1 hour ago, Imagine Everything said:

That is potentially awesome for my idea 🙂. Ahem, I mean, ty @studiot

And would this energy stored massless field follow The principle of minimum energy too?

Yes it follows it but the field alone cannot adopt different energy distributions.

The PofLE really comes into play when the field interacts with something else, resulting in a minimum energy configuration of that something else, for example

Place a load of magents in a mag field and they will line up with it.

1 hour ago, Imagine Everything said:

So the energy has to be stressed, hmm so going back to a BH, has it ever been considered that the inside of it could be a massless field of stressed energy.

And sorry 1 more, if it's massless fields being spoken about, would they not also have massless (non) particles? Perhaps positive & negative?

MigL didn't say the energy was stressed. That is a meaningless idea.

He was referring to what is known as the energy-momentum tensor in GR.

7 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

So the energy has to be stressed

It’s not energy under stress. The stress-energy tensor is part of determining gravity. It’s dependent on density and flux of energy and momentum.

My bad, I misread & misinterpreted what MigL wrote.

@ studiot What is PofLE please?

52 minutes ago, Imagine Everything said:

My bad, I misread & misinterpreted what MigL wrote.

@ studiot What is PofLE please?

Principle of least energy

Ahh ok, thanks studiot

On 9/1/2025 at 8:00 PM, MigL said:

At the mathematical radius where escape velocity becomes equal to c , an Event Horizon is established by nature, and no further information can reach us regarding to the interior composition.

Potential silly question, Can I interpret this as meaning gravity itself creates or might be, creating the EH? And that a neutron star, wouldn't have enough gravity to do this?

Could someone clarify for me please, these Eigenstates, are they themselves the measurement of whatever it is you are measuring?

Is that the scientific word for the measurements of QM? Down Quark (measured eigenstate?) Up Quark (superpositioned eigenstate?)

On 9/4/2025 at 2:46 AM, swansont said:

It’s not energy under stress. The stress-energy tensor is part of determining gravity. It’s dependent on density and flux of energy and momentum.

Edited September 7Sep 7 by Imagine Everything

2 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Could someone clarify for me please, these Eigenstates, are they themselves the measurement of whatever it is you are measuring?

Is that the scientific word for the measurements of QM? Down Quark (measured eigenstate?) Up Quark (superpositioned eigenstate?)

Eigenstates are a solution of a wave equation (e.g. Schrödinger’s equation) associated with the property you’re solving for. You can have energy, momentum, angular momentum, etc. eigenstates. When you do a measurement, the particle will be in an eigenstate. (of the property you’re measuring). A particle can be in a superposition of states until you measure it.

4 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Potential silly question, Can I interpret this as meaning gravity itself creates or might be, creating the EH? And that a neutron star, wouldn't have enough gravity to do this?

Yes.
At the Event Horizon the space-time curvature is such that no geodesics, or trajectories, lead outside the Event Horizon., not even for light.
It is curved in a way that all paths lead to the future collision with the center of the Black Hole ( whatever that may be ).

A neutron star isn't massive enough and its constituent neutrons can resist further gravitational collapse due to neutron degeneracy pressure.

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Eigenstates are a solution of a wave equation (e.g. Schrödinger’s equation) associated with the property you’re solving for. You can have energy, momentum, angular momentum, etc. eigenstates. When you do a measurement, the particle will be in an eigenstate. (of the property you’re measuring). A particle can be in a superposition of states until you measure it.

Perfect, thanks @swansont

1 hour ago, MigL said:

Potential silly question, Can I interpret this as meaning gravity itself creates or might be, creating the EH? And that a neutron star, wouldn't have enough gravity to do this?

Yes.
At the Event Horizon the space-time curvature is such that no geodesics, or trajectories, lead outside the Event Horizon., not even for light.
It is curved in a way that all paths lead to the future collision with the center of the Black Hole ( whatever that may be ).

A neutron star isn't massive enough and its constituent neutrons can resist further gravitational collapse due to neutron degeneracy pressure.

Interesting, thanks @MigL & yes, this is due to Pauli's exclusion right? And only gravity is capable of overcoming degeneracy?

Edited September 7Sep 7 by Imagine Everything

I am posting the following wiki links as they are some of the areas I have researched a little & can hopefully offer support to this idea, as to how the SN-NNP's might fit in.

I am sure there are vastly more different sites, khan academy perhaps for one, that can also offer this information, however, for uniformity's sake, I'll stick with wiki as much as possible.

The wiki links are not there for click bait & I'm not asking for anyone to read them, they are merely useful ways for me to support this idea.

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

In mathematics, a manifold is a topological space that locally resembles Euclidean space near each point. More precisely, an n -dimensional manifold, or n -manifold for short, is a topological space with the property that each point has a neighborhood that is homeomorphic to an open subset of n -dimensional Euclidean space.

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

The "color charge" of quarks and gluons is completely unrelated to the everyday meaning of color, which refers to the frequency of photons, the particles that mediate a different fundamental force, electromagnetism. The term color and the labels red, green, and blue became popular simply because of the loose but convenient analogy to the primary colors.

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

The universal wavefunction or the wavefunction of the universe is the wavefunction or quantum state of the entire universe.

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

In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is a proposed form of energy that affects the universe on the largest scales. Its primary effect is to drive the accelerating expansion of the universe.

Assuming that the lambda-CDM model of cosmology is correct,^[2] dark energy dominates the universe, contributing 68% of the total energy in the present-day observable universe while dark matter and ordinary (baryonic) matter contribute 27% and 5%, respectively, and other components such as neutrinos and photons are nearly negligible.

However, it dominates the universe's mass–energy content because it is uniform across space.

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

In astronomy and cosmology, dark matter is an invisible and hypothetical form of matter that does not interact with light or other electromagnetic radiation. Dark matter is implied by gravitational effects that cannot be explained by general relativity unless more matter is present than can be observed.

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

The superposition principle,^[1] also known as superposition property, states that, for all linear systems, the net response caused by two or more stimuli is the sum of the responses that would have been caused by each stimulus individually. So that if input A produces response X, and input B produces response Y, then input (A + B) produces response (X + Y).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

In modern physics, the double-slit experiment demonstrates that light and matter can exhibit behavior of both classical particles and classical waves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment#/media/File:Double-slit.svg

The above link should take you directly to a double slit experiment diagram from the wiki on the right side of the initial page you see.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_flux & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling

Energy flux is the rate of transfer of energy through a surface.

In physics, quantum tunnelling, barrier penetration, or simply tunnelling is a quantum mechanical phenomenon in which an object such as an electron or atom passes through a potential energy barrier that, according to classical mechanics, should not be passable due to the object not having sufficient energy to pass or surmount the barrier.

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

Frequency is the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit of time.^[1] Frequency is an important parameter used in science and engineering to specify the rate of oscillatory and vibratory phenomena, such as mechanical vibrations, audio signals (sound), radio waves, and light.

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

A black hole is an astronomical body so dense that its gravity prevents anything from escaping, even light. Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that a sufficiently compact mass will form a black hole.^[4] The boundary of no escape is called the event horizon.

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

Hawking radiation would reduce the mass and rotational energy of black holes and consequently cause black hole evaporation. Because of this, black holes that do not gain mass through other means are expected to shrink and ultimately vanish.

https://www.livescience.com/can-a-black-hole-explode (this isn't a wiki page)

But could black holes actually have more interesting interior lives? Could they, for instance, explode? If an "explosion" is "a sudden, brief release of tremendous amounts of energy" then the answer is unequivocally yes. And the best part is that they can explode in several interesting ways, either by detonating themselves or their nearby environments. Hawking radiation, Superradiance, Disks and jets.

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

In various interpretations of quantum mechanics, wave function collapse, also called reduction of the state vector,^[1] occurs when a wave function—initially in a superposition of several eigenstates—reduces to a single eigenstate due to interaction with the external world. This interaction is called an observation and is the essence of a measurement in quantum mechanics, which connects the wave function with classical observables such as position and momentum.

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

In physics, a gravitational field or gravitational acceleration field is a vector field used to explain the influences that a body extends into the space around itself. <--

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feynman_diagram#/media/File:Feynmann_Diagram_Gluon_Radiation.svg

The above link should take you directly to a feynmann diagram from the wiki on the right side of the initial page you see.

There is a lot more but I won't post those unless someone tells me it's ok, I fear I may have posted too many already, sorry didn't realise just how much I had read.

The idea as I originally said last year, is simple yet so very complex.

There is a little bit of maths (I think) I can offer however, I doubt myself & maths will ever be friends & I have more than likely got it wrong.

Still it's just an idea right now, that's all & it's still nice of you folks to have allowed it to progress this far without seeing it as a complete wag. (yes I remember that too lol, and maybe it is)

And I wont pretend that I understand all the science/maths that I have read or perhaps what I will write, however, for whatever reason, I started seeing a pattern & quite literally stumbled across a possibility for this SQEP / 'thingy' / SN-NNP & it's 'journey' around March I think & more has been falling into place since. In my head anyway. I have no idea what you all might think.

My descriptions & explanations might fail straight away, I don't see this idea as being anything different to anything all of you scientists & mathematicians have discovered/proven so far, I see it being an absolute part of it.

Where science/maths may see decay & creation quantum activity, in this idea I see decay, creation, infusion & absorption.

Where science.maths may see a wavelength collapse, I see a possibility.

Where science sees an EH, this idea offers a possible way to look beyond the EH.

I can visualise this SN-NNP, not directly but more as a kind of dark space, I don't know what 'almost nothing' would look like if we could see it so for me it is just a dark shadow type thing.

A shadow of a shadow of a shadow...

@ site admin please let me know if I have posted too many wiki links & if I can post more if I haven't.

I haven't got hundreds but there are a few. It would help me a great deal if you would allow me too please.

I should say, when I might say "I see it" or "I think" or similar phrases, it is only meant within the confines of this idea. If I'm honest I don't know what to think anymore, some parts of science have both baffled & enchanted me 🙂

It's ironic too, all the above information & n^th more being used by me to try & describe 'almost nothing'

Edited September 15Sep 15 by Imagine Everything

I applaud your enthusiasm, but these are fairly advanced concepts that most of us here find challenging.
Without a basic understanding of Physics and the Mathematical tools needed for such understanding, quite a few people go off on 'flights of fancy', and tend to get labelled 'cranks'.
Maybe concentrate on Newtonian Dynamics, basic Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity, Conservation Laws, and Calculus, before tackling subjects on the frontiers of modern Physics.
The 'basics' will help bound the possibilities, and keep your 'flights' close to the ground.

46 minutes ago, MigL said:

I applaud your enthusiasm, but these are fairly advanced concepts that most of us here find challenging.
Without a basic understanding of Physics and the Mathematical tools needed for such understanding, quite a few people go off on 'flights of fancy', and tend to get labelled 'cranks'.
Maybe concentrate on Newtonian Dynamics, basic Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity, Conservation Laws, and Calculus, before tackling subjects on the frontiers of modern Physics.
The 'basics' will help bound the possibilities, and keep your 'flights' close to the ground.

@MigL I can only hazard a few guesses at what parts of science this idea might have touched, so forgive me if it comes across anything other than an idea.

Did not know you considered what I am trying to use to explain as the frontiers of modern physics.

Sorry about that, I'm not trying to rewrite anything or remake, redo anything. I am still quite naive regarding science & maths.

It will be I hope, easy to understand when I explain it & I have little doubt from what I've seen here so far from you folks, you can tell me I'm wrong.

That in itself would be enough for me.

Yes I see the term cranks used a bit, it's not just plausible but quite possible I have seen what I wanted to see or understand what I wanted to understand rather than the actual science itself.

I don't really know myself but I am hoping that you folks can tell me.

It seems retrospectively that 2 boundary conditions meeting was the easy part of this idea. It's what these SN-NNP's do or can do that confuses everything.

I don't think I should actually be writing any of this to be fair. 15 months ago, I wouldn't have believed you if you told me I'd be talking to experts about quantum mechanics.

That in itself is a miracle to me.

So please, anything I write is all written within the 4 walls of this idea as it were. Anything used to support it is just that & NOT scientific proof that this idea works.

I can't hide from the way this idea has seemed to turn out so far, one thing has led to another and if I come across as a bit questionable, I don't mean to, not even slightly. I can only write this how it seems to be encouraging me to.

Have you ever written anything that suddenly takes over & writes itself? That's how this idea is to me. Has been since last year. Very, very strange yet here we are & I'm still baffled by it.

Thanks for your input @MigL

Edited September 15Sep 15 by Imagine Everything

One year later & here is the progress I hope I have made.

I am also adding 2 more wiki links that I purposefully left out last time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-hair_theorem & https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/memory

I looked at memory because I need to know how the information we gather is stored as opposed to how it's created.

I do believe one thing, the universe has it fundaments that everything else follows, including us. And if we can remember, would it be also fair to say the universe does?

@studiot I recently acquired a new book. You might recognise it.

 

 

AISOO

An Illogical Sense Of Order

24/9/25

Previous name tags  

SN-NNP - SuperPositioned Quantum Hair

SN-NNP - SuperPositioned Quantum Hair Field

Gravit - Gf

New name tags

Let SN-NNP & be SuperPositioned Quantum Hairs.

Let SN-NNPF be THE Gravity Field.

Let the GRAVIT be the information force that binds QH’s together.

Let the Gravit be a pre-cursor to gravity.

 

 

So this is my revised idea & I state idea. It in no way me knowingly rewriting science.

 When I say things like ‘I see…’ or ‘I think…’, it is how I try to explain things within this idea only.

Nothing more.

 Hopefully I now have a small but slightly improved scientific way of offering this idea.

 I see these QH’s as being everywhere, all the time, always connected, always have been, always will be

& as the idea progressed, it led me to many different areas of quantum & classic physics places,

some of which I posted 15/9.

 The QH’s are the information of anything & everything that has or might be created.

 When they infuse, they infuse into the formation of a particle or field.

 When the Gravit force is infused into the formation of a particle, it becomes gravitational.

 Within this idea I didn’t want to use the graviton as it seemed to me like science was considering

it a particle.

 I also didn’t intend to find a gravity related force, it just kind of happened.

So the gravit was formed from this idea & became the information force for the QH’s.

  

The Boundary Conditions of 2 states meet & perhaps through quantum acitivity such as Kinetic quantum

tunneling, decay, creation, excitement, fluctuation.

 This in turn also allows infusion & ‘absorption’ in the same acitivity.

 The creation also creates QH’s which are then infused into the formation of other particles/fields.

 Through infusion, the QH’s within the gravity field are then applied with the most attractive one/s being

infused to create whatever it is being used to create.

 The QH’s are not gradients but more like flavours, whatever flavour/s is/are required to create an Eigenstate

observation are the QH’s that are infused.

 The QH’s are QH & QH^- and they behave as though there could be many many different ones, some

with slightly more ‘possible’ energy & others with less than they should have.

And n^th other ‘possible’ gravit energy differences.

 All QH’s are always trying to become ‘nothing’ due to The Principle of Least Energy.

 All QH’s are SuperPositioned.

 All QH’s ‘reside’ in the gravity field. The universal gravity field.

 Similar within this idea, in many ways to a BH . I will get to that.

 These QH’s constantly try to become ‘nothing’ because they are only one step away from ‘nothing’.

 And through PofLE, try as they might, they can’t because of QM.

 So these SPQH’s are sort of stuck / not stuck between 2 quantum principles, collectively & individualy

helping to or indeed creating THE gravity field everywhere, all at the same time, always have, always will.

 Always ‘stuck’ until the information they ARE or COULD BE is needed to create the particle it will.

 When used / infused into the particle they become, the gravit information force becomes more gravitational.

 This might indicate different flavours are being infused to become the particle, producing more of a

gravitational force.

 I don’t see these QH’s as being easily observable, however you folks know more than I do so who knows.

 I see them as only measurable via the influence they have at an observable level.

 

Black Holes

 BH’s are extremely gravitational.

Quantum Hairs are imprinted onto a BH’ gravitational field once what they were is decayed.

The only thing left measurable is angualr momentum & charge & mass.

The rest of the information is imprinted. ‘Lost forever’ into the BH gravitational field.

 The QH’s are both Superpositoned & n^th compacted.

Their combined possible energy/gravity trying to become nothing / implode. But can’t.

Trying to instead become infused but also can’t. All they can seemingly do is create gravity.

 However they do have a ‘release’ from the BH in the forms of Hawkin Radiation, Superradiance, Disks and jets.

So they can ‘escape’ / relay information outside of the BH & everything between the inside & outside of a BH. The information can & is passed on / between them all instantly

All quantum entangled.

 Pre BB I see this not being possible as Hawkins radiation, super radiance, discs & jets can’t leave the

universe to go somewhere else.

The QH’s can in a BH.

 I see these QH’s as all connected directly or indirectly, the superpositioned possibility of acting as one at some point or as groups & any other type of collaboration.

 One could be at one end of the universe & another at the other end & they would both

instantly share any newly acquired information.

 I see the SPQH’s acting as a quantum memory of everything & anything allowed to be created via natural laws.

Perhaps the SPQH’s within the BH gravitational field become one flavour or just a few certain flavours due to their environment.

 Through Hawkins radiation, Superradiance , discs & jets, the QH’s are n^th decayed / created, absorbed back into the gravity field or infused into new particles.

 I see BH’s within this idea as the BB repeating itself. The BB that keep on banging until it can’t.

 The difference between the QH’s in a BH gravitational field & ALL QH’s in the universe is that the QH’s in a BH have got somewhere to go if you will.

I see the BB differently because if the universe is everywhere, no boundary conditions, then any QH’s trying to find somewhere else to go wouldn’t be able to.

 I see the BB as a universe wide BH type event. Perhaps a reverse BH event.

If the universe was one big ‘particle’, could BH’s be seen as it’s paired anti ‘particle’

 BH’s continue to create or help create new matter / non matter n^th times. Until the ‘end’ of the universe.

 Gluon radiation Feynmann diagram

Within this idea, I see perhaps ‘flavoured’ QH/QH^- that are more attractive to different particles/fields.

 For the purpose of the image above that I badly drew above,

 Let red be the E^- / E⁺ QH / QH^- flavour.

 Let blue be the Y QH / QH^- flavour.

Pre BB

 Within this idea the only things that exist are Time, the universal gravity field & ‘blank?’ SPQH’s pre BB.

 Individually, the SPQH’s almost no real impact on their environment but on a vast universal sized manifold?, collectively, they can be quite quite powerful.

 Due to Time & the SP Predetermined Probable Outcome of forming matter at some point, it finally did.

 It had to because PofLE & QM. (nothing cannot exist)

 After a certain amount of time, googolplex’s of light years? the SPQH’s all reached or nearly all reached / synchronised to the point of becoming nothing.

 This couldn’t happen so it was a failed implosion creating an awful lot of pent up Ke

 For perhaps just an instant, the universe seemed frozen, all at once, all at the same time, vastly dense &

hot.

Stuck in a state of nothing & something before being released as the BB,

Inflation was the failed implosion energy + the explosion (BB) it created

 Expansion in this idea is the remaining energy still being created by THE gravity field & it’s QH’s.

 Expansion might happen due to SPQH’s being created everywhere, at the same time.

 These QH’s ‘flavours’ might increase more into one or two types depending on the environment around them.

 DM is how we know they are there.

 DE is the slight Ke created perhaps when an SPQH is infused into the formation of a particle.

 The small Kinetic bump from gravit information to becoming gravity itself.

 Almost negligable close to home but over vast distances it might be enough to create what is

currently called DE.

 The QH’s influence if you will.

 As for mass, I see it as being increadible hard to create whoich could be why there isn’t a lot of it in

comparison to DE or DM.

 If QH’s could create matter whenever they wanted to initiaily, Pre BB, then within this idea there would have been no BB but perhaps just a solidifcation of the entire universe.

 The cause of everything is due to the SPQH’s not being able to decay into nothing.

 They have no choice but to ‘create’ & the rest of the universe follows that fundamental information.

 It continues to create through decay.

At the ‘end’ of the universe, in this idea it has simply created as much as it could ever & the last few SPQH’s are being decay created.

 Several things are about to happen at the same time that will cause the BB.

 The last SPQH is created, nothing else exists except the QH’s, Time & the universal gravity field.

 The single universal wavelength is completed. I see this is the universe observing itself.

 The SPQH’s are again trying to decay/implode but can’t.

They all at some point reach the same ‘trying to decay’ vibration which again tries to implode but instead

becomes a failed implosion universe wide, everywhere, all at once, the universe goes on to do whatever it does * then once everything has been decayed to QH’s, the universe observes itself & repeats.

Perhaps an infinitely finite universe as it were.

 So the maths part, hopefully I can make a little sense if what I have already written hasn’t fallen down aleady.

 Instead of wavelength collapse, in this idea I see the ramaining possible eiegenstate information still

existing as SPQH’s.

 When an Eigenstate is observed & you immeditely know what the opposite Eigenstate is.

 Pre Eiegenstate the eiegnstate is superpositioned, multiple times.

Seeing this a vector in R² led me to consider 2 SP vectors at the point of observed Eiegenstates.

 Let the manifold? be R²

 Let Eiegenstate a, be 1 east, 1 north

 Let Eiegenstate b, be -1 west, -1 south

 Let c be the unobserved eigenstate of a, be 1 north, 1 east

 Let d be the unobserved eigenstate of b, be -1 south, -1 west

 

 Within this idea, when an Eigenstate is observed & it’s observation is within the predetermined probablistic outcome ±.

 Within this idea the Ke from the infusion of QH’s to help create the observation is the extra bit of

measurement that falls outside the predetermined possible outcome but still within the observed ±.

  

 

 Personal Gravity Field

We all have our own gravity field.

 Our perosnal gravity fields are unique to each of us due to our overall physical vibration which is in turn made up of all the diffferent organs, cells, molecules, food, drink, damage etc.

 We merge quantumly with other gravity fields (other people, items, gases, liquids on a quantum level.

 When our vibration/gravity field meets a similar/harmonic vibration/gravity field, we are attracted to it.

Could this be why we find people attractive.

 The opposite would also seem to be true.

Ever found yourself taking an instant dislike to someone? Either in person or seeing them on media, etc.

 When we spend time with people we are attracted to, our unique gravity fields are entwined/shared &

tuned into each other as it were.

 When someone dies, we have lost that connection.

If it was someone we loved, it’s a strong sense of loss because we literally have lost that entwined

connection & physically our vibration/gravity field becomes out of sync & out of tune.

Eventually our gravity field settles down to accept the difference in our vibration/gravity field.

How do dogs & cats know we are coming dowwn the road?

 How is it that we can have a seemingly random thought of a close friend or loved one & then the phone

rings & it’s them.

I read once that soldiers look at the ground when sneaking up to their target becuase if they look at the back of them, the target would sense the soldier was there.

 I see these QH’s as existing everywhere, all the time, always have, always will & they are a kind of memory, they are the memory of the what they were or the imprint of what they could be.

And when one QH becomes ssomething, that information is immeditely passed on through every QH everywhere.

One huge gravity field, a cosmic universal ocean of knowledge & the SP Predetermined Probable Outcome? of it becoming something more.

 All simply because it has the Time to do it.

Always has done, always will.

Within this idea, I see Time as eternal.

These QH's have taken this idea a lot further than the things I have written about here.

And they would have to if they are real but the chance of that are n^th n^th I imagine.

Thanks for reading this if you did & thanks to everyone of the nearly 37k views.

 

I forgot to write, if the universe sets up everything (axioms?, principles?) else after or before it's BB in motion, then surely a fundamental from the universe beginning is that everything has to create. Usually through decay but still creation.

Edited September 24Sep 24 by Imagine Everything

11 minutes ago, Imagine Everything said:

One year later & here is the progress I hope I have made.

@studiot I recently acquired a new book. You might recognise it.

So long as you read it critically.

Remember the old saying.

If an expert is someone who knows a lot about a little

Then a true expert is someone who knows everything about nothing.

Sums up my suspicion of 'everything theories'.

😀

17 minutes ago, studiot said:

So long as you read it critically.

Remember the old saying.

If an expert is someone who knows a lot about a little

Then a true expert is someone who knows everything about nothing.

Sums up my suspicion of 'everything theories'.

😀

@studiot If I'm truly honest, I haven't & never did come here to prove or believe with certainty that this idea is concrete.

It really isn't, Idk what it is, I just had this epithany about something & wanted to know whether it was viable or not.

It's bugging me as to why I even visualised it to start with. I do not have a maths or science background at all.

If I have ever come across as anything else, I apologise. I have been waiting since last year for one or all of you to tell me it's wrong.

That was why I sought out a science forum to start with. I had to know & I still do please.

Oh and I've long joked with friends that my epitaph will state, Here lies a man who knew nothing.

I'm not implying I'm a true expert, I'm, saying I don't think I truly know much. Things always seem to change just as I think I do.

PS. I knew I'd messs something up....

The initial part should have read as

Previous name tags  

SN-NNP - SuperPositioned Nameless Non Particle

SN-NNP - SuperPositioned Nameless Non Particle Field

Gravit - Gf

New name tags

Let SN-NNP & be SuperPositioned Quantum Hairs.

Let SN-NNPF be THE Gravity Field.

Let the GRAVIT be the information force that binds QH’s together.

Let the Gravit be a pre-cursor to gravity.

and not as

Previous name tags  

SN-NNP - SuperPositioned Quantum Hair

SN-NNP - SuperPositioned Quantum Hair Field

Bad me

Edited September 24Sep 24 by Imagine Everything

This seems to happen quite often.
Someone gets some 'new' information, and, from that snippet of knowledge, proceeds to build an overarching idea that seeks to describe everything, while simultaneously trampling on most of established Physics.
Any idea you might have, has to abide by tried and tested Physical laws and principles, observations/experiments, and has to be testable/falsifiable.
IOW, the smaller in scope, the better.
If you try to explain just one thing, people can easily tell you if you're on the right track or not; if you try to explain 'everything', from gravity to Black Holes, or even pre-Big Bang with a sh*t-load of misconceptions, people will just throw up their hands and say "You're wrong" because they don't have the shovel or the time.

On 9/24/2025 at 2:45 PM, MigL said:

This seems to happen quite often.
Someone gets some 'new' information, and, from that snippet of knowledge, proceeds to build an overarching idea that seeks to describe everything, while simultaneously trampling on most of established Physics.
Any idea you might have, has to abide by tried and tested Physical laws and principles, observations/experiments, and has to be testable/falsifiable.
IOW, the smaller in scope, the better.
If you try to explain just one thing, people can easily tell you if you're on the right track or not; if you try to explain 'everything', from gravity to Black Holes, or even pre-Big Bang with a sh*t-load of misconceptions, people will just throw up their hands and say "You're wrong" because they don't have the shovel or the time.

@MigL I have been trying to think of the best answer for your reply.

So here it is, I couldn't think of a good response so I asked a moderator to simply close this entire thread. It seems pointless now & perhaps actually since it started, idea wise anyway.

What you wrote (emboldened) may or may not be directed at me, doesn't really matter but the fact that you wrote it, means it has value for this thread or you wouldn't have written it.

Those 2 emboldened parts are mainly why I asked for this thread to be close.

I understand your reply to not just be directing me to find a better way to understand more but also perhaps dismissing it as total bollocks (sorry).

This is fine & np, I needed to know if this idea was viable & you told me. Thank you.

I trust your view, as I do studiot, mordred, swansont, phi etc, you are the experts.

I will say this, I struggle with trying to put what I see into language you all understand.

I don't know how much to say, or how little.

I know I wrote a lot & the reason I posted those wiki links was because I can explain (in text) how I see each & every one of them supporting (NOT CONFIRMING) my idea.

I didn't write more because I know I had already written too much, for that I am guilty.

I am not a maths expert.

I don't see the things I have mentioned like you all seem to, I see them as names or small images, nothing more.

As for proof (possible supporting evidence in my eyes), I would have explained each & everyone of them to make more sense of this idea but alas, that is now extremely doubtful.

As for the small scope, well if anyone is interested any more, you could all completely ignore the text & go directly to the SP vector I offered. I doubt it means anything or that I got it right but...oh well.

I guess you will just see me as a crank even though you haven't said so directly.

For what it's worth the moderator declined my request.

As always, I am grateful to all of you, including you migl.

Edited September 26Sep 26 by Imagine Everything