Verbum Significatium

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

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

 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

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 FERMION PARTICLES PRIMES

YES.  I decided to add ONE to the prime sequence just as a rebellious guy I am..:)

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...:)

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,

MP

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

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

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,

MP

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..:)

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,

MP

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

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,

MP