Graph of failing magnetic protection.

a reply to: annonentity

Apparently Solidified lava is storing earth magnetic fields. There are old layers that indicate that the magnetic field has flipped several times in earth's history.

If those lava samples and their interpretation hold any water, there is nothing we can do.

a reply to: andy06shake

It all actually fits perfectly with accepted science

It just puts it in order, and explains how the parts are relative and connected

The structure and formation of any cell "torus" is explained in the correctly translated Biblical "Torah"

Torus is Torah, is Horus, is Taurus

The science aligns with all the mythologies ...

Which all align with geometry, biology, mathematics

Which also align with the meaning of the symbols we use for our number system

Which tell the sequence for the formation of a torus




4 - Gravity - Width
5 - Magnetism - Depth
6 - Polarised magnetism - Height

The same sequence for the formation of any sized cell/sphere is also taught in the Constellations (Taurus - Torus)

Science is just mapping out ancient knowledge we already knew

originally posted by: Compendium
a reply to: andy06shake

You are looking at things linearly, not cyclically

The suns magnetic field, dictates gravity

No, it doesn't.

Despite all the theories of electro and magneto-gravitics, no-one has ever demonstrated magnetic changes to gravitation. Additionally, moving a coil through a magnetic field induces a current in the coil, but moving the same coil through a gravitational field does not. They are just that different.

Gravity is caused by the curvature of spacetime which changes (deflects) the path of objects from a straight line to a curve as they pass through the differing 'densities' of variable local spacetimes.

Without its central pull to orbit, we would have no regulated rotation, and hence no gravity

Orbits and rotational paths always demonstrate centripetal forces which are opposite in direction that things gravitate to.

Without gravity, evidencing variable spacetime, or some other attracting or repelling force, objects in free space would always move in straight lines.

And I assure you, those things do affect the other planets

All the planets we have observed are consistent with the same celestial mechanics as the Earth.

There are mechanics of exchange between the planets, as they exist within a torus, with the sun at its centre

It depends upon all the cumulative positions and relative masses of the masses of all celestial objects in the solar system as to where the centre of mass is. The Sun also orbits that centre of mass of the solar system and, as such, the Sun is not necessarily the centre of the solar system.

The solar system is a torus. Not a flat plate. The plate is just a disk centralised within the donut.

A torus or doughnut shape has a central hole. Since there is no central hole, and in fact the heaviest object, the Sun resides close to the centre of mass, the solar system is not a torus but would be an ellipsoid with a significant bulge towards the centre of mass.

Mostly, the plane of the planets is quite flat, with the exception of Neptune, and this planarity is probably something to do with Coriolis force as the planetary objects condensed gravitationally. Similar formation, on a grander scale is demonstrated in many galaxies.

EVERYTHING is connected

Everything was once connected, in the singularity event at the start of the big bang, but if the universe is still expanding (as redshift suggests), then there may well be portions of the universe that have expanded beyond the light-cone of other parts of the universe, and are therefore now essentially decoupled from them in terms of light, time, distance and forces.

Everything we do, effects the other planets and vice versa

That's why what they refer to as "global warming" is happening on all planets not just Earth

Some other planets have a permanent atmospheric cloud canopy and have always been essentially greenhouse planets. Some have too little atmosphere such as Mars and Mercury and the classification doesn't really fit. Some are frozen solid and have no gaseous atmosphere. To refer to other planets as having 'global warming' anything like we have here on Earth is a misnomer.

Nothing we can do here on Earth is likely to be able to affect the atmospheres of other planets in any significant way.

Venus is an example of a greenhouse planet with runaway global warming, but that started before humans existed..

Regardless of what you believe the cause is, it is uniform across all the planets, because they are connected

This is ancient knowledge, which has been suppressed

Mystery orders are not only given this information, but go through dimensional processes to experience it, so they can properly visualise and understand it

Science has no evidence or measurement that would support this idea.

But the truth is you are living inside a giant body. Where the mind and manifest universe is a massive "all seeing" eye

We go beyond this physical world to learn these things

It is up up you if you believe it or not

The reason we have no problems with telling people, is that most cannot conceive such a thing, let alone believe it

Some people want more than metaphysical and allegorical tales. They want evidence based repeatable observations.

This does not stop them from conceiving of the Gaia hypothesis, or some of the further fringes of simulation hypotheses.

We have been writing fictions based upon these ideas for millennia. You don't have to believe the woo-woo to conceive its ideas. These days, you can probably just go and watch such stuff in Marvel or DC Comics movies.

originally posted by: Compendium
a reply to: andy06shake

When exceeding invariant potential permeates planetary atmosphere, the resistance it meets is a flux differential of equilibration, between its centrally-distributed nuclear impression ‘point of mass’, and the radiom expression of its ocular countenance.

You do realize that those words don't make sense?

For instance, if something is invariant, then it doesn't change. Which means it can't go from 'not exceeding' to 'exceeding'.

‘Oculus’ is the overlooked but equally important partner and opposite of ‘Nucleus’. A consideration within all forms of nuclear physics that should be considered as vital as the nucle- itself.

The central nucleus and its surrounding oculus are a hyper-divergent binary stasis.

How can something that is static, diverge? And even more so, "hyper-diverge". What even is hyper-divergence?

The internalised to externalised duality of the pairs exception is not psiotic in its true form, by rather polyanthrophonic.

*Psiotic: Form of self, without influence.
*Polyanthrophonic: Many bodies of influence.

PSI = pounds per square inch
otic = relating to the ear

Poly = many
anthropos = man

It needs to be understood (or at least visualised) that what we physically perceive as “internalisation” is not simply the countenance of a externalised parity, but actually is the externalised parity also.

BODY
A persons physical body is invariant expression which chemically seats a focus point of bioelectric recurrence. The result of perpetually promoted microcosmic off-set states. A calculated impression of that which is given by the layers of the world not only above and around it, but below and within it also.

BODIES
Whether it be tiny cells or a massive sun, all nuclear bodies work in much the same way. And all are formed in much the same way.

Exceeding surge paid inwards to a focus point causes hyper-interpolated transitioning within the concentration. This promotes exponential precipitation of cellular complexity, which in-turn translates into density as it is relayed into subsequent sub-layers. Inwardly filling the construct of the bodies focus point layer-by-layer.

Within a planetary perspective, we sit upon the edge of the Earths inward processes. This relegates our bodies precept subject to the forward propensity of angular momentum, towards the centrum point of density equalisation. Which is binary to its relative expartum dissipate equalisation.

The equilibration of the exceeding integration of angular motion potential over and into a torus, causes a centrally-distributed focal constriction within the parent equilibria, in which its microcosm promotion must be met with a equated dissonant distortion, which is relative and contrary to the constrictions propensity.

The exception of this pro- and con- relationship balances with itself, relative to vector equilibrium within the torus.

The prose force and its counter-force dysplasia promote a stabilisation dissident between them referred to as GRAVITY.

Within this dissident a point of biological stability is presented, where (energise) emanate potential is conducive in form and state to molecular aggregate.

Within all ‘nuclear’ microcosm torus, the proportions of the presented exceeding force permeate are at least equal to its countenance, as is essential to form and maintain a microcosmic stasis.

Besides gravity, the phase relationship between the hyper-commute of the ‘excelsior’ which exceeds of force/resistance, and the draught consumption of the ‘excalibur’ which inwardly recedes from force/resistance, creates a secondary polarisation which is moderate of the 'faster' accession of the parent macrocosm equilibria causing gravity and the 'slower' incision of the microcosm parabola.

This polarisation second of gravity, is referred to as MAGNETISM.

Magnetism is the expansive contraction of hyper-distillate sanctioning between two equilibria.

The comparative distress exchange of relative coalescence.

The recessive funnelling committed to its relative transitory phase, illustrates a recurrence of itself, within itself. Centring it and evenly distributing it’s ‘distress’ out to opposite sides of its form. The result is POLARISED MAGNETISM.

The directional distribution of this polarisation is relative and subject to the forward propensity of the macrocosm hyper-commute. Our minds physical perspective seated within the layering of both these fields of momentum, affords us the precept referred to as TIME.

The atmospheres exceeding permeate conveyance transmitted through, or super-exposed to the resistance of biological seatings within the same polarisation, are responsible for what is referred to as AGING.

The comparative isometric oppression within the biological seatings which resist and counter the conveyance of age-inducing permeate, find centre, and draw upon biological induction to rejuvenation the bodies construct and counter the decay effect caused by aging. This is what is referred to as GROWTH.

GROWTH < / > AGING

The divergence of this relationship relative to time, cannot be quantified beyond the designated cyclic indication markers we use to measure it, because its sync prevails the common perceptive congruence of the imperative by which it could be distinguished.

Meaning that time is promoted to us in such a way that it can only be ascertained as a comparative of itself within the given perspective we share with it. This allows us the deduction of its reception, exception and transitory comparative, but not its preeminent gestures.

Any physical baring upon, or within which extrapolation of such preeminent gestures could be correlated, sits well beyond the realms of physically manifested biological seatings, as well as all relative pre-, super,- and hyper-effigian realms.

It also sits well beyond any possible situational positioning of the biologically seated, and any other form-essences who may be seated 'relative' to the manifested effigian realm.

Basically, If we were to be, in such a way as to be able to perceive the 'dimensions' of time, then through the relatable precept, its function would cease.

Perhaps a similar theoretical basis?

originally posted by: Compendium
a reply to: andy06shake

It all actually fits perfectly with accepted science

It just puts it in order, and explains how the parts are relative and connected

The structure and formation of any cell "torus" is explained in the correctly translated Biblical "Torah"

Torus is Torah, is Horus, is Taurus

Ah, the Doctor Seuss conjecture!

The science aligns with all the mythologies ...

Which all align with geometry, biology, mathematics

and colonoscopy!

Which also align with the meaning of the symbols we use for our number system

Which tell the sequence for the formation of a torus

4 - Gravity - Width
5 - Magnetism - Depth
6 - Polarised magnetism - Height

15 - Polyhedral duodechotomy - Thickness
43 - Word salad with garlic aoli dressing - Denseness

The same sequence for the formation of any sized cell/sphere is also taught in the Constellations (Taurus - Torus)

Science is just mapping out ancient knowledge we already knew

With play dough.

a reply to: Compendium

The same sequence for the formation of any sized cell/sphere is also taught in the Constellations (Taurus - Torus)

The formation of cells and spheres is a biological and physical process.

Taurus is an astrological constellation and a torus is a mathematical shape.

Diagrams aside Compendium i dont think the concepts directly overlap in scientific teaching or explanation.

Science and mythology are fundamentally different ways of understanding the world and they don't necessarily align at all.

They operate in different domains for a start.

Science focuses on empirical evidence and testable theories, while mythology is more about cultural narratives and symbolic interpretations.

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: annonentity

Apparently Solidified lava is storing earth magnetic fields. There are old layers that indicate that the magnetic field has flipped several times in earth's history.

If those lava samples and their interpretation hold any water, there is nothing we can do.

And they also seem to have happened slowly and without causing any disaster in the past:

Geomagnetic reversal

a reply to: Terpene

If those lava samples and their interpretation hold any water, there is nothing we can do.

If you mean in the likes of the Ringwoodite found within the Earths mantle, you need to realize the water its not in liquid form, but bound within the actual mineral's structure.

a reply to: andy06shake

Nope, holding water as in figure of speech... Maybe I've got that wrong? It happens with my English...

a reply to: Terpene

I see.

The reason i asked is there are extensive threads here at ATS that cover the topic pertaining to the likes of global floods.

The release of water in Ringwoodite being proposed as a catalyst for such.

But that dont hold water nether so to speak.

a reply to: andy06shake

We don't really know what's beyond a certain depth. Even if the deductions from our observations are confirmed by math they can still be wrong.
they are not first hand proof. I find all deductions, from observation gained trough equipment that doesn't just enhance our five senses, questionable...

a reply to: Terpene

Direct observation being rather limited in that area.

Our understanding of the Earth's interior is indeed based on indirect evidence/theoretical models, which are subject to revision.

But thats why we build and create better tools and technologies that can refine or even overhaul current understanding.

Some things we are never going to attain first-hand proof all the same.

It does not mean we can not endeavor to understand the process involved and the mechanisms behind such.

Questions are good, and the answers, well those tend to breed more questions more often than not.

As to senses, well how many of those do we possess, 5, 7, 22?

That's is another topic for debate i suppose.

a reply to: andy06shake

Here's another modelling that looks at this topic.

However, shifts in mass on the Earth’s surface and in its interior caused by the melting ice not only change the Earth’s rotational speed and the length of day: as the researchers show in Nature Geoscience, they also alter the axis of rotation. This means that the points where the axis of rotation actually meets the Earth’s surface move. Researchers can observe this polar motion, which, over a longer timeframe, comes to some ten metres per hundred years. It’s not only the melting of the ice sheets that plays a role here, but also movements taking place in the Earth’s interior. Deep in the Earth’s mantle, where the rock becomes viscous due to high pressure, displacements occur over long periods of time. And there are also heat flows in the liquid metal of Earth’s outer core, which are responsible both generate the Earth’s magnetic field and lead to shifts in mass.

In the most comprehensive modelling to date, Soja and his team have now shown how polar motion results from the individual processes in the core, in the mantle and from the climate at the surface. Their study was recently published in the journal Nature Geoscience. “For the first time, we present a complete explanation for the causes of long-period polar motion,” says Mostafa Kiani Shahvandi, one of Soja’s doctoral students and lead author of the study. “In other words, we now know why and how the Earth’s axis of rotation moves relative to the Earth’s crust.”

One finding in particular stands out in their study in Nature Geoscience: that the processes on and in the Earth are interconnected and influence each other. “Climate change is causing the Earth’s axis of rotation to move, and it appears that the feedback from the conservation of angular momentum is also changing the dynamics of the Earth’s core,” Soja explains. Kiani Shahvandi adds: “Ongoing climate change could therefore even be affecting processes deep inside the Earth and have a greater reach than previously assumed.” However, there is little cause for concern, as these effects are minor and it’s unlikely that they pose a risk.

The algorithms that Kiani Shahvandi developed have made it possible for the first time to record all the different effects on the Earth’s surface, in its mantle and in its core, and to model their possible interactions. The result of the calculations shows how the Earth’s rotational poles have moved since 1900. These model values are in excellent agreement with the real data provided by astronomical observations in the past and by satellites over the last thirty years, which means they also enable forecasts for the future.

ethz.ch...

www.nature.com...

Worth repeating:

"However, there is little cause for concern, as these effects are minor and it’s unlikely that they pose a risk."

a reply to: chr0naut

It makes perfect sense. You are just having trouble understanding it

"When exceeding invariant potential permeates planetary atmosphere", means invariant potential, passes through (permeates) and exceeds planetary atmosphere

Permeate does not mean to "not exceed", it means to "pass through(out)"

Hyper-divergent, means a divergence to many layers or degrees. The stasis runs through the middle of something which diverges in greater and more extreme layers, both inwards and outwards

Internally replicating itself, within things like cellular complexity

In a way which matches, exactly, the expansion of its externalised binary

The point between which is passes, remains a binary stasis. Regardless of how much it diverges inwardly and outwardly

Super- to exceed over a limitation, within phase
Hyper- to exceed over a limitation, being accelerated or promoted by phase

The most fundamental example of this, is the perceivable "expansion" of the universe, externally, equating directly and proportionately, to the increase in cellular density and complexity

Every layer, either internalises, or externalises from the invariant potential, which passes from the source of creation, at the very start of the universe, through all things

You can call it the big bang. You can call it God. But they are exactly the same thing

The invariant potential creates the space, and within its passing, fills it

What we call fractal recurrence and decay

Everything within this passing, and the foundation of all physical reality, amounts to varying measures and degrees of ANGLE and POTENTIAL

What is referred to in the Biblical texts as ALPHA (Angle) and OMEGA (Potential)

"Everything we know amounts to angle and potential", or, "I am the Alpha and the Omega"

All such texts actually talk about things like physics, they are just mistranslated by people who did not understand the concepts they were trying to translate

1) The symbol for the number one - That which casts forth
2) The symbol for the number two - The space which it opens up to fill
3) The symbol for the number three - One curve closing inward from centre, one curve closing outwards

Exactly like in the diagrams I gave

Within the middle point of the 3, where the invariant passes, we get DIRECTION

One side of the passing invariant curves inwards, while the other curves outwards, it gives a point in between, which is FACE

The "anēr - ōps", of "Anthro", "that which has face. Or direction of eye (within perception)"

From this, we get the ability to perceive "INTERNAL / EXTERNAL"

A big problem is that most people are wired to view this world, within POSITION (which is within "3 dimensional" - width, depth, height) without any consideration to necessity of DIRECTION, and triangulation of AREA for such things to even be able to exist, to give a point of origin and focus

What we call the "3 Dimensions" are actually the 4th, 5th, and 6th dimensions within Illuminated teachings of the mystery schools

As with the Philosophers stone, the torus must come first

It does not matter if you are talking about the shape of the entire universe, or the smallest of cells. They are all torus, within torus, within torus

And they all form and act in the same way, regardless of layer or size (though the perceivable dynamics may be amplified)

Because things like width, depth and height, cannot exist, without a perception of direction, between internal and external

There needs to be a perception of Internal, External, and Direction, between them to understand where you are, and whether you are inside facing out, or outside facing in

This can only be done within a sphere

And as direction must emanate from a source. That sphere needs to be both THE BEGINNING and THE END within direction. Direction which forms a cycle, means a torus

It is the only shape that allows you to exist as:

1) The direction and focus of the source itself
2) The space it opens up
3) That which forms within the space

To exist as all three at once, is the the source of what is referred to as "the Trinity" found within the many different religions and mythologies

The cycle of the torus also allows for the promotion of both macrocosm and microcosm layers, within its transit

Which are hyper-divergent

Diverging from the largest of macro, to the smallest of micro. Whilst remaining a binary stasis "FACE", within which life can be seated across the invariant from the source

Torus, within torus, growing denser and more complex, within things like matter. And torus outside of torus, expanding and promoting a greater number or larger systems within which the smaller systems can populate and evolve

Scientists are starting to understand parts of this, with studies into things such as the 3-torus

But they are still perceiving it linearly, instead of cyclically. Which makes it seem impossibly recursive

Those who perceive all the systems as being separate and divided, are naive and disconnected from their true nature

Whether or not there is a "hole" in the middle of a torus, depends on whether or not you are viewing it from inside the torus or not, as well as which layer you are looking at

From within the cyclical outflow, the centre of a torus is a focus point like a sun. The same applies for if you are looking at torus distances away, within a relative dimensional spectrum. They will appear as suns, similar to your own

If you are looking externally? Or at dimensional spectrum outside your own, the centres appear as a black hole

If you are within it, light is emerging. A sun
If you are outside of it, light is pulled in. A black hole

Outside of the pathways and structure which form all perceivable dimensional spectrum (both internal and external perspective) we get empty (but dense) space that we call "dark matter"

The reason dark matter seems odd to us, is because it is the counter to the invariant potential which permeates "through" the centre of us/everything perceivable

Once you have DIRECTION, then you get what we call our 3 dimensions within the AREA, then we get POSITION


PHILOSOPHERS STONE
CIRCLE - DIRECTION
1) Internal
2) External
3) Direction
TRIANGLE - AREA
4) Width (Gravity)
5) Depth (Magnetism)
6) Height (Polarised Mangetism)
SQUARE - POSITION
7) Expansion (North)
8) Contraction (South)
9) Enter (East)
10) Exit (West)
CYCLE
11) Internalise
12) Externalise
13) Directional

PSI = pounds per square inch
otic = relating to the ear

Pounds per square inch?

That's an abbreviation

Psi- means the emanating projection of an intangible, or supernatural source, such as soul. Or sense of self. Or a body of influence (such as a cell). It is cognate with "Psy-"

-otic as an adjective suffix, means "of, relating to, or characterized by a (specified) action, process, or condition"

Combined, they are any eminent form or body, dictated of self, without external influence

Poly- is many, within a given structure or form

-anthophonic, is the creation, relation, or perceived measure of frequency (such a sound) to a body/face/form. "Anthros", meaning "human", originated from anēr - ōps "that which has face", meaning DIRECTION within any relatable form, such as "man". But it can be used for any familiar body/bodies

originally posted by: chr0naut

and colonoscopy!

15 - Polyhedral duodechotomy - Thickness
43 - Word salad with garlic aoli dressing - Denseness

With play dough.

There is no need to be, nasty, rude or disrespectful

I've never been anything but respectful to you, regardless of my opinion of your content, or the way you express yourself

I do not expect you to understand complex non-linear dynamics, that you have no experience or grounds for understanding

If you do not understand what is written, think it is wrong, or cannot/will not believe ... then just ignore it

It will do you no harm

Believe what you wish to believe

I posted this information for perpetuity

So your saying that our understanding (I use the word loosely) of the inside of Earth is woo woo without any scientific basis? We can’t test any theories about it’s composition nor perform any repeatable experiments to work out what exactly is going on in there.

We do however observe electrical phenomena at the poles (every planet in the solar system has Aurora)

Has anyone ever spun a ball of iron really fast and observed magnetic fields or Aurora as a result? No? There must be more forces at work than we allow for in our scope of possible influences.

Is there any force naturally present in our environment that induces spin innately? Why yes there is. Electricity. If you can point me to other possible causes for the whole solar system and everything in it to be spinning then perhaps electricity won’t be responsible for the observable facts.

👍 well done compendium, too many peeps buy the stale bread mechanics presented as the fundamentals of interplanetary interaction.

a reply to: andy06shake

originally posted by: Compendium

originally posted by: chr0naut

and colonoscopy!

15 - Polyhedral duodechotomy - Thickness
43 - Word salad with garlic aoli dressing - Denseness

With play dough.

There is no need to be, nasty, rude or disrespectful

Killjoy!

I've never been anything but respectful to you, regardless of my opinion of your content, or the way you express yourself

I do not expect you to understand complex non-linear dynamics, that you have no experience or grounds for understanding

I went to university and was expected to be fluent in mathematical methods for describing non-linear dynamics. For instance simple integral calculus can be used to describe the ballistic path of an accelerating object, and I was often tasked to be able to tell the vector gradient of travel and position of an object undergoing acceleration at a particular instant. These mathematics were often integrated into other useful engineering equations such as the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation.

If you do not understand what is written, think it is wrong, or cannot/will not believe ... then just ignore it

It will do you no harm

Believe what you wish to believe

I posted this information for perpetuity

Perhaps you could re-frame what you are trying to say in mathematical terms with variables and constants clearly denoted.

a reply to: Dalamax

So your saying that our understanding (I use the word loosely) of the inside of Earth is woo woo without any scientific basis?

No that's not what im saying.

Theories regarding the Earth's interior are based on extensive scientific research and evidence.

And while we cannot directly observe the Earth's core, scientists use various methods to study it indirectly.

Has anyone ever spun a ball of iron really fast and observed magnetic fields or Aurora as a result? No?

I dont know where you get that idea.

There have been several experiments that have attempted to replicate the Earth's geodynamo process on a small scale.

Take for instance the "Riga Dynamo Experiment" the "Karlsruhe Dynamo Experiment" or "Madison Dynamo Experiment".

Is there any force naturally present in our environment that induces spin innately? Why yes there is. Electricity.

Yes, several forces and mechanisms can induce spin in objects, gravity, planetary formation, and tidal forces can induce spin and affect rotation.

Then there is the Coriolis effect, magnetic fields, solar wind and Earth's magnetosphere.

Anything else i can help you with this morning Dalamax?

www.hzdr.de...
ui.adsabs.harvard.edu...
pubs.aip.org...

originally posted by: andy06shake

Yes, several forces and mechanisms can induce spin in objects, gravity, planetary formation, and tidal forces can induce spin and affect rotation.

Then there is the Coriolis effect, magnetic fields, solar wind and Earth's magnetosphere.

These things are the effect of spin/rotation, not the cause

Again ...

You need to follow the fundamental structure of all things, if you wish to understand how the parts, "forces or mechanisms" within it work

Otherwise you can get things backwards, perceiving effect as being cause

This "primary sequence" is the same as "origin" within mathematics, especially in the field of coordinate geometry. Where you need an initial point, or the starting point from where we begin calculations or measurements

To properly visualise the workings and mechanics of things which exist "within space", you need to first acknowledge and understand the structure of the space they exist within

Because the order and sequence of that structure, allows you to understand how things are connected, and what causes what



ROTATION / SPIN is needed first, or the other forces and mechanics could not/would not exist


The internalisation and externalisation of ANGLE (Alpha) and POTENTIAL (Omega) (measured as cycles of internal and external "angular recurrence") manifests comparatively within our physical spheres as ELECTRICITY

Think of it using information technology ...

Electrons: I.P addresses, D.N.S and networking

Protons: Are the physical "nucleus" I.T devices
- Solid - Hardware
- Liquid - Routers
- Gas - Cloud

Neutrons: Are the data-stream
- Up quarks - Upload
- Down quarks - Download

Axion: The relationship between physical and virtual space. Such as streaming or file sharing to a particular address or location

Photon: GUI interaction and audiovisual representation of data

a reply to: Compendium

I think i know what i need to follow Compendium.

And that would be the actual science as opposed to what you choose to mix it with.

Again there are several natural forces and mechanisms that can induce spin/rotation.

Gravitational interactions, electromagnetic induction, tidal forces, the Coriolis effect, solar radiation pressure, angular momentum transfer, and internal fluid dynamics can cause initially non-rotating objects to start spinning.

They can also alter the spin of an already rotating object.

The problem being Compendium you're attempting to blend scientific concepts with more abstract or philosophical notions.

I mean it's a creative mix of scientific principles with speculative ideas and analogies, ile give you that.