Physics of Psychology

Maybe Mithus wants to compare that “change of PHT-values” with a decay like the following one: After about 10.25 minutes a neutron (neutral charge) decays into a proton (positive charge), an electron (negative charge) and an antineutrino (no charge).

The intent of my last post was to express that one cannot compare the perception of a human with the behavior of a subatomic particle. Although one can compare such a perception with an amount of charge that, when very stable, can be thought of as a “particle that is charged”, like a charged spec of dust, just not subatomic because subatomic particles have no substructure like a nervous system interfering with their dynamics. The mind is still built upon and sensitive to its physical biochemical substrate, the brain, thus its perceptions are never as pure as physical subatomic particles.

Beyond that, one must be careful when speaking Quantum Particle Physics Ontology. The word “particle” in quantum physics is no more than a number used to account for an amount of something otherwise unaccounted for, much like the square root of a negative number - purely imaginary.

A neutrino is an actual physical particle, much like an electron void of charge. But an “anti-neutrino” is not an actual particle at all, not really even a virtual particle. The idea of “anti-neutrino” refers to a neutrino amount of energy that is missing from the surrounding environment. But quantum theory physicists do not like to refer to anything except as a “particle”, a quanta (in their mathematics).

A proton is at a lower entropy than a neutron. It has more energy than a neutron. So for them to say that a neutron “decays” into a proton, is another misuse of the language (they seem to love doing that - semantics). When a neutron becomes a proton, it absorbs a positron worth of charge and a neutrino amount of mass. So in Quantum Physics Ontology, there is a missing amount of charge and mass from the surrounding universe. So to call out the missing amount of positive charge, the same amount of negative charge is claimed to be generated into the universe from the change, an “electron”. And to call out the amount of missing mass, a “negative-mass” particle, an anti-neutrino is claimed. Neither the electron, nor the negative-mass particle physically exist as real particles. They are merely referred to as “particles” so as to account for the amount of missing charge and mass energy. An objective in Quantum Physics is to ensure that in all things, there is a zero-sum.

It is a little dangerous to the mind to casually step in and out of different ontologies (language issues and thus logic issues arise), especially ontologies that are incomplete, such as Quantum Physics and Relativity.

Yes, but for people like me, who are not familiar with Physics, it can become difficult to translate it all into the language of Psychology. In your ontology you wrote that "there is a limit to the rate of adding affects/influences, when affects merge in such a way as to require more than an infinite change rate, a maximum change rate point, MCR point, forms and as the participating affects continue to attempt adding at the same location, any additional followup propagating affects must wait for time to pass. - “Inertia”.

I understand that this is the precondition for the forming of a particle, or, in other words, “the mass particle of the spirit”. What equals this MCR point in Psychology, which causes a delay of further influences? I imagine something like a sensory overload, which has an inhibiting effect to the receptivity of the mind, so that the mind has to filter out useful from useless information, in order to form an understanding.
But that might be completely wrong. Sorry, if I confuse this all.

I agree, because I also think that “perceptions are never as pure as physical subatomic particles”, that it is not possible or at least quite difficult and also quite useless to compare the “perception of a human with the behavior of a subatomic particle”. But the point Mithus made could be the change from “positive” to “negative” and vice versa, from “neutral” to “positive” or “neagtive” and vice versa, regardless whether subatomic particles behave in the same way or not, and if they do, then the comparison is useful, and if they do not do, then the comparison is useless.

Quantum Physics and Relativity are not complete, yes.

The human brain is a network a “web” of interconnected modules. Charge physics are it’s “electricity” but we can’t discern a computer’s future behavior based on it’s simple voltage. The logic and code systems are at play here.

What could or should the analogy of the sensory be?

[tab]

The S.S. as the S.S. [/tab]
It is very plausible to have an hierarchical structure of several realms, so that it is not always possible to compare them with each other. An example is the brain: this biological (neurological) organ has no analogy in physics, because physics as such (as well as chemistry as such) does not belong to that organic realm. The level of the organic realm is higher than the inorganic realm, although the inorganic realm determines the organic realm. This means in the case of the brain example that the brain does not only exist of parts of the organic realm, cells for example, but also of parts of the inorganic realm, molecules and atoms for example.

So when it comes to the inorganic realm, it is difficult to find an analogy to the brain as a part of the organic realm. If you said that “the sun is the ‘brain’ of the solar system (or the planetary system)”, then this would be “true” only in a metaphorical sense. But if you said that “the brain (or the heart) is the ‘sun’ of the organism”, then this would be “true” not only in a metaphorical but also in a more ontological, a more real sense.

And if it is difficult to find an analogy to the organic realm in the inorganic realm, then it is even more difficult to find an analogy to the psycho-/sociological realm, not only because of the fact that you have to find an analogy to the psycho-/sociological realm in both the inorganic realm and the organic realm.

The biological organ has analogy to physics, it’s just that the physics you have been taught (rigid bodies) does not apply here. Rigid body is a simplification of physics (simplified physics) useful to simulations. Actual physics is fluid body physics, all things (even light) uses fluid body physics and so does the brain.

However, the brain is more complicated than that, it is a logic center with various logic modes and operations…Logic modes are associated with physical conditions (such as flow of electricty in ON state and no flow in OFF state.) However to simplify it to one single On/Off state as implied in the OP is an oversimplification.

^^^^ That’s no analogy!

This seems to have veered off course. Let me speak of a fantasy universe made strictly of PHT, just to get some bearing here.

A PHT Universe
Supposed for a moment that there is only mind void of any physical reality at all. Every mind is guided by its Perception of Hopes and Threats, PHT. Such PHT would actually be the fundamental substance of that universe just as waves of positive and negative electromagnetic radiation is in the physical universe. Wave’s of PHT would randomly and chaotically radiate throughout that universe, creating “PHT Affectance” (def: the fundamental stuff that had affect). That PHT Affectance would be infinitely divisible because there is no more fundamental substrate. All existence would be defined by where the most infinitesimal PHT Affectance was.

The end effect of such a universe would be that “subatomic particles” of Perception of Hope and Threat would collect into tiny little fuzzy balls, just like physical subatomic particle do. Those particles would necessarily form into three categories:
[list]Perception of Hope particles (PHT positrons, protons),
Perception of Threat particles (PHT electrons), and
the combined Perceived Neutral particles (PHT neutrinos, neutrons).[/list:u]

And from those subatomic particles PHT atoms would form. And from those PHT atoms, PHT molecules would form. And eventually up the line, PHT living beings would form, being far too great and sophisticated to be aware of their subatomic nature yet capable of manipulating tremendously complex structures of Perceived of Hope and Threat throughout their world. The analogy to physical existence would be perfect.

Now, back to reality
Although throughout history, many have believed such to be the real universe, it is not. Perception of Hope and Threat requires a physical substrate. And due to that substrate, PHT is not actually infinitely divisible nor capable of forming tiny little fuzzy balls of pure 100% PHT particles. Instead, the physical universe provides for a PHT substrate, much like the hardware of a computer provides a substrate for its software.

And just as software in a computer has its own priorities and behaviors, mind and PHT has its own relatively independent behavior which inherently mimics (“is analogous to”) that of larger scale physical affectance.

Even though PHT cannot form true subatomic particles, it still has to ability to propagate in waves and “charge” larger scale items within the mind, similar to balloons gaining a static electric charge.

That is quite true.

I don’t see how the OP implies an “ON/OFF state” … ?? The perception of hope and threat, PHT, is not a binary value, not a one or zero. PHT can range from infinitesimal to as close to infinite as the physical substrate allows, as either hope or threat values, positive or negative values. The only distinction from physics is that the mind, and thus PHT, is dependent upon the underlying physics whereas the physics is only dependent upon the underlying logic.

Back to the question:

The concept of MCR is still valid but in physics it occurs due to maximum affect rate that is logically possible whereas in psychology it occurs due to maximum perception rate physically possible.

Speed of Propagation
Light propagates at the speed that it does because it is logically impossible for anything to affect anything else at a faster rate than what we refer to as “the speed of light”. The speed of PHT is a little different because its propagation rate depends upon how quickly the physical substratum can be affected, how quickly neurons respond. Faster neurons (electric wires or optic fiber) would allow for any associated perception to change faster.

And you raised a good point in that perception is not merely due to neurological response, but also mental “filtering” of noise and categorizing neurological pulses into perception information. Perception cannot change until some part of the mind has deduced the relevance of the information being sensed, relating it to hope or threat, aka “filtered out the noise”.

Inertia and Impedance
So all of that builds up to the concept of PHT Maximum Change Rate, PHT-MCR, and PHT-Inertia. And although there is an inertia in the mind, the more obvious and significant effects to observe are those that occur socially - how quickly does a change of mind propagate through society. In physics, psychology and sociology, any restriction or inhibition to flow is called “impedance”. And that of course, is directly related to how fast a single mind changes and then relays that change to another - PHT social propagation and Socio-chemistry; propaganda, social construct, and population control. But before getting into those more socially relevant concerns … back to the PHT flow within the mind.

The human mind and brain doesn’t really function in a digital manner like computers despite being constructed of binary neurons and despite the analogy of having hardware (“wetware”) and software (“mind”). When billions of neurons are interconnected and capable of perception dependent altering of their connection pathways, the brain stops looking like anything associated with binary functions and instead looks far more like a material allowing waves of influence, physical affectance, to propagate through it along restricted corridors - a massive “neural network”, a “brain”. And exactly how those waves of influence propagate is what forms the mind, which in turn reflects back some degree of influence on exactly how those waves will propagate next time - “learning”. Perception affects perception, often causing blindness or lust.

These neurologically based waves within the brain are not as spherically radiating as their subatomic cousins. The physiology of the brain guides affectance waves through corridors that both limit and accumulate their subtle affects such as to form what we call “intelligent response”. Socially this is analogous to some information passed to a neighbor, other information passed to the police, other to news media, and other to church, while much overlaps and goes to any or all combinations.

Mass and Memory
When these waves of affect are associated with good or bad, they become waves of hope or threat, positive or negative. Such waves interact with other concurrent waves often “reflecting” through channels created by both physiology and memory. And when they overlap, they produce a point of greater strength, often sufficient enough to cause a physiological change, a “memory engram” and a spec of not-so-changable pebble in a corridor, an impediment. The next time a wave passes through that corridor, a small reflection occurs as the wave stumbles over that bit of rubble. The impediment of normal flow, “increased impedance”, reflects some of the wave in other directions, much like a kink in a electronic coax cable feeding a television or a spec of dirt in a microwave channel. If for any reason the free flow along a corridor changes, it is referred to as an “impedance mismatch”. Such impedance mismatching is what causes light and sounds to reflect off of physical objects to affect eyes and ears.

That sensory reflection begins its own wave referred to as “recall” as it denotes that at some time, one sensory wave was associated with another sensory wave. Relatively simple physiological deduction reveals which other sensory wave must have been happening at the same time for there to be a pebble in that particular location and by thus memory associations are formed.

That little pebble of memory is a type of mass-particle formed by waves of PHT interacting such as to create a physical change in the free flow of perception, possibly “charged” with hope or threat value. Once something bad (negative) has been associated with a former hope (positive), it is more difficult to maintain that perception of hope. The persons perception of hope has been more “neutralized”. That is why anti-Christians are always promoting evil associations with Christianity - to reduce hope in Christianity. The Media takes full advantage of this effect so as to promote engram programming within the population, once called “product placement” and “mass hypnosis”, used to alter the opinions of consumers and voters into a preferred direction.

Trauma and Fear
When sufficient strength of PHT wave interaction occurs, it is not a simple and single engram that gets produced, but rather a mass of engrams form a very rigid block to perception and strong responses to any possibility of associated concerns - from drama to Trauma. Trauma events then act a bit like a cancer in the mind and brain, growing and spreading impediments to perception, a black-hole consuming the perception and mind - Fear.

Persistent fears form insecurities. Such was the incentive for producing the “fear films” of the 1970’s. And from such strong insecurities within, social behavior is greatly modified as fear amplifies both perception of threats and perception of hopes. The mind becomes over-reactive, obsessed, and/or paranoid, lusting for anything entertaining and dreading the slightest inconvenience. Sound familiar?

In your ontology, a list of 33 points, you wrote at the end, that each of those fundamentals have an equivalent within each and every field of study.
So far you covered in this thread the subjects of attraction and repulsion, gravity, gravitational migration, positive and negative charge and interaction, General Relativity, propagation of affect, speed of propagation, MCR, Inertia and Mass. Did I leave something out?
To get a better understanding of the analogy between particle physics and psychology, I would like to go on with those points in your affectance-ontology. One of the following subjects is the issue of „remaining stable“. You wrote that particles, in order to remain stable, absorb noise of their own polarity and continue to deliver strong waves. Concerning PHT, this is quite clear to me. But then, the next point is: „When a small negative particle approaches a larger positive particle, the smaller particle grows asymmetrically with its greater increasing noise closer to the larger positive particle.“
When the mind filters out those negative influences to keep it’s (positive) emotional charge, what does it mean that those influences still increase and grow „asymmetrically“?

It seems that you are keeping closer track than I am. And I wouldn’t say that I have “covered them” as much as merely “mentioned their analogous relation to psychology and Affectance Ontology”.

Possibly the most important subject in all engineering, practical physics, psychology, and sociology is the mentioned Impedance and especially Impedance Mismatching. It is literally true that all formations and their interactions with other formations (particle formation, inertia, momentum, charge, migration,…) is a matter of impedance matching. It is the interaction between minuscule pulses of EMR affectance that cause mass particles to form in the first place. Psychologically, it is the interaction between minuscule instinctive PHT affectance that cause every bit of one’s perception of reality to form. And precisely how those objects, whether physical or psychological, interact can be calculated by consideration of the impedance matching involved.

It is the end result of impedance matching that cause all “laws of physics” and “laws of psychology” to exist.

That would be the issue of Anentropy of Charged Particles - why physical charged particles maintain their charge and why people’s attitudes maintain their bias.

It is easy to see how people who favor something tend to accept any sign of positive concerning the subject and reject any sign of negative. They maintain a bias that filters out the probability of a change in attitude. Strong love or hatred have that affect. Those who disfavor something tend to do the exact opposite, maintaining their disfavor. Such is the make of “Personal Bias”.

Someone with a “positive attitude” will quickly accept any sign of hope and reject obvious signs of despair. Since Perception of Hope constructively guides the will of a person, creating persistence in accomplishing, having a positive attitude is considered favorable for those wanting accomplishment. Many fight for just the opposite, seeking to promote a negative attitude because they favor destruction or change. Negative attitudes accumulate often leading to anger, depression, violence, and even suicide.

This particular web site is a good place to observe and even measure such behaviors.

That is an issue of extreme impedance mismatching. The term “asymmetrical” was referring merely to the physical shape of the particle. In a uniform space, a particle will maintain a spherical form. But within a gradient, it becomes less spherical and when in the situation of being a small charge getting very close to a large mass with the opposite charge (an electron approaching a nucleus), the small particle becomes relatively flattened, such as in the pict below:

[list]Impedance Block.png[/list:u]

This behavior is due to the gradient between the two objects becoming too steep, forming an impenetrable wall between them. Such is what causes the tiny negative electrons to merely float around and orbit much larger positive nuclei of atoms to which they are otherwise drawn strongly toward. Analogous things happen concerning psychology and sociology.

In that picture, you might notice that the flattened small black object (“asymmetrical”) appears slightly darker than the unflattened ones. They are, in fact, the exact same color. It has been noted for quite some time that instinctive perception emphasizes contrasts at the union between strongly differing levels of sensation. And such helps to prevent the mind from obscuring one into the other, allowing for the easier detection of a black spec amidst a white background or a tiny berry among the tree leaves. The physiology of the retina actually plays a role in ensuring the emphasis of contrast, but so do the mental intuitive processing and emotional responses.

Sociologically, this behavior is witnessed as “wierding”, “decrying”, “denouncing”, “demonizing”, “criminalizing”, “outcasting”, and just generally bringing attention and importance to any reason to reject a person or thought from the group.

Psychologically, this is witnessed as emotional overemphasis as seen in jealousy, blind hatred, bigotry, prejudice, “touchiness”, and “over-sensitivity” when a disfavored concern gets perceptibly associated with a much favored concern.

A woman might not have any issue with another women until the other seems to be getting too close to her lover, mark, or husband. At such a point, every tiny little nuance of the other woman is magnified as potential threat. And more to the point, the distinction in perception of the other woman and that of her object of concern is greatly enhanced. She more firmly than ever maintains a distinction in perception, a “separation”, of the two people. Such is that “Impedance-Block” in perception. She cannot accept that the two are united and perhaps similar while she is separate. She cannot see them as one. The negative and positive perceptions cannot blend as long as one of the two concerns is perceived as far more important than the other (of “greater mass”).

The “asymmetry” in perception would be only that everything associated with the smaller object of concern (whether the positive or negative) gets perceived as being more equally associated to the larger concern whereas before they came close, each facet of the smaller concerned is perceived as more obviously a separate facet. It isn’t easy to convey to the jealous woman that even though the newcomer flirting with her fiance is very thin wasted, pretty, and sexy, she isn’t his type even though the day before, such nuances in perception could be easily distinguished and accepted. The smaller object is “perception-compressed” into a singular indivisible concern.

Such exaggerated impedance mismatching in perception, over-contrasting, is the fundamental make of “black or white” thinking, prejudice, and inability to distinguish the detailed good and bad within an overall issue, “over-generalizing”. Such is what prevents unions of otherwise seemingly compatible associations and is often intentionally used just for that purpose.

In the Entertainment and News Media’s role as lord and psycho-therapist to society, extreme measures are taken to de-emphasize distinctions between racial and gender differences to the point of extreme reverse perversion and malignant intervention. At the same time, extreme wierding is used to segregate currently disfavored associations such as Christianity, Islam, masculinity, non-interracial marriage, and individuality. A variety of PHT objects are used to manipulate the entirely impedance controlled outcome, such as the famed “Sex, Drugs”, and Rock-n-Roll [now Rap]".

Within the Laws of Psychology, Impedance is King.

Continuing with your ontology, you wrote – before it comes to the subject of Magnetism - , that strong negatives waves, which encounter the strong positive waves of a larger particle, create many points of inertia, which prevent the smaller negative particle from getting too close to the positive particle, instead it veers off to a side, orbiting the positive particle.
Why is it that the negative particle doesn’t crash into the positive particle, or, in association to psychology, why don’t negative and positive influences mix and neutralize each other?

One certainly must for science has precisely nothing to say about ontology as it only investigates
the behaviour of observable phenomena the purpose of which is superfluous to any investigation

This gets into more detail concerning my prior post:

Wave Propagation
For a wave of anything to propagate past a point along its path, that point must raise or lower to the instantaneous value that the wave represents moment by moment as it is passing. As a wave of water passes a certain point, the level of water at that point must increase or decrease to match the wave pattern. It is by that action that the wave propagates from point to point. Each point along the path must reach the value of the prior point in order for the wave pattern to continue. And how quickly those values can change determines the speed of the propagation:

MCR
In the physical universe there is a Maximum Change Rate of affect, MCR, directly responsible for the “speed of light in an [absolute] vacuum”. As an electromagnetic wave propagates through space, the electric potential, the “voltage” at each point must raise and lower such as to reflect the value of the passing wave, just as the water level must for a passing water wave. And there is a maximum change rate possible referred to as the MCR. Voltage cannot change faster than the MCR. The MCR is an issue of the voltage having to change at faster than infinite rate in order for the wave to propagate any faster. Because nothing can change faster than infinitely fast, there is a maximum possible propagation rate - “the speed of light in an [absolute] vacuum” - a natural impedance.

The Physics
Since space is filled with propagating waves crossing each other, the voltage values at each point raise and lower such as to reflect not merely one wave passing by, but many waves simultaneously crossing each point. The voltage value at each point is merely the sum of all of the intersecting waves at that point.

Statistically, that means that often the addition of all of the waves will reach the MCR. When that happens, the waves must take longer to continue their travel, thus delays arise in the form of extremely brief “traffic jams”. Those single point traffic jams are “MCR points”. And the number of them occurring within any given region of space is what gives space its “density” (the “permittivity of free space”). The higher the density of space (the “Affectance density”), the slower light will travel through it because it is not an “absolute vacuum” and delays must occur. When the density reaches extremely high levels, we refer to it as “mass” or “dark matter”. Light can still very slowly pass through the dark matter, but gets completely blocked and dispersed by mass. When the change rate gets too high, the waves simply cannot pass until sufficient time has elapsed, “delays”. Particles of impenetrable mass are formed when too much delay has caused traffic jams that cannot ever disperse (“subatomic particles”).

The Impenetrable Wall - An Exclusion Barrier
The point is that delays occur due to the extreme change rate required at each point in order to have many waves crossing. And that means that if a point in space is at a very high positive value due to a positive wave or pulse traveling by and a very negative pulse happens immediately afterward, the rate of voltage change at that point can become nearly infinite. And that means that a MCR point has occurred and any waves involved must delay their travel. They are impeded.

The very same traffic jam effect that causes limited propagation speed and a mass’s inertia also delays strongly positive and negative waves as they interact. And since the electron subatomic particle and the nucleus of an atom are made of such strongly negative and positive waves or pulses, as they approach each other, the constant stream of pulses associated with each particle form a steady impenetrable wall of MCR points between the two particles.

Particle Annihilation
The question becomes, “Why don’t they just gradually cancel and disperse into neutral, random radiant energy?” And if the two particles were of equally yet opposite charge and also the same size, that is exactly what would happen. If one of the two particles is not of significantly greater mass, the two particles, although delayed a bit, would annihilate each other into merely a puff of EMR noise of sufficient magnitude to express the amount of energy involved - a “photon”. If one is of much greater mass (thus greater energy), it cannot be dispersed at the same rate as the other even if they were otherwise annihilating each other. And that means that the dispersing does not take place.

As particles are releasing tiny portions of their traffic jam, they are constantly absorbing more and reforming themselves from that same surrounding EMR noise that they help create, the ambient space - mass field - “gravity field”. For a total annihilation to occur, there must be equally opposite potential and also equal mass. If the annihilation is not total, the particles merely reform as perhaps smaller particles. And if one particle was much more massive than the other, each tiny little pulse interaction between the two particles is not of equal opposing potential because the one with the larger mass will be more spread out. If each tiny portion is not annihilating, the whole cannot annihilate either.

And that is why an electron will never merely rush into a nucleus even through strongly “attracted” toward it. There is an impedance barrier between them. The theory concerning orbiting centrifugal force as the cause, is bogus. If an electron didn’t fall into a nucleus merely due to an orbiting centrifugal force, a great, great many electrons would never establish an orbit to begin with as they immediately plunged directly into the nucleus causing serious radioactivity disintegrating all materials (so don’t be misled).

Now Back to Psychology

Psycho-Impedance Exclusion Barrier
Sociologically speaking, that same impenetrable wall is formed by the prospect that Israel become Catholic. The two entities are actually drawn toward each other, yet they can never converge. The change would be too great for the high priests to mentally handle. All progress would halt as they argued among themselves as to which is to be more sacred than what. Yet they would hang around each other and feed off of each other’s opposing behaviors - the negative not being able to fall into the positive. The same is true for many conceptually defined groups that maintain a sacred order and priority.

The social groups cannot converge because of the totally unacceptable mental and emotional changes required of the persons involved. It is not merely an issue of “those are the bad guys and we are the good guys”. It is far more an issue of which idea is believed to be of higher priority, true, or serves a greater purpose. How easy would it be for you to accept that 2+2 is really 5 … and truly accept the belief? Could you merely accept the irrationality? Most people certainly could not and thus would not. So if any proposed theory ends up requiring that one believe that 2+2=5, the theory will not be accepted by anyone who accepts logical mathematics. The theory might seem plausible and be strongly associated with logical mathematics, but despite such close association, logical mathematics and the theory could never converge. There are many mind puzzles proposed throughout the history of philosophy that demonstrate how two perceived truths can not converge. They are called “paradoxes” - both A and B seem to be true, yet if A is true, B cannot be true and vsvrsa.

Psycho-mass
If contrary theories had an equal amount of application (aka equal “mass” - instances of usefulness), a person is likely to dismiss both into a neutrality of favor and indifference of belief - “annihilation” of acceptance. And if the two theories were equally opposite in perceived hope and threat, no passion toward either direction would be generated - neutral PHT. But given that mathematics requires 2+2=4 in millions of applications and it is merely a newly postulated theory demands that 2+2=5, annihilation into non-belief of both will not occur. The new theory will be rejected, kept separate and isolated (hovering around mathematics, yet never converging with it). Why? Because the field of mathematics is far more spread out into millions of applications and not so easily dismissed.

Socio-Impedance Exclusion Barrier
And socially, given Catholicism is spread so much more widely than Judaism, the two could never annihilate each other even if they had otherwise equally opposing potential .

The next point in your ontology deals with the forming of a “magnetic wave”. You wrote that “a wave of affect, when entering a region of greater noise, gets more delayed and the trailing edge of the wave begins to catch up to the leading edge compressing the entire wave”, which makes it to a “magnetic wave”, and further, that “a compressed wave stores its energy potential within a smaller volume yielding a greater affect within the same propagating time frame as a non-compressed wave”.

I’m not sure whether you described this effect already in your example of that woman, who “perception-compresses” the smaller object into a singular indivisible concern, or whether this is a different issue.
In the latter case, concerning the Perception of Hope and Threat, what makes a “non-compressed” influence to a “compressed” influence (what does it mean in psychological terms, that the trailing edge of the wave catches up to the leading edge), and what equals that “smaller volume”, wherein the potential is stored?

The following is an anime that I put together to illustrate what happens when a PHT or electric potential wave encounters an increasing then decreasing mass field density, a gravity field. The mass field retards and compresses the wave, producing a “magnetic” wave component (pink in the anime). Since all of space has some degree of mass field (the affectance), such real waves are always associated and referred to as “electromagnetic waves” or “EMR” (electromagnetic radiation).

An EMR wave is typically illustrated thusly:
Electromagnetic Wave 2.gif
The understanding that the magnetic wave component is merely the compressed portion of the “electric field” or PHT, is strictly RM:AO. Concurrent physics agrees that such waves compress (become shorter) when entering a gravitational field. RM:AO explains why they do, as well as why they decompress as they leave. Due to the change in affectance density, radio waves that leave Earth into space obtain a longer wavelength as they decompress their magnetic component. If a truly absolute void could be achieved, zero ambient affectance, there would be no magnetic field left and the electric potential wave would be traveling at maximum speed of affect.

The field of physics grows with complexity into the fields of chemistry and electronics. Magnetics is perhaps the most complicated subject within physics and electronics to fully envision and comprehend. In psychology, electronics is a field that more simply addresses the analogous issues. Let me list a few directly analogous terms between electronics and psychology (and sociology):
[list]

  • Electric voltage = PHT
    [*]Electric current = effort
  • Conductor = path of effort
  • Resister = burdensome clutter along the path
  • Inductor = a frustrating path tempting trying too hard, trying to go too fast, “lusting”, or impatience.
  • Capacitance = memory
  • Magnetics - compression of hope or threat
  • Distance = degree of association
  • Compression = more closely associated than normal
  • Compressed PHT = oppression: frustration, anticipation
  • Voltage multiplier = teasing so as to amplify desire (amplify PHT)
    [/*:m][/list:u]

From that list;

  • Voltage produces a current along a conductor = PHT produces effort along a path
  • Resisters block free current along the conductor, consuming energy = distractive clutter blocks free effort along the path, consuming enthusiasm, passion, and incentive.
  • Inductors retard current, producing magnetic fields, compressing energy = frustrated efforts tempt trying too hard, lusting, possibly anger, “compressing passion” into demand.

These associations could have been easily seen hundreds of years ago, making psychology and sociology into precise measurable sciences much sooner.

Magnetic fields indicate that things are compressed and could be more spread out from their beginning to their end, lengths could be greater, more time could be taken, perceptions could be more distinct, and/or concerns could be more separated.

Socially, these concepts are used to sell products, create both loyalties and rebellions, instill loves, hatreds, ideologies, and racial manipulations.

According to RM:AO, gravity / gravitation and electromagnetism are something like concomitants of the affectance.

As far as I understand it, Affectance is defined as ultra-minuscule, mostly randomized electromagnetic pulses, and that which is called “gravity” is an aberrant effect of the natural behavior of affectance, the result of a gradient field of affectance density. And that without electromagnetic radiation, there couldn’t be any “gravity”.

According to your ontology, a magnetic induction is created when “compressed waves, passing into a charged particle, have greater affect upon a particle causing the particle to shift more greatly into the oncoming wave”.

So when an influence is more greatly associated than normal, the person involved cannot create those inertia-points, which would prevent the negative from getting too close, and the mental impedance barrier doesn’t work properly, because a “compressed” influence and the person involved are more equally (yet opposite) charged and more of the same “size”?