Al,
You are right that I do connect coordinates with space in a familiar way because coordinates are used by man to show relationships between motion entities that exist in space. They are used to show position, distance, direction, and change of position, etc. of such entities individually and in relation to each other as appropriate. In general space does not come equipped with such coordinates that man can discern, so man generates them artificially and imposes them onto space to allow the measurement of such things. In truth, in the sense that man uses them, the coordinates are not physical entities of themselves at all, but at best are merely constructed information similitudes of the underlying informational structure of the space that is generated by the dimensional system and the motion entities that exist within it. They can be used to fix for comparison such basic spatial information structures such as position, direction, and change of position in the spatial structure. In most cases this is not done in an absolute sense, but merely in relation to and between motion entities that exist in space. It is the basic dimensional system generated information structures such as position, direction, and change of position that really exist as parts of the structure of space and motion entities and are then stored in the motion entities that exist in that space. Man is not able to accurately directly access that information from the motion entities, so he generates the coordinate systems to allow external measurements of them and the resulting variations of them that are stored in and are a part of motion entities. Lines that are generated as parts of coordinate systems can be either straight or curved depending on the structure of the entity system to which they are applied. When they are applied to the surface of a two- dimensional flat plain they will generally be straight. When they are applied to the surface of a sphere they will be curved due to the three-dimensional curvature of its surface. In our world, curvature is not possible in a one-dimensional structure because it is a result of a combination of change of position in two or more dimensions simultaneously. The moon takes a curved path around the earth because its motion toward the center of the earth caused by gravity is combined with its motion in another direction (dimension) that would cause it to leave the earth in a straight line in the absence of gravity and the resulting two-dimensional change of position combination generates the curved path. A true one-dimensional world cannot possess curvature because curvature requires at least two dimensions for its generation. This is primarily because curvature requires the combination of two or more opposing motions or directional paths and in a one-dimensional world with bi-directional dimensions two opposing motions could only be at 180 degrees from each other and opposition at 180 degrees does not generate curvature. It would generally only result in a slowing down somewhat of the greater motion or if the two motions were equal it would result in a stable position with no motion. Curved spaces can only properly accept curved coordinates. Flat spaces with two or more dimensions can accept either flat or curved coordinates, but flat coordinates generally work better for most purposes. The structure of the boundary of finite flat spaces can make a difference, as an example. I hope you can understand this somewhat disjointed explanation. Much of dimensional structuring is beyond man's current acceptance threshold and much if the rest is currently not for dissemination into the local structure, so I have tried to give what I can at the level that I can, so it contains approximations to full concepts and lack of details and connections of details in logical sequencing in some areas, etc.
The other paragraphs are somewhat clearer than before. What such things as QCM, CHI, DSI, etc. mean is only given in the Petitjean paper that you attached, however. I like to at least define the meaning of such mnemonics and the terms of mathematical expressions, etc. at least once at their first introduction of them in a communication, so new readers can follow my meaning. CHI is also the Chinese word for universal energy among other things. Even the Petitjean paper that is designed more for mathematicians defined the mnemonics. Papers designed for more general audiences or even other scientists that might not work in the same field or be as specialized in your area of your field as you are, should explain concepts first in relatively simple terms and then advance to the degree necessary to get your point across. If the other person doesn't understand what you are saying, you can't expect him to be on your side. He will more likely either ignore you, or speak against you to save face for his lack of understanding. Man has many such weaknesses. If you speak about something that is beyond man's acceptance threshold, you will usually get the same result even if you present your point in simple language, but lucky for you, your point is not beyond that level and is somewhat in line with others. Some physicists may not have the chemistry background that you have, however, so it would be good to explain how you get from matter particles being left handed and anti-matter particles being right handed, which most of them will understand, to what left handed and right handed molecules are, their connection to the same parity and symmetry principles, etc., and how they can be used to test to see if they fall differently in a gravitational field, etc. In general the more difficult you make your language structure, the fewer people you will reach. If you get them to understand and follow you, you will have adequate time later to impress them with all of the intimate details and abstract math formulas, etc., if you so desire. I am telling you these things because you are trying to get support from others to get the funds to do your experiment and you will need to get others to understand your concepts to convince them to support you. I feel for you. I know how hard it can be to simplify your language so others can understand when you have been used to working on the concepts at a much higher level and have made many language short cuts, etc., so you can work faster. It is a skill that will pay off greatly if you can master it though. My situation here is much easier than yours because my purpose is to only give basic concepts in a simple form to see if anyone can pick them up and develop them in detail. The only hard part of this limited interaction phase is the analysis of the resultant data, but so far it is pretty much as I suspected based on the results of the observational phase of the study.
