Electro magnetic sensing keyboard springs for poly AT

[John Hendry]

The control of mass moving in a direction relative to (with) time within the weak force mass oscillation cycle points in time, that is to simply say electricity in a circuit of any current size within the Higgs Field, can be accomplished using a {patent related part that will make you laugh how simple} to create a 2nd relative inertial frame of reference from the one before it (second mass frame in time cycle is not connected in same force frame, a “rest” of the force frame relative to time. Frame space is still there in its time location (there is some tiny resistance added to it from {*.*} if you get technical), or, and this is huge, it can act as a fulcrum within a single relative inertial frame of reference to control a veriable mass force of direction change within the time frame/cycle and observing this difference shows the advancement in the EM> key system which acknowledges the time signature of electromagnetism and gravity in the electric ciucut of the key controller switch as it eliminates the need for the redundant second relative (force) frame and switch currently used giving accurate real time mass location control. This system is allowing a change in force within time to occur in the two mass flow directions required for controlling anticipated location points in time for mass arrival by controlling mass flow direction. This timing device works and adds observer mass without mentioning it… outside of mentioning it of course.

In a class C system you can keep the non electrically connected separate frame of the metal spring force out of the EM> force (sense) cycle of the system (not counting the springs other complex mass effects within the strong force that join them) by keeping the EM force ahead of the metal spring force in time just by changing the force direction of the springs relative to the EM (you would reverse EM, not play upside down;-) removing the springs “sense of mass torque” from the system adding the observer’s “sense of mass toque” in time through EM>. The “extra” spring energy force noted is put back within the whole sense system by the strong force. Observer/player is still “one” with EM force affecting mass flow rate and metal spring force is behind observer force in time relative to EM control cycle. Observer input controls spring through EM, not spring controlling observer output through reduction in EM force….like small control rotor (EM spring) used to control larger main rotor (metal spring) to control following (location) rate found on an R/C helicopter.

Will the player notice this correction? It depends on the size of the EM at first thought as obviously the bigger the EM spring the better getting closer to class A “feel” (and less practical to manufacture for low cost key bed), but a good player may be able to detect the difference even using a really tiny class C EM spring leaving player energy 100% in control of the mass flow rate within control circuit. Regardless of EM size, overall metal spring force averaged through key throw is a constant and at equal point of averaged force between EM and spring this effect may get worse as the EM gets smaller so a really tiny EM may exaggerate this taking it the other way from the equal force point. Not what you would think to happen, but time, therefore space curvature, acts as a lens, the component of a magnifying glass and the symmetry here is ripping my head off but I think I may have a point here to consider within the force field of the space time effect relative to a single observer at a single transition point in time.

In simple words, in allowing the metal spring force to assist the ER force, which is a spring itself even if tiny, the metal spring will take away from player sense control in the EM circuit. Interesting to see if it’s noticeable at this scale, and if it is how, if any, exaggerated does making EMs force smaller past relative layer affect it. I may just be noticing something not normally noticed that cannot be “felt”, and imaging the point reference change in scale sense data information. I think I’m right….the math will answer this in time after some aspren.

This “sense” loss also applies to class C2 as 2nd EM spring direction cannot be reversed and class B as well as their large EMs will be sharing metal spring force direction. Metal spring tension just to keep keys up when turned off. I think knowing why the keys fall make it look like it should. There is no mechanical advantage to this system outside of keys not moving about in a standard hard case resolved with foam key strip in top of case lid.

My guess is this awareness of mass EM> sense/effect at this scale is completely unnoticeable to the observer, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it surprised me and was to a good player. At any rate, this system sure shows what I have been talking about. Sorry to spin your head a little, it spins mine too going this far into the system but lets us see it. Hard to say the observer is not mass and affects the Universe when you look at this system in detail.

Last post on tech of EM key system, time to figure out what class A programs needed.

John^-^

[John Hendry]

Well here it is added at the very bottom left out because its so obvious to me but I need to mention the EM system also adds velocity sensed after touch because it is controlled by base pad height and density creating the feel and response needed from aftertouch.

John^^

[John Hendry]

This is not a forgotten idea at all. It is only the massive chiminal conspiracy affecting an entire HOA exposing the actions of a very few individuals I am in that has stopped it's development. As Sharp pointed out there are legal issues to contend with EVEN TO GIVE IT AWAY so it cannot claimed by some other individual. And contacting Fatar is planned ...but as a past Elka and Fatar dealer with damaged non-working units due to AC issues I know I have to deal with the fact the techs don't speak English.


John^^