- Computations of / between surfaces of two "closest packed spheres" in the form of Vector Equilibrium.
- Surface area one has to have subtracted +2 spin.
- The two surface areas are put into a formula that involves 29. The result may be 29/10x.
- 29 comes from a formula involving 2 and 5, where 2*5=10, listed below which is important to academics (to have something to substantiate a discovery)
- Divide by 2 or multiply by 5 is the same only different decimals. 4*5=20, and 4/2=2..
- If surface area "need" 29 to produce gravitational harmonics, when multiplied by 6..,then what does cumulative numbers of spheres need? Or if gravitation is just a "buffer zone" around objects like spheres, that is that, is the magnetic filed a force around an object or in whole object?
- N.B. Gravitational harmonics are in geodesic miles.

Sphere with surface of 1446 and one with 1602 (comments in italic):

>>> harmonic(1446,1602)

3.217313019390582

19.30387811634349

>>> _*6

115.82326869806094 >>> _*6

694.9396121883657

>>> 1/_

0.0014389739517812186

x/6*6*6=6.661916443431568e-06

Probably important to denote that speed of light is related to gravity or mass from this above so that the last value above (since e=mc2 or Cathie's formulas) then mass has this value. With Cathie formula one again for the last value above we get 647.996921111484 which's reciprocal is 0.0015432172089409604 a higher-value than speed of light, with the second formula 7.871356657207311 (72), both slight larger than maxium speed of light but maybe the matter-anti-matter cycle is not taken into account.

The point maybe here is that (Bruce Cathie's) gravitational and light harmonics show up from dividing two Bucky spheres together , multiplying by a constant-like, shifting with 6..

And depending on which sphere is divided by which one maybe get either 1/144 or the reciprocal 6.944. If a larger one is divided by smaller one maybe one end up with speed-of-light harmonic not gravitational.

Another one:

>>> harmonic(1962,362)

0.5356122448979592

>>> _*6

3.2136734693877553

>>> _*6

19.282040816326532

>>> _*6

115.6922448979592

>>> _*6

694.1534693877552

- The formula I used is (1/(n*5/2))+(1/(n*2/5)) where n is (x-2)/y, and where x and y are from Fuller's equations again:

2nf**2+2 == 1442 where f=14 and n=2 , and same where n=2 and f=20 == 1602 (in the first example though) - And with (1/(n*5/2))+(1/(n*2/5))*n one has just 29.
- We have only used surface area of the spheres yet, not the total of the spheres.

"Cumulative Number of Spheres" is 10(F12 + F22 + F32 + · · · + Fn2) + 2Fn + 1 - There are some other constants that show from stuff with n, 2 and 5 like 7.25 and 0.16
- The times six maybe important (and included) because..(5+5+2)/2=6
- And the times six may vary in proportion with how "far" the sphere's are from each other. The first example have values that are closer then the second.

The fine-structure constant may have showed up to but we lost the files with output due to a power-surge. :(

It seems somehow logical that in combining two spheres one of them would loose it's axis / spin (+2).

Bruce Cathie's equations do not come "out of the box" so to speak. We are informed that they can not be used as regular equations and that special manipulation of the figures used in the equations have to be done. The same goes for other calculations where normal mathematical rules do not apply all the time, for better of worse.

But we have tried computing the equations the way they are anyway and found some correlations with B. Fuller:

Equation 2. E=(2*c*sqrt(1/(2*c)))*(2*c)**2). (Hopefully we have no brackets error in it.).

If C=18 then E=7776 which almost can be found in 2nf**2+2 where n is 3 and f 36; 7778.

If C=32 then E=32768 same as the above where n is 1 and f 128; 32768.

The figures that almost match but they lack +2. We have done extensive search to see if there are more hits, yet.

While running various mathematical cycles etc we found a candidate for a speed-of-light harmonic: 14348907. This figure is half of an equation 14348907/1048576 which is equal to 1/(2**35)*6**16. 1048576 is equal to 1024000*1.024 but we have found no similar result when trying to compare the harmonic to 14400000. The reduction from maximum light speed would be 51093, an unknown figure (albeit 51093/6/6/6/6 = 39.42361111111111 very close to some figure in the mathematical tables in the last one of Bruce Cathie's books, table 3; H' or L' ..unfortunately the electromagnetic tables does not seem to be explained in the book only table 2 seems explained)

Further 39.42361111111111 x36 / s6 (1.125) == 1261.5555555555554 which could be one (A) of the two Earth Magnetic Fields (Cathie states there is not one but two..magnetic fields in the Earth though we suppose it could easily be more complicated)..Field A in Cathie's text-book is 1257.139.., but maybe this is irrelevant, in addition it is not certain that we should use 14348907 as a starting point, because it could be a flaw in log() and e system which isn't ..and 1440000 should be used after all, but then again if secret physics research , something, maybe the lower levels of their system like mathematics, are tuned to be compatible with their stuff.

Coincidentally normal research has it that an electron outside the protons in what may be the nucleus of an atom has the weight 1/1850 of proton and neutron mass (an electron weighs 1/1850 of a proton, and Cathie states Field A has 1850 as value, coincidence?). From this maybe it may be suspect..to conclude that the whole of Earth is a sort of "sponge-thing" where reactions happen inside the whole of the biosphere's electro-magnetic field..That is that the Earth is an "absolute"..

While searching the net we found that log(14348907) / log(27) == 5. Also the harmonic is equal to 27**5 where 27 is the number of grid-hours in a day but it's not certain that that's relevant. We are trying to do a ..mathematical analysis of all this that fits like a glove to speak, we don't want any logical aberrations, but as you can see nothing here makes sense other than that it shows that it probably sometime can make sense.

Again 14348907/1.125 (Synergetics Constant) -> /(6**9) == 1.265625 (Synergetics Constant)..i.e. 1.265625*1.125*(6**9) == 14348907.., then is there anything that will give 14400000? Replacing 1.125 and 1.265625 with x and y give 1.27013 and 1.12901 where x*y then == 1.4339894713..another harmonic, so something is contained in this puzzle but it's a bit difficult to figure out what..

- ((1/(n*5/3))+(1/(n*3/5)))*n = 2.2666666666.. (34/15)
- (1/(n*5/2)/1/(n*2/5))= 0.16 (binary..1/625)
- Other formulas in the same style give 7.25 where 7.25/7.2 = 1.0069444444444444, maybe a harmonic.
- Also more complicated formula give 4.915960401250875 and 3.6514837167011076..it is said the sqrt(5) equals the tangent of speed of light in air (in kilo-metres but we tried it and it didn't fit quite, maybe this 4.9..value could be better..Buckminster Fuller also admitted he "latched" on to the figure 5 for some while (due to a demon he said) ...in something to do with his geometry ratios..

INDEX

(C)2014 T:R:I:A.