Eugenio Ullauri

A couple of days ago i decided to make public my philosphy of reality as some of you may know so the topic was closed because i dont have completed my unified field equations but it has a new way of describing reality so a moderator suggested me to keep talking about my theory so i wanted to know if anyone is able to find some inconsistency woth my philosophy of reality because i think this is a very important realization as always im very happy to answer any question you may have Thank you I will leave some videos i have made on the topic

I will publish any updates if someone here wants to help me please write me to Discussions need to stay here, and if you want to talk about some other aspect of my theory im here to keep talking Thank you for your help if you want my opinion on some topic just ask me i am willing to help you if i can of course Have you ever heard a theory like mine? i mean i didn't copied this from anyone and i haven't found this philosophy on the internet I think the hardest part of a ToE is to create coherent philosophy and i already have it i just need to work out the equations which are realtively easy when you have a coherent philosophy of reality i will pulish new updates every day in this forum I will be back tomorrow but i will answer e-mails in the night thank you all that commented on this topic, i hope more people can join

that is correct for the clasical definition of energy but my definition of energy is more like saying amount of stuff like matter so maybe is my fault to use energy to refer to matter and energy I think i will complete it with the math is just about translating what i have explained here into a formal language And yes i need to create an equation that can predict when a system will reach enough density to become unstable for example Which i think is not that difficult

Do you think if i work the math this could one day become widely accepted as the main the theory of everything?

Does anyone here believe that my theory could be right i mean of course that there is still a lot of math to be written to be formally accepted as a theory of everything but what do you think about the philosophy of it does the infinite loop density cycle looks promising? Energy in the clasical definition is a property of matter, a color is a structure or characteristic of an object you cannot say i have a red, you need to say i have a red car

The electromagnetic radiation is the real thing yes that radiation behaves like waves but that does not make them waves. Is like saying that painting your car red makes the car to be a color, so the car has a color but it is still car, it is not a color

Waves are a behavior i mean waves are not a physical thing are behaviours of physical things like trajectories the problem is to threat behaviours like objects is like saying a movement is an object is like waves being an adjective but not a thing is a property of an object not an object itself

What i said is that superposition is not real and it does not apply to reality

Yes this is a great example of challenge i will try to figure out how to apply my theory on this but ok lets start with the basics that is that the photo should have enough quality to distinguish the main level of detail of the energy organization which is being able to see where every block starts and ends, that is a must obviously, and then we need to figure out how that energy organization of blocks at the block arrangement level works, so what my theory says is that of course if you build it from the ground up and you have photos on how the arch was built you will know that the bottom ones were first and then the obvious way of doing it and the most important block you mentioned but for my theory it is different what it does is that it doesnt know the most important block because every block is the most important block because if you remove one block of an arch it will fall apart so for my theory the important thing is the whole structure because i dont want to know how to build an arch i just want to know how an arch behaves, so it distiguishes each block, as an object that wants to fall to the ground in simpler terms but they dont fall because of all other blocks so all other blocks have the same importance here so lets say it starts looking for the bottom left block and says this block is stable on its own and then it will say the next block is stable because of the previous but also because of the next until it reaches the last block which is the bottom right one in which will say this block is again stable on its own and is connected to the other block that is stable on its own which is the bottom left one kind of like that but of course here i need to apply more maths What do you mean by where do energy is involved? So how does my theory looks at the Schrodinger's cat: The experiment states that there is a cat , and a poison that has 50% change of killing the cat in a box and the box is closed So as is commonly known the experiment tells that the cat is in a superposition of states, that meaning alive and dead at the same time and when someone opens the box the superposition collapses on one state and you can know the cat state. What my theory says about this is that if you put a cat and a poison in a box and you close it you have lost the state of the inside of the box, this means that the cat is not dead and is not alive and also the cat is not even cat and the poison is not even poison, this means the contents of the box stopped existing when you were not able to look inside the box, so what i say here is that the cat is state is unknown is not in a superposition. Another example of how my theory looks at information is: Does black holes destroy information? So my theory solves this problem in a very simple and new way, which is figuring out what information is, so information is the data collected by a focuser. Information exist only for the focuser it is not a thing on its own, so information is the focusable state of something black holes just change the energy organization is the same that if you throw a car to the sun or to a black hole it just changes its energy organization. The information depends on the eye who looks at it, so for a certain type of eye a certain event can destroy information but it is just changing its energy organization, but we are confussed with black holes because they are dense enough to absorb photons so info depends on how much details the eye can map How do my theory explains the double slit experiment? My theory says that every object is a cloud that has some energy organization. So a photon an electron and everything else is seen as a cloud. When a photon is fired to the double slit for an interference pattern to emerge the slit should be small enough to make the photon which is a cloud to at least one very small part of it enters the other slit so lets say 99% of the cloud enters the first slit and 1% of it enters the second slit that 1% pulls or changes the cloud trajectory making the interference pattern emerge this does not mean that the 1% passed through the other slit this just means that it entered and then went for the slit in which the majority of the cloud passed through is like throwing a cat and the tail of the cat enters for the other slit but then the tail follows the head so that event makes the trajectory of the cloud to change like if it was a wave. Please tell me what do you think about that

That is true but to make a neutron behave like a wave you need more energy than the electron needs for example

Yes in this case agree with you, this means that to make waves it is easier if the less energy it has, for example this is why the double slit experiment works only with "particles" that are weak enough to be affected by the double slit. Yes instead of saying field excitations i would say energy organizations, they exhibit point like and wave like because of the observer, ok so i agree that particles in that sense does not exist, and yes i agree that solid is an ilusion but i meant is that one is easier to modify or influence than the other

Thank you for you opinion i really appreciate it, ok what my TOE would say about the arch is as follows: Take a camera and take a photo of the system and wait until you notice a change in the data and take another photo so you have two photos of the system how my theory approaches to this problem is that the arch and the floor are the same object if the arch is not moving in relation to the floor, what this says is that you cannot know for sure how stable is the arch just by looking at it in rest on the other hand lets say we have a system in which you told me more info about the arch energy organization like saying The thing is that i need to learn how to apply my theory into the real world, so if you tell me how is traditionally described an arch i can maybe translate it into my TOE.

Because photons are more wavy behavior they are like a cloud so that is why they seem to occupy the same place, and fermions are denser and its energy organization in other words a photon is more dynamic more flexible due to its energy organization, a photon is like a cloud and a fermion is like a rock, kind of

Energy is not released, energy just changes its organization they reorganize into photons because photons are less denser so the system decreases its density, this is saying the system is unstable , but it depends on how it is organized because it can produce a certain type of photon in some conditions, is like making an explosion Yeah i dont know about quantum physics but i will learn Sorry if it was not sarcastic

Well this kind of thing is because of the arrangement of their component pieces. 1)Well first an arch can fall down, a well done arch does not fall down because the interaction between the floor and the arch energy distribution, but mainly because the material if you make it with a good material it will just stay up, i mean is a simple structure is like organizing energy in the correct way to make it stable for a given environment 2)Pulling from the right side with a point of support or something These questions are kind of sarcastic i think. Energy can be organized so programmed, like you can do multiplications with additions