RS2 Update

bperet's picture
Submitted by bperet on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 17:53

I am in the process of writing up a detailed book on RS2, simply called, "RS2: The Next Generation; A summary of 15 years of research into the Reciprocal System of theory." The book will contain everything that myself, Nehru and Gopi have come up with when experimenting with variants of Larson's theories--basically, the stuff that actually worked to better the RS in general. It is not meant to replace Larson's work, but to supplement it with a more detailed understanding of the relationships of space and time.

I do check in on the RS2 forum regularly, and will make sections of the book available on the site when they get to a stable state. I find it harder to try to keep a web copy and a book form in sync, particularly with all the figures and diagrams (the biggest complaint I've gotten from selling Larson's books was that there weren't enough diagrams, so I am going diagram-heavy).

I am also working on upgrading both the RS and RS2 sites with the latest software, to get more material online. But there are a lot of demands on my time right now, so I'll do what I can, when I can. If this, or the RStheory site disappears or starts dumping errors, just try again in an hour or so. I do my debugging on Windows 7, and the production server is CentOS Linux, so there are some compatibility issues when I copy things over. I do my best to keep the sites in a working order.

Any comments on the book or the RS or RS2 theory, please feel free to post to the RS2 forum, as I don't have the RS forums working yet.

Comments

cdannemi

Mon, 05/09/2011 - 19:41

bperet, I am looking forward to that book, I will say the lack of pictures is my biggest complaint in Larson's work. Also please include lots of mathematical formulas as well. With this I am getting into the different ways that individuals take in information, for me math and pictures are key to understanding how something works.

bperet's picture

bperet

Fri, 05/13/2011 - 10:22

There are a LOT of diagrams. I am not going too heavy on math--all that is really needed is basic arithmetic. Curiously enough, when Gopi and I were working on the geometric aspects, we found that it was the geometry that generated the higher mathematical functions--namely the series expansions for logs and trig. The logs and trigonometric functions aren't fundamental, but just a "hall of mirrors" trying to describe a geometric relationship that is in time, not in space, and hence cannot be directly observed. So it has to be "faked" with infinite series. And our current mathematics does not do a good job once "infinity" enters the equations.

It will be explained in the book, and hopefully be understandable!

Bruce

cdannemi

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 08:54

So what you are saying is that the Taylor Maclaurin series is the "natrual view", and the compressed form that humans have created is an abstraction. If its true, it wouldn't suprise me. I have always wonder if the Universe can be built off a few fundamental posulates it follows that so can math, after all multiplcation is just a short hand way to write series addition. I am now even more curious about this book.

bperet's picture

bperet

Sat, 05/14/2011 - 10:24

Take a look at Gopi's paper on Calculus and Geometry: http://forum.rs2theory.org/node/366.

It was the first step in understanding what Infinity is, conceptually, and why we have to use series expansions when infinity becomes the reference point of measure, rather than zero.

Gopi's picture

Gopi

Wed, 05/25/2011 - 00:00

The Taylor Maclaurin series is the natural view ONLY under the assumptions which we have set up with regard to differentiability and so on, which are to be taken in their proper context. Every series expansion is done "around a point" and extends to infinite terms. For example, the sine, cosine, exponential functions work very well, because the differential of those functions just multiplies or divides by a number, or phase.

It is important to treat the series expansions by taking care that:

1. The infinite number of terms are all justified

2. The point of reference is justified

With that, they are just a bridge between zero and infinity.

BE the change that you want to see in the world.

davelook

Fri, 07/01/2011 - 11:39

I've mentioned it before, but what do you think of this series?

http://physics-quest.org/fine_structure_constant.pdf