Vmedvil Posted November 23, 2017 Author Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Dubbelosix said: no it can't - do you understand, for instance why [math]mc^2 \ne ma[/math] If m is the mass, c is the speed of light and a is acceleration? a = V(299792458) (1/Δt) Edited November 23, 2017 by Vmedvil 1
SuperPolymath Posted November 23, 2017 Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) 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 8 hours ago, SuperPolymath said: 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 Edited November 23, 2017 by SuperPolymath
Vmedvil Posted November 23, 2017 Author Posted November 23, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, SuperPolymath said: 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 Ya, I am done with this would admin please Lock or delete or trash this thread. I will screw with model on my own no longer taking comments. Ultimately equation 00000543252, you have failed your master time for you to be throw away like the trash you are for being variant under what some may call kinda messed up conditions but still. ∇'(x',y',z') = ∇(1-(((2MbG / Rs) - (Isωs2/2Mb))2/C2))1/2 Though you did yield one interesting fact, the shape a Tipler cylinder must be. I Suggest deletion but do whatever you would like. Edited November 23, 2017 by Vmedvil
Vmedvil Posted November 24, 2017 Author Posted November 24, 2017 (edited) 13 hours ago, Vmedvil said: Ya, I am done with this would admin please Lock or delete or trash this thread. I will screw with model on my own no longer taking comments. Ultimately equation 00000543252, you have failed your master time for you to be throw away like the trash you are for being variant under what some may call kinda messed up conditions but still. ∇'(x',y',z') = ∇(1-(((2MbG / Rs) - (Isωs2/2Mb))2/C2))1/2 Though you did yield one interesting fact, the shape a Tipler cylinder must be. I Suggest deletion but do whatever you would like. Like you said equation by far the most screwed up shape you can bend a BH into. Edited November 24, 2017 by Vmedvil
Vmedvil Posted November 24, 2017 Author Posted November 24, 2017 (edited) s = 3 Torus ΔΘ = 60 Time s = 7 Torus ΔΘ = 25.7 Time s = 20 Torus ΔΘ = 9 Time Torus shaped. k = 553 Space Sphere shaped. k = 553 Space Torus s = 20, k = 553, ΔΘ = 9 Space-time Sphere s = 20, k = 553, ΔΘ = 9 Space-time Edited November 24, 2017 by Vmedvil
Vmedvil Posted November 24, 2017 Author Posted November 24, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Vmedvil said: s = 3 Torus ΔΘ = 60 Time s = 7 Torus ΔΘ = 25.7 Time s = 20 Torus ΔΘ = 9 Time Torus shaped. k = 553 Space Sphere shaped. k = 553 Space Torus s = 20, k = 553, ΔΘ = 9 Space-time Sphere s = 20, k = 553, ΔΘ = 9 Space-time Space for Perfect Torus k = 553 Time s = 20, ΔΘ = 9 Time Torus oh ya, there is a wormhole but you could never escape every path does literally lead back inside and reverse time travel has to be impossible your best bet would be to gun it near an edge, but you would still be pulled back in but you could possibly sit there. Edited November 24, 2017 by Vmedvil 1
SuperPolymath Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, Vmedvil said: Space for Perfect Torus k = 553 Time s = 20, ΔΘ = 9 Time Torus oh ya, there is a wormhole but you could never escape every path does literally lead back inside and reverse time travel has to be impossible your best bet would be to gun it near an edge, but you would still be pulled back in but you could possibly sit there. 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 Edited November 24, 2017 by SuperPolymath
Strange Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 5 minutes ago, SuperPolymath said: 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 Does that actually mean anything?
SuperPolymath Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Strange said: Does that actually mean anything? 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 On 11/23/2017 at 7:20 AM, Vmedvil said: a = V(299792458) (1/Δt) 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 Edited November 24, 2017 by SuperPolymath
Vmedvil Posted November 25, 2017 Author Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, SuperPolymath said: 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 Kinda I was taking 299792458(1/Δt) as a dimensionless or dimensional constant dependent on 1/Δt which is a frequency to fix the mixed conversion until something defines that better as V would also equal 299792458 where MC2 = Ma, the values would be the same but different dimensions, which you can technically do as long as the values match at every point in the system exactly, like MC2 ≠ Ma, but does = Ma(1/Δt @ 299792458, where V is also @ 299792458 ) even though a Δx is missing, if a = V (1/Δt), which the simple conclusion would be at there is a missing Δx = 299792458, but since it has to be a, we will just say dimensionless constant that equals 299792458. Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil
SuperPolymath Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Vmedvil said: Kinda I was taking 299792458(1/Δt) as a dimensionless or dimensional constant dependent on 1/Δt to fix the mixed conversion until something defines that better as V would also equal 299792458. 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. Edited November 25, 2017 by SuperPolymath
Vmedvil Posted November 25, 2017 Author Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, SuperPolymath said: 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 & multiply that by itself. But what you do, is you only take like a meter of space & shrink that for your rooster. 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. No the fractal geometry can be defined by a SO(n) group which is smooth kinda, despite what it looks like in that picture its transformations were still smooth. Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil
SuperPolymath Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 14 minutes ago, Vmedvil said: No the fractal geometry can be defined by a SO(n) group which is smooth kinda, despite what it looks like in that picture its transformations were still smooth. The transformations are smooth but the resulting geometry isn't
Vmedvil Posted November 25, 2017 Author Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, SuperPolymath said: The transformations are smooth but the resulting geometry isn't Yep, but isn't smooth kinda look at the shape of the curves. Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil
SuperPolymath Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Vmedvil said: Yep. 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 Edited November 25, 2017 by SuperPolymath
Vmedvil Posted November 25, 2017 Author Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, SuperPolymath said: 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 logical much slack off any mainstream uft you'll find it's not even funny It does if the equation is in the right form.(Vector Bundle) Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil
SuperPolymath Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 Well I guess because it's notation. But CERN's computers would have a heyday with this
Vmedvil Posted November 25, 2017 Author Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 46 minutes ago, SuperPolymath said: Well I guess because it's notation. But CERN's computers would have a heyday with this but like I said it is variant it is not perfectly correct needs to be invariant under automorphisms, I will explain it this way in Molecular biology Certain Envelope layers of viruses will accept other viruses glycoproteins which makes them invariant under automorphism from those virii's glycoprotiens where others like the Adenovirus's Envelope will only accept their own glycoproteins having a different structure from most virii. Variant automorphic viruses (Adenovirus) Variant Automorphic virus. (Bacteriophage T4) Invariant Automorphic viruses. (HIV) (Rabies) (SARS) (Ebola) (Measles) (Flu) Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil
SuperPolymath Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, Vmedvil said: but like I said it is variant it is not perfectly correct needs to be invariant under automorphisms, I will explain it this way in Molecular biology Certain Envelope layers of viruses will accept other viruses glycoproteins which makes them invariant under automorphism from those virii's glycoprotiens where others like the Adenovirus's Envelope will only accept their own glycoproteins having a different structure from most virii. Variant automorphic viruses (Adenovirus) Variant Automorphic virus. (Bacteriophage T4) Invariant Automorphic viruses. (HIV) (Rabies) (SARS) (Ebola) (Measles) (Flu) 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. Edited November 25, 2017 by SuperPolymath
Mordred Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) You two really don't believe in mastering the basic before tackling the complex do you? How do you you two ever plan on accomplishing your goals, if you don't ? I hate to break it to you both but both the mathematics I posted as well as Dubbelsix is really entry to intermediate level. Yet neither one of you could follow either and misapplied both examples by assuming you were understanding them. Yet your trying to handle higher dimension string theory without even understanding the lemmas and axoims involved in the group theory. Edited November 25, 2017 by Mordred
SuperPolymath Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 9 minutes ago, Mordred said: You two really don't believe in mastering the basic before tackling the complex do you? How do you you two ever plan on accomplishing your goals, if you don't ? 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?
Mordred Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) He may very well have but your missing all the applicable axioms and lemmas of the lie groups under symmetry. This has to be studied seperately. For example the SO(1.3) lie group, do either of you know how matrix and tensors work or understand what the difference is between the two? Every coordinate in field theory has a vector assignment to it. (Every coordinate). That is how field theories work. Every coordinate is a function. That is true true complexity involved. Every group is its own algebra with specific lemmas and axioms specific to that group. Edited November 25, 2017 by Mordred
SuperPolymath Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Mordred said: He may very well have but your missing all the applicable axioms and lemmas of the lie groups under symmetry. This has to be studied seperately. For example the SO(1.3) lie group, do either of you know how matrix and tensors work or understand what the difference is between the two? Every coordinate in field theory has a vector assignment to it. (Every coordinate). That is how field theories work. Every coordinate is a function. That is true true complexity involved. 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
Vmedvil Posted November 25, 2017 Author Posted November 25, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Mordred said: He may very well have but your missing all the applicable axioms and lemmas of the lie groups under symmetry. This has to be studied seperately. For example the SO(1.3) lie group, do either of you know how matrix and tensors work or understand what the difference is between the two? Every coordinate in field theory has a vector assignment to it. (Every coordinate). That is how field theories work. Every coordinate is a function. That is true true complexity involved. Every group is its own algebra with specific lemmas and axioms specific to that group. Yes Mordred I fully understand how all that works. Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil
Mordred Posted November 25, 2017 Posted November 25, 2017 No he is attempting the math, but unfortunately he isn't look deep enough to properly apply that math and yet your trying to advise him without even understanding the basics of the math. I lost track of the number of misconceptions in every post by you two that I cannot even list them all. You both assume you understand what is involved in string theory etc but I don't even know if you understand thee difference between Hilbert and phase space let alone how to describe a vector field. SO(1.3) is a Guassian vector field, Guassian is a particular treatment unto itself, the higher stage being Sturm Luiville. Niether of you can descibe the difference between a conformal and canonical field treatment. Neither has demonstrated a working knowledge of vector symmetry to apply it to a multiparticle system nor demonstrated how path integrals work under the various groups. Yet your both trying to model something as complex as the Schwartzchild metric which is far fa more advanced than the ds^2 line element shows. You both keep trying to apply those equations without understanding how they were derived in the first place. As such you get numerous errors.
Recommended Posts