On re-reading I see that the jumps do refer to the existence of a ratio thus of proportionality.

But I guess their characteristic is "orthogonal"; they are always orthogonal. The "length" and "reference length" can each be in any direction even in different universes; only the ratio is what counts. (And only the ratios count in Schrodinger's equation too). When I said "back and forth across the first jump" I mean not "subtraction" but "across dimensions". It could be back and forth between universes; it's just "back and forth" not linear.

But "back and forth across the first jump" is the exception (self-reference); otherwise there is an implied third jump. So my dimensional and perspective analysis gave the result that the "fine structure constant" is: an option between self-reference
and 3-dimensions. This tallies with my concept that "thinking (including physics) involves either "contemplating Existence directly (self-reference); or comparing (C) and matching at least two patterns (A, B), thus 3 dimensions A, B, C so the fine structure constant is the same as the large structure constant: the thinking physicist!

-dolphin

THe mathematics of complex numbers etc. thus is accounted for bt tracking the jumps while doing dimensional analysis thus getting a perspective analysis. Hopefully anyway!

• From the triangle - yanniru - March 5, 2002 - 14:39 UTC
  • Maintaining fences when demolishing them - dolphin - March 7, 2002 - 08:55 UTC
    • Thanks - yanniru - March 7, 2002 - 14:46 UTC