A site dedicated to the rational study of the UMMO affair
D59-3 Report on the IBOZOO UU
THE CONCEPT OF THE OAWOO
By provisionally defining the IBOZOO as an elementary though differentiated entity, made up of a bundle of orthogonal axes that cannot intersect one another, we are precisely introducing (albeit for pedagogical purposes) a concept that you must reject a priori: the one expressed by a word very familiar on EARTH, namely that of AXIS. The moment you associate our word OAWOO (“AXIS” or DIRECTION) with an oriented straight line, we shall be back at the starting point, since you will not have understood anything of our previous explanations.
Clearly a serious obstacle arises here, since we speak different mathematical languages. Languages which of course (as we pointed out to you in a previous report) are conditioned by a complex of psychological conceptions that differ between you and us. When, from the earliest stages of childhood, the UUGEEYIE has been educated within defined and narrow logical moulds, and taught to respect unreal mathematical postulates, it will be very difficult, if not impossible, for him to train his mental mechanisms to dissociate illusory images rooted in his world of perceptions.
Therefore: if we invite those who are lay in Mathematics to imagine the IBOZOO UU as a series of axes (indefinite straight lines, ideal ones)
we urge the MATHEMATICIANS to bear in mind that our concept of OAWOO, although it implies “DIRECTION”, could never be equated with real or ideal axes or straight lines.
We wish to stress the fact that an isolated IBOZOO UU makes no SENSE as a concept; that is, it lacks reality (we say AIOOIEDOO: a false, absurd concept, one that cannot possibly possess reality).
For those who are lay in PHYSICS we can give an example. Imagine that we wish to obtain a closed enclosure and you have a certain number of cylindrical glasses. Obviously, an isolated glass will never constitute a closed space, but if we cover its opening with another one (image 20)
we shall at least obtain a small closed enclosure. A chain of glasses joined as in IMAGE 21 will obviously form a string of closed enclosures.
Before going any further, it is necessary to broaden the concept of a STRAIGHT LINE still more for you. We have already seen that the distance from one point to another must be interpreted as a succession of IBOZOO UU whose EIDIIU (ANGLES), or, to be more exact, whose IOAWOO (1) differ from one another by dθ (see image 15 of the previous report).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The difference between EIDIIU and IOAWOO is very important: EIDIIU is the version in our language of the familiar concept of angle. Thus the right angle formed by a vertical wall and the floor of a room would be an EIDIIU.
IOAWOO would be the “ANGLE” formed by two OAWOO (“AXES”) of two associated IBOZOO UU. (Image 11) If we use the Spanish word “ÁNGULO” (ANGLE) for both cases, although they are two very different concepts, it is because there is no word in your language that matches it, and because using the word “ÁNGULO” will be of greater help to laymen in these matters.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We were telling you that between two points (image 15) we could consider not one but infinitely many differentiated chains of IBOZOO UU (for different three-dimensional reference systems). Put another way, it would seem that one of them would in reality be a “geodesic” (the shortest LINE that a moving body would follow between two points of a hypersphere situated in a four-dimensional frame. IMAGE 22.)
But this is insufficient: any other arc situated on that sphere (of course representing a greater apparent distance (image 23)
would be represented by the SAME chain of IBOZOO UU, so that the name “GEODESIC” will be incorrect, and we have preferred to call it a GEOID, although both words have an etymology linked to the sphere of the planet EARTH.
THE CONCEPT OF TIME
For the OEMII, the flow of time involves a perception of a psychological kind. It is another of our illusions. Within our organism a complex series of periodic phenomena take place, from the circulation of the blood to processes such as the metabolism of fats. If we closed our eyes we would go on perceiving that TIME flows, thanks to the rhythmic periodicity of these thousands of physiological phenomena.
But the concept of Time held by the physicist of Earth differs greatly from the perception analysed by psychobiologists. You consider TIME to be a dimension; at least this is accepted by the followers of EINSTEIN’s Theory of relativity.
Our concept of TIME, however, presents new facets unknown to you. In the first place, we cannot consider TIME as a dimension or continuum, as you conceive it. It is not that time is quantized; it is that, among other things, an instant cannot be conceived as a point on the time axis. The interval dt, although it may tend to zero, cannot be considered as small as we might wish.
There is moreover an aspect linked to this question that we very much want to stress. You consider that the maximum speed a subparticle could reach in the WAAM (COSMOS) is 299780 km/sec (speed of light) and you regard this speed as “CONSTANT”.
You have undoubtedly not made this measurement wrongly; indeed: it is the very same speed recorded by us... in this same three-dimensional frame. But it is enough to change frame, that is, three-dimensional system, for that LIMIT SPEED to change considerably, to the point that the only reference capable of reflecting the change of axes is precisely the measurement of that speed, or constant c.
We shall thus have a family of values
c0 c1 c2 c3 ............ ci .................. cn
which extends from c0 = 0 to cn =∞
each one representing a definite reference system.
In the first case (speed of light zero):
We shall tell you, anticipating concepts, that certain phenomena take place which you associate with parapsychology, such as telepathic communications. The WAAM analysed under this three-dimensional reference system presents an absolute uniformity (MAXIMUM ENTROPY, you would say) (1)
(1) Although this state of MAXIMUM ENTROPY OR DEGRADATION may occur in any other reference system in which the speed of light is “NON-ZERO”.
In the limiting case of infinite speed of light, the WAAM can be regarded as non-existent, WAAM AIOOIEDOO, since it could be likened to an identification of all the IBOZOO UU with themselves, that is, to a single IBOZOO UU, which, as you know, lacks PHYSICAL reality.
You must understand this last point before going any further, although it is hard to accept if you use the usual logical reasoning. Let us see: if you imagine in space an infinite range of little spheres, of multicoloured beads, each differing from all the others by its colour, and within its colour by its tone or shade, you will have, as we were telling you in previous paragraphs, a rough image of the WAAM.
Imagine now that you suddenly locate two little spheres of exactly the same colour and shade. Using the customary logical mechanisms, you will say that if both beads are in different places, they are different entities. They are two beads, in short; and that this plurality of chromatically differentiated spheres has regrettably failed.
But if I transfer that reasoning to the Cosmos, if you locate two IBOZOO UU which until now were distinct because their “axes” (OAWOO) were oriented in another direction; if now, I repeat, you contemplate them from such a perspective that both IBOZOO are equal, you will have to use another kind of reasoning, dissociated from two-valued logic, and assert: those “two” IBOZOO UU are the “same” IBOZOO UU.
And indeed: a pair of IBOZOO UU that appeared differentiated in one reference system, perhaps being a neutrino and a pion respectively, on changing the reference axes, both subparticles, which in the other frame appeared to the observer so distant from each other, both belonging to two different Galaxies, must afterwards, in another three-dimensional system, be regarded as one and the same IBOZOO UU. But the probability of this happening for a pair of IBOZOO UU α and β is practically nil when the new reference system differs only very slightly in angle from the previous one.
-------------------------------
We have strayed somewhat from the central question, deliberately. We define an interval of time ΔT as a succession of IBOZOO UU whose IOAWO differ from one another by constant amounts (image 24).
That is: let us consider in an IBOZOO UU the four “axes” (OAWOO) (bear in mind the true concept of OAWOO) which we call OAWOO UXGIGII because they represent precisely the three-dimensional frame of reference (Image 25). OAWOO UXGIGII which do not exist in reality, that is, they are as conventional as a symbol, but which serve the mathematician to fix the position of the real OAWOO.
If the real OAWOO (Ū) oscillates within that ideal frame, imagine now a new reference system of two OAWO UXGIGII, each of which forms 90º with the four previous ones (drawn in image 25).
This new frame of action of a real Ť (OAWOO)
and the one defined previously define, respectively, SPACE AND TIME. Observe that the OAXOO (GOVERNING AXES) Ū and Ť which define SPACE AND TIME possess different degrees of freedom. The first can sweep through IOAXOO (Space-Angles) in three different orientations, corresponding to the three typical dimensions of SPACE; the second is “condemned” to move in a single plane.
Two IBOZOO UU whose OAXOO axes T1 and T2 differ by such an angle that there DOES NOT EXIST in the WAAN any other IBOZOO UU whose T lies between them, will define the minimum interval of TIME. We shall call this interval UIWIIOO (INSTANT). Image 27.
What does the flow of TIME consist of? Is this flow an optical illusion?
Let us take any object: a piece of fruit. Although we have not yet developed the concept of atomic subparticles, we have already suggested in other reports that each of the atomic components is in reality an IBOZOO UU. The fruit will be made up of water, carbohydrates, proteins and other organic chemical components. These in turn will be made up of NIIO A (ATOMS), and these of subparticles, each of which is an IBOZOO UU with its (OAXOO) (AXES) oriented in a particular way.
When we measure an interval of one microsecond on our clock: is the apple we are holding in our hand identical to the one we held before? Is it the same one? A chemist of EARTH will say: in reality it is not the same, since within it, in its cells, the process of metabolism has modified its characteristics.
The physicist will say: no, its electrons changed position within the orbitals. But if we now ask him whether those electrons, although their position has changed, are the same electrons as before, he will perhaps answer: Yes. But that is a mistake: a jump has taken place; the IBOZOO UU that previously represented the electron ei of orbital oi of atom ai is no longer the same:
A layman in physics will understand it better with this example. Imagine a panel made up of a mosaic of electric lamps (image 28).
At an instant t1 a series of filament lamps are lit, such that they form a capital A. But an instant later, t2, the A seems to have moved. The A is the same, but its components have changed. Some lamps went out and others lit up. The illusion of continuity is the same, but the A seems to “flow” along the mosaic of lamps....
One bulb (B) has not yet gone out when the tungsten filament of the next one (C) begins to glow (Image 29). The electron eb of our example was nothing but an IBOZOO UU Ii; an instant dt later it becomes ec.
If you regard the Waam as the integration of all the IBOZOO UU “(past, present and future)”, what we call (My now) can be represented on a plane in image 30. If I am at the “point” P, represented by an IBOZOO UU with its Tp (OAXOO) oriented vertically, what will happen tomorrow? “I” will be at T'p (another IBOZOO UU), which I shall call future. (1)
(1) In saying I we refer not to an OEMII (PERSON) made up of trillions of IBOZOO UU, but to an elementary subparticle of my organism: a proton, for example. Observe that the Earth Physicist EINSTEN conceived a Universe that in a certain way does not differ too much from the one we are describing to you. Only you must replace the space-time “CONTINUUM” by the discrete set of IBOZOO UU. In other respects EINSTEIN also agreed with us on other essential points. Einstein was also unaware that what he regards as the CONSTANT SPEED OF LIGHT is so only in one of the possible reference systems. He did not know that there were other three-dimensional frames besides the one familiar to us. Our conception of the WAAM explains certain contradictions that the physicists of Earth believe they have noticed between Quantum Mechanics and the relativistic conception, as we shall explain to you in subsequent reports.
But what happens in the plane of “MY NOW” for another point at a distance d from me, that is, a chain of IBOZOO UU? Simply that the orientation of its (OAXOO) Tu (Time axis) will be different. I cannot therefore say that there is simultaneity of TIME. I cannot say, for example, that such and such a thing is happening “NOW” on the Planet VENUS, since such a concept of simultaneity is meaningless (AND ALL this within one and the same frame of reference).
THE LIMIT SPEED.
For one and the same three-dimensional system, the speed of light or limit speed is constant
