SuperPolymath

My idea has no wormhole bridging two portions of de sitter space. De sitter space=white hole, anti desitter space = black hole. Parallel universes (white holes) =/= the interaction of adjacent universes in which you refer

It's dynamic dark energy. What's pulling these bosonic adjacent parts of the universe through each other from a big rip into a big crunch are mother black holes shrinking rapidly in a near perfect vacuum after they've flung all matter away pushing these adjacent parts of u together.

Just like particle wave propagation

The universe acts the same at 1.6 x 10^-35 meters as it does at 18x13 billion light years & 1.6 x 10^-(35^35) meters because that's where the forces of gravity balance out to cause energy-mass to behave like a particle-wave

A white holes parallel universe could be a virtual particle that becomes a particle when our universe absorbs it, that would patch the vacuum catastrophe but it also adds new space time to our universe, which contributes to expansion & is a prime source of dark energy.

but a particle wave (entropied solid-state particle) could also be a source of zero point energy like those virtual particles.

Black holes don't spontaneously form or completely disappear as they evaporate. They everywhere because anti de sitter space is perpendicular to de sitter space, black holes are negative dimensions overlapping our positive dimension. Everything that has mass, even a wave in the particle wavelength, is filled with micro black holes. Matter doesn't go into macro black holes, only its micro black holes, the matter jets out with less micro black holes & therefore less mass in it. That's another source of dark energy entirely

The photon sphere of the first "reduction" in a set serves as the event horizon radius for the next reduction, ad infinitum, even if you "only have 4 sets".

You need to set a limit Tsub(uv)Fsub(uv)>0. But we're obviously dealing with interactions a certain level beneath the Planck length in the waves (those trident looking symbols) for the fiber-optic measurement of nx10^4 relating to the Lorentz transformations. How do you find that n without infinite loops? Well, it will be a pretty accurate with that cursive w symbol, or L, or Tsub(uv)Fsub(uv)=1.6x10^-1004 meters or so I'd imagine. The Planck length is 1.6x10^-35.

Now, I know your Tsub(uv)Fsub(uv)=0, but I don't think wolfram can calculate to infinity, while a decimal followed by 1000 zeroes followed by 16 is close enough to zero for an approximate, even if that's not right. Sometimes you have to break the rules, so you'll have to change all the values in the equation to get a calculation.

Look, all you're doing is setting a limit to the Lorentz transformation, whether or not there is actually a limit calculators, therefore math and therefore physics don't mix with infinities. It's a very technical solution to your problems, 10^-1000 meters is close enough to zero & far enough beyond 10^4C to show that if your equation for V of QE is still consistent with 4 orders of magnitude greater than the speed of light all the way down at 10^-1000 m than your model still proves promising for quantum gate communication technologies which has far reaching applications, VAST. Even in the field you study.

5 hours ago, Vmedvil said:

Where to stop the infinite looping around and around the equation you need to add a Radius which we will add the Schwarzchild Radius solved for C^2 of R_s

I had pictured this object (photon sphere around an event horizon) when considering what a black hole relative to the rest of the universe would look like if you turned them both inside out. It was very difficult to imagine. It's a hollow sphere, not quite a white hole. Or, a hypersphere, we're inside the surface of an expanding bubble, we're not within a solid sphere like your typical stellar object. It doesn't have to be infinite, but there's an event horizon filling the bubble of the interior of the event horizon that fills our "bubble". It's an onion with infinite layers, between every layer of anti de sitter space is a layer of space-time that shares our spatial-temporal linearity. So either approx 2.5 dimensions has infinite size. Thing is, even a finite size has infinite time, the volume of your bubble can always smaller so it had no origin point - so that's the infinity loop you need to worry about. Whose to say our scale isn't smaller than the Planck length of a larger "verse", it's more likely we're the wavelength light in someone's microverse. A wavelength has more entropy than a solid-state particle & therefore the most complexity within its inner systems (composed of all 3 types of microverses) than the qg plasma or the atom, that's why it's the most anthropic of the three.

1 hour ago, Vmedvil said:

The Idea of wormholes in large stellar space comes from Einstein and Rosen , which is described like this, which comes from the Schwarzchild Metric, the Kerr Metric does not say that it happens the same way.

 

Couldn't black hole just be an inside-out version if our universe, no throat connecting it to another, very isolated until it merges.

That's what I'd say, no matter can go into it,just the micro bh's in all matter. Space-time can go into it, the curtain of space-time gets reduced around the event horizon as it gets turned inside out. That's the mechanism for gravity (waves that contract space-time). If black holes aren't constantly absorbing micro black holes in the vacuum radiation, they decay rapidly as negative black holes form from the inside out matter-energy inside that event horizon.

Merging black holes & collisions with parallel universes looks exactly the same mathematically (the wormhole with a "throat" between p-branes as gravity pulling negative black holes [our universe & one parallel to it] together in anti de-sitter & vice versa for black holes/d-branes with our gravity pulling them together)as the wormhole metric your using in your model so I'm not stressing about where it differs from my ideas

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

Three posts promoting a pet idea were split off to the Trash. Please, NEVER interject non-mainstream science into a mainstream discussion. We have a Speculations section for a reason.

 

It could become a mainstream model. It explains 4 quantum mechanical effects, 2 anomalies in the CMB, it's a UFT, & it has a mechanism for expansion & mass that covers anything from DE to the Higgs field.

BoT: got that ... (infinity or forever in summation notation) because your TuvFuv transform was 0. Can't be 0.

Or, if you'd prefer, this devilry.

Yeah, set your T_uvF_uv transform to close enough to zero & plug it in as zed for your iterative sets

That sameness is crucial to building the first quantum computer, as I was trying to explain in the pms. The first is only a few million strings across, because that's the limit in processing power for using this + fractal geometry sets to graph the behavior of the particle waves using current computing power. But once you have this quantum computer, you can process information at the rate of something x 10^4 C. Think about what calculations you could then. It would be enough to make a bigger quantum computer, which could make even bigger ones. The implications are profound as I explained in the above link to my theory.

Anyway back to the ... which is infinity in summation notation, the reason that happened was that T_uvF_uv to 0. When you plug this equation into the julia sets, don't do that. They need to be <h (smaller than a planck length) because where dealing with the whole C dilation thing, but only so much so but you need to find out how close to 0 you need to do the T_uvF_uv transform. You'll have to literally have to calculate how far into infinitesimal space you'll need to go for this equation. But you'll get an approximate for the speed of QE which should be consistent with 4 orders of magnitude greater than C, you should, through iterating sets, be able to construct some graphs that will tell you how your observer effect will re-polarize & displace all surrounding particles (again, approximately). That data would be used to construct a tiny quantum network in the lab, get enough of these going & you can construct larger networks which could be used for all sorts of mischief.

On 11/16/2017 at 8:15 PM, Vmedvil said:

 means forever or infinity, which wouldn't describe the universe

Infinite & ageless could most certainly describe the universe. & that's only between 2 & 3 out of 5 dimensions in my theory, & that's just the amount of baryonic matter above the planck length. There's an horizon we can't see beyond. I explain why that is in my theory which I still don't think you've read.

I think you were plugging in for interactions partially beneath the planck length though, in the subplanckian particles of a particle-wave. Or at least where the gravity experiences lorentz transformations. There's infinite interactions occurring between any two points of space in this model, it's just a matter of how minuscule & quick they occur. But the behavior of these interactions is the same. That is, governed by the scale relativity equivalent of gravity wherever C dilates.

On 11/16/2017 at 6:56 AM, Vmedvil said:

In any case, If this doesn't work for as a solution I found a new DDOS packet. *computer implodes* *Processor gets sucked into another dimension instantly*  What are your computers not...... Safe! How do you stack a quantum computer.... This equation. 

Meaning of DDOS.

Wolfram Alpha's Hardware

You're not going to get an exact velocity without doing infinite calculations but we don't need one. We know it's within 4 orders of magnitude of the speed of light. What we need is to predict the position of particles within the waves in order to fully manipulate the atomic world for quantum gate communication methods that would give us an exact velocity. How we do this is we take the output of this operation & use it as the input of next a few million times (& modern computers can be made to do this with your equation) until a graph is formed that predicts quantum positions & therefore falsifies the uncertainty principle. So you can't test this mathematical model if your terms like mass & energy are any specific quantities.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.01619.pdf

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

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

2 minutes ago, Mordred said:

How do you go sideways in time?

Change occuring in the gravity fields manifests as waves, gravity as the spacetime being pulled or pushed by sqe & wqe ripples in all directions in spacetime. Nothing is traveling sideways through time

15 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

No, this still says he is right like I said doesn't violate anything. 

Well in this model gravity is the cause, he just said treat it like probabilities regardless of the cause &, lol, nobody gave the cause much thought after that tbh.

This could do better than probabilities, or remove the uncertainty principal if this is how the physical world operates beyond the planck length (which is pretty much the same as it works above but accelerated)

Suffice it to say I'm not a big fan of Max born, more concerned with treating the symptoms that really caring about how things are actually working in the underlying cause

2 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

No, actually it tends to agree with you Weak and strong QE being like this conductor which still doesn't violate anything still.

The standard model is incomplete or partially accurate is what I meant. How could it not be? It states waves are immaterial probabilities & can't account for DE & DM. At least here we'd have a more logical take on things.

38 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

Where is places the graviton as something very odd Time-Space Radiation with a spin of ω_s² = 4π²f_s²  where E_p = hf_p then E_s = h(ω_s/2π) which does something screwed up change the causality of space where  C is negative if 

Where

Its not screwed up,  Gravity waves propagate in all directions, entanglement effects both both cones on both sides of the observer. You might think some of the math yields odd implications but the standard model is so wrong, so I'd just roll with the implications.

43 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

[math]\frac{ds}{dt} = \frac{1}{\hbar} \frac{c^4}{8 \pi G}\sqrt{<\psi|R_{ij}|\psi>} = \frac{1}{\hbar} \sqrt{<\psi|H|\psi>}[/math]

Was not latex