Mordred

Yes but every field coordinate is a function or field value which infliences the particle excitation at every coordinate lol. GR at the QFT level can get rather funky.

Well its a truism that the HUP applies to both the field at every coordinate as well as the particle. So it becomes an arbitrary choice as to the accepted degree of accuracy

Bounds of a reasonable approximation. Under GR via infinitisimal coordinates the paths will have slight deviations. ie coordinates at each planck length spacing. Keep in mind the beams could still arrive at the same origin point but the path taken can still vary

I can't see the lightpaths being perfectly reversible. Only as a reasonable approximation will they appear similar but never perfectly identical. The problem is on a time dependent metric spacetime at each infinitisimal coordinate would never have identical conditions. So following the path of least resistance each infinitisimal coordinate will have different conditions causing slight path alterations.

Nice find thanks for sharing, will read up further on it then get back to your questions

No I didn't concede anything by that statement. Without proper modelling and proper terminology it won't go anywhere. Its your choice to apply the advise given and have a chance of succes or ignore it and most likely fail Umm what ? this makes no sense

It is rather lacking so trust your instincts on this paper lol

As mentioned DM has non relativistic dynamics the strongest model of DM being cold (non relativistic). It literally doesn't require GR to describe its dynamics nor does it in cosmology. Its more a case of a puzzle of particle physics than cosmology. In cosmology applications the influence of DM is rather easily detected. The identification is what is daunting. DM if a weakly interactive particle will not be the only particle that is extremely difficult to detect. Neutrinos share many of the same characteristics though the known neutrinos are relativistic. Such research by CERN the LHC and similar apparatus is one of our best hopes to identifying DM. Simply because we haven't done so yet does not preclude the possibility. Even so it is incredible the amount of scientific research that is still being confirmed, fine tuned, cross examined by CERN. Just because we believe we understand something (including Higgs) doesn't mean the research stops. If anything they get further studied in greater and greater detail. An extremely important aspect of Higgs still needing greater research is the Higgs metastability. A huge body of theories requires this key detail to confirm or overthrow countless models including a huge body of supersymmetric models. This aspect of Higgs can also overturn or confirm the potential of numerous DM and DE models. A little sidenote I have an unpublished personal model attempt involving Higgs that requires greater details involving its thermodynamic influences. My model is literally at a stall point due to lack of data on Higg's

Another hint the curvature is followed by the null geodesic light path as the primary metric. The primary reason for this is the curvature affects how we see and measure the cosmos. This includes distortions of CMB which is one of the primary measuring tools to confirm what curvature constant "k" is the best fit ie Planck dataresults. So for example here is the 4d spacetime null geodesic of the FRW metric [latex]d{s^2}=-c^2d{t^2}+a(t^2)[dr^2+S,k(r)^2d\Omega^2][/latex] [latex]S\kappa(r)= \begin{cases} R sinr/R &k=+1\\ r &k=0\\ R sinr/R &k=-1 \end {cases}[/latex] On the first k=+1 light paths converge positive curvature. In the second k=0 light paths remain parallel (flat) when k=-1 light paths diverge (negative curvature)

On my planer I remove the blades with an allen key, then I clamp them with sheet metal pliers and sharpen on a whetstone first. (relatively new as they develop unevenness over time. For the honing I use the adhesive sheets and glass. In essence its the same aa a chisel though I follow the angle they come in. The main trick is clamping the blade with sheet metal pliers. Unfortunately you can't do too often as the more modern planers have disposable blades but you can extend their lifetime a bit. Many ppl use belt sanders but I prefer doing by hand but this vid shows the procedure https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DWx0shUhRguc&ved=0ahUKEwjKrpP5r8_aAhUE32MKHXktAMcQtwIIMzAE&usg=AOvVaw0RvM48V2lNXzUk4yCjcPHD The end of the vid shows the limit signs to the amount of sharpening.

One of my favourite purchases is my electric handplaner. I do a lot of smaller work with pallet wood and its a huge time saver though tend to have to sharpen the blades often lol.

For honing I prefer the sheets on glass works extremely well

excellent starting point

Never force wood excessively beyond light placement taps. Glue does take up spacing but more likely it is a case of placement from dry test to glue stage. I typically place alignment marks when matching pieces together to ensure the same placement from one stage to the next. Such things do occur regardless of how diligent. As mentioned before this thread. A good craftsman isn't one that never makes mistakes but knows how to hide any mistakes. ALL Too often joints can be too tight, it should only take light taps to get a tight fit, excessively tight fits are as you noticed problematic. If you find gaps a trick to to mix glue and the same sawdust as the material used as a filler. Its not perfect on blending but better that many store bought fillers in matching coloration (use a stain ready glue). PS the very statement "You hammered the $$$$ out of the boards" tells me your fit was misaligned on gluing stage and possibly too tight. Once glue has already started to set even if not completely dry it is too late to realign. Practice chisel skills as well on joint and levelling corrections/blending. Chisel skills can oft remove unwanted material as well as save a lot of time in coorections. For fine detail slice not tap or force. I've found that one truly learns to understand the strength in the different grains of different woods when chiselling joints. For example oak is easier to fine tune chisel than maple. Teak one must take extra care on cleaning the natural oils from tools and hands as you work. Speaking of maple you will also want to develop your chisel sharpening skills.

Ok particlelike and wavelike duality does exist. Make note how I described the previous sentence. Under certain conditions a particle can exhibit either. Now comes the tricky part, particles under QFT is a bit of a historical misnomer term. Under QFT a particle is a field excitation. The pointlike properties is defined by the Debroglie wavelength for fermions (matter particles) or the Compton wavelength for bosons ie photons. A good read is as follows "There are no particles there is only fields" by Art Hobson https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.4616&ved=2ahUKEwih_PnDpM3aAhVH0WMKHfQcB7MQFjAAegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw0yvDJRWMF0aCmF5wnTNnEn It is arxiv on phone atm

That isn't completely accurate the BB was is a thermal equilibrium state where the particle sea becomes indistinquishable from one another. This isn't quite the same as everything is photons. Other particles can form but quickly destabilize. The expansion rate assists particles dropping out of thermal equilibrium by assisting in seperation of the particle/antiparticle pairs as well as temperature reduction. The thermal equilibrium state is conveniently modelled by its temperature with photons being the gauge boson however this is a convenient approximation not an absolute. The entirety of the SM particles cannot be formed from photons as the ultimate starter particle due to the various conservation laws involved in the Eightfold wayen such as charge, color, flavor, isospin, energy/momentum, parity etc.

Correct entanglement does not involve FTL communication its communication application of interest is encryption not FTL. There is no hidden variables or dimensions

Non locality is related to spacetime. It is more often based on Einstein locality. In essence on field treatments with your 4d spacetime coordinates (including time) it is the interactions that occur between both the field and particle within a specified unit of time. Typically it will be the neighboring 4d coordinate to a coordinate being measured. (keep in mind 4d) so past and future events are non local to present events. In quantum correlstions non local are previous interactions that have occurred that affect current local measurements. Ie when the entangled particle pair is created is non local to the local spacetime region at time of measurement within the locality of the detectors Edit a more accurate definition of Einstein locality is as follows if two events are outside each others’ light cones there cannot be any causal connection between them.

Hrrm thoughts, Well here is my thought. There is literally nothing in this proposal of any substance. It certainly does not qualify as a model. There is no means of testability nor does it make any predictions. Ie What rate will two coordinates expand or contract? Particles move apart and contract at different rates so how can you apply a single rate such as c to account for this? Further more any Model of the universe must meet certain criteria. Specifically must have a coordinate basis. You have no coordinate basis where one can apply scalar, vector, spinor assignments. There is also zero application of thermodynamics or any quantity of any applied physics. A lot more effort and study is highly recommended if you want this proposal to ever be taken seriously

The angles and ensuring precise 22.5 degrees took some scrap pieces to fine tune. For the other cuts I usually make sure I am within 1/16 of an inch. That often requires some chiselling to fine tune the joints. For squaring up each side I used a tape measure diagonally from corner to corner.

Dowel joint on the trim pieces, with glue of course. Further strength is added by the bottom base inside with screws hidden by the bottom trim.

correct for the classical usage but now consider the mass/energy density terms in cosmology applications. Here is an example article " then obtain for the time change of the entropy [latex] kTd(sR^3) = d(pR3^) + pdR&3,[/latex] where R is the radius of the universe as it appears in the Robertson-Walker metric. The vanishing of Eq. 2.2 express that the evolution is adiabatic" https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/83/17/6245.full.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj2n8mf-sXaAhXoslQKHQP1BjM4ChAWMAN6BAgAEAE&usg=AOvVaw0WnKtpy7_8BFZXcg6jL_ud Some literature use entropy other literature uses energy in the above. Ie via "For a system at equilibrium the entropy density, energy density and pressure can be written as functions only of the temperature, ρ = ρ(T), s = s(T), P = P(T). Since ds and dρ are intensive quantities proportional to dT, the coefficients of the dT and dV terms must separately be zero (for example under a volume change at constant temperature the dV term must be zero). For the dV coefficient we get an expression for the entropy density" https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://cosmologist.info/teaching/EU/notes_EU1_thermo.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi2ro-e_8XaAhWO0J8KHZjuAkc4HhAWMAN6BAgEEAE&usg=AOvVaw0T1BASBIvgzb2FpZSOBPW6

My current project wishing well made out of cedar, Dimensions 30 inch diameter, height of bucket 30 inches. Costs roughly 150.00 Canadian for the wood. Magic angle for the hexagon 22.5 degrees

Welcome aboard.

Incorrect on light speed being involved with an open or closed universe. The speed limit does not rely upon wheher or not the universe is open or closed. It is simply the speed of information exchange maximum. No cause is needed. Space itself is simply volume. The universe expands or contracts depending on the thermodynamic laws. It will cool down as the universe expands just like any ideal gas does ie PV=NrT. Though the precise application is the formula for an adiabatic and isentropic fluid. It is precisely the same formula under those two conditions as it is for a classical gas in statistical mechanics. This article will get you started its not the greatest but its math level is lower https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/matnat/fys/FYS4130/v10/undervisningsmateriale/Cosmology.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiriIier8XaAhUF8GMKHSiVDZIQFjAAegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw0jph7ZkMGUqUdYHArIOIir It is an introductory level on the equations of state (thermodynamic term precise same application) and the FLRW metric with a small amount of GR.