SuperPolymath

QM was one big conspiracy A cover-up for what Einstein was really getting at. Said innovations would not be made, lest the working class got their hands on such technology

This math wouldn't be based on the same assumptions behind whatever math you could show me This is speculations, & earlier in this thread Vmedvil was attempting to use these speculations but you steered him away

No, it's a matter of mathematical complexity having to account for number of interactions everything is governed by relativity Prove that there's no action

Lorentz transformations arise from c propagating over a distance of 1/n planck length at 1/n planck time. These small changes between adjacent qubit cells occur at that rate & eventually effect large scale polarity over any distance

QM is based on action at distance. EFE governs the behavior of commutative quantum automation once you've applied the respective lorentz transformations in scale relativity. I liked your comments on teleparallelism & QM's incompatibility with it, the mathematical incompatibility itself should tell you something. You have to define sub-planckian curves by assuming smaller components such as the pseudo-particles or fractional-photon, generating the waves of fractional-graviton (abrupt accelerations cause frame dragging of the EM field linking polarities) when a solid particle goes solid to wave. It's called particle scattering.

You're not going to be able to determine anything if you don't account for efe interactions beneath the planck length. Stop not doing that!

Yeah, just beware that there's an understanding of the equations @Mordred has been exposed to so I try and understand everything he shows you first. In math, you have to not only cover all the angles, but know all the angles you have to cover. @swansont, this is my last post in this thread, I promise. Good luck, Vmedvil. @Vmedvilyour final summarized equation should only be an inch long when written out on a chalk board after being simplified. That's how you'll know it's done. The polarity of a photon when the quantum it's mass, the polarity aka mass of psuedo-particles in a wave of a wave are collective far far more dynamic. The four fundamental interactions are euphemisms for ADS' effects on DS spacetime & vice versa (as governed by bodies in motion with GR &SR) infinitely beyond the Planck scale

This is what he's modelling as well. @Mordred laugh after you've taught him how to show this mathematically & it checks out. You'll wish you did it You'll also realize I knew what I was talking about So there is no reason to take Niels Bohr seriously. The quantum interpretation is just a fairy tale that he has made. Two fairy tales, one claiming action at a distance, clear violations in the laws of motion defined by GR at the quantum level. The other, the one being modelled in this thread, just applying special relativity & a no limits argument for Zeno's paradox to explain things like bells theorem & double slit experiment

This is going to be major, a molecular biologist is going to win the Nobel for physics. How does that even work? Can they give it to non-physicists? There are so many implications to this model that are pushing the limits of mind-blowing. If this is the right TOE, than the consequences of a ToE are far greater than anyone could have imagined. Michio Kaku talked about the implications, he really low-balled them if this is it. Mastery of spacetime? That's what he said. With this, yes & no. We're talking about the notion of infinite parallel realities where there is a 1:1 chance of alternate human histories, applied to the inside of every particle in the universe as well as far enough into deep space. No need for any parallel realities as per non-locality or a probabilistic version of the subatomic particle. No warp drive or wormhole, but http://www.scienceforums.com/topic/30570-possible-proof-of-the-great-filter/?p=352524 & that leads to a God like a late stage entropy Boltzmann brain but worked toward, a slightly less random product of mathematical chaos. 1:1 chance of it arising from that infinite regression of microverses in entropy states

Alright fine don't walk him through how to properly show frame dragging & geodetic recession for that part of his equation

They aren't wrong rules if they're applied properly. Surely any model can be modified, otherwise you're not even model building, you're just using a preexisting model

This isn't a competition between who's better with mathematics, this is like the last element to his equation & apparently he needs find close to a thousand ways to apply them properly to every element of his equation somehow.

What are you talking about frame dragging & geodetic recession can be applied with any math not just algebra

The concept behind algebraic equation can always be modified, developed, & incorporated I any calculus or applied to all the tensors, etc as well as applied to the variables of higher dimensional math I'd show vmedvil how to do this step by arduous step. I may have been missing minutaes but they didn't change the jist of my theory much at all other than adding new elements

Actually I am comprehending most of the physics involved, regardless of my inability to express mathematically.

The polarity phase angles are not controlled by static electromagnetic fields in this model. Refer to frame dragging. This is not action at a distance. How long does it take light or a propagating gravity wave to cover a distance of 1/nx10^4 Planck lengths? The answer is the speed of QE.

Particles are paired over vast distance. Move one & it's like superluminal dominoes. They used this for https://www.nature.com/news/china-s-quantum-satellite-clears-major-hurdle-on-way-to-ultrasecure-communications-1.22142 Anyway take a closer look, The qubit from strings vmedvil modelled does not behave like a probabilistic wave function with randomized polarity, but a diffusion of a measurable subatomic energy into an immeasurable pseudo-energy whose spins, polarities, charges, & overall behavior is governed by virtually the exact same laws of motion & number of bodies (scattered pseudo-particles) as our cosmos at 234 billion light years across (13 billion ly wide CMB expanded to 18x it's original volume). This is not subject to the quantum interpretation adopted by popular models, this is an alternative assumption that's just as valid theoretically speaking. Yes, I meant QCA. But you know all this already Mordred. This is becoming redundant so you are intentionally misdirecting Vmedvil in his attempts at model building! Weak.

Yes I am aware of observer effect, I explained how microgravity does that in my thread. This is done on a mathematical level the communication pathways is already constructed, no interference or wave collapse isn't already graphed out & predicted no observation is done it just plays out on it's own. Which is why you can only create a string computer the size of a meter at first. But string computers can network & graph more interactions for bigger string computers Google quantum autamata

I see, that's actually kind of clever. Can you graph it? There's so much you could show from this. A solution to the quantum venn diagram paradox, the velocity of quantum entanglement, how many of the microverses you'd have to jam into one small area before they behave like an atom, like qg-plasma, or a full macroscopic black hole. Or the flight paths of individual particle-waves including spin, charge, polarity or exactly how one will effect another ad infinitum & again at what rate (QE). All of this should be consistent with observational &, if so, would be nearly 100 accurate but a **** to calculate.

<Planck unit

Sorry, I'm just mad at the long line of plebs starting with Niels Bohr who completely shut Einstein down & band-wagoned their own ideas thinking they were going to make the next break through acting like they were going to be the next Einstein. But nothing has really produced anything like that after nearly a century. In fact the only one who's still getting his theories proven right is Einstein, like the LIGO detection of gravity waves (post Newtonian frame dragging) Guess I'm wrong to let it out on their acolyte. They started this mess of a model, not Mordred. The Planck length didn't come from Einstein, & neither did anything with "quantum" in it. Space & time are not at all how you're conceptualizing right now. The length of a Planck unit is actually 1.6x10^-35 The Planck length needs to be reduced to fractions of a Planck length. Period. It came from Zeno's paradox, which wasn't even really a paradox. You can always reduce something. & string theory really hasn't yielded much of anything at all. That picture is an oxymoron

That's what the vacuum is, a soup of radiation from all different sources. It's amazing we can even receive signals probes way out in the edge of the solar system with all that interference. That's why there is no perfect vacuum & why most of the baryonic matter is in the vacuum radiation of great voids between galactic superclusters. This isn't why I cited those links. Vmedvil was trying to make an invariant equation based on toric geometry & SU(n). I was showing something along the lines of what he'd need to use. We're not just talking about distinguishing signals, we're talking about ftl communication using quantum entanglement. Obviously far beyond the standard model, especially since a lot of it is based on incorrect interpretations. Small things acting differently than our macroscopic world is an illusion, it could just be special relativity beyond the speed of light in sub Planck particles that compose "psuedo-energy", a concept adopted out of necessity in fractal analyses happened helped with isolating individual signals. That simple understanding would need to use different math than anything you've been indoctrinated with, Mordred.

Well, maybe because sometimes you speak broken English. I understand everything but the bolded part. What do you mean by "in the glory my idea will solve"? No, I understand that the links are using fractal analysis to get more accurate signaling than otherwise possible, but this "fractal analysis" is very literally defining a wave differently than the standard model does in order to do so, is it not? Why would you have to define a wave as a physical thing with curves & a contour in order to measure it. Perhaps the standard model is wrong? Perhaps now there's something better than a wave of probability? That's why, if I were you, I'd start trying to develop a new interpretation other than more of the same.

Yes but moreover the infinities used in measurements are greatest in fractal geometries, even more so than the SO(11) mentioned in the heterotic string theory that used toric geometry in another link I shared. Furthermore, the second link refers to the particle wave as psuedo-energy, & does it in a way that implies that this notion is novel. Now a pseudo-energy is not a probability, & it is much closer to the diffusion of an expanding subatomic particle that my theory depicts as a literal micro universe going from the hot dense qg-plasma CMB-like state of a solid measurable subatomic particle into the micro galactic-stellar era of it's wave function beneath the minimum luminousity, or "pseudo-energy", that any tool on our cosmic scale could measure. But mostly because fractal cosmology implores a thing which you probably aren't familiar with called scale relativity, it leads to special relativity beyond the speed of light due to fractions of the Planck length or fractions of Planck time, & I know you are familiar with the lorentz transformation. This discredits action at a distance, replacing it with gravitational micro-waves (frame dragging) for QE (that is measured by fiber optics to be within 4 orders of magnitude greater than C) but it does away with the quantum interpretation (this notion that little act differently than big things) entirely because microverse interpretation implies that it's just scale relativity making subatomic particles in a vacuum act just like our universe does at a scale of 13 billion light years across. Or makes all of the pseudo-energy surrounding the proposed micro bh at the center of an atom act like a million of our universes would at a million billion light years if they were surrounding a black hole with an event horizon of over 10 billion light years across. I'm getting exhausted but I'll keep going, the third link speaks of negative energy. & no not negative charge or negative spin. Literally reality inside out. Remember my idea about a black hole being a perpendicular universe with negative dimensionality? This goes back to what I said earlier-"fluctuations in the density medium of reality" (matter, energy, pseudo-energy, atoms,particles, waves, gravitons) are not particles. These fluctuations in the reality medium on all scales can't be some graviton, I say they are caused by distortions in spacetime that result in what we perceive as gravity - gravity is behind the 4 forces & comes from a negative spacetime trying to occupy our spacetime simultaneously. This is mathemically the simplest explanation possible, a universe that's entropy will vary in order to achieve an equilibrium with it's opposite It's still closer to my idea than what you were feeding vmedvil in this topic. I need my idea modelled. Trust me, it will be a lot more "fractized" than whatever subordinate theory was behind article I could link to, that is, once someone has figured the math for its sets. Waaay more infinities. Where entropy is greatest there will more complexity in a system. Ie, the vacuum will have more expansion, & thus will have the most anthropic microverses. But these fractal equations, regardless of their applications, will look more like my theory, they are kind of at the verge of my ideas.

Never once did I claim that & you just now went back on what you said earlier with that link in your post before this. Which still looks to me not exactly the same as its heavy incorporation in the more recently dated links I shared specifically (which actually word for word say some the things I said in my thread before even seeing these articles without me even knowing the basics) (which means it's being incorporated more & more). No, I claimed that a non-steady state model, a big bang singularity, a limit in how far the scales reduce in natural interactions being that of a Planck length, & the quantum interpretation should all be discredited for the advance of science.