Deep-Gas, Deep Hot Biosphere Theory

On Earth matter can take on many shapes but all shapes are still alligned internally to the gravity well. Gravity fields are static and all rotations are alligned to the force of gravity so that we feel zero movement of the Earth that is also rotating at a 1,000 mph, and revolving around sun at 69,000 mph. We do not feel the motion of our galaxy that is moving through space at 1.4 million miles an hour, and the central core is rotating around center of galaxy at 4.4 million miles per hour. Why such extreme motion???? Magnetic confinement of ions creates extreme rotation of the ions. All this motion including the switching of mesons between matter and antimatter states at three trillion x per second is caused by the greater cycling of gravitational motion that is a cascade from a larger scale that our scale just like the small atomic scales is imbedded in.

I agree with Larry regarding multiple scales having a repetitive generalized organizations to include polarity and the spherical rotations, and Gregg no doubt you are also correct that atomic structure does have peculiar shapes that appear to not be spherical. Lets examine that for a minute.

Large scales probably look the same way, because we cannot see the actual flux pathways between all the orbiting objects that give the rigidity and over all shape. In other words, the atomic charged fields around the orbitals might look a lot like our Earth does while it is shooting through the solar wind [shock wave would not be spherical].

John Rickey

The elagance of form in Universe is mind blowing and 'life' could not exist at all if these 'circuits' were not balanced in large and small scale motion. The evidence for 'attractive forces at a distance' or 'charge' can easily be recognized at all scale levels, and is why Matter dominates Antimatter in forward time. To see how this exchange of energy in our scale takes place we can look at smaller atomic scales to find an exact model of repetitive scales [scale defined as two way circulations balanced between matter/antimatter lobes in motion around themselves] as found in Universe.

To answer your question Gregg how the Universe 'engineers' rigid relationships, crystals, and the many shapes found within and outside of static gravity fields is because all motion is due to scale interactions imbedded in a greater balanced field of motion between positive and negative matter/antimatter on very large scales [all Graviton tubes of force/impacts/demodulations/plasmoid feeds around nucleons/with central twist annihilations/reverses circuit on way out as an Antigraviton at FTL speeds/and above frequencies of Light].

The sub particle Mesons reveal the shape of our Universe. High rotational matter/antimatter lobes rotating around lines of force from gravity stream, and around itself and in opposite directions creating attractive force and exchanging flux [push from collapsing fields/flux] from both sides of circulations attempting to collapse back to zero. The closer the two opposing circulations become the faster the rotations and exchange of flux. The flux is the graviton and antigraviton completing the circuit between the two opposing circulations. This sub particle Meson might be a whole mini-universe unto itself!!!! With multiple scales/frequencies approaching an infinity but it is finite and is an example how the division between polarities is constantly in motion in attempting to collapse back to the zero point.

John Rickey

<b>[cosmicsurfer] " ... we can look at smaller atomic scales to find an exact model of repetitive scales ... "</b>

Scale is infinite, so there must me one or more exact match somewhere. But infinite is, well, infinite. The chances of us finding an exact repetition are pretty small. We could look forever and not succeed.

<b>[cosmicsurfer] " ... scale defined as two way circulations balanced between matter/antimatter lobes ... "</b>

Please choose a word or words other than scale for this. Unless you just really want others to not have a clue what you are talking about. Redefining common words like this is a sure fire way to loose your audience.

Adding a modifer of some sort is one way to reduce the confusion. You could use "surfer's scale". Or "John's scale". And that way you get credit if it should ever catch on.

Even better would be a word or phrase that does not include the word "scale". I'm not sure what you are trying to talk about, but from the definition you gave it has absolutely nothing to do with scale as defined in the dictionary, and even less to do with scale as we use it here.

Modifying "scale" may well be less confusing, but it is still far from clear. So, your best bet (IF you want to avoid confusion) would be an invented word, something like "dfprure" or maybe "himelsputr" or ... .

Regards,
LB

Larry,

If scales are infinite then they are not measurable. The definition of a scale is something that can be measured, obviously you cannot measure an infinity that is absurd. We live in a multiple scale Universe that is duplicatable otherwise the scale of weights and measures could not have any equivalancy anywhere in your model of scales being infinite. It is impossible to have infinite atomic scales, if so the atom would not be a solid and your circular logic would make it impossible to contruct a Universe.

Now, maybe there is a better way to describe "Multiple Scales" I am open to trying to make a clearer description. Regarding repetition of form, I think we have a three dimensions that are represented at every scale and are a cascade imbedded in the next higher/lower scale of measurable quanta. So, clearly I am not referring to "Multiple Dimensions" because in reality we really do not have multiple dimensions, each imbedded scale is a three dimensional matrix. However, there could be hyperdimensional exchanges going on that would cross the multiple scales. So, if you can come up with a better description please let me know I would be open to your comments.

Sorry Larry, but you are wrong in my opinion about scales being an infinity [maybe what you mean is that a scale can approach an infinite proportions which I believe is true-part of the problem is with Meta Model no boundary condition that would create a center of Universe which I agree with because space is infinite/however; there are boundaries between SCALES and mass in motion around centers of rotation otherwise no structures can exist that are SCALABLE/there might be an ALMOST infinite number of scales....SPACE is infinite, so again maybe there are ALMOST an infinite number of MEGA arrangements of finite measearable SCALES in Universe],

John Rickey

A measuring device, such as a meter stick or a clock, has physical existence. Physical things cannot be infinite.

A coordinate axis, such as scale or time, has conceptual existence. Conceptual things can be as infinite as we want them to be.

A scale of geometries, a scale of spectrums, are not concepts, they are real. A music scale is a description of notes that are real not infinite. A scale is more then a concept it is a construct of measurable parameters. A range of scales indicates finite qualities not infinities...multiple scales define multiple ranges. Maybe to your satisfaction there does need to be an aditional description attached to scales and I have been thinking about that...I will let you know what I come up with.

An 'infinite scale' well that certainly would be a paradox. Let's see the Universe is scalable to infinite proportions. What would that mean? How do you perform the "concept" of scalable measurements on an infinity? Impossible there is nothing to compare it to in size, so there for it is not even scalable!!!! All scales are infinite???? Impossible again-no dimensions for measurement would exist in a non-scalable infinity.

Infinity is a non scale. Time is a measurement of motion which is scalable. [Astronomical] Scales are a parameter of measurement defining size, shape, and motion of mass in a particular given space. So, Larry you are wrong on your points regarding scale being just a concept it is a boundary region that can be compared to another boundary region not an infinity.