MJ kihara

What is,if your are not paraphrasing Hamiltonian. There is a place in the thread you used the term 'crystallization'..... rigidity after those ideas crystallize..am sorry for this shallow explanation....remember in physics they are two major fields classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. The one you deem necessary were derived from somewhere. ''Any future observation" that is the main reason why I said your model seems to give answers to already established facts...it can't predict what is made up of dark matter but it will end up giving answers as if dark matter doesn't exist.... Haaaaa I like this explanation🙏....the reason I say answers without because of, where from? Again how do things acquire mass? Important note :we have been trying to follow your language...please try to answer mainstream questions as presented by @ Mordred in a precise way so that we can follow your understanding,I salute him for being the residential expert being patient with all this. Take your time to answer in a format close to mainstream way... don't panic.

That's is the definition of dark matter according to you,therefore, it ceases being dark...by explaining it's nature, confirming it's existence, it no longer become dark...I think the issue not by it being called dark...it's just an indication of physics at that particular era not being able to explain the source of ' missing mass' The fact that 'dark matter and dark energy ' makes up almost 95% of the universe is not a small issue. According to your formulation how does matter or rather how does things acquire mass? Also from your definition above,how do you explain the discrepancy between rotation velocity in the outer of the Galaxy and the inner region? Does gravitational wave/force move at/transmitted at speed of light.?

And some of the added parameters lead to discovery of new particles...when a model give you answers almost immediately(it's more knowledgeable) it regards the intermediate steps are clear(it assume you know...) a good example your model incorporates Hamiltonian,Klein Gordon equations, cosine/sine laws and manipulation of physics units/SI units in a smart way(of geniuses are smart people....i don't know...) to give answers in the shortest way possible, it becomes difficult to predict existence of something unknown. Added parameters leads to experimentation so that they can be confirmed or disregarded...therefore, the said flexibility is an important part of scientific discoveries. The definition of Energy I have is too much controversial,however, I tend to think eventually it generates the mainstream definition, therefore, by default am not against mainstream definitions,however, I don't regard them as fundamental...unlike the author I have been slow to develop the math...the author seems to be on steroids turbocharged by AI.

Meaning dark matter doesn't exist? Are you happy with this definition? Personally I don't regard that as the fundamental definition of energy...since I entered this forum have been using it as the mainstream definition....otherwise,you are the first person to encounter in this forum whose arguments come near what I regard as the fundamental definition of energy.

To decode what he is doing ... We have to look at his own language...to him it appears everything to do with/that is energy boils down to transformations further definitions are artefacts,he is working with minimals. LLM inner/deep layers the way information is processed is sometimes not well understood,there is a possibility it forms structures/models that are very simple after sieving a lot of information, the residues form formulations like the one used by the author....am sensing the danger in a future date when everything will be connected to AI the pressure of these LLMs to give correct answers will lead to corruption of data received through spectroscopy and other other methods connected to computers...anyway, just a worry. What's your physics background? You haven't indicated it in your profile...the way you are handling some terminologies, you seem to have a professional background in physics...if not so, you have had an intensive learning of physics....which one is which? Not to be personal such information can help us understand better your perspective.

Observer A has frame of reference with axis S^1 and S^2 while B has his own frame of reference with axis S^1 and S^2...your relational frame seems to be a universal frame of reference with axis beta and kappa The above two statements to me is not clear...

Energy is the ability to do work...by doing work, transformations are observed... therefore,your defination of energy is the same version as ability to do work. What is the relational framework?... observer A has a co-ordinate system the axis not being X,Y but S^1 and S^2 Every observer has his own reference frame with axis S^1 and S^2. Where do this parameter fit? Is it between the observers or is it within the observer's circle? Subscript X and Y stand for what? S^1- kinematic relations and S^2-gravitational relations....Hamiltonian equals kinetic energy plus potential energy...what you are doing is splitting the Hamiltonian and distributing it's component into axis. Q is equivalent to spacetime interval which is, if am not wrong, the same to all observers therefore invariant. That's partially why I was asking about prior knowledge.

I will try to answer the question when I get to know somehow what you are doing, philosophically they are things I agree with you, however,am wondering how you are getting the answers,why is it possible you are getting the answers and why is it working like that...because if it's true it's working, then the implications are profound... I would like you to answer the question above because it would clarify to us your thinking. There are four fundamental quantities in your formulation/method; 1-Energy...2-Time...3-mass...4-length. Can you briefly explain to us your understanding of those quantities and your intuition about them? From the perspective of your formulation.

The reason I ask that question is that...so far it seems to me your method require prior knowledge that's why maybe you require to cross check your results from people who are aquainted with GR and SR...also how many people so far can use your arguments to get results the way you are doing.. You use signal delay to determine distance..how do you determine where the signal is coming from and how do you determine the delay?

Assuming your methodology was developed prior to SR and GR being realized by Einstein...and assuming SR and GR developed much later..could your methodology lead to practical technological innovations e.g assuming it was like that for like 50 years prior to 1945 could atomic bomb been developed within that time frame?

💤😇 ...You are going overdrive...if you mix consciousness discussion which already is a messy issue, that we are trying to keep in order,with..'no reality'..the head will go pop 🤯. What's your take on phase space and it's connection to physical world?

Your statement is contradictory:...'wave function NOT real'.....'observation/interaction is made to collapse the wave function'.. How does something that is not real collapse? Non locality infact enhances argument of consciousness,it isn't a local thing it's global or rather universal. The person making the measurements does not dictate the outcome even if the results are spread within a certain limit....they are random to the extend you are doing the measurement to know the result.... otherwise, what's the need of measure? Scientific principles were derived after making observations... scientific principles don't do experiments...they might as well be principles of consciousness that we label scientific principle...long before humans wrote down scientific principles,quantum processes and other classical processes e.g planets orbiting stars were taking place.

The same thing will also applies to scalar fields once used to model wavefunction collapse.As long as the scalar field is not a static field but a dynamic one that changes in a probabilistic way. Just an example-if you measure an electron spin to be up spin...wait for twenty minutes do a second measurement a you sure 100% getting spin up state? What is the minimum threshold required for a quantum state to have interaction so that it can change it's state?

Which one is which one? According to you it doesn't evolve but there are always interactions that make it evolve.. Does it have to wait for interactions or does it naturally evolve until you make measurements to know its new state? Am not introducing mystism into probability....I tend to think quantum wave function is distinct from throwing coins and dices...coins and dices don't evolve on themselves and of course they are classical objects. If you put a coin head up in a box you close it and store it in a place that is stable i.e without issues like shaking and rusting..wait for 4 min,40 hours,million years open the box you expect to find head up...for a quantum particle the issue is different,therefore, we can't have the same kind of intuition from the probability calculations from the two situations.

It's weird that it's hidden how Galaxy shapes are just a manifestation of the very nature of fundamental particle composition...of course(fundamental particle) they are considered to be point like...I know it's controversial when I talk a bout fundamental particles composition. And how Galaxy rotation curves are just linked to the very nature of dark matter...as i was learning about a simple harmonic oscillator,just a simple thing like Hooke's law,I was surprised to realize how Galaxy rotation is linked to dark matter more a kin to Hooke's law, with minor adjustments of constant k. Excuse me for all this...I just find it hard to resist commenting...

Can you offer a short explanation how its related to wave function collapse...is can be of great help,to have an alternative view...photons are always moving in a certain direction therefore,vector explanation is more intuitive. Mathematics is the best language we can use to describe what we have measured but by its self it doesn't know what is happening.math it's not an object it's a medium of communication...and of course the best standardized form of communication with established rules and axioms. I just gave you the evidence... It could be appropriate if we start by giving out a list of properties of consciousness....first of all what is that,that make us conclude something is conscious? Just an example to provide clarification...Objects interact using gravity, however,weak it is....can you hand me gravity? Why do we need it. We are trying to bridge the gap...I have realized that as you come from classical physics to quantum physics notations and explanations become more important..if it was a spectrum one end having physical and the other end information...the pointer tends towards the information side,as you go quantum. What came before the other...is it the function or what is happening ?...I tend to think the function is the best thing we invented to outline what is happening.

I considered this approach while self learning about QM wave function and it led to a lot of confusion in my head...I could not get the essence of wave function collapse...until I came across a good explanation based on inner product and the importance of orthogonality. Do this simple thing,it may help you get my approach...it's not the observer (EXTERNAL)making measurements.. whatever...it's we interacting with the observer (INTERNAL)...in this case the definition observer need to be considered carefully...of course observable properties I consider them as conclusions. Once you make measurements wave function collapse occurs and then quantum state evolves...the highest probability outcome is highly considered however an outcome of the lowest probability can still occur...the process is purely random however the process has a freedom go give out it's output...to us 'the observer' outcome...we have to wait for measurements result...however the process seem to have the freedom to throw wherever it wants to us but within the expected result. Really? We are the new comers,consciousness has always been there,according to my thinking . We don't have a choice ...we stumbled on that best explanation,it then happened to explain what's going on and it gives use the best prediction. It depends with wat you consider to be pilot waves...also how actual is phase space. Once you make measurements wave function collapse occurs and then quantum state evolves...the highest probability outcome is highly considered however an outcome of the lowest probability can still occur...the process is purely random however the process has a freedom to give out it's output...to us 'the observer' outcome...we have to wait for measurements result...however the process seem to have the freedom to throw wherever it wants to us but within the expected result. ( Correcting a previous typo, underlined it's not go it's to.)

So narrow minded... I just did it and am not what your have referred to above. Can you provide clarification of what you mean...like how? a mathematical process how? Wave function collapse just happened.

What is the cause of Probability amplitudes,coeffecients and wave function collapse in quantum mechanics...? I tend to think quantum mechanics is an emergent phenomenon...gaze from what ?...mmmm... consciousness!... I mean wave function collapse is not consciousness but a manifestation of consciousness. What do you think about that?

Have been following online lectures on QM so that I can appropriately incorporate it to a theory have been developing...when I start thinking about the link btn what am doing and QM ...I just feel... abnormally heavy sleep...when I transition from GR to what am doing to QM back to what am doing...episodes of mental freeze occurs 😂, it seems fundamental science is a form of intoxication.

I didn't give your a red mark..I don't get any joy out of that..am not a fun of swansont...you have cornered him,that's a great thing👍....However given he is not a specialist on your area of expertise...he has done a great job engaging you...he could have opted to keep quiet...what a good show when two titan lock horns...at least I see with good understanding swansont can be cornered.

Eventually... someone's enemy becomes a fascist...after all,the word is proving to be a good Cliché...TikTok era...finally snoring at night will end up someone be labeled a fascist...why over think the AI is here to think for us....🤣.

From where am, am outside the competing spheres... NATO, Russia, Europe...when it comes to nukes radiation affect every inhabitants of earth.. therefore, My concern...otherwise here we're just spectators...I think a spectator outside the competing spheres has unbiased view, from a vantage point of view, outside of competing spheres. Policy of appeasement,is not applicable in this case,unlike 85 years ago...there is nuclear weapons and satellite imagery(it's almost impossible to creat secret armies and launch mass surprise attack on others without being noted). In one way or the other nukes brings strategic stability to world peace...but it's advisable not to sleep walk into nuclear war coz of our egos...i.e wanting not to appear as if we are week....I think Chinese and indians trading with Russia(buying Russia oil) offers breathing space for Russia, therefore,swaying Russia from idea of using nukes... weakening Russia is more dangerous to world peace than a strong Russia...it can just decide to export it's nuclear tech to every other country...which one is better?

How did we reach here? Talking about nukes as if they were toys...I think it's high time given the modern media..tik tok, Instagram,u-tube and all the others should be alerted prior to a live stream of nukes destroying an island somewhere safe...for the current generation to be reminded what nukes are... What seems to be going on it's a war of cultures... Europe wants it's sphere of influence to be entrenched in Ukraine...Ukraine has a significant Russian speaking group...that Russia doesn't want to let go... lf it let it go,that's a disaster to Russia on a future date... therefore,what Russia is doing is self preservation...from my point of view Russia doesn't need to attack other European states,where Russian speaking population is less significant...what happened to Poland I think it's a reminder of what will happen if Russia get economically choked off completely i.e a response to extremely high secondary tariffs to it's trading partners. I think it's high time for the inhabitants (humans) of earth to appreciate each other's cultures...coz someone may see some other's people leaders as if they are a dictator while others/for them they see that leader as a source/point of stability...the issue of imposing values on others should be a forgotten thing/a thing of the past...what we should be doing is avoiding fragmentation of internet, encourage social media, then let people advertise their values,cultures if something is good human beings have common sense, given enough time they will embrace values and cultures they think it's best for them...at the same time we should not forget international trade has been a source of peace on itself.

When explanation for something lack... emergent becomes an easy answer...the ocean is largely a large aggregate of water molecules how wonderful could it be conscious....or you will say the octopus feel it and communicate with it..hhh...