It is not easy to find perceptible images of certain elements or factors (it does not seem correct to us to name them particles) which can be only conceived analytically using mathematical algorithms.
But we repeat you that certain liberties in the interest of simplifying comprehension entail a very serious risk. Thus when the teachers of an Earth child represent the atom to her as " a miniature planetary model " and incite her to represent the nucleus as a sort of " sun " and the orbiting electrons like revolving " planetoids ", the child assimilates an erroneous concept which, if it is not superceded by more advanced studies, will remain all her life and will prevent her from conceiving a Physical Cosmos nearer to reality.
We say all this to warn you against simple and erroneous preconceptions. It is very important to us that you do not identify the concept of OAWOO (AXIS or ORIENTATION of DIMENSION) with a line. Nor even with a rotating or axial vector representative of the oriented magnitudes. The OAWOO is not measurable, that is, it is not a length, such as the physicists of OYAGAA (Planet Earth) conceive it. For all these reasons we ask you not to try to identify it with the dimension LENGTH.
Undoubtedly a layman in mathematics would try through our theory to seek a PERCEPTIBLE representation of such an "AXIS " but we know that for you such a mental representation is currently impossible. That is why the graphs of this document are drawn in the form of spherical and axial representations which are as childlike as the concept of the atom explained by some humble schoolteachers.
In addition, the OAWOO IS NOT a CONVENTION, it is not a simple parameter, nor an arbitrary way of representing an IBOZOO UU. The OAWOO does not exist without imagining it related or " connected " to another OAWOO with which it forms an ELEMENTARY ANGLE that we call IOAWOO.
All the confusion resulting from our presentation of our Physical concepts to you spring from our desire to convey these ideas to you in an understandable. Apparent contradictions are inevitable, just as with the question of a Earth child, concerning how a transistor radio can receive a radio station if your answer was " the words come from the air ".
On the other hand it will be much simpler to imagine the IOAWOO (we could translate this by (" THE ANGLE FORMED BY TWO OAWOO ") if you remember how in previous documents we identified this IOAWOO with certain magnitudes which are familiar to you (LENGTH OF TIME).
Despite all this it will not be easy for you to conceive an ANGLE not formed by intersecting lines or planes. Such a model of the angle differs from Earth mathematical conventions.
In short: if you try to apply your own mental images through the orthodoxy of Formal logic, and even if we bring to you all the scientific formulation of our theory, it will be impossible for you to assimilate these concepts. This is the reason for our attempt to facilitate the comprehension of the IBOZOO UU with rough approximations.
In addition this does not seem reasonable. The unversed OEMII is accustomed to seeing objects delimited by lines, to mentally imagine angles delimited by lines and planes, and to position objects at such a point or in such a place.
It will thus be difficult for this OEMII to imagine an IBOZOO UU that cannot be defined by the three co-ordinates which define the point in Euclidean space; it will be difficult for him to imagine that in addition he has no mass, and that he cannot be compared to a changing quantity. Also that he does not have energy in him or electric charge because such concepts (MASS, ENERGY AND CHARGE) are creations of the mind associated with a particular orientation of such elements. Perhaps an expert in OYAGAA logic might define him as the non-A (*) of divalent logic (that is, WHAT DOES NOT EXIST)
But the IBOZOO UU is not a simple mathematical postulate, a &&" entéléchie " composed of strange conceptions of " axes " which make it possible to outline a new model of perceiving physics and cosmology.
On the contrary, we have confirmed for you the empirical validity of this design. We know that the IBOZOO UU REALLY EXISTS, but we recognise that we are unaware of other aspects of such entities and that consequently we do not have even half of the COSMOLOGICAL TRUTH, and perhaps will never arrive there even if we are approaching it in an asymptotic way.
Consequently we are not trying to make you accept this model unknown to the physicists of OYAGAA (Earth). Otherwise it would be necessary for us to lay out our logical principles as a preliminary, and we accompany these disclosures not only with their mathematical formulation but also with a certain amount of empirical evidence.
It would be childish to think that an Earth physicist would accept any premise advanced by a primarily didactic text, without a considerable amount of coherent arguments or a testimony worthy of belief. Never would the OEMII of UMMO, who remain hidden and operate discreetly, for reasons already explained, hope to be believed on the basis of mysterious telephone calls or typed documents without an identifiable signature.
In short, we try TO DESCRIBE A THEORY and not DEMONSTRATE it.