Discussion with David Chester of the quantum gravity research team with Garreth Lisi, Ray Ascheim, Klee Irwin, .... The problem about the strings is really philosophical at my humble opinion.

David Chester s answer

Steve, the only reason I'm interested in strings is because others are. Branes are the way to go, that's what Witten by unifying string theory with supergravity in M-theory. Supergravity has branes. You always talk about spheres, yes, there is Bott periodicity for n-dimensional spheres.

Einstein created multiple theories of gravity, including metric-affine gravity. Tesla should have studied that theory. Tesla had an idea for what gravity was. By the 1990's it was shown that there is a form of symmetric teleparallelism that is equivalent to GR. This gives a canonical energy-momentum tensor...

The problem isn't Einstein or Witten. The problem is everyone not studying their work in full detail.

My answer

David Chester, You have not well understood what I told, the problem is philosophical, we cannot affirm that we have a 1D string at this planck scale and a main Cosmic field like if all was fields, the GR and its details is not the problem, I like this GR , I say that we have probably a deeper logic than this photon like main primordial essence. the Bott periodicity is well and the n dimensional spheres, but that has nothing to do with my 3D coded spheres sent from the central cosmological spheres., I prefer to formalise them with the Clifford algebras, the problem so in that the thinkers forcus only on strings, photons and GR and forget to Think deeper. Tesla was good but he considered also that all was made of fields, can we affirm this ? no , nobody can affirm this and all now they try with tese fields and strings or points to explain the emergent geometries, topologies, matters due to fields. For me it is a fashion and I prefer my 3D coded spheres , particles like main origin, I don t want to change the works of thinkers, they make all what they want, but ne logic, these 3D coded Spheres seem more logic and that respects the wave particle duality and the fields and the energy distribution. I suggest to the thinkers to Think beyond the box and change their philosophies and don t forget to doubt, me I doubt and if I am false I will accept but nobody can prove me that I am false with my philosophy of spherisation and these coded spheres , we don t see this planck scale and we don t know how this universe transforms the energy in matters. You are persuaded, me also lol so we could converge but I find very odd that the persons consider only this GR and photons and strings, is it a business or a blockage in the mind or lobbies ? I don t know but that seems very odd for me, the coded particles are better for me and explain the evoluttion, not the fields because there is a big philosophical problem about this consciousness aand the evolution with these strings and fields like origin of all. Sorry for Witten and the teams working about this but I see like that andd I am frank, never these roads shall explain this quantum gravitation. Don t be persuaded but doubt like I make, we must prove after all what we extrapolate like assumptions, but nobody can prove these strings and the branes or Mtheory or fields, the same for me and my coded spheres. But see well the generality of sciences, all seesm made of coded particles ....3D coded spheres for me , not need to have a 1D towards a 11D. Friendly

Witten has not reached this quantum gravitation, he has not renormalised and quantified it , and he has not proved these strings at this planck scale and this 1d main Cosmic field, sorry. Maybe many confound his field medal for a good work about the mathematical rankings of fields , with his theory, he has well worked I recognise, but is it a reason to accept his exterapolations and assumptions ? My theory os the theory of spherisation, an evolution optimisation of the universal 3D sphere or future sphere with quantum 3d Spheres and cosmological 3D spheres, I don t consider extradimensions, for me it is just a mathematical Tools, we have a pure 3D at all scales, if this universe has chosen the 3D and the 3D spheres, maybe there are reasons, don t complicate the general simplicity of this universe, don t forget the Words of Feynmann in all humility, one day we shall see all the truth and we shall say all, oh my god, how is it possible that we have not seen a thing so simple Before? it is maybe for me because the thinkers have forgotten the generality and the simplicity in focusing on details. It was evident for me, I have found this universal link in ranking a littlee bit of all, animals, vegetals, minerals, maths, physics, Chemistry, evolution, biology and you know how I have had this simple humble Eureka, due to a page of biology where we see the evolution of hominid Brains since the lemurians, we see this relative spherisation also, it was for me incredible, the spheres can create all Shape and geometries and not need to have an external field to create these geometries and topologies, the codes are inside the particles for me and they can be deformed these sspheres simply.

Think well about all this even if I know that it is difficult to change a line of reasoning, I know that Lisi has worked about this E8 and that QGR team works with this but please forget your prison and Think deeper, I know that you have a business als...Voir plus

Can you prove that all what I tell is false? No , the same for me , we cannot affirm but see well the general philosophy and the nature around you, the universe at all scales is very simple and logic....Even Einstein was clear about these photons and GR , he has never told that they were the only one piece of puzzle ....

I have asked on FQXi to have Witten to discuss, Hooft, Susskind, Baez and Connes, together we can with these 3D spheres coded and with the Clifford algbras make an incredible revolution if we formalise this space and the two fuels, I wait , I hope they shall come on FQXi, they are good mathematician and that can be relevant in complementarity in forgetting the vanity

lol how the thinkers can affirm that the way to go are the branes lol and these strings and the correlated philosophy about how this universe transforms the energy ??? is it a joke, who can affirm ? they speak to God dear David Chester? Me I want well but it is odd for me all this. Is it the lobbies of strings the problem or the Vanity or what , a lack of generality and simplicity?

Hi Mr Kampaktsis, welcome to this wonderful platform,

I am not a specialist of this time, but for me I see it like a pure universal duration correlated with a pure entropical irreversible Arrow of time. I beleive strongly that it is like an universal general Clock of evolution. I don t beleive that we can check it really , we cannot for me travel in time because respecting the evolution andencodings of informations, we could have a problem os mass equivalence if we travel in the past or the future. But we know that with the relativity we can decrease our internal Clocks in travelling at c, so we can go in a kind of future but the problem is that we cannot return at our present. An other thing about this time respecting this general relativity is that we see our past more we observe far in the space, for example we see our sun 8M20sec in late, it is good tool to observe the universe and its evolution, we can better understand the evolution of this universe. But I consider it purely irreversible and it cannot be checked for me, but of course it is just my opinion.

Best Regards

7 days later

I study the Clifford algebras and Bott periodicty for these spheres and I try to find a conjecture unifying the two different philosophical interpretations about this main origin of our universe, my 3D coded spheres or the fields, it exists probably something there to unify, not easy I must say.

the periodicity in the homotopy groups of classical groups, which proved to be of foundational significance for much further research, there is convergence with the K theory but I am interested to converge with the 3D coded spheres like primoridal essence as well as the stable homotopy groups of spheres. The quaternionic symplectic group becomes interesting for the homomorphism i from the homotopy groups of orthogonal groups to stable homotopy groups of spheres, now in inserting the good number for these finite primordial coded series of 3D spheres, that can become very relevant with the Clifford algebras. This poincare conjecture also becomes relevant and an intrinsic Ricci flow more the lie groups, derivatives and algebras, and the topological and euclidian spaces, an universal partition exists in logic with these motions of 3D spheres, their rotations and oscillations more the 3 main finite series thjat I have explained, one for the main space, this gravitational aether and the two others, the fuels, the photons and this cold dark matter.

The Hopf fibrations on 2D surfaces of My 3D spheres permit to rank a lot of quasiparticles under excitations, these finite primordial finite series of 3D spheres more these hopf fibrations on their surfaces can permit to rank and discover many quasiparticles. The phonons, polarons,magnons,plasmons, excitons, are just a small part of all these rankings.

The rankings with the Hopf fibration on 2D surfaces, more the motions rotations of these 3D finite series, one for the space, and the two fuels can show us an universal partition if it is well utilised, see these relevances for the ranking of all these 3D spheres with the angles of rotations, sense of rotations permiting to balance and di fferenciate this negentropy and entropy with the cold and heat, the photons and this cold dark matter encoded also, in fact we can rank many things, the particles, the fields and quasiparticles with the volumes of these finite primordial series having the same finite number than our cosmological finite serie of spheres ,more the fact that this space disappears with the gravitation space aether, the main codes and the two fuels. We can rank the motions, the volumes, the 2D surfaces with these hopf fibrations, the densities due to synchro, sortings, superimposings, the moments, orbital and spinal rotations, the mass, this and that, in fact the combinations are infinite.

5 days later

Dear contest particiants,

I have recently proposed a new theory of quantum gravity, which I named Spontaneous Quantum Gravity. According to this theory, underlying quantum indeterminism, there is a deterministic theory at the Planck scale.

If this is of interest to you, please have a look at the following recent paper:

Nature does not play dice at the Planck scale

Thank you,

Tejinder

    Dear Singh,

    I am not sure why you are upset by your score. You are a FQXI member with a lot of knowledgeable peers, so they can evaluate your theory a lot better than the huge majority of the contestants who are mostly pseudo philosophers, arm chair physicists and what not.

    Also, given the huge numbers of essays, people are unable to dig into essays that need careful study. My essay is that kind, so I use the opportunity to enhance its results but do not expect people to dig deep and I am not interested in political chit chat for the score.

    Tejinder,

    Your new gravity theory agrees with with the 2019 collaboration paper cited in my essay, as a 'Higgs Condensate' dark energy effect. You didn't cite that so I assume may not have seen it. I agree it's basis but didn't find an ontological explanation, or relationship with EM's similar 'action at a distance'. Do you have any different ideas in those regards? If so can you outline? ..and give your views on mutual consistency. www.isaacpub.org/images/PaperPDF/TP_100087_2019070910523565700.pdf

    Tejinder,

    I was intrigued by your FQXi essay. Thanks for this reference to you paper, which takes this to a deeper level. I will try to respond here for a day or so, but this page has a lot of posts and is pretty cranky at loading.

    Cheers LC

    24 days later

    I am new here, and I was not sure whether to send my question to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. So, I send it to both.

    I have found a simple method to calculate alpha (α) based on phi (φ) .007297352569... My question is: An alpha constant based on phi, if true, (I guess only time will tell), would that confirm that alpha (α) is a perfect unchanging constant? Because phi is.

    I am new here, and I was not sure whether to send my question to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. So, I send it to both.

    I have found a simple method to calculate alpha (α) based on phi (φ) .007297352569... My question is: An alpha constant based on phi, if true, (I guess only time will tell), would that confirm that alpha (α) is a perfect unchanging constant? Because phi is.

    I am new here, and I think I messed up because the link didn't open on my last post. Hope you don't mind another try.

    Not sure whether to send my question to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread, so I send it to both.

    I have found a simple method to calculate alpha (α) .007297352569... based on phi (φ) My question is: An alpha constant based on phi, if true, (I guess only time will tell), would that confirm that alpha (α) is a perfect unchanging constant? Because phi is.

    12 days later

    I am a new contributor to FQXi blogs and I am submitting to both the "alternative models of Reality and alternative models of Cosmology blogs. In file 2 below you will find the introductory submission to the alternative model of Reality thread and in file 1 you will find the original essay entered into the 2019/2020 FQXi essay contest. Your comments will be appreciated.Attachment #1: Clarification_of_Physics_FINAL.pdfAttachment #2: FQXi_NEW_REALITY_BLOG.pdf

    In my previous post I had two attachments that, when I tried, did not open. So I am resubmitting the same ideas. My FQXi essay "Clarification of Physics..." -- I will try again to attach it below -However, if it will not open, you can find it in the 2019/2020 FQXi "Undecidability...." essay contest under the author name John D Crowell. In that essay I introduced a new Successful Self-Creation (SSC) process and its relationships to physics/cosmology. However, the SSC process (and its model) go beyond the world of physics. The model covers the origination and progression of SuccessfulSelf-Creation as it creates/becomes all intelligence, the complete physical world and the successful interweaving of SSC/intelligent/physical compositions, capabilities and attributes into every progressive result.

    Note

    Every SSC process/result is a SSC/intelligent/physical combination. The individual components do not exist alone.

    Humans are successful self-creating/intelligent/ physical "beings". Each of us relate back to the original C*s to SSCU transformation. We are results of: participants in: and agents of: Successful Self-Creation. Everything we sense, think, do and create are results of this process.

    An (amazing to me) aspect of the SSC process is that, in addition to creating the SSC/intelligent/physical world, the process also creates its own integers/mathematics, algorithms/computations, homonuclei/holograms, and fractal/hierarchies. All of which can be used to explain its processing and results. SSC also creates humans with the physical complexity and mental "minding" to understand and use those tools to adapt and create within the changing dynamics of SSC.

    Alignment of human creativity and SuccessfulSelf-Creation will produce the next stage of successful human development.

    I would appreciate your comments.

    See my previous submission. I will try again to attach my essay to this submission.

    6 days later

    There is an easy way to solve quantum gravity; and then we could be on our way to experiments with gravity lasers. You only have to add one more particle to the standard model: the graviton. You could say that nature played a trick on the physics community. The trick was this: remember in your physics classes how particles were treated as point particles? Electrons, protons were always treated as points. Although protons and neutrons are actually a collection of quarks-gluons, which is not really a point particle. But the graviton, IMO, has a property that it starts as a point. It expands spherically at the speed of light. The idea of unifying quantum mechanics with general relativity is to say that the gluon interacts with other particles and is the the "thing" that wave functions are describing. But then, it can escape from the quantum system and continue to expand indefinitely. When large numbers of gravitons overlap, they become spacetime geometry. A graviton is an expanding sphere, so it has geometry built into it. The surface of the expanding sphere (of radium r = ct) is a virtual photon (unless it's energized which would make it a real photon). The interior of the graviton is made of quantum states for position/momentum/spin etc. When many gravitons overlap, then it's really quantum states for position/momentum/spin that are overlapping; this creates spacetime. The idea that gravitons expand into spheres, at the speed of light, is meant to explain (1) the invariance of the speed of light and (2) behave similarly to the big bang where the universe began at a point and expanded (faster than light). The inflationary epoch of the big bang can be explained because there are a near infinite number of gravitons, all of which individually expand at the speed of light, but together, they expand faster than c. I think you could create a gravity laser by using entangled photons. Each pair of entangled photons is actually two photons with a graviton between them. The graviton has, in a sense, captured two photons. If you trapped one of the entangled photons, P1, and you dropped the other photon into a gravity well of a blackhole, P2, then, I argue that the graviton between them would acquire a gravitational potential energy between the P1 and P2 photon. We don't have any black holes nearby, but we do have the Equivalence Principle. We could in principle, and someday in practice, we could centrifuge the P1 and P2 photons. We could blueshift the P1 and redshift the P2 photons by attaching a fiber optic cable to a centrifuge. If we centrifuged the entangled photons millions of times, we could cause the entanglement between them to build up a gravitational potential energy. We have centrifuges. We don't need exotic matter. We have lasers, We have quantum entanglements. We actually have everything we need to perform the experiments. We have everything we need to create gravity lasers.

    The idea of unifying quantum mechanics with general relativity is to say that the GRAVITON interacts with other particles and is the the "thing" that wave functions are describing.

    14 days later

    If you guys would listen to me, we could have superluminal drives. I know how the laws of physics are set up!

    8 days later

    What is really generally my Theory of Spherisation ? a small general resume....

    1 it is an evolutive general point of vue of the universe, an optimisation evolution of the universal sphere or future sphere, the evolution is foundamental at my humble opinion.

    2 I consider that the 3D spheres are foundamental, so the coded particles are 3D spheres and the cosmological spheres are 3D spheres also.

    3 I consider philosophically speaking that the main origin is particles and they are coded and sent from the central cosmological sphere, it is like a supermatter , and it distributes the codes and informations in finite series of 3D spheres.

    4 I utilise for the mathematical tools, the clifford algebras, the lie groups, the lie dferivatives, the lie algebras, the topological and euclidian spaces, the poincare conjecture, the hopf fibrations on surfaces of 3D pshres for the quasiparticles, I try to conjecture with the bott periodicity and the strings also .

    5 I consider philosophically speaking that we have a kind of thing that we cannot define transforming at this central cosmological sphere the Energy in coded matters in an aether, so I consider 3 main finite series of 3D spheres sent from this central cosmological sphere, one for the space without motions and having the main codes and two fuels, the cold dark matter and the photons and when they merge they create our topologies, geometries, matters, fields and properties.

    6 I have reached , I was surprised this quantum gravitation in encoding and superimposing the cold dark matter in our standard model, I have just changed the distances because the main codes are farer and so the electromagntism is just emergent but the gravitation is th main chief orchestra, I have also a fith force due to a serie of quantum BHs, so the standard model is like encircled by this gravitation, the 3D spheres so become relevant in their properties like the senses of rotations or others and their oscillations to make this universal balance between gravitation and electromagntism , negentropy entropy, heat cold, + , ....

    7 I consider so this Dark energy like a simple anti gravitational push spherical necessary for this universal spherisation and this dark matter like a matter non baryonic permitting this balance ,

      I think you are ultimately right about a theory of spheres. I think the universe is made of spheres of gravitons that obey the equation,

      [math]x^2 y^2 z^2 -(ct)^2 = 0[/math]

      An continuously flowing, an infinite number of expanding spheres, gravitons, to create our spacetime.

      Hi Jason, thanks, I am persuaded that these 3D coded spheres are our foundamental mathematical and physical objects, but of course it seems difficult to prove them at this moment. I agree about a kind of graviton they are necessary to balance all this standard model, like you can see I have encoded this matter not baryonic in the cold in our nuclei and they permit to create these weakest fields , they are bosons also of spin different, a little bit in the same line of reasoning than these gravitons, thanks for your interest, best regards

      You were right all along! Gravitons are expanding spheres! The idea of the expanding graviton is that there is a chance it can be captured by a particle system. If it is, it behaves like what the wave function is describing. Or is could be the quantum entanglement between two particles. The reason the expanding graviton is a better idea than superstrings or quantum loops is because nobody has ever measured a superstring or a quantum loop. In contrast, quantum entanglements and wave functions are actual parts of physics!