Reciprocal System #364-Bruce Peret-RS2-109b-"Dimensional Thinking" [Thomas Newsome]

Transcript

hello everyone and welcome to my channel uh this channel is for educational purposes and we like to look at theories of everything in depth um all-encompassing theories Magnum opuses and the like that uh you probably don't know about because they've been suppressed and uh can only be accessed through a lot of digging and a lot of uh you know kind of pouring over the uh material uh with nobody to help you and um you know the stuff is there it's out there but it's difficult to access today is our 364th video that we have done on the reciprocal system of theory and the reciprocal system of theory was originated by dwey B Larson back in the 20th century uh put out his two fundamental postulates in the 19 late 1950s and uh from there uh set out on a path of deduction took his two simple postulates and from them derived a theore iCal Universe about how the universe would behave if his postures were correct and then compared those in his books compared those uh findings uh his theoretical Universe with the actual um universe that the uh scientists had discovered through their observations and measurements uh especially he did a lot of comparing of the the tables you know the scientific tables of you know the the he's got a book that's called basic properties of matter that we're going to take a look at pretty soon here and uh you know in that book you know he has a the say the first chapter is called compressibility and um now uh the first chapter is called solid cohesion and uh then his second chapter is called um distances uh interatomic distances and so he Compares uh his theoretical um derivation of the interatomic distances of elements with the actual published scientific tables that the mainstream scientists had come up with with for um that they produced in a Laboratory um you know how far apart these atoms are in their various orientations and in their various States and um It's actually kind of amazing to look at how his correlations are so accurate um given that he's just pulling them out of his theoretical uh you know Matrix or whatever that he's he's not using a laboratory but he's in many cases coming up with um tables that are as accurate as the you know where they agree uh to one tenth of 1% of the values of you know these people that are measuring this stuff in like for real in a laboratory you know where he he's able to make theoretical conclusions that are concrete uh or just about concrete and in many cases where in many cases where they differ he's able to show that his results are actually correct and theirs are wrong so it's pretty interesting uh we'll get to some of that basic properties of matter later most of what we looked at has been more theoretical and it's all theoretical but um today we're reading an article from Dr Bruce peret who is one of Larson's um Chief uh revisers after Larson died in 1990 um pet kind of um emerged and um stayed within the Spirit of the reciprocal system but made some uh key adjustments to some of the uh up uh many updates uh updated the system based on some new findings and some new uh techniques that Larson didn't know about or maybe Larsson did know about them but didn't really want to bring them up such as uh non ukian geometries uh uh project geometries computer Imaging um uh Chinese dosm uh a lot of different things that Mr Dr pet brought to the table um that Larson didn't and I thought think that pet did a great job of um kind of updating re-evaluating the reciprocal system and making some key changes um um but first we'll try just try to figure out what Larson is actually saying in his two fundamental postulates the first postulate which is by far the more important of the two is that the universe is composed uh entirely of one component motion existing in three dimensions in discret units and with two reciprocal aspects space and time the second postulate is that the Universe conforms to the relations of ordinary commutative mathematics its primary magnitudes are absolute and its geometry is ukian now just to clarify a little bit uh lson uh basically uh revised his own postulate several times over the next 30 years before he died and so you know I'm not quoting Larson verbatim I don't believe I maybe I am but um you know he tweaked he tweaked his postulate several times uh between 1959 and death in 1990 uh changed around a few of the words and um you know put in a word here or there um he originally started instead of saying that the universe is composed of motion uh he originally started by saying the universe is composed entirely of SpaceTime he eventually came around to say instead of saying SpaceTime he said motion and that motion has two reciprocal aspects space and time eventually later on in his life he actually he didn't officially change the postulates but he came to recognize that what he's actually talking about uh was not even motion but change in three dimensions so um you know it's difficult to present larsson's fundamental postulates because he changed them several different times and now his second postulate is very much under dispute from some of his revisers especially Dr Bruce pet I mean Dr pet died back in 2020 as well but before he died uh he uh made some some big changes to the second fundamental postulate including getting rid of the ukian geometry part and putting in projective geometry instead and that uh the projective geometry actually includes ukian geometry so ukan geometry is a small subset of projective geometry um now I guess one thing that I would uh say about the postulates is that I would I would have uh put in a qualifier an adjective to the word motion the universe is composed entirely of motion uh I'm not sure why I'm sure there is a reason I don't know what it is uh why Larson didn't say scaler motion or perhaps aggressive motion or nonlocal motion or um something like that instead of just emotion CU normally when people hear the term motion they think more of a vectorial motion a motion that has a specific Direction but the motion that Larson is talking about is specifically a non vectorial motion what he calls a scalar motion uh which is a motion that has a magnitude but has no specific Direction and a scalar motion can be visualized using a balloon with dots on it that I've gone over a million times but it's still uh worth thinking about um if you blow up the balloon all of the dots are moving away from each other but they're not moving in any specific Direction and um you know if you suck in the balloon all the dots are moving toward each other but they're not moving in any specific direction that is a scalar motion um and um time also uh is a scaler motion time is always getting later and later and later and later but it's not moving in any specific direction or if it is it's certainly not moving in any space likee Direction and um Larson refers to these as progress uh progression it calls it the progression of the natural reference system and uh he refers to these as clock time and clock space the clock is always getting later and later and later space is always getting farther and farther and farther apart so um and that you know that motion has been observed not just in this hypothetical balloon but also the distant galaxies have been observed to have been moving away from each other so it's kind of uh criminal that the scientists have not um investigated and emphasized scalar motion more and have just kind of treated it as an anomaly whereas Larsson is putting it really at the center of his entire theoretical Universe now also uh space and time uh are reciprocals of each other uh so that's where he gets the name of the reciprocal system and that also means that uh space and time basically they multiply to be one like all reciprocals and they um have the same general qualities like all reciprocals and so what Larsson knows about space is that it is basically threedimensional that's why he says uh existing in three dimensions um that's what he calls coordinate space but since space is threedimensional and it is the reciprocal of time then time is also three-dimensional and that uh actually was kind of a leap that he made in his um findings early on that that propelled him to kind of propose the reciprocal system is the three-dimensionality of time and then um time and space are both quantized they both have um a minimum unit uh and you you have to have a full unit of either space or time or motion to make uh have anything and if you have exactly one unit of space in one unit of time um space over time being speed the car is moving 15 M hour 15 mil of Space 1 hour of time one unit of space in one unit of time is the speed of light Larsson refers to this as unit speed 1 over 1 equals 1 and this unit speed is really the background of this universe of motion that Larson is proposing uh that it is the state of rest of the universe uh if you don't have anything if you have a featureless uniformity you still have the outward progression at all at the speed of light in all directions Larsson refers to this as the progression of the natural reference system and this is where uh this is his reference point this is where he makes measurements from um so where the Legacy scientists are making their measurements from zero Larsson is measuring from one just like you would in a reciprocal system the center of a reciprocal system is one uh on the positive side you have two 3 four and five on the negative you have 1/2 1/3 1/4 and 1/5 they multiply to be one but unlike the Legacy system that is measuring from zero and has plus one plus 2 plus three on the negative side min-1 -2 -3 they add to be zero so the reciprocal system is a multiplicative system um okay now uh the article that we're reading from Dr Bruce pet is called dimensional thinking and this is one of his kind of primer articles in the uh of rs2 the re-evaluation of the reciprocal system now we started this article yesterday and so if you want to catch up you might want to watch yesterday's video but we will be starting it uh in the middle here starting here by making rotation primary a constant angular velocity the photon could now be represented by a a two-dimensional quantity the complex number with the real aspect being the translational speed of the outward progression and the imaginary aspect as a rotational operator to specify the angular velocity of the rotation now if you're trying to scramble back and remember your algebra 2 from high school or whatever class that was a complex number is the combination of a real number and an imaginary number uh the imaginary numbers are I especially I but I J and K they all are the square root of -1 um they're not real numbers per se but they do participate in a lot of U equations especially for magnetism and electricity and what they basically are are 90° uh rotations and um they are combined with a real number so a complex number is takes the form of a plus bi so a real number like one and then plus bi like plus 2 I 1 + 2 I is a complex number and um you know there are various rules of how to combine them that I'm not all that up to date on but so that is uh what a complex number looks like with the real aspect being the translational speed of the outward progression or the progression of the natural reference system and the imaginary aspect ECT being a rotational operator to specify the angular velocity uh or frequency of the rotation n's concept was actually buried in Larson's own research concerning the idea of units of motion that represented three possible speed ranges of any specific motion the basis of this is larsson's speed energy relationship where any motion could exist as either a unit of speed 1/n or a unit of energy n over one as a simple matter of arrangement not requiring any addition or loss of energy to change between the two speed was larsson's first unit of Motion 1 - x speed range and energy was the second 2 - x range energy having its direction reversal in time and over one the one being + 1 -1 + 1 equal 1 had to be expressed in equivalent space which is a two-dimensional form of space representing the effect time has upon space speed in space was a linear translation but because equivalent space was a second power function speed in equivalent space is orbital making equivalent space Larson's version of the imaginary number n's concept of rotation as primary is just Larson's Motion in equivalent space but this is still one or two dimensional thinking uh I I think I forgot to mention that this article is called dimensional thinking so that's why he's going back to this but this is still one or two dimensional thinking in a three-dimensional Universe larsson's work is basically done on a number line where all values are real Neu extended larsson's work into the complex plane giving two Dimensions to motion what happens if we take thinking up to three dimensions the first thing we run into 2 is an old problem from the 1800s uh that puzzled researchers into imaginary quantities how to increase the rotational dimensions of the points on a plane of complex numbers into points on a sphere where it becomes impossible to calculate the quotient of the coordinates of two points in space this was resolved by William Hamilton in 1843 with this concept of the querian a four-dimensional quantity that had a real scalar value coupled to a rotational triplet three rotations not two make it work uh it seems like it's three rotations not one make it work because a complex number just has one imaginary number while equitan has three imaginary numbers um moving on continued investigation found that there were only four dimensional structures that were solvable 1 2 4 and eight Dimensions known today as division algebra Larson did attempt to take motion into a third unit through the use of his ultra high high speed range incr uh incrementing the second unit of motion energy into the first unit speed of a second dimension of motion and reversing its scalar Direction though there is no conceptual reason why that would happen okay Larson uses the ultra highspeed range primarily in the discussion of astronomical objects where such motion can be observed as a general concept it works but when applied to specific equations fails for the same reasons Hamilton ran ran into but Hamilton's solution works just as well in the reciprocal system all right hello again and I'm sorry that my phone overheated again mids sentence and uh I was close to being done anyway so just wanted to uh say we will return tomorrow tomorrow and uh finish up this paper and um stay tuned thanks for tuning in today and have a good day