Lorraine ,

This meeting is a relevant meeting where several thinkers share ideas and put seeds for the others. We need these kind of meetings or conferences to present the ideas, works, theories. They don t tell rubbish because simply they try to explain unknowns and it is well like this.

Secondly you have not define the free will, the consciousness or others. Because even with...

view entire post

Lorraine ,

This meeting is a relevant meeting where several thinkers share ideas and put seeds for the others. We need these kind of meetings or conferences to present the ideas, works, theories. They don t tell rubbish because simply they try to explain unknowns and it is well like this.

Secondly you have not define the free will, the consciousness or others. Because even with numbers, variables , changes inserted in the equations of physics, we are limited about the main informations and in philosophy also. These limitations are mainly due to limitations about what is the primoridal essence of informations and hat are the foundamental objects and how is really transformed and coded the energy to create our matters, topologies, geometries, fields.

In fact imagine that the variables , numbers, changes are a key to explain this consciousness, the problem is that you don t know the partitions universal permitting this, that is why it is difficult to explain the free will and the consciousness wich are different of the intelligence. Many confound the intelligence and the consciousness. In fact there is a kind of very fascinating thing about the consciousness, the free will and the unique creations, it is like if something permits specific partitions unique somewhere. It is like even we have an order and after a specific order. like in fact some assymetries appear at the end of somethings where the codes and informations permit these unique creations. It is there the secret to explain this consciousness, we must find what are the main mathematical and foundamental objects, how the cognitive sciences are correlated in these microtubules and the consciousness, what is really the main primordial informations and codes and the general relatifvity alone is a problem like the fields because they are probably emergent. So the variables and numbers are important indeed but they are under a partition so complex and so beyond our understanding that we cannot confound this intelliegcne and this consciousness.

Furthermore never the physicists tell that we cannot act on the laws of nature because we have this consciousness and that this consciousness can be aware of universal truths and so we can understand that we are tools of optimisation and so that we can act on this nature in improving it with wisdom. Maybe it is better to utilise this consciousness than to explain it at this moment .....

view post as summary

Lorraine,

It is slowly becoming apparent, to more and more people, that all existing physical theories, are merely Effective Theories; like Ptolemy's theory of epicycles, they are good (effective) at quantitatively describing observed effects, but say little, if anything at all, about what causes those effects to exist, in the first place.

Hence, the "laws of physics" in such...

view entire post

Lorraine,

It is slowly becoming apparent, to more and more people, that all existing physical theories, are merely Effective Theories; like Ptolemy's theory of epicycles, they are good (effective) at quantitatively describing observed effects, but say little, if anything at all, about what causes those effects to exist, in the first place.

Hence, the "laws of physics" in such theories, do not represent "causal powers", but only precise descriptions of effects. In essence, they fit accurate curves to the observed data, but accomplish little, in regards to actually explaining why anything happens the way it does. The situation is not much different than you or I being able to predict that the sun will rise in the morning; the fact that we can make such successful predictions, does not imply that we are the cause for the effect, but it does imply that something, non-random, is causing it.

But physicists have yet to succeed at identifying any cause, for any of the observed effects, that their theories are so good at describing.

But Shannon did: He identified the most fundamental cause, for every possible interaction; an interaction can only be "triggered" by detecting the mere existence of something to interact with. Nothing needs to be "measured" at all, no variables need to be assigned values, as you keep saying. An entity just needs to be able to determine that something, that it can interact with, actually exists, "right here, right now", right in front of it. What the subsequent interaction is, how the interacting entities behave, is a completely separate issue; but the ultimate fact is that, there can never be any interaction behavior at all, until after the mere existence of the "trigger" has been detected.

The problem with every "effective theory", is that they all simply assume that "then a miracle occurs"; interacting entities "simply know", seemingly via some "miracle", or "spooky action at a distance" etc., that something to interact with (such as an immeasurably-tiny gravitational field) is now present, and that they should consequently, respond accordingly, and be effected, by whatever it is that happens to be there. But Shannon was "more explicit", regarding that missing step; reality does not function via miracles, it functions via discrete (quantized) "triggers" that initiate all subsequent interactions. The error-free detection of such triggers, is what Shannon's Information Recovery, is all about. When the circumstances are such, that it is possible to accomplish such error-free information recovery, then deterministic behaviors become possible (recovering the same identical trigger, enables a subsequent, identical effect); otherwise they are not possible, which is ultimately why "free-will" exists. When the same (repeatable) trigger cannot possibly be reliably detected, then the corresponding triggered behavior, cannot be reliably "determined", hence determinism cannot exist in such a situation. Determinism cannot exist, in any situation, in which it is not possible to recover at least one, single bit of information, indicative of the existence of some "trigger", that matches whatever triggers an entity is capable of detecting.

Rob McEachern

view post as summary

"Local slit-geometry and scattering cannot account for these coincidence results..."

When you change the nature of the detector, you will also change the nature of what is being detected.

Whenever a particle passes though the same location within a slit, it induces the same electrical field around the slit, that subsequently causes the particle to scatter off that...

view entire post

"Local slit-geometry and scattering cannot account for these coincidence results..."

When you change the nature of the detector, you will also change the nature of what is being detected.

Whenever a particle passes though the same location within a slit, it induces the same electrical field around the slit, that subsequently causes the particle to scatter off that field, in the same deterministic manner. Reproducing the same geometry on the "other side", will reproduce the same deterministic pattern.

As you have correctly stated, that pattern will be obscured, when you send many different particles through the slits, with different incident geometries and/or energies, but if you use a coincidence detector to eliminate every single one of those other particles except for the one that passes through the other slit with exactly the same geometry at exactly the same time, then the same deterministic pattern will emerge from the analysis.

It is just like using a strobe light to make a movie of a rotating, spoked-wheel; you can "freeze" the apparent rotation of the wheel (the observed pattern), and thus subsequently observe a different pattern, that was created by the joint behavior of the coincidence detector and the wheel it is observing, and not just the wheel by itself. When you change the detector, you change what will be detected.

As I stated on the page that you linked to; "Information about that geometry is merely being modulated onto the "carrier" passing through the slits..." When you change the detector (the demodulator), you change the information subset to be extracted from that carrier, but not the information that was being carried in the first place. If you place a colored filter between yourself and a white light, you will no longer see the white light; what is detected depends upon both the nature of the input to a detector and the nature of the detector itself.

Rob McEachern

view post as summary

Lorraine,

"what the electrical circuits, voltages and transistors represent depends on what human beings want them to represent."

Physical entities "represent" themselves, to other physical entities, by merely BEING themselves - they are what they are.

Hence, Shannon's point was, humans, such as yourself and every physicist on Earth, should never have expected to be...

view entire post

Lorraine,

"what the electrical circuits, voltages and transistors represent depends on what human beings want them to represent."

Physical entities "represent" themselves, to other physical entities, by merely BEING themselves - they are what they are.

Hence, Shannon's point was, humans, such as yourself and every physicist on Earth, should never have expected to be capable of reliably detecting the existence of such entities (at any specific location in both space and time), unless you first already know, apriori, EXACTLY what type of detector MUST be employed - a perfect MATCH (copy) of the entity itself.

You, and every physicist on Earth, have been deluding yourselves, by naively assuming, that you ought to be able to correctly detect entities, that exist in the real world (rather than in some idealistic thought experiment), even when you do not know exactly what you need to be looking for.

As Shannon proved, there are situations in which nature, will never allow that to happen. If you do not know EXACTLY what to look for, then you are just "s... out of luck." (Hence the difficulties with detecting "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy) What humans either want, or expect things to "represent", is not necessarily what they actually do represent; A crappy drug-test will never correctly indicate that the drug being tested for, is actually present. And a crappy test for a "bit of information" will never correctly detect such a bit.

Entities existing in the real-world, "represent" their very existence, to other entities, by simply, merely BEING themselves: "It takes one, to know one!" and it takes one, a perfect matched filter, to reliably detect the mere existence of one.

In other words, Shannon proved that their are situations, in the real-world, in which it is impossible, even in principle, to "measure" something and then reliably deduce/determine/infer what it was, that you just measured, from those self-same measurements; because, there is nothing there to ever be reliably measured, in the first place! there is no INFORMATION present. Such problems have nothing directly to do with a small physical size, as has been incorrectly assumed for over a century; the problem has to do with a small, TINY (one single bit) information content.

Rob McEachern

view post as summary

Robert,

you wrote on https://www.quantamagazine.org/famous-experiment-dooms-pilot
-wave-alternative-to-quantum-weirdness-20181011:

“There is no interference - it is just discrete scattering, as Bohm demonstrated, like the balls in an old bin-pall machine, striking obstructions in the field (playing surface) at discrete locations.”

and

“A skier encountering...

view entire post

Robert,

you wrote on https://www.quantamagazine.org/famous-experiment-dooms-pilot
-wave-alternative-to-quantum-weirdness-20181011:

“There is no interference - it is just discrete scattering, as Bohm demonstrated, like the balls in an old bin-pall machine, striking obstructions in the field (playing surface) at discrete locations.”

and

“A skier encountering moguls on a ski-slope, might be a better metaphor, for the particle/Gibb-phenomenon interaction, within a slit. The point is, that although you do not "see" the moguls looking at the slits themselves, as Bohm demonstrated, a tiny skier passing through a slit, will encounter the Fourier transform of the slit, whose band-limiting will ensure that any skier passing through a slit, will encounter some very big moguls in the field there.”

No double-slit aperture has the exact same microscopic surface as another. Hence what you replied by writing

“Whenever a particle passes though the same location within a slit, it induces the same electrical field around the slit, that subsequently causes the particle to scatter off that field, in the same deterministic manner. Reproducing the same geometry on the "other side", will reproduce the same deterministic pattern.”

is inconsistent. Even if all double-slit apertures would be exactly identical, you cannot explain the result of the experiment I brought up.

Why should one and the same location within a double-slit have anything to do with what happens at the other double-slit to produce an interference pattern? Nothing is “reproduced” at the other side! What you ascribe to a detector's ability to sample an interference pattern only when there are coincidence counts at another detector is just a wild and confused fantasy of yours.

You wrote

“When you change the detector (the demodulator), you change the information subset to be extracted from that carrier, but not the information that was being carried in the first place."

Man, this is so damned silly what you wrote and I wonder that is indeed you that wrote it. The “carrier” is one bit of information – as you rightfully stated a million times before here and elsewhere. Nothing has been “carried in the first place”!

“If you place a colored filter between yourself and a white light, you will no longer see the white light;”

Deep insight! Needs a Genius to arrive at that conclusion...

“what is detected depends upon both the nature of the input to a detector and the nature of the detector itself.”

Again deep insight, and again meant ironically... I think you should take your personal filters (your model about detectors, filters and the nature of detections) away from your eyes for being able to discuss the experiment objectively and scientificly.

view post as summary

Robert,

I like to better explain why I find your answers so silly. Let's recap the experiment:

1) A light source sends out particle pairs. For every pair the source sends out the two particles in opposite directions.

2) At side A (left side) there is a double-slit with a fixed detector behind it at a certain location.

3) At side B (right side) there is a double-slit...

view entire post

Robert,

I like to better explain why I find your answers so silly. Let's recap the experiment:

1) A light source sends out particle pairs. For every pair the source sends out the two particles in opposite directions.

2) At side A (left side) there is a double-slit with a fixed detector behind it at a certain location.

3) At side B (right side) there is a double-slit with a detector behind it which has to scan the detection plane step by step to make the interference pattern appear.

You explain a double-slit interference pattern by a scattering process at the surface of the slits. Tiny moguls on these surfaces should lead each particle to its place such that there are dark and light stripes as a result (interference pattern).

Now you wrote

“Whenever a particle passes though the same location within a slit, it induces the same electrical field around the slit, that subsequently causes the particle to scatter off that field, in the same deterministic manner.”

If that assumption would be correct, then the detector on side A should always click when a particle passes through the same location within a slit. Maybe there are also other “locations” within those slits that cause this particle to also end up in detector A every time a particle hits such a location. The main point here is to assume that this would be the correct explanation and then to ask why at side B these “moguls” should be located such that they built up an interference pattern for the detector at side B to detect – whenever detector A at side A clicks.

One now can assume that even if detector A does not click but only detector B, that the counts of detector B alone can establish the interference pattern on side B. But that is not the case. Only the coincident counts make the interference pattern appear.

So is that interference pattern simply a filtering result out of many overlapping interference patterns? As tempting as this answer may be, before subscribing to it as the result of your scattering processes one had at first to explain why the myriads of tiny “moguls” of two independently manufactured double-slits coincide such that at side B an interference pattern can be detected. Keep in mind that the source sends out particle pairs such that the two particles fly in opposite directions. Hence each and every of the respective locations a particle pair passes through at one side must be mysteriously correlated with its 180 degree counterpart at the other side such that the result is always the detection of an interference pattern at one side – no matter if we fix detector A at location X in the detection plane or slightly off that location (say at location Y).

Be it double-slits or two roughly identical pencils or screws, I see no rational and scientific reason why two different objects should coincide concerning their microscopic surface properties in such an orchestrated way. I also see no reason why “the nature of the detector” should be responsible for the interference pattern at side B because one can also use a photographic plate and according to your theory that pattern then merely is hidden within different impact locations of other particles. But that does not explain why independent “moguls” on each side TOGETHER lead at all to an identifiable interference pattern instead of leading to any other pattern – or to no pattern.

Hope that the reader and you can now better trace my arguments.

view post as summary

Robert,

I tell you how I see the issue:

Only in your mind you correlate some locations of some “moguls” for side A of the experiment with some locations of some “moguls” for side B of the experiment to get the known results. You correlate them such that if some moguls on side A lead some particles to detector A, then some moguls on side B lead some particles to detector B...

view entire post

Robert,

I tell you how I see the issue:

Only in your mind you correlate some locations of some “moguls” for side A of the experiment with some locations of some “moguls” for side B of the experiment to get the known results. You correlate them such that if some moguls on side A lead some particles to detector A, then some moguls on side B lead some particles to detector B (but surely not all of them).

I don't know how these assumptions can lead in all cases to the observed results. “All cases” means that there are a plethora of double-slit manufactures, surely all with moguls at different locations. You take it for guaranteed that each combination of two double-slits has the right internal “mogul-combination” to enable the measured results – no matter how weird these combinations may be.

All we know is that in the experiment there are less coincidence clicks in destructive areas as are in constructive areas for side B. For at all obtaining clicks at detector A one should not place this detector in areas where there is maximal destructive interference. So we selected a “mogul-location” for detector A with maximum constructive interference after the double-slit. According to your assumptions, that location depends on at least one mogul that leads every particle deterministically to the same location after it passed the slit with the mogul, provided that every such particle hits this mogul.

At which incoming angle the particles hit all the moguls an how this does affect / enable the end result is another open question for me. Another open question is whether or not there are many differently located moguls in one double-slit that could lead all the particles that pass these moguls deterministically to one and the same location (for example to detector A). These complications multiply by not only considering them for one side, but for both sides in combination.

Somehow you seem to believe that once we defined the right place for detector A, then all the differently located moguls in both double-slits together with all the different momenta for the particles that pass the slits can guarantee that there will be less coincidence clicks in destructive areas as are in constructive areas for detector B.

Additionally you also bring a detection statistics into play what reminds me of your assumptions about the necessity to wipe away the false counts from these statistics to get a proper picture of reality. So additionally we also have to consider these false counts (and non-counts?) that coincide with all the other already mentioned coincidences to obtain the “realistic picture of what is really going on”.

Maybe after the experiment we should redo the experiment, but with an exchange of the double-slit at side B. If we change that double-slit with another appropriate one, we change the locations for the moguls in that slit – unless you believe that every double-slit of the same kind must have the same moguls at the exact some locations.

What do you think, will there be changes in the frequencies of coincident clicks at certain former locations at side B?

I do not mind if you don't answer that question, but then a further discussion makes no sense to me.

view post as summary

Robert,

let me tell you how I see all this.

Concerning the experiment, we are talking about a subset of all the particles that manage to get through the slits and to the detection plane, independent of whether or not they will be detected there by some apparatus.

The only difference between you and me here is that I do not correlate the word “subset” automatically to a...

view entire post

Robert,

let me tell you how I see all this.

Concerning the experiment, we are talking about a subset of all the particles that manage to get through the slits and to the detection plane, independent of whether or not they will be detected there by some apparatus.

The only difference between you and me here is that I do not correlate the word “subset” automatically to a mechanical, deterministic filtering process. I do not automatically associate “subset” with “filtering”. It is a subset in relation to the whole set, independently of how the whole set or the subset got into appearance / existence. So I am not confused, I just try to understand how you explain the formation of the whole set / subset.

Now you have given an explanation scheme in terms of electromagnetic ripples and diffraction. If an electromagnetic field is something physical, it has to consist of some kind of matter. Your metaphor with the water and the boat is enlightening. The boat is a huge amount of times larger than the “atoms” the water is composed of. On the other hand, the “atoms” of an electromagnetic field – if such a field is really a real physical entity – is composed of myriads of photons of the same size as the photons that later hit the detectors. Surely one can assume that this field is composed of much smaller “atoms” then photons are. But I think that would be a too great leap into the unknown.

So let's assume the electromagnetic field is composed out of myriads of photons. If we think in terms of scattering (little balls bumping into each other and changing each others locations and momenta) I see no straightforward way that these myriads of photons can lead a single photon of the same size reliably to ever the same location whenever it passes the same location at a slit. It is not a boat sitting on classical water waves that are much smaller than the boat. Additionally photons are defined to travel with a very high speed, they do not hover around the same area.

Moreover, unlike the “classical” double-slit experiment with single photons where the source is such that we know with certainty one of the space coordinates the photon came from (always straight from the left side for example), the situation in the experiment we discuss here is different: each photon that passes the slits could have had a slightly different impact angle.

Now, what is true here is that all these different impact angles for each particle pair are indeed correlated, since the particle pairs are always send out from the source in opposite directions. Leaving aside the nature of the electromagnetic field for a moment (many photons in a small area), we then can say that whenever the source sends out a particle pair in exactly the same directions, it logically should hit the same spots at the slits and should encounter the same scattering angle.

But besides the issue with the electromagnetic field, there is now another issue. Namely that coincidence counts are only valid when detector A clicks (of course also detector B). If detector A does only click when the source has send out the particles in only one allowed direction (in the direction such that the end result of this deterministic billiard chain is a click of detector A), then it can only hit one allowed location at the slits and the deterministic result would be only one allowed place at the detection plane to arrive for it (namely detector A).

Since the same exclusive behaviour is then logically mandatory also for particle B, the logical result in this case would be that particle B also can only arrive at one and the same allowed spot at the detection plane. Since this is not what has been registered, we are forced to conclude that there necessarily must be much more than one spot at the slits that allow a photon to arrive at detectors A and B.

But we also know that there must be spots at the slits that do not allow both twin particles to arrive at the detectors A and B. And we also know that there must be spots at the slits where only one of the twin particles is allowed to arrive at a detector. Whereas this behaviour could be intuitively explained by the correlated impact angles for each particle pair, the conservation of that correlation of their momenta before they hit the slits and after they have hit the slits is not a guaranteed thing.

That conservation of correlation is nothing other than the fact that there are less coincidence clicks in destructive areas as are in constructive areas for side B.

The issue here is that at the one hand we talk about real particles that fly off the source (billiard balls) and at the other hand these billiard balls should fly through myriads of other billiard balls (the electromagnetic field) and at the end are guaranteed to produce less coincidence clicks in destructive areas as for constructive areas at side B (or in other words, produce a distinctive pattern instead of a chaotic, homogenous mix). Even a highly orchestrated “dance” of these myriads of billiard balls in the electromagnetic field does not alter the picture that it then needs an unbelievably complex orchestrated behaviour for all these balls to govern one photon reliably such that the interference pattern can establish. What is already a non-trivial task on an ordinary billiard table with a dozen of balls gets astronomically magnified when thinking of the electromagnetic field as composed of myriads of photons.

On the other hand, if we give up thinking of photons as material objects, what then remains of your deterministic explanation scheme with all the interactions being strictly local and working perfectly together like geared wheels? Additionally we necessarily need many different locations in a double-slit that all result in the same impact location for a detector. Together with the myriads of interactions within the sea of electromagnetic photons I see no way to perfectly orchestrate / correlate all these variables to obtain at all a distinct pattern instead of just a chaotic, homogenous impact mix.

You wrote

"Information about that geometry is merely being modulated onto the "carrier" passing through the slits..."

If a photon is “one bit of information” as you repeatedly asserted here and elsewhere, how then is it able to being “modulated” such that it deterministically reaches its destined location at the detection plane? Your answer is that the “carrier” is the electromagnetic field with its myriads of photons. But each of those photons again have only “one bit of information”, each of them can't even “carry” or “represent” where in 3D-space they themselves should be located and with what momenta they should move. I think you strictly have to differentiate a model of the world as a computer program where the nature of the entities (and even the nature of 3D space, whatever it is) is negligible from the model of the world in physical 3D-space where the nature of each of the material entities plays a crucial role for any local and deterministic explanation.

view post as summary

Stefan,

"Your metaphor with the water and the boat is enlightening." Good.

"I see no straightforward way... " Because you have incorrectly assumed that the induced EM field is being caused by the "water", when it is in fact caused by the huge structure of the nearby slits, which are many, many, many orders of magnitude larger than the "boats".

To continue with the...

view entire post

Stefan,

"Your metaphor with the water and the boat is enlightening." Good.

"I see no straightforward way... " Because you have incorrectly assumed that the induced EM field is being caused by the "water", when it is in fact caused by the huge structure of the nearby slits, which are many, many, many orders of magnitude larger than the "boats".

To continue with the metaphor:

The "water" is not in an open ocean, it is in a narrow channel, with huge, nearby walls and the "boats" are not all going EXACTLY down the center-line of the channel. Hence boats that are nearer to one side-wall than the other, induce a different EM field (caused by the walls, not the water) than a boat moving down the center-line of the channel. The resulting "ripples" interact with both the boat and the walls, so they are no longer exactly symmetrical along the center-line and thus deflect the boat slightly, to one side or the other, in a deterministic pattern, that depends upon how much off-center, each boat was while passing through the channel. At a great distance from the slits, these deterministic deflections "add up" to a deterministic pattern - the interference pattern observed.

"If a photon is “one bit of information” ..., how then is it able to being “modulated” such that it deterministically reaches its destined location at the detection plane?"

The photon itself, the boat, is not being modulated, it is not being altered. Only its induced behavior, how it is deflected (or, if it even is deflected!), by the asymmetrical, induced EM field, is what is being modulated; by the fact that there can be no modulated, altered behavior at all, when, in effect, the boat cannot even detect that such ripples even exist - the boat is simply too insensitive to the ripples. That "test for existence", is what "information" detection/recovery IS, it is not about making "measurements", and the outcome of that test, is what is being altered/modulated. Whenever one entity cannot recover that one, single bit of carried (within the induced field) information, being "caused" by the existence of a second entity, that MEANS that it has totally failed to detect the very existence of the second entity - hence, it cannot "trigger" any interaction at all. That is what "quantum" is all about; either you detect that "something" else exists and consequently modulate/alter your behavior, or you fail to detect that "something" exists and therefore behave just as if nothing exists to ever cause a change in behavior.

As another metaphor, instead of thinking about boats interacting with walls, think of two submarines, each weighing thousands of tons, that are, by design, difficult to detect; when they each actually do fail to detect that the other exists, when they pass near each other, neither's behavior will be "modulated", they will behave just as if the other does not even exist. They are both inducing changes in the behavior of the water around them, but neither is sensitive enough to those changes, to detect the other's existence. The point being, that such behaviors have nothing directly to do with small, physical size. It is the small information content of the induced "signal" (only one recoverable bit, indicative of only two possible states; "trigger some interaction" or "do not trigger any interaction at all"), not small physical size, that determines (AKA causes) such "quantized" behaviors. That is what "quantum" behavior is all about. That is what "information" is all about. Physicists have been confusing themselves, and every one else, for an entire century, by naively assuming that "information" is about making "measurements". It is not. It is about detecting existence itself.

"the nature of each of the material entities plays a crucial role for any local and deterministic explanation." Not quite. A boat traveling through a sea of oil, rather than a sea of water, would still "make waves"; the question is "Would waves in oil, deflect the boats in an observably different pattern than waves in water?" Or would boats made of one type of plastic, induce waves/ripples that differ from those induced by boats made of a different type of plastic. As another metaphor to consider in this regards, the "father" of Quantum Field Theory, Paul Dirac, pointed out that how chess pieces are moved, how they behave, is independent of the nature of the material they are made of, and the same seems to be true in quantum theory; we can only actually observe how entities, such as electrons and photons behave, not what they are made of. And how they behave when they encounter each other, seems to be "triggered" in exactly the same manner that the process of "information" recovery" triggers observable changes in behaviors.

Rob McEachern

view post as summary

Lorraine,

I agree with your statement that: "I’m saying that information is an aspect of the world that people can only symbolically represent..."

My point is, that "physics" is not about trying to figure out how people, do what they do. It is about trying to figure out how "elementary" entities, do what they do.

Until people figure out how "elementary" entities...

view entire post

Lorraine,

I agree with your statement that: "I’m saying that information is an aspect of the world that people can only symbolically represent..."

My point is, that "physics" is not about trying to figure out how people, do what they do. It is about trying to figure out how "elementary" entities, do what they do.

Until people figure out how "elementary" entities represent and process information, they will never understand the nature of reality.

I am not disputing your claims, about the way most "people" deal with what they consider to be "information." I am merely trying to get those very same people, to understand, that the only people that have learned to process information, in a manner anything like the way "elementary" entities process it (which appears to be extremely different from the methods that you describe) are the people that design communications systems - the people that created "Information Theory", precisely for that purpose. Physicists have yet to figure that out. But it is about time that they try.

As described towards the end of this Article about Shannon's Information Theory, what Shannon discovered was a way to do the one thing that everyone thought was a logical impossibility, "the one Fano called 'unknown, unthinkable,' until Shannon thought it."

Shannon discovered a way to create highly complex systems, that work PERFECTLY, in spite of being constructed entirely out of maximally IMPERFECT PARTS! Every single "bit" being used to build the system can be deeply flawed, but nevertheless, the entire complex system built from those highly corrupted "bits" will still function PERFECTLY - no errors whatsoever!

It is the HOLY GRAIL of reality! It is what enables complex systems, like "life" to exist, in the first place. As the article states: "(In technical terms, it was a promise of an “arbitrarily small” rate of error: an error rate as low as we want, and want to pay for.)": PERFECTION is just a matter of cost, not a logical impossibility. And the cost of "near-perfection", turns out to be surprisingly affordable - which is why we humans exist.

Rob McEachern

view post as summary

You know Jonathan, I recognise that the Einstein field equation and his mass energy equivalence and his equation have some relevances but the problem is that we have generalised these equations like the only one primary essence with the photons . Probably due to an euphory when he has pondered his GR and SR, all the philosophes, the religious, the scientists and others have told , wowwww he has...

view entire post

You know Jonathan, I recognise that the Einstein field equation and his mass energy equivalence and his equation have some relevances but the problem is that we have generalised these equations like the only one primary essence with the photons . Probably due to an euphory when he has pondered his GR and SR, all the philosophes, the religious, the scientists and others have told , wowwww he has understood god and how is transformed the enery to create this reality and since 100 years the thinkers have not thought beyond the box and they consider still this GR and SR like the only one truth. In fact his theory is not complete for me ,and the photons oscillating and vibrating are not the cause of our QM with a kind of 1d main cosmic field of this GR connected with these photons at this planck scale still in 1d. His masse energy equivalence too is not complete , that is why I have created my intuitive equation about the mass energy , in considering this cold dark matter and this dark energy. The problem actually is that only this GR and SR are considered and the problem is mainly philosophical and ontological. And like all the thinkers in theoretical phyysics are endoctrinated, so they continue to work only this GR and SR in details with points or strings . But in fact nothing has proved that these photons were the primary essence, nothing has proved that god transforms the energy in matter like this with these EFE, the GR and SR. Nothing has proved that we must unify G c and h to explain this QG, nothing has proved that this GR and QM must be unified . I d say that in fact we must unify the DE,the DM, the GR, the QM and the 3D spheres to understand really how god creates this universe. You are a thinker thinking in God like me, you see well that there are many philosophical problems considering god if we consider these fields like primary essence and the strings and photons alone, it contredicts even God , because frankly a god having been able to create a so incredible complex universe with fields, why god has not created a more perfect universe with fields more quickly and why god does not stop an accident or a murderer like god is omnipotent, it is not possible and it is even against the universal altruistic love and the evolution these fields and these strings like primary essence. We evolve and it is important, maybe we create it this thing that we name the paradise, we are results of evolution and we are conscious and this consciousness seems a tool of optimisation because we can improve and utilise the matters, the energies and the environments. This GR and SR frankly have created a prison philosophically speaking and now we turn in round instead to consider deeper parameters and instead to return at this old school.

The quantum gravitation for example , it is still due to einstein the confusion, they consider the gravitons being the quanta of gravitational waves, insetad to consider pure newtonian gravitational fields hidden behind the others forces, it is really odd and it is still due to an interpretation of this gravitation from this GR and this curvature of the spacetime at high velocities for observations. We forget to relativate lol in fact the observations and the primary essence of the universe.

Regards

view post as summary

This antimatter is a reality, each particle has a partner, an antiparticle, of same mass but with an opposite charge. It becomes relevant to try to understand philosophically their origin, they permit us to balance our actual known particles and if my reasoning is correct about these main scalar fields of the DE antigravitational present also in our standard model like the cold dark matter, that...

view entire post

This antimatter is a reality, each particle has a partner, an antiparticle, of same mass but with an opposite charge. It becomes relevant to try to understand philosophically their origin, they permit us to balance our actual known particles and if my reasoning is correct about these main scalar fields of the DE antigravitational present also in our standard model like the cold dark matter, that makes sense. Their annihilations are a process that we must know better. This annihilation creates an energy, the problem actually is technological about the fact to stock this antimatter.

But it is still the general philosophy of this universe which becomes interesting to analyze if the DE and the DM are in our standard model too. There are like mechanisms where the 3 systems are under specific partitions. The photons, the DE and DM merging together to create this standard model become relevant .

We know that Positrons are produced naturally in β+ decays for radioactive isotopes (for example, potassium-40) and for interactions of gamma quanta (emitted by radioactive nuclei) with matter. Antineutrinos are another kind of antiparticle created by natural radioactivity (β− decay). It is their process under the fields of the DE and DM which becomes relevant to know. The partitions of my model with the spherical geometrical topological algebras and in considering these quantum spheres and the specific series and the 3 main systems merging more 4 E8 superimposed with one for the baryonic matter and standard model become relevant if we consider different combinations and mechanisms. That could permit us to better understand the productions and annihilations of particles and antiparticles. In all cases their productions are confirmed for these antiparticles, partners of particles. There are specific mechanisms.

The real interest is to check these antiparticles, the problem is that they cannot be stocked due to the fact that they react with the matters of containers for example and that implies an annihilation. The actual methods with the electric and magnetic fields are not sufficient and cost too much, even with technologies with high vacuum and cooling. We need probably these scalar fields antigravitational but the problem is that we don't check them.

Non Commutativity, Non commutative Spheres

The commutativity , the non commutativity, the associativity , the non associativity are important for the tool that I have created, the spherical geometrical topological algebras .

The geometrical algebras of Lie or Clifford have been important in physics and maths. The works of Alain Connes and this non commutativity permit a distinction for the algebraic geometries. It is mainly how we utilize the numerical functions on spaces and geometries. The different partitions become relevant with the spheres for the functions in playing with associative algebras on a commutative systeme where the products and orders becomes adapted in function of groups and subgroups with non commutativities on non commutative spaces and in correlating with the non commutative spheres.



Ergodic Theory

Non commutative C algebras and Von Neumann Algebras

Riemannian Varieties

Non Commutative Spheres

Correlation Spherical Geometrical Toplogical Algebras

view post as summary

E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y for a baryonic matter, that is why we cannot generalise the matter energy equivalnce because we have 3 systems free comsologically and a fourth one the baryonic matter when they merge , I must probably improve it but here is the general equation about the matter energy of our standard model when the 3 systems merge to create the ordinary matter . Xl is for the cold dark matter, Y...

view entire post

E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y for a baryonic matter, that is why we cannot generalise the matter energy equivalnce because we have 3 systems free comsologically and a fourth one the baryonic matter when they merge , I must probably improve it but here is the general equation about the matter energy of our standard model when the 3 systems merge to create the ordinary matter . Xl is for the cold dark matter, Y is for the DE , that implies new scalar fields and probably a fifth force too. Xl in logic is for this DM and does not give a lot of E because they are quanta of mass, mainly these particles of DM, X is a parameter correlated with the cold , but Y is relevant like antigravitational energy .

This equation intuitively implies a different philosophy than with the mass energy equivalence of Einstein. The fact to differentiate also the matter baryonic is important and the fact to consider the 3 main systems free cosmologically speaking, the DM, the DE and the photons. The mass and the energy are not really the same , the energy of this DE is not the same that the energy of photons also, and the DM non-baryonic is a matter not the same than this baryonic matter. Now when we consider the standard model like result of 3 systems merging together , it is there that my equation becomes relevant for the energies and mass disponible. My equation implies that we have more energy than with the mass energy equivalence of Einstein for this baryonic matter and standard model.

Actually we utilize the equation of einstein and the equivalence principle implies that when we lose an energy for a chemical or nuclear reaction , we lose a correlated mass, but we can consider that we lose simply a mass due to this dark matter encoded and we loose also an energy of the DE that we cannot check still , that changes all the general philosophy of the mass energy equivalence of this baryonic matter but that changes also the general philosophy of the origin of the universe and how is really transformed this energy and I d say hos is really created the universe and the matters .

I have thought a lot about the concept of Einstein and these massless photons. Maybe there is a big error , imagine that these photons and these particles of DM are fuels for the universe and in being encoded like I said in this vacuum of the DE possessing the main codes, they create the baryonic matter, so the photons can be seen like quanta of Energy , permitting the electromagnetism and the thermodynamics and they possess more energy than mass. And for the DM it is the opposite, they possess less energy than mass , that is why they are cold. That implies that these Photons are not massless. That changes all in fact , Debroglie considered these photons with a very small mass and I agree with him. It seems that the only one thing massless is this DE.

See that this reasoning permits to solve the missing mass problem , and improve the higgs mechanism and can solve the gap mass problem and this quantum gravitation.

view post as summary

For the gap mass problem , we have the same general philosophical problem and we need to superimpose deeper logics, you are going to understand.

If we consider the QFT and the difference in energy between the lowest state of the vacuum and the next lowest state and in considering the actual reasoning considering a 0 energy for this vacuum, the mass gap becomes the mass of the lightest...

view entire post

For the gap mass problem , we have the same general philosophical problem and we need to superimpose deeper logics, you are going to understand.

If we consider the QFT and the difference in energy between the lowest state of the vacuum and the next lowest state and in considering the actual reasoning considering a 0 energy for this vacuum, the mass gap becomes the mass of the lightest particles, The energy eigenstates non perturbative become problematic if we don t add deeper parameters for this vacuum, there are problems.

The observations due to this QFT and the yang Mills theory create like a non observable bridge for the QCD. Even in considering a Lagrangian and the QFT ,the yang mills theory and the couplings for the fermions, the problem cannot be solved and the massless gluons are a problem, we need to consider these deeper parameters that I explained about the scalar fields of the DE and this cold dark matter . The main problem is simply philosophical considering mainly the fields taken like the origin of our reality and it is mainly due to a kind of indoctrination of general relativity taken as the cause of our said reality.

If we take a simple group compact G and the QFT and the yang Mills theory , we must prove a ,mass gap more than 0 but even with the Wightman Axioms that cannot be solved, that is why we must consider a different vacuum and a different general philosophy considering why our baryonic matter emerges .And the QFT , the GR , the fields in fact simply like main cause cannot answer.The particle the less massive cannot be reached in this line of reasoning in considering the group SU3. That implies that these gluons are the problem being massless. The different general philosophy and the fact to consider the problem of this missing mass and in considering the gap mass more the parameters added , superimposed to this standard model and the QFT, Yang Mills theory , QCD, we arrive at possible general solutions due mainly to this general different philosophy and ontology. It is mainly how we consider this vacuum and this quarks confinement with the gluons and the missing mass. We see quickly that the confinement of gluons become the key , and we return about the problem philosophical of massless particles and the problem philosophical of origin of the universe. If these confined gluons are massive and if this DE is the vacuum implying scalar fields and if the DM is encoded permitting mass , that becomes clear.

view post as summary

This geometrodynamic is an attempt to describe spacetime like a geometry without considering the matters. This method tries to unify the forces. It was Einstein who first utilized this word but it is Wheeler who has developed this geometrodynamics in detail. It is mainly a theory of the general relativity where the gravitation is considered with the geometries of this spacetime.In resume, the...

view entire post

This geometrodynamic is an attempt to describe spacetime like a geometry without considering the matters. This method tries to unify the forces. It was Einstein who first utilized this word but it is Wheeler who has developed this geometrodynamics in detail. It is mainly a theory of the general relativity where the gravitation is considered with the geometries of this spacetime.In resume, the geometries of this spacetime are the causes of this matter and fields.It is mainly about the strengths of curvatures which are ranked and implying the fields, like the gravitational fields for the waves or the electromagnetic fields for the weak curvatures or the particles,charges for strong curvatures.

The problem still is the philosophy that we consider considering the origin of the universe and its particles, charges, geometries, fields…..the general relativity is an interpretation, the geometrodynamics another in 4D , the Newtonian mechanics another. It is how we consider the primary substance which seems essential . I believe that these interpretations are interesting, that said we must probably add deeper parameters that this universe has created and the dark matter and dark energy seem essential to complete this puzzle.

The philosophy becomes a main point considering these primary essences, why we exist and from what. Why the fields , the particles, the charges, the forces …emerge in fact.

My theory considers these deeper parameters and 3D spheres in a superfluidity like fundamental mathematical and physical objects, they are not emergent these spheres but are the primary substance of this universe, it implies that this spacetime of this general relativity and points or strings in 1D at this planck scale are not the cause of the reality and this baryonic matter. That is why the geometries are emergent due to the spheres and deformations of spherical volumes for specific geometries in 3D in this superfluidity of 3 main cosmological systems , the DE, the DM, the photons.

We can see quickly that with the works of Wheeler about this geometrodynamics, the works of Eisntein and the EFE, the works of Hilbert or minkowski and now the works of strings theorists with the 1D strings ,in fact it is always this substance primary of the spacetime which is taken into account. And many tools are utilised like the E8 or others to try to explain all. But it lacks really a deeper philosophy and deeper parameters.

view post as summary

I continue Jonathan in developing my general ideas with these spherical topological geometrical algebras and this deeper philosophy added to this GR.

he Lie Algebra in math is an important tool and is also important for our physics and quantum mechanics. The Lie algebra is a vector space and the operations are Lie brackets . The Jacobi identity is considered. The Lie bracket of 2 vectors...

view entire post

I continue Jonathan in developing my general ideas with these spherical topological geometrical algebras and this deeper philosophy added to this GR.

he Lie Algebra in math is an important tool and is also important for our physics and quantum mechanics. The Lie algebra is a vector space and the operations are Lie brackets . The Jacobi identity is considered. The Lie bracket of 2 vectors permits operations associative or non associative.

The commutativity or non commutativity can be applied and that permits to correlate with the Lie groups with groups, subgroups….Different partitions can be utilized with the numbers, reals, complex….The relevance of the E8 exceptional group is interesting for the classifications of symmetry groups with the tangent vectors. In my model and these spheres like fundamental objects, their volumes and the motions and the 3 vectors of the space become essential.

The main idea is like I explained is to consider these 3 systems free cosmologically , the DE, the DM, the photons and to consider a E8 for for each system and a fourth one for the baryonic matter like result of 3 others merging together with the main informations in the space vacuum of the dark energy anti gravitational. Many partitions can be utilized considering the number of primary finite series of spheres and their motions, rotations, oscillations become essential . If the number is preserved when they merge and that the densities become important, there are many relevant roads for the rankings of groups, subgroups with the associativity, non associativity, commutativity, non commutativity. It is correlated with the tool that I have invented, the spherical topological geometrical algebras. Another tool can be considered in the partitions , the symplectomorphisms preserving the volumes for the deformations. The isomorphisms and homomorphisms also.

The products and derivations are utilized in function of chosen partitions.That implies different matrix , groups and subgroups.The possibilities are infinite considering the choice of partitions.

Many utilizing the Lie algebra and Lie groups for the general relativity and the quantum mechanics consider extra dimensions, and they consider mainly this GR like primary essence , substance of the universe and after they consider points or strings in 1D at this planck scale connected with a 1D cosmic field of this GR, they create different partitions and create dimensions, I personally consider 3D spheres like I said like fundamental objects and a pure 3D at all scales more motions correlated with the time .

The Lie algebras permit to correlate with our actual quantum mechanics and for the symmetry groups, we can consider the angular momentum and the rotations groups SO3. The correlations with the tool that I have invented permit me to consider the volumes and the oscillations of spheres . We can add these tools to the SUn.

It is mainly the fact to add parameters to these Lie algebras and groups with the tool that I have invented with these 3D spheres like fundamental objects which become very relevant to rank our particles and fields with this deeper philosophical origin of the universe than just this general relativity alone and these photons like primary essence.

view post as summary

The substance primary is made in my model of these spherical 3D volumes and with specific serie for the primary particles. See that considering the Riemanian varieties, the curvature is constant and positive for these spheres and that makes sense considering all the other interpreations of curvatures and this gravitation. We cannot only consider this GR for the curvatures and the...

view entire post

The substance primary is made in my model of these spherical 3D volumes and with specific serie for the primary particles. See that considering the Riemanian varieties, the curvature is constant and positive for these spheres and that makes sense considering all the other interpreations of curvatures and this gravitation. We cannot only consider this GR for the curvatures and the gravitation....there is a deeper philosophical logic about the geometries which are from these deformations and under the codes antigravitational of this spacevacuum of the DE probably. The GR has created this prison about how we consider this gravitation and the curvatures. If we take the spacetime and the curvatures and fields and geometrical algebras of Lie with only this GR, we cannot reach these deepest unknowns and we confound the primary substance of the universe and how is transformed the Energy. It is not about the fact to curve to create the geometries from this GR but the opposite, it is about positive constant curvatures of spheres deforming this constant positive natural fundame3ntal curvature. The spheres and the gravitation and the antigravitation are purelly linked universally in this superfluidity of 3D spheres changing their natural fundamental positive constant curvatures......

That changes all philosophically speaking if they are not emergent but the foundamental objects and if the spacetime of the GR alone is not the substance primary of this universe. That becomes interesting to analyse this different general philosophy of the universe. Gravitation, antigravitation, constant positive curvatures for these spherical volumes, symplectomorphisms for the deformations and changements of curvatures, ........

It is like if I said that I all is a question of gravitation, curvatures positive constant of spheres and deformations due to this antigravitation and fields and energy due to these quanta the photons and mass due to these quanta the dark matter under the main codes of this DE......

view post as summary

they have all considered the GR and SR and the mass energy equivalence and let s nmame a cat a cat, they believe that god creates the matters in oscilating the fields of this E with the strings or points in 1D at this planck scale with the geometrical algebras, it is total non sense, einstein was famous but he has created a prison, a trap, and he was false generally about the primary essence and...

view entire post

they have all considered the GR and SR and the mass energy equivalence and let s nmame a cat a cat, they believe that god creates the matters in oscilating the fields of this E with the strings or points in 1D at this planck scale with the geometrical algebras, it is total non sense, einstein was famous but he has created a prison, a trap, and he was false generally about the primary essence and the mass energy equivalence, my equation is more logic with or without the approvements of endoctrinated frustrated . You shall see that I am right .The energy and mass are not the same, we have 3 main systems , the photons, the coldf dark matter and the DE and my equation permits to better understand this standard model and the mass energy equivalence of the ordinary matter, the real equation is this one E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y=2 mc², eureka,

be sure, I have taken the time to really see the whole and I know my basii in maths and sciences, like I told you I was in maths sciences strong in secondary 9 h of maths and 9 h of sciences each week, and after I was at university in geology I have stopped in 3 due to a coma but I have ranked the maths, sciences, physics since the age of 21 maybe, I have ranked many maths with the books of bronstein and semendiaev....I have ranked and studied the best papers on arxiv too in physcs , I know that I found something relevant , not only the spherisation the evolution of the universe with these spheres , no the most important is the deepest philosophy added and these scalar fields. If nobody wants to help me, it is not serious, I will do it myself for the formalism mathematical, I know what are the maths simply , nothing falls down from the sky, there are always a lot of works behind innovative works in science.

why a 2 mc², why a 2 because the scalar field antigravitational balances the system equally , Xl it is for the dark matter, but the energy is not important and Y is for the dark energy, that is why we have a 2 , because this energy antigravitational balances the actual relativistic system . nothing of odd, it seems logic

view post as summary

You are going to understand now Jonathan the general idea of all this in considering even a kind of infinite eternal consciousness that we name god in 0D everywhere inside and outside the physical 3D universe. So we have the 3 main systems cosmologically free, the scalar massless fields of the DE antigravitational, the photons anbd the cold dark matter with finite series of 3D spheres and when...

view entire post

You are going to understand now Jonathan the general idea of all this in considering even a kind of infinite eternal consciousness that we name god in 0D everywhere inside and outside the physical 3D universe. So we have the 3 main systems cosmologically free, the scalar massless fields of the DE antigravitational, the photons anbd the cold dark matter with finite series of 3D spheres and when they merge like I explained they create the diversity of atoms , the standard model, the baryonic mass , .....more the chemistry , the biology, the evolution and the consciousness. But why this evolution and complexification and why this consciousness, the big secret is there. So we can consider this 0D of god connected with this 3D scalar fields of the DE for the main codes and like this thing is omnipotent, that makes sense, we are fractals of consciousness. This 0D of GOD and this 3D with the DE are connected and the real secret is to know how , maybe the strings there are important , not with nthe GR and photons or in 1D , no just a string between the 0D and this 3D of scalar fields of this DE . if it is not a string with codes , it is a kind of Energy in 0D of consciousness able to give the codes to this scalar massless field of the DE antigravitational . The photons and the cold dark matter them, are just fuels, series of 3D spheres invariant, they permit just for the photons the QFT, the electromagnetism, the thermodynamics when they are encoded having more energy than mass, and the cold dark matter they permit the mass and gravitation having more mass than energy. So it is these 3D scalar fields of this DE connected with this 0D of consciousness which permits the codes and so the encodings of photons and cold dark matter for the standard model, permitting the mass, the QFT, the electromagnetic forces, the weak interactions, the nuclear interactions, the gravitational quantum fields , the charges, the kinetic momentum.....it is always the 3 systems merging more this 0D connected.

There are probably now roads to search with the BFSS matrix model in considering the 3 systems merging that I explained with the 3D spheres .The consciousness, the gap mass, the missing mass, the quantum gravitation appear with groups, subgroups and the non commutativity , just with this 0D of consciousness and the 3 other systems in 3D and the result in 3D when they merge, that is why we have 4 E8 with 3d spheres like foundamental objects and my spherical topological geometrical algebras and this 0D and DO branes for this main energy of consciousness and after the main codes given in these scalar fields massless of the DE antigravitational.

view post as summary

The real difficulty in my model and these 4 E8 superimposed and the series of 3D spheres like foundamental objects is to to rank all the groups, subgroups, ,matrix and to correlate with the actual standard model . It is what I try to do with the spherical topological geometrical algebras that I have invencted.

Let s consider the unification of of groups in considering the actual standard...

view entire post

The real difficulty in my model and these 4 E8 superimposed and the series of 3D spheres like foundamental objects is to to rank all the groups, subgroups, ,matrix and to correlate with the actual standard model . It is what I try to do with the spherical topological geometrical algebras that I have invencted.

Let s consider the unification of of groups in considering the actual standard model and the gauge symmetries where SU3XSU2XU1 are the groups for the QCD, the weak interactions and the electromagnetism.

The unification of all forces with this quantum gravitation correlated with the particles of cold dark matter encoded and under the main codes of the antigravitational dark energy imply a fifth force and other groups , We can consider other SUn groups and deeper groups SO10 where we derive the spin groups. The Pati Salam model is interesting about the GUT and in adding my reasoning with these 3D spheres like fundamental objects and the 4 E8 superimposed , we have new particles , bosons and this fifth force which can be furthermore decomposed in considering these scalar massless fields of the DE anti gravitational. We try in this logic to unify the gauge fields in adding deeper parameters to our actual standard model with this DE and DM added .

That said it becomes very complex considering these 4 E8 and in considering this DM and DE added and in taking these 3D spheres like fundamental objects. The main difficulty is to renormalise all these couplings, forces, fields with the 3 main systems creating this ordinary matter baryonic and the correlated standard model.The mechanisms exist in all case with specific properties in function of groups. The symmetry breaking becomes an essential point also. In my model considering these series finite of 3D spheres like fundamental objects , the volumes become important and if the number of series does not change and that the densities, oscillations, motions are a key , we must consider these parameters added to the lie groups to better understand the charges, mass, momentum,....of actual particles or groups of particles.

view post as summary

Returning at this quantum graviation, these gravitational waves for example can be seen in a different logic , the confusion seems there in considering this GR like primary essence and in considering now gravitons like quantas of gravitational waves, and so in trying to renormlaise this QG weakest force with these gravitons . There is a problem about this GR and photons like primary essence, you...

view entire post

Returning at this quantum graviation, these gravitational waves for example can be seen in a different logic , the confusion seems there in considering this GR like primary essence and in considering now gravitons like quantas of gravitational waves, and so in trying to renormlaise this QG weakest force with these gravitons . There is a problem about this GR and photons like primary essence, you see well that this interpretation of the gravitation like a curvature of the spacetime at high velocities cannot explain the spiral galaxies and their motions, nor the constant cosmological problem. This gravitation needs to consider deeper parameters at all scales , like we have made in completing the newtonian gravitation at slow velocities where this gravitation is a force between mass, in fact it depends of how we nalayse and interpret this gravitation, we cannot generalise , the newtonian mechanics that said for the QM seems a reality for this quantum gravitation, and this DM and DE seems essential at all scales. If the thinkers try to unify G c and h , the QM and the GR in considering only this GR and the gravitational waves, it is not renormalisable .



the problem is really philosophical and ontological ,

The quantum mecanic is interpreted with this GR and the flat spacetime , ok and the forces are considered in this spacetime euclidian or pseudo euclidian, ok with the newtonian mecanic, the special relativity and after we arrive at this GR where the pseudo riemannian spacetime is considered and the curvatures for the densities of energies and correlated mass under the mass energy equivalence of einstein, ok we arrive at the problem for the time and the dilation and that does not converge between the GR and the QM , it is due to this gravity implying the effects on time and space and volumes, so we arrive at the ontological problem and these gravitational waves and GR correlated with the standard model . The problem is not that the QM is false or the GR is false , but simply not complete about the deeper parameters to add. That implies that the aim is not to unify the GR and the QM, but to add to both of them, the scalar massless fields of the DE and the scalar massive fields of the DM and at all scalaes , quant and cosmol.

This planck scale is not the problem in resume, and the fact to invent these gravitons like the quanta of gravitational waves also are not the problem, because simply they don t exist these gravitons and we see it quickly because it is not renormalisable because they interact with themselves infinitely and it is not possible logically speaking . You can utilise all the partitions and all the symmetries that you want, it is not renormalisable and all has been tried by simulations by the best labs, institutes....Yous see well that the couplings and the planck scale cannot be solved. You can try with the loops, the twistors,the Mtheory or the non commutativity, that will not solve because simply it lacks these parameters that I explain and a deeper philosophy added to this GR .

view post as summary

You know Jonathan, there is a like a philosophical enormous problem about the mass energy equivalence of Einstein . All they are endoctrinated like if the mass energy equivalence of einstein was the philosophical truth about how this universe transforms the energy in mass in changing the oscillations vibrations of these photons at this planck scale. But in fact if it is not like this that this...

view entire post

You know Jonathan, there is a like a philosophical enormous problem about the mass energy equivalence of Einstein . All they are endoctrinated like if the mass energy equivalence of einstein was the philosophical truth about how this universe transforms the energy in mass in changing the oscillations vibrations of these photons at this planck scale. But in fact if it is not like this that this universe creates the matters, so you imagine the philosophical trap. If the baryonic matter is a result of the scalar massless fields of the DE encoding the photons and the cold dark matter, you imagine the problem inside the sciences community. The higgs is not a field of this GR transforming the energy in mass, it is just a scalar massless field of the DE and a scalar massive field of the DM simply and with the photons , create these higgs , it is totally different. How is it possible to consider these photons oscillating and the mass energy equivalence of einstein like the only one truth, they belive all that they have understood the universe, god or mathematical accident with these photons oscillating, vibrating, and after they have inve3ncted these strings in 1D at this planck scale and hop hocus pocus, god plays at guitar in changing the energy in mass and creates the topologies and geometries like this with this mass energy equivalence, it is total non sense generally speaking, and they dislike to be contredicted , they are persuaded furthermore it is their philosophy and works which are touched when you explain that there are important ontological and philosophical problems in considering this reasoning about the matter and the energy.

There are deeper parameters to add at all scales , the spacetime that we know is just a limited part of the universal puzzle, these scalar massless fields of the DE antigravitational possessing the main codes and givinmg us non commutative causes for a kind of discrete spacetime of this DE and for the vaccuum seem essential and the massive scalar fields of the DM too seem important. How is it possible that the thinkers consider only this GR, SR and mass energy equivalence of einstein , how is it possible that they are all endoctrinated like this in believing that they have understood the general philosophy of the universe and why we exist. We must think beyond the box of this GR and mass energy equivalence of Einstein. Sometimes I tell me that it is a trap invented by several powerfull economical systems, it is not possible , like this the thinkers turn in round during that the others work in secrete about these deeper parameters .

view post as summary

You imagine if I am right the revolution about the matter energy equivalence of the ordinary matter and in considering the 3 systems merging, the actual equation of matter energy equivalence of Einstein is from this time when Einstein, Poincare and the others worked about this mass and energy in 1900 , they didn t know the actual deeper parameters that we know know and there are enormous...

view entire post

You imagine if I am right the revolution about the matter energy equivalence of the ordinary matter and in considering the 3 systems merging, the actual equation of matter energy equivalence of Einstein is from this time when Einstein, Poincare and the others worked about this mass and energy in 1900 , they didn t know the actual deeper parameters that we know know and there are enormous probabilities that they exist, we must really reconsider the mass energy equivalence and go farer . The equation of einstein is not complete and furthermore not really true generally considering the different scalar fields of this DE for all the different atoms. We must differenciate the 3 systems free cosmologically and the ordinary baryonic matter , my equation is for the baryonic matter and furthermore in the details the E cannot be generalised to be the same for all mass, there are small differences . Because the number of photons or particles of CDM or these antigravitational scalar fields are not the same , but generally we can consider this E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y=2 mc²,it chages all the philosophy that we have about the universe and the origin of this ordinary matter . If we loose a mass during a fission or a nuclear reaction , we loose particles of DM parallely to these photons liberated simply .And probably an energy of this DE too proportionally but we cannot measure and check them ,our error was to consider that we loose a mass due to the equivalence mass energy of einstein , it is not true. If I am right it changes all. The problem is technological , we cannot check this CDM and this DE in our ordinary matter, we can just observe, measure the actual QFT and the photonic reasonings and we have concluded too quickly about these photons, this SR, this GR and the mass energy equivalence. In all humility , if I am right , it is revolutionary, I know that the thinkers are endoctrinated with the works of Einstein but please lets be concrete, we evolve and we can think beyond the box and we can add these parameters.You imagine if we check this antigravitation in our standard model and if we check this mass non baryonic also in our standard model, it is incredible for the applications and technologies.

view post as summary

You know Jonathan, we are arrived at a new era for our physics, we have this newtonian mechanics and this GR like interpretation of the gravitation. Einstein has improved the works of Newton, they are both relevant in their referentials of analysis. Now we must complete their works in considering these new paraneters, this DM and this DE. It is not that we must modify the newtonian mechanics or...

view entire post

You know Jonathan, we are arrived at a new era for our physics, we have this newtonian mechanics and this GR like interpretation of the gravitation. Einstein has improved the works of Newton, they are both relevant in their referentials of analysis. Now we must complete their works in considering these new paraneters, this DM and this DE. It is not that we must modify the newtonian mechanics or modify this general relativity , we must simply add these scalar new fields and particles of this DM and DE and at all scales.

The fact that this DE is a negative pressure antigravitational is relevanmt for the evolution of the universe considering the state equation.And it is relevant to consider these couplings of the DE in our standard model because this antigravitationa, this fith force is fascinating and permit to balance the actuaql gravitational system and the electromagnetic forces. The scalar massless fields of this DE possessing the main codes permit to explain furthermore this evolution and the diversity of atoms, the chemistry, the biology ....the actual standard model cannot explain this .It lacks pieces to add to this puzzle. The massive scalar fields of this cold dark matter too seem important.

I repeat but if the 3 systems free cosmologically speaking are essential and that this DE possesses these main informations permiting to create this ordinary matter in encoding the photons which are quanta of electromagnetism, thermodynamics and that the cold dark matter are mainly quanta of mass permitting even a pure newtonian mechanics, that becomes clear.

The real interest is to find their couplings in our standard model , these particles exist. It seems that all is under a kind of antigravitation gravitation balance , and the actual known 3 forces of our standard model are balanced too with these scalar massless fields of this DE. That becomes clear in considering that the photons create simply the 3 actual forces due to simply a number of photons encoded.

The higgs mechanism seems to be due to this logic , the scalar massless fields of the DE and the massive scalar fields of the DM permit to give a mass to these W and Zphotons,we have the same kind of mechanism for the QCD and the missing mass is explained with kinds of axions giving the mass from this dark matter under an antigravitational field of this DE.

My equation is about all this , it is an equation which can be probably improved but the generality is there E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y=2 mc², it is important philosophically speaking about how is created the matter from the mass and the energy, the energy of these photons doesn t become a mass like this you know with specific fields and oscillations of this GR with scalar fields of this GR, we need the 3 systems to create a baryonic ordinary mass and matter.

If I am right in all humility it is really revolutionary philosophically, mathematically and physically speaking because it is mainly about how is created the matters ordinary and what is the philosophical origin of this universe.

The main incredible thing in this reasoning about the DE possessing the main informations and being not invarients is the complexity of these informations, these scalar fields are not the same for all the particles of DE, and it is intriguing ontologically and philosophically.

The universe is like a yin yang balanced system in evolution with small differences permitting the motions in this fluidity and the 3 spacetimes, the gravitation and the antigravitation seem really the 2 main chielfs orchestra and these photons permit of course the actual 3 known forces in increasing simply this balance gravitation antigravitation in forces. We have a fifth force and this force is more than fascinating considering its complexity of codes ....a new entropy appears a new theory of informations.

Einstein and Newton were right in their referentials, now we can go farer in completing their works about deeper referentials.

view post as summary

Jonathan, I repeat the resume about my reasoning, it can be relevant I believe, Imagine that this equation of einstein about the mass energy equivalence is not complete and furthermore philosophically false E=mc² and that we have considered this mass and energy the same but no in fact , they have concluded that during a nuclear fission for example that we loose a mass due to the energy...

view entire post

Jonathan, I repeat the resume about my reasoning, it can be relevant I believe, Imagine that this equation of einstein about the mass energy equivalence is not complete and furthermore philosophically false E=mc² and that we have considered this mass and energy the same but no in fact , they have concluded that during a nuclear fission for example that we loose a mass due to the energy liberated, I can understand but they didn t know that we have probably these scalar massless fields of the DE and the massive scalar fields of the DM in our standard matter considering the ordinary matter , so when they have made a fission they have seen a mass lost also ,

it is logic if during this fission if we loose the particles of DM giving the mass and that we loose also an energy antigravitational, my equation permits to reconsider this mass energy equivalence E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y=2 mc². The philosophical problem that has created the SR and the GR are important considering the origin of the universe and how is created this reality. The mass is mainly probably due to this DM encoded in this space vacuum of this DE antigravitational possessing the main codes and informations .

The Higgs mechanism is correlated with this reasoning , it is not really a specific field of this GR permitting a mass due to this mass energy equivalence of Einstein but is a field mixing the 3 systems , the scalar massless field of the DE more a scalar massive field of the DM more photons encoded, that is why the higgs bosons appear and give a mass to the W and Z bosons of the weak interaction . An other mechanism in the same logic appears for the nuclear forces and explain the missing mass and give a mass to these gluons with axions ,particles of DM .

That changes all in fact if my reasoning is correct and even that changes the interpretation of this quantum gravitation which is simply a pure newtonian mechanics between the massive particles, that implies in fact many quantum gravitational fields in our standard model hidden behind these 3 actual known forces, a fifth force appears also considering this DE ,and this force is antigravitational and seems the main chief orchestra.

view post as summary

I have studied several papers about the renormalization of conformal gravity

let s consider the weyl squared and riemann geometry transformations , I agree that these 4 derivatives are relevant and can be correlated with the higgs for the mass, but the gravitons are considered massless and quanta of gravitational waves and it is there the problem ,and the higgs fields could be scalar...

view entire post

I have studied several papers about the renormalization of conformal gravity

let s consider the weyl squared and riemann geometry transformations , I agree that these 4 derivatives are relevant and can be correlated with the higgs for the mass, but the gravitons are considered massless and quanta of gravitational waves and it is there the problem ,and the higgs fields could be scalar massles fields of the DE from the vacuum and scalar massive fields of the DM......

I believe really that the problem is always philosophical in considering only these fields, this GR and the photons like primary essence and so they try all to explain this QG, this DE ,this DM with partitions and only with this GR, in modifying the newtonian mechanic or the GR.

There are a lot of subtle different formulations of conformal gravity and we can even consider more gravitational fields in this reasoning of conformal gravity with axions and dilatns or others. but the problem is philosophical about the nature of this gravitation at this quantum scale.

I have considered these axions from the dark matter in fact , a little bit like the higgs mechanism but in considering these scalar massless fields of the DE and the massive scalar fields of this DM, that explains the missing mass and that gives a mass to gluons in fact in my reasoning, like for the higgs and the W and Z bosons but for the nuclear forces. I believe that the higgs fields are due to this DE and DM anfd that we don t need to modify this GR or newtonian mechanic, it is just my opinion of course, I respect the other ideas trying to unify G c and h, the QM ,yang mills, the GR , the QFT, I just consider this DM and DE like other parameters.

I have considered like you know so a pure newtonian QG between massive particles.....without gravitons . It is a different general philosophy in considering the main informations in this vacuum of the DE antigravitational in fact encoding the photons and the particles of cold dark matter. It is different like reasoning but I believe strongly that this universe has not only created photons oscillating you know but that we have these 3 main systems, the photons, the DE and DM merging in the fluidity due to specific series of Spheres 3D for these particles . I don t affirm but the fields are emergent due to these motions, oscillations, vibrations of these Spheres and not strings in 1D at this planck scale.

The ideas to unify the fields of this SM and the GR and the quantum gravitation from this conformal gravity is a good attempt but like I said it depends of what we consider like primary philosophical essence of the universe.If we add a gravitational correlated analysis to our standard model in curved spacetime and that we create a local conformal weyl invariance , we choose referentials for the mass like for the fields of our vectors bosons and even the higgs but it lack a kind of logic and if we consider my equation and the fact that the 3 syswtems merge together , that makes sense and permit non symmetry breakings for this mass ....It is the generation of this mass the most important and the renormalisation of this quantum gravitation in a pure newtonian way. That appears in the logic that I explain without considering the mass energy equivalence of einstein, the SR and the GR like primary essence

view post as summary

Jonathan, I believe that I have understood all this puzzle . If we consider my equation intuitive E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y=2 mc², that implies that for a mass ordinary we have the 3 systems , the photons, the DM and the DE . We actually measure and analyse or observe in our standard model of this ordinary matter the QFT and the photons and sor other fields . Now returning about these gravitational waves...

view entire post

Jonathan, I believe that I have understood all this puzzle . If we consider my equation intuitive E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y=2 mc², that implies that for a mass ordinary we have the 3 systems , the photons, the DM and the DE . We actually measure and analyse or observe in our standard model of this ordinary matter the QFT and the photons and sor other fields . Now returning about these gravitational waves that LIGO has found, we can see the process like this. When the 2 BHs have merge to create one BH and that a mass has been lost. That implies that we have lost particles of DM in my reasoning and electromagnetic waves and fields antigravitational of this DE . That implies that what they have found is electromagnetic waves very weak in frequences due to a pure newtonian effect on the photons of the environments and it is paralle to these elkectromagnetic waves of higher frequences. That changes all because in fact these gravitational waves are not from the the lost of the mass but from a pure newtonian effect considering massive photons in the environments.

I believe strongly that the mass energy equivalence of Einstein is not complete and has implied philosophical problems .And our other error is to have considered considering this SR these photons massless , they have a very small mass for me , that is why the photons and the cold dark matter are gravitationa in their pure meaning and the only one thing massless is this DE and it is antigravitational.

For the quantum gravitation now , we have probably a pure newtonian mechanic for this gravitation like aq force between all the massive particles. The gluons must be probably completed with a kind of higgs mechanism but with axions from this DM and with ascalar massless fields of the DE permitting a mass to gluons and quarks, that explains the missing mass. After this we can rank all the gravitational fields in our standard model and the weakest one is maybe between photons in the lectromagnetism or between a photons and particle of DM.

My equation and resoning change all about the philosophy and the gravitation, the fact to consider also this antigravitation seems inmportant because it permits to balance the gravitational system proportionally and generally even if probably there are small differences in this equilibrium, that is why I have 2 mc².

The gravitons in fact in this reasoning don t really exist, they are not the quanta of these gravitational waves,the gravitational waves are just effects newtonian on the massive photons free of this spacetime that we observe. The confusion comes really from the philosophy of the mass energy equivalence of Einstein and how we consider this gravitation generally at this quantum scale.

view post as summary

These spherical topological geometrical algebras that I have invented permit to rank the groups and permit to consider the 3D spheres like foundamental Objects, the works of Hestenes are important like the geometrical algebras of Clifford and Lie. We can consider specific series of 3D spheres and we choose our partitions, that implies specific finite series in number and specific volumes . The...

view entire post

These spherical topological geometrical algebras that I have invented permit to rank the groups and permit to consider the 3D spheres like foundamental Objects, the works of Hestenes are important like the geometrical algebras of Clifford and Lie. We can consider specific series of 3D spheres and we choose our partitions, that implies specific finite series in number and specific volumes . The phases, rotations, and imaginary numbers can be utilised at specific topological places. We can correlate after this with the works of Lie and for example in my theory I considered 4 E8 and that becomes relevant because that permits to rank the groups with the 3D spheres in function of systems. The 4D spacetime of this GR and the photons is one system . The baryonic matter and the standard model is an other where we correlate with the yang mills theory, the QFT.... We have the two other E8 in considering 3D spheres like foundamental objects for the scalar massless fields of the DE and the massive scalar fields of the dark matter. We can now insert in these E8 and these spherical tpological geometrical algebras the tensors, vectors, torsors, spinors, differential forms, the complex ,......but we can also choose groups of spheres or unique spheres where we want topologically ......the mass ,the charges, the spins,.....all this too can be considered and correlated with our actual knowledges of the standard model in ranki8ng the particles and their properties. Now the vectors and scalars can be utilised in function of partitions chosen. In my model I have considered these 4 systems and these 3D spheres, the aim being to consider the massless scalar fields of the DE possessing the main codes and informations and this vacuum encoded the photons and this cold dark matter permitting the create this Fourth system being the ordinary baryonic matter. That becomes relevant if the series of Spheres preserve the volumes and the number of the series, that is why the couplings and interactions can be studied deeper in function of these interactions . The densities become relevant and their motions, rotations, oscillations. The commutativity, the associativity, the non associativity, the non commutativity also can be utilised for the groups and matrix. For the deformations we can utilise the symplectomorphisms preserving these volumes and that can be correlated with the motions, rotations, oscillations. It is there that the scalar products becomes interesting in function of partitions chosen and the topologies chosen for the 3D spheres. These spherical topological geometrical algebras are infinite in combinations and depend of our partitions chosen. The aim actually is to superimpose this tool to our actual standard model and this GR in considering the nyang mills theory and the QFT more this DM and DE superimposed. In my model a fith force appears and new scalar fields . This tool is an extension of the lie algebras, the clifford geom alg and the works of Hestenes . That can permit to find deeper unknowns and symmetries, couplings, interactions not relativistic even.

view post as summary

Answer to Emily Adlam about the background independence in facebook,

Emily Adlam your paper is a good general analysis about the hole argument and diffeomorphisms and substantial manifolds, it is a philosophical problem, it is mainly about the independent metric fields and the events of this spacetime taken like a substance. That implies background independence and implies interesting...

view entire post

Answer to Emily Adlam about the background independence in facebook,

Emily Adlam your paper is a good general analysis about the hole argument and diffeomorphisms and substantial manifolds, it is a philosophical problem, it is mainly about the independent metric fields and the events of this spacetime taken like a substance. That implies background independence and implies interesting approachs possible for this quantum gravitation, I am curious, what are your ideas for this quantum gravitation .......have you already tried the E8 and the non commutativity and quandrupoles of the GR converging with the yang mills squared to quantize this quantum weakest force....

that implies that the free coordinates and free parameters become probably relevant to unify this GR and thew QM to reach this QG. But there are problems of renormalisation if we consider these gravitons like the quanta of gravitational waves unfortunately. That is why the geometrical algebras become important and we arrive at a main problem about the convergences of this GR and this QM, indeed In classical mechanics the case is different for the metric and our observations , that is why the predictions can imply confusions and that is why the different interpretations are interesting and the philosophy of origin of this universe. The 5 main interpretations , the qubism, the manyworlds, copenaghe, the relational QM, the de broglie bohm one are interesting to analyse. It is mainly about the 3D and 4D convergences and backgroun independences and mainly also about the no local degrees of freedom.

We arrive now at this ADS CFT correspondence, but if these strings are not the foundamental objects and that this GR alone and these photons oscillating are not the only one primary essence of our reality, so this duality looses its meaning, and it is there the major problem inside the theoretical physics community, the problem is philosophical in conclusion. How must we approach this quantum gravitation if this general philosophy and actual conjectures are not the answer....

view post as summary

The Von Neuman Koopman classical mechanic is a key, We can consider that the classical mechanic is incomplete. The philosophical origin also of this QM and CM needs to have causes. In fact they want to unify the QG in unifying the classical mechanic, the newtonian gravitation,the QM, the QFT, the SR, the GR and the quantum field theory in curved spacetime but that does not solve because it lacks...

view entire post

The Von Neuman Koopman classical mechanic is a key, We can consider that the classical mechanic is incomplete. The philosophical origin also of this QM and CM needs to have causes. In fact they want to unify the QG in unifying the classical mechanic, the newtonian gravitation,the QM, the QFT, the SR, the GR and the quantum field theory in curved spacetime but that does not solve because it lacks the deeper scalar fields to add and this mass energy equivalence is not complete and so implying a false general philosophy about the oriGin of the ordinary matter and this reality and so the QG is not renormalisable simply and the planck unit and BHs shall not change the problem of renormalisation and quantization of this QG with its porblems of infinite quantities.. iIf you take the Loop quantum gravitation, it is a good attempt in the sense tht they give a structure for this spacetime of the GR with the network spinfoam. The background independent becomes relevant but this philosophy of origin of this ordinary matter and this reality is really the problem. If we give a structure for the spacetime of this GR we can superimpose the 2 others, the DE and DM in considering a kind of aether possessing the main informations in the fluidity of the DE antigravitational, their structures made of series finite of spheres become relevant and their pure motions, rotations, oscillations. If the standard mode3l and this ordinary matter is the result of 3 main systems merging together under the main scalar massless fields of this DE, all becomes clear , the non commutativity becomes relevant .....

It is mainly this wich intrigues me , the mass energy equivalence of einstein taken like a postulate and the GR alone like cause of this ordinary baryonic matter. That is why I have my intuitive equation with these deeper massive and massles scalar fields Xl and Y, he energy equivalence is different and philosophically all is different E=m(c²+Xl²)+Y=2 mc² , that changes all if I am right in all humility.

The secret probably is to give a strucutre for this spacetime or the spacetimes, we need structures . Now the problem is complex for this quantum gravitation where the aim for the majority of thinkers is to not consider it like a force but like a geometric meaning, a curvature of the spacetime. But if you consider these deeper parameters and structures of 2 other spacetimes, all becomes clear , the aim is not to unify the GR and this QM , but the lambda CDM with the QM at my opinion, but the thinkers have difficulties to think beyond the box of this GR unfortunately, maybe they fear also to chaqnge their philosophies or maybe also they are endoctrinated due to university and the learnings, in all case the universe shows us the roads generally .

There is a general formalism you know for these spacetimes and their fluidity due to specific series of 3d spheres like strucutures primary of 3 main systems, after it is just a classical von neuman koopman mechanics and liouville mechanic with groups, subgroups , matrix due to their motions rotations oscillations in this fluidity, like a pure newtonian mechanic for this QM ,new axioms can be created in correlation with the spherical geometrical topological algebras that I have invented.

The volumes, the phases , the fact that the volumes and the number of series finite of 3D spherical volumes are preserved when they merge mainly generally are the key, the ergodic theory is relevant with the von neuman koopman CM with the statistics. The phases space in the hilbert space are the key for a general universal formalism even. The most difficult is to have the good finite primary series of spheres in the fluidity considering the photons, the CDM and the DE , but that can be approached or generalised. The densities of volumes become even a key with their motions and oscillations in a pure CM.

The relevance is that we can rank the quantum states and the properties of particles just with their motions, rotations, oscillations. Many methods can be considered in this tool with the spherical geometrical topological algebras correlated of these spherical volumes. I give a general idea universal able to link all at all scales, now the thinkers make what they want, probably these 3D spheres can be the foundamental objects simply in this fluidity and that this CDM and DE must be added to these photons and GR . There are also relevances about the broken symmetries and chiralities to consider considering the evolution and these scalar massless fields of this DE having a structure also made of 3D spheres can answer if they possess the main informations correlated with a pure CM of motions , maybe simply an opposite sense of rotation even generally implying this antigravitation

view post as summary

We try after all to unify the mechanisms. The quantum scales, the cosmological scales. The numbers,reals, complex, imaginaries, complex, rationals, irrationals,primes, padics, their partitions, their distributions. There are like an universal partition between these numbers, theses quantum and cosmological 3D spheres, the photons, the cold dark matter, the dark energy. We try to unify the general...

view entire post

We try after all to unify the mechanisms. The quantum scales, the cosmological scales. The numbers,reals, complex, imaginaries, complex, rationals, irrationals,primes, padics, their partitions, their distributions. There are like an universal partition between these numbers, theses quantum and cosmological 3D spheres, the photons, the cold dark matter, the dark energy. We try to unify the general foundamentals, the philosophy also of origin of this universe and even this consciousness, all seems to have mechanisms. There is a logic in all this.

This central cosmological sphere of this universe if it exists intrigues me a lot I must say philosophically speaking. Many thinkers and they were the best considered a kind of God. Imagine this, imagine that before the universe there was a kind of infinite eternal consciousness alone in 0D. Maybe this thing has created in first this central sphere a kind of super matter energy where we had the photons the quantas of heat , thermodynamics, electromagnetism having more energy than mass , the cold dark matter the quantas of mass having more mass than energy,they are both gravitational and this Dark energy antigravitational like quantas of informations possessing the main codes. Now imagine instead of this big bang a decoupling of this super matter energy creating these photons and their properties, this dark matter and this dark energy and now imagine that under these codes and informations of the DE they merge to create the ordinary matter , that makes sense ,and a fifth force appears.

The relevance if that this DE is not like the two others , it is not constant and the informations depend of what they must build , that is why we have this evolution, this mendeleev table for the atoms, the chemistry, the biology and even this consciousness. It is fascinating if it is this dear all because we create a thing wonderful and we are youngs generally and universally speaking, maybe we create this thing that we name the paradise, a thing relevant is that nothing is lost, all is transformed and this evolution is incredible considering the evolution of souls if they exist. It seems that the encodings and sortings of informations are important considering these minds and souls and this consciousness.

I don t affrim all my assumptions, I just share a kind of general philosophy correlated with my theory of spherisation, there is a kind of logic in all this puzzle with the particles, the fields, the energies, the matters, the evolution. We are inside God of course in 0D , maybe in a kind of brain of God frankly, we are the babies of God, this central sphere of the universe is very intriguing if it exists you know. It is there that god has began. The physics try to explain the quantum mechanics, the cosmology, but the philosophy also is important and after all it is not odd to speak about god, the best past and actual thinkers considered god, like einstein , schrodinger, newton, galilei,heisenberg, maxwell,lorentz,godel, cantor,riemann, and so more, they have seen a kind of logic about this universe and its mechanisms.

It seems total non sense to come from an accident from a kind of infinite heat not conscious frankly. We have well evolved the last 100 years with the quantum mecanic and the general and special relativity but we can go farer I believe with these deeper scalar massless fields of the DE and the massive scalar fields of this DM, they are more difficult to observe and measure of course because they are not like the actual measurements with the photonic reasonings and tools. But they are there you know these parameters in our quantum mechanics, there are mechanisms , specific and logic even for this consciousness it is there probably with this DE even.

We are all inside an incredible project of evolution , the spherisation it is this , the optimisation of the universe,and the potential is infinite dear all, it is fascinating and the word is weak. Einstein has tried to encircle all this I believe and how god created this universe but his equation seems not complete ,and the SR and GR also seems just a part of puzzle. If these 3d spheres are the choice of God and that the fluidity of the universe is a reality and that all is in contact , that becomes clear .The mechanisms can be better understood , why we exist, why we evolve,what is god, have we souls, why we live, why we are conscious, why we have more than 2000 billions of galaxies, why this diversity of atoms, why this chemistry,this biology, there is a logic unifying the lambda CDM model, the GR, the QFT, the QM,the evolution,the consciousness, god you know, it seems evident that we cannot come from an accident or from nothing, that has no sense, we are inside a project of God, a project in optimisation ,it is reasuring seeing like this ,we build an universe and we are the babies and tools even for this infinite eternal consciousness. Be the force with you dear jedis of the Sphere lol , the universe and the future are wonderful and the word is weak....

view post as summary