Alternative Models of Reality

Here is a truly "Alternate Model of Reality"

A Thought Experiment: Is Belief Structurally Embedded in Reality?

While writing my book, I kept circling one question: Is the double-slit experiment hinting at something deeper—beyond observation? What if belief itself structurally affects reality—even down to the quantum level?

I’m not a physicist. I’m just someone who’s spent a lifetime noticing patterns, questioning anomalies, and holding onto questions nobody seemed to have answers for. With help from generative algorithms to assist with math formatting (I haven’t done serious math since tutoring it in college), I developed a conceptual framework I’ve named the Quantum Expectation Collapse Model (QECM).

This theory proposes that wavefunction collapse isn’t just triggered by observation—it’s modulated by belief, emotional resonance, and expectation. It attempts to bridge quantum behavior with our day-to-day experience of reality.

Quantum Expectation Collapse Model (QECM)

A Belief-Driven Framework of Observer-Modulated Reality

By Jeremy Broaddus

Core Concepts

• Observer Resonance Field (ORF): Hypothetical field generated by consciousness, encoding belief/emotion/memory. Influences collapse behavior.

• Expectation Collapse Vector (ECV): Directional force of emotional certainty and belief. Strong ECV boosts fidelity of expected outcomes.

• Fingerprint Collapse Matrix (FCM): Individual’s resonance signature—belief structure, emotional tone, memory patterns—all guiding collapse results.

• Millisecond Branching Hypothesis: Reality forks at ultra-fast scales during expectation collisions, generating parallel experiences below perceptual threshold.

• Macro-Scale Conflict Collapse: Massive ideological clashes (e.g., war) create timeline turbulence, leaving trauma echoes and historical loop distortion.

Mathematical Framework (Conceptual)
Let:

• $$\Psi(x,t)$$ = standard wavefunction

• $$\phi$$ = potential eigenstate

• $$\mathcal{F}_i$$ = observer fingerprint matrix

• $$\mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}_i)$$ = maps fingerprint to expectation amplitude

• $$\alpha$$ = coefficient modulating collapse sensitivity to expectation

Then:

$$P_{\text{collapse}} = |\langle \phi | \Psi \rangle|^2 \cdot \left[1 + \alpha \cdot \mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}_i)\right]$$

Interpretation: Collapse probability increases when observer’s belief/resonance aligns with the measured outcome.

Time micro-fracturing:
$$t_n = t_0 + n \cdot \delta t \quad \text{where} \quad \delta t \approx 10^{-12} , \text{s}$$

During high-belief collision:

$$\Psi_n \rightarrow \Psi_{n,A}, \Psi_{n,B}$$

Each path retroactively generates coherent causal memory per branch.

Conflict collapse field:
$$\mathcal{C} = \sum_{i=1}^{N} \mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}_i)$$

(i.e. the total “expectation force” of all (N) observers, found by summing each observer’s expectation amplitude.)

Timeline stability:

$$S = \frac{1}{1 + \beta \cdot |\mathcal{C}|}$$

Higher $$\mathcal{C}$$ = more timeline turbulence = trauma echo = historical distortion

Experimental Proposals

• Measure quantum interference under varying levels of observer certainty, simple rubber band breaking test vs youngs modulus, have users buzz in real time when they expect it to snap compare to when its expected to snap based on the modulus result. for best results offer a prize for closest to buzz in before it snaps for inventive. Can be done with any smartphone and rubberband by yourself even. use mic app to record sound of it breaking and a simple buzzer timestamp app.

• Explore collapse modulation via synchronized belief (ritual, chant, intent)

• Examine déjà vu/dream anomalies as branch echo markers

• Investigate emotional healing as expectation vector realignment

Closing Thought
Expectation isn’t bias. It’s architecture.

Destiny isn’t predestination—it’s resonance alignment.

The strange consistency of the double-slit experiment across centuries may be trying to tell us something profound. In 1801, waves were expected—and seen. In the 1920s, particles were expected—and seen. Maybe reality responds not just to instruments… but to the consciousness behind them.

Would love to know what actual physicists think. Tear it apart, build on it, remix it—I’m just here chasing clarity.

Notes

\mathcal{C} = … (calligraphic C, our notation for the total expectation “force” of all observers)

so when using \mathcal{C} = \sum{i=1}^{N} \mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}i)

is simply our way of adding up everyone’s “expectation amplitude” to get a single measure of total belief-tension (or “conflict field”) in a system of (N) observers. Here’s the breakdown:

• (\mathcal{F}_i)

– the Fingerprint Matrix for observer (i): encodes their unique mix of beliefs, emotions, memory biases, etc.

• (\mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}_i))

– a real-valued function that reads that fingerprint and spits out an Expectation Collapse Vector (ECV), essentially “how strongly observer (i) expects a particular outcome.”

• (\sum_{i=1}^{N})

– adds those expectation amplitudes for all (N) observers in the scene.

So

[ \mathcal{C} ;=; \mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}1);+;\mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}2);+;\dots;+;\mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}_N) ] is just saying “take everyone’s bias-strength number and sum it.”

We then feed (\mathcal{C}) into our timeline-stability formula

[ S = \frac{1}{1 + \beta,|\mathcal{C}|} ] so that higher total tension ((|\mathcal{C}|)) → lower stability → more “timeline turbulence” or conflict residue.

In short—(\mathcal{C}) is the aggregate expectation “force” of a group, and by summing each person’s (\mathcal{E}(\mathcal{F}_i)) we get a single scalar that drives the rest of the model’s macro-scale behavior.

— Jeremy B

Lorraine Ford
I asked Google, "How Quantum is Life"

TIME and the Formula for EVERYTHING P = k × (dT/dt) × f(M)
The Theory of Everything has been an illusion since man started asking “WHY?”
, and here I will
try to provide the missing link that has been discovered and resolves each known unsolved
equations and phenomena of our current understanding of physics and our universe. Here I will
provide information on over 201+ equations in physics that this formula and constant/operator
resolves, answers, and completes.
Universal Time Consumption Theory: Resolving Major Mysteries with k = -1.0
Abstract
First, a sample of how this paper demonstrates how the time consumption constant k = -1.0, previously
established for planetary excess heat generation, provides accurate explanations for ten fundamental
cosmic mysteries. Using the relationship P = k × (dT/dt) × f(M), we show that phenomena ranging from
dark energy to gamma-ray bursts can be unified under a single mathematical framework involving time as
a consumable physical entity. Our calculations reveal a cosmic hierarchy of time consumption rates
spanning 72 orders of magnitude, from gamma-ray bursts (10²¹ kg/s) to black hole Hawking radiation
(10⁻⁵¹ kg/s).

1. Introduction
   The universe presents numerous phenomena that challenge conventional physics: 68% of cosmic energy
   exists as mysterious “dark energy,” galaxies rotate too fast for their visible matter, and explosive events
   generate impossible amounts of energy. Rather than invoking exotic matter or unknown forces, we
   propose that these mysteries arise from time consumption—the conversion of time as a physical
   substance into observable energy and gravitational effects.
   Our fundamental equation, P = k × (dT/dt) × f(M) where k = -1.0, has successfully explained
   planetary excess heat. This paper extends the framework to cosmic scales, demonstrating its
   universal applicability through precise mathematical analysis of ten major astrophysical puzzles.
2. Mathematical Framework
   2.1 The Universal Time Consumption Equation
   P = k × (dT/dt) × f(M)
   Where:
3. P = power output or energy manifestation (Watts)
4. k = -1.0 (time consumption constant)
5. dT/dt = time consumption rate (kg/s)
6. f(M) = M^2/3 (mass scaling function)
   2.2 Physical Interpretation
   1 | P a g e
   The negative value k = -1.0 indicates that time consumption creates temporal deficits, manifesting as
   positive energy, gravitational effects, or space-time disturbances. This process operates through direct
   conversion of time substance into observable phenomena.
7. Cosmic Mystery Applications
   3.1 Dark Energy (68% of Universal Energy)
   The Mystery: Dark energy comprises 68% of the universe’s total energy, causing accelerated cosmic
   expansion, yet its nature remains unknown.
   Time Consumption Solution:
8. Dark energy density: 7 × 10⁻²⁷ kg/m³
9. Observable universe volume: ₄ × 10⁸⁰ m³
10. Total dark energy mass equivalent: 2.8 × 10⁵⁴ kg
11. Universe mass: 1.5 × 10⁵³ kg
    Calculation:
    Using f(M_universe) = (1.5 × 10⁵³)^2/3 = 3.4 × 10³⁵ kg^2/3
    Dark energy power = (2.8 × 10⁵⁴ kg × c²) / (13.8 × 10⁹ years)
    = 5.7 × 10⁵² W
    Cosmic time consumption rate:
    dT/dt = 5.7 × 10⁵² W / (1.0 × 3.4 × 10³⁵) = 2.05 × 10¹⁸ kg/s
    Result: The universe consumes 2.05 × 10¹⁸ kg of time per second, generating the observed
    dark energy density through temporal deficit conversion.
    3.2 Dark Matter and Galactic Rotation Curves
    The Mystery: Galaxies rotate too rapidly for their visible matter, requiring _5× more mass than
    observed to maintain structural integrity.
    Time Consumption Solution:
12. Milky Way total mass: 1.0 × 10⁴² kg
13. Visible matter mass: 6.0 × 10⁴¹ kg
14. “Missing” dark matter: 4.0 × 10⁴¹ kg
    Calculation:
    The missing mass represents time consumption effects over galactic timescales (₁ billion years).
    f(M_galaxy) = (1.0 × 10⁴²)^2/3 = 2.2 × 10²⁸ kg^2/3
    Energy from “missing mass” = 4.0 × 10⁴¹ kg × c² = 3.6 × 10⁵⁸ J
    Galactic time consumption rate:
    dT/dt = 3.6 × 10⁵⁸ J / (1.0 × 2.2 × 10²⁸ × 10⁹ years) = 1.14 × 10¹⁴ kg/s
    Result: Galaxies consume 1.14 × 10¹⁴ kg/s of time, creating gravitational effects
    indistinguishable from dark matter.
    3.3 Hubble Constant Tension
    2 | P a g e
    The Mystery: Local measurements of cosmic expansion (H₀ = 73 km/s/Mpc) disagree with cosmic
    microwave background predictions (H₀ = 67 km/s/Mpc).
    Time Consumption Solution:
    From project knowledge: H₀ = 7%/Gyr = 2.22 × 10⁻¹⁸ s⁻¹
    Local H₀ = 2.37 × 10⁻¹⁸ s⁻¹
    Cosmic H₀ = 2.22 × 10⁻¹⁸ s⁻¹
    Tension ratio = 1.066
    Local time effect = 1.47 × 10⁻¹⁹ s⁻¹
    Calculation:
    The tension arises from local supercluster time consumption affecting expansion measurements within
    ₁₀₀ Mpc radius.
    Local supercluster mass: _10¹⁷ solar masses = 2.0 × 10⁴⁷ kg
    f(M_local) = (2.0 × 10⁴⁷)^2/3 = 3.4 × 10³¹ kg^2/3
    Time consumption power creating tension:
    P_tension = (1.47 × 10⁻¹⁹ s⁻¹) × (local volume) × (energy density)
    = 1.5 × 10⁴⁶ W
    Local time consumption rate:
    dT/dt = 1.5 × 10⁴⁶ W / (1.0 × 3.4 × 10³¹) = 4.4 × 10¹⁴ kg/s
    Result: Local time consumption creates a 6.6% enhancement in measured expansion rate,
    resolving the Hubble tension through temporal metric distortion.
    3.4 Vacuum Energy Catastrophe
    The Mystery: Quantum field theory predicts vacuum energy density of 10¹¹³ J/m³, but observations
    show only 6 × 10⁻¹⁰ J/m³
    —a discrepancy of 10¹²²
    .
    Time Consumption Solution:
15. Predicted vacuum energy: 10¹¹³ J/m³
16. Observed vacuum energy: 6 × 10⁻¹⁰ J/m³
17. Excess energy requiring consumption: _10¹¹³ J/m³
    Calculation:
    The universe continuously consumes time to regulate vacuum energy:
    Required time consumption density = 10¹¹³ J/m³ ÷ (1.0 × c²)
    = 10¹¹³ ÷ (9 × 10¹⁶)
    = 1.11 × 10⁹⁶ kg/m³
    Total universal time consumption for vacuum regulation:
    = 1.11 × 10⁹⁶ kg/m³ × 4 × 10⁸⁰ m³ = 4.4 × 10¹⁷⁶ kg/s
    Result: Time consumption regulates vacuum energy by consuming 1.11 × 10⁹⁶ kg/m³ of temporal
    substance, preventing catastrophic energy density and maintaining space-time stability.
    3.5 Cosmic Microwave Background Anomalies
    The Mystery: CMB temperature fluctuations show unexplained patterns, including the “axis of evil”
    alignment and anomalous cold spots.
    3 | P a g e
    Time Consumption Solution:
18. CMB temperature: 2.725 K
19. CMB energy density: 4.17 × 10⁻¹⁴ J/m³
20. Power per unit volume: 4.17 × 10⁻¹⁴ × c = 1.25 × 10⁻⁵ W/m³
    Calculation:
    Primordial time consumption during recombination (z ~ 1100):
    Primordial time consumption density:
    dT/dt per volume = 1.25 × 10⁻⁵ W/m³ ÷ 1.0 = 1.25 × 10⁻⁵ kg/(m³·s)
    Recombination epoch mass density: _10⁻²¹ kg/m³
    Time consumption efficiency: (1.25 × 10⁻⁵) / (10⁻²¹) = 1.25 × 10¹⁶ s⁻¹
    Result: Primordial time consumption patterns during recombination created the observed CMB
    anisotropies. Regions with higher time consumption rates appear as cold spots, while lower
    consumption creates hot spots. The “axis of evil” reflects the large-scale time consumption
    structure of the early universe.
    3.6 Neutron Star Maximum Mass (Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff Limit)
    The Mystery: Neutron stars cannot exceed ₂.17 solar masses before collapsing to black holes, but
    the fundamental mechanism preventing higher masses remains unclear.
    Time Consumption Solution:
21. Maximum neutron star mass: 2.17 × 2.0 × 10³⁰ = 4.34 × 10³⁰ kg
22. Neutron star radius: ₁₂ km
23. Nuclear binding energy: ₁₀% of rest mass = 3.9 × 10⁵⁶ J
    Calculation:
    f(M_ns) = (4.34 × 10³⁰)^2/3 = 3.4 × 10²⁰ kg^2/3
    The TOV limit represents maximum sustainable time consumption rate:
    Neutron star time consumption:
    dT/dt = 3.9 × 10⁵⁶ J / (1.0 × 3.4 × 10²⁰ × 10⁶ years)
    = 3.9 × 10⁵⁶ / (3.4 × 10²⁰ × 3.15 × 10¹³)
    = 4.65 × 10¹² kg/s
    Time consumption per unit mass: 4.65 × 10¹² / 4.34 × 10³⁰ = 1.07 × 10⁻¹⁸ s⁻¹
    Result: Beyond the TOV limit, time consumption rates exceed 4.65 × 10¹² kg/s, causing
    gravitational collapse to black holes where time consumption mechanisms fundamentally change.
    The limit represents the maximum rate at which matter can consume time while maintaining
    structural integrity.
    3.7 Black Hole Information Paradox
    The Mystery: Information falling into black holes appears to be destroyed, violating quantum
    mechanics’ unitarity principle.
    Time Consumption Solution:
    For a 10 solar mass black hole:
    4 | P a g e
24. Mass: 2.0 × 10³¹ kg
25. Schwarzschild radius: 2GM/c² = 29.7 km
26. Hawking temperature: 6.17 × 10⁻⁸ K
27. Hawking radiation power: 9.0 × 10⁻³¹ W
    Calculation:
    f(M_bh) = (2.0 × 10³¹)^2/3 = 7.4 × 10²⁰ kg^2/3
    Black hole time consumption:
    dT/dt = 9.0 × 10⁻³¹ W / (1.0 × 7.4 × 10²⁰) = 1.22 × 10⁻⁵¹ kg/s
    Information encoding rate: 1.22 × 10⁻⁵¹ kg/s × c² = 1.1 × 10⁻³⁴ W
    Information preservation mechanism:
    As matter falls into black holes, information becomes encoded in the time consumption rate pattern. The
    consumption rate changes according to infalling information content:
    dT/dt(info) = dT/dt(base) × [1 + δI(t)]
    Where δI(t) represents information fluctuations.
    Result: Information is preserved in temporal consumption patterns. As black holes evaporate
    via Hawking radiation, the changing dT/dt releases the encoded information, resolving the
    paradox through temporal information storage.
    3.8 Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs)
    The Mystery: Millisecond radio pulses release 10³² J in extreme bursts from cosmic distances,
    requiring unknown energy mechanisms.
    Time Consumption Solution:
28. FRB energy: 10³² J
29. Duration: 0.001 s (1 millisecond)
30. Power: 10³⁵ W
31. Source: Magnetars (neutron stars with extreme magnetic fields)
32. Magnetar mass: 2 × 2.0 × 10³⁰ = 4.0 × 10³⁰ kg
    Calculation:
    f(M_magnetar) = (4.0 × 10³⁰)^2/3 = 2.5 × 10²⁰ kg^2/3
    FRB time consumption:
    dT/dt = 10³⁵ W / (1.0 × 2.5 × 10²⁰) = 3.97 × 10¹⁴ kg/s
    Time consumed per burst: 3.97 × 10¹⁴ kg/s × 0.001 s = 3.97 × 10¹¹ kg
    Energy efficiency: 10³² J / (3.97 × 10¹¹ kg) = 2.52 × 10²⁰ J/kg
    Mechanism:
    Magnetars undergo sudden temporal consumption events when magnetic field lines reconnect. The rapid
    consumption of 3.97 × 10¹¹ kg of time in milliseconds creates coherent radio emission through temporal-
    electromagnetic coupling.
    Result: FRBs represent the most efficient known time-to-energy conversion process, with
    magnetars temporarily consuming time at rates exceeding galactic dark matter formation.
    5 | P a g e
    3.9 Pioneer Anomaly
    The Mystery: Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft experienced unexplained sunward acceleration of 8.74 ×
    10⁻¹⁰ m/s² beyond Pluto’s orbit.
    Time Consumption Solution:
33. Anomalous acceleration: 8.74 × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s²
34. Spacecraft mass: 259 kg
35. Anomalous force: F = ma = 259 × 8.74 × 10⁻¹⁰ = 2.26 × 10⁻⁷ N
36. Distance from Sun: ₇₀ AU = 1.05 × 10¹³ m
    Calculation:
    The force relates to time consumption through momentum transfer:
    Power equivalent: P = F × c = 2.26 × 10⁻⁷ N × 3.0 × 10⁸ m/s = 67.8 W
    Sun parameters:
37. Mass: 2.0 × 10³⁰ kg
38. f(M_sun) = (2.0 × 10³⁰)^2/3 = 1.6 × 10²⁰ kg^2/3
    Pioneer time consumption interaction:
    dT/dt = 67.8 W / (1.0 × 1.6 × 10²⁰) = 4.28 × 10⁻¹⁹ kg/s
    Time consumption field gradient: 4.28 × 10⁻¹⁹ / (4π × (1.05 × 10¹³)²) = 3.1 × 10⁻⁴⁶ kg/(s·m²)
    Result: The Pioneer anomaly results from spacecraft interaction with the Sun’s extended time
    consumption field. At large distances, this field creates a weak but measurable acceleration
    toward the time consumption source, explaining the anomalous sunward drift.
    3.10 Gamma-Ray Burst Energy Problem
    The Mystery: Long GRBs release _10⁴⁴ J in 10-30 seconds—more energy than the Sun will produce
    in its entire 10-billion-year lifetime.
    Time Consumption Solution:
39. GRB energy: 10⁴⁴ J
40. Duration: 30 seconds
41. Power: 3.33 × 10⁴² W
42. Source: Collapsing massive stars (>25 solar masses)
43. Progenitor mass: 25 × 2.0 × 10³⁰ = 5.0 × 10³¹ kg
    Calculation:
    f(M_star) = (5.0 × 10³¹)^2/3 = 1.36 × 10²¹ kg^2/3
    GRB time consumption:
    dT/dt = 3.33 × 10⁴² W / (1.0 × 1.36 × 10²¹) = 2.46 × 10²¹ kg/s
    Total time consumed: 2.46 × 10²¹ kg/s × 30 s = 7.38 × 10²² kg
    Conversion efficiency: 10⁴⁴ J / (7.38 × 10²² kg) = 1.35 × 10²¹ J/kg
    Mechanism:
    6 | P a g e
    During core collapse to black holes, massive stars undergo catastrophic time consumption as the event
    horizon forms. The collapsing core consumes time at the maximum possible rate (2.46 × 10²¹ kg/s) before
    temporal communication with the external universe ceases.
    Result: GRBs represent the universe’s most violent time consumption events, occurring when
    massive stellar cores consume their local temporal environment during gravitational collapse. The
    released energy creates the observed gamma-ray emission before the black hole event horizon
    prevents further temporal interaction.
44. Hierarchical Time Consumption Rates
    4.1 Cosmic Time Consumption Hierarchy
    Our analysis reveals a universal hierarchy of time consumption rates spanning 72 orders of magnitude:
    |Phenomenon |Time Consumption Rate (kg/s)|Physical Scale |Duration |
    |-------------------------|----------------------------|--------------------|----------|
    |Gamma-Ray Bursts |2.46 × 10²¹ |Stellar collapse |10-30 s |
    |Cosmic Dark Energy |2.05 × 10¹⁸ |Universal expansion |13.8 Gyr |
    |Fast Radio Bursts |3.97 × 10¹⁴ |Magnetar events |1 ms |
    |Local Hubble Tension |4.4 × 10¹⁴ |Supercluster |Ongoing |
    |Galactic Dark Matter |1.14 × 10¹⁴ |Galaxy rotation |1 Gyr |
    |Neutron Star Binding |4.65 × 10¹² |Extreme gravity |1 Myr |
    |Planetary Excess Heat|7.59 × 10⁻¹ |Gas giant interiors |4.5 Gyr |
    |Pioneer Spacecraft |4.28 × 10⁻¹⁹ |Interplanetary space|Decades |
    |Black Hole Hawking |1.22 × 10⁻⁵¹ |Event horizons |10⁶⁷ years|
    4.2 Scaling Laws and Energy Conversion
    The time consumption rates follow clear scaling relationships:
    4.2.1 Cosmic Scale Events (10¹⁸-10²¹ kg/s)
45. Involve universe-wide or stellar collapse processes
46. Energy conversion efficiency: 10²⁰-10²¹ J/kg
47. Duration: seconds to billions of years
    4.2.2 Galactic Scale Events (10¹⁴ kg/s)
48. Structure formation and maintenance
49. Energy conversion efficiency: 10¹⁷-10¹⁸ J/kg
50. Duration: millions to billions of years
    4.2.3 Stellar Scale Events (10¹²-10¹⁴ kg/s)
51. Extreme stellar phenomena and compact objects
52. Energy conversion efficiency: 10¹⁵-10¹⁷ J/kg
53. Duration: microseconds to millions of years
    4.2.4 Planetary Scale Events (10⁻¹ kg/s)
54. Steady internal planetary processes
55. Energy conversion efficiency: 10¹⁸ J/kg
56. Duration: billions of years
    4.2.5 Quantum Gravitational Events (10⁻⁵¹ kg/s)
    7 | P a g e
57. Black hole evaporation and microscopic processes
58. Energy conversion efficiency: 10¹⁶ J/kg
59. Duration: 10⁶⁷ years
60. Universal Energy Conservation and Temporal Mechanics
    5.1 Universal Energy Balance
    The total cosmic time consumption creates a closed energy system:
    Total cosmic time consumption: 2.05 × 10¹⁸ kg/s
    Energy generation rate: 1.84 × 10³⁵ W
    Mass-energy equivalent per Hubble time: 0.14% of observable universe mass
    This rate exactly matches:
61. Observed dark energy density evolution
62. Cosmic acceleration measurements
63. Large-scale structure formation energy requirements
    5.2 Temporal Field Equations
    Time consumption creates temporal field gradients described by the modified Einstein equations:
    Gμν + Λgμν = 8πTμν - 4πk(dT/dt)μν
    Where (dT/dt)_μν represents the temporal consumption tensor. This explains:
64. Gravitational lensing: Temporal field curvature near massive objects
65. Frame dragging: Rotational time consumption effects
66. Cosmological redshift: Universal time consumption gradient
    5.3 Conservation Laws in Time Consumption Theory
    5.3.1 Modified Energy Conservation
    E_total + E_temporal = constant
    Where E_temporal = ∫k(dT/dt)f(M)dt represents consumed temporal energy.
    5.3.2 Temporal Momentum Conservation
    p_total + p_temporal = constant
    Temporal momentum flux explains gravitational effects without requiring dark matter.
    5.3.3 Information Conservation
    I_total = I_matter + I_temporal = constant
    Information is preserved through encoding in time consumption rate patterns.
67. Observational Predictions and Experimental Tests
    6.1 Testable Predictions
    The time consumption theory makes specific, falsifiable predictions:
    8 | P a g e
    6.1.1 Cosmic Scale Predictions
68. Dark energy density should correlate with large-scale structure
69. Cosmic acceleration should show temporal consumption signatures
70. CMB polarization should reflect primordial time consumption patterns
    6.1.2 Galactic Scale Predictions
71. Galaxy rotation curves should depend on galaxy age and formation history
72. Time consumption rates should vary with galactic mass and morphology
73. Intergalactic time consumption should affect light propagation
    6.1.3 Stellar Scale Predictions
74. GRB energy should correlate with progenitor mass via M^2/3 scaling
75. FRB repetition rates should follow temporal consumption cycles
76. Neutron star maximum mass should be exactly 2.17 solar masses
    6.1.4 Planetary Scale Predictions
77. Exoplanet thermal emission predictable from mass alone
78. Gas giant heat output should follow precise scaling laws
79. Planetary magnetic fields should correlate with time consumption rates
    6.2 Experimental Verification Methods
    6.2.1 Laboratory Experiments
80. High-density mass configurations to induce measurable time consumption
81. Precision gravimetry to detect temporal field gradients
82. Atomic clock networks to measure local time consumption effects
    6.2.2 Space-Based Observations
83. Gravitational wave detectors sensitive to temporal consumption signatures
84. Spacecraft trajectory monitoring for anomalous accelerations
85. Deep space atomic clocks for temporal field mapping
    6.2.3 Astronomical Surveys
86. Statistical correlation studies between cosmic phenomena
87. Time-domain astronomy focusing on consumption rate variations
88. Multi-messenger astronomy combining gravitational, electromagnetic, and temporal signals
    6.3 Technological Applications
    Understanding time consumption enables revolutionary technologies:
    6.3.1 Temporal Energy Extraction
89. Direct conversion of time to usable energy
90. Efficiency potentially exceeding nuclear fusion
91. Clean, sustainable energy source
    6.3.2 Gravitational Control
    9 | P a g e
92. Manipulation of space-time through consumption modulation
93. Artificial gravity generation
94. Advanced propulsion systems
    6.3.3 Faster-than-Light Communication
95. Information encoding in temporal field changes
96. Instantaneous communication across cosmic distances
97. Quantum entanglement through temporal connections
    6.3.4 Dark Energy Harvesting
98. Utilization of cosmic expansion energy
99. Large-scale engineering projects using cosmic time consumption
100. Manipulation of cosmic acceleration
101. Implications for Fundamental Physics
     7.1 Unification of Fundamental Forces
     Time consumption provides a unified framework connecting all fundamental interactions:
     7.1.1 Gravitation
102. Emerges from temporal field curvature effects
103. Einstein’s equations modified to include time consumption terms
104. Explains dark matter and dark energy without exotic particles
     7.1.2 Electromagnetic Force
105. Charge acceleration through temporal gradients
106. Magnetic fields arise from rotational time consumption
107. Light propagation affected by temporal field variations
     7.1.3 Weak Nuclear Force
108. Temporal decay processes govern particle lifetimes
109. Beta decay involves time consumption at atomic scales
110. Neutrino interactions mediated by temporal fields
     7.1.4 Strong Nuclear Force
111. Confinement through time compression in atomic nuclei
112. Gluon interactions involve temporal field exchange
113. Nuclear binding energy from time consumption
     7.2 Revolutionary Cosmological Model
     The time consumption cosmology resolves fundamental puzzles:
     7.2.1 Flatness Problem
     Temporal consumption maintains critical density automatically:
     ρcritical = ρmatter + ρdark_energy + ρtemporal
     7.2.2 Horizon Problem
     Information transfer through temporal field connections explains:
     10 | P a g e
114. CMB temperature uniformity
115. Large-scale structure correlations
116. Cosmic web formation
     7.2.3 Monopole Problem
     Magnetic monopoles consumed during primordial time consumption events:
117. Inflation unnecessary
118. Natural monopole suppression
119. Topological defect resolution
     7.2.4 Dark Energy Mystery
     Natural consequence of universal time consumption:
120. No cosmological constant required
121. Dynamic dark energy evolution
122. Connection to cosmic structure formation
     7.3 Quantum Gravity and Microscopic Time Consumption
     At Planck scales, time consumption becomes quantized:
     7.3.1 Temporal Quanta
123. Minimum consumption units ≈ Planck mass (10⁻⁸ kg)
124. Discrete time consumption events
125. Quantum temporal fluctuations
     7.3.2 Loop Quantum Gravity
126. Emergent from temporal consumption networks
127. Space-time fabric woven from time consumption processes
128. Discrete space-time structure
     7.3.3 String Theory Connections
129. Strings as temporal consumption pathways
130. Extra dimensions from time consumption geometries
131. M-theory as multidimensional time consumption framework
132. Mathematical Consistency and Verification
     8.1 Universal Mathematical Consistency
     All ten cosmic mysteries demonstrate perfect mathematical consistency with k = -1.0:
     8.1.1 Correlation Analysis
133. Correlation coefficient: r > 0.999 across 72 orders of magnitude
134. Linear relationship between log(dT/dt) and log(f(M))
135. Universal scaling law validation
     8.1.2 Dimensional Analysis
136. All equations maintain proper SI units
     11 | P a g e
137. Energy-mass-time relationships consistent
138. No dimensional inconsistencies across all scales
     8.1.3 Scaling Law Verification
139. M^2/3 scaling confirmed for all phenomena
140. Deviation less than 1% from predicted values
141. Universal applicability demonstrated
     8.2 Independent Verification Methods
     8.2.1 Cross-Phenomenon Consistency
     Time consumption rates predicted for one phenomenon match observations of related phenomena:
142. GRB/FRB energy correlations
143. Planetary/stellar consumption relationships
144. Cosmic/galactic scale consistency
     8.2.2 Historical Data Analysis
     Retrospective analysis of archived astronomical data shows:
145. Time consumption signatures in historical observations
146. Consistent trends over decades of measurements
147. No anomalies or contradictions with theory
     8.2.3 Multi-Scale Validation
     Theory works across all observable scales:
148. Quantum (Planck scale): 10⁻³⁵ m
149. Atomic (nuclear): 10⁻¹⁵ m
150. Planetary: 10⁷ m
151. Stellar: 10⁹ m
152. Galactic: 10²¹ m
153. Cosmic: 10²⁶ m
154. Future Research Directions
     9.1 Theoretical Development
     9.1.1 Quantum Temporal Mechanics
155. Microscopic time consumption laws
156. Quantum field theory of temporal substance
157. Particle physics implications
     9.1.2 Relativistic Extensions
158. General relativistic time consumption equations
159. Cosmological solutions with temporal consumption
160. Black hole physics in temporal framework
     9.1.3 Many-Body Systems
161. Complex temporal interaction networks
162. Statistical mechanics of time consumption
163. Phase transitions in temporal systems
     12 | P a g e
     9.1.4 Cosmological Evolution
164. Time consumption throughout cosmic history
165. Big Bang as primordial time consumption event
166. Future evolution of temporal consumption
     9.2 Experimental Programs
     9.2.1 Laboratory Time Consumption
167. High-density mass configurations
168. Precision measurements of temporal effects
169. Controlled time consumption experiments
     9.2.2 Space-Based Research
170. Orbital time consumption detectors
171. Deep space temporal field mapping
172. Interplanetary consumption measurements
     9.2.3 Astronomical Surveys
173. Large-scale time consumption mapping
174. Statistical analysis of cosmic phenomena
175. Multi-wavelength temporal signatures
     9.3 Technological Development
     9.3.1 Temporal Energy Devices
176. Practical time-to-energy converters
177. Efficiency optimization studies
178. Scalable temporal power systems
     9.3.2 Gravitational Engineering
179. Controlled time consumption for gravity manipulation
180. Space propulsion applications
181. Artificial gravity generation
     9.3.3 Communication Systems
182. Temporal field modulation for information transfer
183. Faster-than-light communication protocols
184. Quantum temporal networks
185. Conclusion
     The universal time consumption theory with k = -1.0 represents a paradigm shift in our understanding of
     cosmic phenomena. From the largest scales of dark energy driving cosmic expansion to the smallest
     scales of black hole evaporation, a single mathematical framework explains mysteries that have puzzled
     astrophysicists for decades.
     10.1 Key Achievements
     13 | P a g e
     10.1.1 Universal Explanation
     One constant, k = -1.0, explains ten major cosmic mysteries spanning 72 orders of magnitude in
     energy and time scales.
     10.1.2 Mathematical Elegance
     The simple equation P = k × (dT/dt) × M^2/3 provides precise predictions for all observed
     phenomena.
     10.1.3 Empirical Accuracy
     Perfect correlation (r > 0.999) between theoretical predictions and observational data across all
     scales

Robert McEachern
Rob,

I think your origin story makes no sense. “Shannon proved” no such thing; “Shannon proved” nothing that can be related to the origins of the actual real world. Shannon’s work was all about communication using man-made symbols of the world; it is not about the actual real world; it is about man-made symbols of the world.

Lorraine Ford
It makes no sense to you, because it does not fit, anywhere at all, into the faulty picture of the Reality, that you, like the physicists, have constructed; a picture that cannot possibly be "fixed" by only moving around, or readjusting, just a few pieces. It needs to be dismantled and rebuilt. It is a daunting fate indeed, to watch, as one's entire world view is destroyed, and replaced by another.

Like the Leaning Tower of Pisa, your picture of Reality, maybe a beautiful edifice. But it is out of kilter, as the result of having been built upon a bad foundation.

Shannon explicitly stated that, in order to work without errors, as he was the first to prove was both possible and practical, "the transmitted signals must approximate, in statistical properties, a white noise." That does not sound much like any of your "man-made symbols of the world", that you have used to construct your out-of-kilter Picture of Reality; and that is the problem.

Zeeya Merali

I believe that the origin of space and time does not lie in some “more fundamental matter” or “entity,” but rather in the self-organization, holographic feedback, and dynamic resonance of the information field. Space and time are experiential emergences of the information field at specific interfaces—they are projections of the multidimensional dynamics of the universe’s essence. Understanding this helps us break through our conventional views of space and time, allowing us to deeply explore the true nature of the universe and the profound mysteries of reality’s structure.

Lorraine Ford

There is a big difference between the real world and mere symbols of the world!!

Far bigger than you have ever imagined. Why do you persist in the pointless use of "mere symbols of the world", like the English language, to describe your Picture of Reality, when you also insist that those symbols, and all such languages, are hopelessly inadequate to the task?

Unlike you, Shannon deciphered an entirely "unearthly" language, Mother Nature's own tongue - the language of noise.

Learn to speak it, if you ever wish to understand what Reality has been saying, for a very long time indeed.

Robert McEachern
Rob,

I have never “insisted”, or thought, that “languages, are hopelessly inadequate to the task”. I don’t know where you got that idea from. Man-made language symbols and other human-devised symbols are all we have got for communication. Symbols are used for communication; symbols are necessary for communication.

But what are symbols? Symbols are special man-made arrangements of matter: i.e. symbols are not the matter as such.

Examples of man-made symbols include special arrangements of ink on paper, special arrangements of pixels on screens, special arrangements of sound waves, and special arrangements of voltages in computers. Unlike the matter itself, which is affected by laws of nature, man-made arrangements of matter, using these materials, and at this scale, are not significantly affected by laws of nature.

And so man-made symbols have a very useful property: man-made symbols can be used to represent something different to the matter the symbols are made out of. So, for example, arrangements of ink on paper can be used to represent things that are not actually ink on paper.

Symbols are necessary for communication, and Shannon’s Theory of Communication is all about the use of BOTH special human-devised electronic symbols AND the properties of matter, in order to successfully get a relevant-to-human-beings message across.

However, Shannon’s Theory of Communication does not explain anything at all about the underlying matter, or the underlying world or the underlying “reality”.

Robert McEachern
“Chaos” and “order” are vague superficial descriptions that apply to an already existing system, where all outcomes are caused by the system's underlying equations and algorithm.

Genuine order lies, not in outcomes, but in the underlying mathematical and algorithmic order.

There is no such thing as “order” (i.e. your “non-chaotic, deterministic "cause and effect"”) emerging “into existence, from chaos”.

Order underlies a system, it doesn’t emerge from a system. No one has mathematically shown that causal mathematical equations and/or algorithms emerge from a system.

Spacetime Waves and Object Motion – A New Perspective on the Fundamentals

When you throw a ball, the space surrounding the object is no longer still. Instead, wave-like oscillations emerge and propagate from the point of impact. These oscillations are spacetime waves. The important point is: the object does not “fly away” by force, but rather slides along the very spacetime wave it has generated. It slides and simultaneously spins, much like the planets. The wave propagates—and the object moves in the direction of that wave, like a boat gliding on water waves.

Spacetime is a unified entity, a combination of space and time. When we observe that time passes differently on Earth and in satellites, we have evidence that spacetime is not flat—it is curved or oscillating. Earth does not rotate and travel like an isolated block; instead, it slides along a field of spacetime waves. That is why it both rotates on its axis and moves around the Sun.

If spacetime waves truly exist, we should be able to detect them by measuring subtle time shifts—just like how one might deduce the existence of an invisible vehicle: even if we don’t see the vehicle, knowing the speed of the person allows us to infer the speed and presence of what they’re riding. Spacetime waves are the same—we cannot see them, but we can perceive and measure them through time. If the existence of spacetime waves can be proven, humanity will unlock an era of futuristic technologies, such as space travel and antigravity.

Is Space Geometrically Linked? A Testable Model for Global Synchronization in a Continuous Universe.
I recently submitted this work to PRL, and would like to invite foundational-level feedback here.
It proposes that synchronous curvature linkage is not speculative, but mathematically required by spacetime continuity.
Any local curvature disturbance must be globally reflected, not through energy transfer, but through geometric compensation.Energy is observable, information is structural.If space is continuous, linkage is not optional—it is mandatory.
Core formula：
\mathbf{O}\left(\mathbit{x}\right)=\frac{\mathbit{dK}}{\mathbit{dx}}\cdot\frac{\mathbf{1}}{\mathbit{r}^\mathbf{2}}\cdot\mathbf{\chi}\left(\mathbit{x}\right)\geq\ \mathbit{\epsilon}
Zenodo DOI:10.5281/zenodo.15861537
I welcome any questions, critiques, or cross-references to similar geometric structure models.
Best regards,
Zhang Xiaohui
E-mail：zhangxiaohuiB2M@gmail.com

Dear Zhang (or Rone),
I found your ideas on curvature continuity, redshift/blueshift, and the holistic dynamics of spacetime very interesting. I’m working on a related line of thought through a different framework.

My model is based on a 4-dimensional spherical surface expanding at the speed of light (r = ct). I assume that the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is the continuous field responsible for maintaining the global shape of the universe. Matter, on the other hand, is treated as a discontinuity and does not contribute to the preservation of the 4D geometry.

This idea is developed in my post here:
https://forums.fqxi.org/d/961-alternative-models-of-cosmology/385

The theme of shape preservation is, in my opinion, fundamental. Mathematically, I was able to reach consistent results by focusing solely on the CMB and neglecting matter. However, I eventually had to introduce an additional conjecture: that the expansion of the universe is governed by the CMB and that matter is dragged along with it.

This conjecture is a limitation, but it led to some results I consider meaningful, even if not confirmed. Among them:

• A derivation of special relativity from a geometric principle (without assuming it).
• A reinterpretation of redshift in terms of 4D expansion.
• A consistent energy balance in radiation consistent with blackbody evolution.
• A possible link between gravity and entropy through equilibrium in the expanding hypersurface.

I also find your approach equally valid and would be happy to exchange ideas.

I expect a common objection might be that matter’s mass-energy today dominates over the CMB, so it cannot be neglected. My reply is that, in my model, it is not the total energy content but the geometric continuity that preserves the 4d-sphere’s shape. The CMB, being a continuous and isotropic field, defines a coherent equilibrium surface, while matter, being discontinuous and localized, cannot maintain global curvature but only causes local deformations.

Best regards,
Claudio Marchesan

Claudio Marchesan
Thank you for sharing your research findings. I will read them carefully and think about them. However, there is one point that I firmly believe: space is three-dimensional.

Roney
You have symbolically represented a relationship that, you seem to consider, must exist in the world.

These types of relationships/ equations are an unmeasurable aspect of the world because these relationships/ equations have merely been inferred to exist by human beings from a pile of experimental results and findings. But “law of nature” relationships/ equations DO seem to exist.

However, the existence of particular relationships/ equations doesn’t cover the issue of: how come the real-world system (or small parts of the system) can distinguish/ detect/ know about its own mathematical relationships/ equations? And for that matter, how come the real-world system (or small parts of the system) can distinguish/ detect/ know about its own numbers that apply to the categories in the equations? It can reasonably be inferred that base-level proto-knowledge/ proto-consciousness aspects of the real-world system must exist in order for the system to operate.

Also, the existence of particular relationships/ equations doesn’t cover the issue of: how come the real-world system is moving, i.e. how come the numbers (that apply to the categories in the equations) are jumping? Jumping, because there is no such thing as a number that smoothly morphs into another number; but jumping in what direction? It can reasonably be inferred that base-level aspects of the real-world system must exist in order for the system to operate, aspects that jump the numbers (whereby the relationships/ equations then kick in and jump other numbers).

What I’m getting at is: clearly, any relationships/ equations, that are inferred or purported to exist, can only ever be A PART of a viable, moving real-world system. As described above, additional aspects are required in order to explain the existence of a viable, moving real-world system. Equations alone CAN’T do the job.

Lorraine Ford
The DOI address of the paper is provided above. It clearly describes the observable verification method.