christx11
Jedi Master
I would like to ask about 'Sequential Fragmentation Theory' and whether it has anything to do with the 'expanded gravity model' , 'uft', information or not?
I found the SFT 'Sequential Fragmentation Theory' years ago and many of the sessions clues seem to fit it. I know that there is a high probability that the things I see as fitting the clues are wishful thinking and/or just data fitting in circumstances where the context may have been for something else, yet I have checked on this little theory periodically over the years and it seems more and more that little things seem to fit.
'SFT' seems to have originated in the depths of the scientific intelligence matrix ( DOE, Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore/Berkeley, Oakridge, the national laboratory network ). Wilbur K. Brown seems to be the originator with papers back in the 60's in the area of astrophysics.
Later publications formalized the theory -
SFT is basically a theory about particle size distributions resulting from 'continued comminution', and later 'particle size' was converted to 'mass'. Continued comminution's most extreme example would be explosion.
Later on this theory was also picked up by Ken Wohletz in the field of vulcanology. Ken Wohletz is also from within the scientific intelligence matrix - LANL, LLNL, DOE, etc.
This is the basics of the theory:
Basically the function for the distribution is controlled by a free parameter, a variable, (gamma), where (-1 <= gamma < 0). It is kind of like a function that describes the relationship between particle sizes (or masses) and gamma can be seen as a variable dial defining the distribution. One of the mass derivations describes it as thus:
So from my limited scientific background it appears to be basically a geometric theory which is governed by a tunable variable that has a range (-1 <= gamma < 0).
The clues, first off it is a geometric theory. It does not purport to have anything to do with gravity. In fact the authors state that the theory is only about resultant distributions and does not purport to describe the forces involved at all. The SFT theory is not even about inward binding forces that is gravity as we perceive it. SFT is about an outward process - how a large object breaks into smaller and smaller pieces. It is a reach but 'expanded gravity' - expansion - explosion - outward. And even though the authors make it clear that the theory does not describe the forces involved, there are forces involved in a continued comminution process especially if you think of the outward force of explosion.
The more I read papers on the SFT theory, the more little things seemed to fit. For instance the sessions excerpts on gravity and uft -
SFT is straight out of the Scientific/intelligence matrix.
Ken Wohletz' (the vulcanologist) paper: 'Eruptive Mechanisms of the Neapolitan Yellow Tuff Interpreted from Stratigraphic, Chemical, and Granulometric Data', Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Energy Vol.67, 263-290, 1995.
Ken Wohletz CV as of 2008 -
Currently CV shows -
What else about the theory seems to fit some clues?
Some of the Mandelbrot stuff -
SFT is not only about how matter distributes but the gamma free parameter is also a measure of the fractal dimension of the distribution. In fact it is precisely 1/3 the fractal dimension of the distribution. In other words the fractal dimension of a distribution is -3gamma.
One interesting thing about SFT is that with the variable exponent (gamma), the resultant distribution curves as you tune the free parameter reminds me of an oscilloscope.
It also makes me think that SFT could be used to describe the light spectrum. As you tune the dial (gamma) the waves become more peaked and wavelength narrower. Move the dial the other way and the peaks of the curves become shorter and the wavelengths longer. And this might be a tie-in to the visual spectrum / prism clues. And also remember that each curve's gamma value also describes its fractal dimension.
These clues have been fruitful in many areas, but they also seemingly apply to SFT.
Supernovae:
One may have run into several papers on SFT while researching supernovae.
Pyrotechnics:
Several of the SFT papers have fci experiments: Fuel Coolant Interaction as analogs of phreatomagmatic events - using thermite interaction with water - thermitic compounds are basically what fireworks are made of - aluminum, zinc, magnesium, metal powders. So researching pyrotechnics you could easily run into SFT papers.
Vulcanology:
And then the vulcanology as a cover for the research and all of Ken Wohletz' SFT research.
Sequential Fragmentation Theory has been used successfully in many areas, visual image statistics, sedimentation, aerosols, vulcanology, astrophysics, ....
But gravity is a binding inward force and it obeys the inverse square law.
This is where my idea / hypothesis takes over. Perhaps wishful thinking or just data fitting of a layperson's eyes on a rather complex idea. Anyway I'll put it out there, it can only be wrong. If you don't ask you don't know.
In the last couple of years I ran into a web page where Ken Wohletz consulted some researchers that were trying to determine the mechanism for the creation of what was called the Mars blueberries.
Link
Additional Link and Link
It appears that SFT gamma takes not only minus values for continued comminution, but positive values that indicate accretion, agglomeration, etc.
So SFT models both an outward process (outward forces) and an inward process (inward forces).
So SFT has two directions being modeled - inward and outward. The inward and outward processes (forces) modeled go throughout the entire fractal dimensional range ( 0 --> 3 ) (-1 <= gamma < 0) and (0 < gamma <= 1).
That is interesting.
I subsequently encountered a paper by Wilbur Brown from 2000, that also confirmed this.
Title: The Birth of Planetary Systems Directly from SuperNovae
Author: Wilbur K. Brown
Publication: Origin of Elements in the Solar System: Implications of Post-1957 Observations.
Edit: Edited by O. Manuel, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2000.
Link
An interesting quote I ran into - (Link)
One of the interesting things about SFT is that it seemingly shows that the lognormal distribution is only a mathematical construct. Brown and Wohletz show numerous examples where a lognormal distribution fit a data set, but an SFT distribution fit the data set better, precisely in the areas mentioned above (the tails of the curve).
The second bolded statement in the 'John Conover' quote comes into play in regards to the 'double loop of the cylinder'.
But where do we get to an inverse square or square grid, force???
How do we get here:
Inverse Square Law, General
Inverse Square Law, Light
Inverse Square Law, Gravity
Well the following got me thinking:
Along with the mention in the sessions multiple times of "change the unit".
About a year ago the session from September 2008, regarding Heim, it seemed changing the unit to '2' was a good idea (and the 6 dimensional construct of the Heim theory seems productive). Well here we go, what if in SFT we changed the range of the tunable variable gamma to '2'. make the exponent '2'. Would that give us our square geometric grid that could then include the gravity we are familiar with?
(-2 <= gamma < 0) and (0 < gamma <= 2)
Complexi-gram makes me think of 'complex' 'mass'. What if gamma were complex and or both complex and square.
On the one hand complex and square could be built in to gamma just having a value = -1 ( i^2 ).
On the other hand in a layperson's eyes '2' can be represented as ( 2i^4 ) and here I see at least in a layperson's eyes - octagonal and complex.
Finally, if we imagined that gamma did have a range of (-2 <= gamma < 0) and (0 < gamma <= 2), then if the fractal dimensional coefficient on gamma held (Df = -3gamma), the result would be that we would have 6 fractal dimensional units to be able to account for what we call gravity and what we call gravity would possibly be Df = 6. It would actually be perhaps the realm border of 6D to 7D. Is it possible that what we call gravity is actually a 6th density manifestation? Another interesting thing in such a model would be the perfect balance as there would be an inward and outward force throughout the entire dimensional continuum. And gravity as the sessions allude 'the expanded gravity model' would be the inward force that goes all the way through all 6 dimensional units - the inbreath. Perhaps consciousness is the outward force throughout all 6 dimensional units - the outbreath.
Some of the things that then make sense in a layperson's eyes:
The idea of density versus dimension.
If dimensions are not discrete, 1 dimension, 2 dimensions, 3..., discrete dimensions as we think of them, (2 +1), (3 +1), 11 or 29 and branes or whatever string theory is now up to. If they are continuous, then there are infinitely many. If a density were perhaps a continuous fractal dimensional unit, then some of the sessions excerpts about dimension and density in my eyes seem to make some sense.
Many of the ideas - 'Frequency of light...', 'complex square matrix', 'octagonal complexigram', 'the realities begin to reveal their perfectly squared nature to you', 'connect the threes', 'Both times 2 is your square, my dear. In other words, perfect balance',
If SFT were 6 dimensional maybe what Marinov saw was that all are waves across the entire 6dim continuum.
Even if this idea is not on the mark, I still like the ideas that it presents. The SFT theory with gamma +-2, gives a square grid. In that square grid there are 6 dimensions. The dimensions are not discrete dimensions as we think of dimensions, they are continuous like a visual/electromagnetic spectrum. Gravity may then be the whole thing or at least the inward force throughout the whole thing. The inward and outward forces go through the entire range - perfect balance. The idea anyway makes sense to me.
What is 7th density? Well it seems to be distinguished a little differently. 7th is 'Union with the One', 'One continuous cycling', 'big bang'. I am guessing an endless multiverse of 6D continuums.????
Anyway that is about what constitutes my question. There are dozens of other session excerpts that seem to fit one way or another with the idea of SFT, but then again this is from a layperson's eyes and the wishful thinking / data fitting scenario has a high probability. Octagonal Complexigram could relate to octonions or something else entirely and my layperson's eyes are just fitting what it is familiar with for lack of knowledge.
Did the whole Ken Wohletz vulcanology, scientific intelligence matrix thing send me off in to a data fitting spree or is there something more to the whole SFT story?
I found the SFT 'Sequential Fragmentation Theory' years ago and many of the sessions clues seem to fit it. I know that there is a high probability that the things I see as fitting the clues are wishful thinking and/or just data fitting in circumstances where the context may have been for something else, yet I have checked on this little theory periodically over the years and it seems more and more that little things seem to fit.
'SFT' seems to have originated in the depths of the scientific intelligence matrix ( DOE, Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore/Berkeley, Oakridge, the national laboratory network ). Wilbur K. Brown seems to be the originator with papers back in the 60's in the area of astrophysics.
Later publications formalized the theory -
SFT is basically a theory about particle size distributions resulting from 'continued comminution', and later 'particle size' was converted to 'mass'. Continued comminution's most extreme example would be explosion.
Later on this theory was also picked up by Ken Wohletz in the field of vulcanology. Ken Wohletz is also from within the scientific intelligence matrix - LANL, LLNL, DOE, etc.
This is the basics of the theory:
Basically the function for the distribution is controlled by a free parameter, a variable, (gamma), where (-1 <= gamma < 0). It is kind of like a function that describes the relationship between particle sizes (or masses) and gamma can be seen as a variable dial defining the distribution. One of the mass derivations describes it as thus:
So from my limited scientific background it appears to be basically a geometric theory which is governed by a tunable variable that has a range (-1 <= gamma < 0).
The clues, first off it is a geometric theory. It does not purport to have anything to do with gravity. In fact the authors state that the theory is only about resultant distributions and does not purport to describe the forces involved at all. The SFT theory is not even about inward binding forces that is gravity as we perceive it. SFT is about an outward process - how a large object breaks into smaller and smaller pieces. It is a reach but 'expanded gravity' - expansion - explosion - outward. And even though the authors make it clear that the theory does not describe the forces involved, there are forces involved in a continued comminution process especially if you think of the outward force of explosion.
The more I read papers on the SFT theory, the more little things seemed to fit. For instance the sessions excerpts on gravity and uft -
SFT is straight out of the Scientific/intelligence matrix.
Ken Wohletz' (the vulcanologist) paper: 'Eruptive Mechanisms of the Neapolitan Yellow Tuff Interpreted from Stratigraphic, Chemical, and Granulometric Data', Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Energy Vol.67, 263-290, 1995.
Ken Wohletz CV as of 2008 -
Currently CV shows -
What else about the theory seems to fit some clues?
Some of the Mandelbrot stuff -
SFT is not only about how matter distributes but the gamma free parameter is also a measure of the fractal dimension of the distribution. In fact it is precisely 1/3 the fractal dimension of the distribution. In other words the fractal dimension of a distribution is -3gamma.
One interesting thing about SFT is that with the variable exponent (gamma), the resultant distribution curves as you tune the free parameter reminds me of an oscilloscope.
It also makes me think that SFT could be used to describe the light spectrum. As you tune the dial (gamma) the waves become more peaked and wavelength narrower. Move the dial the other way and the peaks of the curves become shorter and the wavelengths longer. And this might be a tie-in to the visual spectrum / prism clues. And also remember that each curve's gamma value also describes its fractal dimension.
These clues have been fruitful in many areas, but they also seemingly apply to SFT.
Supernovae:
One may have run into several papers on SFT while researching supernovae.
Pyrotechnics:
Several of the SFT papers have fci experiments: Fuel Coolant Interaction as analogs of phreatomagmatic events - using thermite interaction with water - thermitic compounds are basically what fireworks are made of - aluminum, zinc, magnesium, metal powders. So researching pyrotechnics you could easily run into SFT papers.
Vulcanology:
And then the vulcanology as a cover for the research and all of Ken Wohletz' SFT research.
Sequential Fragmentation Theory has been used successfully in many areas, visual image statistics, sedimentation, aerosols, vulcanology, astrophysics, ....
But gravity is a binding inward force and it obeys the inverse square law.
This is where my idea / hypothesis takes over. Perhaps wishful thinking or just data fitting of a layperson's eyes on a rather complex idea. Anyway I'll put it out there, it can only be wrong. If you don't ask you don't know.
In the last couple of years I ran into a web page where Ken Wohletz consulted some researchers that were trying to determine the mechanism for the creation of what was called the Mars blueberries.
Link
Additional Link and Link
It appears that SFT gamma takes not only minus values for continued comminution, but positive values that indicate accretion, agglomeration, etc.
So SFT models both an outward process (outward forces) and an inward process (inward forces).
So SFT has two directions being modeled - inward and outward. The inward and outward processes (forces) modeled go throughout the entire fractal dimensional range ( 0 --> 3 ) (-1 <= gamma < 0) and (0 < gamma <= 1).
That is interesting.
I subsequently encountered a paper by Wilbur Brown from 2000, that also confirmed this.
Title: The Birth of Planetary Systems Directly from SuperNovae
Author: Wilbur K. Brown
Publication: Origin of Elements in the Solar System: Implications of Post-1957 Observations.
Edit: Edited by O. Manuel, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2000.
Link
An interesting quote I ran into - (Link)
One of the interesting things about SFT is that it seemingly shows that the lognormal distribution is only a mathematical construct. Brown and Wohletz show numerous examples where a lognormal distribution fit a data set, but an SFT distribution fit the data set better, precisely in the areas mentioned above (the tails of the curve).
The second bolded statement in the 'John Conover' quote comes into play in regards to the 'double loop of the cylinder'.
But where do we get to an inverse square or square grid, force???
How do we get here:
Inverse Square Law, General
Inverse Square Law, Light
Inverse Square Law, Gravity
Well the following got me thinking:
Along with the mention in the sessions multiple times of "change the unit".
About a year ago the session from September 2008, regarding Heim, it seemed changing the unit to '2' was a good idea (and the 6 dimensional construct of the Heim theory seems productive). Well here we go, what if in SFT we changed the range of the tunable variable gamma to '2'. make the exponent '2'. Would that give us our square geometric grid that could then include the gravity we are familiar with?
(-2 <= gamma < 0) and (0 < gamma <= 2)
Complexi-gram makes me think of 'complex' 'mass'. What if gamma were complex and or both complex and square.
On the one hand complex and square could be built in to gamma just having a value = -1 ( i^2 ).
On the other hand in a layperson's eyes '2' can be represented as ( 2i^4 ) and here I see at least in a layperson's eyes - octagonal and complex.
Finally, if we imagined that gamma did have a range of (-2 <= gamma < 0) and (0 < gamma <= 2), then if the fractal dimensional coefficient on gamma held (Df = -3gamma), the result would be that we would have 6 fractal dimensional units to be able to account for what we call gravity and what we call gravity would possibly be Df = 6. It would actually be perhaps the realm border of 6D to 7D. Is it possible that what we call gravity is actually a 6th density manifestation? Another interesting thing in such a model would be the perfect balance as there would be an inward and outward force throughout the entire dimensional continuum. And gravity as the sessions allude 'the expanded gravity model' would be the inward force that goes all the way through all 6 dimensional units - the inbreath. Perhaps consciousness is the outward force throughout all 6 dimensional units - the outbreath.
Some of the things that then make sense in a layperson's eyes:
The idea of density versus dimension.
If dimensions are not discrete, 1 dimension, 2 dimensions, 3..., discrete dimensions as we think of them, (2 +1), (3 +1), 11 or 29 and branes or whatever string theory is now up to. If they are continuous, then there are infinitely many. If a density were perhaps a continuous fractal dimensional unit, then some of the sessions excerpts about dimension and density in my eyes seem to make some sense.
Many of the ideas - 'Frequency of light...', 'complex square matrix', 'octagonal complexigram', 'the realities begin to reveal their perfectly squared nature to you', 'connect the threes', 'Both times 2 is your square, my dear. In other words, perfect balance',
If SFT were 6 dimensional maybe what Marinov saw was that all are waves across the entire 6dim continuum.
Even if this idea is not on the mark, I still like the ideas that it presents. The SFT theory with gamma +-2, gives a square grid. In that square grid there are 6 dimensions. The dimensions are not discrete dimensions as we think of dimensions, they are continuous like a visual/electromagnetic spectrum. Gravity may then be the whole thing or at least the inward force throughout the whole thing. The inward and outward forces go through the entire range - perfect balance. The idea anyway makes sense to me.
What is 7th density? Well it seems to be distinguished a little differently. 7th is 'Union with the One', 'One continuous cycling', 'big bang'. I am guessing an endless multiverse of 6D continuums.????
Anyway that is about what constitutes my question. There are dozens of other session excerpts that seem to fit one way or another with the idea of SFT, but then again this is from a layperson's eyes and the wishful thinking / data fitting scenario has a high probability. Octagonal Complexigram could relate to octonions or something else entirely and my layperson's eyes are just fitting what it is familiar with for lack of knowledge.
Did the whole Ken Wohletz vulcanology, scientific intelligence matrix thing send me off in to a data fitting spree or is there something more to the whole SFT story?
