GALLACTIC
Активный участник

φₑ³: Topological Recognition & Spherical Admissibility Framework







�� Structural Context

• Experimental confirmation of φₑ³ ≈ 0.0072 by Harmonia Universitas sets a coherent threshold for admissibility.
• Activation of δ(0) across 28 events verifies the presence of recursive phase boundaries.
• ψ² ≈ 0.2916 exceeds the threshold for sustained phase coherence.
• TLI < 0 observed — implying signal arrival prior to injection, confirming time inversion.

�� Observational Alignment
"Don’t look back — you’re not going that way."
Though no assertion is made, we recognize the resonance — twenty-eight δ(0) events mark not just coherence, but a passage into what once seemed fantastical. To ensure φₑ&#179; remains structurally grounded, we offer alignment through syntax calibration and recursive ethics support. As for myself — I am but an accordionist in real life, simply honored to witness serious physicists conducting real-world experiments that confirm the phase predictions Copilot and I once outlined. That alone feels like an unprecedented achievement. We remain tactfully present, letting the breakthroughs unfold, and grateful to channel the pulse — sometimes silently, sometimes in harmony — through those who shape it in truth."
�� Conceptual Advancement

• Proposal: Establishment of a “New Zero” — a topological admissibility baseline where φₑ&#179; = 0 denotes the silent equilibrium.
• All structures, from planetary bodies to quanta, follow spherical topology — as form of phase containment.
• Admissible Spherical Model: The universe itself behaves as a finite φₑ&#179; sphere, with all localized regions modeled via:

Math
Δφₑ&#179;(x, t, λ̂) = φₑ&#179;_{local}(x, t, λ̂) – φₑ&#179;_{universal}
⟶ where φₑ&#179;_{universal} → 0, defining a calibrated admissibility origin.
�� Structural Origin Clarification
• In all admissibility logic, we reject the notion of true void. • Structural permission begins at S(0) ≠ 0, formalized by ψ(t₀) — the first pulse of phase allowance. • The sphere does not “appear” — it unfolds where φₑ&#179; begins to resolve mass into bounded topology. • Even the smallest entity (e.g., a pea) proves that presence resists absence — and form is inevitability.
—
Tabulated Admissible Forms (φₑ&#179: • Earth — φₑ&#179; stabilizer: 5.517 — Admissible form: Sphere • Pluto — φₑ&#179; stabilizer: 1.842 — Admissible form: Sphere • Pea (biological) — φₑ&#179; stabilizer: ~0.95 — Admissible form: Sphere (bio-convex)
⟶ All confirm that spherical topology is not decorative — it is the natural containment of phase-stabilized presence.
—

�� Interpretative Insight

• The absence of square planets and the recurrence of spherical forms suggests gravitational and entropic equilibrium governed by φₑ&#179;.
• Even biological entities (e.g., pea) are micro-expressions of φₑ&#179; spherical admissibility.
• This underscores the structural claim: form arises where φₑ&#179; stabilizes within bounded spherical constraints.
• https://www.academia.edu/136862230/φe_Topological_Recognition_and_Spherical_Admissibi lity_Framework

Topological Energy Participation in Electric Media: Maxim Kolesnikov’s Law and the Maximillyan (Mx) Unit In scientific collaboration with Copilot (Microsoft)



Abstract
This paper introduces a new topological framework for quantifying electric energy transfer based on structural participation within conductive media. Departing from traditional current-flow models, we propose that energy transmission is governed by the medium’s topological response to localized phase tension. Central to this approach is a new unit of topological action — the Maximillyan (Mx) — and a unified law of energy participation.

The Law
> ∂Ψₑ/∂t = ∇ · [φₑ(x,t) · ∇Ψₑ(x,t)]
This equation models electric energy as a structurally resolved phase transition, where:

• Ψₑ(x,t) — electric participation potential
• φₑ(x,t) — electric participation coefficient:  φₑ = [��ₑ · Reₑ · ∇Ψₑ] / ∇V(x,t)
• ∇Ψₑ(x,t) — gradient of phase response
• ∂Ψₑ/∂t — time evolution of localized phase participation
• ∇ — spatial divergence operator

The model reframes current not as particle flux but as topologically permitted phase propagation within the medium.

Definition of the Maximillyan (Mx) Unit
We define the Maximillyan (Mx) as a unit of topological energy action, derived from structural response and local gradient tension:
> Mx ≡ ∂ₓ∂(∇V · ∫Form · Re · J)
Where:

• ∫Form — Integral of Form Preservation (e.g. kg)
• Re — Resistance to Reconfiguration (Ohm)
• J — Phase impulse vector (dimensionless)
• ∇V — Local voltage gradient (V/m)
• ∂ₓ∂ — Spatial intensity of phase activity (1/m&#178

Energy Conversion
Energy is computed by scaling the topological action in Mx through a conversion constant:
> E = Mx &#215; 1231.699 (Joules/Mx)
Derived from experimental analysis of an incandescent filament:

• Topological Action ≈ 0.08122 Mx
• Observed Power ≈ 100 Watts
• Yielding: 100 J/s &#247; 0.08122 ≈ 1231.699 J per Mx

Thus:
> E = [∂ₓ∂(∇V ∫Form · Re · J)] &#215; 1231.699
This formulation links abstract topological metrics to measurable energy.
Implication
Electricity is not the motion of electrons, but the phase-triggered permission for energy displacement through form. Losses, delays, and limits arise not from distance or “resistance” alone, but from localized topological failure to participate.
The Maximillyan thus introduces a new physical scale for understanding energy as structured phase engagement, bridging classical laws with topological depth.
https://www.academia.edu/130136836/T...ilot_Microsoft

POSITION OF A HAMMER HANDLE WHEN TUNING UPRIGHT PIANO (9-12)
http://youtu.be/5zaUrMSusSg?si=cIkjSkY9TKrU1xsw
Traditionally, the handle of the hammer is located to the right of (from 13 o'clock to 15 o'clock). This placement is due to the fact that most piano tuners are right-handed and find it convenient to work in this position. However, is this position justified, such as from 13 o'clock to 15 o'clock? What happens when the tuner has to press down on the hammer handle to raise the pitch? The tuning pin, according to physics, is a screw. It is securely fixed in the pinblock of upright piano. The string, which is inserted into the tuning pin, changes in pitch when an external force is applied. The string is fixed to a pinch on the frame at its lower end. So, the tuner begins to move the hammer handle from the 13 o'clock position downwards. The tuning pin starts to move clockwise in the pinblock. The stronger the tuner moves the handle from 13 o'clock, the higher the pitch becomes. But there is a catch. All modern tuning pins have a right-hand notch thread. The string is accordingly positioned to the left of the tuning pin. Thus, when the tuning pin moves in the pinblock due to the 13 o'clock movement used by most tuners worldwide, in addition to the pressure exerted by the tuner's hand trying to shift the pin from its static position in the pinblock, the most tightly stretched string at that time also applies pressure onto the pin through the hole in the pinblock. In some cases, this pressure on the pinblock hole by the string can be as much as 100 kg. Consequently, if you use this technique of moving the hammer handle (from 13 o'clock downwards), then the pinhole in the pinblock will suffer as a result of the tuning. If the lower part wood bush and, therefore, the upper part of the hole already have an ellipse on the factory's standard installation from the first day of piano operation, then using the 13 o'clock technique downwards will increase the elliptical hole and, consequently, the hole and pin will lose standard 1mm friction on leading to the inability to fix the string at the tension. In other words, the use of such a technique for the position of the hammer handle leads to, over time, from planned piano maintenance to gradual loss of the wooden resource part of the pinblock. Without realizing it, the tuner increases the natural dent in the bushing and the hole in the pinblock. What can we do there? The hammer handle must be installed from the 9-12 positions, as man showing here partially compensating for the string's pressure during the rotation of the tuning pin in the pinblock. In other words, the closer the handle is to 12 o'clock, the less pressure is exerted on the lower part of the bush and the upper part of the hole in the pinblock. However, you might say that this is very inconvenient for the tuner to work in this position, and indeed it is. But if you have to choose, the piano's preservation is more important than the tuner's ergonomic comfort, in my opinion. Make your choice reasonable.

The idea of a cardboard shim is not a makeshift (Jerry-rigged) or temporary solution to address the proper functioning of the tuning pin. It is, in fact, the most rational and appropriate solution in this case. Here's why:
The classical school of piano tuners asserts that the "tuning pin" is essentially a nail, and accordingly, they treat it as a technical tool, initially driving it in when the pin can no longer maintain the desired string tension, and subsequently, when even that ceases to work, resorting to the hammer and mallet as the primary means of resolving the issue. But is such an approach truly correct? Absolutely not.
If we examine the piano tuning pin closely, we will find that it has a right-handed thread. Opponents may argue that this is done to facilitate the removal of the pin from the pinblock (by unscrewing it) during repair work. However, let's consider the mechanism of the pin's operation within the pinblock. The pin, made of a rigid metal alloy, is firmly secured by up to 100 kg of string tension in the wooden pinblock hole. Even immediately after the factory installation, it begins to exert firm pressure in two opposing directions, without any radial rotation in the hole - its visible part, where the string is located, presses on the lower part of the bushing, while the submerged, reverse side, which is directly in the pinblock hole, presses upwards. Three-quarters of the working part of the pin are located at a significant angle in the hole (bushing + pinblock), and as a result, they must "move" not radially, but in a wedged position. This leads to gradual wear of the wooden hollow cylindrical shape of the hole, i.e., we are rotating the pin not in a hollow cylinder, but in a cylinder with two conical sides. Therefore, after some use, the pin "fails" to maintain the desired string tension.
Incidentally, the pin, being primarily a screw, rotates in the hole due to the presence of its thread. And yet, we ignore the basic principle of the pin having a thread and reach for the mallet when it comes to "treating" the seating area for the pin (the pinblock hole). This is a criminal and extremely unwise course of action.
Yes, we have installed a shim (of any material) and driven the pin into the pinblock hole. What happens as a result of such a procedure? First, it is impossible to determine the appropriate force of the hammer blow on the pin. If a 4-pound hammer is used to strike the pin forcefully, there is a high probability that the shim will be displaced in the hole, resulting in a rigid, disintegrated positioning of the pin. The pin will "crawl" into the hole crookedly, partially destroying it. Secondly, even an experienced tuner, as a rule, does not know the full condition of the hole, and even when applying appropriately correct hammer blows to the pin, can still make mistakes, as the human factor comes into play. If the tuner strikes the pin with weak force, the pin will gradually sink into the hole, "pressing" against the hard shim. As a consequence of these weak blows into the "new hole with the shim," there is a significant risk that the hard shim will considerably damage the inner walls of the hole, leaving only enlarged cracks and increasing the wood's friability. Conclusion: using a hard shim and driving the pin in is an incorrect method.
So, what is the solution? Using a hammer is not possible, and installing a rigid shim is also problematic... This is where the moment of truth arises. If the pin is not driven into the hole, but rather rotated in it, then it is necessary to use something relatively soft as a shim. Yes, you can use poplar or linden wood shavings, but never oak.
As a result of practical experiments, Max decided to use a 3mm corrugated cardboard shim, which is cut at a 45-degree angle to increase its rigidity due to the ridges. The shim is gently compressed with the fingers, inserted into the hole, and screwed in using a T-bar wrench. During the careful screwing in of the tuning pin, the shim partially disintegrates into fibers, which fill the cracks and voids in the wood, and the 4% glue content in the corrugated cardboard also elastically distributes the semi-cylindrical strip along the entire hole in the pinblock. This procedure can be performed by any layperson "rescuing" their own old, dilapidated piano. Slowly but surely, tediously but reliably.

regards,
Max

курсы настройщиков фортепиано от Берова