HyperGeometrical Universe - The Theory of Everything

Hyperluminal Neutrinos..:)

2011-09-25T11:43:00.009-04:00

Hyperluminal Neutrinos

Today I will talk about a blockbuster research result from CERN. They discovered that Neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light. That has been in the News, hot from the Press...:) Earth shattering discovery.

Within the framework of the Hypergeometrical Universe theory, a more fundamental theory, this higher than the speed of light amazing discovery is simply explained away with a simple phrase:

Hyperluminal Neutrinos == Dispersion
That is Electron Neutrinos are just asymmetric mode dilatons

Einstein's made many great contributions to Science. The photoelectric effect; proving the existence of atoms by modeling Brownian motion. I have to say, even Restrict Relativity was a great achievement since it emphasized the need for an interpretation where observed (proper) time had to be expanded to explain the observed Universe. I consider General Relativity his least contribution due to the ad-hoc nature of his equations and the resulting confusion of equations with a pole. They were the source of the Black Hole conjecture.

In the past, I went further and explained how the passage of time is dependent upon which laws we choose to describe the Universe in The Image in the Mirror posting. Within the Hypergeometrical Universe, instead of Newton's Gravitational Law (the one with a horrendous pole at zero distance), I proposed that dilators (Hypergeometrical Universe "particles") dilate in phase with the surrounding dilaton field. This is called the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and it is easily supported by considerations of metric deformation quantization (which lays a level deeper than our observed Quantum Mechanics).

By the way, that pole is the reason why we were misguided into considering the existence of a singularity or dressed singularity or Black Hole. The negation of the existence of a singularity naked or covered is different from saying that there isn't compact distributions of matter that irradiates little or no visible ligth. This objection only refers to the spacetime representation with Mass Dependent Curvature. This curvature is dependent upon what laws we use to describe motion. If you law has a pole, then the curvature or spacetime will have to have a singularity. If you choose a law without a pole, there will be no need for a singularity.

The Quantum Fundamental Principle defines the position of dilators at each consecutive de Broglie step of expansion of the Hyperspherical Universe. There is an accumulation point at 45 degrees with respect to the hyperspherical 3D universe. At that angle, matter is traveling at the speed of light and displacements at each de Broglie step approaches asymptotically zero, that is, no motion at time goes by on each and every other reference frame. An dense assemble of dilators will create exact these conditions and light (which is generate by charge motion) will not be generated. In fact, the Black Hole should really be seemed at low frequency radiowaves from that line of reasoning.

All particles, with the exception of the Neutrino, are variations of the Fundamental Dilator and represent coherences with periods close to multiples of the Fundamental Dilator period. This makes them strong interacting. Since they contains the Fundamental Dilator as one of their sub-coherences, they contain local metric deformations that have non zero displacement volume per cycle in nature.

The Neutrino, on the other hand, is a ellipsoid of revolution with only two non-null axes. Since the axes have opposing values the total displacement volume per cycle is null and it also has the wrong frequency.

I haven't paid enough attention to the 4 dimensional ellipsoid of revolution physical model for the dilators, but I will try to make everything coherent there. The physical representation of the dilators is not necessary for this theory to make sense.

Protons, Neutrons, etc have three non-null axes of revolution. Electron and Electron-Neutrino have only two. Electron has a non-zero displacement volume per cycle while neutrino has a zero displacement volume per cycle due to its opposing sign axes' lengths.

This will become clearer next.

Let's review the Neutron Model to make sense of what I just wrote.This was first present in the Review of the Hyperon Family Up to the Pion.

Review of Electron, Proton and Neutron Models

Let take a look at the Fundamental Dilator once again.

The Electron(Proton):

The fundamental dilator is a 4D coherence between stationary states of deformation. The deformation of space is quantized, that is, can be represented as states in a 4D double potential well.

The respective coherence for Electron and Proton are shown below:

and for a Proton:

Notice that the Proton and Electron coherences differ only by which is the initial (in phase) state in the coherence. The states associated with the Electron (0,-2/3,-1/3) and (0,-1/3,-2/3) differ not by "energy" since they have the same 3D volume (the Hpergeometrical Universe equivalent to Energy is the 3D projection of the 4D Volume) but by time. It takes time to rotate the dilator around (at the speed of light) and that introduces an extra phase delay on the Tunnelling Process with respect to the Spinning Process. Remember that all particles in the Universe are described in terms of combinations of this two fundamental dilators and that they have Spin Half, that is, they spin at half the speed of tunneling...:) A nice touch, I might say...:)

The Neutron is the first dimmer or two chord sequence. Its Balls Diagram is shown below:
Notice that I decided to use Red Balls for Positive and Green Balls for Negative moieties...:) Electrician Conventions... (never cut the Green Wire...) :)

Notice that the diagram above introduce one transmutation chord:

Electron-Proton Transmutation Chord

The dimmer character is derived from the impossibility to determine which dimensional note (Electron or Proton) is in phase with the Universe. Under these conditions the Neutron is represented by the two states (one starting with the electron and another starting with the proton) with half probability each one.

The Nature of Neutrinos

Below we show the Anti-Neutrino Coherence.

The anti-neutrino corresponds to the composite of the two transmutation chords found in the neutron coherence. That is the reason that if you split a neutrino, you will be able to create anti-mater out of Matter.

Someday I will explain that in a posting..:) Splitting Hairs and Neutrinos...:)

The 3D Volume Displacement equation is given by:
Neutron(1/3,1/3,-2/3) = Proton(2/3,2/3,-1/3) + Electron(0,-1/3,-2/3) + Anti-Neutrino(-1/3,0,1/3)

That means, unlike the electron which is also has only two axes but corresponds to a net decrease in local metric displacement volume (decrease in one phase but a net increase in the alternative phase when protons become a net decrease), the neutrino is always a net zero local metric displacement volume change. In the example above, the anti-neutrino corresponds to a shrinkage along the X dimension and an stretch on the Z dimension. This local metric modulation changes the moment of inertia of the sub-coherence and allow for the electron-proton transmutation. The local metric modulation changes the moment of inertia and in doing so changes the timing between tunneling and spinning within the four-dimensional spatial manifold.

The anti-neutrino corresponds to the electron-proton + proton-electron transmutation. I struggled to figure out if that sub-coherence was supposed to be in the lower states or in the upper states.

I had to decide if the transmutations corresponds to this sequence
(0,-2/3,-1/3) > (2/3,2/3,-1/3)>(2/3,-1/3,2/3)>(2/3,2/3,-1/3)
or
(0,-2/3,-1/3)>(0,-1/3,-2/3)>(0,-2/3,-1/3)>(2/3,2/3,-1/3)
that is, I had to decide if the delay was cause by a 3D rotation (rotation within the 3D hypersurface) while the coherence was in the lower or in the upper state (proton or electron states).

After looking at the assignments for all the hyperons and analyzing all hyperon decay equations, I decided that the anti-neutrino (electron-neutrino) would correspond to a 3D rotation (rotation within the 3D Hypersurface) while the neutron coherence was in the proton state, to my surprise.:) I was hoping for a neater result, that is, that the anti-neutrino would correspond to a rotation while the dilator coherence is in the electron state..:) but such is life... full of disappointments..:)

Now we know that the neutrino corresponds to a coherence involving the following diagram

it becomes easier to understand the relationship between this diagram and the (-1/3,0,1/3) representation.

If I shrink everything along X and and equally stretch everything along Z, that would correspond to a rotation around the Y axis, or a rotation in the 3D space.

Now let's compare the Neutrino with light.

In my theory light is a modulation of the source position of the dilaton field. The dilaton field is continuously irradiated without loss of energy. In the same way an electromagnetic field would be irradiated without loss if there weren't any absorbers around. For an electromagnetic coherence to decay and energy be absorbed or irradiated, a dephasing event has to occur. Like in the case of a Boy in the Swing, if one doesn't push the swing in an out-of-phase fashion, energy is never lost nor absorbed (disregarding friction). The propagation of the dilaton field occurs in a pristine 4D spatial manifold without anything to absorb that dilaton field.

Both have zero net metric displacement per cycle. They differ in the nature of their modes. Like electromagnetic modes, electromagnetic waves are just modulations of a modulation (the dilaton field). The dilaton field can be thought as a TEM00 or totally symmetric mode. Of course, the Electron Neutrino can be thought as the first asymmetric mode. The dilaton mode is not transversal, it is volumetric. The Neutrino mode is asymmetric and transversal.

In the case of deformation of the local metric, one would expect DISPERSION, that is, different modes with different coherences and frequencies would travel at different speeds, thus the difference in speed between Neutrinos and Photons.

Please feel free to ask me questions. They will help me to clarify the points in this posting.

QED.

Cheers,

MP

PS_ I refreshed the version of my theory, that is, the PDF in this page corresponds to the paper I presented at the 7th Vigier Symposium in London last year.

A Simple Theory of The Mind

2011-08-23T21:47:00.001-04:00

Some 12 years ago, I was thinking about life and came up with some understanding of how the Mind works... Not how it is organized anatomically...:) I didn't have access to free floating brains...:) but how a human personality is created and maintained.

I created a very short, no BS, theory and posted in here:

http://TheAgentTheoryOfTheMind.blogspot.com

Please feel free to criticize, correct, point my misspellings, etc.

I've been very busy but will come back to The Hypergeometrical Universe Theory eventually.

Cheers,

MP

Quantum Gravity

2011-06-27T07:30:00.000-04:00

Quantum Gravity

I am finally free of extra chores and will start developing the Quantum Gravity argument next.

Cheers,

MP

Infinite Dimensionality and the Quantum Lagrangian Principle

2011-01-22T11:24:00.004-05:00

Infinite Dimensionality as a Bridge to Quantum Mechanics

In Physics, more specifically in Quantum Chromodynamics there are neat renormalization tricks, meant to ABRACADABRA some infinities (self-energy) etc...

One of these tricks is called Dimensional Renormalization. Normally it involves redeploying a theory in an N dimensional space and then making N go to 4 or 3. When that happens the infinities disappears or become meaningful within that new framework.

Recently, Dudley R. Herschbach, A.K.A. dude...:) (just kidding, Dudley) used a variation of Dimensional Renormalization in which instead of recovering regularized equations when N goes to 4, he obtained "Surprisingly Accurate Semiclassical Results" resembling Pure Quantum Mechanical Results by making N go to infinity...:)

Also surprisingly is that that same trick worked fine in the calculation of energy levels of atoms (molecules with a single positive center..:)

That is fine and dandy...:) but what is missing is the reasoning behind that coincidence...:) Nobody, including Dudley, is saying that the Universe is infinitely dimensional or the reason for Quantum Mechanics is the infinite dimensionality of the Universe. I should comment that he used the word Dimensional Scaling as opposed to Dimensional Renormalization, but that is a minor detail, just a name...

The unaddressed Hocus Pocus is the WHY? Why would an infinite dimensional Universe lead to Simple and Surprisingly Accurate Approach to the Chemical Bond Obtained from Dimensional Scaling ...:)

To understand that, one should delve deep into the details of the derivation by Professor Herschbach. He did not found that any kind of infinitely dimensional topology yields Accurate Results in the case of Diatomic Molecules (e.g. H2) ...:)

Only a special topology in which rho is infinitely dimensional, Phy is the dihedral angle between the planes containing the electrons and the internuclear axis of a H2 molecule. This special topology makes Rho perpendicular to the interatomic axis of H2.

If you remember that Quantum Lagrangian Principle (QLP), the basis for my Grand Unification Equations derivation, you would realize that that choice of topology is a requirement and the WHY for the Surprising Success of Infinite Dimensionality Scaling.

If you read equation (6) and (7) and understand Figure 2 on his paper, it should become clear that the difference between the incorrect equation (7) and the correct one (6) is the loss of dependence on Phy. This can be seen as if the two Hydrogen nuclei were generating cylindrical dilaton waves and that the electron wavefunction had a k_r component with a de Broglie wavelength r₁and r₂. This is exactly what one would expect from the Quantum Lagrangian Principle.

IF electron 1 is at distance r₁ from nucleus 1, then it is an integer number of wavelengths from that nucleus or conversely, the de Broglie wavelength (5D dilaton projection onto the Hyperbolic 4D spacetime) is the distance to the nucleus divided by an integer n₁. This reasoning leads to the proper calculation of excited states.

Remember that the de Broglie wavelegth associated with the nuclei is much broader due to their 2000 times larger inertia. As you remember, the fundamental dilator has different inertia for the different phases of the coherence.

The QLP states that a dilator will always dilate in phase with the surroundings dilators. This works both in the 5D spacetime as well as in the 4D spacetime projection. The 5D dilatons project onto a 4D Hyperbolic Hypersurface as de Broglie Waves. This means that the Hydrogen atoms will be sitting on the crest of the electron de Broglie wave (at a given Rho-directed momentum).

I wrote this some time ago. I don't have time to review it, but it is likely to be correct. Please review the reasoning and comment on it. You might have to read Dudley's paper.

Cheers,

MP

PS- I found this laying around and thought it would be worthwhile publishing. I was planning to show the detailed derivation of Quantum Mechanics (Schrodinger Equation) from the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, which means a renormalization of the dynamics from 5D Spacetime to 4D Spacetime. The surfing the dilaton field aspect of the Quantum Lagrangian Principle brings in the ondulatory aspects of Quantum Mechanics. The reduction of one dimension introduces the uncertainty in quantum mechanics - the interference between dilaton fields produces lines in our 3D space where the dilator can be at each step of the hyperspherical expansion. This results uncertainty on the path of a dilator (electrons). The loci of these positions is described by a dilator wavefunction...:)

I will get back to this problem later. Let me know if interested in helping me. I've been very busy and it was never my idea to write the whole chimichanga. By the way, what I wrote above should be self-evident...:)

The Flu

2011-01-22T00:25:00.001-05:00

The Flu

Nothing like not being able to think to become vain..:)

I've the flu so I can barely think.. but writing about things I like and know should be a natural choice.

First, let's celebrate a few milestones. The first one is on the upper right panel containing the Blogged Editor's review of my blog. I got a Very Good rating and am thankful for that. For me this is a tremendous compliment, since the Editor reviewed the blog not for content although I hope he executed standard crackpot testing..:), but for style, readability and other literary measures.

The map above shows the distributions of readers, showing that little by little this theory is becoming part of the discussion which is why I wrote this blog. The number of unique URL readers is actually around 43 thousand readers, a very large number for such an obscure and challenging subject.

The third reason to be thankful for is the presentation of this theory at the 7th Symposium in Honour of Jean-Pierre Vigier

The proceedings of the symposium were finally published by the American Institute of Physics. The abstract is here.

Thispaper presents a simple and purely geometrical Grand Unification Theory.Quantum Gravity, Electrostatic and Magnetic interactions are shown in aunified framework. Newton's, Gauss' and Biot-Savart's Laws are derived fromfirst principles. Unification symmetry is defined for all the existingforces. This alternative model does not require Strong and Electroweakforces. A 4D Shock -Wave Hyperspherical topology is proposed forthe Universe which together with a Quantum Lagrangian Principle anda Dilator based model for matter result in a quantizedstepwise expansion for the whole Universe along a radial directionwithin a 4D spatial manifold. The Hypergeometrical Standard Model formatter, Universe Topology and a new Law of Gravitation arepresented. ©2010 American Institute of Physics

This is the goal I had in mind when I started this blog. I wanted to provide an outlet for this idea. If is right or wrong, that is to be decided on a debate among ideas not by censorship.

As I mentioned in the prior blog, there is still a factor of two to be corrected in this paper. I will review it before to long. It is interesting since it will show that the Hypergeometrical Standard Model predicts a relationship between charge and spin..:) Well, one can just review the Delta Plus Plus already discussed in prior blogs to have a glimpse of the future...:)

Cheers,

MP

AS FAT AS YOU WILL EVER GET

2010-10-28T23:29:00.002-04:00

AS FAT AS YOU WILL EVER GET

What is a factor of two among friends...:)

Sorry disappearing. I've been horrendously busy for some time.

I had the opportunity to synthesize my work from 140 pages paper into a 26 pages paper soon to be published. In doing so, and in a very short period of time, I had to remember what I wrote many years ago and make sense of it. In the past, I wrote that you are twice as fat in 4D (5D spacetime) as you are in 3D.

It turned out that this is not a didactic way to present my ideas. It raises inconvenient mapping issues (factors of 2 ) from going from 3D to 4D.

The best way to coherently explain everything will be presented again, and there I will tell you that the Fundamental Dilator (Electromagnetic Fundamental Dilator) is actually HALF of an Hydrogen Atom, which is the Gravitational Fundamental Dilator.

One either say that, or say that we are twice as fat in 5D as I said. It sounds funny but it is not simplest way to present my ideas.

From now on and in retrospect, I will say that the Electromagnetic Fundamental Dilator

has the 4D Mass of HALF a Hydrogen Atom.

The Gravitational Fundamental Dilator (Hydrogen Atom) has the 4D Mass of a Hydrogen Atom:

You might say, of course, of course, a horse is a horse, of course of course... but things were very confusing when I wrote this while shaking on a New York City subway..:)

By the way, my work has a dearth of references for two reasons, one it was written without the benefit of being in an academic setting with all time in the Universe to go to the library or to conferences and find out whom to kiss up or even honestly honor. I would love to have more references in it. It would make justice to other peoples' contribution. Unfortunately, life is so difficult that I didn't even had the heart to ask one of my few scientific friends for the favor of polishing that aspect of my work. Maybe if someday this work is reviewed positively, I will gladly ask around for suggestions (in fact, you are always welcome to suggest anything). If it is reviewed negatively, I will save people from any association by not referring to their work....:)

Hopefully, by the time someone pays attention to this theory, it will be published with all the i's dotted and all the t's crossed...:) That may or may not happen this time.

By the way, this factor of two explains why I calculated the Magnetic Force (Biot-Savart Law) using 2 Lambda1 (two cycles of a Compton one atomic mass unit wavelength).

I explained correctly at the time, but it is better make you equally fat in 3D and 4D and simplify matters.

Again, I have to let you know that I extremely value criticism. Had someone criticized my simple theory or complained that He/She was already fat enough, I could had corrected this many years ago...:)

Cheers,

MP

Answers to Questions

2010-07-27T23:18:00.017-04:00

Anonymous said...

are all your factors constants or functional approximations?

where is your evidence to confirm their definition for each factor, time, time change according to the history of time, what is space?

Is it constant or variable, or constant/variable, or other...

Thanks for the question. Every so often someone asks a kind of general question that permits me to review the whole theory and in many times, to find a better way to explain my ideas..:)

The theory does not have factors other than the Planck's constant, which relates 3D Mass (inertial mass) to a dilaton projection wavelength and the speed of light.

The theory reproduces the laws of physics and in doing so introduces two new constitutive parameters (elasticity anisotropy and elasticity). These parameters can be tested by looking at the predicted gravitational wave frequency and by measuring phase match angles of nuclear reactions.

There are two more parameters (dephasings associated with transmutation notes, explained further in this blog), that are associated with the time it takes for an electron (proton) to rotate 90 degrees in the 3D space.

They differ from constants in other theories since they have a very simple and physical meanings and come in a very small number. These six constants are the minimum information one needs to explain the whole Universe.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The fundamental components of this theory are :

Particles are modeled as dilators
Dimensional notes associated with Electron and Positron. Vertical letters indicates perpendicularity with respect to our 3D Universe
Dilators are coherences between stationary deformation states of a local metric.

Lower (higher) state is associated with Proton(Electron). The initial state (in phase with the 3D Universe) defines the particle nature (proton, antiproton,electron or positron).
The Hypergeometrical Universe topology (3D Universe is a lightspeed expanding hyperspherical shockwave)
Dilators are thin along the radial direction and spin at half the speed of tunneling, that is, when the wavefunction describing the dilator moves from one shape to another (180 degrees), the dilator profile rotates by 90 degrees.
Pseudo-time quantization results from item 4). Interaction only occurs when the dilator has a footprint on the 3D Universe.
Dilators motion along the 4D spatial manifold obeys the Quantum Lagrangian Principle which states that dilators always dilate in phase with surrounding dilaton field.
Items 6, 5 and the embedding of the 3D lightspeed expanding hyperspherical shockwave Universe within a 4D spatial manifold allows for the uncertainty that creates Quantum Mechanical behavior. This means that the Hypergeometrical Universe provides the reasons for the observed Quantum Mechanics.
The two cross-sections shown at the top of this and almost any other posting here, shows that the Hypergeometrical Universe contains an Absolute Time, a preferential direction but the absolute time cannot be used to time anything other than the Universe expansion. The preferential direction cannot be seen within the 3D expanding Hypersphere where we live.

Dilators motion along the 4D spatial manifold obeys the Quantum Lagrangian Principle which states that dilators always dilate in phase with surrounding dilaton field.

At any de Broglie step of the Hypergeometrical Universe expansion (one step is equal to the Compton wavelength of a Hydrogen atom), the dilator has to move itself by distance x to satisfy the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, that is, to dilate in phase with the surrounding field.

In this picture, I show two angles. Alpha1 is the arctan(x/Lambda1), where Lambda1 is the Compton Wavelength of a Hydrogen atom (around 10^-15meters).

If you are a charged fundamental dilator (non spin zero dilator), your k-vector is now along that new direction. If you are a neutral particle (e.g. a hydrogen atom or a neutron), you will also move yourself by distance x, but your k-vector will only point along angle alpha0 or thereabouts. Angle Alpha0 is arctan(x/(R0+lambda1), where R0 is the radius of the Universe (equal to 21.72 billion light years).

The Universe is actually 21.72 Billion Years old, by which I mean that this radius is consistent with the Pioneer Anomaly (it was derived from the Pioneer Anomaly observations) and explains everything in Cosmology. There is another way to calibrate this radius but I would need the redshift data for all the Stellar Candles. That would be an independent measure of the age/radius of the Universe.

This difference in change of direction rate (the change in direction happens at each de Broglie step of the expansion) explains the difference in strength between electromagnetic and gravitational forces. This means that the "force" represented here by the dilaton field and the Quantum Lagrangian Principle is the same. What differs is what the "particle" does in response to that interaction. This is real Grand Unification.

Discrepancies are associated with physical quantities (elasticity of space in the case of gravitation and elasticity anisotropy in the case of electromagnetism). From the elasticity of space derived from the Gravitational constant, one derives the natural frequency of Gravitational Waves. From the anisotropy of elasticity one derives the phase matching conditions required for coherent nuclear fusion, antimatter creation etc…J

If you look at the plot below for a neutron dilation levels you can find the meaning of electron neutrinos. They correspond to the subcoherence between protons and electrons. These subcoherences (half-electron neutrino each) correspond themselves to rotations within the 3D space (as opposed to tumbling withing the 4D spatial manifold). The dephasing associated with this rotation defines the mass of all isotopes, that is, one parameter is used to calculate the mass of everything that is composed of protons and neutrons.

Hyperons requires the knowledge of another dephasing parameter from the pions composition shown below:

Pion Minus diagram.

Here the red lines correspond to the already know half-electron-neutrino. The blue lines correspond to a new dephasing process.

This dephasing process happens by rotations on the upper states and corresponds to rotations of the electron state within the 3D Universe. With this dephasing parameter all other particles in the Univers can have their masses calculated. If you know how to split a neutrino, you can make antimatter..:)

Now let's talk about constants. The theory derives formulas for Cosmological Constants like Newton's Gravitational constant G given by:

= space elasticity

P=3.5

K=elasticity anisotropy

Derivation is simple and it is on the pdfs.

The natural laws for Gravitation and Electromagnetism are derived from first principles as:

Where C1 and C2 are the charges traveling at V1 and V2 and c is the speed of light.

For Gravitational one has exactly the same equation (Gyrogravity). This equation is consistent with Pioneer Anomaly , Gravitational Lensing , the Precession of Mercury Perihelion and explains the Galactic Puzzle (the constant angular speed of mass distributions within spiral galaxies). All these demonstrations are posted within this blog.

This means that one equation describes Electrostatics, Magnetism and Gravitation and this equation was derived from first principles using the fundamental hypotheses presented above.

The Hypergeometrical Universe theory explains the particle physics aspects of the Universe including the puzzling aspects of Cosmology. Currently there are two inconsistent observations:

Hubble measurements using short distance calibration indicates that the Universe is around 14 billion years old.
Standard Stellar Candles (Supernovae type 1A) which are supposed to have constant luminosity through all ages of the Universe life, indicates that the furthest observed Stellar Candle to be around 50-60 Billion light years away. This conclusion is arrived by observing exceedingly weak supernovae type 1A explosion. The weaker the supernovae luminosity the larger the distance inferred (apparent luminosity decays with the inverse of the distance squared).

ActualRadius= ActualAgeOfTheUniverse	21.72				AgeOfTheUniverse as inferred from Hubble Constant=15.36		Pi/180
RadiusOfTheUniverse	Lambda	RedShit	Candle Inferred Distance (BillionLightYears)	alpha	alpha	45-alpha	1A StellarCandleSize
21.72	1.00	-	-	45	0.79	-	1.00
21.34	1.02	(0.02)	(0.39)	44	0.77	0.02	0.98
20.95	1.04	(0.04)	(0.79)	43	0.75	0.03	0.96
20.56	1.06	(0.05)	(1.21)	42	0.73	0.05	0.95
20.15	1.08	(0.07)	(1.64)	41	0.72	0.07	0.93
19.75	1.10	(0.09)	(2.09)	40	0.70	0.09	0.91
19.33	1.12	(0.11)	(2.56)	39	0.68	0.10	0.89
18.91	1.15	(0.13)	(3.05)	38	0.66	0.12	0.87
18.49	1.17	(0.15)	(3.55)	37	0.65	0.14	0.85
18.06	1.20	(0.17)	(4.07)	36	0.63	0.16	0.83
17.62	1.23	(0.19)	(4.61)	35	0.61	0.17	0.81
17.18	1.26	(0.21)	(5.18)	34	0.59	0.19	0.79
16.73	1.30	(0.23)	(5.77)	33	0.58	0.21	0.77
16.28	1.33	(0.25)	(6.38)	32	0.56	0.23	0.75
15.82	1.37	(0.27)	(7.02)	31	0.54	0.24	0.73
15.36	1.41	(0.29)	(7.68)	30	0.52	0.26	0.71
14.89	1.46	(0.31)	(8.38)	29	0.51	0.28	0.69
14.42	1.51	(0.34)	(9.11)	28	0.49	0.30	0.66
13.95	1.56	(0.36)	(9.88)	27	0.47	0.31	0.64
13.47	1.61	(0.38)	(10.68)	26	0.45	0.33	0.62
12.98	1.67	(0.40)	(11.52)	25	0.44	0.35	0.60
12.49	1.74	(0.42)	(12.41)	24	0.42	0.37	0.58
12.00	1.81	(0.45)	(13.35)	23	0.40	0.38	0.55
11.51	1.89	(0.47)	(14.35)	22	0.38	0.40	0.53
11.01	1.97	(0.49)	(15.40)	21	0.37	0.42	0.51
10.51	2.07	(0.52)	(16.53)	20	0.35	0.44	0.48
10.00	2.17	(0.54)	(17.73)	19	0.33	0.45	0.46
9.49	2.29	(0.56)	(19.02)	18	0.31	0.47	0.44
8.98	2.42	(0.59)	(20.41)	17	0.30	0.49	0.41
8.47	2.57	(0.61)	(21.91)	16	0.28	0.51	0.39
7.95	2.73	(0.63)	(23.54)	15	0.26	0.52	0.37
7.43	2.92	(0.66)	(25.34)	14	0.24	0.54	0.34
6.91	3.14	(0.68)	(27.32)	13	0.23	0.56	0.32
6.39	3.40	(0.71)	(29.52)	12	0.21	0.58	0.29
5.86	3.71	(0.73)	(32.01)	11	0.19	0.59	0.27
5.33	4.07	(0.75)	(34.84)	10	0.17	0.61	0.25
4.81	4.52	(0.78)	(38.13)	9	0.16	0.63	0.22
4.28	5.08	(0.80)	(42.03)	8	0.14	0.65	0.20
3.74	5.80	(0.83)	(46.76)	7	0.12	0.66	0.17
3.21	6.76	(0.85)	(52.73)	6	0.10	0.68	0.15
2.68	8.11	(0.88)	(60.64)	5	0.09	0.70	0.12
2.14	10.14	(0.90)	(71.97)	4	0.07	0.72	0.10
1.61	13.51	(0.93)	(90.54)	3	0.05	0.73	0.07
1.07	20.26	(0.95)	(131.44)	2	0.03	0.75	0.05
0.54	40.52	(0.98)		1	0.02	0.77	0.02

This inconsistency is easily explained by the Hypergeometrical Universe theory. Just look at the dependence of the Gravitational "constant" G. It decays with the inverse of the Radius of the Universe. This means that at early epochs, when the radius of the Universe was half (quarter) of today's radius (21.72 billion light years as derived from the Pioneer Anomaly results), G would be twice (four) times larger. A larger value of G means that the supernovae 1A will contain a smaller mass in the early Universe. This correction indicates that the perception of 60 Billion Years away supernova, just means that that supernova is at 2.68 billion years old Universe, no paradox there… NO NEED FOR INFLATION….:) whatever price you paid for your condo at the beginning of times, it is the same you would pay now..:)

To understand the reason why there is an angle alpha, one has to remember that one always see the past at 45 degrees angle with respect the the prior hypersphere (prior epoch). Simple geometry is used to derive the redshift and distance from where we are right now for a given alpha. The 21.72 billion light years radius of the Universe was derived in the Pioneer Anomaly . It seems that I called alpha beta in my prior derivation...:) what can I say, this is not my daytime job...:) Look at this plot below and see alpha where it is written beta...:)

This is a live derivation of the hypergeometrical universe theory and I ended up having to tackle the Pioneer anomaly three times before getting everything right. It doesn't help that the New York subway is so hot and crowded these days...:)

To prove that my theory provides the reason for Quantum Mechanics is trivial and will be presented later in this blog. Only only needs to eliminate the large dilator number approximation (as mentioned many times here and in the pdf containing the theory). This approximation expresses the concept that when one interact large number of dilators in a body, the observed wavelength decreases with the mass (number of dilators). This is the result of the interference pattern along any direction in the neighborhood of a macroscopic body. This approximation was used to derive the equations for the "Natural Laws", which are macroscopic laws. If you try to use these laws directly in a microscopic problem one wouldn't obtain a quantum mechanical behavior, unless you come up with a contrived theory like QM and an ad-hoc equation like Schroedinger's equation.

When dealing with a single dilator or a small number of dilators as in a molecule, one cannot use this approximation. Not using the approximation means that particles will dance in a four-dimensional lightspeed traveling Lissajous interferometric pattern. This pattern is imprinted on space itself as dilaton waves interference.

If you want to understand the Cosmogenesis, please let me know..:) The explanation is simple and based upon these two plots..:)

Before I forget:
SPACE

What is space. Space and Absolute time are quasi-constants, that is, they exist always as they are now, but they exist after the dimensional transition that created the extra four spatial dimensions..:)

I am agnostic with respect to the proposition that space is being created ahead of the hypergeometrical universe expansion or if there is already space there...:) That is irrelevant because it cannot be tested.

Space itself, as far as I am concerned, is just a Cartesian medium which presents no friction, no dephasing events and has a restoring force (elasticity). I am agnostic with respect to any sub-structure since I don't believe any experiment could probe any substructure. The reason is that colliding particles also follow the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, that is, they are always in quantized positions determined by the interference pattern of the dilaton field during their interactions.

A cartesian space would work for all two cross-sections if I didn't have to reproduce current relativistic views. Current views based upon the choice of dynamic laws requires TauXYZ (spacetime) to be hyperbolic, thus the hyperbolic tangent in the Hypergeometrical Universe Newton's Second Law.

Huygens Principle

Huygens and Newton debated how to describe the dynamics of interacting bodies. Newton won.

Huygens was biased by his optical interference experiments and wanted to explain all motions (interaction) as being the sole product of interacting waves, a simplistic reasoning. If you think that the Quantum Lagrangian Principle is equivalent to the Huygens Principle you are wrong. The QLP describes what is happening on the RXYZ cross-section shown in the first figure in this posting. We don't live there…:) at least, we can only see that cross-section with the eye of the mind..:)

We live in the TauXYZ cross-section, where Tau is the proper time. I modified Newton's Second Law to present it as a Spatial Stress-Strain relationship between these two cross-sections

Let's make Area _4D =1 then Area3D is just the overlapping of the unitary dilator 4D volume with the Fabric of Space.

Notice the hyperbolic tangent on the 3D Strain. This is a requirement for relativity.

Even though the dilator moves in the RXYZ following an interference pattern, the dynamics has to be described in the TauXYZ. In that cross-section, wavelengths vary with velocity and one cannot simply imagine motion through an interference pattern. Here one has to take into consideration Doppler shifts of the dilator wavelength while creating the 3D Lissajous figures where dilators will pop-up at each de Broglie step of the Universe expansion. Of course, these Doppler shifts are measured in the Schroedinger equations as changes in momentum or forces.

Had Huygens followed this simple reasoning, he would have discovered Quantum Mechanics.

Cheers,

Crossing the Ts, Dotting the Is

2010-06-27T07:37:00.010-04:00

The Pioneer Anomaly

This problem is being revisited again to clarify a few steps associated with the reasoning. Please, feel free to ask questions, point mistakes, or simply make any meaningful critique. No theory can improve without criticism.:)

This doesn't really apply to this posting, but I want to state something I believe in...:)

It doesn't matter how many times you fall on your knees or in/out of Love for that matter.....:) it only matters how many times you rise up and fight/love again..:)

Someday when this theory is debated and proved right or wrong, I hope I will still have readers/friends interested in chatting about Philosophy and the meaning of life...:)

Cheers,

MP

PS- Currently the pdf file is lagging behind the blog. I should correct that within the next week. Time is coming for this theory to have its day under the Sun...:)
---------------------
---------------------

The solution to the Pioneer Anomaly can be derived directly from the Hypergeometrical Universe topology. It is our current understanding that only matter curves spacetime, this means that locally the curvature is quite well defined by the inexistence of localized matter and equal to zero, that is, without the obvious occurrence of matter we believe that we live in a locally flat space. The addition of another spatial dimension in the Hypergeometrical Universe theory changes things, since there are now many curvatures to talk about.

Let's see what happens when one measures the speed of light within our standard paradigm. The measure time delay between shooting the laser pulse and measuring the reflection is equal to twice the distance divided by the speed of light.

For the reflected radiation bouncing back from the mirror at rest,

Now if we place the mirror in motion we arrive at the standard derivation of the Doppler Effect:

The Doppler shift is given by:

The derivation is different if one allows v to vary:

Resulting:

The derivation is different still if one allows both c and v to vary:

Resulting:

This means that both accelerations on the speed of light or the actual speed of the Pioneer spacecraft would contribute to the Doppler Shift. This also means that if you are not considering that the effective speed of light vary with distance, you will be missing the contribution.

Under the current paradigm, the time it takes for light to bounce back from a mirror is given by 2L/c and doesn't change with the distance L. This considers that light and the mirror are traveling or existing in the same dimension (3D) which is not the Hypergeometrical Universe Paradigm.

There, light (a spatial modulation of the source of a dilaton field) travels within the 5D spacetime (4D spatial manifold). Anything else just flows within the 3D Hyperspherical Universe, which itself travels through the 4D spatial manifold.

If you consider our topology, it is clear that there is a curvature and that is equal to 1/R0 and it is independent of the existence of matter locally. Remember that a 5D Spacetime has more than one radius of curvature. The RX radius of curvature is R0, and so it is the ФX radius of curvature. The situation changes one consider the τX (τ is the local or proper time). The τX radius of curvature will depend upon which laws do you use to describe your Universe (Gauss Electrostatic Law, Newton's Gravitational Law). If you were to use the Quantum Lagrangian Principle to describe dilator dynamics, then you could use a Cartesian reference system for the local proper time. The usage of Newton's, Gauss' or similar laws to describe dilator dynamics makes it necessary to make local proper spacetime metric to be Lorentzian.

Now let's get down to the Pioneer Anomaly and how do we measure how long the Universe is alive from the observed Pioneer Spacecraft deceleration.

The first thing to consider is what would be the perceived speed of light deceleration resulting from the geometry. To do this, we need to consider how much light has to travel back as a function of the farthest distance traveled by the spacecraft.

This figure shows what would be the path traversed by each pulse emitted by the Pioneer spacecraft. The angle of the light ray is always 45 degrees. The leftmost radial line represents Earth position. This means that when Pioneer is far from Earth by 45 degrees or PI/4*R0, light will never come back (the light ray will be parallel to the Earth radial line. Two parallel lines never meet.

Let's say that at time zero Pioneer is at R0 from the 4D Center of the Universe and L from Earth and let's derive the deceleration from the simple geometry.

Let R(t) be the Radius of the Universe at the time t:

Where time is being measured after a light pulse is emitted from the Pioneer while it is at distance from the 4D Center of the Universe equal to R0.

The Cosmological Angle associated with Pioneer at time t given by:

for calculating the deceleration of the speed of light

And

for calculating the deceleration of the speed of the Pioneer spacecraft

The angle alpha is called Cosmological Angle and it is measured from the actual Center of the Universe. The time that measures the expansion of the Universe is the Cosmological Time φ, but for quasi-relaxed fabric of space (low velocities), the Cosmological Time is a reasonable approximation to the proper time.

The equation for the photon trajectory leaving the Spacecraft and reaching Earth later is given by:

Where y(t,t') is the horizontal distance represented in the figure above of the reflected light beam as a function of time t', which starts counting at the reflection moment. The time t refers to the t governing the expansion of the Universe from some given initial condition (R₀, L).

Equating this equation to zero and solving for t', one obtains the time it takes for light to come from Pioneer to Earth at any given time or Pioneer position.

The perceived distance traversed is given by x=c.t':

Taking the second derivative, expanding in Taylor Series and simplifying to obtain the acceleration as:

The observed acceleration is 8.75e-10 m/s2, the speed of light = 299792458 m / s. This yields a value for R₀= 2.05E+26 meters. Since the Pioneer velocity is much smaller than c and the second term can be neglected.

Since the 4D observed velocity is m this means that the perceive age of the Universe is years old or 1.5364E+10 years or

PerceiveAge=15.364 Billion Years Old…:) (using the Hubble Constant as a measure of the age of the Universe).

The important result is that the Universe is actually older that the age perceived by inspecting the Hubble Constant:

RealAge=15.36*sqrt(2)= 21.65 Billion Years Old:)

One salient point is that the Hypergeometrical Lightspeed Expanding Shockwave Universe expands at the observed speed of light, this means that the material world travels slower than the dilaton field, by a factor of cos(45) or .

This conclusion is very important because it breaks the symmetry between dilators and dilatons, in the sense that they do not travel at the same speed. On the other hand, this velocity relationship is strictly necessary for the Quantum Lagrangian Principle to make all dilators to surf the surrounding dilaton field.

Dilators interact with other dilators through retarded potentials or retarded dilaton fields.

The Beginning of Times

At time zero, the initial macroscopic metric fluctuation (the one that followed the dimensional transition) decayed into a huge number of dilators. Many recombined and released Gamma Rays. The initial radiation blast accelerated the extremely small Universe both radially and tangentially with the same strength. Dilators flowed with the retarded dilaton field in all directions of the 4D spatial manifold, creating the 3D Lightspeed Expanding Shockwave Universe. The 4D Big Bang also synchronized all dilators' spinning. Only dilators that were flush (in perfect overlap) with the 3D Hypersphere at time zero, were accelerated into c.

Up to now, I considered that dilators and dilatons always traveled at the only allowed speed (c).

Of course, I noticed that dilators have inertia with respect to lateral motion but I thought that the radial motion was the natural motion of a metric deformation, thus requiring no initial push to be achieved.

If I accept that the dilaton speed or light speed is actually larger than the observed speed of light then the picture associated with the initial Big Bang changes from a simple decaying process into a tangential explosion which set the 3D Hypersphere to travel at the observed speed of light.

It is clear that a dilaton field cannot accelerate dilators to its speed (sqr(2)*c) because interaction has to occur through RETARDED POTENTIALS. Retarded Potentials always propagate at c (Lightspeed) due to the initial geometry.

The interaction of dilators with the retarded dilaton field from other dilators produces a distribution of tangentially dilators traveling at c which is also a distribution of radially traveling dilators at that same speed. In other words, a lightspeed traveling Hyperspherical Universe and an sqr(2)*c dilaton-dilator interaction form a self-consistent solution to the problem.

This salient point can be summarized as:

The speed of light is SQR(2) times C or light is faster than the speed of light..:)

This is due to motion be part of a coherence that was placed in motion at the beginning of times through the interaction of near field dilatons. The interference pattern of near field radially propagating homogeneous dilatons travels along 45 degrees. This is another very salient point.

Cheers,

MP

Matter-Antimatter Ratio Comment

2010-05-25T19:52:00.003-04:00

Anonymous said

Matter and so-called anti-matter are simply materials in opposing condition, they are not opposite ‘existences’. If they were, then when they came into contact they would not merely change condition, they would mutually annihilate. No properties would remain.

In the prior posting, I discussed the actual matter-antimatter annihilation. Here I review the discussion of the Matter-AntiMatter ratio.

The topology I proposed here is a simple dipole. This is not the final word, but it just provides a simple, very simple explanation of the current matter-antimatter ratio consistently with the origination of the Universe out of NAUGHT, or plain flat space...:)

I certainly consider this a very likely scenario, but I am sure people will disagree and write tons of papers with their proposed topologies... and that is all great...:)

Of course, this is not the best topology since it is a higher order hyperspherical harmonic.....:) I guess I will have to revisit this problem soon. The hypersymmetric initial fluctuation would showcase the difference in displacement volumes associated with compression and stretching of space. The stretching volume should be larger and that might explain the left over matter Universe (matter with protons associated with stretching of the local metric). This is another simple explanation for the matter-antimatter asymmetry. I will revisit this when I manage to have a second.

Please, feel free to ask any questions.

What defines the Matter-Antimatter Ratio...:)

I was asked this great question:

Thanks for getting back to me about your simplified Grand Unification Theory.
How does your theory explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the observable
universe? Please give a simplified answer! Thanks.

With much
anticipation,

I have to say that I thought about that before but since the question has two answers, one of them involving Hypergeometrical Cosmogenesis, I didn't blog my thougths..:)

There is always a first time... First let's think about the connection between the Hypergeometrical Standard Model and The Hypergeometrical Cosmogenesis.

The Hypergeometrical Standard Model represents particles by coherences between deformational states. This means that as time goes by the coherence moves from a state to another (proton, antiproton, electron and positron). Each state corresponds to a displacement 4D volume (metric deformation).

Below you can see our Fundamental Dilator - Different phases of the dilator represents the four fundamental particles...;)

The dilator spins perpendicular to the Radial Direction of propagation as it tunnels back and forth.

In the Hypergeometrical Cosmogenesis (paper in this site), the Universe is modeled as single fluctuation of ZERO (that is, ZERO 4D volume). This means that the sum of all dilators in the Universe would result in ZERO again.. that is, if one could group together all particles in the Universe (not only our visible 3D universe), one would return the fluctuation (The Whole Universe) into Naught...:)

In reality, the Cosmogenesis theory is a little more complex, since the fluctuation of Zero that initiated our 5D Spacetime is modeled as process including dimensional transitions (from Zero Dimension plus Cosmological Time to 4D Spatial Dimensions plus Cosmological Time).

You can read the Cosmogenesis paper and ask questions if you cannot understand this...:)

Now let's see why there are two answers to this questions.

The first answer questions the premise of the question (too many questions here..>:)

My theory predicts that G varies inversely with the 4D radius of the Universe and that means that Gravity gets stronger as one goes back in time...The theory also predicts that matter-antimatter gravitational interaction is repulsive... thus creates the possibility of separation of matter and antimatter in clumps and the minimization of collisions. Since matter and antimatter are spectroscopically identical, this scenario wouldn't be discernible from an Universe with only matter... Under this scenario one can question the premise of how different are the number of particles and antiparticles in the knowable 3D Universe. I don't know how this ratio is measured.
The second answer is based again in the icon of the Hypergeometrical Universe Theory show at the top of this blog. If you consider that the fluctuation of Zero is a dipole to begin with (it could be a multipole), that is, one starts with a positive displacement volume in one half and a negative displacement volume in the other, then the ratio between matter and antimatter would depend upon where our planet is located. One can sense only one radian on each direction. If we were exactly on the edge between the positive and negative volumes of the initial fluctuation, then the ratio would be half and half... Any other position would result in an uneven matter:antimatter ratio ...:) Positive (or negative) means your type or matter... the other is antimatter...:)

Needless to say, this model on the interface between matter and antimatter sectors resembles the diffusional problem of charges in a semiconductor...:)

That is a simple solution to the problem...:)

Conversion between matter and antimatter depends upon transmutation notes and their capture cross-section. The cross-section for capture is very small, thus matter-antimatter conversion is not frequent.

I think these two answers are very simple.

Please feel free to ask any questions...:)

Cheers,

MP

Matter-AntiMatter Anihilation Comment

2010-05-25T19:27:00.001-04:00

Anonymous said

Matter and so-called anti-matter are simply materials in opposing condition, they are not opposite ‘existences’. If they were, then when they came into contact they would not merely change condition, they would mutually annihilate. No properties would remain.

My dear reader asked me about the matter-antimatter annihilation process. He loosely uses the term "condition" and "existence" to represent what is in my theory a very well defined local metric deformation.

The nature or condition of being matter or being antimatter is just a matter of phase in the four notes fundamental dilator coherence sequence. If I define proton as being a local metric stretch at this exact moment, an antiproton would be an "exactly" deformation in the opposite phase (i.e., it would be a local metric contraction).

In addition to metric deformation phases, a dilator (matter or antimatter) would also have linear and angular momentum and an extrinsically defined spin (a rotation around an axis perpendicular to R and X, Y or Z).

Of course to send the whole Chimichanga to NILL one would have to add a Gamma Ray photon with exactly the opposing phase, direction such as to cancel the outgoing Gamma Ray.

This seems to be a very fortuitous event, that is, to have the electron-positron pair plus an incoming gamma ray with the exact alignment. It is and it never happens, that is, normally matter-antimatter annihilation never generates a perfectly flat space. It normally generates the dilaton field associated with the outgoing Gamma Ray.

Below is a refresh of how does Matter-Antimatter Annihilate each other. Please, feel free to ask questions.

How does Matter-Antimatter Anihilate each other???..:)

Ask this simple question to a physicist. After looking like a deer on headlights for a some time, he/she will start mumbling something and writing some Feynman diagrams showing wiggling lines representing photons, positrons and electrons..:)

The same thing will happen if you ask them how a photon is created etc, etc...:) It is a crying shame...:)

You will never get anything that has a physical meaning... just lots of hand waiving while providing the interpretations of Feynman diagrams..:) NO PHYSICS...

I have to defend Feynman at this point. I am his unconditional fan....:)

His diagrams represent complex integrals and make easier to think about the Physics behind those equations.

The problem is that this is great if the mathematical representation of reality is perfectly defined by those integrals. If they are not, then the diagrams will mislead you into thinking that any reading of an integral has a physical meaning.

The other horrendous outcome is that any time people believe they know everything, and apply that last layer of varnish on the mathematical constructs, they will react more strongly towards any change... not unlike the reaction of a building contractor when faced with a different request from the owner when the building is about to be delivered...:)

They just want to finish the building...:)

This diagrams tells us that a positron and an electron interact producing a gamma ray which would then decay back into a positron and an electron...:)

Does that really happens???? I don't think so... at least not in heavy nuclei anomalous gamma ray scattering...

It will certainly occur under very specific phase matched gamma ray scattering conditions...

This is another Feynman diagram with a different interpretation...:) Here electron-positron anihilates and two gamma rays are released. This is a diagram for low kinetic energy scenario where the total linear momentum is close to zero and conserved by the emission of opposite traveling photons after the e-p anihilation...
This makes more sense. If there is an initial 3D angular momentum, there might be emissions to conserve 3D angular momentum...:)

This is a tricky question since current physics has no idea what happens when matter-antimatter anihilates each other...

The reason for such trouble is the Higgs boson based explanation for mass. When a positron-electron pair disappears, mass disappears... thus the explanation can never be simple...Mass is a very complex problem for current minded physicist... in fact, an intractable problem....:)

In my theory, mass is just a 3D overlap of a 4D displacement volume at specific phases of a spinning coherence (fundamental dilator)....:) a very simple thing... which can be clearly stated in this short paragraph...:)

Of course, I know that a simpler explanation doesn't make a theory correct. It might make it more desirable if the simpler theory explains everything and more than the complex theory...:)

I would never use Ockham's Razor -

Ockham's Razor is the principle proposed by William of Ockham in the fourteenth century: ``Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate'', which translates as entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily'.

for the simple reason that that principle should be used at the creation of hypotheses and cannot be used to eliminate competing theories...and that might be a stretch since simplicity is not necessarily a requirement in the creation of the Universe... but, that said, that it is likely to be the case...

By the way, Ockham's Razor speaks about generalization. Don't generalize conclusions unless the conclusion is necessarily general... As far as I can tell, it has nothing to do with simplicity...

I simply hate that expression.... for the aforementioned reason... One can use Ockham's Razor to validade Santa Klaus, Eastern Bunny or any religion, cult, crackpot idea etc...:) in addition that I find it pompous pseudo-reasoning...:)

Ockham's Razor was never meant to be used to help choosing between possible theories (explanations). Its valid usage is in choosing hypotheses prior to the creation of the theories...

For a theory to be preferable it has to be more than just simpler... It has to explain everything and more... and I mean a lot more.... Even under those conditions, the two or more theories should coexist until one of them contradicts reality...

I make only one exception for the Hypergeometrial Universe theory....:) since this is not only simpler but also only geometrical...:) that is, IT IS ALL ABOUT SPACE..:) under those very specific conditions Ockham's Razor together with the statement (Never say Never; make perfect sense :) (just kidding)...

The disappearance of mass in my theory amounts to the anhiliation of displacement volumes... well... that poses no difficulty...:) a positive displacement volume is a stretching of the local metric. A negative displacement volume is the opposite. If I both stretch and compress a local metric the result will be null...:) , thus there are no hickups on the disappearance of mass..:) it is the same as the disappearance of displacement volume...not unlike the noise-elimination ocurring now-a-days on ipod headphones..:)

Let's take a look on the anihilation process step by step..:)

Below is the diagram of the dilator interaction and the more complex coherence creation.

This means that according to my theory, anihilation depends upon a spin Minus ONE muon neutrino capture or creation out of their kinetic energy (angular momentum)...:) I am sure that is not in those Feynman diagrams..:) By the way, a spin minus one muon neutrino corresponds to two transmutation notes spinning in the same directions.

The other salient aspect of this equation is that once the coherence from the second diagram is created that coherence itself decays through a secondary coherence (coherence squared) with Naught..:) That means that the electromagnetic field appears as the result of a coherence between the electron-muon neutrino-positron complex and plain unadulterated flat space..:)

As you can see the electron-muon neutrino-positron is a double chord coherence, that is, it is composed of two fundamental dilator subcoherences and two transmutation notes (half muon neutrino)...:)
The half-muon neutrinos correspond to 3D spatial rotations, thus those sub-coherence look like 3D rotations of the positron-electron pair...:)

It should be clear that the positron-muon neutrino-electron dilator coherence is a doublet, that is, due to the uncertainty on which phase is in phase with the 3D Universe, the two isomers coexist forming a dipole. This dipole oscillates at each de Broglie step of the Hyperspherical Shockwave Universe Expansion. In addition, this modulation is modulated by the oscillatory factor due to the coherence between this coherence and the flat 4D metric state or flat space.

The original dimeric coherence (two fundamental dilator chords) generates their standard dilaton field. The secondary coherence between this dimer and flat space creates another cosine factor that is equivalent to a transposition between the positions of the two fundamental dilator thus generating a phase modulation of the dilaton field. This is similar to the dilaton field modulation due to electronic coherences in excited chromophores. At the end what causes an electromagnetic wave is a charge motion (like in an antena..:)

This secondary modulation occurs at the frequency of the emitted gamma rays...:)

If there is any initial 3D angular momentum that becomes a third modulation and thus a third driver of gamma ray emissions... This means that at least two and maybe more gamma rays will be emitted from a electron-muon neutrino-positron complex coherence...:)

That should come up as a shock... who would guess that flat space would play any role in the Universe.... Flat space is the ultimate ground state of an Hypergeometrical Universe.

This is the physical representation of matter-antimatter annihilation.

I should rave a little about the prejudice against anything originated in classical mechanics or classical electrodynamics. The classical picture of coherences (MHS) is perfectly valid in an electronic transition, since the expectation of a dipole operator has a perfectly classical analogy...:)

There is also another prejudice that is a hindrance to a rational evaluation of my ideas. The prejudice is derived from too much reverence towards the people who preceded us. Einstein tried in vain to find a link between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics and failed. The same is valid for everyone else. Schrodinger equation is derived in terms of equivalence principles, which are principles - something that one cannot explain and justifies itself by its own success explaining the world.

In the past, I ranted against censorship of my theory by the Cornell-Los Alamos e-print repository moderator.

As the theory get more recognition, this becomes a moot point although censorship is never irrelevant. Somehow this good idea managed to survived and hopefully it will someday thrive.

Cheers,

MP

Comment On The Beginning of Times

2010-05-16T09:58:00.002-04:00

Anjan posted "The Beginning of Times":

This is simple and effective; though I am no physicist, it seems to hang in self-consistently.
It is also true that Antoine de St-Exupery reached there first, and it is good that due credit has been given in the citation.

The Beginning of Times is both a scientific and philosophical posting. The scientific aspect of it, is the logical support for the amazing (to me) discovery that the actual speed of light is sqrt(2) times the observed speed of light. That is the linchpin holding together the philosophical conclusion about its close relationship with Cause and Effect and the Ontological Question: WHY?

Although logic is always clear and direct, the beauty of the conclusion and the events associated with the Antropic event that begets the question WHY can only be conveyed with the sensibility of Antoine de St-Exupery's Little Prince...:)

In the past, I mentioned that I didn't try to read God's mind or anything that conceited. I tried to see what the brilliant minds of my precursors created and what could still remain in a more consistent theory. I kept Strict Relativity or Lorentz transforms and explained the WHY they need to be used.

They are a contrived solution to the problem of starting with the wrong equations (equations of motion) instead of using the Quantum Lagrangian Principle. I also kept the quark representation for some Hadrons, although I associated them with axes lengths of a four dimensional ellipsoid of revolution. Energy conservation is associated with the 3D volume in the Hypergeometrical Universe. Inertial Mass also equal to the 3D Volume of dilators. 4D Mass or charge or gravitational mass is associated with the 4D displacement volume of the dilator coherence.

Of course, I had to replicate our known Physics otherwise nobody would take my theory into consideration..:) and they shouldn't.

I humbly used the Little Prince to express feelings in a manner superior to what I could have done. It expressed the awe in the view of the Universe as in The Beginning of Times and the solitude of being the creator of an idea which is not incremental..:) and thus has to be fought by the establishment...:)

Loneliness, has also been expressed using my dear friend The Brain..:). His tireless pursuit for world domination has a strong similarity to my Quixotic effort to help by bringing about a better understanding of the Universe.

I would had used more Don Quixote if I could find pictures of the theme.

There is a lot of Don Quixote in me.

Cheers,

MP

The Galactic Puzzle

2010-05-11T22:20:00.009-04:00

The Galactic Puzzle

I found this posting lying around. I suspect I reached a conclusion here and forgot to post it. It explains the Galactic Puzzle where the edges of Galaxies rotate in the same angular speed as the centers of the Galaxies, in contradiction to Newton's Gravitational Law..:) .

Spiral galaxies present a puzzling characteristic. Their most external stars are rotating at speeds that are too high to be still attached to the galaxy if one considers Newton's law.

Of course, if we consider the Hypergeometrical Gyrogravitational Law there is no anomaly. The Gyrogravitational Potential is given by:

Equating the Gyrogravitational Force to the Centrifugal Force one derives the Equilibrium Radius:

As you can see, this equation is quite more complex than the standard one from Newton's Law of Gravitation.

Let's consider that all velocities are tangential, thus perpendicular to R. If one considers that for the Galaxy to keep its equilibrium shape while rotating and

Under those conditions the equilibrium R is given by:

Life is Stranger than Fiction...:)

is the ratio between the Newtonian Gravitational Force and the Centrifugal Force.

The Galactic Puzzle is how to explain situations where this ratio seems to be smaller than one, that is, it seems that there is equilibrium but the Centrifugal Force is too strong. Under those conditions

Or

Or there is a lag of more than 90 degrees between the rotation of the slowly rotating SuperMassive Black Hole and the star on the edge of the Spiral Galaxy.

This is the condition for the creation of the Spiral.

This is a simplified derivation. A proper analysis would take into consideration the Galactic Mass Distribution; integrate over it and possibly take into consideration the effect of retarded potentials.

Despite of being a simplified derivation it already shows how in the vicinity of the SuperMassive Black Hole the beginning of the Spiral Galaxy takes shape.

I am sure you are all thinking...

Hey, that is cheating...:)

After all, I didn't use Newton's Equation... I used something I derived from first principles which reduces to Newton's equation when nothing moves..(rotates).

That is the benefit of starting from a fundamental theory like the Hypergeometrical Universe Theory...:)

Cheers,

MP

PS- The inwards force is not unlike the self force felt by coils in a magnet (current loop). The current creates a magnetic field which itself exerts pressure on the coils. Remember that both electromagnetism and gravitation are explained by the same equations.

An Ancient Flower Bloom...:)

2010-05-02T14:28:00.009-04:00

An Ancient Flower Bloom...:)

There are many things still to be blogged, but many things are already presented. I know that circa 40 thousand readers (scientists or otherwise) have been to this site. A few left questions which I always tried to answer.

This is a free flowing blog, the historical documentation of an idea. I am quite glad with the final product and know that many things changed (a little) from the beginning. At the beginning my Fundamental Dilator had five phases and was red and yellow..:) later became four-phased and green and yellow. Red doesn't print properly on black and while printer. The fifth phase was a return to the original phase so I decided to eclipse it. The five phased coherence might be a better description. People will eventually decide, if this theory takes hold.

I realized that the actual speed of light is sqrt(2) times the observed speed of light. This shouldn't change the fundamental equations (Law and Gravitation) since they are close action at distance equations (even a million light years is just a very small fraction of a 15.36 billion years. The correction are even less relevant since the action at very far distance (billion of light years) will not just decay with the inverse squared distance...:) The exact law can be easily derived from the Pioneer Anomaly diagrams. But that seems to be irrelevant since most interaction takes place within a few million light years...(intergalactic distance).

Equations might have to be changed to adapt to this new insight, but that doesn't change anything in the short distance laws..:) (up to a billion light years)..I don't think we are under the gravitational or electrostatic pull of anything one billion light years away..:) it is just way too far... The calculated frequency of Gravitational Waves will change by a factor equal to the inverse of the quartic root of two...:) This changes are the result of the actual speed of light being sqrt(2) times the observed speed of light. The substitution of R0 by sqrt(2)R0 all over the place should solve the problem.

Next weekend, I will update my paper which is lagging behind the blog these days.

There are things that I haven 't said. I've just don't have the time..:) but maybe someone will ask me a specific question..:) I always answer my readers..:)

In the meantime, enjoy some great music...:)

Cheers,

MP

The 7th Vigier Symposium at the Imperial College, London UK

2010-05-02T12:43:00.007-04:00

I wrote this posting more than a year ago, but consider it better not to publish at the time. I was concerned with any concerted censorship effort and didn't want to jinx it.:)

It is a humble presentation of my state of excitement before the opportunity to present my theory to professional scientists..:) as opposed to me, a simple-minded amateur..:)

Cheers,

MP

The 7th Vigier Symposium

When I thought that Science was way too politicized, monetized - everyone wanted a Discovery Show to scare us with those Gigantic Black Holes.. SuperNovae.... Killer Gamma Ray Bursts.......:) - in fact, given the opportunity, I would also want one...;:), the Arxives were arbitrarily censored left and right by its owner, I was pleasantly surprised...:)

It is a great pleasure to let you know first hand, that I will be presenting this talk at the7th Vigier Symposium at the Imperial College, London UK, on July 15th:
The Hypergeometrical Universe: Cosmology and Standard Model

Abstract. The Hypergeometrical Universe theory contains both Cosmological and Hadron Models. The Cosmological aspects of the theory are contained in the proposed topology. The 3D Universe is proposed to be a 3D Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Shockwave embedded in a 4D spatial manifold. A preferential direction (R) and an absolute time coexist with Relativity Principles. One cannot ever point to that preferential direction within our 3D hypersphere and one can only observe the projection of the absolute time in our local reference frames (proper time). The Hadron model is based in the concept of a Fundamental Dilator. The fundamental dilator is a coherence between deformation states of the local metric and can represent any one of the fundamental particles (electron, proton, anti-proton, positron) depending upon which phase is in phase with our 3D Universe. The resulting paradigm presents a Cosmos where interactions are intermittent while the 3D Universe steps along R in de Broglie steps with the Compton wavelength of a Hydrogen atom. The Fundamental Dilator eliminates the asymmetry between protons and electrons, making them equally ‘massive’ in four dimensions. Since this is a geometrical theory, inertial mass is mapped to the footprint of these dilators on the 3D Universe while Gravitational/Electromagnetic Mass is mapped to the 4D displacement volume associated with each coherence cycle. Cosmological constants can be derived from first principles considerations. A more basic law of Gravitation (Gyrogravitation) is derived from first principle. This new law shows that Gravitation is asymmetric, that is, it is easier to decelerate a body than it is to accelerate it (consistent with Relativity). Accelerating a body can only be done up to c. This asymmetric gravitational law explains double jet black holes.

Keywords: Grand Unification, Quantization in Astrophysics, Coherent Nuclear Fusion, Novel Gravitational Law, Purely Geometric Theory, Hypergeometrical Standard Model

This conference is dedicated to finding the path to a more fundamental understanding of Nature. That in itself is a noble goal. The fact that they were able to overlook the source of my ideas (me) and considered them for themselves is great.

I don't need to tell that my ideas are different, iconoclastic or just clashing with everything kind of theory..

It contains No strings attached, no Dark anything not even Black Magic...:) I even complained about the extension of the Copenhagen Interpretation into the Many Worlds Interpretation (forgive me Everett.:) in de Docta Ignorantia

Many times I mentioned the value of ideas.

In the long dark night, I called for my Giordano Bruno..:)

Some time ago, my Giordano Bruno arrived in the persons of Dr. Christianto, Dr. Schamarandache, Dr.Carlos Castro to name a few. They gave a first voice to my ideas along the lines of the best one could ever find in a scientific person. They were open-minded to permit someone not immediately recognizable as one of them to say something. I really had to say what I said. An idea can be right or wrong, but it should have its day (or second) in our consciousness (to some degree of course)...:) A bad idea is easy to pinpoint, to counter argue. I did that many times in this blog.

My ideas did not have that opportunity until they were published in these books:

Quantization in Cosmology

and

Hadron Models and New Energy Issues

For an amazing fortuity, I had created a theory that actually Quantized Cosmology...:) right on queue when they were publishing the Quantization in Cosmology book.

Few months later, I finished the Hypergeometrical Standard Model and the concept of Coherent Nuclear Fusion and again by coincidence they were publishing a book on Hadrons Models and New Energy Issues. I am not a religious man, but I don't know what to say..:)

Time passed by, I tied a few more knots, dotted a few more Is... crossed a few more Ts...:) Finalizing with the Grand Finalle, where I couldn't avoid the conclusion that the speed of light is actually sqrt(2) times the observed speed of light...:) That was a requirement from the solution of the Pioneer Anomaly problem.

That insight was used to explain the WHY we are able to see the prettiest stars on the farthest regions of the Universe...:) The presence of cause and effect is not possible if light speed is not changed for the four dimensional spatial manifold topology.

Exactly at this time, Dr. Richard Amoroso became my new Giordano Bruno when he invited me to give a talk at the 7th Vigier Symposium in the Imperial College, London UK

It is a great honor, a great reason for trepidation..:) I am an awfully shy speaker... but I think that is only the case when I am not explaining something that I fully believe and understand. Defending ideas was always natural to me. Entertaining people might be more difficult..:) but I am full of jokes... I should be able to pull this off..:)

I will start with the Beginning - by which I mean the Beginning of Times, quickly followed by the Fundamental Dilator, Big Bang Spin Synchronization Event. Change Hubble Law...:)

From that one immediately goes into Quantization of the Light Speed Stepwise (de Broglie steps with Hydrogen Atom Compton Wavelength) Expansion of the Hypergeometrical Universe (Hyperspherical ShockWave 3D Universe).

Next one explain the Quantum Lagrangian Principle (each dilator dilates in phase with the surrounding dilaton field)...:) Show off the new Newton's Laws..:) Duck a few tomatoes (they say tomatos in London..:)

Show the Grand Unification Equation from where all natural laws are derived. Show the final equations themselves. Emphasize the Gyrogravitational equation. Show the solution of the Mercury Perihelion, Gravitational Lensing....:) Explain Double Jet Black Holes and the White Orifice...:)

Introduce the Hyperon Family (Drunken Crazy Deltas, Pious Pions, Great Omegas...:) Show that they are all Primes which finally puts the Riemann Hypothesis into the realm of Physics....:) This was prophecized many times as the indication of the coming of the real Theory of Everything..:) Tell about those cute Majorama particles...:)

If my friend gets the musical chord done in time, play some Encounters of First Kind (music representing the Prime Hyperon Particles)...:) like a Choir of Particles...:)

If they don't believe, just show the calculation of cosmological constants (epsilon, mu, G). Imply that G was much more strong when the radius of the Universe was smaller.

About this time, tell them the calculated frequency of Gravitational Waves, tell how to solve the energy problems of the World with the Coherent Fusion model.

At last solve the Ancient Puzzle...:) which tell amazing things about the Cosmos..:)

This is the correct Rose from Rosecrucians and below is the Ancient Symbol (Verbum Mui Significatium)...:)

If someone solves this puzzle, I will tell them ancient secret..:)

Cheers,

MP

Cheers,

MP

The Beginning of Times

2010-04-27T08:35:00.009-04:00

From time immemorial we have been asking Why?

Why might be a tall order to explain. I might be able to tell you how?...:)

The main characteristic of our lives is causality. You write a blog in the morning, and you might be late to work..:) (so I will be fast..)

Causality means that current events are connected to past events through some action. In physics, that action is actual action-at-distance....Gravitation, Electromagnetism are forces which act at distance. Notice that I didn't mention the others (Electro-weak or Strong). They play no role in my theory. Anything that acts at distance implies that you are interacting with the past. It takes time for the field (dilaton field) to reach you.

There is an Anthropic Principle (which vaguely states as an answer for the why the Universe is like this - It is like this otherwise we couldn't ask this question right now and here..:) - a circular reasoning not unlike my hypergeometrical universe cross-sections...:)

The question I will answer is if there is a deeper understanding we can derive from the Hypergeometrical Universe theory that would provide an answer to that question with a little more details.

This picture has been used to explain how we peer into the past with our telescopes. It also can be used to explain the Universe is causal and why we are the way we are...:)

Ooops, I guess I will explain the WHY after all..:)

Consider a point in a four dimensional spatial manifold. Locally deform the metric such that the total 4D volume surrounding the deformation is preserved. The initial deformational mode is debatable (Y00, Y01, TEM00..::) Now, allow for that deformation to decay into a gazillion spinning smaller deformations.

I used spinning instead of rotating to emphasize the fact that the smaller metric deformation (spinning deformation coherences) are rotating within a 4D spatial manifold as opposed to our 3D rotating objects.

Some of them will annihilate each other resulting in a locally flat metric. The annihilation (not unlike a eletron-positron annihilation) will generate dilatons (Gamma Radiation) which carry momentum.

Now let's consider that the dilaton-dilator interaction depends upon cross-sections, that is, how are the dilators aligned at time zero. Only the dilators which are perfectly aligned with their largest cross-sections perpendicular to R (the 4D radial direction) will be pushed away by the extremely intense dilaton field. This is the synchronization or selection event. Further interactions might contain a mechanism to resynchronize (select) dilators as the Universe travels.

I mentioned R, but at time zero, R,Z,Y,Z are indistinguishable, thus one would expect that dilators would be flying at all directions with identical speed( the maximum possible while driven by an extremely intense dilaton field). I will postulate that the whole Universe contained in a lightspeed expanding hyperspherical shockwave shell reached the speed of light. This postulate will be immediately tested later in this blog when we consider the nonexistence of interaction or visibility cut-offs in this Universe.

Add to that picture the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and you will have an event that accelerated equally (to our observed c) all dilators in all directions (XYZR).

That scenario would correspond to all matter in the Universe being spin synchronized and accelerated to c at time zero.

Notice that at time zero, the very small hypersphere has interaction with a very close past and the dilaton field is hyper intense. At that level, dilators are capable of reaching the speed of light in a single or couple of de Broglie steps.

The interaction with the past should deliver the maximum kinetic energy while allowing for the dilators to surf the dilaton field. The condition where this happens is when the average dilator interaction happens at 45 degrees, that is the shockwave hypersphere has been accelerated to the observed speed of light, which is the same as saying that the tangential speed (along X or Y or Z) is equal to the speed of light. Both are true since there isn't a difference between tangential speed and radial speed for a point.

Being spin synchronized means that we are all here interacting intermittently (as the dilators spin), living in a thin hypersphere, always interacting with our past at 45 degrees (thus preserving the constancy of the speed of light. This angle corresponds to the maximum interaction and the equipartition of energy along all four degrees of freedom (spatial coordinates) at time zero..

Imagine otherwise that we were accelerated radially at higher speed that laterally. This would mean that all forces would not vanish with the inverse of the square distance but just have a cut-off... Causality would be space dependent. We would be blind to anything further than that cut-off distance.

Thus the WHY is explained with simple geometrical reasoning based on cross-sections of dilators to dilaton interaction at the Beginning of Times. That yielded the dilator spin synchronization and the intermittently interacting Universe (Quantum Mechanics). Of course, QM also depends upon the QLP (Quantum Lagrangian Principle) and the inherent delocalization of dilators traveling in an out of a 3D hypersurface guided by dilaton interference patterns (three dimensional Lissajous pattern).

As you can see, if the Big Bang wasn't really Big (accerating everything to the maximum velocity) and if the Bang wasn't really isotropic (along all four spatial dimensions) we wouldn't have Cosmological Causal Relationships today. The night sky would be darker and we wouldn't be allowed to see beyond a point in the Cosmos - Cosmic Censorship...:) of the worse kind.

The isotropy (Michelson Morley) of the speed of light is the direct result of the initial isotropic acceleration.

The causality is because we interact perfectly at 45 degrees with the past hypersphere, thus creating a no cut-off interaction....:)

Thus permitting us to stand in a cloudless night and watch the whole Universe ...

and ask that question...:) WHY?

Cheers,

Darn Retarded Potentials and the Beginning of Times…:)

2010-04-23T22:19:00.007-04:00

Darn Retarded Potentials and the Beginning of Times…:)

In the past few postings I reached a conclusion which I cannot refute within the logical framework of my theory.

The conclusion I reached is that the actual speed of light is Sqrt(2) times the measured speed of light.:)

Or that light is faster than itself (or what we perceive as being its speed..:)

Up to now my mind has been living with a conundrum… a paradox. The equations of motion, the Unification Equation is derived from a simple principle that dilators never do any work as they move. There are two kinds of motion. Radial and lateral, where lateral means within our 3D Universe (a lightspeed expanding Hypersphere).

The equations of motion for lateral movement required the mapping of inertia to the footprint (on specific phases of the spinning motion) of the dilator on our 3D Hypersurface.

There was no equivalent inertia mapping for radial motion. That never caused a problem because we never had time to fully develop the initial Cosmogenesis process.

When I worked on calculating the age of the Universe from the Pioneer Anomaly, I had to struggle with something obvious that I had overlooked for a few years. The problem is the following: If I am surfing, can I make a wave on the surface of the wave and see it propagate? The solution to the old problem of waves in a wave eluded me for many years.

For a dilator to move always without doing any work, the fastest it can ever travel is surfing the dilaton wave generated by other dilators. The larger the dilaton field the highest the acceleration but the highest speed is always c (the observed speed of light).

The paradox is that lateral motion requires inertia while the initial setting in motion of the whole Universe never seemed to require inertia…:) I considered the motion of the dilator (which is a coherence thus not unlike a wave) to be traveling at its natural speed. That was satisfactory explanation until I faced the Pioneer Anomaly problem…;)

The dependence of the observed velocity as a function of observed Epoch (beta angle) was necessary to keep the dilator frequency unchanged. The Hubble related red-shifting had to do only with the geometric projection of the waves into the lightspeed expanding Hypersphere (our Universe).

For that to happen the actual speed of light had to be higher than the observed speed of light by a factor of sqrt(2).

This means that dilators always have the same amount of Inertia for both lateral and radial motion.

Retarded Potential

I remember when I read Landau and Lifshits for the first time about Retarded Potentials. We all know that the Sun is eight light minutes from us, that is, we are always seeing what was happening to the Sun eight minutes ago. The field propagation travels at the speed of light for both Gravity and Electromagnetism. This is convenient since both are described as dilaton field modulations in my theory.

First let's consider that the 3D Universe is already in motion. Here we have the Universe already in motion and all interaction between particles in different positions (relatively close) travel at 45 degrees and thus at c.
This is consistent with my Quantum Lagrangian Principle where dilators always surf the local metric dilaton field. The fastest this dilaton field can drag a dilator with its own local velocity or the observed speed of light (consistent with observation and relativity).

Figure 1 displays the geometry for peering or interacting with the near past. From the past blog, we established that the actual speed of light is sqr(2) times the observed speed of light.

I cannot create a perfect explanation. It would take time. On the other hand, it should be self-evident that this is the only solution to the beginning of times..:) just by looking at the following figure:

Figure 2. Interacting with the past. One always interact with the past through Retarded Potenials...:)

It turns out that the same picture that describes how do we currently look into the past can provide insight on the first moment of this Universe.

Let's consider that in the first instant of this Universe there was two layers of Universe (Biverse)…:) strongly interacting (Gravitation, radiation) etc.

If you consider that the Hypersphere to be a point, tangential motion is the same as radial motion. The only angle which allows dilators to travel at the same tangential speed as the radial speed is 45 degrees interaction.

The symmetry of the problem forces that the radial acceleration to be equal to the tangential acceleration (think about this as basically a point in the 4D spatial manifold).

This means that if one consider that radial and tangential accelerations or speed should yield the same hyperspherical topology at the end if one starts from a point, them the interaction has to take place at 45 degrees and the equilibrium condition is all dilators traveling at the observed speed of light tangentially and radially at the beginning of times.

That acceleration took no time as motion is just the surfing upon the dilaton field. Given a strong enough dilaton field and everything will travel at the speed of light…:)

Is there a need for an initial Biverse? No it was just drawn to show the interaction symmetry. When one interacts with another the other is always in the past. If this interaction is repulsive (as being blown away by gamma radiation, neutrino flows) the originator of the neutrino and the receiver of the momentum are always in different epochs (different radius) of the Universe.

When the Universe is a point, interaction that produces tangential motion also produces radial motion. From a point tangential motion is the same as radial motion.

If you consider that the Four Dimensional Big Bang (created by the dilaton field) creates equally distributed radial and tangential motions, then the speed of the shock wave Hypersphere has to be equal to the dilaton field speed divided by sqrt(2).

From that point on, all potentials were called Retarded Potentials…:)

One more point, in the past I proposed a bipolar (TEM01) initial metric deformation as the format of the initial metric deformation:

This would lead to a bipolar hyperspherical Universe, that is, matter and antimatter would exist in different halves of the Universe with an empty boundary due to mutual assured annihilation of matter and antimatter...:)

It just happens that it is impossible to see anything farther than 45 degrees away from you, let alone 180 degrees from you. By this reasoning we could never see any sign of the original annihilation unless we lived in that neighborhood.

Since then, I started thinking about TEM00. Well, that is also a possibility, in this case the Universe would be perfectly symmetric (not perfectly homogeneous).

In my Cosmogenesis reasoning, I considered that the creation of the Universe occurred together with a dimensional unfolding, that is, metric fluctuations not only changed the local spatial density but also the dimensionality of the space. This reasoning was based on entropy considerations, after all the Universe where we live is a long lived fluctuation, certainly reversible but long lived due to entropy.

Not unlike finding your other half... It is possible but might take the age of the Universe..:)

Cheers,

MP

PS- I found a more succinct argument. Consider my Quantum Lagrangian Principle which I used to unify all forces and to calculate form first principles Cosmological Constants (G, epsilon0, mu0 etc). I explained that the dilators should always surf (dilate in phase with the surrounding dilaton field). To dilate in phase, each dilator has to move at each de Broglie step of the hyperspherical Universe expansion.
This surfing takes place on both 3D and 4D, that is the dilator is always in phase with the dilaton field which is a metric deformation in a 4D spatial manifold. The only way that the dilator will be in phase with both the 3D projection of the dilaton field and with the 4D dilaton field itself is if initially accelerated to the speed of light both tangentially and radially. Starting from a point, the Universe was formed as a flash of lighspeed traveling dilators traveling within a lightspeed expanding hyperspherical shockwave.

This is kind of succinct. Please let me know if you can articulate it better. I will be happy to post it and acknowledge your contribution to the discussion..:) Cheers

Hubble Expansion and the Hypergeometrical Universe

2010-04-04T09:42:00.011-04:00

Hubble Expansion and the Hypergeometrical Universe

Given that the Hypergeometrical Universe proposes a dynamic (lightspeed expanding hyperspherical Universe) topology for our Universe, it shouldn't be surprising that we have to revisit the interpretation of the Hubble constant and how one measures distance across the vast expanses.

Figure 1 displays the geometry for peering into the past. From the past blog, we established that the actual speed of light is sqr(2) times the observed speed of light.

I struggled a lot with this problem because it requires a Gedanken Experiment which I wasn't 100% sure about the outcome. The question is:

Can one make waves on a wave and see them propagating along the wave?
Can two pilots traveling in an open cockpit at the speed of sound hear each other speaking?

These seemingly simple questions (for a fluid dynamicist) bothered me a lot. If the two pilots could not hear each other that would imply that the speed of light is actually faster (sqr(2)* c) than the observed speed of light.

When I first derived the "solution" to this problem I simplified the problem just by considering a static hyperspherical reference frame. That introduced another constant into the problem (pi/3). The reason was the at any given Cosmological Angle, light travels in straight lines through the 4D spatial manifold, while we traveled along an arc. By the time light traveled all the distance to the 4D Center of the Universe, we would have traveled around the arc on an equilateral triangle inscribed inside a circle. I have to confess that this seems to be an artifact of how I tried to solve that problem. It gives a slightly older Universe than what we obtain when using the proper geometry:

The full treatment of the Pioneer Anomaly problem doesn't seem to require that constant.

Figure 1. Looking deep into the past.

This picture is quite telling. It shows the L0 radius of curvature of the time when the first stars lightened. At that time and at that radius of curvature, There was light… It is important to notice that light always travels at 45 degrees with the Fabric of Space – 45 degree with the tangential line at point A.

Under those conditions one can write the following equations for the relating L0, R0, Beta, Lambda_Obseved, C_Observed– yes even the speed of light depends upon what are you looking at…

Let's start with the speed of light. Normally we are observing things close, in our neighborhood… solar system, galaxy… Under those conditions, beta is 45 degrees and point A is almost right radially aligned with B. The two hyperspheres look like two hyperplanes and can be represented by the figure below:

Figure 2. Pioneer Radar Gun Experiment. Looking into a few minutes in the past.

This picture shows the Pioneer experiment. Light, microwaves leave Earth on point A and bounce back from the Pioneer spacecraft on point B. This all happens as the Hyperspherical Ligthspeed Expanding Universe expands at velocity C_observed. The observed value for the speed of light is c, what we are used to think at the velocity of light. It just happens that the observed velocity depends upon the angle of observation. If you are observing the beginning of times, them the angle Beta will be very small, otherwise it will be around 45 degrees.

where beta ranges from 45 degrees to zero degrees

is the actual speed of light which is faster than the speed of light we are used to… by a sqrt(2) factor.

Similarly, the wavelength of light depends upon what is the angle beta of observation.

This is expected, since the actual frequency of light shouldn't change. This also means that Hubble constant should depend upon how you calibrate it. Calibration is done using parallax and red shift or stellar candles and red shifts. These two calibrations are inconsistent since they look at different angles. One should use the near field calibration and then extrapolate it using the hypergeometrical argument.

Hubble equation relates distance with the receding velocity:

The Shifted Frequency is related to Hubble constant by the following equation:

Doppler effect equation.

The value of H is obtained when L is Ro. Under those considerations v becomes Cactual:

In summary, here we presented a geometric model for the Doppler Shift, that is, the change in wavelength has only to do with the 4D angle of observation. This angle cannot be drawn within the 3D Hypersphere since when looking into the past, one is looking outside the hyperspherical hypersurface.

Numerically, the modeled Hubble coefficient is a match to the experimental Hubble coefficient.

H=2.0637E-18 s^-1

Cheers,

MP

PS - The most recent observational determination of the proportionality constant obtained in 2009 by using the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) yielded a value of H₀ = 74.2 ± 3.6 (km/s)/Mpc.^[4] The results agree closely with an earlier measurement of H₀ = 72 ± 8 km/s/Mpc obtained in 2001 also by the HST.^[5] In August 2006, a less-precise figure was obtained independently using data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory: H₀ = 77 (km/s)/Mpc or about 2.5×10⁻¹⁸ s⁻¹ with an uncertainty of ± 15%.^[6] NASA summarizes existing data to indicate a constant of 70.8 ± 1.6 (km/s)/Mpc if space is assumed to be flat, or 70.8 ± 4.0 (km/s)/Mpc otherwise.[7]

1 megaParsec = 3.08568025 × 1022 meters

1megaparsec/Km=3.08568025 × 10¹⁹

Thus

H=2.0637E-18 s^-1=2.0637E-18 s^-1* 3.08568025 E19 km/s/mpc=63.63 km/s/mpc

Where discrepancies are likely due to NASA averaging values from different epochs (beta angles).

The Pioneer Anomaly Reloaded

2010-04-04T08:15:00.004-04:00

THINGS ARE NOT ALWAYS ABOUT YOU, PIONEER

When I wrote about the Pioneer Anomaly as a clear indication that the Universe has actually FOUR NONCOMPACT DIMENSIONS I was in quite a hurry and should had written the paper, posting it in longhand or in a fool proof manner…J People never do their homework and simple reasoning have sometime to be explained by another reasoning that yields exactly the same result. A good theory should be like that. There should be many ways to reach the same conclusion if the logical framework is consistent.

When I calculated the acceleration or deceleration in this case, i realized that if you only consider the 3D spatial coordinates and miss the curvature of the 3D hypersurface within the 4D spatial manifold, one missed the centripetal acceleration, that is, at any given time; light while seeming traveling in straight lines, is actually making a curve to reach Pioneer. This incorrect perception easily explains a delay.

Let's first review the amazing things that come out of the Pioneer Anomaly problem. First let's review what the Pioneer Anomaly is:

People have been mesmerized by some extremely strange results on the analysis of the trajectory of the spacecraft Pioneer launched in 1972 and on their way outwards from our solar system.

The strange result is some extra deceleration, unaccounted after considering its distance from the Sun, interaction with planets, solar wind etc. The acceleration is very precise and steady as seen from the posting in Wikipedia .

In the prior blog, after presenting the Hypergeometrical Law of Gravitation – which corrects Newton and Einstein's works – I suggested that this new equation would explain the Pioneer Anomaly…

Silly me…

Of course, I was wrong - this is a simple problem.

The solution can be derived directly from the topology. It is our current understanding that only matter curves spacetime, this means that locally the curvature is quite well defined by the inexistence of localized matter and equal to zero..:) That is, without the obvious occurrence of matter we believe that we live in a locally flat space…

Let's see what happens when one measures the speed of light. The measurement is shown below. First let's think within our standard paradigm. Instead of getting lost on details like interferometric measurements etc, let's consider just shooting a laser pulse to a mirror place at a known distance and measure the time delay for the echo (mirror reflection).

The measure time delay between shooting the laser pulse and measuring the reflection is equal to twice the distance divided by the speed of light. Simple problem, isn't it…J

Under this paradigm, the time it takes for light to bounce back from a mirror is given by 2L/c. This considers that light and the mirror are traveling or existing in the same dimension (3D) which is not the Hypergeometrical Universe Paradigm. There, light (a spatially modulation of the source of a dilaton field) travels within the 5D spacetime (4D spatial manifold). Anything else just flows within the 3D Hyperspherical Universe, which itself travels through the 4D spatial manifold.

The answer to the second question is that one can only discover what is going on in a 5D spacetime while living in a extremely flat 4D spacetime if one uses the EYE OF THE MIND. One has to concoct an alternative paradigm that explains everything… Something that explains something is not enough… As you know, there are plenty of people who will make a living out of putting down new ideas… Only a complete paradigm would survive scrutiny. That is what I created in the Hypergeometrical Universe Theory. I had to provide a new model for matter that would provide the basis for Quantum Mechanics, a topology that would explain Universe Expansion, Giant Black Holes in the Early Stages of the Universe, Double Jet Black Holes, Cooper Pairs, Hund's Law, Grand Unification as well as experimental applications like the Coherent Nuclear Fusion Experiment.

The situation is different if we consider that the Whole Universe as we Know it is traveling at the real speed of light perpendicularly to this experiment (no matter where we point the laser..:)).

The Hypergeometrical Universe paradigm draws a totally different picture for the same process:

If you consider our topology, it is clear that there is a curvature and that is equal to 1/R0.

Now let's get down to the Pioneer Anomaly and how do we measure how long the Universe is alive from the Pioneer Spacecraft deceleration…J

The actual experimental setup is a complex interferometric process but it mimics the standard pulse experiment. Pioneer emits a microwave pulse at precisely measured intervals (dt). The measure interval on Earth depends upon Pioneers speed.

The first thing to consider is what would be the perceived deceleration resulting from the geometry. To do this, we need to consider how much light has to travel back as a function of the farthest distance traveled by the spacecraft.

This figure shows what would be the path traversed by each pulse emitted by the Pioneer spacecraft. The angle of the light ray is always 45 degrees. The leftmost radial line represents Earth position. This means that when Pioneer is far from Earth by 45 degrees or PI/4*R0, light will never come back (the light ray will be parallel to the Earth radial line. Two parallel lines never meet…J

Let's say that at time zero Pioneer is at R0 from the 4D Center of the Universe and L from Earth and let's derive the deceleration from the simple geometry.

Let R(t) be the Radius of the Universe at the time t:

Where time is being measured after a light pulse is emitted from the Pioneer while it is at distance from the 4D Center of the Universe equal to R0.

The Cosmological Angle associated with Pioneer at time t given by:

The angle alpha is called Cosmological Angle and it is measured from the actual Center of the Universe.

The equation for the photon trajectory leaving the Spacecraft and reaching Earth later is given by:

Equating this equation to zero and solving for t', one obtains the time it takes from light to come from Pioneer to Earth at any given time or Pioneer position. Notice that this has nothing to do with Pioneer. This argument only refers to how the path traversed by light depends upon the spacecraft distance and Cosmological Angle.

The perceived distance traversed is given by c.t':

Taking the second derivative, expand in Taylor Series and simplify to obtain the acceleration as:

The calculated acceleration is twice the observed acceleration since we calculate

The observed acceleration is 8.75e-10 m/s2, the speed of light = 299792458 m / s. This yields a value for R₀= 2.05E+26 meters.

Since the 4D observed velocity is m this means that the Universe is years old or 1.5364E+10 years or

15.364 Billion Years Old…:)

One salient point is that the Hypergeometrical Lightspeed Expanding Shockwave Universe expands at the observed speed of light, this means that the material world travels slower than the dilaton field, by a factor of cos(45) or .

This conclusion is very important because it breaks the symmetry between dilators and dilatons.

Up to now, I considered that dilators and dilatons always traveled at the only allowed speed (c).

Of course, I notice that dilators have inertia with respect to lateral motion but I thought that the radial motion was the natural motion of a metric deformation, thus requiring no initial push to be achieved.

If I accept that the dilaton speed or light speed is actually larger than the observed speed of light then the picture associated with the initial Big Bang changes from a simple decaying process into a tangential explosion which set the 3D Hypersphere to travel at the observed speed of light.

It is clear that a dilaton field cannot accelerate dilators to its speed (sqr(2)*c) because interaction has to occur through RETARDED POTENTIALS. Retarded Potentials always propagate at c (Lightspeed) due to the geometry.

The interaction of dilators with the retarded dilaton field from other dilators produces a distribution of tangentially dilators traveling at c which is also a distribution of radially traveling dilators at that same speed. In other words, a lightspeed traveling Hyperspherical Universe and an sqr(2)*c dilaton-dilator interaction are a consistent solution to the Big Bang problem.

This salient point can be summarized as:

The speed of light is SQR(2) times C or light is faster than the speed of light..:)

This is due to motion be part of a coherence that was placed in motion at the beginning of times through the interaction of near field dilatons. The interference pattern of near field radially propagating homogeneous dilatons travels along 45 degrees. This is a very salient point.

Cheers,

MP

PS- I only have a few minutes to think about this problem every other month…Please feel free to disagree and provide a counter argument. At this time in the morning and without my coffee, this seems to be the only possible conclusion…J

Cheers,

Puzzled Reader

2010-01-30T20:33:00.000-05:00

It looks like the old school code I learned in 4th grade, but made nosense- I got "RESVSQFVHLCEDP". So unless I try loading the alphabet into it backwards and having it mean something, ya got me.

MP said...: I gave all the clues...:) Please go to a Bookstore and read a little of "The Lost Symbol" by Dan Brown (no - I don't get a cent for plugging his book, I just enjoyed reading it..:)I hope you liked my other analogies. I especially enjoyed creating the analogy of the Rosicrucian Rose symbolism with a Hypergeometrical Universe topology...:)Cheers,MP

The Proton Spin Crisis

2010-01-30T12:29:00.002-05:00

The Solution to the Proton Spin Crisis

I wasn't aware that there was a Proton Spin Crisis until a few days ago. This means that I will tackle this problem soon, hopefully tomorrow.

It is only fair to leave my readers with some hints on how to tackle the problem and what the problem is...:)

The problem is that the Standard Model could't explain the observed Proton Spin using the quarks paradigm.

I've just wonder how they explain the electron spin since it is suppose not to have any quarks in it or structure to speak about...:) I suppose they will just say : "Because I said so..:)"

Up to know I have been describing the Fundamental Dilator as a single coherence described by this figure:

This picture depicts the four stages of a deformation coherence of a four dimensional spatial metric (five dimensional spacetime metric). This means the the local space is dilated more, dilated less, shrank less, shrank more as it rotates within a four dimensional spatial manifold.

I've never mentioned anything about another deformation state with the same energy as this (a degenerated state - and I don't mean a very depraved state..>:)

This is a degenerated state, where the metric deformation is splitted into two moieties separated by half dilaton wavelength (to be in phase with each other). The deformational 3D and 4D masses have to be the same, thus placing constraints on the velocity and distance between the two moieties...:)

This pseudo-dimmer has to rotate such as to create the observed magnetic moment, which having a mass distribution such as to produce the appropriate mass and moment of inertia.

Think about it. I will do the same and return as soon as I can with my answer..:)

Cheers,

Verbum Significatium

2009-12-30T14:19:00.003-05:00

Verbum Significatium

It is no Ancient Secret that I enjoyed reading Dan Brown's Angels and Deamons. I rarely read fiction but I was smitten by the subject - a scientific plot within the surroundings of Castelo di Sant'Angelo.

Many of my previous blogs contain references to the Illuminati...:) an humorous take on the Wisdom of the Ancients. I am not someone who believes in the Wisdom of the Ancients, although considering how simple my theory is, it wouldn't surprise me if Ancient Wise people had a glimpse of it.

Knowledge doesn't evolve in straight lines - over long periods of time. This statement looks odd if considered within our short-lived technological framework where new technologies are derived from previous ones. The statement becomes meaningful if one add a longer time frame. Our technology/science will develop in short straight lines with bottlenecks. At these instances, noise will take over until a breakthrough coming from nowhere will make itself felt.

This is where my theory fits in. To a high degree my theory could had been discovered by ancients. I mentioned in several postings similarities between my intermittently interacting Universe and Diana,
the Goddess-Huntress seeking knowledge in the forest of Silva.

The goddess Diana, the huntress, as a model for the searching human soul. In the Forest, his Diana sought out of tracks or traces, literally footprints, vestigia, of God’s divine light.

Plato is an ever inspiring Ancient Sage.

Plato asserts to this in the third book of the Laws, when he teaches that one should track down musical harmonies in the manner of experienced dogs.

If you replace dogs by detectors and musical harmonies by dilatons...:)

His description of the enlightenment process resonates with my experience, facing deeply rooted interests - some defenseable others unconfessable - in trying to bring about a new paradigm or view of the Universe.

Other abundantly mentioned wisdom (As Above as Below, As in Heaven so in Earth) were also mentioned:

Explained Trice Great Hermes Trimegistus' hermetic philosophy on On the Sphaere One and On the Sphaere Two

In fact, it turned out to be more than pattern recognition. Closer reading of Giordano Bruno's ideas about the Universe clearly indicates that he saw it according to the topology expressed by Hermes Trimegistus saying, and repeated by Saint Augustine and Nicholas de Kues :

"the center was everywhere and the circunference nowhere"

Of course, this is exactly what happens to the 3D Universe when understood through my theory. If you think, how could Hermes Trice Great (Trimegistus) come up with the Hypersperical Topology many millenia ago...:)

In my theory you are always at the center of your Universe...:) no matter where you are...:) The center is everywhere --- the circunference is nowhere (since we are bound to the 3D lightspeed expanding hyperspherical Universe and cannot see anything perpendicular to it... :)

In fact, we can see the four-dimensional center of the Universe if we look far away in any direction...:) we can see it with the eye of the mind..:) that is, by understanding that far away in any direction maps directly to the center and thus maps the radius of the circumference...:)

Hidden in plain view as any true and deep wisdom...:)

Now lets see what new pieces of wisdom can be mapped to the Hypergeometrical Universe paradigm. The first that comes to mind is the Circumpunct...which has many meanings, being the most esoteric: the Rose, A.K.A. God...:)

You might notice some similarities between the Rose and my Hypergeometrical Universe topology...:)

Dan Brown research was able to uncover the Rosecrucian symbol shown below:

where you can see a Rose (the Circumpunct) overlaying a Croux. I am not saying that the Rosecrucians worship an long forgotten Universe topology but I am also not saying otherwise...:)

The Complete Rosecrucian symbol, long forgotten in the sands of time but recovered by my research, is shown below:

which contains one Rose for each of the six faces of the Croux.

Of course, when closed, the Complete Rosecrucian symbol represents the Circumpunct symmetry of the Universe, where in any direction, its cross-section is always a Circumpunct...:)

Below is a representation of the Cosmic Cube, representing the Hypergeometrical Universe Paradigm..:) and a shy 33rd degree Rosecrucian:

In addition to concatenating all knowledge of the Ancients with my theory, I was also able to recover a nice Riddle wrapped around a Puzzle...:) from the Ancients ...:)

The first one to solve it will learn a great piece of Ancient Wisdom..>:)

Cheers, Happy New Year!

MP

Comment on Riemann Hypothesis and The Hypergeometrical Universe

2009-12-19T09:43:00.008-05:00

Comment:

Hi MP, I am glad I´ve found your site and your thoughts about things. I have read some of your HU-paper and bits and pieces here and in your blog. I am impressed. Nr 1 reason I am writing is that I have also been thinking about a 4d expanding universe as a solution to understand/explain GR and "facts" like time, CMB and expansion. Well my ideas has been Macro/topographic and I have not been able to incorporate particles. When I realized that this idea has potential I´ve been looking around for a while on the net and in popular books and found nothing like this in the psysics community. And than I stumbelled over your blog when I tried to find information and thinking about the imagined higgs boson. I´m trying to understand your theory and the first question is: how exactly is your theory explaining gravity? Is the FS deformed by dilators like the Einsteinian curved space or is it that gravity is a part/consequence of the dilator interaction? Hope you understand what I mean.

Cheers/PS

Peter,

It is a pleasure to meet a like-minded reader...:) The idea of a lightspeed expanding 3D hyperspherical shockwave universe is unique and revolutionary. There isn't anything in the literature for many reasons. First, the idea is daring and proposes lightspeed traveling which would have a knee-jerk reaction from anyone in academia, not to mention the sheer panic instilled in editors when faced with such proposal. A narrow and ignorant reading of Restrict Relativity would seem to contradict this idea. It just happens that every theory has a scope and the Restrict Relativity's scope is a 4D spacetime. Within a 4D spacetime, proper time and proper space adjust themselves by definition to yield an universally observable constant velocity of light.

I mentioned in my blog that this is the result of a format choice for the equations of motion. There are many choices made by mankind which contributed to this. I mentioned in Newton's Blunder that in introducing the concept of Force and mass to describe acceleration, he missed a great opportunity to create a purely geometrical theory of the Universe. I recast Newton's laws in such a way as to eliminate mass and force and created such a theory..:)

Motion is defined by the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, which is a simple physical principle that can be tested in any body of water and wave producing mechanical dilators. Had I the time and resources, I would do it myself, but this is an easy Gedanken Experiment and I leave the simple demonstration to the readers and future generations.

The Quantun Lagrangian Principle states that dilator (dilaton or metric wave generators) always move in such a way as never do any work...:) they are awfully lazy. To achieve this state of leisure, they always dilate in phase with the surrounding dilaton field. Of course, for such a thing to happen, there has got to be a fundamental dilaton music to be played. Otherwise a cacophony would ensue.

The Fundamental Dilator concept provides this basic chord. There is an very good analogy to the Universe and the ever ringing of a tune and small variations of it. This analogy is what I seek to emphasize in my book: The Flying Orchestra. The fundamental dilator represents the four fundamental particles (proton, electron, positron and antiproton). In a four-dimensional spatial manifold, sound (metric waves) has not only a displacement volume, but also a tilt or orientation with respect to our 3D Universe. When the tilt is zero (the dilator is flush with our Universe) there is interaction. At any other angle there is NO INTERACTION. This means that my Universe is stroboscopic or that there is a pseudo time-quantizaton. I mean pseudo, because time flows unhindered. The appearance of time quantization is due to interaction intermittence. This phenomenon results in our Quantum Mechanics. More precisely, pseudo time-quantization plus the fundamental dilator plus the Quantum Lagrangian Principle plus the Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Shockwave topology yields Quantum Mechanics.

The Fundamental Dilator is what has eluded your project, I suppose. One cannot create the theory of everything would reviewing our concept of particles.

This is the Balls Diagram which conveys what I said about metric waves (dilaton) and wavegenerators (dilators). They have not only amplitude, sign but also orientation (tilt/orientation or spinning).

The lettering was used to indicate the orientation of the metric deformation coherence with respect to the 3D lightspeed expanding hyperspherical shockwave Universe. Interaction happens only when the letters are horizontal.

Despite of having place the Balls sidewise, they are really appearing on the same place as we travel along the R direction (perpendicular to our 3D Universe) at the speed of light. Their change in nature is achieved by tunneling between different stationary states of local metric deformation, that is, space can be deformed in a quantized manner.

Being an electron or a proton or an antiproton or a positron only depends upon which phase is horizontal with respect to the 3D Universe. Of course, the difference between matter and antimatter is just a minus sign, that is, a proton is defined (at an specific Cosmological Time) as a large dilation of the local metric, and and antiproton is a large shrinkage of the local metric. Half cycle away, they would invert definition since being matter or antimatter is a relative event. The electron is a small (1/2000 times the proton amplitude) shrinkage of the local metric and a positron is a small dilation of the local metric. The states are represented by the diagram below.

Of course, I kept everything I could keep from the current view of the Universe. I don't have a psychological need of imprinting myself onto each and every bit of my theory. I believe what I am building has the best parts or ideas of my predecessors. It is always convenient to keep as much of the logical framework people are used to for didactics sake. I kept everything that made sense, that is. The state numbers are assigned to the three axial lengths of a 3D hyper-ellipsoid of revolution. Notice that the difference between states is just orientation. States (0,-1/3,-2/3) and (0,-2/3,-1/3) differ just by a 90 degrees rotation within our 3D space. Since this is a dynamic process, the degeneration in energy is irrelevant. The states degeneration is lifted by the fact that it takes time to rotate a deformation by 90 degrees.

3D rotations are at the heart of the transmutation notes required to transmutate one particle into another or to provide the scaffolding needed to create all hyperons. I will someday explain how to do it in my blog "Splitting Hairs and Neutrinos"..:)

I will not repeat the lengthy hyperons family description. You can find it within the pdf and the pages of this blog.

The Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Shockwave topology provides the support for all the observed phenomena in Astronomy. From Hubble expansion, double jet Black Holes, Gamma Ray Bursts, the Precession of the Mercury Perihelion, Gravitational Lensing, the Pioneer Anomaly, all these phenomena have been presented within this blog. NO NEED for Dark Matter, Dark Energy or Darth Vader..:)

Within the framework of this theory lies the basis for Nonlinear Hadronics which would make it possible to eliminate Mankind's energy needs and allow for us to travel outside our galactic neighborhood.

The energy needs are fulfilled by the Coherent Nuclear Fusion processes which I proposed and described in a letter to Steven Chu. Other applications of the theory can be explained if someone bother to ask..:)

This is a recapitulation of the theory to dispel the idea that this theory has potential..:) This theory is fully developed and explains everything...:)

Now let's answer your nice questions.

The first allusion I want to tackle is the mentioning of the Higgs bosons. In my theory, there is no need for Higgs Boson...In fact, if people reading about the Higgs Boson had a brain they would notice the lack of details on how one distinguishes one boson from the Higgs Boson. Bosons are particles with integer spin. There are several particles like that, although most have spin zero (integer but zero, e.g. delta zero, pion zero, gamma zero etc)... How is that the experiment will prove that a given particle is giving mass to another particle. The only way I can think about is to collide that particle with another and see if inertia just disappears or gets multiplied by a larger number... I've never heard any experimental detail that would indicate that the good people of the Large Hadron Collider is pursuing this avenue. I don't think it is a feasible experiment due to the short life of particles. Thus I have trouble believing that anything conclusive would ever come out of a head-on collisional experiment. Of course, my theory can be easily probed by a sidewise (collinear focusing) collision velocity dependence experiment.

In my theory there is no mass. Inertial mass is the footprint of the dilator onto the Fabric of Space. The Fabric of Space is used interchangeably with the Lightspeed Expanding 3D Shockwave Hyperspherical Universe for obvious reasons..:) If you see equations where mass, electron charge is part of it, you can be sure that those are the connections of my theory to current knowledge. I recover the laws of nature as currently understood to ground my theory into our current understanding.

The 4D mass is the displacement volume equivalent to the coherent addition of the displacement volumes of four contributions (the four phases of the fundamental dilator metric deformation coherence add coherently since they are in phase with the dilaton field - both travel at the speed of light and the dilator is at the holospatial frame of reference).

Thus there is a difference between inertial and gravitational mass..:) although they are proportional at the level of neutral dilator complexes. When dealing with simple dilators (electron and protons), there is a factor of two because of the destructive interference occurring in the neutral dilator complex (spin zero gravitational dilators)...:) Of course, this might sound mysterious but it is addressed clearly in another page of this blog. Here there is no need for hocus pocus or sleights of hand..:)

In summary, the concept of inertial mass is replaced by its in phase displacement metric footprint. The concept of gravitational mass is associated with the dilaton field a dilator complex (e.g. a hydrogen atom) yields.

I showed in the past that the total dilaton field generated by a hydrogen atom is approximately equal to the one of a single dilator. Since neutral particles and neutrons are basic combination of hydrogen atoms, the inertial mass is approximately equal to the gravitational mass.

You question about the origin of Gravitation. All forces are derived from the same interaction: dilator-dilaton field interaction guided by the Quantum Lagrangian Principle which has nothing quantum mechanical about it. The principle is called Quantum Lagrangian Principle because it originates Quantum Mechanics.

The derivation of our common knowledge Gravitational Law is derived within the pdf and has been reviewed within the blog.

I digressed about the paradigm of 4D spacetime deformation and the application of the Quantum Lagrangian Principle within the blog. There is more than one paradigm that will yield the same result. Remember that whatever Einstein proposed in a 4D spacetime has to be a skewed view of a phenomenon happening within a 5D spacetime that I proposed.

This means that both models have to be compatible. If you decide to talk about 4D spacetime then local metric deformation due to an aggregation of dilators (large mass black hole for instance) will be a fine model. If you want to think about what is really happening the topology is more complex...:) You do have a lightspeed traveling framework and observes only what crosses the Fabric of Space.

Ultimately gravitation and all forces all comes naturally from the simplest equation you will ever see. The Grand Unification Equation is shown in my pdf and has been presented before here.

The distinction between gravitational mass (neutral dilator complexes) and charged masses (charged particles, e.g. electrons, protons) appears in the distinct behavior of the two probes. The charged particles are allowed to change their k-vectors while the neutral matter only changes location at each de Broglie step of the expansion of the Universe.

The observed change in k-vector (acceleration) at each de Broglie step is 10^38 times smaller for neutral dilators complexes (gravitation) as it is for simple dilators (electrons, protons), thus the difference in strength between Gravitation and Electromagnetism.

Of course, Magnetism is dependent upon motion. Motion (velocity) is modeled within the spacetime cross-section of my Universe and it is sensitive to Doppler effect or Lorentzian Length contraction. The deformation of the dilator field of electrons within a conductor together with the non-deformation of the dilaton field of the nuclei (they don't move) yields an effective dipolar dilaton field emanating from any wire where a current passes through. This has been used to derived the fundamental law of Magnetism (Biot-Savart).

It suffices since the final objective of any theory is to describe motion of matter or charged particles at motion or repose with respect to each other.

The other forces (Strong and Weak or Electro-Weak) are explained away by replacing the Standard Model (elimination of Quarks) and by introducing the concept of Nonlinear Hadronics, thus explaining the structure of neutrons and other isotopes.

Let summarize, FS (Fabric of Space) is the locus that travels at the speed of light. In the RXYZ, framework (left panel), it is a perfect circle or hypersphere (if you don't consider an specific cross-section). Thus there isn't any mass induced curvature.

On the TauXYZ framework (right panel) the story is slightly more complex. In that framework there is an absolute time PHI and the proper time tau which is a projection of PHI into the proper time axis. Within Einstein theory, he only perceived the proper time, he could conceive a paradigm that embraced both proper and absolute time.

If you only think about proper time and don't understand the correct laws of dynamics (which rules both chemistry, mechanics,electromagnetism, gravitation, nuclear decaying reactions or nuclear chemistry), then you will have to consider that space is curved. This is equivalent to say that the projections or overlapping dilaton field onto the Fabric of Space is more closely spaced with the proximity of a larger mass (black hole).

Both paradigm yield the same result. That is, you can think about equally spaced dilaton topographic lines or circles drawn onto a curved space or you can think about increasingly closer circles drawn onto a flat surface. Both paradigms will yield the same dynamics. The first is good for Einstein, the second is mine..:)

Cheers, Peter

MP

PS - By the way, I was always attracted to Sweden and when I was a kid I considered moving there. I liked the freedom of being a scientist in a society that allows for you not to spend your lifetime and mind on making money for the retirement age...:) I though that my mind would be freer there than in any other place... :) not to mention the mythological Swedish bikini team (Brazilian Mythology)...:) an idea that inhabited my mind during my teenage years...:) and still does every so often..:)

Cheers.

Comment on Does God Play Dice

2009-12-11T21:33:00.004-05:00

JD has left a new comment on your post "Does God Play Dice":

On the (phases) of particles...that makes sense for the quarks...particles of the same...or close to the same mass...particle phsyics would be simpler if electrons and protons had similar mass....being as their charge is near opposite...."Dice" no, we are God's ahem.."Experiment"...the universe plays dice ie...gamma ray burst..

I would like to thank JD for his enigmatic comment. Enigmatic since I mentioned that my paradigm shift (The Fundamental Dilator) eliminates the mass asymmetry between protons and electrons..:) It is like my pearls felt onto some deaf ears..:)

My theory rethinks the Universe Laws within a four dimensional spatial framework where the 3D Universe is a lightspeed traveling hyperspherical thin shell. Since the spatial manifold is four-dimensional, my Fundamental Dilator can be assigned a phase (phase of tunneling relative to spinning or rotating in the 4D spatial manifold).

As the Fundamental Dilator coherence spins, only an extremely well defined phase (overlap of the thin dilator with the thin hyperspherical shell) is seen in our Universe. That is the phase I mentioned, not something that people don't understand like a wavefunction phase - which is a 3D cross-section of the 4D dilaton field.

This relationship between the 4D dilaton field and the associated de Broglie waves (and thus the wavefunction within the Schrodinger's equation) was explained when I tackled the Double-Slit Interference problem.

Today, I will not repeat myself. I will just give some hints where to find the understanding that you seek for soooo long.

"Dice" no, we are God's ahem.."Experiment"...the universe plays dice ie...gamma ray burst..

I guess, I should NOT complain when my readers are whimsical themselves since I feel quite good when I manage to say something deep and mysterious..:)

Cheers, JD

MP

PS- Please feel free to ask questions. You are soooo close to the Truth..:)

Riemann Hypothesis and The Hypergeometrical Universe

2009-11-22T19:52:00.011-05:00

Riemann Hypothesis and The Hypergeometrical Universe

Our love for knowledge and beauty has always driven us to find the most sublime analogies to represent what we are seeing in the Universe. Einstein wanted to read God's Mind. The Hypothetical Higgs Boson has been named by some as the God Particle. I equated the steps of my Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe as being somewhat similar to the Pendulum of Brahma. At each cycle we see ourselves changed by that Universal Operator.

Mathematics is always the Golden Standard of beauty. We always hope to find a nicely fitting mathematical equation to describe the whole Universe. Mathematicians (String Theorists) are especially hopeful..:). Of course, after all, that would be redemption to their endeavor of creating the least physical (most mathematical) theory in history.

Euler's Beta Function relationship to the Strong Force model was immediately recognized as the sign we are on the right track, after all, for a theory to be correct it has to be aesthetically beautiful….:) Form over content…very typical of our Mankind always driven by superficial calculations….:)

It just happens that there isn't any indication that physics doesn't matter, that is, there isn't any indication that at the end of all, we will have everything described by a simple mathematical equations that overrules all physical properties.

For example, there is the wave equation which describes all waves as long as they have a natural velocity or one knows the elasticity of the medium where those waves propagate. This means that even though we have the knowledge of an equation which would describe such a general phenomena as waves, the physics is still there in the form of a pesky constant.. :)

This does not demerit the scientists who found those beautiful equations, it just serves as a reminder that there might be a limit on what mathematical abstraction can achieve.

It has been said with some understated deepness that the Riemann Hypothesis might be the solution to the Theory of Everything, that is, something, some force, some string might be represented somehow by the zeros of the Zeta function along the critical line. The details are fuzzy since this is just a wild (albeit educated..:) guess...:)

Scientists look down to Horoscopists all their lives…:) It is well know that vague statements can always find resonance within some fraction of the population and thus keep the readers happy and aware of their daily best options…:)

One might say that the same happens in Science. There is a difference. Since we are a much more educated bunch than the average person, our guesses are better educated..:) that is, there is something deep in the number theory applied to Primes..:)

Of course, this is just because people doesn't know how to think about numbers and one should expect that if the zeros of an equation are primes, most likely the logic behind the construction of the equation is such that only certain primes will be zeros..:)

It is like being surprised that f(x)=(x-1)*(x-2) has zeros equal to 1 and 2.

Number theory is just not developed enough to see the underlying logic behind the Riemann Hypothesis and the Zeta Function (or Eta Function on the Analytic Continuation).

As usual, the statement that the Riemann Hypothesis should be relevant to our understanding of the Universe can be decomposed into the simpler statement that Primes will be relevant..:) I am a simple minded man, so I will cut to the chase and explore this proposition..:)

Nobody bothered to think about Primes because nothing in Physics looks like Primes. If a poor string theorist looks around and think about making Primes to be some property of strings them we might end up with 10^500000000000000 possible Universes with different string theories explaining each one of them..:)

A Standard Model Physicist is not in much better position. Let say that zero are electromagnetic waves, the ONE is…J The next basic particles are electron and Proton … Neutron might be TWO but that does not solve the problem. Electrons and Protons are certainly not equal in the Standard Model and the analogy dies there…:)

Of course, that is not the case in the Hypergeometrical Universe.

ARE CHARGED PARTICLES PRIMES

YES.

In my theory one can easily relate ZERO to the dilaton field and its spatial modulation (electromagnetic waves).

ONE is clearly the Fundamental Dilator which represents all four fundamental particles (Electron, Proton, AntiElectron, AntiProton).

TWO is of course the Neutron

THREE are the Pions

FIVE are the CRAZY DELTAS

SEVEN are the KAONS

ELEVEN are the XIS Star – This Channel decays into a KaonZero and a Pion Minus.

THIRTEEN are the LUCKY OMEGAS

ARE Neutral Majorama PARTICLES 2^N NUMBERS

YES. I am sure the numerologists will have a field day..:)

As in any good Horoscope, there is a caveat. There are exclusions to the Prime Rule. They are associated with another nice mathematical formula, the formula for 2 to the power of another number. (2,4,8,16…)

TWO is the precursor to a Gamma photon from the annihilation of a Positron-Electron pair.

FOUR is the Pion Zero

EIGTH is the KAON ZERO

Later, I will show how the mathematical space topology and mathematical instrumentation needed to solve the Riemann Hypothesis also describes the mass of the Hyperons…:)

A hint. Look at the Fundamental Dilator coherence 'energy' diagram. The degenerated states on the two potential wells lose their degeneration due to the finite velocity of light, which creates a time delay for a spatial rotation within the 3D Lightspeed Expanding Hypersphere.

Think about what does it means to be real…:) and read the Meaning of Material Existence blog I wrote in the past.

ARE THERE Neutral PARTICLES = 2*N NUMBERS

As in any good Horoscope, there is always something for everyone. It just happens that 2N is also a valid mapping for Neutral Particles.

Of course, since they decompose into opposite charged particles, they have to be the SUM OF TWO PRIMES (Goldbach's Conjecture) or 2 Majorama Particles…:)

SIX is the DELTA ZERO

Now that you know the answer to the question, it should be easier to derive the equation that describes the process...:) I wrote a book called The Flying Orchestra, which represents our journey through the Universe inside the Ligthspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe. Most of us :) are composed of isotopes, which turned out to be quite harmonious dimensional notes. The Hyperons are the basic notes of our Universe, that is, the most unique, cacophonous notes one can create- like Heavy Metal...:)

In comparison, the isotopes are like Mozart Symphonies...NAH....in fact, they are quite boring and more like Kenny G

In the next few blogs, I will address the isotopes, the mass equation (or God Equation if you so prefer :) .

I am awaiting for Steven Chu to say something before I write about how to make a neutral particle accelerator or anything accelerator or dimensional accelerator...:)

Cheers,

MP

Listen Dr Fate's Music...:) I love it...:)

2009-11-15T21:29:00.004-05:00

Dr. Fate

I am not someone given to believe in Fate. Unless it is Scientific Fate or the Fate of my scientific theory...

My last Blog explored the need to believe or better the imperative for believing contained in certain widely accepted theories. As you might know, wide acceptance is not an assurance of correctness..:)

By the way, surrounding oneself just with friendly admirers is what academia has been doing and that is what precluded a stronger revaluation of current models and created the censorship conditions that prevail today. One should welcome ideas and their purporters if they pass basic scrutiny. I did that with Dr. Chucanov. If one idea is not good, it shouldn't take a big effort to pinpoint its flaws.

For example: The Standard Model started with some nicely defined Up and Down Quarks... As usual, they asked us to believe. Someday, in some huge accelerator we would meet those little things and be happy that we knew they would come..:) When they did not appear, they asked us to believe that they were glued together...:) Oh, Good Lord....

Peter Higgs demanded us to believe that a Boson would come out of collisions in the heart of another beast (another accelerator - Large Hadron Collider)... It is just the beast that changed, the request is the same ---- Faith ....

No wonder some people see some similarities between Religion and Science. Both can be dogmatic and censor iconoclastic non members of the choir...

Despite of this requirement of Faith, I believe that Fate is a slightly different concept. They sound pretty much the same to me, but in one we have to drop disbelieve, rationality, questioning (Faith) while in the other we only have Rationality, Questioning to hold us up...

My believe in Fate is that there will be a theory in which things will fit so well and make so much sense that Anyone Will Be Able To See That Truth Has Been Spoken.

Of course, that will have to be followed by hardcore experimental proof...:)

A theory is just a guide...... A great theory can be a map...

Currently, I am placing my bets on my theory. I had other "Theories" in the past, but I knew that they were just concoctions in which things pointed, maybe, in the correct direction but they didn't hold water properly..;)

I've never bother people with hare-brain schemes like Peter Higgs or Alan Guth (Higgs Boson and The Inflation Theory), but I decided that The Hypergeometrical Universe deserved a closer look.

There is a path for redemption for Peter Higgs and Alan Guth or any other Big Wig. It is very simple, just take a position in favor of bringing (my theory and others) back into the realm of discussion... Not unlike reopening the Plenarium for debate.

Unsettle Physics!!!

Of course, that would be slightly detrimental to your Superstar status but in History that would make you even Bigger. It takes a real scientist to second guess himself/herself, to revise one's own hypotheses and to appreciate the beauty in someone else's ideas.

Currently, I believe that the Fate of this theory is to have its own life. I am just the messenger.

Some people mentioned that Science requires a highly mathematical framework. I don't believe that to be the case. Any theory is just simple ideas dressed up in algebra. The ideas behind them are always quite simple...an Harmonic Oscillator here, a vibrating string there, mapping mass to a self-energy or not....making infinite equal to zero.... etc...etc...

All the math, the proposed Lagrangians, Green Function Propagators, Feymann Diagrams sums, Dyson Theorem, etc. are simple ideas... Superstrings wrapped around Calabi-Yau manifolds always reminds me Bacon Wrapped Scallops...:)

Those are simple analogies and they taste great...:)

I used Naked Science in my blog because it shows how rich this theory is and how much easier it is to think in terms of physical ideas than to get lost in algebra.

The goal is to See The Florest By The Trees..:)

If you oppose censorship, click the Chicken below and learn all about my plight...:)

Cheers,

PS- Read this with the musical background...:) By the way, I identify myself with Dr. Fate...:)

Of course, not being a connosseur of marvel comics, I suspect Dr. Fate is a Force of Good..:)

Sapor Similis Pullus

Comment on the Mercury Perihelion Solution

2009-11-08T10:09:00.006-05:00

Comments are always welcome

Comment on the Mercury Perihelion Solution

I found this site using google and i want to thank you for your work. You have done really very good site. Great work, great site! Thank you!

Sorry for offtopic

Comments are always welcome, as well as solid criticism. I tried to tie down the theory the best I could without the benefit of criticism...:)

In the Mercury Perihelion Prequel, I reviewed the why Paul Gerber's work was dismissed. He started with a velocity dependent formula for which he couldn't provide a convincing derivation.

I reproduced his formula when I derived the Gravitation force for a non-rotating Sun..:) In fact, Gerber's formula is a limiting value of my more general formula.

Of course, nobody derives the Gravitational formula from first principles in any theory other than in this one. Remember that this theory is derived to explain motion, interaction, action-at-distance and does it through the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and the Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Shock-Wave Universe Topology. All forces come naturally when I reconnected this theory to our Physics.

The derivation was done in the relaxed Fabric of Space condition, that is, I started the derivation using a flat local Fabric of Space.

I considered interaction between dilators where the probe dilator was moving radially with the expansion of the Universe. This happens when the local fabric of space is totally relaxed and its normal points radially- perpendicularly to our 3D Universe. This means that the force was derived as a partial derivative of the deformation of the local fabric of space from a given initial velocity(zero velocity). This is equivalent in Strict Relativity to consider the relative velocity zero while the bodies interact. Under those conditions, SR is well approximated by Newtonian Dynamics.

To recover the force for any velocity one has to use the Lagrangian Force equivalent, which we used on the Mercury Perihelion Prequel. For the case of Gravitational Lensing, the velocity amplitude (c) doesn't change. The only change is its direction. Under those conditions, the partial derivative was fine.

This is means that Paul Gerber's ansatz equation for a velocity dependent Gravitation was OK. He just did not have a understanding of the WHY...:)

As I mentioned, this theory passed the basic tests a theory has to pass to be discussed (Gravitational Lensing, Mercury's Perihelion, reproduced all the necessary forces and provide an alternative description to the remaining forces strong and electroweak).

There are a few remaining blogs I want to write but have been too busy to do. One of them has to do with our interest in traveling within our galactic neighborhood. This blog will disclose a new propulsion mechanism which is good enough for short travels.

To go further there is a way to create macroscopic Fabric of Space waves which would lead to light speed traveling of massive bodies. I know that this is forbidden by Relativity..:) of course, it is..:) but that is a just an artifact of the Newtonian choice of Force definition.

It is not that massive bodies cannot travel at the speed of light, it is that due to how one chose to interact them makes their interaction ineffectual to accelerate them to the speed of light. I will propose another mechanism to create motion.

I wrote about Newton's, Galileo's blunders...Of course, I've never meant to minimize their contribution... Just a provocative hindsight consideration aimed at creating a debate..:) As I always mention, nothing would be done without the work of our predecessors, luminaries..and no good theory can be built without strong debate and criticism.

Please, always feel free to compliment but also accept your need to criticize it. It is OK...:)

Cheers,

MP

Comment on Dr. Steven Chu's Letter

2009-09-29T21:00:00.041-04:00

Comment on Dr.

Steven Chu's Letter

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Letter to Dr. Steven Chu":

You do understand that electrons and protons are completely different things, right? Electrons are fundamental particles, and protons are made of three quarks (two up quarks and one down quark) with gluons keeping the together.

Regardless, have you heard back from Dr. Chu yet?

If not, the point I mentioned above may be the reason, OR you mentioned "revise Science." I'm sure you meant well, but I think it comes across as too bold.

This comment was left by a well-meaning scientist...:)

He was way too kind. If I hadn't paid attention to the fact that seemingly a Proton and an Electron are different entities (different things), I would be arrogant.

That is a basic piece of knowledge mankind accumulated during its journey towards illumination...:)

He mentioned that by stating that my theory was an attempt to revise science, I had come across as too bold.

Hadn't I paid attention to the very relevant detail that an electron is different from a proton in the current understanding, I would be more than bold, I would be really stupid and arrogant.

Despite of the fact that I don't put my picture and name on each and every page of my blog, my name and information can be easily found in the pdfs. I believe that my theory is important, I am not. I am just the carrier. This means that everything I stated here, if wrong, would damage my projected image.

As the saying goes, Egg would be on my face. I think this is how science should be discussed.

There's got to be a penalty for overlooking a relevant piece of information in a scientific discussion.

I chose to have a public review of my theory and never shied away from criticism. In fact, I didn't have an option other than to post it here in this corner of the internet…:) . Well, it is also published in two books.

This lack of anonymity from my side is also the reason why I asked scientists to name themselves. That makes the discussion more interesting and intellectually more honest.

Don’t be shy, just remember that everything you say will live forever in the net..:)

The word revision comes from many things in my theory. A very salient new paradigm in my theory is the Fundamental Dilator shown below:

This is called the Balls Diagram because I used Balls to denote the orientation (by the lettering orientation) and tunneling phase of the 4D spatial metric deformation coherence with respect to our 3D Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe.

The spinning creates a stroboscopic effect (interaction only occurs when the deformations are flush with the 3D Hypersphere) which yields both Quantum Mechanics and the distinct character of the four fundamental particles (electron, proton, positron and antiproton).

On the other hand, one has to have Balls (in the figurative sense) to propose such a revolutionary model. Here Electrons, positrons, antiprotons and protons are really different phases of the same entity. I call this concept a revision of what we currently consider to be a particle.

If you had read a fraction of my theory, you would know that I proposed a paradigm where the four fundamental particles are just phases of the same metric deformation coherence.

A Horse is a Horse, of course, of course...:) and a Proton is different from an Electron, unless we are dealing with a revisionist theory (different view of the same reality) where they are the same...:)

Had you named yourself, it would be clear that you cast a comment without reading the basic tenets of my theory and egg would be on your face...:) It is just fair...:)

I would be delighted to discuss the theory with my critics - right here because this is the only place where a broad scope theory can be debated. If this were a review of my work, never in a million years could I point out that the reviewer didn't do a good job ..>:) In fact, the reviewer missed all the relevant points...:) (if you don't believe, read my other blog with the censorship events).

By the way, if I were wrong, I would love to hear a good argument. I hate wasting time and have other things to do...:)

I was asked if I received any reply from Dr. Steven Chu. I can tell that there has been a pick-up on the interest level of my theory.

Below you can see the Maploco displaying readers from several places:

Cambridge - Probably MIT's Dr Guth..>:)
Alamogordo - Most likely radioative scientists from White Sands...:) (I am guessing...:)
Berkeley - Probably some brilliant string theorist...:)
Stockholm, Sweden - Probably the Nobel Prize Committee...;)
Ithaca - Probably Dr. Paul Ginsparg..>:)

Many of my visitors do not leave comments, which is a shame...:) As you know, everyone is tempted to put down other people's ideas..>:) but very few have the courage to say something positive about someone else's controversial work..>:)

Dr Steven Chu, most likely asked our Luminaries to go and find out what this theory is about..>:)

I hope they do a better job than our well-meaning scientist. It would be inappropriate to conclude that the lack of a reply means that the theory is incorrect ...:)

The case in point is that most people have biases (e.g. an electron is a different 'particle' from a proton) and will simply discard the theory without even reading it as did the current critic. Of course, if the concept of particle were the only way to describe the immutable electron and if the electron were really immutable, then they would be right...:) I question the immutability and the concept that particle or particle-wave are the only way to describe an electron...:) Not only question, but provided an alternative description where there is no immutability and instead of a particle or particle/wave, the electron is modeled as a metric deformation coherence (thus highly mutable..:) and better described as a traveling wave-generator...

Of course, I also provided a new paradigm for interaction which yields quantum mechanics and relativity. I proposed that Relativity is in the eyes of the beholder in my posting The Image in the Mirror , that is, the hyperbolic nature of spacetime is due to the choice of equations of motion. I also solved a paradox there...:)

Using the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, the limiting velocity of light comes naturally...:)

Returning to the problem of biased critics. They might do with nice words like "well-meaning" but what is really important is that they read the theory before reaching a conclusion...:) or at least read the basic and very controversial paradigms and make a critique of them before concluding something..:)

Every so often, I repost my "The Silence of the Lambs" posting as a guide to controversy and to help critics to find their way without too much reading..>:)

I would like to make the discussion more fluent.

The Silence of the Lambs verses about the silence of the scientific community after being hit by a much simpler alternative explanation of the Universe. This would be the time that I would expect them to jump up and down and say Occam's Razor ..>:) as so many of them like to do...:) ( I hate that pompous line of speech). It contains many if not most of the controversial points of this theory in a bullet point form.

Thanks for the opportunity to point the why my theory revises science. It proposes a paradigm that provides an alternative view of particles, the cosmos etc....

Cheers,

Location	Time
Astoria, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:18:18 -0500
Atlanta, GA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:38:49 -0500
Astoria, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:32:29 -0500
Euless, TX, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:13:01 -0500
Pasadena, CA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:49:54 -0500
Carrollton, TX, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:14:16 -0500
Wayne, NJ, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:59:58 -0500
Long Beach, CA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:55:51 -0500
Seoul, Korea, Republic of	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:42:11 -0500
New York, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:21:50 -0500
New York, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:02:56 -0500
Cambridge, MA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:44:35 -0500
Hoboken, NJ, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:12:14 -0500
Joliet, IL, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:50:12 -0500
, United Kingdom	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:28:26 -0500
Alamogordo, NM, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:54:06 -0500
New York, NY, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:30:39 -0500
Bridgeport, CT, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 08:04:48 -0500
Bangkok, Thailand	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:22:21 -0500
Berkeley, CA, United States	Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:08:46 -0500
Warren, NJ, United States	Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:50:25 -0500
Wayne, NJ, United States	Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:49:52 -0500
Lawrenceville, GA, United States	Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:39:34 -0500

Mamaroneck, NY, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 18:55:11 -0500
Stockholm, Sweden	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:44:47 -0500
, Europe	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:55:55 -0500
Bayonne, NJ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 12:22:00 -0500
North Dartmouth, MA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:24:23 -0500
East Brunswick, NJ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:04:22 -0500
Peoria, AZ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:54:04 -0500
Cambridge, MA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:07:55 -0500
Rosedale, NY, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:03:06 -0500
Washington, DC, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:50:34 -0500
Montgomery, AL, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:44:59 -0500
Edison, NJ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:44:36 -0500
Brooklyn, NY, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:26:40 -0500
Ashburn, VA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:23:34 -0500
Waddy, KY, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:20:14 -0500
Munich, Germany	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:00:33 -0500
Berkeley, CA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 07:23:44 -0500
Spokane, WA, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 04:08:22 -0500
, , United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 03:03:03 -0500
Warren, NJ, United States	Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:03:54 -0500
Astoria, NY, United States	Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:08:25 -0500
Columbus, OH, United States	Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:56:47 -0500

Clifton, NJ, United States Sat, 03 Oct 2009 12:02:56 -0500
Nottingham, United Kingdom Sat, 03 Oct 2009 10:55:07 -0500
Gatineau, QC, Canada Sat, 03 Oct 2009 10:35:35 -0500
Ithaca, NY, United States Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:33:32 -0500
Mount Kisco, NY, United States Sat, 03 Oct 2009 06:27:27 -0500
Yucca Valley, CA, United States Sat, 03 Oct 2009 04:11:30 -0500

The Luddites are coming..:)

2009-08-27T20:15:00.018-04:00

The Luddites are coming..:)

Vedic Astrology has left a new comment on your post "The Cosmic Microwave Background":

The CMBR is well explained by the Big Bang model – when the universe was young, before the formation of stars and planets, it was smaller, much hotter, and filled with a uniform glow from its white-hot fog of hydrogen plasma. As the universe expanded, both the plasma and the radiation filling it grew cooler. When the universe cooled enough, stable atoms could form. These atoms could no longer absorb the thermal radiation, and the universe became transparent instead of being an opaque fog. The photons that were around at that time have been propagating ever since, though growing fainter and less energetic, since the exact same photons fill a larger and larger universe. This is the source for the term relic radiation, another name for theCMBR.

Maybe not..:) This comment doesn't come from a real Luddite..:) that is, from a real Inflation Theorist..:) The explanation is too imprecise to be rebutted properly.

The first problem is White-Hot Plasma... that is way too cold...:) What is the black-body temperature that corresponds to white...:) 6000 degrees is already yellow...:)

What kind of Big Bang yields just White Hot Matter??????? If you tell me that there is an initial sea of radiation that is decaying into particles, that makes more sense to me...:)

You remember... IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS THE LIGHT..:) not Hot White Plasma...:)

The Astrologist did not provide a time frame for the cooling or thermal equilibration and did not mentioned the requirement that the 15 Billion light years Universe size to be reached in an attosecond after the Big Bang..:) small details, of course...but they are worthy of comments since they require matter to travel faster than the speed of light and then stop or travel at speeds below the speed of light..:) Forget momentum conservation, that is another law that goes off the window in Inflation Theory. It begetts the question of what happens to the light that bounces back from the Universe bondary???? Can we see a reflected Universe there?....:)

Any theory that proposes a finite 3D Universe suffers from this problem. Infinite 3D Universes have bright nights..>:) One cannot win...:)

Notice that my 3D Universe is finite but cannot be traversed neither by matter nor light...:) It expands due to the natural expansion of a 3D shockwave within an infinite 4D spatial manifold. There is no need to create space out of nothing...:) space is always there, we are the stuff that is moving outwards, radially, at the speed of light. Also, nights are dark, not bright due to the expansion of the shockwave radius. Farther apart light sources suffer from Doppler Shifting and no light ever reaches from anyting farther that a radian away or 15.6 billion light years....:)

I will summarise the salient points of any physical model describing the initial few attoseconds of this Universe.

• Instead of White-Hot Plasma, consider Protons, Neutrons, Electrons surrounded by a sea of Gamma Rays.
• Inflation Theory adds to this an almost infinitely fast expansion process where the "boundaries" of the Universe (edge of it, if you will...:) quickly expanded to current positions. With the newly discovery of a continuous expansion, this image has been patched to contain a process of continuous "space creation"... Thus between any two points in the Universe, there is some space been created... I think this doesn't make absolutely any sense. Of course, almost infinitely fast expansion of the Universe means that matter would be traveling together with the boundaries at speeds larger than the speed of light...:) another offensive hypothesis.
• Considering these two hypotheses, one would expect that the almost infinitely fast expansion would NOT result in thermal equilibrium between Gamma Rays and particles. Does light also speeds up during the Inflation Period????

On the other hand an expansion yields a sudden decrease of density and that means a burst of any radiation that is not "THERMALIZED" that is a burst of Gamma Rays at the beginning of times is something to be expected..:)

As far as I know, there is no indication of any dependency of a Gamma Ray photon wavelength with the size of the Universe. As you know, the Universe is not a box and a Gamma Ray photon is closer to a localized particle than to a normal model (pure frequency) of the Universe box…J

The appropriate reading of inflation theory indicates that the initial expansion takes place in such a short time that there is not time for cooling equilibration. In addition, there is no proven relationship between "The Size of The Universe" and the wavelength of a photon traveling within it. If the Universe were to change the dimensions of everything equally as it changes its own size one would have an atom of the size of a planet...:).. Of course, the inflationary period changes only the distance between particles. On an amazing stretch of imagination one might say that it also changes the wavelength of White-Hot Plasma radiation. The scale of the inflation is such that no Gamma Ray or White-Hot Plasma radiation would survive above DC (zero frequency or thereabouts). Thus one cannot consider that whatever radiation we had at time zero, were to do a wavelength scale corresponding to the size increase of the 3D Universe...:)

The second possible physical argument that one can raise to explain the dependence of radiation wavelength with the size of the Universe is the Variable Size Resonance Cavity Model. In this model, one consider that Universe to be initially a very small box of conducting matter. Inside it, our 3D Universe were sitting hot and bothered....white-hot and bothered...:)

Under those circumstances, radiation is constrained by the permitted normal modes of the Resonance Cavity. As the cavity changes size, there is a crossing or elimination of orthogonality of the different modes and energy relaxes into the new lower modes. Under these circumstances one can consider a radiation cooling process synchronous to the change in the position of the boundaries (Resonant Cavity Dimensions). The physics is similar to considering that the photons were particles with momentum hk bouncing of the walls of this Universe Box. Adiabatic cooling happens when one changes the size of the box quickly. Pressure times Volume should remain the same, that is, larger volume implies lower pressure or lower photon momentum hk...:) This would meant that an Universe expansion would yield photons with lower momentum or larger wavelength.

This is fine and dandy, but it requires that radiation bounces back and forth off those walls during the equilibration period. In a 15 Billion Light Years Resonance Cavity this is a strech...:) In addition that it requires that end of the Universe to be a perfect conductor...:) (superconductor to be precise...:)

I hate to say, but this stinks...:) Not physical process we know would propel all the stars in the Universe at speeds almost infinitely larger than the speed of light... stop their motion after an attosecond...have a perfectly reflective End Of Universe...:) etc..

Let's review this part of the commentary:

The photons that were around at that time have been propagating ever since, though growing fainter and less energetic, since the exact same photons fill a larger and larger universe. This is the source for the term relic radiation, another name for theCMBR.

Photons do not loose energy - become less energetic by traveling through space. If that were the case one wouldn't see far aways stars... their radiation would be tired by now..:) There is a funky Tired Photon theory which I discredited in some other posting that talks about tired - less energetic photons due to traveling through distances..:) One cannot take that idea seriously... This idea has been used to keep the Universe nice and infinite...:)

Below is the simple picture I draw to explain what is the meaning of looking into the past or into the distance within our 3D Universe.

This picture was created to explain how to calculate the real age of the Universe using my proposed topology and the appropriate Hubble Law in the Pioneer Anomaly posting

Remember that we are actually looking into the past through a 4D Spatial Manifold... Also notice that light always travels along the 45 degrees direction (the shockwave is also traveling at the speed of light).

Of course, the external hypersphere is running away from the internal sphere with an speed that reaches the speed of light when the internal sphere is just a point..:)

This means that the radiation emanating from that initial 4D point has zero frequency (DC). Any radiation traveling from a slighter period would be in the microwaves, later in the visible etc...:)

Under these conditions, there is no need of thermal equilibration in an attosecond. Gamma radiation is emitted as Gamma Radiation. The observer on Earth will see it as microwaves due to the well known Doppler Effect. THIS IS A PHYSICAL THEORY. No slight of hands, no unproven relationship between exoteric non-observable (Edge of The Universe, Size of The Universe), infinitely fast matter-radiation Thermal equilibrium...etc.

Due to the symmetry of the topology, any place is the Center of The Universe. For the Narcisistic Scientist this is the Ultimate Paradigm..>:)

YOU ARE SO VAIN... I BET YOU THINK THIS THEORY IS ABOUT YOU >:) (Carly Simon)

Here everyone is happy ... you are always at the Center of the Universe... :) no matter where you are...

I think I ranted enough about that simple and imprecise paragraph.

I would like to thank the Vedic Astrologist for the opportunity to clarify my problems with Inflation Theory and to show how my much simpler explanation explains the events as well or better than the competition..:)

Cheers,

PS- I would love to have scientists to pose their opinions in an up-front manner - without hiding behind the Vedic Philosophy...:) I presented a counter argument based upon my theory, which is the subject of this blog. If one presents an argument supporting another theory and I am kind enough to post it and debate it here, I would expect to receive back a correction to my counter-argument and a critique of how I use my topology to explain the same events (Big Bang).

I am looking forward to that..>:)

Letter to Dr. Steven Chu

2009-08-15T18:06:00.012-04:00

Dear Dr. Chu,

I created a new paradigm for modeling the Cosmos and particles and ran into trouble getting over the non-scientific barriers one finds when revising science.

The paradigm shift proposes that the 3D Universe is a very thin 3D shockwave traveling at the speed of light within a 4D Spatial Manifold. Thus in my model, the Spacetime Continuum is actually 5D and there are a preferred spatial Direction (R) and an Absolute Time PHI, although both are non-observables from within the 3D Universe or 4D Spacetime Continuum.

The figure that describes such paradigm is reproduced here:

Figure 1. Two cross-sections of the Universe. The internal radius is the speed of light times the age of the Universe. The Green circle represents the 3D Lightspeed Expanding Hyperspherical Universe or just our 3D Universe (XYZ).

It should be easily verifiable that the standard relativistic reference frames (xTau and x’Tau ‘ related to each other by a Lorentz Transformation ) are at hand from inspecting the PHI.XYZ cross-section shown on the right panel of Fig 1. The left panel contains the RXYZ cross-section.

The more interesting paradigm shift is the representation of particles.

The four elementary particles (Electron, Proton, AntiProton, Positron) are represented by four phases of a metric coherences that spins as it travels at the speed of light with the 3D Shockwave Universe. The spinning makes up for an intermittent overlap of the coherence (dilator) and the 3D Universe (Fabric of Space).

The Fundamental Dilator representing the 4 elementary particles is shown below:

Figure 2. Balls Diagram representing Electron and Positron.

The different phases represent metric dilation (Green) or compression (Red). Being an Electron or a Proton indicates just a difference in displacement volume. The phases with horizontal lettering are flush (full overlap) with the 3D Space while the vertical are not thus having no footprint in it. No footprint implies no interaction. The footprint is modeled as our 3D Mass.

Below are the diagrams for Proton and AntiProton:

Figure 3. Balls diagram representing Proton and AntiProton. The change in color and orientation represents tunneling and spinning concomitant processes.

I was able to represent all hyperons accordingly. Next you can see the representation of a Pion Plus.

Figure 4. Balls Diagram for Pion Plus. This diagram represents a complex coherence with three Fundamental Dilator subcoherences.

The point I want to reach is that this representation is amenable to shifting the paradigm for nuclear reactions from Nuclear Chemistry (with reagent and product states with a barrier in the middle, transition state etc) into Nonlinear Hadronics - where particle creation is the result of nonlinear beating between two coherences.

This paradigm shift gives support for the experiment of COHERENT NUCLEAR FUSION.

Normally one, using the Nuclear Chemistry paradigm collide particles with maximum energy (temperature) such as to create fusion. This paradigm disregards length of interaction and phase-matching angle. A velocity defines and angle with the Fabric of Space and thus one can probe the metric elastic ellipsoid of revolution and find the appropriate phase matching angle.

This means that a COHERENT NUCLEAR FUSION experiment would start with particle beams traveling along the same axis. They would interact by converging under the influence of a magnetic lens. Their conversion length would be defined by their de Broglie wavelength and the focal length of the magnetic length as in a standard nonlinear optical interaction. Under perfect phase-matching condition the productions (beating) would be released at specific angles. That would facilitate energy extraction through magneto-hydrodynamics methods.

I know that this is not the most efficient manner to convey a new idea, but there isn't other available to me at this time.

I seek support for the evaluation of my ideas and/or the test of them in the aforementioned experiment.

Nuclear Chemistry experiments are not easy or cheap and are defined by committees or very invested scientists. This means that they would always be timid and always err on the side of caution and never test a new revolutionary idea.

If correct, this paradigm shift would permit the solution of energy problems, interplanetary travel etc.

Please take a second looking at my drawings. I believe someone as intelligent as you are would be able to grasp my paradigm quickly.

I will post this message on my site;
http://hypergeometricaluniverse.blogspot.com

By the way, I also derived Grand Unification equations, Cosmological Constants from first principles, explained the Pioneer Anomaly, derived Gravitational Lensing and the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion etc. Everything is posted in that blog.

Please feel free to ask me any questions or to contact me.

This is a brief exposure of an conceptually challenging revisionist theory. I am not seeking your endorsement or support. I am just mentioning that this theory if correct would lead to a novel path in energy production and that the only way to seeking this new path is through the exploration of novel paradigm (Nonlinear Nuclear Hadronics). The current paradigm wouldn’t support event the simple exploratory experiments needed to test this paradigm, that is, Science needs a theoretical base to even consider other possibilities.

My theory provides that theoretical support.

Thanks,

MP

PS_ I wrote this letter to Dr. Steven Chu in hopes that it brings attention to my new paradigm. Despite of all claims of perfect knowledge of the Universe, including mines...:) Science is still an experimental branch of knowledge. I wrote the letter trying to shortcut the arduous path of bringing a new revision to Science into the mainstream discussion. Earth could use an alternative energy solution to fossil fuels and the sooner the better. The faster I can bring this paradigm into discussion the sooner someone can decide to do the simple experiment to test the Coherent Nuclear Fusion Hypothesis.

Of course, I will continue explaining my theory here. Now there is a possibility of publishing it into a mainstream journal. I will eventually do it while doing my balancing act with life...:)

Cheers,

The Silence of the Lambs

2009-08-12T08:21:00.006-04:00

The Silence of The Lambs..:)

This blog is about to reach its 33,000 unique IP readers...:) Hurray!!!!

I didn't know there were so many cosmologists, string theorists, particle physicists in the planet...:)

There are many reasons to celebrate...

This is a rerun and a review, creating well defined claims and easy targets for criticism...:)

I said many times, I would welcome criticism and that is the reason why this blog was written in the first place - to have a public peer review since the stardard reviewing process is so INAPPROPRIATE for the review of an extensive logical framework.

The theory has been published in two books:

Quantization in Astrophysics - containing the Grand Unification and New Cosmology Paradigm
Hadron Physics New Energy Issues - Containing the Hypergeometrical Standard Model

not that bad for something created in the everyday commuting to work (on a shaking NYC subway..>:)

and reached the following crowning achievements...:)

I demonstrated that the theory provides the appropriate solutions to the Precession of Mercury's Perihelion and the Gravitational Lensing problems.
In the Gravitional Lensing blog, I showed how a simple reasoning about the usage of Gerber's potential could be used to show that Gerber's potential (Hypergeometrical Potential) could predict the correct Gravitational light deflection. Somehow that simple reasoning was beyond the specialists of the time and since then. Einstein, very cunningly, placed the responsibility for the demise of Gerber's ideas in the hands of the specialists at the time. Something like, I wash my hands..:)
I provided the solution to the Pioneer Anomaly in which I clarify the meaning of Hubble equation and the topology of looking into the past...:)
I provided a full description of all particles (hyperon family and isotopes).
I corrected Newton's equations by eliminating all non-geometrical elements of Classical Mechanics.
I kept the theory relativistic despite of introducing Absolute Time and a Preferential Frame of Reference or at least a preferential direction of reference (R).
Somehow, it seems that I introduced a geometrical interpretation of Lorentz transforms of all things... I did not hear any angry relativistic cosmologists telling me otherwise...which is a surprise... I thought everyone knew that Lorentz transform is a rotation by an imaginary angle...
I introduced a new model for matter... the first non-obvious model. Up to know things were waves, particles or particle-waves...:) The dilator is a wavegenerator that flows like a wave...:)
The Humble Fundamental Dilator shows how a proton and an electron are the same entity and have the same 4D Mass, thus simplifying tremendously the understanding and unification of the Universe.
The Humble Fundamental Dilator is also the hidden variable Einstein tried throoughout his whole life to find. The entity that creates Quantum Mechanics.
I challenged the concept of Field and showed that implicit in it is the existence of a Cosmological Coherence (all dilators in the Universe dilate in synch with their local dilaton fields). Synchronization is evident using absolute time (in the RXYZ frame).
I Grand Unified all the Forces (Gravitation and Electromagnetism) while providing a replacement for the Gluon-Quark paradigm (the dilator itself) and for the Electroweak force (the advent of nonlinear hadronics)...
In replacing the Gluon-Quark paradigm I modified the symmetry requirements for a Grand Unification or Supersymmetry Theory. The pesky Reciprocal Symmetry is eliminated and with that the need that everything very slow to have the same energy as everything very fast...:) This is an outrageous symmetry... Physicist should be kissing my ring for eliminating such nasty constraint....:)
I proposed the solution for all energy problems in the shape of fusion reactors while produce fusion (or fission) products along a single direction (or cone)...:) Energy is readily extracted through magneto-hydrodynamics means... Charged products make up powerful currents to be slowed down by reversed accelerators...:)
I proposed a new topology for the Cosmos...:) which eliminates the need for Einstein Cosmological Constant, dark energy, inflation... This at a time when inflationary people are adjusting their parameters to explain the whole chimichanga...:) Very unfortunate...:) At least at this time, I would love to say Ockham's Razor... People have already readied their acceptance speeches for the Nobel Ceremony...:) Horrible situation...:)
In creating this new topology, I explained why the speed of light is the limiting speed in our Fabric of Space..(3D Universe)...
I acknowledged that in fact things can move faster than the speed of light by traveling (surfing) along an interference pattern...:) This might be someday used to create superluminal traveling when people learn how to pattern dilaton fields...:) or die waiting to ride a Tachyon driven spacecraft...:)
I provided the equations to Cosmological Constants (vacuum permittivity and magnetic susceptibility).
I also showed that the Gravitational Constant is not constant and scaled down with the inverse of the age of the Universe....:) Earlier times had stronger Gravitational fields..>:)
The Gravitational "constant" dependence provides the blueprint for the demise of the Universe...:) The relaxation of the dilators... A totally new Cosmogony..>:)
I provided an alternative explanation for the Action-At-Distance paradox which bothered Einstein so much and that is the basis for a total delusional state of mind where people throw their hands up and accept anything..:) from time travel to time traveling backwards in Black Holes ... to Black Holes...:)
I also provided an alternative explanation for the Double Slit Experiment. In my theory, dilators (electron included) travel on a four dimensional space at the center of a horospherical reference frame. The waves it creates are the same it surfs, that is, the electron surfs a four-dimensional wave (dilaton field) and by simple projection, it also surfs the 3D projection (de Broglie waves). This means that the de Broglie wave is not a matter wave. Instead, it is a metric deformation wave created by the dilator. The much larger wavelength is due to the way things are projected in an hyperbolic space... The electron in the two slit experiment will travel through a single slit while its dilaton field projection will travel through both...:) On the other side of the barrier, the electron will continue to surf the interferometric dilaton fields and thus will deposit itself on an interferometric pattern onto the detector..:) Very simple and again I would love to say, Ockham's Razor... despite my qualms about its usage...:)
I provided a simple multi-coherence (dilator dimensional chords) description for each and every hyperon and isotope (isotopes are trivial since they only have protons and neutrons)...: )
I provided an alternative solution to the mass paradigm by assigning it to an overlapping 4D volume (dilator overlapping with the fabric of space at specific phases of the dilator spinning).
I created an extrinsic representation for the Spin.... that obscure quantity that bothered so many quantum physics students for so long...:) and explained What the Hell is the meaning of 1/2 ... as you might know rotation description does not include any quadratic potential and thus there isn't any zero point rotation....:) It was always a bothering 1/2 to me...:)
In making Spin extrinsic, I introduced the delightful Girlfriend on a Swing Gedanken Experiment to show how time could be Pseudo-Quantized..>:)
I corrected all Newton's equations (Four of them) and provided the really relativistic Biot-Savart law. That law can be used to project better Tokamaks if that is the way one wants to proceed.
Einstein also got his share...:) In creating an Absolute Time and explaining the meaning of inertia, I rebutted Mach's principle of nonlocal interaction and restored Newton's Absolute Time..>:) which times the existence of the Universe as opposed to our short existence...:)
I did all this by looking into what people did right and throwing away without fear what people did wrong...:) That was easy since I don't have to write this as a grant to my reactionary peers..:)
Most of all, I told you that the most important outlet for Physics - The Cornell-Los Alamos E-Print Repository should be in the hands of someone more capable than Paul Ginsparg. It is a shame Science can be silenced by arbitrary actions of a single person...:)

I also pleaded for my Lambs not to remain silent and to speak up their minds. I value criticism and would be happy to post any one of your meaningful comments. I know that in those thirty thousand readers many are scientists (professional scientists).

What I expect from them is either a statement telling me that I made a mistake here or there or some active action against the barriers that precluded a more wider distribution of this theory, namely, to request, demand that my theory receives a 1 megabyte space on the Cornell-Los Alamos E-Print Repository hard drive..:) NOT TOO MUCH TO ASK...:)

I've fulfilled all the requirements to post the theory there... (already peer-reviewed, published work that has been endorsed)...:)

Double-click the Bird below to find out more..>:)

I would welcome anyone to take the initiative to publish my paper on the Cornell-Los Alamos Arxives. :)

The pdf is here. This is a shorter version of the theory. Just below 1 megabyte length. It was accepted and endorsed the last time I attempted posting it there.

As I mentioned, I would be eternally grateful to anyone (My Giordano Bruno) that would bring this work to a wider audience through posting it at the Arxives or through forwarding this blog link or the pdfs to other people...

Considering that this theory provides a new paradigm for Coherent Nuclear Fusion, the planet you might save might be yours...:)

Feynman wouldn't blink in face of this challenge...:)

The current version of the work is here.

I know that if you do so, Paul Ginsparg might place you on his blacklist. I know that I am not a professional scientist any longer..:) I know it all....

I also know the VALUE OF IDEAS and that they are worth fighting for. I don't expect any thing less from a scientist (professional or not)...

Just think, "What would Richard P. Feynman do????"

Poets say science takes away from the beauty of the stars - mere globs of gas atoms. I, too, can see the stars on a desert night, and feel them. But do I see less or more? Richard P. Feynman

Don't make me explain analogies:

Poets - String Theorist, Supersymmetrists...Gauge Physicists...:)
the Beauty of the Stars - The Beauty of Weyl Fermions, Higgs, Bosons, Dirac Matrices, etc...
Mere globs of gas atoms - My humble and simple theory
Feynman - The little me...

Cheers,

PS- Since the first release of this blog, I had the opportunity to discuss my theory with Craig Markwardt from JPL. I will present the discussion in its interity soon.

I wonder if my friends from the Laser Laboratory at UofR or at the Fermi Lab are reading the changes in paradigm for nuclear fusion....:) I once told Professor Huizenga while attending a party at his house, that I knew how to make a Gamma Ray laser... He looked very surprised and most likely somewhat amused..>:)

I am sure that in his mind briefly passed those concerns about the problems pumping an ultrafast decaying nuclear transition, etc... As usual, people can only think within the paradigms they lived by...I wasn't able to create any interest in that brief interaction...:)

I told the same thing to Gary Holton many years ago... Life is full of hits and misses...As usual , I would love to hear from my friends at UPenn, Princeton, Berkeley, UofChicago..>:) CERN, Steven Hawking comes to mind, the 5Dimension Centre, USAF, Whiteman Airforce Base, The Institute for Advanced Studies, well, the Devil Himself (I mean, Paul Ginsparg).....>:)