Q Technology
Basic Methodology of Quantum Field Science
Games and Theory By T Skrinjar
Quantum Field science is a terminology given to a new type of physical science that completely replaces the current atomic model allowing the possibility of explaining all actions and functions including anomalies and chaotic functionality.
Current theories give the user the ability to mathematically explain the functionality of certain aspects of the known universe, but fail to anticipate and/or explain seemingly random chaotic functions that occur. The reason for this is that the base construct that is currently seen as the foundation of existence is in fact incorrect, in the sense that function, energy and matter are seen as separate entities that co-exist rather than being seen as the same “material” viewed from differing perspectives.
The existence of atoms, protons, neutrons, electrons and all other hypothetical particles within the physical realm has never been proven to exist, but still to this day are used as the solid foundation for all matter and functions throughout the known universe. Aspects such as environment are limited to the immediate vicinity while contraindications that occur throughout the intended function are viewed as “side effects” and/or “random variations” and hence ignored or given the application of an etheric formula or fabricated function in order to compensate for the irregularity in the integrity of the progression of the event.
This new model/concept begins at the very core of simplicity itself, and is an explanation to not only physical matter, but to the functions, reactions, interactions and complex procedures that occur throughout nature that range from the simplest physical reaction through to the complexity of the human biomass. Many of these events throughout our universe are not explainable, with the use of current concepts, by any one doctrine or philosophy. Several are usually needed to generate a hypothesis of the action based purely on postulated supposition and conjecture of the occurrences surrounding an event from a biased objective view. This statement is not intended to ridicule the sciences, but allow them to see that the “third person” perspective based system of analysis is no longer a valid method of discerning a viable solution nor is it an efficient use of time and resources when attempting to predetermine an accurate outcome to an event or function.
Many of the current theories surrounding the physical universe contain exceptions to the rule and have anomalies surrounding them that contravene their existence. It is mainly due to the complexity and multitude of these various theorems that leads to their eventual extinction, but in order to maintain their integrity, each in turn will be used to support the other in such a fashion as to generate a circular argument or function that relies upon the existence of proof of another presumption. Unfortunately, this only leads to the creation of a hypothetical universe, which is only one percent effective and useful in the real universe.
Particles and Waves
My knowledge of current theories and methodology is limited to basics of the philosophy for that is all that should be required from a concept to establish an individual knowledge base from the first person.
Classic physics denotes that the universe is made up of particles ranging from atoms and molecules through to quarks and neutrinos. These particles have physical size and weight, as does a grain of sand on the beach, implying that the beach is a solid singular object and a grain of sand is a representation of one of an almost infinite number of molecules that makes up the entire object. Each molecule contains the parts, components and three-dimensional pattern that make up the entire object as a singular mass.
Chemistry can give us the make-up of the object, but cannot give us the spatial geometry. Physics can give us reactance to the object from exterior sources, which tells us how the object interacts with our physical universe, but still cannot give us certain answers.
Geometry can give us the physical shape and dimensions but in the end none of the current doctrines can give us the one single thing that is required to truly understand, which is what the object actually is.
Waves, on the other hand, can give us the resultant effect of the object’s interaction with its surrounding environment, which is then discerned as the object’s signature. If an object is interacted with by another object or effect, it will exhibit and emit a waveform effect that is based on the object’s source signature (that is — the innate emanation of the compounded vibrations emitting from the individual components that make up the object) or global MRF (Magnetic Resonance Frequency) and the waveform pattern used to create the desired response from the object.
To coin an analogy, if you throw a pebble into a pond, the resultant waves display the effect of the object on its surroundings.
The closer of these two scientific concepts would have to be “waves” since the resultant fluctuation of effect generated by the object is seen as a “magnetic” effect in nature and not considered as solid mass or matter in respect to what is called solid.
The only step that the wave theory has not taken is to remove the particle theory from the equation and base the initial calculations on an existent compound mass as a “wave” based function/event instead of a particle discerned format that is “seen” to generate waveform emissions. The angle of thought required to approach this subject is to see the emitter itself as a function/event that evolves with and conforms to the restrictions and capabilities of its environment and surroundings. The emitter itself is an emission as such generated by the action of both its own construct and that which developed it as an outcome event. (ps…this is not a “chicken and the egg” theory since the former and later are both a construct of corporeal fields).
The point that I am attempting to make here is not to ridicule the doctrines, but to show that the perspective view of a substance/object/function/event can only show an outcome in reference to the voyeur. The substance/object/function/event cannot be set a series of guidelines and parameters based on what the voyeur requires. The substance/object/function/event has its own parameters in reference to itself and its surroundings based on what it is, where, when, how and why and also in which sequence of already existent events it is currently involved in.
Physics of the Field
A “field” is currently described as an emanation of an object of substance that is the resultant effect of the material of the substance or interaction with another object of same, similar, or differing compound.
In short, a field is that which surrounds.
This is not exactly correct.
A field, in the Q Mechanics terminology is that which “is”. The substance / object as it is without any exterior interaction from other sources. That which makes up the material or the object contains a pattern or signature that designates what it is, where it is, when, how and why.
A field or signature of an object is a culmination of many constituents and/or actions/functions that make it up. These constituents are not physical matter as we know it, but in fact are the actions/functions that interact with each other to develop an evolvement of what is considered as physical matter or particle form. The evolvement is established by the interaction of two or more actions in an immediate environmental medium. In any functional equation we have a minimum of 3 constituents to produce an action.
Three – Four Base Table
The 3-4 base table is a simplistic method of how to explain the action, function and interaction of the base “elemental” signatures that make up a complex signature or Global Resonance Signature. This GRS is the representative pattern format of an actual physical piece of solid matter, which means that it is actually the physical piece of solid matter and not just a function generated by its existence within an environment.
In order to explain this core/base fundamental action (3-4 base table), The labels of “Alpha”, “Beta” and “Gamma” will be given to the three core functions. “Alpha” will represent the first action/function, “Beta” will represent the second and “Gamma” will be the medium/environment.
Mathematical Extrapolation of the Function of a “Delta” Point or Function
After the “Delta” evolves, it becomes the “Alpha” or “Beta” of the next evolutionary function in the chain of events that occur to formulate the pattern construct of an action / function / object / environment.
The Delta becomes the next Alpha or Beta
This action/function of the 3-4 is not bound to the linear progression of time even though time plays an important part in the evolvement of the global event. The timing of the interactions is based upon the formulated strategy of the environment verses the constituency of the interactions in relation to the events that within and surrounding the currently observed event.
Each Delta event does not necessarily have to become a base function of the next event. This is what creates an event sequence in that the Delta events that do not evolve to the next function become signature markers for the progression of the creation of a “Delta Bar” or singular individual marker aspect of the GRS.
As can be seen above, the 3 different event sequences look different, but in fact they are the same event sequence seen from 3 differing perspectives.
The event sequence or Delta sequence is in fact far more detailed and complex than is shown above, but for explanation purposes, the diagrams will be kept simple so as to be understood.
The Delta sequence that is shown on the left is a representation of a more complex and detailed function / event.
The picture on the right represents a combination of these events or Delta sequences that is referred to as a MATRIX. This combination depicts a complete Delta function, which is the Culmination of all of the individual events giving rise to Stage 1 of a GRS.
The image below is a simplified version of the MATRIX shown as such so as to allow for the representation of the Delta sequences to be displayed as differing from each other.
Each Delta Event Sequence is different in that the size/intensity, position, rotation, vector angle and direction of focus vary from Delta Point to Delta Point thus creating a seemingly random and chaotic construct. The randomness of the sequence is in fact ordered and follows a specific design depending upon the material or action / function of the final GRS.
Flash plugin required to view
The next stage in the construction is to interact several of these matrices together so as to generate a larger and more complex signature base. Stage 2 (as seen below) is the visual representation of the next level of evolvement.
Once again the apparent randomness of the construct can be seen in the pictures above and below, but in fact there is a specific pattern evolving that can be extrapolated from the matrix through to the solid mass. This pattern is the emergence of what is referenced as a “signature” of the substance/object/function/event. The individual matrices interact with each other, not as separate entities as is depicted above, but as an individual mass that is in a virtual liquid state of both motion and function. Interactions and evolving functions are not bound to each point but are still bound by the constraints of the pre-existent evolvement of the delta construct as such.
If we “zoom out”, it can be seen that the matrix is interacting with itself and integrating to form a pattern construct. This combination of matrices can be now identified as a complex pattern that will evolve into a GRS construct.
The representation of the sphere below is a pictorial representation of a GRS template of an object / function. All three images below represent differing visual perspectives of the emission pattern generated by the GRS. This is what a true “frequency” of a substance or action / function is. The first is a wire frame that allows you to still see the functions and interactions that form the GRS. The second shows the silhouette of the GRS while still allowing the functions to be seen, while the third shows the exterior true representation of a frequency in its entirety. These three representations are still the same object/signature but have been shown as such to give you a perspective view of the signature from differing angles of thought.
Below is a pattern as seen on a 2D imaging system such as a CRO (Cathode Ray Oscilloscope). This signature/signal of an object/substance/action/function is an interpolation by a two-dimensional measuring system attempting to measure a three dimensional situation.
In order to do this, the device requires a cross-sectional aspect of the GRS in order to take the measurements of the function. This cross-section is in a 2D aspect and unfortunately does not give a true representation of the pattern construct of the material/function.
(Addendum Point 1) States of Matter
If the reference of the GRS is taken into consideration, then there can only be 1 state of matter. Since every event is constantly in motion and evolving within its own environmental constraints, and those environments are a function of the outcome of the previous evolvement, then this can be considered as “fluid” motion as there are no pauses, stops nor stationary events occurring within the construct.
The commonly referred to “3 states of matter” are simply visual aspects of a fluid function based on the observer’s own function being the reference point for the establishment of the parameters on which the state is being judged. Solid is still fluid, as is gaseous. These observations are based on the corporeal existence and function of the observer and not on the object/function/event itself.
A qualifying example of this is water. When in its natural environmental state based on its location and functionality, it is liquid. When heated it vaporizes to steam and when frozen, it solidifies to ice. As its environment is altered, so is its representative format in reference to the observer, but it always remains water.
Evolvement 101
From a core GRS, a complex event/function can be formulated by interacting 2 or more GRS constructs together in an environmental situation. The equating procedure is identical per evolvement step irrespective of the size, shape or consistency of the event. This action holds true throughout all functions. An example would be in order to joint 2 pieces of steel together, the environment must include a heat component sufficient enough to destabilize the functionality of the GRS construct of both materials to a synchronous point where the 2 combine as a fluid.
If the Gamma (Environment) is a common or synchronous factor to the Alpha and Beta alike, then there will be an interaction between the two actions/materials based on the event process of the Gamma function.
As can be seen above, the two elements, once interacted with by an environmental event that was synchronous to particular aspects of the differing GRS patterns, developed a combined function based of the Alpha, Beta and Gamma elements in the equation. Since evolvement is continually unidirectional, the function of “undoing” the event is not to do exactly the “opposite” function in order to separate the two aspects from each other, but rather to discern the commonality points of the event sequence that developed the event and apply a synchronous catalyst and/or function/event sequence that will evolve the separation of the two substances.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.