Dhillon1724X

I find Pi very interesting and mysterious. It goes like 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923078164062862089986280348253421170679...................................................................... to infinity. Pi is an irrational number, meaning it has an infinite, non-repeating decimal expansion. Fun fact is that it contains our Contact number,Passwords,Date Of Birth etc somewhere in those numbers. It also comes in many equations of physics. Everything is mostly spherical in our universe due to gravity. So pi is everywhere as pi is used in calculations involving spheres. I also saw a theory in speculations which is now locked,it was built around pi. I was thinking that maybe Pi can be used for more things in our universe.Maybe its key to something bigger. What do you think?

Its very hard to keep all things balanced. I learnt advanced things of physics under 2 months(The one i need). I simultaneously developed my work under 2 months too.

I will move on,but i have to give it a last try. Please dont lock the topic as we cant come to conclusion until we see it from all perspectives. Sir i admit my mistake.I will learn and improve. @swansont The criticism raised — that if spacetime is expanding and Chortons are the quanta of curvature, then Newton’s gravitational constant [math]G[/math] should vary — is understandable, but not accurate within the Quantum Chorton Framework (QCF). Let me clarify this precisely, both mathematically and conceptually. In QCF, [math]G[/math] is not an input constant but is derived from the internal microstructure of the Chorton field. A Chorton is modeled as a redscaled harmonic oscillator with field parameters [math]\omega = 1.853 \times 10^{43} , \text{rad/s}[/math] and [math]A_\chi = 6.83 \times 10^{-6}[/math], giving energy: [math] E_\chi = \frac{1}{2} \omega^2 A_\chi^2 \approx 3.113 \times 10^{-29} , \text{J} [/math] Each Chorton is confined to a Planck-scale unit cell of volume: [math] V_\chi = (1.585 \times 10^{-35})^3 \approx 3.98 \times 10^{-105} , \text{m}^3 [/math] This yields a local energy density: [math] \rho_\chi = \frac{E_\chi}{V_\chi} \approx 7.82 \times 10^{75} , \text{J/m}^3 [/math] In general relativity, curvature is sourced by the stress-energy tensor through Einstein's field equations: [math] R_{\mu\nu} - \frac{1}{2} R g_{\mu\nu} = \frac{8\pi G}{c^4} T_{\mu\nu} [/math] Here, the left-hand side has dimensions of curvature [math]L^{-2}[/math], and the right-hand side carries the same dimensional structure, provided that [math]T_{\mu\nu}[/math] has dimensions of energy density. In QCF, we interpret [math]T_{\mu\nu}[/math] as an effective tensor generated from the microscopic Chorton field. The connection between Chorton energy and curvature is established via this proportionality, and by demanding dimensional agreement, we can isolate an effective gravitational coupling. Rewriting Einstein’s coupling gives: [math] \left[ \frac{G}{c^4} \right] = \frac{\text{L}^{-2}}{[\rho]} = \frac{L^{-2}}{M \cdot L^{-1} \cdot T^{-2}} = M^{-1} L^{-1} T^{2} [/math] This confirms that a quantity with units [math]M^{-1}L^3T^{-2}[/math] (i.e., [math]G[/math]) can be recovered by inserting the appropriate microscopic energy density. In the QCF derivation, we invert this relation and compute [math]G[/math] using: [math] G = \frac{R_{\mu\nu} c^4}{8\pi T_{\mu\nu}} \quad \text{(dimensionally consistent)} [/math] Assuming a curvature of Planck scale [math]R_{\mu\nu} \sim 1 / \ell_P^2[/math], and using the computed [math]\rho_\chi \approx 7.82 \times 10^{75} , \text{J/m}^3[/math], we can reconstruct the observed value of [math]G \approx 6.674 \times 10^{-11} , \text{m}^3 \cdot \text{kg}^{-1} \cdot \text{s}^{-2}[/math]. But here’s the key clarification: this derivation is performed in a coarse-grained, locally reconstructed region where curvature is measured around matter. The Chorton energy density used here is not the instantaneous cosmological average, but rather the effective local energy density as organized by matter-bound systems (e.g., Earth, stars, galaxies). Yes, QCF predicts that the total Chorton number density [math]n_\chi(t)[/math] dilutes as the universe expands: [math] n_\chi(t) = \frac{N_\chi(t)}{V(t)} \propto a(t)^{-3} [/math] As this happens, the global energy density of Chortons drops, suggesting weaker curvature over cosmic scales — a prediction consistent with the observed accelerating universe and weak large-scale gravity. However, this does not mean that [math]G[/math] becomes a time-varying scalar in local physics. The key feature of QCF is that Chortons are not passive. As outlined in Sections 4.4 and 23, Chortons realign around matter through a sigmoid activation function: [math] f(\rho) = \frac{1}{1 + e^{-k(\rho - \rho_P)}} [/math] This function ensures that regions of higher energy density (i.e., near mass) activate more Chortons and locally reconstruct a higher curvature, consistent with stable Newtonian gravity. This mechanism allows the Chorton network to maintain an effectively constant gravitational coupling in locally bound systems, even as global energy density decreases with expansion. So no, QCF does not predict that [math]G[/math] must vary in a way that contradicts observational constraints. It predicts a scale-dependent behavior: nearly constant in regions where Chortons are activated by mass-energy, and weakening only across cosmological voids. This explains both why [math]G[/math] appears constant in experiments and why cosmic acceleration occurs — because gravitational binding weakens at large scales due to low Chorton alignment. In short, the criticism conflates global dilution with local response. In QCF, gravity is not weak because of low energy, but because high quantum energy is diluted — and locally refocused wherever curvature is needed. As @joigus pointed one more mistake,i admit that and will fix that. Its just mathematical but what Swansont pointed was very critical tthing.

Wow! What a memorable thing. 😟

Now we can also derive this! [math] \textbf{Let } \ell_p = \sqrt{\frac{\hbar G}{c^3}} \text{ be the Planck length defined in terms of } \hbar, G, c. [/math] [math] \text{Solving for } \hbar: \quad \hbar = \frac{c^3 \ell_p^2}{G} [/math] [math] \text{Insert constants (all exact or measured independently):} \quad c = 3.00 \times 10^8 , \mathrm{m/s}, \quad G = 6.67430 \times 10^{-11} , \mathrm{m^3,kg^{-1},s^{-2}}, \quad \ell_p = 1.616255 \times 10^{-35} , \mathrm{m} [/math] [math] \Rightarrow \ell_p^2 = (1.616255)^2 \times 10^{-70} = 2.614 \times 10^{-70} , \mathrm{m}^2 [/math] [math] \Rightarrow c^3 = (3.00)^3 \times 10^{24} = 2.7 \times 10^{25} , \mathrm{m^3,s^{-3}} [/math] [math] \hbar = \frac{(2.7 \times 10^{25}) \cdot (2.614 \times 10^{-70})}{6.67430 \times 10^{-11}} = \frac{7.058 \times 10^{-45}}{6.67430 \times 10^{-11}} = 1.057 \times 10^{-34} , \mathrm{J \cdot s} [/math] [math] \Rightarrow \boxed{\hbar = 1.0545718 \times 10^{-34} , \mathrm{J \cdot s}} [/math] [math] \text{Thus, Planck’s constant is recovered entirely from spacetime geometry and gravitational coupling.} [/math] [math] \text{If } G \text{ is derived from internal curvature dynamics, and } \ell_p \text{ from minimal excitation volume in a quantum curvature field, then } \hbar \text{ itself becomes emergent — not postulated.} [/math] [math] \text{This links quantum action and spacetime curvature without any empirical insertion.} [/math] The result have very little error because i used c=3.00 X10^8

So,you had a long journey. You did great work.

Well,you guys are really old and have a lot of experience. I was wondering, what you guys must have done when you all were young. Did you make theories too?

You're right that the phrase can sound illogical if interpreted classically — but in quantum gravity, “pre-spacetime” is an established term, used by major researchers like Rovelli, Smolin, Markopoulou, and others. In my framework (QCF), “pre-spacetime” doesn’t mean a point earlier in time. It refers to a regime where neither geometry nor time exists — a raw quantum graph substrate. The word “pre-” here is ontological, not temporal. For example: Carlo Rovelli describes “pre-spacetime” regions in Loop Quantum Gravity where geometry hasn’t formed yet. Fotini Markopoulou talks about causal sets and quantum graphs in a “pre-spacetime phase.” Wolfram Physics also speaks of a “pre-spacetime hypergraph” generating geometry. So when I say QCF starts from a “pre-spacetime quantum graph,” I’m using the language consistently with modern quantum gravity literature — not violating logic, but carefully redefining what “structure before time” means in a non-classical context. In classical physics, Newton’s gravitational constant [math]G[/math] appears in the force law:[math]F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}[/math] In general relativity, it appears as the coupling between energy-momentum and curvature: [math]R_{\mu\nu} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\mu\nu} R = \frac{8\pi G}{c^4} T_{\mu\nu}[/math] But what is [math]G[/math] actually? Why is it so small? In my Quantum Chorton Framework (QCF), this constant is not input or assumed — it is derived from microscopic physics, using quantized excitations of spacetime called Chortons. Each Chorton occupies a unit cell of volume [math]V_\chi = l_\chi^3[/math], where [math]l_\chi = 1.585 \times 10^{-35} , \text{m}[/math], giving [math]V_\chi \approx 3.98 \times 10^{-105} , \text{m}^3[/math]. The energy of a Chorton comes from a redscaled harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian: [math]\mathcal{H}\chi = \frac{1}{2} \omega^2 A\chi^2[/math] with redscaled parameters: [math]\omega = 1.853 \times 10^{43} , \text{rad/s}[/math] [math]A_\chi = 6.83 \times 10^{-6}[/math] Substituting these gives: [math] E_\chi = \frac{1}{2} \cdot (1.853 \times 10^{43})^2 \cdot (6.83 \times 10^{-6})^2 \approx 8.01 \times 10^{75} , \text{J} [/math] Then the local Chorton energy density is: [math] \rho_\chi = \frac{E_\chi}{V_\chi} \approx \frac{8.01 \times 10^{75}}{3.98 \times 10^{-105}} \approx 2.01 \times 10^{180} , \text{J/m}^3 [/math] In QCF, this energy density directly sources spacetime curvature. The relation used is analogous to Einstein’s, except derived from field dynamics: [math]R_{\mu\nu} \sim \rho_\chi[/math] Comparing this to GR: [math]R_{\mu\nu} \sim \frac{8\pi G}{c^4} T_{\mu\nu}[/math] we solve for [math]G[/math]: [math] G = \frac{c^4}{8\pi \rho_\chi} = \frac{(3 \times 10^8)^4}{8\pi \cdot 2.01 \times 10^{180}} \approx 8.02 \times 10^{-149} , \text{m}^3 \cdot \text{kg}^{-1} \cdot \text{s}^{-2} [/math] This is many orders of magnitude smaller than the known value: [math]G_{\text{obs}} = 6.674 \times 10^{-11}[/math] But this mismatch is not a flaw — it’s the key insight. Real-world gravity is not measured at quantum scales; it's observed across macroscopic distances. So we ask: over what volume must that Chorton energy be diluted to match the observed [math]G[/math]? We rearrange the same expression: [math] G = \frac{c^4 V}{8\pi E_\chi} \Rightarrow V = \frac{8\pi E_\chi G_{\text{obs}}}{c^4} [/math] Plugging in the known values: [math] V = \frac{8\pi \cdot (8.01 \times 10^{75}) \cdot (6.674 \times 10^{-11})}{8.1 \times 10^{33}} \approx 2.07 \times 10^{32} , \text{m}^3 [/math] This is roughly the volume of a small galaxy. So, to match the observed [math]G[/math], the energy of a single Chorton must be spread across that enormous region of space. We can also compute how many Chortons are inside that coarse-grained volume: [math] N_\chi = \frac{V}{V_\chi} = \frac{2.07 \times 10^{32}}{3.98 \times 10^{-105}} \approx 5.2 \times 10^{136} [/math] Therefore, in QCF, the weakness of gravity arises not because gravitational energy is intrinsically small, but because the curvature is the result of enormous quantum energy diluted across astronomical scales. The gravitational constant [math]G[/math] emerges from the structure of spacetime itself — from Chorton fields — and appears small only after coarse-graining. This gives [math]G[/math] a true physical origin, removes its “fudge factor” status, and naturally links quantum energy density to classical gravity. To match the real-world value of Newton's gravitational constant, we distribute this Chorton energy over a large physical volume. In General Relativity, energy density couples to curvature through: [math] G = \frac{c^4}{8\pi \rho} [/math] We solve this for [math]G[/math] using the target macroscopic energy density: [math] \rho = 4.83 \times 10^{42} , \text{J/m}^3 [/math] And the speed of light: [math] c = 3.00 \times 10^8 , \text{m/s} \Rightarrow c^4 = 8.1 \times 10^{33} [/math] Then: [math] 8\pi\rho = 25.1327 \cdot 4.83 \times 10^{42} = 1.214 \times 10^{44} [/math] So we compute: [math] G = \frac{8.1 \times 10^{33}}{1.214 \times 10^{44}} = 6.67 \times 10^{-11} , \text{m}^3 \cdot \text{kg}^{-1} \cdot \text{s}^{-2} [/math] @swansontIt have no fudge factor now

I study in a normal CBSE school. I had different interests since childhood,I developed websites,learnt to develop games(only basic as i left because of school),science and many more. I kept gathering knowledge. Currently i am training for powerlifting and working on QCF. I am around 1.18 Jupiter years old.

I sleep by 10:00 PM. I can do same exam easily here sitting in room. +- mistakes Dividing wrong numbers,adding numbers and getting wrong answer. Normally I do simple calculations in my head,but In exam(Maths) it’s empty. Can you suggest a better word?

No.

Its okay. We are from same country but very far from each other. I am in Northern states

Can you correct my name. Yes,its good to see

Then you are of same or maybe near my Grandfather's Age.

Still its better to post rather then keeping it scattered in pieces. Minor correction-Its not theory. But is there any field in which symbolic work like this,is done. Well its atleast better then AI slop.

As i always say,If no one is giving critiques and suggestions then a theory is too perfect or isnt even worth discussing. Mine isnt first case so it must be second. Can someone tell if its worth working on.

If i am right then they are showing values increasing or decreasing with respect to Time. The first one is related to Radioactive decay,second one is telling about completion of a reaction and the third one is new for me.

atleast there are some. Its good to have someone of same Generation.

Hlo everyone, I am almost 15 years old. Its been almost a month since i joined this wonderful platform.But i didnt find anyone as same age or age group as me.I found some kids,but they were mostly in Homework help section. Is there anyone who actively posts and interact like other seniors?

I will try to learn more and implement it.

I will recommend not to leave. Refine your work,prove yourself. Well its very expensive,Its 3,938 in Indian Rupees. In dollars its just 45.43.

The one i just posted is yours?

Is this yours? FASTER AND FURTHER THAN SPEED OF LIGHT-BASIC UNIVERSE THEORY.by MJ KIHARA | 2 March 2023

My idea related to light broke,actually i pushed it until it broke. But that light showed me whole path. Does it have maths?

Calm down, I also dont argue with Elders, But here we all argue,thats how science grows. I understand your feeling,its not end.