More Mathematical Proofs To Define A Unified Scalar Theory

The purpose of this paper is to serve as a computational proof of concept for my "Unified Theory Of Scalability". The contents of this paper show an extended framework for the intitial logic pattern that was described in the original super formula I call the "Puritz Scalar." Here is the unadjusted super formula:

Z = (X•(A/B)•Y)^t

Where the bounds of the system are set to where the highest and lowest order relationships resolve to 1. C is that resolution point as described by a 1 dimensional base 10 scale of math.

This mathematical framework establishes a self constrained system that is dynamically scaling relative to its upper and lower bounds. As the values in the vector relationships shift in scale to each other, the total outcomes as determined by the minimum and maximum conversion rate would resolve as a point in a 3d volume space. Essentially, all volume effects arrise as a self constrained system is constantly approaching an equilibrium we define as a numerical solution, this solution appearing as a particle moving in space. This means at its core, our universe can essentially be defined by the rules of computation and quantization. Once that principle is established, Einsteins Theory Of Relativity essentially defines how volume space shifts in proportion to the defined upper and lower bounds. As you approach one or the other (The speed of light or plank length), the total volume space shifts to reflect the warped field of total volume outcomes as the vector begins to exponentially change in scale to its alternate:

Z = (X•(volumetric total of ħ outcomes)•Y)^T

As we approach the smallest limit of discrete transformation values, volume space adjusts proportionally to reflect this. This essentially means that volume space perfectly scales as you approach the plank length. This is simply perceived as decreasing volume sizes to an observer in volume space. As the total degrees of freedom for a resolution in volume space decreases, the overall volume of the relative system decreases to adjust for the lost degrees of freedom. Relativity just shows these volume effects arising as you approach the upper bound. Essentially the volume space would bend to reflect the ever decreasing array of total outcomes as a particle travels closer to the speed of light. This might suggest that larger objects would perceive time much slower as they don't necessarily have a larger frame of reference and are still bound by the minimum transfer rate. Tiny objects then might appear to be jittering through time as they are essentially always jumping to a new vector calculation as many slight influences shift the vector. All of this is very abstract but everything will be clarified in a future comprehensive framework. I will discuss the ramifications of these principles in future papers. These current works should be treated as a mathematical and computational basis for establishing a grand map of our universe.