• [deleted]

Thanks for the thought-provoking comments. Everything about Astronomy magazine seems to be behind a paywall. I was receiving emails from them but I got disgusted by their worship of the holy dollar, and cancelled this service. I was tempted to stop buying the magazine but I have to continue because they provide so much valuable information.

As for infinity = nothing, may I refer you to my article "Equation Describing the Universe" at http://viXra.org/abs/1305.0030 It explains that total elimination of distance, or space, does not produce nothing. It produces nothing physical but instead reverts the universe to the mathematical blueprint from which physical being is constructed. So, infinity = something. Here are a couple of paragraphs from the article that might make my meaning clearer -

Let's borrow a few ideas from string theory's ideas of everything being ultimately composed of tiny, one-dimensional strings that vibrate as clockwise, standing, and counterclockwise currents in a four-dimensional looped superstring. We can visualize tiny, one dimensional binary digits of 1 and 0 (base 2 mathematics) forming currents in a Mobius loop - or in 2 Mobius loops, clockwise currents in one loop combining with counterclockwise currents in the other to form a standing current. Combination of the 2 loops' currents requires connection of the two as a four-dimensional Klein bottle. This connection can be made with the infinitely-long irrational and transcendental numbers. Such an infinite connection translates - via bosons being ultimately composed of 1's and 0's depicting pi, e, √2 etc.; and fermions being given mass by bosons interacting in matter particles' "wave packets" - into an infinite number of Figure-8 Klein bottles (each bottle becomes one of the "subuniverses" in the universe - our own subuniverse being 13.7 billion years old). Slight imperfections in the way the Mobius loops fit together determine the precise nature of the binary-digit currents (the producers of gravitational waves, electromagnetic waves, the nuclear strong force and the nuclear weak force) and thus of exact mass, charge, quantum spin, and adherence to Pauli's exclusion principle. Referring to a Bose-Einstein condensate, the slightest change in the binary-digit flow (Mobius loop orientation) would alter the way gravitation and electromagnetism interact, and the BEC could become a gas (experiments confirm that it does).

The second part of this article addresses the scientific reasons for believing that a whole universe can be created from nothing. (See pp.179-180 of Stephen Hawking's/Leonard Mlodinow's book "The Grand Design"). It reinterprets these reasons in terms of hyperspace and entanglement, to conclude more than two-thirds of any and all parts of the universe requires no assembly at all. It seemingly appears from nothing, but actually uses the brain's positive energy which interacts with the negative energy in 5th-dimensional hyperspace (negative energy requires no work at all, according to "The Grand Design"). The remaining third is entangled with the no-work two-thirds and similarly only needs personal interaction with hyperspace (since every particle in the universe contains hyperspace, interactions can be physical e.g. using computers, manufacturing and engineering). Thus, the whole universe appears to be created from nothing but is really produced from something.

  • [deleted]

A NEW IDEA INSPIRED BY MY FQXi (FOXY) ENTRY -

Referring to http://vixra.org/abs/1305.0030 -

5th-dimensional hyperspace would be tinier than a subatomic particle, like the dimensions invoked by string theory (about 70% of space consists of dark energy, according to the WMAP and Planck space probes - which is interpreted in this article as 70% of a particle also consisting of dark energy since "space-time itself plays a role in the constitution of elementary particles and the nuclear forces" (see paragraph about Einstein's 1919 submission to the Prussian Academy of Sciences). This dark energy can be associated with hyperspace and its binary digits, so a) 70% of a particle is composed of hyperspace, and b) the extra dimension also exists everywhere in empty space. With a single extra dimension of astronomical size, gravity is expected to cause the solar system to collapse ("The hierarchy problem and new dimensions at a millimetre" by N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, G. Dvali - Physics Letters B - Volume 429, Issues 3-4, 18 June 1998, Pages 263-272, and "Gravity in large extra dimensions" by U.S. Department of Energy - http://www.eurekalert.org/features/doe/2001-10/dbnl-gil053102.php). However, collapse never occurs if gravity accounts for repulsion as well as attraction on both subatomic and astronomical scales (accounts for dark energy and familiar concepts of gravity, as well as repelling aspects of the electroweak force such as placing two like magnetic poles together and attracting electroweak/strong force aspects).

15 days later

I think I read somewhere that Community Evaluations for the current contest end today. To say farewell to Foxy, I'd like to post this article that was inspired by my entry. It's called "GRAVITY AND UNKNOWN SPECTRAL LINES EXPLAIN DARK UNIVERSE AND HIGGS BOSON MASS", and here's the abstract -

The start of this article lies a few years in the past, when I wrote about the Little Ice Age experienced in Europe some 300-360 years ago. I then read an article in "Astronomy" magazine which prompted me to extend those ideas to explanation of heating the Sun's corona. On the same page of Astronomy, I was inspired by a story on unidentified spectral lines in the Sun. I thought about this, and decided it could be extended to all matter, supporting Einstein's conviction that mass is generated by gravitational-electromagnetic interactions (maybe the Higgs field is actually these interactions, for they fill the universe and are certainly capable of producing the Higgs boson, as will be explained here). In writing this, I felt the need to go into more detail frequently - about string theory, the mathematical universe, the infinite universe, the strong and weak nuclear forces, etc. (some of this is covered in previous articles I posted at www.vixra.org, www.fqxi.org and www.researchgate.net; some is new).

All of this seems to fit together perfectly in my mind. However, I don't feel as though I've done much of the work myself. It feels like figuring out the nature of the universe is a giant jigsaw puzzle, and I've been handed the solution (if indeed I have it) piece by piece over the years and decades. This fitting together of a giant jigsaw made me think the universe isn't really such a complicated place, and reminded me of Professor John Wheeler saying - Can we ever expect to understand existence? Clues we have, and work to do, to make headway on that issue. Surely someday, we can believe, we will grasp the central idea of it all as so simple, so beautiful, so compelling that we will all say to each other, "Oh, how could it have been otherwise! How could we all have been so blind so long! "

The scientist and philosopher in me inspire each other. They combined logic with measurement and willingness to speculate so they could produce these subheadings - Unidentified Spectral Lines; Graviton-Photon Oscillation; Relativistic Mass Increase and Time Dilation; Higgs Boson and (e∞); Quantum Entanglement and Retrocausality; Mathematical Unification; Coronal Heating (Part 1 - Little Ice Age); String Theory, the Mobius Loop and the Klein Bottle; Coronal Heating (Part 2 - Gravity and EM Interact); Nuclear Forces as Modified Gravity; Electromagnetism as Modified Gravity; Nonlinear Gravity and EM; Infinite Universe (Physically and Electronically); Brian Greene's Cosmic Movie; Something from Nothing, Something from Something; Universal Intelligence; Hidden Variables and Virtual Particles; Biogenesis; Bell's Theorem; Immortal Life; Space-time, Hyperspace and the Big Bang; Physicist John Wheeler; Equation Describing the Universe; and CHALLENGE - Explain To The Layman How Gravity Accounts For Dark Matter and Dark Energy Without Using Any Mathematics (this could have been given subheadings of its own - about Kepler's laws of planetary motion, tides, orbits, but my abstract's long enough).Attachment #1: GRAVITY_AND_UNKNOWN_SPECTRAL_LINES_EXPLAIN_DARK_UNIVERSE_AND_HIGGS_BOSON_MASS.pdf

Dear Sir,

How can "any fraction of infinity is essentially zero" or "infinity equals the total elimination of distance" be a valid physical or scientific statement? It is logically not consistent and does not correspond to reality.

Number is a property of all substances by which we differentiate between similars. If there are no other similars, then it is one. If there are similars, then it is many. Depending the times of perception of similars, many can be 2. 3. ....n. Zero is the spatio-temporal absence of something that exists elsewhere. Infinity is like one - without similars - with one difference. While the dimensions (the perception of difference between the "inner space" from "outer space" of an object) of one are fully perceptible, the dimensions of infinity are not perceptible. Since there are no similars like space or time and since the dimensions of space and time cannot be perceived fully, both are infinite. Infinity is not a very big number, just like zero is not a very small number. Like different objects with numbers can co-exist, different similarities can co-exist. Mathematics is possible only between numbers, whose dimensions are fully perceived. Hence mathematics using infinities is not possible. Of all physical objects, only space and time are infinite. Yet we use digital segments of these regularly.

Length contraction and Mass increase are only apparent from the stationary frame and cannot be real for the moving frame. What the man on the platform sees cannot affect the train. The passenger on the train will not notice any length contraction. The same goes for mass increase. As per the equation, any particle traveling at the velocity of light would acquire infinite mass. This is because division by zero has been erroneously treated as infinity as explained now. If you divide 20 by 5, then what you actually do is take out bunches of 5 from the lot of 20. When the lot becomes empty or the remainder is below 5, the divisor, so that it cannot be considered a bunch and taken away further, the number of bunches of 5 are counted. That gives the result of division as 4. In case of division by zero, you take out bunches of zero. At no stage the lot becomes zero or less than zero. Thus, the operation is not complete and result of division cannot be known, just like while dividing 20 by 5, you cannot start counting the result after taking away two or three bunches. Conclusion: division by zero leaves the number unchanged. Hence no mass increase.

However, time dilation is real in a different sense. All experiments conducted to prove time dilation are defective. Data from the first experiment available in US naval archives proves that it was fudged. Time dilation has meaning only in relative terms of cyclic evolutionary sequences. The evolutionary cycles are different for different categories or different species of the same category. Their evolution over universal time (Einstein's clock at A) can lead to comparative time dilation.

Dimension of objects is the perception that differentiates the "internal structural space" from the "external relational space". Since such perception is mediated by electromagnetic interaction, where an electric field and a magnetic field move perpendicular to each other in a direction perpendicular to both, we have three mutually perpendicular directions. Mathematical space always contains one dimension more than physical space. For example, a point in physical space has existence, but no dimension, but a point in mathematical space requires at least a line or intersection of lines. A straight line in physical space is the minimum distance between two points, i.e., in one dimension. In mathematical space, it must be drawn on a two dimensional paper. So on. Since the extra-dimensions have not been found even after more than a century, how long shall we perpetuate this fantasy?

Sir, we do not follow everything blindly, as that is superstition. We apply our mind to each case. May be we are wrong. In that case the fallacies in our statements need to be pointed out. Kindly do not take our post as offensive, but a sincere query in search of truth.

Regards,

basudeba

    It is my honour to answer your post. I deeply respect anyone who is on a sincere search for truth. That's what science should always be about.

    I'll start by telling you a couple of things about how my mind works. First, I've had a powerful conviction that we live in a unified field or unification ever since I was a teenager. It's such a strong feeling that I take it for granted that the universe is physically unified, and I find it hard to imagine it being in any other state (despite my senses constantly telling me that everything is separate). Second, I've also had a deep mistrust of present-day mathematics since my teenage years. I'm still not sure of the reason for this. Maybe this is the reason - how can a theory of unification be achieved by clinging to the old fashioned idea that this thing is separate from that thing and 1 1 = 2 separate things? This is how maths began thousands of years ago when our ancestors had no concept of anything existing beyond the things we can only see as separate.

    There is no need for differentiation between similars. There is no "inner" and "outer" but only one (representing unification) and zero. Together with one, zero comprises the binary digits of base-2 mathematics (which seems to be the producer of space and time). Like a one-dimensional line drawn on two-dimensional paper, the "drawing" of space-time occurs in an extra dimension called hyperspace. The perception of extra dimensions only exists in the reality humans and their instruments detect. Nothing can be truly separate when we consider the universe as a unification caused by 1's and 0's, but our physical senses and scientific instruments don't detect binary digits and our senses/instruments thus reinforce the illusion of separateness. Even the 1's and 0's are united by the quantum entanglement existing throughout all space and time (in time, we call the entanglement "retrocausality"). On Earth in 2013, union of 1's and 0's is represented by the qubits in quantum computers. What happens when we view the universe as a unification created by ones and zeros, or qubits? There is no separation between space, time, and hyperspace - and extra dimensions are indeed a fantasy.

    When I say "infinity equals the total elimination of distance", you must remember to differentiate between physical infinity (the universe going on and on forever) and what I call electronic infinity (explained below).

    "The inverse-square law states that the force between two particles becomes infinite if the distance of separation between them goes to zero. Remembering that gravitation (associated with particles) partly depends on the distance between their centres, the distance of separation only goes to zero when those centres occupy the same space-time coordinates (not merely when the particles' or objects' sides are touching i.e. infinity equals the total elimination of distance). The infinite cosmos could possess this absence of distance in space and time, via the electronic mechanism of binary digits. To distinguish this definition from "the universe going on and on forever", we can call it "electronic infinity or e ".

    Of course, the difference between "physical" and "electronic" infinity doesn't exist in reality, but we can speak of the difference because we live in the human world where the ones and zeros producing unification can't be seen. Failing to distinguish between the infinities causes confusion and could lead to us saying "infinity equals the total elimination of distance is logically not consistent".

    It's impossible to point to the 4th dimension of time, so this cannot be physical. Since the union of space-time is well established in modern science, we can assume the 4th dimension is actually measurement of the motions of the particles occurring in the 3 dimensions of length, width, and height. The basic standard of time in the universe is the measurement of the motions of photons - specifically, of the speed of light. This is comparable to the 1960's adoption on Earth of the measurement of time as the vibration rate of cesium atoms. At lightspeed, time = 0 (it is stopped). Below 300,000 km/sec, acceleration or gravitation causes time dilation (slowing of time as the speed of light is approached). If time's 0, space is also 0 because space and time coexist as space-time whose warping (gravity) is necessarily 0 too. Spacetime/gravity form matter/mass (see next paragraph), so the latter pair can't exist at lightspeed and photons are massless. I think time dilation is real because it fits in perfectly with the revised gravitational theory I put together in my article. It's just a composite of Newton's and Einstein's ideas that explains - in nonmathematical, layman's language - gravity as a push by gravitational waves that explains dark energy, dark matter, Kepler's laws of planetary motion, tides, orbits, and apples falling on a 17th-century scientist's head. It supports Einstein's idea of gravitational-electromagnetic interaction forming mass, saying gravity is weaker at higher altitudes because it is concentrated in more and more wave packets at lower heights and below a planet's surface - where it corresponds to higher density, magnification of gravity's effects, and slowing down of time because motion of the particles is less in greater densities (particle motion increases at lower density, allowing the universe's highest speed in the vacuum of space).

    Suppose Albert Einstein was correct when he said gravitation plays a role in the constitution of elementary particles (in "Do Gravitational Fields Play An Essential Part In The Structure of the Elementary Particles?" - a 1919 submission to the Prussian Academy of Sciences). And suppose he was also correct when he said gravitation is the warping of space-time. Then it is logical that 1) gravitation would play a role in constitution of elementary particles and also in the operation of the nuclear forces, and 2) the warping of space-time that produces gravity means space-time itself plays a role in the constitution of elementary particles and the nuclear forces. I think mass increase is shown to be real by ultra-high-energy cosmic rays. Mass increase at increasing accelerations is inevitable because the object is encountering more spacetime and gravity (the producers of mass; which also confer mass's equivalent [energy] on cosmic rays that travel far enough through space, turning them into ultra-high-energy cosmic rays). But mass increase cannot become infinitely large since space-time, gravity and mass don't exist at lightspeed. The object is converted into energy which means mass and energy must be equivalent and Energy must equal Mass related to the Speed of Light (E=mc^2, in the words of Albert Einstein). You point out that "As per the equation, any particle traveling at the velocity of light would acquire infinite mass." This paragraph says mass does increase up to the speed of light - but mass is totally converted to energy at Lightspeed instead of becoming infinite. So E=mc^2 appears to only be partly correct because the highest speed possible is Lightspeed. Physically speaking, it cannot be multiplied. Einstein himself proved this. The equation E=mc^2 can be considered a degenerate form of the mass-energy-momentum relation for vanishing momentum. Einstein was very well aware of this, and in later papers repetitively stressed that his mass-energy equation is strictly limited to observers co-moving with the object under study. The version of the equation applicable here is E=m/c^2*c^2. In the case of a proton travelling at Lightspeed, the equation means the energy the proton is changed into equals its mass of 938.27231 MeV/c^2 multiplied by c^2.

    Length contraction (or Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction) - like time dilation, described by a pair of equations known as the Lorentz transformations (named after the Dutch physicist Hendrik Lorentz, 1853-1928) - says a vehicle reaching 90% of lightspeed will, to a non-comoving (stationary) observer, appear to be less then half as long as its rest length ("The Cosmos", a book in the series "Voyage Through The Universe" - Time-Life Books, pp. 42, 44). This is how Albert Einstein described the reality of length contraction in 1911 -

    The question as to whether the Lorentz contraction really exists or not is misleading. It doesn't "really" exist, in so far as it doesn't exist for a comoving observer; though it "really" exists, i.e. in such a way that it could be demonstrated in principle by physical means by a non-comoving observer. ( "Zum Ehrenfestschen Paradoxon. Eine Bemerkung zu V. Variĉaks Aufsatz". Physikalische Zeitschrift 12: 509-510)

    We are compelled to use terms like co-moving and non-comoving because we live in the human world where the ones and zeros producing unification can't be seen. What would happen to length contraction, mass increase and time dilation if we could perceive the ones and zeros? All 3 Relativistic effects might disappear, to be replaced by an endless number of ones and zeros at rest (an infinite universe where time is "at rest" i.e. every second that ever existed, or will exist, resembles a frame in a movie film). This "rest" could also be viewed as confirmation of Hidden Variables - an interpretation of quantum mechanics which is based on belief that the theory is incomplete (Albert Einstein is the most famous proponent of hidden variables) and it says there is an underlying reality with additional information of the quantum world. Their identification would lead to problems having exact, instead of merely probabilistic, outcomes - and could also restore a reality that exists independently of observation ("Quantum" by Manjit Kumar - Icon Books 2008, p.379) Exact outcomes that are independent of observation could eliminate variables such as co-moving and non-comoving. I suggest this underlying reality is the binary digits generated in 5D hyperspace.

    I hope my answers give you things to think about. Best wishes to you.

    Dear Sir,

    Reading your post was a pleasure because it was so refreshing and thought provoking. We agree with your first assertion that interconnectedness and interdependence are laws of Nature. Even your sense is not immune from this law, as it is only the instrument used by an observer to observer an observable. But your mistrust of mathematics is misplaced. Mathematics explains only "how much" one quantity accumulates or reduces in an interaction involving similar or partly similar quantities and not "what", "why", "when", "where", or "with whom" about the objects involved in such interactions. These are the subject matters of physics.

    As we have said, number is a property of all substances by which we differentiate between similars. We differentiate objects by space and duration by time. These (objects and duration) are discrete. But numbers are applicable to our perception of everything. Hence as long as perception remains, numbers will exist. It is neither old fashioned nor redundant. If you cannot differentiate "this thing is separate from that thing", then you are not conscious.

    Your "one" and "zero" differentiate not only between them, but also between objects and their concepts that includes "inner" and "outer". Otherwise they are meaningless. By themselves, they do not mean anything. They have to be assigned some values, which will be different for each "one" and "zero". They only conform or deny their existence. In any case, the binary is only a way of expressing higher numbers.

    If you do not accept anything, how do you talk about one extra-dimension and hyper-space? These built on existing dimensions and space. But are these concepts scientifically valid? We see through electromagnetic radiation where one electric field and one magnetic field move together perpendicular to each other in a direction perpendicular to both. Hence we have three mutually perpendicular dimensions. By these we differentiate between states of matter: if it has fixed dimension, it is solid. If it has variable dimension, it is fluid and if it is unbound, it is plasma radiation. Since time does not behave like this, it is not a dimension. Where-from you get the extra dimension? From a nineteenth century fiction? Fiction is not science! Space is the ordered interval of substances that also acts like a base or ground for everything that exists. What is hyper-space? Another fiction!

    The inverse square law only stipulates that if one of the parameters are increased, then the other parameter decreases proportionately. If the denominator in one case is made zero (by total merger), the result becomes infinite. But this is wrong mathematics. Firstly, infinity is not a very big number that can be fully perceived. Secondly, a number divided by zero remains unchanged as is explained. If you divide 20 by 5, then what you actually do is take out bunches of 5 from the lot of 20. When the lot becomes empty or the remainder is below 5, the divisor, so that it cannot be considered a bunch and taken away further, the number of bunches of 5 are counted. That gives the result of division as 4. In case of division by zero, you take out bunches of zero. At no stage the lot becomes zero or less than zero. Thus, the operation is not complete and result of division cannot be known, just like while dividing 20 by 5, you cannot start counting the result after taking away two or three bunches. Conclusion: division by zero leaves the number unchanged.

    Gravitation never reduces the distance between objects to zero. It only shifts the barycenter so that the objects revolve around fixed orbits. Can you show us where gravitation reduced two objects to "the same space-time coordinates"? If you talk of black-holes, it is not caused due to gravitation (as has been interpreted by GR), but for the same reason by which protons and neutrons accumulate in the nucleus violating Coulomb's law. We have discussed it elaborately on many forums.

    Newton said both the apple and the Earth are stationary. Gravity pulls the apple to Earth. This itself is debatable, as nothing can be physically "pulled". It is always a push from the opposite direction. The weakening of the stem could not support the mass of the apple, so that it got free and moved in the direction of least resistance. Einstein also told that both the apple and the Earth are stationary, but he reasoned that the space between the Earth and the apple curved, so that the distance between the Earth and the apple became zero with matching distance between the apple and the stem. We wonder, by what mechanism only the space between the Earth and the apple curved leaving all other objects around unaffected! What is so special about the apple that is not in the stem or the tree or al other objects around?

    Einsteinian space-time curvature calculations were based on vacuum, i.e. on a medium without any gravitational properties (since it has no mass). Now if a material medium is considered (which space certainly is), then it will have a profound effect on the space-time geometry as opposed to that in vacuum. It will make the gravitational constant differential for different localities (as seen in the acceleration due to gravity case).

    Doppler effect is used in light, sound, cosmology, and SR (length contraction). Yet, no one used it to SR to point out that the length contraction is only apparent to the observer due to Doppler effect. When you move towards or away from a mountain, the changing angles of the light coming from the mountain and reaching your cornea gives the impression of change in its volume - hence mass and height, which is the same as length in a different direction. This obvious fact is not seen by many.

    Modern science is built on an incremental manner. Theories are built upon "established theories" without continuously evaluating them in the light of the results of latest experiments and observations. This blind acceptance of "established theories" is nothing but superstition. It is perpetuated by the books and papers eulogizing these as "in a brilliant deduction", "with a stroke of genius", "a highly successful theory", etc, to label these theories, which are unwanted misleading information to prevent free thinking and guiding the students in the right direction.

    This has been compounded by the race for going ahead, which prevents students to look back. In the peer group, it generates the cult of incomprehensibility. For this reason, precise definitions are becoming rare in science. They use "operational definitions", which can be manipulated to suit their convenience. Look at the declarations by LHC regarding detection of the Higg's boson. Now there is a rush to change the name of the particle to share honors. Given the clarity level, we wonder how many people applauding the writers in this context really understand their views totally! The hurry also generates reductionism, so that totality of the theories is lost sight of. Hence please think independently - think out of the box.

    Regards,

    basudeba

    14 days later

    Dear Rodney Bartlett

    You have a great faith - it really is very valuable. It would great more if you give a concrete conclusion to our topic.

    http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

    Dear Rodney,

    I am shared your ideas in somewhat, that you can convinced from my references in article: I am going to appraise your work because it likely to me.

    I hope my work will be interested you.

    Best wishes,

    George

    FQXi Article

    4 days later

    Hello Rodney,

    I noticed that you mention above that there is just one real Universe - something which I am very much an advocate of. Also I found your essay extremely comprehensible despite the constraints of the contest. I wish my essay was more concise than it is!

    All the best,

    Antony

    4 days later

    Here's the latest article my FQXi entry has led to - "MODERN SCIENCE EMPHASIZES MATHEMATICS. WHAT THE UNIVERSE LOOKS LIKE WHEN LOGIC IS EMPHASIZED (MATHS HAS A VITAL, BUT SECONDARY, ROLE IN THIS ARTICLE)." I posted it on my profile at ResearchGate an hour or two ago

    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Rodney_Bartlett/?ev=pub_int_doc_dlext

    and it's in the process of replacing an earlier version of the same name at my vixra profile

    http://vixra.org/author/rodney_bartlett

    The abstract is -

    This article had its start with another article, concerned with measuring the speed of gravitational waves - "The Measurement of the Light Deflection from Jupiter: Experimental Results" by Ed Fomalont and Sergei Kopeikin (2003) - The Astrophysical Journal 598 (1): 704-711. This starting-point led to many other topics that required explanation or naturally seemed to follow on - Unification of gravity with electromagnetism and the 2 nuclear forces, Speed of electromagnetic waves, Energy of cosmic rays and UHECRs, Digital string theory, Isolation is an illusion, Dark energy gravity binary digits, Cosmic strings and wormholes from Figure-8 Klein bottles, Massless and massive photons and gravitons, Inverse square quantum entanglement = God evolution, Binary digits projected to make Prof. Greene's cosmic holographic movie, Renormalization of infinity, Physically infinite universe, Colliding subuniverses, Unifying cosmic inflation, Theory Of Everything (emphasizing "EVERYthing") = Bose-Einstein renormalized. The text also addresses (in a nonmathematical way) the wavelength of electromagnetic waves, the frequency of gravitational waves, gravitational and electromagnetic waves having identical speed, the gamma-ray burst designated GRB 090510, the smoothness of space, Self-influence and ESP caused by quantum entanglement in time, and Human involvement in the retrocausality of gravity, electromagnetism and matter. Topics in this article's PS and PPS include - Gravitational waves actually have a much shorter wavelength than gamma rays, but are extraordinarily weak because almost all that energy goes into the formation of matter - How the Law of Conservation works - Mathematicians, physicists and Richard Feynman - Time travel to the past - Interstellar and intergalactic travel - Nonsupernatural God - 5th dimensional hyperspace - Dark Matter - Variable Speed of Light - Trillions of millennia in the distant future.

      Rodney,

      If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, "It's good to be the king," is serious about our subject.

      Jim

      6 days later

      Hello Rodney,

      I wanted to let you know that I passed your posted message on to Zeeya Merali, that I found on the page regarding Steven Kauffmann's paper. He has responded there, and copied your comments to his podcast page, because they appear to be relevant. My thanks also; for some interesting graviton mass links, which I passed on to a colleague Andy Beckwith, who is researching HF gravity waves.

      I have not read your essay yet, but it is on my list, and I'll post any comments or questions here. I hope you have not checked out entirely, because a lot of the other authors were latecomers, like myself. I wish you luck in the contest.

      All the Best,

      Jonathan

      Hi Jonathan,

      I'm glad I could help you and Andy Beckwith.

      No, I haven't checked out entirely. I did for a while, due to the poor reception my entry seems to be getting. It isn't faring any better than my entry from a couple of years ago. And I couldn't see any point in logging in. But I'm really pleased with the response from you and Zeeya Merali - so in the words of Arnold Scharzenegger, I'm b-a-ack! (For today at least - I haven't been able to stop typing all year, and who knows where that typing will take me tomorrow.)

      Thanks for reading my essay sometime. I had to chop nearly half of it to meet length-limits for the contest, but I've been told it's still "very comprehensible".

      Regards,

      Rodney

        Thanks Rodney,

        I downloaded the longer version too, but I'll wait to read that later - so as not to get confused. I need to base any decision about the quality of your essay on the short version, so I'll need to cycle back for more info later..

        Looks interesting, though.

        Regards,

        Jonathan

        7 days later

        I posted this little article at vixra.org and researchgate.net, so why not fqxi.org too? I don't have time to search for an appropriate article in the forums on which to comment, so I'll just post the whole article on my own page. OK?

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

        Title -

        From T Tauri Stars to Coronal Heating via Newton and Einstein

        Author - Rodney Bartlett

        Abstract -

        This article begins with the subject of gravitational collapse producing energy in T Tauri stars. It finishes with heating of the Sun's corona via infrared photons forming charged electrons and protons when they interact with gravity, and all these particles being trapped in magnetic fields which extend to the corona (i.e. heating is due to magnetism plus hot jets). Paragraphs in between deal with E=mc^2 versus E=m/c^2*c^2, matter as "coherent space or coherent gravity", linearity and nonlinearity in the universe, human intelligence and divine intelligence, a one-paragraph snapshot of the mathematics behind time travel to the past, why hyperspace doesn't cause the solar system to collapse, photon-graviton oscillation, how space-time ceases to exist physically, a one-paragraph snapshot of the gravitational-electromagnetic equivalence behind time travel to the past, why space-time (and gravitational-electromagnetic equivalence) exist mathematically, why space-time is warped and why DNA is a double helix, General Relativity's deflection of starlight by the Sun is only half the story, photons and gravitons interact to produce reflection and deflection of light. By the way, it occurs to me that my recent articles possess a "modular" aspect. Often, paragraphs from previous articles can be copied and pasted into new articles. The copied paragraphs are modules that are the basis of new articles. Of course, to make those new articles different, the modules are placed in a different order and new words or paragraphs appropriate to different subjects are inserted.

        Content -

        "T Tauri stars don't generate energy through fusion but rather as a result of gravitational collapse" (Astronomy magazine - June 2013, p.73)

        Gravity currents circulate through space and can be referred to as dark energy. See http://vixra.org/abs/1303.0218 for further explanation regarding gravity's attraction, Kepler's laws of planetary motion, tides, orbits, dark matter. As gravity currents converge on the space bounded by a T Tauri star, they are converted into matter. This agrees with the principle of mass-energy relation, popularly known as E=mc^2. We should remember that E=mc^2 appears to only be partly correct because the highest speed possible is Lightspeed. Physically speaking, it cannot be multiplied. Einstein himself proved this. The equation E=mc^2 can be considered a degenerate form of the mass-energy-momentum relation for vanishing momentum. Einstein was very well aware of this, and in later papers repetitively stressed that his mass-energy equation is strictly limited to observers co-moving with the object under study. The version of the equation applicable here may be E=m/c^2*c^2. Dividing by c^2 then multiplying by c^2 cancels, leaving E=m. That is, in this case, (gravitational) energy = (T Tauri) matter.

        Exactly how does this energy change into matter? Suppose Albert Einstein was correct when he said gravitation plays a role in the constitution of elementary particles (in "Do Gravitational Fields Play An Essential Part In The Structure of the Elementary Particles?" - a 1919 submission to the Prussian Academy of Sciences). And suppose he was also correct when he said gravitation is the warping of space-time. Then it is logical that 1) gravitation would play a role in constitution of elementary particles, and their mass, and also in the constitution of the nuclear forces associated with those particles, and 2) the warping of space-time that produces gravity means space-time itself plays a role in the constitution of elementary particles, their mass, and the nuclear forces. Matter can be thought of as "coherent space or coherent gravity" that is bound by forces and gravity. How could gravity be involved in the structure of particles? To understand how this could happen, we need to remember that higher-frequency light (in the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum) can be converted into lower-frequency infrared light (by being absorbed as visible light and re-emitted at infrared wavelengths by interstellar gas and dust). Similarly, the gravitational waves of space could have a frequency even greater than gamma rays. When converted into lower frequencies, they'd produce all the electromagnetic wavelengths - including T Tauri stars' generation of energy through gravitational collapse.

        Einstein's paper suggests electromagnetism interacts with gravity to form particles of matter (E=mc^2 or E=m/c^2*c^2 would provide the mathematics that describes the conversion from gravitational energy to the "coherent, organized energy" that is matter). If we adopt a strictly linear view of cause and effect, we'd say the EM that interacts with gravity to produce matter must come from other stars in space because EM energy from the T Tauri doesn't exist until its matter forms. But what happens when the paragraph above is combined with later parts of this article? We see that a) space-time warps to produce gravity, b) space-time itself plays a role in the constitution of elementary particles, their mass, and the nuclear forces, and c) currents of binary digits within Mobius loops are the producers of the 4 fundamental forces of gravitational waves, electromagnetic waves, the nuclear strong force and the nuclear weak force? There is a unification of time with all the space, gravity, forces, and matter in the universe (as Einstein said when forced to summarize the general theory of relativity in one sentence - "time and space and gravitation have no separate existence from matter" - http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Physics-Albert-Einstein-Theory-Relativity.htm). In other words; the universe is nonlinear, effects can influence causes (this is called quantum entanglement in time or retrocausality), and it becomes possible for the T Tauri's EM to produce the T Tauri star itself. At first, this sounds too fantastic to seriously consider. But before dismissing it, read the 2nd last paragraph and remember that if the universe sprang from mathematics, it's likely to be the result of the electricity and magnetism in computers. As fundamental as gravity may be to everything else (including EM), we can take a nonlinear approach and simultaneously understand that electromagnetism is fundamental to everything (including gravity). When we realize that every mind exists in a unified field with the maths behind the cosmos and the quantum, there will be absolutely no physical limitations for humans*.

        * Does this mean there is no God? No. God's existence cannot possibly be scientifically comprehended in the current non-unified understanding of the cosmos. Thus, many scientists need to invoke the existence of an unlimited number of parallel universes having limitless combinations of the laws of physics (so one of those universes would produce all the correct laws that enable beings such as ourselves to exist). A non-supernatural God is proposed via the inverse-square law's infinite aspect coupled with eternal quantum entanglement, but Einstein taught us that time is warped. Warped time is nonlinear, making it at least possible that the BITS composing space-time and all particles originate from the computer science of humans - BInary digiTS only suggest existence of the divine if time is linear. The inverse-square law states that the force between two particles becomes infinite if the distance of separation between them goes to zero. Remembering that gravitation partly depends on the distance between the centres of objects, the distance of separation between objects only goes to zero when those centres occupy the same space-time coordinates (not merely when the objects' sides are touching i.e. infinity equals the total elimination of distance). The infinite cosmos could possess this absence of distance in space and time, via the electronic mechanism of binary digits (this would enable it to be as malleable and flexible as anything on a computer screen). Zero separation is the case in quantum-entangled space-time and physicist Michio Kaku says in his book "Physics of the Impossible" that modern science thinks the whole universe has been quantum-entangled forever. This means there's still room for the infinity known as God. God would be a suprapantheistic union of the universe's spatial, temporal, hyperspatial, material and conscious parts; forming a union with humans in a cosmic unification, and forming a universal intelligence. Science's own Law of Conservation says the total mass (or matter) and energy in the universe does not change, though the quantity of each varies (I interpret this Law as saying - to get matter and energy, you have to start with matter and energy; which means that time must be warped). So what happens if we subtract humans of the distant future - with their ability to travel into the past** (also, see the paragraph mentioning Yale Uni) and use incomprehensibly-advanced cosmogenesis, terraforming and biotechnology (cosmos, Earth-like planet, and life-generating abilities) from the origins of life? It becomes impossible for inorganic materials - and referring to the creation of amino acids in the laboratory by Harold Urey and Stanley Miller in 1952, relatively simple amino acids - to be assembled into complex plants and animals, whose adaptations are often called evolution.

        ** Maybe hidden variables called binary digits (binary digits would be the hidden variables which Einstein said carry extra information about the world of quantum mechanics ... and complete it, eliminating probabilities and bringing about exact predictions) could permit time travel into the future by warping positive space-time. And maybe they'd allow time travel into the past by warping a 5D hyperspace # that is translated 180 degrees to space-time, and could be labelled as negative or inverted. (The space-time we live in is described by ordinary [or "real"] numbers which, when multiplied by themselves, result in positive numbers e.g. 2x2=4, and -2x-2 also equals 4. Inverted "positive" space-time becomes negative hyperspace which is described by so-called imaginary numbers that give negative results when multiplied by themselves e.g. i multiplied by itself gives -1.) The past can never be changed from what occurred, and the future can never be altered from what it will be. Both are programmed by the 1's and 0's.

        # This 5th-dimensional hyperspace would be tinier than a subatomic particle, like the dimensions invoked by string theory (about 70% of space consists of dark energy, according to the WMAP and Planck space probes - which is interpreted in this article as 70% of a particle also consisting of dark energy since "space-time itself plays a role in the constitution of elementary particles and the nuclear forces" (see paragraph above about Einstein's 1919 submission to the Prussian Academy of Sciences). This dark energy can be associated with hyperspace and its binary digits, so a) 70% of a particle is composed of hyperspace, and b) the extra dimension exists everywhere in space occupied by particles (also everywhere in "empty" space, where binary digits are referred to as Virtual Particles). With a single extra dimension of astronomical size, gravity is expected to cause the solar system to collapse ("The hierarchy problem and new dimensions at a millimetre" by N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, G. Dvali - Physics Letters B - Volume 429, Issues 3-4, 18 June 1998, Pages 263-272, and "Gravity in large extra dimensions" by U.S. Department of Energy - http://www.eurekalert.org/features/doe/2001-10/dbnl-gil053102.php However, collapse never occurs if gravity accounts for repulsion as well as attraction on both subatomic and astronomical scales (accounts for dark energy and familiar concepts of gravity, as well as repelling aspects of the electroweak force [such as placing two like magnetic poles together] and attracting electroweak/strong force aspects). "Electroweak" and "strong" force can be united in that sentence because gravitation and space-time are united with both the (electro)weak and strong nuclear forces.

        When gravitons and photons transfer energy to each other, E=mc^2 (set forth in "Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?" by Albert Einstein - "Annalen der Physik" - November 21, 1905) says the relation of mass to energy means they're transferring mass, too. Another way to view their interaction is - the product of gravity interacting with electromagnetism is what we call "mass"; the gravitons and photons therefore give mass to each other. Experiments conducted by the Particle Data Group ("Review of Particle Physics" - Physics Letters B, Volume 667, Issues 1-5, 11 September 2008, Pages 1-6) say the mass of a single photon is no more than 10^-18 eV/c^2.

        "Mass of the graviton" by Alfred S. Goldhaber and Michael Martin Nieto - Phys. Rev. D 9, 1119-1121 (1974) - says "...although it is not known if the graviton exists, one can still say that its rest mass is less than 2 テ-- 10-62 g. It's important to note that this paragraph is referring to either subluminal or rest mass of the photon. In other articles e.g. "Equation Describing the Universe" (http://vixra.org/abs/1305.0030), I refer to photons as massless. This is their state at the speed of light (the same applies to gravitons for electromagnetic and gravitational waves are both parts of, and disturbances in, the fabric of space-time) -

        It's impossible to point to the 4th dimension of time, so this cannot be physical. Since the union of space-time is well established in modern science, we can assume the 4th dimension is actually measurement of the motions of the particles occurring in the 3 dimensions of length, width, and height. The basic standard of time in the universe is the measurement of the motions of photons - specifically, of the speed of light. This is comparable to the 1960's adoption on Earth of the measurement of time as the vibration rate of cesium atoms. Suppose that at lightspeed, time = 0 (it is stopped). Below 300,000 km/sec, in accord with Relativity, acceleration or gravitation causes time dilation (slowing of time as the speed of light is approached). If time's 0, space is also 0 because space and time coexist as space-time whose warping (gravity) is necessarily 0 too. Spacetime/gravity form matter/mass, so the latter pair can't exist at lightspeed and photons are massless.

        How can space-time equal 0 and not exist? A new definition of infinity is needed. The inverse-square law states that the force between two particles becomes infinite if the distance of separation between them goes to zero. Remembering that gravitation (associated with particles) partly depends on the distance between their centres, the distance of separation only goes to zero when those centres occupy the same space-time coordinates (not merely when the particles' or objects' sides are touching i.e. infinity equals the total elimination of distance^). The infinite cosmos could possess this absence of distance in space and time, via the electronic mechanism of binary digits (this would enable it to be as malleable and flexible as anything on a computer screen). To distinguish this definition from "the universe going on and on forever", we can call it "electronic infinity or e infinity".

        ^ If infinity (not physical infinity, but e infinity) is the total elimination of distance in space-time, there would be nothing to prevent instant intergalactic travel or time travel to the past and future^^. Infinity does not equal nothing - total elimination of distance, or space-time, produces nothing in a physical sense and reverts to theoretical physicist Lee Smolin's imagining of strings as "not made of anything at all" (p.35 of Dr. Sten Odenwald's article "What String Theory Tells Us About the Universe": Astronomy - April 2013). It also reverts the universe to the mathematical blueprint from which physical being is constructed (see below - this agrees with cosmologist Max Tegmark's hypothesis that mathematical formulas create reality, http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/16-is-the-universe-actually-made-of-math#.UZsHDaIwebs and http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.0646). So, infinity = something, agreeing with Dr. Sten Odenwald's statement on p.32 of his article, that "The basic idea is that every particle of matter ... and every particle that transmits a force ... is actually a small one-dimensional loop of something.

        ^^ Here's a proposed method for making time travel to the past practical - In July 2009, electrical engineer Hong Tang and his team at Yale University in the USA demonstrated that, on silicon chip-and transistor-scales, light can attract and repel itself like electric charges/magnets. This is the "optical force", a phenomenon that theorists first predicted in 2005 (this time delay is rather confusing since James Clerk Maxwell showed that light is an electromagnetic disturbance approx. 150 years ago). In the event of the universe having an underlying electronic foundation, it would be composed of "silicon chip-and transistor-scales" and the Optical Force would not be restricted to microscopic scales but could operate universally. Tang proposes that the optical force could be exploited in telecommunications. For example, switches based on the optical force could be used to speed up the routing of light signals in fibre-optic cables, and optical oscillators could improve cell phone signal processing. From 1929 until his death in 1955, Einstein worked on his Unified Field Theory with the aim of uniting electromagnetism (light is one form of this) and gravitation. Achievement of this means warps of space (gravity, according to General Relativity) between spaceships/stars could mimic the Optical Effect and could be attracted together, thereby eliminating distance (similar to traversing a wormhole between two folds in space). And "warp drive" would not only come to life in future science/technology ... it would be improved tremendously; even allowing literally instant travel to points many, many billions of light years away. This reminds me of the 1994 proposal by Mexican physicist Miguel Alcubierre of a method of stretching space in a wave which would in theory cause the fabric of space ahead of a spacecraft to contract and the space behind it to expand - Alcubierre, Miguel (1994). "The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity". Classical and Quantum Gravity 11 (5): L73-L77. Therefore, the ship would be carried along in a warp bubble like a person being transported on an escalator, reaching its destination faster than a light beam restricted to travelling outside the warp bubble. There are no practical known methods to warp space - however, this extension of the Yale demonstration in electrical engineering may provide one.

        How could this infinite mathematical something be measured (in other words, what form could it take?)

        Let's borrow a few ideas from string theory's ideas of everything being ultimately composed of tiny, one-dimensional strings that vibrate as clockwise, standing, and counterclockwise currents in a four-dimensional looped superstring. We can visualize tiny, one dimensional binary digits of 1 and 0 (base 2 mathematics) forming currents in a two-dimensional program called a Mobius loop - or in 2 Mobius loops, clockwise currents in one loop combining with counterclockwise currents in the other to form a standing current. Combination of the 2 loops' currents requires connection of the two as a four-dimensional Klein bottle. This connection can be made with the infinitely-long irrational and transcendental numbers. Such an infinite connection translates - via bosons being ultimately composed of the binary digits of 1 and 0 depicting pi, e, √2 etc.; and fermions being given mass by bosons interacting in matter particles' "wave packets" - into an infinite number of (possibly Figure-8) Klein bottles.[1] Slight imperfections in the way the Mobius loops fit together determine the precise nature of the binary-digit currents (the producers of space-time-hyperspace, gravitational waves, electromagnetic waves, the nuclear strong force and the nuclear weak force) and thus of exact mass, charge, quantum spin, and adherence to Pauli's exclusion principle. Referring to a Bose-Einstein condensate, the slightest change in the binary-digit flow (Mobius loop orientation) would alter the way gravitation and electromagnetism interact, and the BEC could become a gas (experiments confirm that it does).

        [1] Each one is a "subuniverse" composing the physically infinite and eternal space-time of the universe. The infinite numbers make the cosmos physically infinite, the union of space and time makes it eternal, and it's in a static or steady state because it's already infinite and has no room for expansion. Our own subuniverse has a limited size (and age of 13.8 billion years), has warped space-time[2] (and spiralling DNA which is made of warped space-time or gravity and shaped like a double helix) because it's modelled on two Mobius loops which can be fashioned by giving a strip of paper a 180-degree twist before joining the ends, and is expanding from a big bang. We don't have to worry about accelerating cosmic expansion - the result of more space, forces, energy and matter being continually produced by binary digits - leaving our galaxy alone in space. As the aspect of gravity known as "dark energy" (see the vixra article mentioned below) causes known galaxies to depart from view, more energy and matter can replace them (since the universe obeys fractal geometry, gravity is the source of repelling and attracting not only on a quantum scale but on a cosmic scale, too i.e. it accounts for dark energy - it accounts for dark matter and Kepler's laws of planetary motion, too [but that's a long explanation best left in http://vixra.org/abs/1303.0218]). The Law of Conservation says neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed (though the quantity of each can change), so a better phrase might be "binary digits recycle spacetime" (when matter changes into energy or energy becomes matter, we commonly say matter or energy has been created). As well, other expanding subuniverses can collide with ours and their galaxies enter our space to keep our galaxy company. (see "Cosmic evolution in a cyclic universe" by Paul Steinhardt and Neil Turok - Phys. Rev. D 65, 126003 (2002) [20 pages] - also see http://discovermagazine.com/2009/oct/04-will-our-universe-collide-with-neighboring-one#.UY3YTKL-Gbs that speaks of the "axis of evil", an unexpected alignment of cold and hot [denser and less dense] spots in the cosmic microwave background; one of the possible explanations of this being collision with another universe [other proposals are that the universe's inflation wasn't perfectly symmetrical, and that the entire universe is rotating])

        [2] Since the warping of space-time is modelled on two Mobius loops, it should be twice what Einstein calculated. His figure of 1.75 seconds of arc for the deflection of starlight by the Sun has been experimentally proven because starlight which grazes the sun is indeed deflected at 1.75". However, this is not 100% of the light emitted by a star. It represents the warping of space that is created by one Mobius - the other Mobius accounts for an extra 1.75" of space warping which causes part of the starlight to be gravitationally pushed into the Sun where gravity and electromagnetism interact to form mass (and the energy contributes to heating of the Sun's corona or outer atmosphere). The binary digits in space-time (assumed by modern science to be "virtual particles") confer energy (and mass) on cosmic rays that travel far through space, turning them into UHECRs (ultra-high-energy cosmic rays). Similarly, the digits give energy to a star's photons - which has the potential to cause scientific instruments to overestimate the energy released from distant stars. However, this increase in energy of the light photons may be balanced by the stretching of space, which causes decrease of energy (as of 21 March 2013, the Hubble

        constant, as measured by the Planck Mission, is 67.80 ツア 0.77 km/s/Mpc -"Planck Mission Brings Universe Into Sharp Focus" - http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2013-

        109&rn=news.xml&rst=3739). Thus, the speed of light in a vacuum would be a constant.

        [2.1] How is passing starlight deflected towards the Sun? The refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun "captures" [2.2] the light from distant stars that appear close to the rim of the sun before the gravity wave's diverted to the centre of our star (string theory predicts that gravity's gravitons interact with light's photons). Acting as a gravitational attractor, the refracted wave carries the light with it as it bends towards the sun's centre. The light is not carried all the way but breaks free since photons have their own energy and momentum. However, the light is carried far enough to be deflected a tiny amount from its original path. According to Newton's 3rd Law of Motion (to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction), the light will be deflected toward the sun by an equal and opposite amount to the gravity wave's deflection to the solar interior. "Opposite" means the light wave travels away from the sun at approx. 186,282 miles per second and the gravity wave travels into the sun at the same velocity. "Equal" means, since experiments have shown the bending of starlight to be 1.75 seconds of arc (in geometry 60 seconds = 1 minute, 60 minutes = 1 degree, and there are 360 degrees in a circle), the refraction of gravitation from the solar rim is also 1.75 arcseconds (as density increases the deeper the gravity wave goes, the greater its refraction becomes).

        [2.2] Gravitons and photons interact via Einstein's mass-energy relation. A gravitational wave acts as an attractor and captures light by feeling friction with the mass-energy of the photons. This causes gravitational refraction or bending in which part of the gravity pushes a photon by travelling in the direction of the centre of each photon in the light (once it reaches the centre, the 3rd Law of Motion accounts for the photons' reaction of being attracted to the gravitons). Compared to the other forces we know; gravity is incredibly weak and the weak "equal but opposite" reaction cannot overcome the heaviness of macroscopic objects which consequently don't float off towards the gravity doing the pushing. Photons, when pushed towards the surface of Earth, are so tiny and light that they do recoil from the push - they "reflect".

        [2.3] Starlight that is gravitationally pushed into the Sun is not the only cause of coronal heating - it's undoubtedly extremely unimportant in this respect. The intense magnetism of sunspots prevents heat from rising to the surface and radiating into space because magnetic fields restrict the motion of charged particles - and infrared photons form charged electrons and protons when they interact with gravity in wave packets (at the most basic level, this process is mathematical and relies on quantum Mobius loops along with their translation into fractally quantum-sized figure-8 Klein bottles). As the sun's magnetic field extends to its corona (outer atmosphere), the infrared photons trapped within it heat the corona to temperatures of one to three million kelvin. Recall that "magnetic fields restrict the motion of charged particles - and infrared photons form charged electrons and protons when they interact with gravity in wave packets". This means heating of the corona is not solely dependent on magnetic fields but also, as a result of the electrons and protons, on "... rapid heating events like fast jets of hot material ..." (Astronomy magazine - April 2013, p.50). In the Astronomy article; Scott McIntosh from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, USA writes, "The Alfven (magnetic) waves likely dump their energy in the corona, too, but the means by which that happens is a topic of great debate. So, we still don't know exactly why the Sun's corona is hot ..." This article proposes that magnetic waves "dump" energy in the corona by interacting with gravity waves refracted towards the sun's centre from the outer solar system, thus producing mass in the corona and giving the illusion that gravitational attraction emanates from the sun's centre.

          Dear Rodney Bartlett,

          Thanks for your nice essay, well done, i enjoy reading it and rate it high,

          Yes,

          to finally understand information we need a TOE, WE need merge all Unified Field, Relativity and Quantum Mechanics Meet String Theory, Parallel Universes, the Mathematical Universe,

          and from a different point view, my essay may interest you

          Bit: from Breaking symmetry of it

          http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1906

          Hope you enjoy it

          Regards,

          Xiong

          I'm very glad you enjoyed my essay, Xiong. I enjoyed your interesting essay, too. It nicely leads to the concluding "The trinity: Matter-Energy-Information".

          I'm just wondering about this trinity. Could matter-energy-information be compared with the religious trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit? I wonder about this because I think science and religion will unite in the future.

          I've noticed a strange belief in the scientific community - scientists seem to claim they don't "believe" in anything. I imagine this claim is a refute of religion, mysticism and New Agers. After all, scientists DO believe in atoms, the Earth orbiting the Sun, etc. etc. They should also be extremely careful when they criticise every aspect of religion and mysticism. For example, think of the strange things that could result from the universe being a unified field in which all seemingly separate objects in time and space are actually one thing. That is, all seemingly separate objects in space and time would be products of one mathematical blueprint. This maths could make space-time and everything it contains as flexible as objects in a computer game, thus having the potential to delete distances in space-time and create quantum entanglement/retrocausality on macroscopic scales. Centuries from now, this could render today's scientific reluctance to believe a quaint symbol of a primitive culture ... and expose today's science as a dinosaur unable to adjust to the modern world of those future centuries. Tomorrow's world could regard today's scientists in the same way that the science of 2013 thinks of priests who lived in the Middle Ages.

          Dear Rodney,

          World contests FQXi - it contests new fundamental ideas, new deep meanings and new concepts. You have great ideas and a wonderful conclusion: «FAITH - an absolute, unshakeable knowledge that you can do anything; even if it's supposed to be impossible. That sounds easy, but I can't do anything I can imagine ... not yet!

          I bet you a high rating.

          Constructive ways to the truth may be different. One of them said Alexander Zenkin in the article "Science counterrevolution in mathematics":

          «The truth should be drawn with the help of the cognitive computer visualization technology and should be presented to" an unlimited circle "of spectators in the form of color-musical cognitive images of its immanent essence.»

          http://www.ccas.ru/alexzen/papers/ng-02/contr_rev.htm

          I have only one question: why the picture of the world of physicists poorer meanings than the picture of the world lyricists? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3ho31QhjsY

          I wish you success,

          Vladimir

            Many thanks for your kind comments, Vladimir. I clicked on both of the extremely interesting links you supplied.

            I don't speak Russian but I still enjoyed the link to You Tube because I love music and I also love listening to any foreign language (I don't care if I can't understand the words).

            About the paper -

            Aristotle's "Infinitum Actu Non Datur" (there is no actual infinity) could mean my concept of electronic infinity or e infinity - which deletes all distances in space and time - is valid. And Kronecker's statement that the usual final natural numbers "were created by the God, but all the rest is a human-being work" could be viewed in a new light where the unified field removes all separateness (by, in this case, removing all distance between God and human beings). This would further validate e infinity. My essay states this removal with these words - "God would be a suprapantheistic union of the universe's spatial, temporal, hyperspatial, material and conscious parts; forming a union with humans in a cosmic unification, and a universal intelligence.