the middle of this article and hash it out a little bit further uh it's not an easy article uh but hopefully we set the stage there and hopefully you'll tune in tomorrow and we'll check out um I don't know if we'll get all the way through this paper but the next installment uh will be tomorrow so thanks for tuning in today have a great day