Alternative Models of Reality

My intuitive equation considering the cold dark matter encoded in nuclei and the space vacuum of this DE for the main codes have the same kind of logic than for our photons encoded in our standard model giving the electromagnetic properties and the 3 forces known. E=m(c^2+Xl^2)+Y , so we have also frequences and waves different in a larger spectrum that actually we cannot analyse. The relevance is that this cold dark matter encoded permit to explain this quantum gravitation and also the anti particles. The dark energy for the main codes , the two other series of Spheres being like fuels permitting the forces and properties of matters like if these particles encoded permitted to activate this super matter energy of this space vacuum coded.

The other relevance is that these finite series have I have calculated the dirac large number and so when they fuse they keep this number and the relevance is that the codes permit the geometries, topologies, fields, waves. The frequences beyond our understanding of this DM and DE are intriguing considering the large spectrum. The superfluidity of these 3 ethers where all is in contact become very interesting to analyse deeper.

The superfluidity is due to fact that the central sphere of series is the biggest volume, and after we apply a serie around in decreasing the volumes. It is there that the real space disappears because the fact that these volumes decrease and that the number increases imply this superfluidity. So you can see easily that it is opposite like reasoning than the strings or geometrodynamics about the origin of geonetries, topologies, matters, fields, it is the particles the real primordial essence and also we have two other spacetimes superimposed instead of just this spacetime of the general relativity.

It is very important this general idea and I need help of mathematicians to formalise all this and also make experiments, we have not only these photons and this GR , it d be odd to think that we have just photons, and the strings are an assumption, so there is like a conjecture between these spheres and these strings in focusing on a pure 3D, the extradimensions are not necessary. That is why I have invented this tool in maths, the spherical geometrical topological algebras, We can superimpose the 3 ethers and find the way to explain our deepest unknowns.

Food for thoughts

we resume the standard model , we have this generality .

We have the fermions and the bosons of gauge.

The quarks are fermions , u c t , up, charm, top and d s b , down, strange , bottom. The bosons correlated are the gluons and the photons , and the higgs boson.

We have after the leptons, e μ τ, electron, muon, Tau and νe νμ ντ, the electronic neutrino, the muonic neutrino and the tauic neutrino, with the bosons correlated the boson Z0 and boson W+-.

The Kaon is a K meson and we have 4 kaons,

K+ wich is us , up and strange quarks , with K- the antiparticle

K0 wich is ds, down and strange quarks , with K_0 the antiparticle

K0s wich is ds-sd/Rac2 ,self antiparticle

K0l wich is ds+sd/Rac2, self antiparticle

We have the groups, U(1) X SU(2) X SU(3)

with U(1) the unitary lie group

SU(2) for the electroweak interactions , semisimple le group, universal covering for the homomorphisms of SO(3) and the rotations, wich is a non relativistic spin

SU(3) for the quantum chromodynamics.

Now we have rankings in function of particle, the mass, the statistics, the interactions, the spin, the parity, the charge, the lifetime.

But if my reasoning is correct about these 3D spheres , so we must add other parameters, the volumes, the number of 3D spheres, the densities , and probably the sense of rotations and angles when we go into the details.

An other point is these 3 main finite series merging where the space vacuum possesses the main codes and the two other series are fuels permitting the properties and fields. The photons and the cold dark matter, the antiparticles and gravitational fields are correlated with this cold dark matter. The main important point is that the number finite does not change ,when they merge, that is why the densities become a key about the couplings and encodings of informations. The volumes also don t change , that is why in the electromagnetism the symplectomorphisms become interesting for the geometries, topologies and deformations. That is why I have invented this mathematical tool, the spherical toopological geometrical algebras.

I forgot these pions ,

they are interesting also like the kaons

The Pion is a pi meson, a quark and an anti quark, we have 3 pions

π+ wich is ud

π0 wich is uu or dd

π- wich is du

I search a road with the spherical topological geometrical algebras that I have invented and the 3D spheres to find the couplings of this dark matter cold encoded in our standard model, I have reached and quantified the quantum gravitation, but now my aim is to find this Dark matter and its couplings, the vectors, scalars are the key , but not easy for the symmetries due to fact that this matter is different and is a new physics .

This matter non baryonic permits to balance if the cold is considered and the antiparticles are the key in logic and this quantum gravitation also. The aim is to find an experiment able to prove this , and probably the best way is the LHC in searching in the quarks and specially the kaons and this antimatter and how the decays and interactions act really. This space vacuum possessing the main codes is essential but it is an other story still.

The cold could help in a kind of bose einstein condensate but I need help to create this experiment , the most difficult will be the measurements technologically speaking, the predictions are not really the problem with the geometrical algebras, but the observations and measurements yes

It seems that the error is to consider that the energy and the mass are the same , but not really, if we consider that the dark energy possesses the main codes and is an energy , if we consider that the photons are massless and quanta of E also, and that this Dark matter is a mass and that these 3 main systems merge together to create the ordinary matter , so the equation of einstein is not complete , the photons permit simply the bosonic electromagnetic fields in being encoded in this space vacuum and the heat. For this matter non baryonic,the cold dark matter permits the gravitational bosonic fields and the cold coded and the mass activated with the photons permitting the higgs mechanism, so the ordinary matter is a mass and an energy merging . But they are not the same at the origin.

The simplicity of the universe shows us the truths at my humble opinion. The aim is not to consider only this general relativity and only these photons oscillationg and creating the reality with the fields, cosmic and quant.

The cosmological constant problem and the quantum gravitation if we take this GR alone cannot be solved because simply it lacks things deeper to superimpose. Now when we unify not G c and h but the DE , the DM, the GR, the QG with these 3 ethers superimposed and these 3D finite series of 3D spheres, that permits to return at this old school of pure motions and logical proportions.

Furthermore the changes and the evolution can be predicted. The important point is this evolution also in my theory of spherisation, it is not lol that all will be spherical, no, it is the optimisation evolution of the universe, and the dark energy and dark matter disponible permit to explain this. We can even go very far about the consciousness and the continuity but it is an other story.

My equation considers the 3 main primoridal systems and it is relevant to extrapolate this general equation. See also that this central cosmological sphere becomes more than intriguing , this super matter energy able to create all kind of coded informations and systems with these series of spheres can imply deep philosophical questions.

The standard model seems to be losing credibility lately. For a long time it has successfully explained phenomena we observe around us. However, as we observe more accurately, the standard model is coming up short. This post is suggesting a reason for this and proposes a fix. This author purports the problem began 2000 years ago when Aristotle expressed ideas about the structure of the universe. This structure was unspoken but became the underlying structure of what eventually became modern physics. This author strongly believes the solution lies with an accurate understanding of Einstein's special relativity. And therein lays another problem. We only have a math description of the phenomena. It is somewhat like saying 25 grams describes an apple. END OF THE STANDARD MODEL . addresses these issues.

Hi , it is not that the standard model is not true, it is mainly that it is not complete. We have with the lie groups and the ranking of fields and vectors bosons understood better this standard model. Of course we must add many things and complete it,the unification with the quantum gravitation is an important piece like the philosophical origin of the universe and the foundamental objects.We have unfortunally still many limitations of scales and knowledges.

Steve

it would appear you did not view the linked to site. There is a suggestion the standard model is falling short as it has origins that are over 2000 years old. The suggestion is that, due to more accurate observations, perhaps there may be a more accurate basis of understanding. I believe Einstein's special relativity is the most solid theory in physics. I believe it is the most not understood theory. The point of the site is to suggest there is an explanation of it. To address the validity of the standard model is a disservice to other readers. The major issue is that this post presents the only logical model of special relativity in existence and may be worthy of investigating. I would have been much happier had your post indicated other models I am not aware of. I have searched for one for over 40 years. Part of that search includes getting a degree in physics. The question is: is the proposed model worth considering.

Hi Al,

you seems to search answers and it is the most important. I have read your blog, all this is general. I am going to explain my opinion. Like I said the standard model is not complete but we have well evolved. The problem that we have actually is philosophical also about the real origin of the universe and what are the foundamental mathematical and physical objects and why they create these fields, topologies, geometries, matters of our ordinary matter.

The special relativity for me is just a tool for this universe , the photons before to be encoded in a kind of coded space vacuum of the DE have these properties, so we have c , and we have also the general relativity correlated and the einstein fields equations. The photons are just in my model a fuel, they permit the electromagnetic forces , the heat and the fact to observe because they are quanta of light . The bosons for me emerge due to these phtons encoded in our standard model giving due to the number and their motions oscillations these bosonic fields.

There is nothing of really odd with the special relativity. The real big question is this philosophical and ontological origin of our reality, of our standard model and the topologies, geometries correlated. Many consider only this general relativity like primoridal essence and these photons from a big bang and due to the works of witten, they have considered strings oscillating inside them in 1D connected with a 1D main cosmic field of this general relativity, so with different geometrical algebras like Lie, hopf, clifford, they rank the fields and consider that all come from these fields.

The general relativity is a different intepretation than newton for the gravitation, for newton it is a force at slow velocities between mass, for eisntein it is for observations and is a curvature of the space time at high velocities. Both were right. The standard model is made of fermions and vectors bosons and I believe strongly that all is made of particles , the waves and fields are emergent in my reasoning. The fact that this space vacuum of the DE possesses the main codes and is made of finite series of 3D spheres for me merging with the two fuels , the photons and the cold dark matter solve many actual problems and we can rank and go farer in this standard model with the good mathematical partitions.

All seems made of particles in a kind of superfluidity where all is in contact when you consider speciifc series of spheres where a kind of space disappears , it is due to volumes . The stabdard model has been proved to be correct and we need to complete it , of course we have different interpretations of the quantum mechanics but there is like a pure universal determinism. The postulate of einstein are important but are just a part of the puzzle and we must superimpose for me this vacuum of the DE and the cold dark matter and consider particles to reach the unknowns. I wish you all the best in your model, but like all models we are obliged to prove our assumptions with rigourous mathematical proofs, best Regards

Georgina Woodward

Thank you for reviewing my post. Second, I agree with you totally that what is observed and what is, are two different things. At least that is what I think you meant. Your comment, "It would be a shame to give up on existent realty and be left just with the products of our senses and measurements." I think that is a travesty. I think that is going on now because some cannot get out of the box. I have observed that sometimes when people "teach" SR or provide samples of applying the theory, they include an SR property in their "lesson" instead of what some observer might simply see. That is, they use an omniscient point of view to make their case. And I agree, there are paradoxes that seem to render SR illogical. I believe this is due to not understanding what SR is. In my little pitch, I attempted to show the frailty of math. That has often been a question at FQXi. I believe having a correct understanding of SR will explain so called paradoxes but will explain what the standard model is. Note what I have said, the proposed model will lead to an explanation of what the standard model is. I am battling logic that was formed 2000 years ago. I do not expect to win but I am like the mouse giving the finger to the hawk sweeping down.

I plan to review the two issues you reference.

I am disappointed that the responses to my post are giving me more information from standard thought and a standard model perspective.

I was hopping for a comment on the model rather than an attempt to educate me about what you guys already believe.

I sincerely appreciate the time you have already invested.

I visited Fermi-Labs. I stood beside the collider. I stood beside the massie array of wires that measured energy coming from the collisions inside the collider. I stood beside the wall of electronics used to meeasue the enegy hitting that massive array of thin wires. The man that built them stood beside me. I am amazed that no one can see that the decay of all those particles into photons that hit those wires implies those particles consisted of those photons.

I have achieved what I wanted to achive in submitting these posts.

Thank you FQXi

Hello Zeeya,

A quick search informs me that "Zeeya Merali is a journalist and author who has written for Scientific American, Nature, New Scientist, and Discover, as well as published two textbooks in collaboration with National Geographic."

I have an insight which I hope you will think is worthy of a scientific news story.

I entered the FQXi essay competitions in 2010 and 2012, which I have recently reviewed with some feelings of remorse that I could have expressed myself more clearly, knowing what I know now.

The covid-19 epidemic and lockdown in the UK has given me time to reevaluate my ideas and I've been expressing them on Dr. Judith Curry's online site whilst having much time to do so (reminiscent of Newton himself during a past epidemic):

....

I've concluded that there's two types of matter within the Earth, which would invalidate Newton's simplistic equation.

In short, why not consider gravity as a strong force that emanates from a compact exotic core but which only interacts with known matter very weakly?

It's a simple solution, yet solves everything.

....

Kind regards

Alan Lowey

(A former UK missile scientist)

I offered this to the community roughly ten years ago, and thought that I would try the waters again.

The reigning models of theoretical physics are grounded upon the assumption that we have explored phenomena down to the point that what remains is an infinitely differentiable field. Einstein was awarded the Nobel prize for pointing out the limitations of that assumption as applied to water and light waves.

For the last thirty years, theoretical physics has struggled to fit the inconsistencies between theory and measurement by adding additional continuous fields. Even so, it is still unable to calculate particle masses (the Higgs boson does not solve the problem of mass - it only solves the problem of parity violation in the Dirac equation) or explain galaxy formation.

The discovery of dark energy, as Einstein understood (he called the cosmological constant his "biggest blunder") implies that there is a another level of discrete physical structure underneath the reigning Standard Model. The most fruitful way forward, as indicated in the first posts on this board, is with models of superfluidity.

Anyone interested in discussion of strategies should respond to this post.

Brian

What % chance would you give of Einstein's gravity theory being incorrect, with respect to there being a crisis in physics & cosmology for the last 40 years? Starting with the assumption that Einstein's ideas being idolised is where the problem lies imo.

Alan

we see quickly that we have an enormous problem in trying to unify the microscales and the macroscales , in fact the problem comes really from this general relativity at this cosmological scale. The EFE describes geometrical modifications of the photonic spacetime due to the energy matters . They are curvatures of the spacetime. Einstein has well worked about a different interpretation of the gravityation, but that does not mean that newton is false, it is just a spacetime made of photons and we observe it .The gravitational fields so in this spacetime made of photons from a source imply so motions. But the philosophical problem to unify this quantum mechanic with this GR is there. The majority tries to consider so that the quantum gravitation is in the same logic, that is why they utilises the tensors, vectors, geometrical algebras and strings and points to reach, quantify, renormlise this QG. The EFE are good for this macroscale and the observations but that does not mean that we must utilise this GR to explain our standard model and reach this QG. The newtonian mechanic is the best way for me and the fact to return at this old school about the motions of particles. If we consider furthermore the two other spacetimes superimposed and the 3D quantum spheres with 3 main primoridal series, that permits to quantify it. This GR cannot be unified with this QM in fact simply, that is why that does not converge. The fields are emergent due to simply photons encoded in this space vacuum of the DE. The Fields of this GR are different and are not the key for this QM.

I have been working on an physical model that attempts to explain the physical mechanism of the curvature of space by matter. This model proposes that all of the properties of the Universe (time, matter, energy, waves, etc) are all emergent properties of the interaction of the medium of space with quanta of information that I call informatons. These quanta can not rightly be called particles themselves. The less lesser the information contained in a system, the faster that system naturally moves in a vacuum, and photons contain the least amount of information that we are able to detect.

Informatons are the only thing in the universe that can move faster than the speed of light, because they contain less information than light itself. The informatons interact weakly through gravity and I propose that they they could be candidates for dark matter. Before I discuss them further, I would like to detail how information interacts with space and results in what we identify as curvature. Experimentation has shown that light travels at a constant speed in a vacuum, thus space itself is not a traditional fluid-like medium like water, as was suspected before the constant speed was identified. I propose that space is still a liquid-like material, an aether, but that it behaves like a non-newtonian fluid. In the presence of information, space itself is distorted and changed into matter and mass emerges as the meta-property that describes it. Informatons themselves have no mass, only information.

As an informaton moves through space, space is distored in front of the informaton, and the distortion is lost as it moves away. This is why particles move through space in a discrete nature, and don't leave any sort of trail, there is no friction, and the particle appears physically to be in only one place at one time. When a particle moves into a higher area of distortion, information is "borrowed" from the informaton and transfered into space. This process causes the wavelength of the particle to change, but not the frequency, thus the particle undergoes refraction and it curves. Simultaneously it is slowed down, thus time varies depending on the amount of distortion in an area. This corresponds to the curvature described in general relativity, and gravitational time dilation. The curvature of space is actually a kind of refraction, and space itself has a refraction index based on gravity. The more gravity in a area, the greater the refraction, and also the slower than time flows.

Because space is distorted, and expands and contracts based on the presense of information, time is tightly coupled to the physical location of information, and appears to be a fourth dimension, mathematically, but entropy provides an arrow for time. The only way that it would be possible to move backwards in time would be to move all of the information in a system back to the place it was at the desired time to travel to, which is impossible for any system. In order to be compatible with other quantum mechanical observations, Informatons must form into units called swarms. Swarms can interact together to create systems and these systems are what we identify as the particles of the standard model. The informatons, having half the information content of light, move at the square of the speed of light. This results in the strange observations of quantum reality, where a particle appears to be in more than one place at once. Sub-parts of the particle are in fact distributed over an area of confinement and when one of the informatons are observed, all of the rest of the informatons are perturbed and "fall" into the place of disturbance. This is how wave function collapse works.

The expansion in front of, and contraction of space behind an informaton is what we observe as wave/particle duality. The informaton is not a particle, nor is it a wave, but both of these properties emerge from the interaction of the informaton with space, thus they are also both particles and waves, as these things arise from the interaction. This is a paradox, I suppose, not a particle, not a wave, but creates a particle, and a wave, and it is very hard to reason about these things from first principles.

Informatons come in only two varieties, and I give them a property I call affinity which applies to their charge and their spin. One of the informatons, is called an "on informaton" and it has positive affinity, and the other is called an "off informaton" which has negative affinity, the spin affinity can also be positive or negative. In a fully populated (evenly filled) chain, half of the informations have positive spin and half have negative, which cancels the spin out. On and off charges attract ie, they have an affinity for each other. When two opposite spin affinities encounter each other, they cancel spin. Informatons each have 1/3 charge (positive or negative) and 1/2 spin. Every three informatons in a system represent one charge. When a system has a fractional remainder of spin, the fraction is always 1/2 for fermions (there is always one extra informaton to create spin). Swarms with an even number of informatons that all spin in the same direction have net spin one, and net charge 0, while swarms with odd numbers of informatons have fractional spin and fractional charge. When there are two extra informatons, there is a net charge of 2/3 because it takes three informations to form a full charge.

A swarm can also be viewed as a string, or a chain of particles. Because opposite informatons attract, informations form long series of alternating ons and offs, and can be rendered in a type of binary notation using 0 for off informatons and 1 for on informatons. Informaton chains are tightly connected together, whereas swarms that are interacting to form a system are loosely coupled together by charge. In the notation I have developed, coupled systems of chains/swarms are connected by a + sign, while chains are represented by series of zeroes and ones. A chain always has a specific "stable" or "ground" length. The longest chain is 8 informatons, but a swarm may consist of many chains linked together, up to a million informatons in the largest swarms, which are top quarks. An chain can be missing informatons from its "ground" length. When this happens, the chain will have spin but may not necessarily have charge. For example, an 8 informaton chain that is missing 4 informatons will have 4/8 spin but 0 net charge. Note that the muon neutrino results in a convenient chain on which everything larger than muon neutrinos are based on. A muon neutrino is 01010101+01 and is respresented by a the shortcut symbol M in the notation.

Thus 4M+010 would represents 4 chains of what would be a muon neutrino linked together with a three chain. This is in fact the notation for an electron! There are 4 eight size chains 4 2 size chains and one three size chain. Because there are an odd number of informatons, the last informaton adds 1/2 uncancelled spin, and the three chain provides a negative net charge of -1, because each information represents positive or negative and 3 informatons always yield a full charge. The notation for a proton is: RLR + 5519M. In this case, the LRL is a six chain that is missing three informations, thus it has 3/6 or 1/2 spin, positive one charge and an awful lot of muon neutrino-like chains. One of the most interesting particles is the W Boson, which can be either 47288M+LRL or RLR+47288M which results in either -1 or +1. Again the LRL and RLR are both halves of six chains, so there is net 1/2 spin, you can think of the three informations in the six chain as spinning in the same affinity.

There is a lot more to discuss about these ideas, but I am going to stop here and see if there are any comments.

You've started in your first sentence with the assumption that Einstein's gravity theory is correct. Do you believe that gravity is always going to be viewed as a very weak force so that an underlying unification of the known forces can never be achieved??

If in a hundred years time there is still a crisis in physics & cosmology, would you consider compact dark matter to exist at Earth's core??