Wormhole Metric...... How is this screwed up.

[Vmedvil]

1 minute ago, Mordred said:

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.

 

Ya, I don't use integrals have you ever seen me use one?

Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Mordred]

1 minute ago, Vmedvil said:

Yes Mordred I fully understand how all that works.

Do you ?, or do you only think you do?

Can you describe the orthogonal group above  under unitary groups ?

Can you incorperate the right hand rule ? to the above?

[SuperPolymath]

18 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.

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 

[Mordred]

1 minute ago, Vmedvil said:

Ya, I don't use integrals have you ever seen me use one?

if you don't use integrals how do you plan on understand the very metrics that use them?

[Vmedvil]

Just now, Mordred said:

if you don't use integrals how do you plan on understand the very metrics that use them?

Summation

[Mordred]

1 minute ago, SuperPolymath said:

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 

 

Do you even know the Lemmas involved in the extended groups above?

1 minute ago, Vmedvil said:

Summation

then your not working under the groups themselves and will get incorrect answers.

[SuperPolymath]

2 minutes ago, Mordred said:

 

Do you even know the Lemmas involved in the extended groups above?

 

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.

[Mordred]

What good would that do? its just like programming in order to program a complex problem you must break that problem into simpler stages. Example flow charting.

[Vmedvil]

11 minutes ago, Mordred said:

 

Do you even know the Lemmas involved in the extended groups above?

then your not working under the groups themselves and will get incorrect answers.

How so, ∑∑ x₁.... x_nn = SU(2) where SU(3) =∑∑∑ x₁.... x_nnn, Where SU(n) = ∑_1.......∑_nx_1.........x_n......n_n

Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil

[SuperPolymath]

4 minutes ago, Mordred said:

What good would that do? its just like programming in order to program a complex problem you must break that problem into simpler stages. Example flow charting.

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. 

Edited November 25, 2017 by SuperPolymath

[Mordred]

OK lets do a simpler demonstration how many product under truth table is involved in a qubit multiplied by a qubit?

write or the truth table.

Now do the same truth table to the groups you just named.

2 minutes ago, SuperPolymath said:

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. 

Your working with Tensor products, its just like Binary operations (more than one derivitave.....)

[Vmedvil]

14 minutes ago, Mordred said:

OK lets do a simpler demonstration how many product under truth table is involved in a qubit multiplied by a qubit?

write or the truth table.

Now do the same truth table to the groups you just named.

what α² + β² = 1 , SU(2), the 2 comes from the Squared relation being 1

Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil

[SuperPolymath]

4 minutes ago, Mordred said:

OK lets do a simpler demonstration how many product under truth table is involved in a qubit multiplied by a qubit?

write or the truth table.

Now do the same truth table to the groups you just named.

Your working with Tensor products, its just like Binary operations (more than one derivitave.....)

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

[Mordred]

7 minutes ago, SuperPolymath said:

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

You have absolutely no clue what your talking about.

OK simple programming question. How many possible answers do you get when you add two 8 bit registers? (ALL POSSIBLE ANSWERS).

that is tensor products....

ie [math]E_8\otimes E_8[/math]

Edited November 25, 2017 by Mordred

[Vmedvil]

1 minute ago, Mordred said:

You have absolutely no clue what your talking about.

OK simple programming question. How many possible answers do you get when you add two 8 bit registers? (ALL POSSIBLE ANSWERS).

that is tensor products....

64

[Mordred]

nope far far too low

[SuperPolymath]

10 minutes ago, Mordred said:

You have absolutely no clue what your talking about.

OK simple programming question. How many possible answers do you get when you add two 8 bit registers? (ALL POSSIBLE ANSWERS).

that is tensor products....

ie E_8\otimes E_8

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

4 minutes ago, Mordred said:

nope far far too low

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

[Mordred]

Super just stop, you are causing more problems than its worth. When you have the tensor product of

[math]E_8\otimes E_8[/math] this is the matrix of 8 columns and 8 rows multiplied by 8 columns and 8 rows of which the tensor product of such only shows the irreducible to zero portions. Every entry is multiplied to every other entry.

 

[Vmedvil]

11 minutes ago, Mordred said:

nope far far too low

Oh in qubits, yes I did think you meant binary. '

16777216 I think that is actually E₇ x E₇ , E₈ x E₈ = 10000000000

Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Mordred]

there ya go now that is just 2*8 by 2*8 not (8*8)*(8*8) of which every entry has two possible values 0 and 1.

Edited November 25, 2017 by Mordred

[SuperPolymath]

5 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Super just stop, you are causing more problems than its worth. When you have the tensor product of

E8⊗E8 this is the matrix of 8 columns and 8 rows multiplied by 8 columns and 8 rows of which the tensor product of such only shows the irreducible to zero portions. Every entry is multiplied to every other entry.

 

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

[Mordred]

Then why all the mistakes?

[Vmedvil]

12 minutes ago, Mordred said:

there ya go now that is just 2*8 by 2*8 not (8*8)*(8*8)

Oh, I know why do you think I never want to do a complete cross product on that equation and why wolfram alpha said "Do not understand" when I put for it to cross product it.

Edited November 25, 2017 by Vmedvil

[SuperPolymath]

5 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

Oh, I know why do you think I never want to do a complete cross product on that equation.

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

Edited November 25, 2017 by SuperPolymath

[Mordred]

Unfortunately physics is concerned with all possible paths not just the ones you want. It must account for all to be fully predictive.

1 minute ago, SuperPolymath said:

This is still finite toric geometry. There will always be a variant of you don't apply infinite fractal geometry.

Fractal geometry follows the same rules as the above....