Non-unifying Geometrized Newton-Cartan Gravity

[Mordred]

So once again you have a different interpretation than what is commonly understood by quantum erasure?

Tell me does anything in your OP match any definition used by standard physics?

I would really hate to see your definition of mass lol

[inSe]

1 minute ago, Mordred said:

Very good now why did the wavelength increase?

Ion clouds dissapitated as the first atoms formed & gathered together to form into the first stars & galaxies, which dispersed.

Are you ever going to get to my equations?

[Mordred]

I am but quite frankly I need to figure out just how little physics you truly understand in order to guide you in the right direction and no that last answer is incorrect.

The answer you gave is a mean free path limit of photons, the wavelength decrease I a result of the universe expansion and is detailed by the cosmological redshift equation.

[latex]1+Z=\frac{\lambda}{\lambda_O}[/latex]

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/C/Cosmological+Redshift

Here is the problem if you don't know the proper meaning behind common terminology any answer I give you to any of your questions becomes meaningless. We simply have no common language to start with.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Mordred

[inSe]

43 minutes ago, Mordred said:

 

The answer you gave is a mean free path limit of photons, 

That has everything to do with the wavelength. Even under current expansion the wavelength of photons is greatly decreased through a medium like crystal. If there had been a modern-like vacuum anywhere in the cmb expansion wouldn't have changed the wavelength within that ion-cloudless gap at all.

If I had said expansion you could have said that was only an indirect consequence. Try your trick questions on someone who doesn't know any better.

Edited April 12, 2018 by inSe

[Mordred]

There is no trick involved. The CMB opacity cleared up at 380.000 years of age from the BB. There is no opacity today interfering with photon path yet from the time of last scattering the wavelength continued to decrease. Your understanding is wrong plain and simple. Why don't you google the term Cosmological redshift if you don't believe me.

here

[latex]{\small\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}\hline T_{Ho} (Gy) & T_{H\infty} (Gy) & S_{eq} & H_{0} & \Omega_\Lambda & \Omega_m\\ \hline 14.4&17.3&3400&67.9&0.693&0.307\\ \hline \end{array}}[/latex] [latex]{\small\begin{array}{|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|} \hline a=1/S&S&z&T (Gy)&R (Gly)&D_{hor}(Gly) \\ \hline 0.001&1090.000&1089.000&0.000373&0.000628&0.056714\\ \hline 0.001&970.069&969.069&0.000454&0.000759&0.063641\\ \hline 0.001&863.334&862.334&0.000551&0.000915&0.071406\\ \hline 0.001&768.343&767.343&0.000668&0.001102&0.080109\\ \hline 0.001&683.804&682.804&0.000810&0.001326&0.089864\\ \hline 0.002&608.566&607.566&0.000979&0.001594&0.100794\\ \hline 0.002&541.606&540.606&0.001183&0.001915&0.113040\\ \hline 0.002&482.014&481.014&0.001428&0.002298&0.126756\\ \hline 0.002&428.979&427.979&0.001722&0.002756&0.142116\\ \hline 0.003&381.779&380.779&0.002074&0.003303&0.159313\\ \hline 0.003&339.773&338.773&0.002496&0.003956&0.178562\\ \hline 0.003&302.388&301.388&0.003001&0.004736&0.200103\\ \hline 0.004&269.117&268.117&0.003606&0.005666&0.224202\\ \hline 0.004&239.507&238.507&0.004329&0.006776&0.251154\\ \hline 0.005&213.154&212.154&0.005194&0.008100&0.281289\\ \hline 0.005&189.701&188.701&0.006228&0.009680&0.314971\\ \hline 0.006&168.829&167.829&0.007463&0.011563&0.352603\\ \hline 0.007&150.253&149.253&0.008937&0.013808&0.394635\\ \hline 0.007&133.721&132.721&0.010698&0.016484&0.441559\\ \hline 0.008&119.008&118.008&0.012800&0.019675&0.493924\\ \hline 0.009&105.913&104.913&0.015309&0.023478&0.552333\\ \hline 0.011&94.260&93.260&0.018302&0.028010&0.617449\\ \hline 0.012&83.889&82.889&0.021873&0.033412&0.690005\\ \hline 0.013&74.659&73.659&0.026132&0.039848&0.770801\\ \hline 0.015&66.444&65.444&0.031211&0.047518&0.860719\\ \hline 0.017&59.133&58.133&0.037266&0.056657&0.960718\\ \hline 0.019&52.627&51.627&0.044487&0.067545&1.071848\\ \hline 0.021&46.837&45.837&0.053094&0.080518&1.195249\\ \hline 0.024&41.683&40.683&0.063355&0.095974&1.332155\\ \hline 0.027&37.097&36.097&0.075584&0.114387&1.483902\\ \hline 0.030&33.015&32.015&0.090158&0.136321&1.651928\\ \hline 0.034&29.383&28.383&0.107528&0.162452&1.837767\\ \hline 0.038&26.150&25.150&0.128224&0.193578&2.043059\\ \hline 0.043&23.272&22.272&0.152887&0.230655&2.269531\\ \hline 0.048&20.712&19.712&0.182274&0.274818&2.519001\\ \hline 0.054&18.433&17.433&0.217283&0.327417&2.793361\\ \hline 0.061&16.405&15.405&0.258995&0.390062&3.094542\\ \hline 0.068&14.600&13.600&0.308686&0.464664&3.424511\\ \hline 0.077&12.993&11.993&0.367873&0.553490&3.785220\\ \hline 0.086&11.564&10.564&0.438378&0.659241&4.178540\\ \hline 0.097&10.291&9.291&0.522342&0.785104&4.606237\\ \hline 0.109&9.159&8.159&0.622337&0.934864&5.069835\\ \hline 0.123&8.151&7.151&0.741396&1.112970&5.570564\\ \hline 0.138&7.254&6.254&0.883106&1.324642&6.109216\\ \hline 0.155&6.456&5.456&1.051751&1.575989&6.685941\\ \hline 0.174&5.746&4.746&1.252327&1.874042&7.300157\\ \hline 0.196&5.114&4.114&1.490772&2.226851&7.950210\\ \hline 0.220&4.551&3.551&1.773969&2.643393&8.633245\\ \hline 0.247&4.050&3.050&2.109877&3.133394&9.344906\\ \hline 0.277&3.605&2.605&2.507705&3.706949&10.078977\\ \hline 0.312&3.208&2.208&2.977691&4.373615&10.827382\\ \hline 0.350&2.855&1.855&3.531250&5.141190&11.579797\\ \hline 0.394&2.541&1.541&4.180384&6.013592&12.323993\\ \hline 0.442&2.261&1.261&4.937174&6.988248&13.046138\\ \hline 0.497&2.013&1.013&5.813076&8.053192&13.731340\\ \hline 0.558&1.791&0.791&6.817286&9.184553&14.365254\\ \hline 0.627&1.594&0.594&7.955449&10.346218&14.935503\\ \hline 0.705&1.419&0.419&9.228712&11.492781&15.432947\\ \hline 0.792&1.263&0.263&10.632280&12.576261&15.853609\\ \hline 0.890&1.124&0.124&12.156498&13.554725&16.198190\\ \hline 1.000&1.000&-0.000&13.787206&14.399932&16.472274\\ \hline 1.122&0.891&-0.109&15.486308&15.092847&16.682257\\ \hline 1.259&0.794&-0.206&17.257193&15.648602&16.841624\\ \hline 1.413&0.708&-0.292&19.084811&16.081339&16.960166\\ \hline 1.585&0.631&-0.369&20.956083&16.410335&17.046787\\ \hline 1.778&0.562&-0.438&22.860235&16.655836&17.109031\\ \hline 1.995&0.501&-0.499&24.788750&16.836447&17.152975\\ \hline 2.239&0.447&-0.553&26.735095&16.967918&17.183327\\ \hline 2.512&0.398&-0.602&28.694196&17.063037&17.203810\\ \hline 2.818&0.355&-0.645&30.662778&17.131233&17.216703\\ \hline 3.162&0.316&-0.684&32.638034&17.180008&17.224075\\ \hline 3.548&0.282&-0.718&34.618055&17.214789&17.227279\\ \hline 3.981&0.251&-0.749&36.601471&17.239540&17.239540\\ \hline 4.467&0.224&-0.776&38.587301&17.257125&17.257125\\ \hline 5.012&0.200&-0.800&40.574846&17.269607&17.269607\\ \hline 5.623&0.178&-0.822&42.563607&17.278458&17.278458\\ \hline 6.310&0.158&-0.842&44.553231&17.284732&17.284732\\ \hline 7.079&0.141&-0.859&46.543466&17.289176&17.289176\\ \hline 7.943&0.126&-0.874&48.534134&17.292324&17.292324\\ \hline 8.913&0.112&-0.888&50.525109&17.294553&17.294553\\ \hline 10.000&0.100&-0.900&52.516301&17.296130&17.296130\\ \hline 11.220&0.089&-0.911&54.507647&17.297246&17.297246\\ \hline 12.589&0.079&-0.921&56.499102&17.298036&17.298036\\ \hline 14.125&0.071&-0.929&58.490634&17.298594&17.298594\\ \hline 15.849&0.063&-0.937&60.482221&17.298988&17.298988\\ \hline 17.783&0.056&-0.944&62.473846&17.299266&17.299266\\ \hline 19.953&0.050&-0.950&64.465499&17.299463&17.299463\\ \hline 22.387&0.045&-0.955&66.457171&17.299601&17.299601\\ \hline 25.119&0.040&-0.960&68.448857&17.299697&17.299697\\ \hline 28.184&0.035&-0.965&70.440552&17.299765&17.299765\\ \hline 31.623&0.032&-0.968&72.432255&17.299812&17.299812\\ \hline 35.481&0.028&-0.972&74.423962&17.299845&17.299845\\ \hline 39.811&0.025&-0.975&76.415673&17.299867&17.299867\\ \hline 44.668&0.022&-0.978&78.407386&17.299882&17.299882\\ \hline 50.119&0.020&-0.980&80.399101&17.299891&17.299891\\ \hline 56.234&0.018&-0.982&82.390817&17.299897&17.299897\\ \hline 63.096&0.016&-0.984&84.382534&17.299901&17.299901\\ \hline 70.795&0.014&-0.986&86.374252&17.299902&17.299902\\ \hline 79.433&0.013&-0.987&88.365970&17.299902&17.299902\\ \hline 89.125&0.011&-0.989&90.357688&17.299902&17.299902\\ \hline 100.000&0.010&-0.990&92.349407&17.299900&17.299900\\ \hline \end{array}}[/latex]

 

Here is the redshift to Hubble radius evolution since CMB last scattering at Z=1100 approximately to today and into the future the row where S=1 is today.

 

 

Edited April 12, 2018 by Mordred

[inSe]

2 hours ago, inSe said:

The di-brane in this three is the fabric of reality that has a positive density medium minus the fabric of reality which has a negative density medium manifested in the form of black holes which exist at every point in space, Cantor's infinity. You can always cram smaller holes inbetween black holes, no matter how small said black holes, because holes curve because they're spherical. You take a simple structure like this, with a simple singular deleterious operation, & iterate it infinitely, but sequentially from the smallest to the largest points of contact between positive & negative density medium, & a universe arises. 

Positive or negative density mediums. The more vague the better. Think of a thermal solid if it ever became equal to 3 dimensions, where time dilates to a standstill. At the 2x dimensions explained above the thermodynamical structure is as complex as anything from the core of a neutron star to tree bark in Earth's atmosphere to the blackshifted radiation of virtual "particles" in the dead of the vacuum of space as devoid as the Bootes void. Which is pretty dynamic.

Honestly, since you cannot (will-not) entertain this concept - it would be impossible for you to address the equations in any case.

[Mordred]

Nothing in that paragraph makes an ounce of sense to any reader let alone any physicist. YOU don't use any standard of definitions so reads as utter garbage.

By your own admission every common physics terminology in the above does not match common definitions yet you cannot provide your definition of the key words I have asked for such as branes as one example

Edited April 12, 2018 by Mordred

[inSe]

23 minutes ago, Mordred said:

There is no trick involved. The CMB opacity cleared up at 380.000 years of age from the BB. There is no opacity today interfering with photon path yet from the time of last scattering the wavelength continued to decrease. Your understanding is wrong plain and simple. Why don't you google the term Cosmological redshift if you don't believe me.

here

{\small\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}\hline T_{Ho} (Gy) & T_{H\infty} (Gy) & S_{eq} & H_{0} & \Omega_\Lambda & \Omega_m\\ \hline 14.4&17.3&3400&67.9&0.693&0.307\\ \hline \end{array}} {\small\begin{array}{|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|} \hline a=1/S&S&z&T (Gy)&R (Gly)&D_{hor}(Gly) \\ \hline 0.001&1090.000&1089.000&0.000373&0.000628&0.056714\\ \hline 0.001&970.069&969.069&0.000454&0.000759&0.063641\\ \hline 0.001&863.334&862.334&0.000551&0.000915&0.071406\\ \hline 0.001&768.343&767.343&0.000668&0.001102&0.080109\\ \hline 0.001&683.804&682.804&0.000810&0.001326&0.089864\\ \hline 0.002&608.566&607.566&0.000979&0.001594&0.100794\\ \hline 0.002&541.606&540.606&0.001183&0.001915&0.113040\\ \hline 0.002&482.014&481.014&0.001428&0.002298&0.126756\\ \hline 0.002&428.979&427.979&0.001722&0.002756&0.142116\\ \hline 0.003&381.779&380.779&0.002074&0.003303&0.159313\\ \hline 0.003&339.773&338.773&0.002496&0.003956&0.178562\\ \hline 0.003&302.388&301.388&0.003001&0.004736&0.200103\\ \hline 0.004&269.117&268.117&0.003606&0.005666&0.224202\\ \hline 0.004&239.507&238.507&0.004329&0.006776&0.251154\\ \hline 0.005&213.154&212.154&0.005194&0.008100&0.281289\\ \hline 0.005&189.701&188.701&0.006228&0.009680&0.314971\\ \hline 0.006&168.829&167.829&0.007463&0.011563&0.352603\\ \hline 0.007&150.253&149.253&0.008937&0.013808&0.394635\\ \hline 0.007&133.721&132.721&0.010698&0.016484&0.441559\\ \hline 0.008&119.008&118.008&0.012800&0.019675&0.493924\\ \hline 0.009&105.913&104.913&0.015309&0.023478&0.552333\\ \hline 0.011&94.260&93.260&0.018302&0.028010&0.617449\\ \hline 0.012&83.889&82.889&0.021873&0.033412&0.690005\\ \hline 0.013&74.659&73.659&0.026132&0.039848&0.770801\\ \hline 0.015&66.444&65.444&0.031211&0.047518&0.860719\\ \hline 0.017&59.133&58.133&0.037266&0.056657&0.960718\\ \hline 0.019&52.627&51.627&0.044487&0.067545&1.071848\\ \hline 0.021&46.837&45.837&0.053094&0.080518&1.195249\\ \hline 0.024&41.683&40.683&0.063355&0.095974&1.332155\\ \hline 0.027&37.097&36.097&0.075584&0.114387&1.483902\\ \hline 0.030&33.015&32.015&0.090158&0.136321&1.651928\\ \hline 0.034&29.383&28.383&0.107528&0.162452&1.837767\\ \hline 0.038&26.150&25.150&0.128224&0.193578&2.043059\\ \hline 0.043&23.272&22.272&0.152887&0.230655&2.269531\\ \hline 0.048&20.712&19.712&0.182274&0.274818&2.519001\\ \hline 0.054&18.433&17.433&0.217283&0.327417&2.793361\\ \hline 0.061&16.405&15.405&0.258995&0.390062&3.094542\\ \hline 0.068&14.600&13.600&0.308686&0.464664&3.424511\\ \hline 0.077&12.993&11.993&0.367873&0.553490&3.785220\\ \hline 0.086&11.564&10.564&0.438378&0.659241&4.178540\\ \hline 0.097&10.291&9.291&0.522342&0.785104&4.606237\\ \hline 0.109&9.159&8.159&0.622337&0.934864&5.069835\\ \hline 0.123&8.151&7.151&0.741396&1.112970&5.570564\\ \hline 0.138&7.254&6.254&0.883106&1.324642&6.109216\\ \hline 0.155&6.456&5.456&1.051751&1.575989&6.685941\\ \hline 0.174&5.746&4.746&1.252327&1.874042&7.300157\\ \hline 0.196&5.114&4.114&1.490772&2.226851&7.950210\\ \hline 0.220&4.551&3.551&1.773969&2.643393&8.633245\\ \hline 0.247&4.050&3.050&2.109877&3.133394&9.344906\\ \hline 0.277&3.605&2.605&2.507705&3.706949&10.078977\\ \hline 0.312&3.208&2.208&2.977691&4.373615&10.827382\\ \hline 0.350&2.855&1.855&3.531250&5.141190&11.579797\\ \hline 0.394&2.541&1.541&4.180384&6.013592&12.323993\\ \hline 0.442&2.261&1.261&4.937174&6.988248&13.046138\\ \hline 0.497&2.013&1.013&5.813076&8.053192&13.731340\\ \hline 0.558&1.791&0.791&6.817286&9.184553&14.365254\\ \hline 0.627&1.594&0.594&7.955449&10.346218&14.935503\\ \hline 0.705&1.419&0.419&9.228712&11.492781&15.432947\\ \hline 0.792&1.263&0.263&10.632280&12.576261&15.853609\\ \hline 0.890&1.124&0.124&12.156498&13.554725&16.198190\\ \hline 1.000&1.000&-0.000&13.787206&14.399932&16.472274\\ \hline 1.122&0.891&-0.109&15.486308&15.092847&16.682257\\ \hline 1.259&0.794&-0.206&17.257193&15.648602&16.841624\\ \hline 1.413&0.708&-0.292&19.084811&16.081339&16.960166\\ \hline 1.585&0.631&-0.369&20.956083&16.410335&17.046787\\ \hline 1.778&0.562&-0.438&22.860235&16.655836&17.109031\\ \hline 1.995&0.501&-0.499&24.788750&16.836447&17.152975\\ \hline 2.239&0.447&-0.553&26.735095&16.967918&17.183327\\ \hline 2.512&0.398&-0.602&28.694196&17.063037&17.203810\\ \hline 2.818&0.355&-0.645&30.662778&17.131233&17.216703\\ \hline 3.162&0.316&-0.684&32.638034&17.180008&17.224075\\ \hline 3.548&0.282&-0.718&34.618055&17.214789&17.227279\\ \hline 3.981&0.251&-0.749&36.601471&17.239540&17.239540\\ \hline 4.467&0.224&-0.776&38.587301&17.257125&17.257125\\ \hline 5.012&0.200&-0.800&40.574846&17.269607&17.269607\\ \hline 5.623&0.178&-0.822&42.563607&17.278458&17.278458\\ \hline 6.310&0.158&-0.842&44.553231&17.284732&17.284732\\ \hline 7.079&0.141&-0.859&46.543466&17.289176&17.289176\\ \hline 7.943&0.126&-0.874&48.534134&17.292324&17.292324\\ \hline 8.913&0.112&-0.888&50.525109&17.294553&17.294553\\ \hline 10.000&0.100&-0.900&52.516301&17.296130&17.296130\\ \hline 11.220&0.089&-0.911&54.507647&17.297246&17.297246\\ \hline 12.589&0.079&-0.921&56.499102&17.298036&17.298036\\ \hline 14.125&0.071&-0.929&58.490634&17.298594&17.298594\\ \hline 15.849&0.063&-0.937&60.482221&17.298988&17.298988\\ \hline 17.783&0.056&-0.944&62.473846&17.299266&17.299266\\ \hline 19.953&0.050&-0.950&64.465499&17.299463&17.299463\\ \hline 22.387&0.045&-0.955&66.457171&17.299601&17.299601\\ \hline 25.119&0.040&-0.960&68.448857&17.299697&17.299697\\ \hline 28.184&0.035&-0.965&70.440552&17.299765&17.299765\\ \hline 31.623&0.032&-0.968&72.432255&17.299812&17.299812\\ \hline 35.481&0.028&-0.972&74.423962&17.299845&17.299845\\ \hline 39.811&0.025&-0.975&76.415673&17.299867&17.299867\\ \hline 44.668&0.022&-0.978&78.407386&17.299882&17.299882\\ \hline 50.119&0.020&-0.980&80.399101&17.299891&17.299891\\ \hline 56.234&0.018&-0.982&82.390817&17.299897&17.299897\\ \hline 63.096&0.016&-0.984&84.382534&17.299901&17.299901\\ \hline 70.795&0.014&-0.986&86.374252&17.299902&17.299902\\ \hline 79.433&0.013&-0.987&88.365970&17.299902&17.299902\\ \hline 89.125&0.011&-0.989&90.357688&17.299902&17.299902\\ \hline 100.000&0.010&-0.990&92.349407&17.299900&17.299900\\ \hline \end{array}}

 

Here is the redshift to Hubble radius evolution since CMB last scattering at Z=1100 approximately to today and into the future the row where S=1 is today.

 

 

Dude, the wavelength of photons has redshifted because the opacity interference in photon paths has cleared up. It has cleared up due to the last scattering. The last scattering was due to expansion. What part of indirect consequence are you playing dumb about/spamming over with page filling charts???

8 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Nothing in that paragraph makes an ounce of sense to any reader let alone any physicist. YOU don't use any standard of definitions so reads as utter garbage

Explain why. Is there a reason it doesn't make sense? 

[Mordred]

no no no the surface of last scattering occurred at Z=1100 google it for Petes sake it is a state of thermodynamic equilibrium when electrons first started combining to form atoms. Redshift still occurs today even though our universe today is not in a state of thermodynamic equilibrium

here is a basic entry article

https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Glossary/Essay_lss.html

to quote

"Although the surface of last scattering has a temperature of 3000 K, the cosmic microwave background photons now have a temperature of about 3 K. This factor-of-1000 reduction in temperature is the result of the factor-of-1000 expansion between the time the photons were emitted and now. The photons have cooled and become redshifted as a result of the expansion of the Universe. For example, when the Universe is three times bigger than it is now, the CMB will have a temperature of about 1 K. "

Edited April 12, 2018 by Mordred

[inSe]

Or is it that you refuse to make sense of it?

 

I'm well aware as to the motives behind burrying any realistic form of Unified Field Oscillations beneath a century of statistical probability.

1 minute ago, Mordred said:

no no no the surface of last scattering occurred at Z=1100 google it for Petes sake it is a state of thermodynamic equilibrium when electrons first started combining to form atoms. Redshift still occurs today even though our universe today is not in a state of thermodynamic equilibrium

here is a basic entry article

https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Glossary/Essay_lss.html

IIRC that event occurs AFTER the opacity interference that were these massive clouds of ions clears up

[Mordred]

How can I make sense of something when its apparent you don't even understand any of the physics involved in any of the terminology you mentioned?????

 

You don't have the same definition for branes, quantum erasure, dimension etc try learning the real physics involved instead of made up garbage

Edited April 12, 2018 by Mordred

[inSe]

8 minutes ago, Mordred said:

" as a ** result "

*INDIRECT*

[Mordred]

Doesn't address the problem of the made up garbage with non standard definition on any key word due to your lack of knowledge on the recognized physics involved in any theory you mentioned. You tried to apply Newton-Cartan theory which you don't understand.

 You mentioned String theory terminology without knowing the proper definitions. You tried mentioning quantum erasure but that involved probability amplitudes of wavefunctions. I could keep going but this is beginning to bore me. Here is a news flash

a D(d=0) brane is a particle, a D(d=1) brane is a string, a D(d=2 brane) is a plane or membrane. the lower case d can be upwards to 26 dimensions all of which follows the rules of mathematics as an "independent variable." just as length of an object can change without affecting the width. these are independent spatial dimensions.

However you didn't know any of this did you, you simly invoked cool sounding words to make your article sound impressive. That might fool a layperson but it won't fool any physicist

Edited April 12, 2018 by Mordred

[inSe]

On 4/12/2018 at 1:04 AM, Mordred said:

Doesn't address the problem of the made up garbage with non standard definition

It does matter that I was right in saying that the dissipation of the ion clouds was culminated by redshift. That was the DIRECT cause for redshift.

It DOES matter that you said that was wrong, giving the INDIRECT cause as expansion.

on any key word due to your lack of knowledge on the recognized physics involved in any theory you mentioned. You tried to apply Newton-Cartan theory which you don't understand.

 You mentioned String theory terminology without knowing the proper definitions. You tried mentioning quantum erasure but that involved probability amplitudes of wavefunctions. I could keep going but this is beginning to bore me. Here is a news flash

a D(d=0) brane is a particle, a D(d=1) brane is a string, a D(d=2 brane) is a plane or membrane. the lower case d can be upwards to 26 dimensions all of which follows the rules of mathematics as an "independent variable." just as length of an object can change without affecting the width. these are independent spatial dimensions.

However you didn't know any of this did you, you simly invoked cool sounding words to make your article sound impressive. That might fool a layperson but it won't fool any physicist

A brane, the mathematical term, is not intrinsically string theory. It's intrinsically a word meaning width times height times depth in geometry. So I can apply it to ANY interpretation

 Especially when the interpretation builds rudimentary equations that predict the exact same values that standard interpretations equations for black evaporation rates and quantum entangling velocities under a completely different axiomatic syntax of the physical.

This interpration was applied, in the OP, to equations which you are still dancing around with irrelevant distractions like whether or not I fathomed the physics in a video, so it can be applied to a geodesic. All I need is tensor calculus, tensor calculus, and the definitions of relevant physics symbols most of which aren't even used in the standard model

9 minutes ago, inSe said:

 

Quote

on any key word due to your lack of knowledge on the recognized physics involved in any theory you mentioned. You tried to apply Newton-Cartan theory which you don't understand.

 You mentioned String theory terminology without knowing the proper definitions. You tried mentioning quantum erasure but that involved probability amplitudes of wavefunctions. I could keep going but this is beginning to bore me. Here is a news flash

a D(d=0) brane is a particle, a D(d=1) brane is a string, a D(d=2 brane) is a plane or membrane. the lower case d can be upwards to 26 dimensions all of which follows the rules of mathematics as an "independent variable." just as length of an object can change without affecting the width. these are independent spatial dimensions.

However you didn't know any of this did you, you simly invoked cool sounding words to make your article sound impressive. That might fool a layperson but it won't fool any physicist

A brane, the mathematical term, is not intrinsically string theory. It's intrinsically a word meaning width times height times depth in geometry. So I can apply it to ANY interpretation

 Especially when the interpretation builds rudimentary equations that predict the exact same values that standard interpretations equations for black evaporation rates and quantum entangling velocities under a completely different axiomatic syntax of the physical.

This interpration was applied, in the OP, to equations which you are still dancing around with irrelevant distractions like whether or not I fathomed the physics in a video, so it can be applied to a geodesic. All I need is tensor calculus, tensor calculus, and the definitions of relevant physics symbols most of which aren't even used in the standard model

[Mordred]

Well its your model, no one will do the work for you particularly since its poorly defined mathematically.

 Little hint try applying a coordinate system and go from there. I recommend polar coordinates. You will need to define properly and with proper terminology your model if you ever hope to get it off the ground.

[inSe]

On 4/13/2018 at 5:33 PM, Mordred said:

Well its your model, no one will do the work for you particularly since its poorly defined mathematically.

 Little hint try applying a coordinate system and go from there. I recommend polar coordinates. You will need to define properly and with proper terminology your model if you ever hope to get it off the ground.

Good, you concede via omission that the dispersion of the clouds of ion gas was directly culminated by the redshift of the photon vacuum radiation. I know my astrophysics.

 

Back on topic:

So I'm thinking in order to turn my OP into a geodesic we take a koch snowflake, iterate it (600 billion light years over ten to the power of negative thirty five meters) times. Take each triangle and turn them into cones. Take the circles at the base of the cones and transform them into spheres. Turn half of the spheres inside out

now we have it so they make contact with a parallel inversed copy of this operation at the highest iteration & conduct a branar cancellation where outside in sphere meets inside out sphere. That's your coordinate system. Assuming space, time, matter & energy are apart of one continuum, cancelled by a negative continuum.

You would need to connect koch snowflakes first, do this for the inversed parallel operations:

Fold that into a sphere. This accounts for every 360 degree angle frame drag of the brane built from the original singular Koch snowflake representing a cosmos that we can only observe 1/45th of. You notice things only rotate in a phi fashion

Edited April 25, 2018 by inSe

[inSe]

Superluminal synchronization of inverse particle spins in this scenario occurs by adding the velocity in which half of the gravity wave propagates from the relativistic particle as it crosses paths with like particles with perpendicular trajectories.

So we need granular coordinates like that for these kinds of non-vanishing classical gravitational components to wave through.

[Mordred]

No I didn't concede anything by that statement. Without proper modelling and proper terminology it won't go anywhere. Its your choice to apply the advise given and have a chance of succes or ignore it and most likely fail

38 minutes ago, inSe said:

Superluminal synchronization of inverse particle spins in this scenario occurs by adding the velocity in which half of the gravity wave propagates from the relativistic particle as it crosses paths with like particles with perpendicular trajectories.

So we need granular coordinates like that for these kinds of non-vanishing classical gravitational components to wave through.

Umm what ? this makes no sense

Edited April 25, 2018 by Mordred

[inSe]

6 hours ago, Mordred said:

 

Umm what ? this makes no sense

That's because you have still failed to read my OP. Non-locality isn't accepted by every physicist. I had nearly a dozen papers in my OP discussing non-instantaneous particle entanglement which would undoubtedly imply Unified Field Oscillations:

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04/einstein-s-spooky-action-distance-spotted-objects-almost-big-enough-see see how the second method would be used for unification.

Do you know that we rather recently achieved rudimentary signalling via what they think is ESP?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2018-04-quantum-physicists-entanglement.amp

My op is non-unifying gravity, because there is no non-locality, mechanics is all classical. Turtles all the way down, no need for anything to be unified.

6 hours ago, Mordred said:

No I didn't concede anything by that statement. 

You're not refuting the direct cause for redshift. Those photon wavelengths went from orange to red the instant the clouds of ion gas that filled the early universe dissipated, that was my answer for "why did the wavelength increase". Expansion caused those ion clouds to expand. So you falsely accused my answer as being wrong, I would appreciate it if you'd just admit that and be a little humble.

Edited April 26, 2018 by inSe

[Mordred]

I don't see any reason to change my previous replies yet. Keep trying yes expansion is involved in gravitational redshift. This will occur regardless of the presence of ion clouds or not. What of it ?

On 11/04/2018 at 10:35 PM, Mordred said:

I am but quite frankly I need to figure out just how little physics you truly understand in order to guide you in the right direction and no that last answer is incorrect.

The answer you gave is a mean free path limit of photons, the wavelength decrease I a result of the universe expansion and is detailed by the cosmological redshift equation.

1+Z=λλO

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/C/Cosmological+Redshift

Here is the problem if you don't know the proper meaning behind common terminology any answer I give you to any of your questions becomes meaningless. We simply have no common language to start with.

As stated here. Mean free path has nothing to do with redshift 

Edited April 26, 2018 by Mordred

[Strange]

8 hours ago, inSe said:

Do you know that we rather recently achieved rudimentary signalling via what they think is ESP?

No. Do you have any evidence of this? 

[inSe]

5 hours ago, Mordred said:

I don't see any reason to change my previous replies yet. Keep trying yes expansion is involved in gravitational redshift. This will occur regardless of the presence of ion clouds or not. What of it ?

As stated here. Mean free path has nothing to do with redshift 

 

 

"Wavelength depends on the medium (for example, vacuum, air, or water) " -wavelength /wiki/

That is what redirecting photons does, it shortens their wavelengths. You didn't know that?

A: Expansion is occurring faster now and no light in Earth's atmosphere is being redshifted

B: Earth's atmosphere interrupts the photon paths to alter their wavelengths less than the ion clouds in the CMB did

C: Redshift was immediately culminated by the decay of the clouds of ion gas that both occured simultaneously before before the last scattering 

5 hours ago, Strange said:

No. Do you have any evidence of this? 

Maybe you quote the link I put underneath that sentence as well. 

[swansont]

5 minutes ago, inSe said:

"Wavelength depends on the medium (for example, vacuum, air, or water) " -wavelength /wiki/

That is what redirecting photons does, it shortens their wavelengths. You didn't know that?

For some kinds of inelastic scattering, but you need to have a mechanism to add energy, because shorter wavelengths have more energy. For other types of scattering, the wavelength increases. And there's elastic scattering.

 

[Strange]

51 minutes ago, inSe said:

Maybe you quote the link I put underneath that sentence as well. 

I wondered if that was supposed to be relevant. But it doesn't appear to say anything about "signalling" or ESP.

[inSe]

53 minutes ago, Strange said:

I wondered if that was supposed to be relevant. But it doesn't appear to say anything about "signalling" or ESP.

It says a lot about quantum computing. Because they were "able to address and read out every single quantum bit individually" which is the whole point behind why ESP signaling is thought to be impossible because it supposedly can't be read/measured out without changing the whole system effecting entangled states. This WAS accomplished in the lab only less than month for only 20 atoms after almost 100 years of knowing about the phenomenon.

The fact that they can measure ESP throughout this line of 20 atoms without altering the ESP which had been measured fits with what I said ESP is. Which is the collective gws of of electrons with a perpendicular trajectory (like a cross) passing through that string of 20 atoms with the velocity at which gws propagate (micro c) plus the velocity of an electron (c/600 something) multiplied by distance divided by the dilation of time as space covered by collective gws increases. The actual equation is in my OP and does yield a velocity within 4 orders of magnitude greater than speed of light, which fits with measurent of ESP s velocity

Edited April 26, 2018 by inSe