Infinity line

[Epsilon=One]

Infinity Line

An Infinity line is a "gedanken" that appears to be a two dimensional, straight line that, heuristically, represents Infinity (www.CQthus.com/PT/I); Of course, a two-dimensial line can have no dimensions; as, orthogalness requires three dimensions.

An Infinity line is infinitely long and infinitesimally wide.

An Infinity line has three points: the midpoint of said line heuristically represents the infinitesimal and the end points represent the infinite.

An analysis of simultaneous, seminal motion from the three points of an Infinity line reveals the fundamental, ellipsoidal geometry of all phenomena.

It is an Infinity line that, heuristically, demonstrates the origin of two foci that evolve from three points from which all oscillations of natural phenomena originate. The complex oscillations are referred to as Triquametric motion (http://www.physicsmathforums.com/showthread.php?t=101). (In special circumstances the foci may be congruent or nearly infinitely separated.)

It may be noted that an Infinity line is analogous to the “eleventh dimension” that has had some success in unifying the disparate versions of String Theory into one theory referred to as Membrane Theory or M-Theory.

©Copyright 2005-2007 by Brunardot. All rights reserved.
Terms: PhysicsMathForums.com, Brunardot, and Pulsoid Theory must be cited.
Sorry! This Thread has not been completed.

Please Bookmark and return to this site often.

If there is an immediate need for information,
please e-mail directly at the below "Click" link.

Every effort will be made to expedite a reply
with the requested information.Please ask questions. :)
With questions it’s possible to know if
comments are logical and convincing;
or whether clarification is required.

Please note that any private correspondence
may be edited and anonymously posted unless
requested otherwise.

If images are missing, "click" the Refresh Icon.
http://www.g2d.us/ws.gifhttp://www.g2d.us/s.gifhttp://www.g2d.us/t.gifhttp://www.g2d.us/m.jpghttp://www.g2d.us/i.gif
http://www.g2d.us/x.jpg

[ste]

A line, by definition, is infinitely long. Following this logic, "endpoints" of such a line must represent the absolute extreme; the unapproachable; Infinity itself.

Having two endpoints, does this imply that there are two ways to approach infinity?

Now, if Infinity can be approached from either side, and there is only one infinity or Singularity by definition, does this mean that the universe is cyclic in nature? Is there only one Infinity line, or an Infinite amount? What are Infinity Strings (http://physicsmathforums.com/showthread.php?t=166) and how are they related to an Infinity Line? On what "scale" does an Infinity line exist (does it stretch across the entire universe)?

Is it possible for "something" to travel from being on one side of the infinitesimal to the mirrored location on the other side? Is all that occurs on one side of the infinitesimal mirrored on the other side? What does any given point on the locus of an infinity line between the infinitesimal and infinite represent? How does the Infinitesimal "connect" with reality?

Does an Infinity line have any relationship with a conceptual ellipse (in particular, its foci)?

Where on the Infinity line is Reality? Does Infinity exist within Reality, or the opposite?

How can a line that represents Infinity have an endpoint which is Infinity itself?

[ste]

An Infinity line is a two dimensional, straight line that, heuristically, represents Infinity.


There are no dimensions until there is orthogalness; the line is dimensionless.

Unless you are referring to another line in the second quotation, these two statements appear to contradict one another. Care to explain?

[Epsilon=One]

Unless you are referring to another line in the second quotation, these two statements appear to contradict one another. Care to explain?The first statement should be: "An Infinity line appears to be a two dimensional, straight line that, heuristically, represents Infinity; Of course, a two-dimensial line can have no dimensions; as, orthogalness requires three dimensions."

Thanks for catching the "loose" writing. It is difficult to be precise when writing ad hoc with little, if any, review.

I will edit and correct the original statement.