disgusting terrsts of foreign gypsies foreign terrorst grp/cult

 meanwhile whilst resting started to rethink of the quest of finding the topological structure of dimensional structure of multiverse ->

 - even though i had not yet revisited topology introduction again,

what i improvised thought of following ideas 

of the usual standard gauge thought pattern. 

of why to light as if universe is a single point 

and for else in L1 L2 or L3 whatever, its not a single point topology there. there is even comparatively distance concept in euclidean space coordinates right?

so if a point in standard space time point A to point B takes time t ->

this might not be because of light actually takes longer time wtr to its single point 0 time taking travel experience.

maybe from A to B it also takes 0 time. but observer in B observes t time (just forgetting about minkovski framework as of now) but because of (forgetting also initially thought hilbertian holographic analytical recursive intra dimensions concepts since i need to revisit topology revisiting for that) but basically maybe  it takes also time from A to B also 0 time. but B perceives many universe versions where some what points between A to B also is visited by photon and then again to B. so yet even not thought of it, so how the distance logic (forget about minkovski for a moment) A to B in which ever closed or open topological space and whicnhever distance measure mimght enable that B perceives it as if takes some t time thats somewhat relative to  its distance to A? 

forget the old fashioned minkovski struct there. forget also euclidean side. 

then think of what kind of even more weirder topology there might be there to have in effect B perceive it in its heisenbergs uncertainity wise as if photon took time to travel there?  i mean what is t when actually photon travels instantenaous? 

so this all roots to real analysis topics and maybe complex analysis definitions and topological space definitions to then bind to a heisenberg uncertainity wise superposition definition which defines the pseudo perception of B thinking it take some time. so whats time actually in such definition? 

so throw away minkovski/euclidean although we still need eculidean. 

but keep open mind to real analysis concepts and topology space concepts. 

and i couldnt keep open mind when during this initial thought experiments to the concept of actual topology science. e.g. D1 D2 D3 topology alike concepts and their comparative perspects. and their actual link  to analytical maths in abstract side. (topology's link to direct relatedness to abstract maths group theory sides)  so -> I couldnt think those aspects since i need to even revise D1 topology knowledge etc. and some such knowledge i need to revisit.

but to all physicists out there if you want to invent warp, this is the thought perspective you need to follow. you need to throw away minkovski away from your mental frameworks and read about L1/L2 and topological space definitions and very get expert in topology science and throw completely away minkovski alike basical initial thought frameworks  to setup this.  you might use that as a data generator to test your theoresms but not the actual underlying theorem. since as einstein said, you cant solve a problem in same mind set that creates the problem.  you have to throw away minkovski definition set there. forget about it completely (other than a data generator to test your theorems )

so -> I today in today's rest time started to tackle this quest. even had not without ml algos yet. since got curious to.  but i could very simplistically thought because i forgot the topology knowledge introduction knowledge i studied to before. 

but with that (with temporarily me throwing hilbertian mindset and holographic universe theories mindset, i dont currently know enough topology to think that (I need to revisit rerember topology introduction for that) )  with some more simplistic thought patterns,  one goes in heisenberg wise directions. of superposition wise directions of photon. of basical multiverse simplification in thought model. and connecting the  incorrect t time perception to such basical frameworkization. starting with such simplistic framework (of nonholographic and nonanalytical hilbertian (recursively ) holographic definitions) but rather very simplistic i started. since i need to revisit topology to become less simplistic on this topic. 

but even with this simplistic mindset -> one needs to revisit the measure theory concepts to understand measure of distance to A to B but with more creative interpretations in which its not a distance actually. but using caveats from measure theory which has distance concept. but their concepts but for nondistance topic. since in this brainstorming session, light photon actually has no direction.  for photon there is only  a point topology which point to point takes no time at all. so a is a point  and b is also a point. and so how so a to b movement of photon is perceived in b's side as if took it took t  time that is somewhat relative to distance of a to b?

so solving the creative interpretations to this requires taking caveats from measure theory field of maths but using it a nondirectional distance concept. but some topological uncertainity distance concept in somewwhat unkwnon L1 L2 whatever point space concept.   

so guh's initial such topology nonliterate (yep i need to revisit topology science) version tackling of this dimensional toplogy structur edefinition quest task, would take caveats from measure theory field of maths. would also use some borel side of probability definition frameworkizations and such algebras  /possible group theories either. and define many alternate definitions of why b perceives it as it takes t time to have photon be perceived at b? 

but this is just a starting point. for more literate dimension topology definition defining quest requires also very literate topology science knowldge.  i mean when with more analytical topology knowledge be present, we can very more advance these frameworks with alternate frameworks. 

but starting simplistically initially just for the curiosity. 

so during tomorrow would recheck some measure theory concepts and some borel sets and algebras and groups for borel sets concepts definitions then also would revisit L1 and maths real analysis concepts to define a framework which actually for photon it still takes 0 time to travel from A to B whilst b wrongly perceives in multiverse as if it takes t time whilst it does not. 

so we are going to throw away minkovski based frameworks -> nah. throw away you bad frameworks which makes scientists thinks warp is not possible wrongly. -> to turn such frameworks ancient physics frameworks minkovski based things. which closes humanity's horizons to newer forms of travel mechanisms. 

if you go to physics from maths science you reach a much more abstract creativity enabled by abstract maths side. 

this is the perspect physicists should have. throwing old earlier ancient frameworks.  :) those are limiting your creativity! 

ok i did dramatized the topic whislt telling  with trying to create a hype of intuitonistic maths alike perspects in physics science. which physics science already has. e.g.  for abstract maths side of physics gauge concept comes from physics. lie grps comes from physics. so physics is also very abstract the most. i just did went on some hype myself and did over dramatized :D physicists are also abstractionists :D even more:D so I somewhat get myself on hype i talked of that i tried to create and i very exaggerated whilst talking it :D dramatized it :D I mean if you read this you would think as if physicists are using nonabstract maths which is definitely not any the case.  so i very exagerated since i were dramatizing/exagerating topic i talk of (e.g. throwing away minkovski space time) whilst talking of :D  

so actually physicists already are abstractionists :D even much more than guh :D

so i over exagerated as if physicsts do not abstract enough in above paragraph.

but still the attitude of obsessedness to ancient frameworks makes one very dramatizedly talk of this topic:D  

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------