comes from the Latin word toccare, meaning to knock, to strike implying touch. The Italian word toccata comes from toccare. A toccata refers to a rapid organ, harpsichord,or keyboard composition.
Obviously touch refers to a concept, a brain work in which we relate objects. One of those objects is always a hand or fingers intimately pushing another object for example the key of a piano or keyboard. At the microscopic/atomic/quantum level this always involves atoms with their feature we call electron, or I call electron thread(s). So I really don't think that atoms separated by immensely long Threads can said to be touching one another.
Some seem to think that atoms separated by light years worth of Thread are in contact with one another. Contact comes from another Latin based word called tangere. Tangere means to touch, with the prefix con means to to touch together. Contact is the intimate coming together of two things or two people. At the atomic level this implies the feature of the atom called electron: thread emanating out sideways from what we call proton. Again atoms separated by immensely long EM Threads are not literally in contact with one another.
Contact is used in electricity "Electrical contact" and this implies the coming together of metallic atoms with their electron threads.
comes from the Latin word nectere meaning to tie, to link. Nexus is a offshoot of nectere. Nexus is a means of connection, a mediator, a go between. The sense of the concept "connect" seems to be that two objects separated by some great distance and NOT TOUCHING and NOT IN CONTACT are somehow united by means of another object. For example two buildings are connected by a bridge. The bridge doesn't have to be touching or contacting the two buildings.
So connect would be a fit word to use for the relationship of all atoms assumed in rope hypothesis and thread theory. All the atoms are connected by EM Threads or EM Ropes. Atoms are remotely linked together by means of this fundamental entity called Thread. They communicate with one another and influence one another, they pull one another but this activity is not intimate like two bodies coming together in touch. As a side note it if very interesting to see how some ancients and moderns used words like connected, linked, united to describe the relationship conceived of matter (see this link:https://www.facebook.com/groups/442708405857037/permalink/465216723606205/ )
An atom, the fundamental unit of matter, or one of the fundamental objects I assume is radically distinct and unequal to the more fundamental entity called Thread even if they are somewhat the same. The form of atom is radically distinct and unequal to the form of Thread even if they rely upon one another and complement one another. This alone should make it clear that two objects like the Sun and the Moon are distinct even if united by the Thread.
When Thread intersects, overlaps, or superposes to what we call a critical Thread density (an intersection, overlap or superposition of Thread through which no more Thread may pass) I assume some sort of radical transformation is established that is utterly unique; as unique as the Thread. Without this critical thread density atoms would not organize an electronic structure (a pattern of electron threads), they would not be able to relate to one anther intimately in the concepts embodied as push, touch, contact, etc. They would not be able to chemically bond, etc. They would not be modified by the word tangible, an adjective meaning capable of being touched. And yet without this critical thread density atoms would not be able to dynamically relate to one another remotely as in the concept embodied in pull, light, gravity, etc. Without a converging bundle of Thread there would be no atoms. So I think there is this sort of wondrous perfection. Given that some of these ideas are true, all things would truly be elegant.
There is also a newer idea I call Critical Ethereal Thread Anomaly. This concept is defined as a radial superposing alignment of electron thread and EM Ropes beyond the nucleus. This is where light happens. Electron thread and EM Rope influence one another, they turn one another, etc. There is probably a critical number of these Threads that needs to be established in order to trigger a primal light event. This concept can also be applied to electricity. Electron threads from two or more atoms superpose in alignment and begin turning one another at the same frequencies.
I think these fundamentals are somewhat mysterious (inexplicable) and perhaps not even able to be completely understood. Critical Thread Density and its opposite doesn't explain a phenomena. It is descriptive. And it seems that the proton is structurally dynamic which is interesting. Obviously the atom also constantly reforms. This is somewhat mysterious to me. I'm willing to concede a couple of natural wonders like Thread overlapping Thread and Thread establishing a radically distinct form in what we call the hydrogen atom and all the atomic elements beyond. And also an idea such as Critical Ethereal Thread Anomaly.