MJ kihara

The equivalence of frequency let's term it Mj or Kihara equivalence....mmm... selfish... 😋. Pliz give the reason for a red tick,think about it is complicated without reasoning.

This is a continuation of ideas that I have posted in this forum a while back with some mathematics and new outlook added to strengthen my arguments.for those not familiar with those ideas it's appropriate they revisit my previous posts in the forum since I will be using some information/diagrams from them,you will have to be patient with this thread. I will use the diagram above as a foundation of my arguments,since am not good at latex, mathematics to Back up the ideas, will be handwritten photos, after all math is math.

".....just as photon/vitual photon pop out of magnetic fields virtual graviton pops out of gravitational fields....." let me take my pill in the speculation side...red pill is certainly bitter . Observation reign supreme, but in this case it's virtual ...due to uncertainty principle,no further questions. It's also good to emphasis that as 'currently/conventionally' known nothing escape from a blackhole to avoid finality and leave room for further research.

Would you like the mystery to be broken down into parts that can be solved or trying to solve the mystery it's a mystery on itself? The wonderfulness of the brain is a mystery that should not be looked at,is what you are implying?

Why can't the impasse be solved by a having a chimeric particle that transition either way...hhhh kinda of gatekeeper....anyway I know it sounds unconventional and belongs to speculation section,apologies for that.

Offer some clarification about that pliz? In the above case where does the choice or decision comes from? I think the act of deciding is by its self part of consciousness...we should not treat consciousness based on our human capacity as the final definition...I think there are various levels of consciousness depending on the amount of awareness and the extent of deciding(how far you can make unrestricted decision).

Thanks for the article,however,am still not getting the way gravitational field is source of gravity....I don't know how to put it....what am trying to say is gravitational field is gravity,i think talking of gravity and gravitational field is the same thing.

I think self coupling and generating itself are two different issues, anyway,am struggling to understand how gravitational field is a source of gravity...Are there examples supported by observation?

The issue of gravity itself gravitating what is it?

Are you sure its not the urge of your brain to exchange and process information that leads you to discuss? You make 'will' appear as if it's some immaterial matter that can be accessed remotely,so that you can have it or not,is that the case?

Where and when should we ever expect to have one or we just wait for the AI to generate one? Frozen...As in time or as stored memory? Should we go with what classic or quantum theories say or with observation made? Recent observations..JWST..is that there might be older galaxies than our current models predict... supposing they had a blackhole then going by your argument that it's eternal we should be expecting observation of super super supermassive blackhole that could have sucked all of us.....I doubt blackhole don't transition back to normal spacetime (average curvature).

Stay tuned.

You cannot create nor destroy energy...I think blackhole is more of energy,that is, enormously packed energy, whose impact induces the gravity that we detect from blackhole. Therefore,blackhole cannot suddenly disappear maybe transition to other energy forms i.e evaporate through Hawking radiation...the distance as experienced by the photon or observer near a black is highly warped.. therefore, photons moves at speed of light near the blackhole,for outside observer the clock appear slower to compensate for invariance of speed of light.

There is a need for a better model/ theory that clarify how and why there is the exchange of 'virtual photon' I think there might be two issues of 'virtual photons' and attraction of oppositely charged particles that are displayed in electromagnetism that makes the definition of virtual particles from Wikipedia,which is somehow valid,seem ambiguous.

Before we look at artificial neural network thinking...how do you know you are thinking,what makes someone conclude thinking is taking place?