Maximum symmetry, infinite relativity. Can someone model this mathematically?

[SuperPolymath]

The right theory of everything may lead us to stable fusion, which can cheaply turn small amounts of lead into smaller amounts of gold, which can then be replicated into large amounts of gold. Who said money doesn't grow on trees? A ToE could tell us how fast future spacecrafts could ever possibly go. A ToE could provide avenues for computation & communication that bypass the speed of light. Such a theory would as much lead to a technological Utopia as Einstein's theory of General Relativity led to the atom bomb that ended all of the catastrophes of global scale warfare many decades ago.

 

To start I had to ask myself a few questions:

 

How do you explain particle states influencing each other clearly violating C with violations in Einstein's relativity?

I think it's less far fetched than a superposition of DS. The smaller you get the stronger gravity's influence. <Planck length >C because C & h are related.

Now, how could there be superluminal communication?

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.livescience.com/27920-quantum-action-faster-than-light.html&ved=0ahUKEwji4Jq7k-XXAhUlUt8KHURYA_IQFghLMAM&usg=AOvVaw2UDSknujRQ4qWThoSA-ujZ&ampcf=1

 

Two possible explanations:

 

A: the quantum interpretation: superposition or non-locality action

 

B: C traverses 1 planck length in 1 planck time, therefore C traverses 1/n planck lengths in 1/n planck times, so any sub-planckian curve with abrupt accelerations will lead to superluminal gravity waves. In teleparallelism (gravity = EM) this can link polarities (particle states) ftl via interactions between adjacent qubit cells. It can also collapse a wave (particle-scattering) into a particle as the masses attract & merge after being brought into close proximity by that which gives any subatomic particle motion, or anything in nature, motion, & that would obviously be expansion in option B. Expansion = wave function, gravity = wave collapse as well. These forces obviously mediated by DS & ADS fluctuating by the value of each other's curve to attain a state of thermodynamic equilibrium. If this is about a boundless plane, the equilibrium never occurs. Translate that into mathematical expressions & you have a Nobel prize.

 

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. I mean, what seems more conceptually sound to you?

 

A: that a subatomic particle, the smallest unit of measurement, is a small expanding universe just like ours because it seems to behave just like our universe as per particle wave duality. And that you can always find smaller objects in nature

 

B: that a subatomic particle has no smaller components, is the mystical building block of nature, & turns into pixy dust as a wave. & that objects cannot be smaller than a Planck length (these are OLD school, like Capernicus, philosophies still taught in today's world).

 

This "microversal cellular automaton interpretation" does not implore superpositions or non-locality (a particle being in multiple places at one time); which to me would be even more far fetched than my interpretation, yet that is the interpretation represented by the standard model. I quote Gerard t'Hooft:

 

"Einstein had difficulties with the relativistic invariance of quantum mechanics (“does

the spooky information transmitted by these particles go faster than light?”). These,

however, are now seen as technical difficulties that have been resolved. It may be consid-

ered part of Copenhagen’s Doctrine, that the transmission of information over a distance

can only take place, if we can identify operators A at space-time point x1 and operators

B at space-time point x2 that do not commute: [A, B] 6= 0 . We now understand that, in

elementary particle theory, all space-like separated observables mutually commute, which

precludes any signalling faster than light. It is a built-in feature of the Standard Model,

to which it actually owes much of its success.

So, with the technical difficulties out of the way, we are left with the more essential

Einsteinian objections against the Copenhagen doctrine for quantum mechanics: it is a

probabilistic theory that does not tell us what actually is going on. It is sometimes even

suggested that we have to put our “classical” sense of logic on hold. Others deny that:

“Keep remembering what you should never ask, while reshaping your sense of logic, and

everything will be fine.” According to the present author, the Einstein-Bohr debate is not

over. A theory must be found that does not force us to redefine any aspect of classical,

logical reasoning.

What Einstein and Bohr did seem to agree about is the importance of the role of an

observer. Indeed, this was the important lesson learned in the 20th century: if something

cannot be observed, it may not be a well-defined concept – it may even not exist at all. We

have to limit ourselves to observable features of a theory. It is an important ingredient

of our present work that we propose to part from this doctrine, at least to some extent:

Things that are not directly observable may still exist and as such play a decisive role

in the observable properties of an object. They may also help us to construct realistic

models of the world.

Indeed, there are big problems with the dictum that everything we talk about must be

observable. While observing microscopic objects, an observer may disturb them, even in

a classical theory; moreover, in gravity theories, observers may carry gravitational fields

that disturb the system they are looking at, so we cannot afford to make an observer

infinitely heavy (carrying large bags full of “data”, whose sheer weight gravitationally

disturbs the environment), but also not infinitely light (light particles do not transmit

large amounts of data at all), while, if the mass of an observer would be “somewhere in between”, this could entail that our theory will be inaccurate from its very inception."

 

Key Terms

 

· Quantum observer/entanglement/eraser/venn diagram paradox

· Teleparallel quantum gravity

· Quantum cellular automaton interpretation

· anti/de sitter space/ADS/CFT duality

·  fractal geometry/scale relativity/special relativity beyond the speed of light

· White Hole/Black Hole

· Higgs field/dark matter/gravity waves

· The cosmological constant/dynamic dark energy/Hawking radiation

· FRBs & the OMG particle

· The transplanckian problem

· Dark Flow/Cosmic Bruising

 

Let's start with the Black Hole. What is it exactly? My theory:

 

Matter with positive dimensions doesn't get turned inside out with the spacetime that enters the event horizon of the black hole, matter cannot pass into perpendicular dimensions, instead the micro black holes within all quasar matter combines with the macro black hole (parallel spacetimes merging in anti desitter space leading to dark energy there).



This is why matter jets are so powerful around black holes, & the source of FRBs & OMG particles (relativistic protons) - the microverses of these relativistic particles don't have any microblack holes to delay expansion at first until they pick them up as they meet other radiation propagating through space. Stripping microverses of their black holes gives you more energy than matter/anti-matter annihilation.

A black hole is a white hole in ADS space (with negative three dimensions). Everything that's contracting in desitter space is expanding in ADS space. So black holes are perpendicular universes that have negative dimensions, so when black holes merge in those perpendicular universes - the direction of expansion inside the inside out dimension of a black hole contracts & the black hole shrinks. That's Hawking radiation for you.

 

Now, let's start with the idea that the smallest objects we can measure (the subatomic world) is a miniature version of the largest objects we can measure (the CMB & the current observable universe), and then apply special relativity to define time & motion in such miniaturized cosmoses. This kills two birds with one stone; for one, it tells us what's beyond the cosmic event horizon, and two, it tells us what's inside of a subatomic particle.

Let's start with the atom:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOHYT5q5lhQ

 

We have this notion of black hole atoms, now suppose that these micro black holes are crucial in the formation of all atoms:



This is an atom with an atomic nucleus composed of one proton. However, most atoms have multiple protons with charge as well as a charge-neutral "neutron" which, unlike said protons, flies apart within 10 minutes when freed from the nucleus. Why? Let's break it down:

 

 

The protons of adjacent atoms feed each other, as the micro black hole is in the process of consuming it's accretion disk; that's negative charge & all material around said nucleus, even the electrons that form, are going inward. Going outward would be positive charge, & that is when the proton has fully consumed it's accretion disk, stripped of it's mass, the matter of the accretion flows back outward in the form of Cherenkov radiation. That is positive charge, & as that proton's BH evaporates, the - proton within the nuclei of adjacent atoms grow. The cycles must be synchronized perfectly or the atoms will annihilate into light. A proton with negative charge will always become positively charged. Now, this is also an example of how quantum entanglement comes about, these atoms are causally linked by micro-gravity. It also solves the anti-matter problem; what annihilation would leave in its wake were rapidly evaporating microversal scale cosmic unit black holes in a pre-CMB, CDM state, just like a big rip. Whatever is pulled back by the expansion generated by BH shrinkage would have to be causally synchronized by gravity, just like all particle pairs. You can have a duodecillion black holes, each with a different spin, if they merge, there's only going to be one spin.

 

 

As you can see here, the neutron is a glorified subatomic pulsar, held together by the collective gravity of the protons. 

 

Distortions in spacetime around black hole atoms change location, dips in the fabric of spacetime elliptically orbiting the micro mother black hole (Planck particle, micro cosmic unit) at the center of the atomic nucleus. These orbital dips in spacetime are hot convergence points in waves where particles form around atomic nuclei.

 

This new picture of microversal cellular automata tells us more about how our universe might operate beyond it's cosmic horizon, id est; dynamical dark energy:

 

 

You have late entropy stage mother black holes increasing the space-time via evaporation surrounding early entropy stage CMB bodies causing the isotropic qg plasma to break apart into the first atoms there. What happens with this new cosmic portion is anisotropic black hole sizes. As the universe section ages macro bh's become larger as they consume mass from matter & micro black holes (the higgs field that gives matter-energy mass & DM) shrink overall until a new late entropy section forms overlapping the previous one where those monster black holes of the previous one have been reduced to micro-bh's. 

Now those 2 sources alone would end in  an omega entropy state if not for source 3, the horizon of the white hole with contour=infinity is constantly absorbing parallel white holes beyond its horizon, continously adding additional energy-matter & space-time. This is the positive approx 2.5 dimensions (fractal geometry which allows the scale relativity Lorentz transformations in this model) that we experience, beyond that is an approx negative 2.5 dimension, these two space-times (de sitter & anti de sitter space) are literally the same but with opposite directions of space-time & negative matter-energy. Anti de sitter space is literally these perpendicular dimensions that give energy-matter mass as space-time gets turned inside out flowing through their event horizons it's curtain is yanked, these black holes of an infinity variety of sizes that occupy literally every point in space is behind the fundamental interactions (gravity, electromagnetic, strong & weak nuclear). This 5 dimensional hypersphere is like a cosmic yin-yang symbol, or an infinitely long snake eating it's own tail.

 

This explains dark flow & cosmic bruising. However, when applied to a microverse, the cosmological constant in accelerated fractional transplanckian spacetime is how radiation propagates through space. Adjacent microverses overlap as they expand, reigniting quark-gluon plasma states, which we observe as particles. I'd look at a photon as a microverse in a hot dense state, or the electron that orbits the micro-SMBH atomic nucleus as a larger micro-plasma sphere with super-micro black holes in it. These little CMBs are gravitational convergence points in subatomic particle waves, which are microverses that are too cool & spread-about to actually see.

Protons or electrons in fact as points where sub-quantum bits in continuous spacetime (such as particle waves) face the greatest compression force (into non-wave particles) within atomic orbits. Apart of what the microverse interpretation entails, is that as space becomes infinitesimal, & time gets contracted nigh-infinitely, matter can assume the exact same forms as it does as space becomes vast & time dilates to a near stand-still (the cosmic event horizon). This is because the ratio between the size of an atom & a galaxy is the same in a microverse as it is in the universe, so time dilation is equitable in exactness & the same forces are experienced by matter on different scales, & the patterns of matter formations become poetically reemergent: 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...The reason we can't see past the cosmic event horizon is because before the CMB, it was slowly converging adjacent universes in a state exactly as ours is now, which would have been outshone by the CMBR that proceeded it.

 

 

Now, let's explain the observer effect, which can also be attributed to the quantum eraser:

 

 

As you can see, the protons with negative charge get heated when compressed into the double slits, this is attributed to the wave function. However, when the mass of the photo-electrons are added to that same proton beam, the negatively charged protons in the double slit get positively charged as the accretion disks get stripped from the protonic micro-BH by the mass of the protons interacting with the photo-electrons behind them causing positively charged protons to become negatively charged.

 

This microversal cellular automaton interpretation is much more versatile than QM, it works in explaining virtually anything in QM. For instance, let's use the quantum venn diagram paradox;

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcqZHYo7ONs

 

Between wave functions, the photons adopt new polarities as they expand through space-time. More polarizing filters=greater variety of polarities. 

 

Now let's look at the 3rd type of microverse: Quark-gluon plasma is the absolute densest state matter can take. We see it in the cores of neutron stars, discs of quasars as matter is folded upon itself by compressing spacetime (gravity/mass/dark matter) around macro black holes, & in the cosmic microwave background radiation. Any denser, & matter is just a macro black hole as there's no space between micro black holes. It's composed of micro quasars with micro black holes at their cores, barely held apart by micro expansion. Unlike vacuum radiation & the atomic world, these microverses are non-anthropic (no stellar eras) because less entropy equates to less complexity. Quark-gluon plasma is the only state of matter composed entirely of microverses that are exclusively the same as itself. Atoms & vacuum radiation will have microverses with atoms, quark-gluon plasma & vacuum radiation within them, quark-gluon plasma is only composed of microverses that are entirely filled with quark-gluon plasma.

Edited December 9, 2017 by SuperPolymath

[swansont]

1 hour ago, SuperPolymath said:

what seems more conceptually sound to you?

!

Moderator Note

This is a science discussion site, so appeals to the fallacy of personal incredulity have no place here. As it stands, this does not measure up to our guidelines for speculations discussions. No model, no testable predictions, no evidence. If that's not fixed, then this will be closed.

 

[SuperPolymath]

18 minutes ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

This is a science discussion site, so appeals to the fallacy of personal incredulity have no place here. As it stands, this does not measure up to our guidelines for speculations discussions. No model, no testable predictions, no evidence. If that's not fixed, then this will be closed.

 

Explain how there's more evidence for, or testable predictions in, non-locality than in this first. Any model can be tested & any well-sensed theory can be modeled (which was what Mordred said he would do if said thread was posted). There was no true evidence for the super-positions in space-time that QM predicted, this is why Einstein opposed it. This doesn't actually violate C, & it doesn't assume the non-commutation of action like in the standard model's version of QE which there's really no evidence for. 

I'll tell you what, move this to trash-can until someone models it. That seems to be the only issue here. 

Edited December 9, 2017 by SuperPolymath

[studiot]

With all that huff and puff do you understand what superposition asserts?

 

It is simply a mathematical shorthand for saying that when two (or more) causes, drivers or activities are present, their effects add up and in particular certain properties combine in a linear fashion according to the normal rules of arithmetic.

This has been used widely from engineering stress analysis to electrical circuit theory to chemical bonding to classical and quantum wave mechanics and many more.

 

It is one of the most field tested proceedures in applied mathematics.

[SuperPolymath]

Quantum interpretation states:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality

This theory states:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_locality#Local_realism

[swansont]

4 hours ago, SuperPolymath said:

Explain how there's more evidence for, or testable predictions in, non-locality than in this first. Any model can be tested & any well-sensed theory can be modeled (which was what Mordred said he would do if said thread was posted). There was no true evidence for the super-positions in space-time that QM predicted, this is why Einstein opposed it. This doesn't actually violate C, & it doesn't assume the non-commutation of action like in the standard model's version of QE which there's really no evidence for. 

I'll tell you what, move this to trash-can until someone models it. That seems to be the only issue here. 

!

Moderator Note

Those would be good questions to ask without superimposing speculation on the discussion. But if you claim these models are wrong, or some alternative is correct, you need to do more.

" I have a hand-wave, can someone model it" isn't a viable strategy.