SuperPolymath

Math is yin & yang.

I will misdirect you again too, because anyone working on a UFT should read http://www.scienceforums.com/topic/30597-the-theory-of-everything/ The universes within universes depicted in that thread might seem too cartoonish and bizarre to be true, but that has to be how the universe works. Theres a reason I keep linking that. QM needs to be radically altered, particles, waves fields, energy, matter, these are euphemisms for the density medium of reality as positive spacetime is distorted by a negative spacetime trying to occupy the same infinite plane simultaneously. That's why your screwed up black hole shape a few pages ago looked like a logarithmic spiral. Scale relativity in an infinitely reducible universe with no Planck length/time/c barrier means that inside of a photon or around the electron orbiting an atom, is an expanding universe just like ours but a lot smaller & faster. That's why infinities always arise in quantum field theory. & that's just like in the mandelbrot set, as you zoom in the same structures, the same shapes, reemerge again & again ad infinitum. & that is so consistent with the fact that time is relative. It's infinitely relative. The scales are infinite. Understanding that reality is like an onion with infinite layers is key to mastering a theory of everything. That and understanding that all forces ultimately come from the concept of yin & yang.

Not if you only do it for like the space a meter. You have you lasers in a Cern lab, you predict the way the particles will interact, & you design a small qe gate just enough for a vast number of simple transmissions for one complex calculation. That qe gate could be one of many doing faster calculations.

No, remember what I was saying about what makes such things undefined? You even said it would take me 500,000,000 years because of how undefinable the asymptote of the infinite contour is as you approach the 0 space-time center of the heterotic superstring But those last three links provide some background on how to define those variables invariantly

This is still finite toric geometry. There will always be a variant if you don't apply infinite fractal geometry. Those last three links use completely new concepts that relate to your ideas on gravity here more than what you've been using

Like I said, Vmedvil is doing the math for this, but I don't think he needs to waste time before working on this because he has the background

Esub8 x Esub8 equaling (0Uinfinity) is not making things invariant here. Quite the contrary. @Vmedvil, really hope you see the three last links here: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/111607-wormhole-metric-how-is-this-screwed-up/?do=findComment&comment=1025193 That quote was sort of misleading before you edited it. I'd say intentionally so because you said bit not qubit, knowing his background for vector calc was for computer science relating to molecular nanotech as opposed to a purely physics maths Props Mordred,you're a natural Dolos

One would inevitably end up recognizing these mathematical syntaxes. You basically reinvent all this in your own way when developing a theory, because every theory involves the same nature that has to lead to the same math. It's the concept behind the theory that matters, thats what leads to a new understanding, that's how you develop math

Why does it have to be broken into simpler stages? Conceptual euphemisms (understanding a mathematical machination in a different way) can be as much a pneumonic device. One person's simple is another person's complex & vice versa. There is no right way to do math.

If I were him I'd network with those who do the whole way so I'd have a translator at the end when I have to find out how to express my concept with a universal mathematical language.

Thing is this goes beyond SO(11) and SU(6) & Esub8 x Esub8 & all of the vector bundled. The toric geometry of the vector bundles is close to ->infinity ot E(infinity) fractal geometry but infinitely not close enough. I have linked completely different math involving scale relativity that has a whole other PhD of its own exclusive syntaxes His best bet is to APPLY the CONCEPT to something with its own mathematical syntax or lemmas & axioms & worry about what it looks in standard form later. Which would have a universal mathematical languagr form, he'd just need to learn those axioms lemmas & syntaxes

No he's doing the math & taking the credit should a model arise. Again, I'm not edumocated in these areas (I've got like college algebra & French 1 lol) but I do understand hardcore physics on a conceptual level & share the same ideas as him regarding the nature of gravity

I thought vmedvil had the basics of physics & mathematics (molecular nanotech) through the conventional channels (education system) on top of formal structured education in vector calculus similar to 006s masters in physics for the computer use in molecular nanotech?

Interesting, the bacteriophage t4 had 17 legs, the smallpox had 17 tubules, the adenovirus had 11 sides, 5 edges on the (front) & 6 edges in the (back) along with a (top & bottom) with 7 + 8 + 2 = 17 antennae. Anyway yeah, the universe would be composed of all variant microverses, in fact the current universe alone contains 17 additional 13 billion light-year collections of observable universes, each similar to ours but with slightly different cluster formations all coming from the same CMB as ours. Imagine how many micro-variants are in our vacuum's quantum particle waves. The universe needs to accept all the cosmic deviations when applying it to said cosmic->microcosmic transformations necessary to define the higgs field that pairs the polarity of particle-waves at superluminal rates ((nx10^4)C)) in this model for total quantum determinism, which would be the ultimate achievement of science. Anyway I was going through the deep Web & here's some stuff you can steal, merge, or incorporate into this model to make it invariant This is more along the lines of what you've been using: https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9704097https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9704097 It might get you closer to invariance, but it's still too simplistic for the complexity scale of a theory like this. This will get you closer to invariance: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3866471/ Examples: http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?paperID=72482 More examples: https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0007224 You will have to make a new form of math that's never been before though that incorporates the following concepts, so good luck with that.

Well I guess because it's notation. But CERN's computers would have a heyday with this

I don't think an SO(n) group will decrease the amount of calculations regarding how the higgs field will effect particle waves (energy's sub-planck energy). Youre math will be accounting for an insane amount of insanely tiny black holes that exist for an insanely brief amount of time. But if you want determinism, my idea cuts so many inconsistencies with experimental & astronomical data out of any mainstream UFT you'll find it's not even funny

The transformations are smooth but the resulting geometry isn't

What I was saying earlier about transforming your model (which I guess needs to be unmerged) from conventional smooth geometry into literally infinite fractal geometry with scale relativity to define all missing variables literally does so because you transform all the black holes in a cosmos into basically the entire higgs field when that cosmos gets rooted by itself & becomes a microscopic cosmos. But I don't think modern computers can calculate that much data. Think of the complexity from one Planck length to 18 x 13 billion light years & exponentiate that number by a factor of itself But what you do, is you only take like a meter of space & shrink that for your rooted cosmoses. That's enough to test the predictions about quantum locality, or mathematical prescience regarding state the particles will take. That will give you a meter sized qe gate computer that operates within 10 orders of magnitude faster than light. Enough of those would eventually be able to build a virtual solar system with cosmic rootsets.

In layman's terms, if you can affect the spacetime going into a black hole, you can effect the four fundamental interactions' effects on matter-energy inside where space-time is reversed in this model. Doing that could effect things with space-time exiting the BH What he had in the torus was a lateral flow of space-time, as opposed linear (time forward) it's moving backwards & forwards So basically if t is fractions of Planck time, than the denominator will go into one 299792458 times. Which will make mc^2 = ma This is scale relativity

Well, since it's causal assymetry you could use ftl subplanckian fractional supergravity of quatum entanglement in the heterotic string at the contour of the edge of a black hole to effect the past in that inside out dimension which could in turn end up affecting your past on the quantum scale This is also something I've considered

So basically you use whatever mathematical model that incorporates heterotic strings for a positive & negative 11 dimensions and apply it to astronomical data that documents the expansion of the CMB for the past 13699600000 years to create your first cosmic set. Each time you transform a cosmic set into a cosmic rootset that composes the next cosmic set (this isn't through exact calculation but approx representation) as you transition from conventional geometries into fractal geometry your micro Schwartzchild radi become more defined which defines the missing variables in your original set such as DE, the higgs field, quantum entanglement, micro supergravity in the heterotic string, & DM

Or better yet, use a perfect 22 dimensional built on the heterotic string bridging positive space-time & matter-energy with negative space-time & matter-energy, map out the 11 dimensions of 1/2 of the heterotic string for all particle interactions in a change from 1 symmetry breaking CMB to 18x 1 current observable universe, & then fractize the 11 dimensions into 8.5 dimensions by reducing all Planck values. Basically what was a length of 1.6x10^-35 meters gets a new length of 1.6x(10^-1(35^(1.6x10^35))) meters, a velocity of C gets a new velocity of C^C, & same with Planck time...then you get a more accurate model. This can be done infinite times, each time you do it your model gets more accurate in predicting the behavior of quantum particles. Remember

But that's exactly what I did. & it works to a degree, it's just not precise. If you have 3 dimensions, my theory had 5. If you have 11, my theory has 17. So make the rest of it precise Again, you have to set limits purely for the sake of calculation, even if they aren't actually there. The approximate solution should yield within 4 orders of magnitude of c for qe even at 1.6x10^-1000 meters. So try it at whatever can be calculated. Max wolfram out

You just jumped from basic to advanced. Now I see how 5 dimensions translates to ~+/-2.5 spatial, ~+/-.5 temporal, ~+/-.5 charge, ~+/-2.5 flavor, ~+/-2.5 color for a total of 17 dimensions. 8.5 in de sitter space, connected via heterotic string w/ scale relativitic Lorentz transformations of c, l, & t within the asymptote of the infinite contour of its center, to -8.5 dimensional anti de sitter space, Still different from string theory,not quite super string theory either. It's it's own thing, & that's because of the fractal geometry & the fact that scale relativity beyond the Planck length & C has replaced the roles of quantum & super gravity. Well, space-time does get transferred to both sides of the heterotic string, so I guess that's your super gravity.

So only variables that are independent are mathematical dimensions? What about dependent variables? Which are the only variables you'd deal with in real life. Real dimensions are geometric structures in any case. Independent variables are just called by the same name to prevent people from knowing this