Quantum Geometry 1 (1170) words

This is a continuation of this.


These are my opinions.


Zeroth waveform configuration space: atomic nucleus = {proton, neutron}
First waveform configuration space: atomic radius = {proton, electron}


Many people are having a hard time understanding the Periodic Table. It took me several months as well, and I only connected the shape to microcanonical “space” & “time” after much contemplation: there was simply nothing else they could be.

There are only so many unknown variables.

The challenge is in perceiving the totality of the nested structure and also the particular reactions taking place within it. The trick is to recall that no matter how much we “zoom in” on reality, there are 3 space and 1 time dimensions. It’s true on the scale of the universe right down to the scale of a single atom. Thus we can conclude that: Spacetime cardinality (number of independent dimensions (=4)) is preserved under [the] fractal [operator] (zooming in arbitrarily).

A single atom thus represents a particular quantum number within the microcanonical set or: “Periodic Table” (below). A particular atom’s reactions are consequent wholly to its positioning relative this greater fractal shape: the set of all sets of possible waveform stable states (this will be explored in my book).

postulates of quantum chemistry 3jp
Possible Microstates of the First Configuration Space

This is the geometric shape of the Periodic Table: consequent to the {electron, proton} duality. The stable states are the Noble Gases, equal to a full electron complement for a particular heptant (above). (heptant = any of the seven rows of the Periodic Table).

Fractal Spiral Geometry

On the finest scale, each micro-canonical “dimension” is nested within subsequent dimensions. As micro-space and micro-time are entangled, the Periodic Table has a structure which is not independent of itself.

You are above, below & within

Chemical and Nuclear Reactivity

We will see in my book that the microcanonical spacetime cardinality (4) also explains nuclear reactivity. The microcanonical harmonics (heptants delineated by the black  oscillating wave) are illlustrated below. The vertical axis represents the number of neutrons and horizontal is protons.

Known Microstates of the Zeroth Configuration Space

An isotope’s proximity to the (zeroth configuration space) stable states predicts its (nuclear) reactivity (a.k.a.: radioactivity). Specifically, the further a species is from the central (darker) line, the more radioactive it is. By contrast, an element’s proximity to a (first configuration space) stable state (“Noble Gases”) predicts its (chemical) reactivity. The closer a species is to a Noble Gas, the more reactive it is.

We postulate that this inverse relationship stems from the canonical conjugation (CC) of the attributes of the {proton, electron} and {proton, neutron} waveform pairs. Namely, the waveforms possess the qualities of

Ψ Neutron: {dense, uncharged, heavy}
Ψ Proton: {dense, charged, heavy}
Ψ Electron: {diffuse, charged, light}

We can explicitly see that while individual waveform pairs share certain attributes, several are polar opposites. These connections will be further explored in my book.

Since both contain the proton, the pair sets of the zeroth ({Ψn, Ψp}) and first ({Ψe, Ψp}) waveform configuration spaces cannot be 100% independent. But they are also maximally independent. For an example of independence: trends in reactivity are perpendicular and complementary. For an example of dependence, nuclear properties of elements are predicted both by their zeroth and first configuration space waveform numbers. This will also be explored in my book: I present a model of universal energetic exchange free of any singularity.

What is Energy? (Pet Peeve #1)

<rant> Pretty much anytime someone says the word “Energy”, I get annoyed. This is because energy is the universal “currency”: all the universe can be imagined as different manifestations of such. Obviously, there aren’t many similarities between the mass-energy of a black hole (unobservable) and the energetic potential contained in light (wholly unmanifest). In fact, these phenomena are so different that they are only connected via Energy.

Thus to say “all is Energy” is meaningless: it makes no predictions because it discerns no hypotheses. It reminds me of people who use words like “Tantric” and “Physics” to bolster their pathetic attempts at cultural contribution. Don’t make the mistake of thinking you can bullshit your way through rigorous disciplines, it only angers those of us who have spent our whole lives pursuing knowledge and truth! </rant>

“All is love & energy & blissfulness” = put the book down, walk away.

When dealing specifically with massive waveforms, Energy is the potential function [of mass]. This is true inside the manifest realm, and also between the unmanifest and manifest realms. In the latter case, as Energy penetrates the barrier between the unmanifest and manifest (as an atom is “created”), [unmanifest] energy is literally manifesting the qualities of length and momentum. Thus once an atom exists, it possesses qualities both unmanifest (position & momentum are in potential) and manifest (existing within a particular geometric radius).

The Microcanonical Spacetime Event (if you’ve made it this far, you’re math-core)

Consider a single atom as a spacetime event. The event (Δs2) is defined by the relation:



Special Relativity indicates that on the macrocanonical scale (our scale), a single event makes the link between the size of the displacement vector (Δx2+Δy2+Δz2) and the corresponding time interval (Δt) (vis-à-vis the speed of light). When we shrink to the level of an atom (fractal operator), we are additionally bound by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which states that such (Δx2+Δy2+Δz2) are not independent of their time varying measurements. However, Special Relativity also imposes that these observables are not independent of the time variable (since measurements of state variables must take place over a nonzero interval) over which they are measured!

It’s enough to make your head spin.

What Next?

I have already challenged the world to see if anyone can demonstrate how this formalism predicts the allotropic distribution of Sulphur (easiest example since allotropes are numerous). No one has gotten back to me. I don’t know why it didn’t work out yet, but I feel people are thinking about it…

Good Luck 😉

Epilogue: How Many Measurements are Possible?

Inclusive of their antimatter equivalents, the set of fundamental massive waveforms: {electron, proton, neutron} has 6 elements. This cardinality is also noted in the Trasarenu of the Bhagavata Purana (III.11.5, Lingham, 2016): 6.

It is not clear exactly what this means exactly but I wonder: Is six somehow connected to measurement limits of massive systems? Can the objective limits of subjective conscious converge with objective mathematical calculations? Should they? Can we give a reasonable treatise to “occult” or “mystic” phenomena? If so, which ones? Which systems are demonstrably based on false precepts?


As a warm-up, I have given a proof of Master’s Perfected Pariksha. I use concepts from modern physics (Entropy, Statistics) to demonstrate that his system is both of lower Entropy (less energy “wasted” on diagnosis) and higher discernment (13 basic archetypes instead of 10) than a rival system. So fun!

As another warm-up, I demonstrated reincarnation. I used the Quantum Mind Hypothesis as well as posits of the Copenhagen Interpretation. Now I’m really getting excited!

These steps are hopefully just the start of geeking out at a whole new level. Reality should be made as simple as possible of course, but no simpler… (giggles)

Jai Ganesha  ❤





Science: Boring God, Great Weapon (1599 words)

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAOm Ganesha, Lord of Knowledge, please guide our exploration of the nature of reality.

Disclaimer: These are my opinions. Although not inconsistent with the Copenhagen Interpretation, this Quantum Mechanical (QM) formalism centres on the individual waveform. Thus algebraic QM is replaced with its set-theoretic counterpart: we consider individual waveforms (neutron, proton, electron, conscious), their interactions and reconfigurations but the focus is primarily geometric, not analytic. The removal of explicit algebra is done in the hope that these findings will find a broader audience.

Primary Measurement Uncertainty

There are two primary manifestations of Uncertainty: {Position & Momentum} and {Energy, Time}. Both sets of variables are canonically conjugate on the fine scale of reality: the product of their uncertainty has a lower bound: the Heisenberg constant. The {Position, Momentum} conjugation occurs in systems of measurable length and massive momentum. The {Energy, Time} set applies to unmanifest systems, which exist in potential energetic form and are not confined to the physics of manifest space. This effect places an upper bound on the coherent information that can be extracted from systems.

Secondary Measurement Uncertainty

Since the fundamental nature of matter is quantum mechanical, then there must be some aspect to us which is wavelike. If we are to enjoy awareness, then we must measure our environment and ourselves. Our consciousness, a quantum mechanical waveform: is also wavelike. As waves always have the potential to interfere when they are coherent, additional measurement uncertainty is involved in consciousness. This effect imposes even more limitations on the coherent information that can be extracted from wavelike systems by living consciousness.

Quantum Waveform Projector Flesh Blobs Create Coherent Electron Sub-Matrix to Sample Light-Powered Environment: What Could Possibly go Wrong?

As it is projected by the individual living body, human consciousness is subjective by definition. However, we encounter much in ancient teachings stating there is also an objective aspect to consciousness. How can we reconcile these two?

Hint: it’s not by saying “all is one” and taking a giant gulp of ayahuasca.

Optical Resolution

The Optical Resolution is defined how far apart two distinct objects must be for them to register as distinct objects (in a lens system, specifically a camera). It is described by the formula:

r =0.61(lambda)/NA

where lambda is the wavelength (of light) and the numerical aperture is determined by the physical properties of the camera. Since our eyes are lenses, we hypothesize this form might predict some effects of observational consciousness.

Lambda is the wavelength of light. A wavelength is how much space must pass before a waveform shape repeats itself. We consider the simplistic example of white light spreading into its individual coloured wavelengths through a prism:

“we are all beings of light” – hippies


Electromagnetic waves (radiation) contain particular energies, corresponding to particular frequencies. Every individual light oscillation (quantum) contains the same energy, but the energy density varies depending on the type of radiation. Since light travels at a finite speed, as its wavelength gets longer, the contained energy takes longer to propagate. The red wavelength is longest and violet is shortest, making it easy to see that red light has the lowest energy density and violet the highest. We observe many more full wavelengths of violet than red outside of the prism. It is for this reason that higher frequencies make it possible to distinguish increasingly nearby objects: since the wavelength is shorter, more individual waveforms occur (per unit distance) and since the information is held in the waveforms, more waveforms = more information. Thus a longer wavelength creates a longer resolution distance, as the energetic density of waveforms is lower. This is also noted as “frequency” in physics textbooks. Understanding the fabric of reality means accepting that there is no procedural separation between these notions but for the physical substratum which expounds them: described by NA.

The numerical aperture (NA) has to do with how light is absorbed by your device. For instance: denser media bend light more and so are considered better collimators (light gathering devices). Since superior collimators can gather more information, this increases a camera’s ability to resolve different objects, yielding a decrease in the minimum distance required between two objects to distinguish them.

In physics, resolution is the ability to tell the difference between two objects which are different whereas deconvolution is the process of distinguishing two entities whose effects are entangled.



How can we separate two things that appear to us as identical? Can we know whether two seemingly different things are actually aspects of one sameness?  The process of deconvolution must be more complex than resolution, earlier expounded with a single formula. Deconvolution is often encountered in Signal Processing: a highly sophisticated multi-disciplinary domain.

If we are beings of light and light is made up entirely of waveforms, how can we distinguish our particular nodes? We must possess some means to observe (sample) ourselves: this is how we draw meaning from our external and internal environments. It seems reasonable that the clarity of such observations will predict their objectivity if such are predicated on true hypotheses.

As beginners, we minimize the subjective bias by restricting ourselves to the observable domain: the one where Entropy unilaterally increases in the absence of outside forces. Forces are just that: they force something to happen. Certainly they can force Entropy to remain constant or decrease. “Negentropy” or “The potential for Entropy to increase at some later time” is commonly referenced in biological writings. This is because Negentropy (as a positive quantity) is a way to measure how much ordered energy is held by living organisms.


In the Manifest, Entropy (spontaneous increase of disorder) precludes no mechanism but time reversal invariance. The unmanifest wavelike exists in potential: not bound to unconstrained Entropy increase, but subject to its own “quantum mechanics”. This might seem “esoteric” but consider: what happens to your consciousness when you’re asleep (and not dreaming)? Do you change in the interim? Can you? Whosoever holds the key to the potential of the coherent electron matrix?

Guruji recently shared a story of blind men touching an elephant to discover his nature. Since each touched a different part, each described him completely differently. How can we describe the elephant if we do not see him? How can we speak on his nature if we have not known every facet? We can try, but we risk error if we interpret our experience incompletely.

It could be argued that we cannot satisfactorily know whether we are observing different entities or different aspects of the same entity until both entities are resolved in their totality. At first, convolution might seem to preclude such. The conscious mind self-samples, the definition of subjectivity. This subjective bias creates inevitable false associations: right down to the level of the individual observation: what is focused upon excludes the possibility of alternative focus.

Quantum mechanics describes the flow of what can be known in advance of measurements and by implication what is excluded from such measurements (as by the familiar canonical conjugation relation). The mathematical basis of Uncertainty will be expounded in my upcoming book.


The individual mind (both coherent and nonlocal) can display impressive quantum mechanical effects, if we know where to look for them. It is not my place to comment on what is psychically possible for the perfected mind, but I postulate that there is a hard lower bound on the conscious projection (sufficient complexity/coherence to display consciousness) and a soft upper bound. This latter point allows for the seemingly impossible non-local mind effects. These represent often sought but rarely realized higher harmonics (and thus less localized) of the quantum mind.

Both the degree of nonlocality (liquids being more localized and gases/plasmas increasingly non-localized) and coherence (are the waveforms coherently entangled?) of QM waveforms determine the rate at which meaningful information can be conveyed from one waveform to another. In fact, there is no time separation (but that which can be equated to “phaser calibration”) in the displacement of information within coherent QM waveforms. Entangled systems are just that: convoluted: it takes energy (Negentropy) to distinguish them.

Without understanding the underlying mathematical and set-theoretic nature of Yogic concepts, many Westerners are guilty of dismissing them as being too complicated before understanding anything about them. This is multi-dimensional saddies.

Math Without Arithmetic


When I read in Guruji’s book that he prized Viveka or Yogic discernment above all else, I was very happy. I am tired of my questions being dismissed by spiritual leaders. I know he will never do this because his standard is so much higher.

In my experience, numbers and later algebra eventually halt progress. We muse about formulae and lose sight of the greater set-theoretic aspect the thought process. As we distort our minds to do mathemacrobatics we risk losing coherence with the uninitiated (at best) or spiralling into egotistical self-aggrandizement (worse) or into evil plots to “hide the knowledge” and “make people pay their way to enlightenment” (ugh), a ploy so old it is actually pathetic how transparent it is.

literally everyone sees through that in 2 seconds.

If we are to make things as simple as they can be made (but no simpler), we must understand the nature of that which samples the environment. I have contemplated this for a long time and come to the conclusion that past a certain point, new spiritual growth is not possible without guidance: the subjectivity of the conscious mind precludes one “training oneself to objectivity”. Any attempts appear to lead only to egotistical self-justification. At some point, the confirmation bias inherent to conscious auto-sampling creates physical limitations precluding new growth.

Om Shanti