🚀 go-pugleaf

fbonsignore@beethoven.com wrote:
About the development of stars, first it must be taken into account
that we can only see a still picture of stars, then we assume there is
some relationship among them! Hence the different families of star
development. But a more integrated approach would postulate a process
similar to the formation of black holes, where particularly valued
spins (taken from a small set probably) are magnetizing the surrounding
spins in a continuous process that takes them from the single particle
which stabilizes (probably by magnetizing a stable small set of
adjacent or near adjacent fundamental particles into a higher level set
that actually helps fix the primeval spin) to full stars as we know
them. Notice that this process would take place fundamentally in all
spatial dimensions, hence the "ball" structure of natural stars, but
notice also that there is nothing that would imply that the matter
within the star is actually the same kind of matter we know of on
Earth! Actually we call it plasma, but plasma can be modeled as a set
of less-than-freely-spinning fundamental particles in the process of
losing their fixed spins, including fundamental particles that normally
("attached" to stabilized matter) would be completely-freely spinning
(void), making a very dense kind of matter *WHICH NOT NECESARILY WOULD
BE THE SAME -KIND- OF PLASMA MATTER EVERY TIME IT IS CREATED, THUS
HAVING DIFFERENT PROPERTIES* (it would make a very difficult object of
study, indeed). But also notice the following: we are assuming that the
core of the star is actually very hot! We postulate atomic reactions,
which makes sense, but it can also be considered that it is just the
boundary where activity takes place, while the interior of the star is
actually some form (completely different set of spins) of *INCONSISTENT
MATTER*, the inconsistency being shown as a high activity of spin
interaction and fixing. Heat can then be modeled as the propagation of
this spin setting activity, where the inner matter (supported by the
internal structure of spins of the star, that is, the mean value to
which the whole field is converging), is disordering outer space matter
already stabilized or fixing void matter. Notice that at some point
this spin fixing activity at the fundamental particle level will
actually begin affecting higher level structures, directly (nuclear
disintegration as we postulate it occurs in the inside of the star),
and then through intermediate particle-structures (local mean fields),
arrives to us as heat. Heat is modeled here under the usual form of
"disordered" matter and is directly linked to movement in the sense
that movement implies a continuous propagation of fixed spins through a
dense medium of freely spinning fundamental particles (or not freely
spinning fundamental particles where all constraints are solved
simultaneously to maintain "approximately" the same average mean field
value over big quantities of fundamental particles [tending to
infinity], the effect of this disequilibrium-equilibrium-disequilibrium
value setting error being heat precisely).

The important point of the process as is being modeled here is that the
core of a star can actually be a very stable and *cool* form of matter,
or even an entirely different form of matter! Indeed, the possibilities
of this model allow for stars to be local Universes, composed of
fundamentally different forms of matter and actually the remains of the
original process of the primeval fundamental particle setting its spin
and

It is also important to understand that since fields achieve an average
value, after all interactions take effect, there must be local fields
that

Consider too that being plasma as we conceive it coloquially fully
disordered matter, the ultimate form of plasma is void! Now, this
implies that in order for some process of matter (Universe) creation to
take place it is necesary that not only one fundamental particle fixes
its spin, but that (Trinity)

[About the Michelangelo code, it certainly corroborates the hypothesis
that Michelangelo was turned into da Vinci! But in order to prove it
(as fas as it can be proved without proving that there is no registry
indicating it in the secret library of the Vatican, which I would love
to inspect), it is necessary to prove that the same phenomenon of
hiding body parts in paintings when autopsies began to be performed
with a scientific intention cannot be found in any other painter of the
epoch whose work cannot be traced back to Michelangelo]

Fabrizio J Bonsignore now Danilo Jose Bonsignore
(looks like they want me to say that I am Mexican so they can have
"national pride" which seems so provincial in the context of this
discussion that it should make evident many situations...)

(Oh, oh, another session I have to close earlier)