Monday, October 29, 2007

Coherent Nuclear Fusion

Coherent Nuclear Fusion

Before I forget, I should remind you that all Laws of Physics were modified to be 4D (spatial) or 5D spacetime. This might help in the understanding of the paper.

This is also a reminder that a worthwhile experiment for the Large Hadron Collider is to collide particles which are traveling in the same direction... :) A big change in paradigm since a collider normally uses head-on collisions to maximize the collision energy...:)

Remember, in life, not always power is the most important thing...sometimes some finesse might be helpful.

Cheers,

MP

Friday, October 26, 2007

Miguel de Unamuno

"Only he who attempts the absurd is capable of achieving the impossible"
Miguel de Unamuno


I couldn't resist....:) Check the
interview. It is quite funny....



Well, well... We are experiencing Technical Difficulties and you might have to go to the link itself until I figure out how to put a video in this blog...:)

In fact, I heard that Presidential Candidate Dennis Kucinich also carries a pocket copy of my Vacuum Permittivity Formula...:)



I forgot to mention, another source of error might be Wikipedia...:) All my numbers comes from that handy source...:)

There is also a numerically invisible 1Kg on the denominator of mu and in the numerator of epsilon, otherwise the units would be incorrect. Please check the derivation on the pdf for details.

The error in the estimation of the Vacuum Permittivity is 0.008:1 or
0.8%

I hope you people are smart enough to understand that the error estimate in this case also means that conversely there is a 0.8% possible error in the estimation of the fundamental dilator 4DMass or more precisely there is a total propagated error of 0.8% from all the sources...:) Remember that I use the preferential reference frame to derive the forces. I didn't take Gravitation or absolute speed in consideration.

Even the most retarded editor/moderator etc would be impressed with those numbers...:) after all this is a quantity that is IMPOSSIBLE to be calculated...:0

I am still awaiting for Stephen Hawking's reply...:)

Cheers,


MP

PS- by the way, I have to stop watching Borne Identity when I calculate things...:)



Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Hypergeometrical Epsilon

How to calculate Cosmological Constants

The vacuum permitivity is a Cosmological Constant, that is, there is NO formula for it. That might be the case in other theories.

In fact, this is a great time for a DARE.... :) Just to check if you people are awaken or not...:) Go ahead and ask Stephen Hawking if he knows how to calculate THE PERMITTIVITY OF VACUUM....:)

I bet money he doesn't...:)

Well, I am trying to emphasize how different my theory is from M Theory, String Theory or any other.... In any other theory, someone would present some Lagrangian, Metric for some wildly guessed scenario (e.g. branes under Gravitation interaction)...:) and from that imaginary Universe they would extract some impossible to measure results.... Not too long ago someone calculated that the Gravitational fields between branes decays exponentially... while decaying inversely with the square of distance within the brane...:) At the time, this was heralded as a challenge to Einstein and/or Newton... I thought to myself, Ginsparg has the petulance to preclude me from using a megabyte of hard drive on his Cornell-Los Alamos Arxives... and this piece of speculative science is hailed as great science...


I should say that I am only mentioning this specific case because I can remember it...

A friend of mine asked me if maybe my theory is incorrect and thus Ginsparg took the correct decision... I mentioned that every year, thirty thousand papers are posted there... each has a different set of assumptions and since reality will follow just a few of those, 99% of the papers are by definition incorrect....:) Everything might be at most self-consistent.. but there are no assurances that a posted paper is correct...:) In fact, the assurance is that most likely they are wrong...:)

To solve nature's enigma, I inverted the way how one tackles Physics problems... :) Up to know, people have been inventing FORCE, QUARKS, GAUGES, LAGRANGIANS, METRICS etc... each and every time they couldn't answer a question....:) If you cannot separate a QUARK, well, let's make them inseparable...:) glue them together.... if that is not enough, make them live in a different time (e.g. the future, the past... any time other than now...:)

Those are solutions... but they are lame solutions...:) especially if they need CENSORSHIP to survive....:) I tried to post an alternative model for matter and was rejected as INAPPROPRIATE by what I consider to be an extremely arrogant fellow (Paul Ginsparg)... How can someone have my paper in their hands and not be able to see the logic and the innovation... I suspect he never read the stuff... Just assumed I couldn't possibly be correct...:) after all he doesn't know me...:)

The approach I took, is that if there is a FORCE and there are different kinds of interactions, maybe it is not the FORCE that is different. MAYBE IT IS THE INTERACTORS...

Using this paradigm shift, I proposed that GRAVITATION (in my case represented by dilaton fields) is the same as ELECTROMAGNETISM. The difference is on what they actuate...

Again, this might be brilliant... (I am sure it will be called brilliant someday...)... just because the people who will say those words never thought those thoughts...:) (If I didn't thought it, it is because it is simply genius..>:)

As usual, there are some very good clues... An electron interacts with another electron through electromagnetism....An electron interacts with a proton via electromagnetism...:)

Now place that same electron together with another proton (forming a hydrogen atom) close to another hydrogen atom and they will interact through Gravitation...:)

That should had been a great give away...:)

Even when a Hydrogen atom interacts with a lone electron....the nature of the interaction is much weaker than if that electron were interacting with the Hydrogen atom components...:) This is because the electron pushes away the other electron and attracts the proton... The center of mass (of the Hydrogen atom) only shifts slightly due to the electrostatic field gradient...:)

If you remember that fields were recreated within the Hypergeometrical Universe Model as dilaton fields (field of waving metric), then those fields will interact differently with a single dilator with spin half than with a dilator system with spin zero...:) In one case we will call it Electrostatic interaction while in the other we will call it Gravitational Interaction....:)

I can see that some of you will be puzzled by spin... Notice that this spin doesn't take into consideration angular momentum which is our 3D space spin...:) When I mention spin, I am talking about rotation perpendicular to RX or RY or RZ...

Thus the same dilaton field yields both reactions... It is not the field that is different... It is the subject that is different...:)

Thus there is no meaning in the search of a Superforce... at least for now... I was able to account for everything we know just with the simplest dilaton field...

Of course, that wouldn't be enough if I hadn't created the concept of the Fundamental Dilator...:) Thanks to it, we can Quantize Time and create Quantum Mechanics...:)

Now let's see this theory doing the IMPOSSIBLE...:)

Below are the formulas for the Hypergeometrical Epsilon or the Permittivity of Vacuum. This cannot be calculated in other theories.. :) Maybe if one add Feynman path integrals in a supercomputer for some time, someone might be able to calculate it...:) but one might have to eliminate some infinities here and there... (they all add together nicely..:)

In mine, there is a simple formula for both the vacuum permittivity and the magnetic susceptibility and they obey the standard formula to yield the speed of light....:)

The elimination of infinities most likely is derived from the non-perturbative nature of my work and by the choice of dilator field decay. I considered that the dilator field decays with the number of cycles. There is no decay in the first cycle...:) and there are no poles... infinitely close to the dilator, the dilaton field is just a cosine...:)...it doesn't go to infinite...and yet it gives the correct result.

The consideration that a dilaton field would decay with the number of ondulations is new... Since forever (Newton, Einstein etc), distance plays that role...Nobody cared or understood that a field has inherently a macroscopic (cosmological) coherence implicit in in... thus one could use the inverse of the number of ondulations as a decaying factors... It makes sense.....:) and fits quite well with quantization...:)

This might be the simplest way I can use to convey that this theory is simple but as you might know, it is easy to shuffle equations to yield a new equation. It is very difficult to simplify things...:)



The calculated vacuum permittivity and magnetic susceptibility error is zero since we used it to obtain the best estimate of the electron (proton) 4DMass. The calculated 4DMass is 1.0083077 a.m.u. as opposed to the expected 1.00785 a.m.u. The very small discrepancy (0.045%) is attributed at this time to the inherent anisotropy of the hyperspherical expansion or just to the propagated error due to the factors in the formula...:)

I was certainly made a believer when I obtained this number... There is no theory that can calculate these two cosmological constant (electrostatic permittivity and the magnetic susceptibility) , even less with such precision and ease....:)

Of course, this formulas are in the new version of the paper.

By the way, if someone were to show me a theory that calculates Cosmological Constants with simple formula and NO parameters and NO errors (0.045% is attributable to the error propagation of the components of the formula), I would pay attention....;0

Cheers,

MP

Monday, October 22, 2007

So much for Wikipedia

Wikipedia Entry Set for Speedy Deletion -

I considered writing a small posting on Wikipedia to explain the Fundamental Dilator Paradigm. This is a fundamental part of my theory and the link (hidden variable) that allow one goes from Classical Mechanics to Quantum Mechanics...:)

I wrote the following little thing:

== Fundamental Dilator in the Hypergeometrical Universe Model ==

In the Hypergeometrical Universe Model,“particles” are considered to be coherences between 4D stationary states of metric deformation. These coherence can have spin (rotation along any axis perpendicular to R), and nuclear angular momentum (rotation around any axis in the Fabric of Space).

The Fabric of Space (FS) is defined within the Hypergeometrical Universe Model as the lightspeed traveling locus where all the dilators are located. This corresponds to a 3D hypersurface on non-compact Cartesian four-dimensional space. This lightspeed expanding hypersurface contains our 3D Universe.

Local deformations of the Fabric of Space are achieved by dilator dilaton field interactions which result in acceleration and eventually in constant velocity lateral travel. The inertial motion is how the Fabric of Space relaxes. Dilators will travel until they reach their Hubble angle. This is the Hypergeometrical Universe Newton’s First Law.

Since the boundary where the Universe (3D) is located is moving at the speed of light along R, the Hypergeometrical Universe Model does not contain the concept of particle since that doesn’t include the inherent lighspeed motion and has inherently some immutability assumptions.

The dilator is by definition mobile and always tunneling back and forth. It can have non-zero spin. In the Hypergeometrical Standard Model presented in the Hypergeometrical Universe blog, all particles models are shown to be decomposable into variations of the fundamental dilator. Different phases of the fundamental dilator correspond to Proton, Electron, Positron and antiproton.

There is an obvious analogy to musical notes. Each dilator phase (proton, electron, antiproton and positron) can be thought as dimensional notes (notes that modulate the space metric as opposed to air density).

Electron Model


Figure 1. 4D Stationary Deformation State diagram for electron


The coherence four notes repeat forever.
Where p=(2/3,2/3,-1/3), p*=(2/3,-1/3,2/3),e=(0,-2/3,-1/3),e*=(0,-1/3,-2/3) are a subset of states involved in the most common “particles”= proton, electron and neutron, isotopes, hyperons.


Below is another representation of the electron and positron. Notice that the first and last elements of the coherence chain are the same and that the coherence repeats itself for its lifetime. In the case of a proton/electron, that lifetime is infinite, since that coherence is between two ground states.
Figure 2. Dimensional notes associated with Electron and Positron.
Yellow (ligther)= positive charge.
Green (darker)= Negative charge.
White = Invisible in 3D due to 4D orientation – perpendicular to the Fabric of Space.

This is an effort to represent a tumbling 4D object, which changes shape as it tumbles. Notice that the sidewise states have no FS overlap. Interaction or “Existence” depends upon FS overlap and the frequency matching with the other dilators. This is the reason behind representing all “particle” in terms of the Fundamental Dilator or the Hypergeometrical Standard Model.

Since in the theory, there is an absolute time, one can define an absolute phase and that is what distinguishes an electron from a positron. Later it will be clear that more complex coherences involving the p* and e* state (neutrino states) will result in a phase shift of the tunneling process with respect to the tumbling process, thus modifying which state is in phase with the shock-wave universe.

The colors are shown only for states that have both a FS overlap and the same frequency as the fundamental dilator.

Another important element of the model is the bolding of the third axis length (e.g. p=(2/3,2/3,-1/3)). This means that the spin is a tumbling process around and rotational axis perpendicular to both the radial direction (perpendicular to all three spatial coordinates and the z coordinate). This defines a 4D angular momentum, which has to be conserved. More complex coherences like the ones associated with Delta and Sigma particles differs just by the final spin and thus by how the sub-coherences tumbles to make up the final amount of spinning.

Proton Model

Similarly for a proton:
Figure 3. 4D Stationary Deformation State diagram for proton

The coherence’s four notes repeat forever, thus the fourth state is represented connecting to the initial state emphasizing the closing of the coherence cycle. Belly up states represent anti-states (anti-proton or positron states).

Here is the representation of a proton and an antiproton.


Figure 4. Dimensional notes associated with Proton and anti-Proton.

The fundamental dilator is the paradigm behind the Fat Electron (4DMass=1.004145287 a.m.u. electron) used in the derivations of Electrostatic and Biot-Savart Laws in the Hypergeometrical Universe Model.

3D and 4D Masses

The Hypergeometrical Universe Model is a purely geometrical theory. This means that there is no concept of Mass, Charge, Force. Instead of Mass one has 4D displacement volumes (4DMasses) and their equivalent 3D FS Overlap displacement volumes (3DMasses).

This means that the dilaton field (lighspeed traveling dilatons) are coherently generated by all the four phases of the fundamental dilator and thus sense the equivalent volume of a proton and an electron. This means that the 4D Mass of Proton,Antiproton,Electron and Positron are the same.

Newton’s :Law of Gravitation, Gauss Law of Electrostatics and Biot-Savart Law of Magnetism were rederived from first principles as a law guiding dilator motion subject to a four-dimensional dilaton field. A Quantum Lagrangian Principle was proposed based on the minimization of virtual work done by constraints (FS). This QLP states that a dilator will step through the de Broglie expansion always in phase with the surrounding dilaton field.

Hence, 3DMass is the overlap of the fundamental dilator displacement volume with the FS.

The 4DMass can be understood as a mass proportional to the 4D volume associated with a dilator cycle. In a dilator cycle one has the two phases of an electron and the two phases of a proton, thus resulting in a coherent displacement 4D volume of a proton and an electron. The ideal 4DMass would be 1.00785 a.m.u.. The discrepancy is the result that the 4D space is not totally isotropic, that is, the shock-wave universe creates a small anisotropy that makes radial and FS orientations different in terms of displacement volumes of coherent states.

Below is the corresponding Balls Diagram for the Neutron and the Hydrogen Atom.

Figure 5. This figure displays the Neutron and Hydrogen Atom diagrams. Notice the red lines corresponding to the transmutation notes. These transmutation notes correspond to 3D rotations of the 4D displacement volume at specific phases of the dilator coherence.

The Hypergeometrial Model is based on the following diagram:

Figure 6. This figure shows the two cross-sections representing the Hypergeometrical Universe Model. The 3D Universe topology is one of a four-dimensional shockwave traveling at the speed of light perpendicular to our space.


==References==

Quantization in Astrophysics, Brownian Motion, and Supersymmetry (2007) editors: Florentin Smarandache; V. Christianto ISBN 819021909X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

{{subst:Newdelrevpg=The Fundamental Dilator in the Hypergeometrical Universe Modelreason=UNDELETE_REASON}} ~~~~

== The Fundamental Dilator in the Hypergeometrical Universe Model ==

Below is the original discussion for the Hypergeometrical Universe Theory which has been published and peer reviewed. Please follow the links associated with the Quantization in Astrophysics book. The Hypergeometrical Standard Model will be published by the end of October in a Hadron Physics book. None of them were initiated by me. These are peer-reviewed books.

[http://worldcatlibraries.org/isbn/819021909X Quantization in astrophysics, Brownian motion and supersymmetry: by Florentin Smarandache; V Christianto]

[Amazon Description of the Book Contents http://www.amazon.com/Quantization-Astrophysics-Brownian-Motion-Supersymmetry/dp/819021909X/ref=sr_1_1/002-0388091-0808040?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1174235841&sr=8-1#sipbody]

Mr. Bachmann set my new page into a speedy deletion process which let no space for reviewing prior comments directed at my theory. He did not make any substantiate comment. He stated that my work was a HOAX, which did not stand scrutiny.

Below are some of the comments which are obviously out of place since the theory has been peer review and published. Snide comments such as "Quaint or WP:BOLLOCKS" have no merit since the theory is peer reviewed and published and show lack of civility unworthy to Wikipedia.
They did not have any merit at the time of their issuance. Any disagreement with the content of the work should be directed to a journal or at least should be made clear to me.

'''There is no copyrights violation in this page since all work is mine.'''

By the way, there is and there wasn't any copyright violations. Five dimensional spacetimes are common (normally they have compact dimensions like Kaluza-Klein). There has not being published a single model in which the 3D Universe is a shock-wave traveling at the speed of light. That hypothesis together with the Fundamental Dilator model allow for the unification of Gravitation and Electromagnetism. Had the reviewer noticed that detail, he/she would not mention that my work has been done before. The other comments deserve no reply, but if you need answer to any of my prior reviewers please let me know.

The Fundamental Dilator is a departure from the concept of Particle. Electrons, Protons, Antiprotons and Positrons are all modeled as different phases of the same 4D deformational coherence. This means that in this theory, those four particles displace the same 4D volume as they travel along the radial direction, thus having the same 4DMass.

This theory is an extensive theory and thus can only be published in books due to its scope. It is difficult for me to cover all the details in this communication, but I will be more than willing to explain anything to anyone.

If you have any questions or issues with respect to the page, please let me know. I will be happy to clarify anything.

Thanks,

Marco Pereira

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Fundamental Dilator in the Hypergeometrical Universe Model

It is nice that you people are having a little more appreciation towards my theory. I thought that Dieter calling it a HOAX or someone else calling it from Star Trek a little childish.

As I mentioned, I appreciate your efforts to keep crackpots from Wikipedia. I understand the risk, personal risk, you people face by being too much of an inclusionist. I am sure you understand that managing risk is a matter of equilibrium. If you keep novel ideas out, you prevent the dissemination of what might be a great idea. Science as it is today is very reactionary. My theory is currently 80 pages long and cannot be defended in chunks of 5 pages. It is a broad theory with the unification of Gravitation and Electromagnetism and a replacement for the Standard Model- a pillar of support of what that we hold near and dear.

I have to confess that the breadth and innovation that my theory brings is a hindrance to its dissemination. People like to see a constant build towards something. I analysed all physics and restructured it. The theory starts at a Classical Relativistic level with the proposition of a new topology for the Universe (a ligthspeed outward traveling shockwave 3D Universe embedded in a four dimensional Cartesian spatial manifold). It introduces absolute time and reference frames which are not observable within the 4D relativistic spacetime.

Einstein sought throughout his life the hidden variable that would make the transition between classical and quantum mechanics. With the introduction of the fundamental dilator paradigm, particles became shape shifting 4D displacement volumes -corresponding to the coherence between stationary 4D metric deformational states. Proton, antiproton, electron and positron are modeled as just phases of a 4D volume that spins while in contact with the 3D Fabric of Space. The displacement volume is modeled as a quantity proportional to our 3DMass. From that proportionality relationship I was able to assign a 4D mass for the fundamental dilator equal to the sum of one electron and one proton (1.00785 a.m.u.).

Using simple logic, I derived Newton's Gravitational Law, Gauss Electrostatics Law and the Biot-Savart Law. The non-metaphysical character of my theory becomes evident when I calculate from first principles two Cosmological Constant: vacuum permittivity and vacuum magnetic susceptibility.

The equations are shown below
The numerical value for m (the 4DMass of the fundamental dilator) that corresponds to the perfect Epsilon calculation is 1.0083077 a.m.u. or an error of 0.045%. Since the formula uses inputs with significant uncertainty, 0.045% error is certainly more than expected.

If you are a physicist, you might realize that there is not formula in any theory (physical or metaphysical) that calculates the value of epsilon. Of course, I also can calculate G for that matter.

Needless to say, the fundamental dilator concept is also the basis for the smooth transition between classical and quantum mechanics- the solution to the hidden variable problem that Albert Einstein failed to solve.

There are many other fascinating results I published in the Quantization in Astrophysics book and some that will be published on the Hadron Physics book due in November. The latest version of the work is in this link http://www.hypergeometricaluniverse.com/pdfs/1.pdf I am writing it because Geocities is having some glitches in the redirectioning of links.

I created a site for discussion and invited scientists, banker, bakers, PhD students or anyone to criticize (positive or negative criticism). I rarely receive any criticism and certainly I've never received any criticism which I couldn't solve, clarify or remediate. You are welcome to bring your questions, critique and that includes literary critique.

Now, returning to the posting in question. I demonstrated that the theory has been published, people had the opportunity to criticize it and chose not to. The reason why I tried to post it in Wikipedia is exactly because of this intellectual inertia or reactionary attitude (demonstrated clearly in the comments by your peers).

It is difficult to accept that a new and great idea might come from someone you never heard of...:) but not to allow that idea to be disseminated or discussed would be a crime against Science.

This is site where statements will be edited, discussed, ideas will come to life. I believe this is the best place for the Fundamental Dilator Paradigm to be presented.

I would appreciate if the summary deletion were considered in view of the new facts.

Thanks for your attention,

Marco Pereira


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will try to lead you through the above discussion. I replicated the original posting where I mentioned the Fundamental Dilator Paradigm. I briefly mentioned that the Hypergeometrical Universe Model is supported and support this paradigm.

Dieter Backman or something like that immediately call the theory a HOAX...:) Faced with the fact that the theory has been published and that it has been posted here for years without any substantial criticism... despite of my efforts to bring it on..:) (From time to time, I made outrageous statements - which I believe it as true, noneless still outrageous - like I solved the riddle of Time, or Due to the Quantum Lagrangian Principle - dilators surf 4D dilatons and because of their position in the horospherical referential frame, they also surf the 3D de Broglie wave projections. That means, that the two slit experiment can be explained by the real aspect assigned to the dilator field projection (3D de Broglie waves) and by the QLP that states that dilators will surf those waves...:) This means that the two slit experiment interferometric electronic deposition can be explained also by considering the electron to pass through a single slot while its horospherical dilaton will pass through all slots and interfere with itself on the other side of the blocking plate. This means that the electron will surf the interference pattern on the other side of the plate and deposit itself accordingly.

This is a challenge to the standard staple of Quantum Mechanics lectures..:) I am sure Feymann gave this lesson and most likely didn't believe it...:) Richard Feymann was smart enough to know that there was something fishy on the state of the art. Creating a new quark for each new particle or set of them was never a pleasant thing to see.

I recreated all hyperons and all isotopes with just a fundamental dilator and two transmutation subcoherences...:) That is a real economic model...:)

I guess I will keep posting my challenges to my audience always in search for some interesting discussion.

NOW, returning to the Wikipedia effort, well... it was a failure... complete failure... By the end, I was succeding in all possible aspects of the debate. I showed that there was a book with my work on it. I couldn't tell them if there was any reference to my work by a third party. I don't follow the literature and have the faintest idea if people will say anything about it. Pleople are very shy and will running from taking sides as much as they can...:) It is just natural..

I also couldn' provide a balanced discussion about the Fundamental Dilator Paradigm.... I didn't realize that there was this technicality - which was used by the ultrafast, and I mean it bureaucrat to eliminate my posting and all vestiges of my argument... You will never find anything in Wikipedia about the Fundamental Dilator nor the Hypergeometrical Universe Theory.

In fact, there is a way, someone will have to understand the theory and post something there...:) I will not hold my breath until this happens..;)

It was a valient effort. It was done. I failed and I will never try it again.

I had to try as usual for the reason that I believe that IDEAS are IMPORTANT...:)

That said, one can only make one's best effort.

Cheers,

MP

Sunday, October 21, 2007

How to Write a Theory of Everything

How to Write a Theory of Everything

It turns out that writing a theory of everything is not a simple as you might think. The first reason being that every scientist would hate to have someone else writing it before them..:) That explains some of the reactionary responses to my efforts to disseminate my ideas.

The second reason is the necessarily wide scope of the writing. A theory of everything has to replicate all data associated with Cosmology, our concepts of Cosmogenesis, Quantum Mechanics and Particle Physics (preferably in compliance with the Standard Model and written in terms of Strings or Branes)..:) After all it is just common cortesy to write it in the language of the people who will read it...:)

The other force acting against this effort is that it is easy to attack anyone who dare to say they have such a theory. Every great scientist thought about it, thus for the small (minded) scientist it is a slam dunk, a no-brainer - anyone who says they wrote a theory of everything has to be a Bozo...:)

Small (minded) scientists always play safe... You don't want to be one the wrong side of History...:) at least statistically... they just kick left and right to see if you go alway...:) Forget thinking... Small scientists are incapable of understanding anything deep, thus will attack you on form, length, picture size etc... as if they knew how to write the Theory of Everything.

I also didn't try to write in the String/Brane language of the day. I tried to make something simple where people could build upon, dress it up as a brane if they want it and figure how to do it....:) I thought that it was better to make the theory simple and physical than to get the Physics lost in the mathematical details.

I took the position that I should explain the theory at lenght, since I know that any telegraphic explanation will pass a mile over all the small scientists... and small minded editors...

That, of course, makes my papers horrendously poorly written. Too much space wasted...some repetition... :) It doesn't fit the 5 pages limit... etc...etc... It doesn't help that I have a day job and do this during my subway commute or when I am tired or sleepy...:)

Those constraints weren't created for the Theory of Everything. They were created for small theories...

Thus, don't criticize me on form. Tackle the content first. If the theory is not what I promised, then it is my fault and I will learn from it and correct it.

Otherwise, there are no rules for the Theory of Everything.

Please visit my Wikipedia deletion entry. I am trying to make a point or to get a reasonable review of my work there... Here is the link.

Cheers,

MP

Hypergeometrical Universe Epsilon

How to calculate Cosmological Constants

The vacuum permitivity is a Cosmological Constant, that is, there is NO formula for it. That might be the case in other theories. In mine, there is a simple formula for both the vacuum permitivity and the magnetic susceptibility and they obey the standard formula to yield the speed of light....:)

This might be the simplest way I can use to convey that this theory is simple but as you might know, it is easy to shuffle equations to yield a new equation. It is very difficult to simplify things...:)



The calculated vacuum permitivity and magnetic susceptiblity error is zero since we used it to obtain the best estimate of the electron (proton) 4DMass. The very small discrepancy (0.8%) is attributed at this time to the inherent anisotropy of the hyperspherical expansion, the inherent error associated with the assumption that one is at rest with respect to the Fabric of Space...:)

I was certainly made a believer when I obtained this number... There is no theory that can calculate these two cosmological constant (electrostatic permitivity and the magnectic susceptibility) , even less with such precision and ease....:)

Of course, this formulas are in the new version of the
paper.

Cheers,

MP

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Where is the Hyperon Family?


William has left a new comment on your post "Deuterium Coherent Fusion Questions":


Where can I find: "Those are experimental results and have been verified.
It also matches all decay reactions (see the Hyperon Family), that is also another experimental result." I don't see Hyperon on this site.Thanks...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the question.

The Hyperon Family was covered although not completely in the Blog:

Please check the blogs of August.

Of course, a slightly expanded version of the blogs can be found in the paper on section 4: The Hypergeometrical Standard Model.

Notice that I created a consistent description of all nuclear decay reactions of all hyperons and also provided an alternative explanation (one that does not violate energy conservation) for the Solar Neutrino Puzzle on page 78 (Solar Neutrino Conclusion). I mentioned that the electron neutrino could capture an electron and a muon neutrino to become a tau neutrino. This would satisfy energy conservation. The current explanation fails to do so. It is based upon a neutrino oscillation model, thus relies on a coherence between wildly different energy levels (the three neutrino masses are quite different).

I will include the mass calculation of all isotopes and hyperons in my next version.

Please feel free to ask me question. It is the only way for me to teach the Hyperon Model.

Cheers,

MP

Sunday, October 14, 2007

Alia iacta est


Alia iacta est

Steven Colbert is a man of vision..>:)

As you know, he was supporting me at my
first blog. Pretty soon, I will pay him back with the release of my book below and a brief homage..:) I hope you like the icon associated with the theory and book.

You should have no trouble recognizing the paradigm of The Flying Orchestra representing our lightspeed expanding hyperspherical Universe with their singing dilators...:) (you and me included in the chorus)...:) The two eyes are the two cross-sections of the Hypergeometrical Universe, and the side adornments are the two phases of the fundamental dilator representing the proton and electron, thus summarizing the theory in a single picture.

The smile is mine...:)

The Hypergeometrical Standard Model, replaces the millenia old concept of particles (atoms) by the concept of fundamental dilators or 4D deformation coherences. Using a single four note coherence (fundamental dilator), I was able to replicate all "particles", "isotopes" by a series of coherences. Those coherences provided a alternative model for the quark mess associated with the Standard Model. This is very important.

Currently, gazillion mathematicians (I wouldn't go far and call them Physicists) are searching algebrae capable of replicating the symmetries imposed by their current view of Nature's Forces. Well, since the so called Quarks can never be isolated, someone had to create a force that increases with distance squared, the archetypical never saturating harmonic oscillator. On the other hand, all the other forces decrease with the inverse of distance squared.

This imposes another symmetry to the Universe Hamiltonian. It has to be reciprocally symmetric, that is, one should be able to replace r by 1/r and I suppose speediness with slowness and get the same Hamiltionian (or Lagrangian or whatever technique one wants to use).

Books, gazillion papers have been written to comply with this symmetry requirement.

What would be the effect if one tries to write a simple paper like mine proposing an equally satisfying theory that does not have that symmetry and explains nuclear energy without a gluonic potential?

My theory, replaces "particles" , providing a interaction without poles, one that depends not upon distance, but instead it depends upon number of wavelenght cycles- a quantized dependency supported by the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and the Pseudo Time Quantization.

It is a departure from distance square...you know. I don't even speak the same language as the others...:)

I challenged the concept of Field. Well, not really, what I challenged is that implicit in the concept of field is the concept of a macroscopic (Cosmological) coherence. The concept of field (together with the concept of the Fundamental Dilator)and its succesfully usage is the obvious support to the Quantum Lagrangian Principle.

Of course, I also challenged Einstein by bringing back the absolutism of time and space in the 5D spacetime while keeping the relativism on the 4D spacetime. I placed the whole Universe traveling at the speed of light...:) along the radial direction...:) That is a kick in the pants..:)

My impression is that, that theory is doomed. It simply cannot be published, after all how Science will protect itself from ideological (derived from ideas) anarchy...>:)

I am guilty as charged.

Yesterday, I had to restate that IDEAS ARE IMPORTANT. Today, I still believe it. I also believe that as in any other revolution, people will have to take positions. Sitting on the fence will not do.

Yesterday, I also had to restate my genuine appreciation of other people's skills. Despite of myself refusing to call a mathematician a physicist in a paragraph above, I don't consider the mathematical models less important. They just work better with some physical insight. We all have to get along and work together...:)

Yesterday, I was also asked point blank if I believe I am better than Einstein....:) This is a tricky question. It would be easier to answer if you compare me with Einstein while he was sitting in the Patent Office without any of his ideas published. Had I answered yes under those conditions, there would not be any disagreement. The question of achievements comes into play as soon as Einstein's ideas are published. At that crucial point, life takes a turn. His ideas take life and defend themselves and Einstein's reputation.

Challenged, I had to answer Yes, based simply in the fact that I believe I succeeded where he failed - that is just one measure of quality.... I haven't been given the opportunity to give life to my ideas (through low key censorship).


By the way, this wasn't a friendly question. It was a question that if I were to answer no, the conclusion would be that I would be wasting time pushing forward a theory that even Einstein wasn't able to figure out. In summary, the questioner was trying to make me conclude that I couldn't possibly be right, since I am no Einstein...:)

I don't need to remind the people who really knows the history of science, that even Einstein was no Einstein after 1905. He lagged behind and rejected Quantum Mechanics. I am sure Dirac, Schrodinger, Fermi etc didn't see Einstein with the same lustre we see him now. Everyone has some skills, insights and one shouldn't be hold back by silly comparisons...

This is a simple argument that I were to answer : "No, I am no Einstein" - then one has to conclude that I couldn't succeed where Einstein failed. That is a fallacy, different people have different insights, life experiences, ideas exposure etc. This argument has been brought up remarkably many times. I sure Einstein heard "You are no Gauss"... or "You are no Lorentz"..:)

I have to say that I share some of his perseverance and the difficulties he faced in his time. (not the WWII but lack of support , censorship... petty, small people...:) On the other hand, at his time it was even clearer why IDEAS ARE IMPORTANT.

That said, I have to complement the answer and state that different people will have different insights, skills and that is what makes the knowledge growth of mankind so fruitful. Einstein looked into God's Mind to seek knowledge. I looked into great scientist's minds for guidance - including his. I sought to find out which hidden hypotheses where not perceived by the great men who preceded me.

Gauss fields had implicit a Cosmological Coherence, Time Quantization.

Gauss' and Biot-Savart laws provided me with a simple way to replicate Maxwell's equations without have to unnecessarily formalize my theory. I didn't want to introduce spurious concepts at this stage. Potential vectors, electric fields are unnecessary. The basic physics is what happens to a charge when the other charge moves or stays still. Everything else is a simple formalization of that dynamics. I am sure this statement will put me at odds with the Gauge Theorists...:)

From Einstein and Lorentz, I learned the value of the Lorentz transformation, metric modulations (gravitational waves). Einstein also gave a lot of headaches by his proposal of the twin paradox. I solved the riddle of time on my blog
The Passage of Time. I couldn't had done it if the paradox didn't exist and hadn't brought up by Einstein.

From Mach, I realized that non-local interaction explanation for inertia was wrong (unnecessary). Even when one disagrees with a predecessor, it doesn't diminishes the value of the predecessor's pondering. The most difficult task in science is to find out which questions to ask.

Ideas are not only important (I am not), but also they have a life of their own.. once people understand my theory, it will have a life of its own and I will move on into another project.

Below is the last task of this effort, this together with a few Blog interviews. Bloggers are finally catching up with the relevance of censorship in the physics environment. From the orthodox point of view, the more innovative an idea is the harsher the censorship should be. By that measure, I am doing fine.



I will be publishing "The Flying Orchestra" soon. I hope I can count on your strident support or dissent...:) Either way, my work would be done.

By the end of this odyssey, Egg will be in the face of Ginsparg, unless there is such a thing as reciprocal symmetry and them it would be on mine...:)


Cheers,


MP


ps- Don't forget to view my theory latest version and to visit my blog on the Mismanagement of at Cornell-Los Alamos Arxives


I had the pleasure to notice my colleagues from Ithaca visiting my site. The site is open to comments. Anyone can submit anonymous dissenting, challenges, or supportive comment to the theory. I will keep the identity of all dissenting opinionators private, thus Paul Ginsparg can be free to bash the theory as much as he wants.:)

Well, that said, bashing wasn't my goal. As in any theory, one hopes for intelligent, constructive dissenting opinions, but if I get bashing, I will have to be happy with it... One has to play the hand one is dealt with...:) Alia iacta est...:)

Friday, October 12, 2007

Mismanagement at Cornell-Los Alamos Arxives

Mismanagement at Cornell-Los Alamos Arxives

It happened again. Cornell-Los Alamos Arxives, where I emphasize the word
Cornell, managed to censor my work again. Here is the file describing some of my efforts.

As I was saying, I emphasize Cornell due to its continued support of censorship even though this activity has been brought up to its attention by several lawsuits. If this is not condoning censorship, I don't know what it is.

You might ask what is the point of having Ginsparg dressed like a chicken in my site. Of course, I enjoy the sight, would love to be offensive etc... I think that the worse thing I can call Ginsparg is Censor. This job was always performed by the Church, State or any other evil entity. Scientists, specially when there was some scrutiny and visibility, would and should not censor other ideas. There is plenty of visibility now-a-days.

The real point I am trying to make is that the person in the helm of the most import outlet of Physics ideas should be above childish behavior. The fact that one sees a Ginsparg Chicken should never make Ginsparg to blacklist my ideas. This is the most important job in Physics and due to Physics importance to Mankind, a very, very important job to hold.

Ginsparg did a great job creating the Los Alamos arxives, although it would be created by him or someone else. It was a state driven initiative, not unlike the internet, the atomic bomb etc.. Someone is always at the helm of those initiatives. That said, I hope Ginsparg, like Faust, will recover his soul someday and move back into the Light...:)

Of course, roughing up some feathers is necessary sometimes to bring up a good point.

I sincerely hope that Cornell University and Paul Ginsparg will raise to occasion and perform their jobs accordingly.

Up to now, they have done an unspeakable job.

Cheers,

MP

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Deuterium Coherent Fusion Questions


Deuterium Coherent Fusion Questions:


William asked:

On page 68 of the second paper under papers in your blog you are discussing
nuclear fusion of deuterium.

The diagram labeled deuterium shows
interaction of one electron with one nuetron, but deuterium has two
neutrons.

Does your theory predict any new experimental observations
that have
been verified?

What does your theory say about dark energy
and mass?
It is always a pleasure answering questions and having the theory defend itself...:) I will do my part..>:)

Let's see what Wikipedia tells us about Deuterium:

The nucleus of deuterium, called a deuteron, contains one proton and one
neutron...
Let's see the figure on page 68


Thus Figure 47 shows on the left side the Hypergeometrical Standard Model coherence representation of a proton and a neutron...:)

The proton is the four notes coherence in the lower part of the left panel...It starts with a Proton (horinzontally positioned, thus having a shadow or being in phase with the Fabric of Space).

This is the Fundamental Dilator (Coherence), the reason for Quantum Mechanics and for the Pseudo Time Quantization (which is the reason for Quantum Mechanics)...:)

Let me explain in bullets:

  1. Fundamental Dilator (Coherence) has a quantized interaction with the 3D Universe, that is, if one considers the interaction strength proportional to the footprint of the dilator with the Fabric of Space, them the fundamental dilator only interacts when it is perfectly horizontal..:)

  2. This Quantization makes the Lagrangian Quantized also, that is, the Lagrangian that defines the dilator motion only applies to these phases of the coherence, 0,pi,2pi,3pi...etc...

  3. The Quantum Lagrangian Principle is based on the minimum work done by constraints - which is the physical basis for Hamilton's Principle, Variational Calculus etc....

  4. The 4D de Broglie stepwise lightspeed expansion of the Shockwave Universe together with the Quantum Lagrangian Principle means that at each step the dilator will move to a new position in phase with the surrounding dilaton field. This means that a dilator never dilates out of phase (local phase) with the surrounding dilators. Notice the word local, this means that I am not considering that each and every dilator (no matter where it is localized) will dilate in phase. That is not what Cosmological Coherence means. The meaning is that dilators will dilate in phase with the local dilaton field, thus adding its amplitude contribution coherently (thus extensively)..>:) (in the sense of extensive property of matter).

  5. A dilator will not only surfs the 4D dilaton field but its projection will also surf the 3D projection (the 3D projection of a dilaton field of a single dilator is the de Broglie wave associated with that dilator).

  6. In a Hydrogen atom for example, one has spherical symmetry. The 4D dimension and the de Broglie stepping there is always uncertainly where the dilator will land next. Its dilaton field projection will scatter around the proton at each de Broglie step of the Universe expansion. The scattered dilaton field will create the 3D Lissajous figures associated with the electronic orbitals....:)

In summary, the fundamental dilator is both the source of Grand Unification and the source of Quantum Mechanics. I didn't mention its effect on Grand Unification, but one just need to know that both a Proton and a Electron are different phases of the same coherence. The dilaton field is dependent only upon the displacement as seen from the 4D perspective (RXYZ). This means the even thought the 3D mass is only dependent upon the footprint of the dilator (that footprint is different for a proton and an electron), the 4D mass or 4D displacement volume is the same for both "particles"..:) The intensity of an electromagnetic field is dependent upon the 4D displacement mass and only depends upon the number of dilators, that is, both electron and proton have the same "4DMass" (4D Displacement volume). I wrote the Gravitation and Electromagnetism equations (Gauss and Biot-Savart) in terms of 4D Masses in my Grand Unification...

Before I forget, I have to finish answering William question:

The upper dilator on Figure 47 is a Neutron..:) a dimmer dilator composed of an electron, a transmutation note (electron-proton), a proton and another transmutation note (proton-electron).

Transmutation notes are 3D rotations (rotations around one of the axes in our familiar 3D manifold). The dilator spins and tunnels from 4D deformation state to 4D deformation state. The spinning takes place around an axis perpendicular to R and X(or Y or Z)... The rotation associated with the transmutation note is along any direction within the XYZ subspace.

The difference in time between these two kinds of rotation creates a dephasing and changes which dilator phase is in phase with the Fabric of Space, thus transmutating it from electron into proton. The accumulated dephasing is responsible for the nuclear energy and for the shorter lifetime....:)

So here is your Strong Force..>:)

The diagram labeled deuterium shows interaction of one electron with one neutron, but deuterium has two neutrons.

This is not really what is shown in Figure 47. It shows a Proton and a Neutron, the components of a Deuterium nucleus. Deuterium has only one neutron...:)

Does your theory predict any new experimental observations that have been verified? What does your theory say about dark energy and mass?

The theory provides the mass of all particles. Those are experimental results and have been verified. It also matches all decay reactions (see the Hyperon Family), that is also another experimental result. It also match all the particle spins (Hyperons Delta and Sigma family differs only by spin)...:)

It predicts the possibility to create nuclear fusion coherently, thus with much higher yield, directionality etc...:) The phase matching conditions can easily be measured in an experimental setup... but I can help if one ask me how..:)

I mentioned Gravitational Shielding but I know that you people don't believe in such thing...:) I guess, someday I will explain... when you believe in it...:)

With respect to Dark Matter, the expansion is a direct result of the 4D Shockwave topology and does not require Dark Energy to explain it...:) Dark Matter is another subject... All known spin zero matter is created from spin half dilators. There is a possibility to create dilator with spin zero... like a spin zero neutron...:) I didn't bother to think about this because I don't have data, but I can easily calculate the mass and lifetime of a zero spin neutron... It should be much longer than the spin half neutron (8 minutes)... One can also find out which nuclear reactions would create them..etc...


William, thanks for your questions. Please post them since I normally don't read my gmail email... but whenever I read it, I always answer the questions.

There are other amazing possibilities in this theory. It doesn't provide the thrills of time traveling... or wormholes...:) or black holes entropy that disappears.. or not... but it might take you out of this little planet some day... or save you from that nasty asteroid that has your name on it.....:)

I leave you admiring the Omega Minus Dilator..:) Quite a sight...:)

Cheers,

MP

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

The Passage of Time


The Passage of Time
Before I forget, I posted a newer version of my theory.

A friend of mine who is very curious about the meaning of time...:) asked me to deliver the details promised in my book...:) Kind of anti-climatic... but I guess I have to oblige...

The problem is simple from the Hypergeometrical point of view... I mentioned that a deformation shown on the two cross-sections of the Hypergeometrical Universe icon correspond to an inertial reference frame with a given velocity v1. That velocity has a corresponding angle alpha1.

Let's just consider what would happen to someone in that reference frame observing something moving at a velocity v2 corresponding to an angle alpha2. This angle is now measured with respect to the inertial reference frame with velocity v1.
As you know angles have to be added according to the equation below
tan(alpha1 + alpha2)=(tan(alpha1)+tan(alpha2))/(1+tan(alpha1)*tan(alpha2))
in the RXYZ cross-section
or the corresponding hyperbolic version
tanh(alpha1 + alpha2)=(tanh(alpha1)+tanh(alpha2))/(1+tanh(alpha1)*tanh(alpha2))
on the PSIXYZ cross-section
This equation means that the addition of angles alpha1 and alpha2 saturates at 45 degrees or the speed of light..

Lorentz transforms are a contrivance due to the way Physics evolved. If the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and the Hyperspherical Shockwave Universe topology were discovered earlier, interactions would naturally not produce any speed higher than the speed of light.

What about time???... Well... Nice you asked...:)

Time affect us through two different processes: a) The first one is through Gravitation/electromagnetism...b) The second is through nuclear decaying processes.

The first kind of processes is very broad... Gravitation and electromagnetism will control the speed of your chemistry, electrochemistry, thoughts...:) the perception of the passage of time etc...:) These processes are controlled by the tiny angles in the 4D space associated with the dilator-dilaton field interaction occurring at each de Broglie step of the Hyperspherical Universe lightspeed expansion. The actual angle change due to interaction also saturates at 45 degrees. This means that the ability of interactions to produce results (change in the state of motion) decreases as v1 tends towards c...

From the point of view of someone sitting in the fabric of space, these angles grow smaller as v1 reaches close to the speed of light. Of course, the tangent formula for angle addition is the basis for the Lorentz transforms. This means that forces become weaker, dynamics slower. Time seems to be passing by quite slowly...:)

In fact, time is passing always at the same speed. The cosmological time doesn't wait for nobody...:) The weakening down of gravitation and electromagnetism results in a slowed down chemistry, electrochemistry, dynamics...Anything traveling close to the speed of light will be frozen...:)which is quite distinct from some funky flow of mysterious time particles...or anything our imaginative mind can conjure up...

That said, one should address the slowing down of the atomic clock...:) How does lifetimes changes with the local deformation of the Fabric of Space...:) Notice that I didn't invoke speed or anything that might bring back the automaton reaction of restricted relativists... :)

Since the particle lifetime also slows down accordingly, the only conclusion one can reach is that nuclear lifetimes are inversely proportional to the deformation associated with the complex dilator (complex deformation coherences). The angle saturation at the speed of light makes any particle to be flattened with the surrounding Fabric of Space.

Serendipitous to some degree...and perhaps just an approximation.

Thus neither Einstein nor anyone else could ask the correct question... which has three items:
a) How many forces are out there??? I say one and if you really pressure me, I might say three (Gravitation,Electrostatics and Magnetism)...which I unified in my paper.
b) How those forces depend upon the local Fabric of Space deformational angle?
c) How particle lifetimes depend upon the local Fabric of Space deformational angle?

Those are trick questions to figure out... The first the one has an unexpected low number of forces...:) The second has, implicit in it, the proposed universe topology and the recast of Newton's equations in terms of FS deformation...

The third requires the creation of an alternative standard model (The Hypergeometrical Standard Model).

No wonder no one knew what time is!!!!

Cheers,

MP

PS- I will soon tell you how one can actuate upon the Fabric of Space ... This is a impressive feat since the Fabric of Space is very thin, embedded in a 4D manifold, traveling at the speed of light...:)
I will give you a hint... if you were living inside a page of a book... How would you find a way to point outwards...:) in the direction of the third dimension...:) Remember that you are a 2D person....:) Quite a feat..:) Please make sure to leave a message if you can figure this out...:)
Then moved the same idea onto the 3D light speed expanding hyperspherical universe... Can you tell where R is poyinting to...:)