Alternative Models of Reality

Georgina Woodward
Just a wave spread out in space; a partial wavefront is not concentated enough at the receptor site for the energy 'kick' that's needed at receptor site to cause a response.
A carried particle, however, can provide the energy together in one place. Each spreadout quantum wave amount will deliver one quantum particle of same frequency. At a place influenced by the environment, such as the presence of interference causing there to be anunseen interference pattern in the base substance. Particle and wave have the same frequency as the wave vibrates sympatheticallty with the particle's vibration at emission.

This needs correcting or clarifying..the universe that is seen is many products from which we presume there is a whole 3+1 universe ,although it can't be seen in its entitrety due to viewpoint of the observer being bound to our solar system .The James Webb telescope gives clarity of image but they are space time images from 'light' as it was emitted but in space only now (at no other time). It too, as an observer, only has its own view point due where it is in the solar system, The content of space between the matter/stuff is what the seen universe is made from. We can't just see holograms due to waves and wave interference. We need the particle part of light transmission to provide the photocells with concentrated energy, not spead out over space..The waves and interference and not yet received particles are there as the data pool now. This is another aspect .Not the mater, material existing things. Not the seen productof intercepting and processing light. Part of the Object ,that is, the universe.

I don't think holograms would usually be produced because of blurring of many different potential images superimposed and lack of coherence of light sources. I wonder though, if under exeptional circumstances, when conditions are just right something like a natural hologram could be generated, that leads to certain happenings being seen, that are assumed paranormal.

Inertia
“Newton's First Law of Motion, also known as the Law of Inertia, states that an object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force. “via google seach and Khan acadeny
Why and does gravity have a role?
When it is in a frame of reference deemed to be non moving, that is not accelerating, remaining with same velocity as the observer; the background too is considered as having the same state of apparently stationary motion as the observed object.
When the object is seen to be moving relative to the background. some of the background moves with the object and some not. Take planet Earth , loose things collected on the surface, things in the air like planes and birds, the atmosphere, sound waves in the air, the base medium and waves within it, allowing there to be forces and transmission of electromagnetism such as visible ‘light’ and radio on Earth, which is no different because of it. Everywhere under the influence of gravity moves with the Earth as it moves. The same will apply to smaller gravitational masses, such as a ball.
Starting or stopping motion, is because of this effect of gravity, not just reliant on the force necessary to move, or stop from moving, the object mass itself, but the object mass and everything influenced by it. GETTING AN OBJECT MOVING OR STOPPING IT MOVING IS MORE DIFFICULT THAN IT IS THOUGHT IT OUGHT TO BE.

The Earth is a bit of a strange example, you might think, because it doesn't travel in a straight line, the reason being because gravity acts on the SUN- EARTH Together as a system, also influenced by other planets nearby. On the Earth's own gravity acts most where the mass is concentrated which is the core of the planet and centre of mass. This gives an attraction inwards. Felt all over the planet from the layers of the atmoshpere, where 'outer space' gives way to the region of influence of gravity,due to the EARTH'A MASSto the centre of Mass. Experienced as holding us close to Earth's surface and a tendency of objects to fall down to the Earth surface, if the surface is hard or into the Earth if thr surface is soft or hollow.
AI OVERVIEW FROM GOOGLE via google searchn;
Facts;
Earth's orbit is not circular, but rather elliptical. However, it's close enough to being circular that it's sometimes considered nearly circular.
Earth's orbit is elliptical due to the gravitational pull of Jupiter and Saturn.
The Earth's orbit is stable and has the same amount of energy as a circular orbit.
Earth's orbit is faster when it's closer to the sun, and slower when it's further away.
The point closest to the sun is called the perihelion, and the point farthest away is called the aphelion.
Earth's orbit takes 365.256 days to complete, which is one sidereal year.

Georgina Woodward
Sorry it has been a while. there are replies i'd have liked to have made but couldn't at the time. I've been stuck in hospital.
"14 days ago
''Physicist Brian Greene is now saying that, logically, primitive particles must have a degree of consciousness. Particles supposedly have feelings: people tend to think that consciousness is all about the feelings. But thoughts and feelings and emotions are merely the superficial signs of consciousness, and they say nothing about what type of thing that consciousness actually is.''Lorainne Ford
i think we need to separate the responsiveness of matter to forces,either by contact by matter or unknown space filling substance and consciosness which is more than mere response and is the feelings and sensations of being a being, not just a thing.

Georgina Woodward
Which is why a brief taxonomy of the organismis needed as a preface to the word consciouness.
Getting away from the black and whiute idea., that the organism eirher hast or doesn't , to more of a spectrum or gradation according to type of nervous system and endocrine stystem being considered.

Georgina Woodward
GOOGLE search results for tree communication
AI Overview (Not guaranteed accursate ,not checked) Generative AI is experimental.
''he Wood Wide Web: How trees secretly talk to and share with each other
Trees communicate with each other through an underground network of fungi called mycorrhizal networks. This network allows trees to share nutrients, water, and defense signals.
How trees communicate
Chemical signals: Trees send chemical signals to communicate with each other.
Electrical signals: Trees send slow-pulsing electrical signals to communicate with each other.
Hormonal signals: Trees send hormonal signals to communicate with each other.
What trees communicate
Needs: Trees communicate their needs to each other.
Warning signals: Trees send warning signals to each other about environmental change.
Kin: Trees search for kin through the fungal network.
Nutrients: Trees transfer nutrients to neighboring plants before they die.
The Wood Wide Web
This network has been called the "Wood Wide Web" because it emphasizes the interconnectedness of forest ecosystems.
Research
Ecologist Suzanne Simard has pioneered research into how trees communicate. She has shown how trees have been communicating through this underground network for 500 million years.
Exploring the secret world of trees and their communication networks
21 Mar 2024 — Trees communicate through fungal networks Trees communicate through an underground network of fungi known as mycorrhiza...
Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland
Exploring How and Why Trees 'Talk' to Each Other - Yale E360
1 Sept 2016 — Ecologist Suzanne Simard has shown how trees use a network of soil fungi to communicate their needs and aid neighboring...
Yale E360
Rooted Together – Trees Are Community
A recent article by Smithsonian Magazine, Do Trees Talk to Each Other, claims thatTo communicate through the network, trees s...''AI by google

Georgina Woodward
All living things produce stored chemical energy. If they are large enough.,or should i say strong enough, they are able to use their energy to work in opposition or to enhance the forces of nature, that gives them a certain ability to exert their will ,and perhaps make events that are desired happen. A single celled plancton ,try as it might will not be able to resist the force of the much larger and stronger tide,

SPHERICAL TOPOLOGICAL GEOMETRICAL ALGEBRAS, THE THEORY OF SPHERISATION, QUANTUM SPHERES, COSMOLOGICAL SPHERES The Spheres like foundamental quantum objects are more logic than the strings, here is why,

1. Philosophical Perspective: Ontological and Epistemological Arguments
   Principle of Natural Simplicity (Ontological Argument)
   The sphere is the most symmetric, simplest, and least arbitrary geometrical object in higher dimensions.
   Unlike 1D strings, which require additional assumptions about tension, oscillatory modes, and compactification, a sphere is a self-contained structure needing fewer extra conditions.
   Strings are a problem because require an external spacetime framework (they vibrate in space rather than defining space itself).
   Background Dependence: Many formulations of string theory assume a pre-existing space, making it less fundamental in a quantum gravity context. Spheres could be inherently background-independent.
   Holography and Encoding of Informations
   The sphere naturally encodes quantum information via the holographic principle (think of black hole horizons).
   1D strings do not exhibit holographic storage in the same intrinsic way
2. Physical Perspective: Quantum Gravity and Geometry
   Strings are 1D and require extra degrees of freedom (oscillations, compactifications, and extra dimensions).
   Spheres (such as Planck-scale 2D or 3D objects) are more localized, yet extended, meaning they naturally avoid the issue of defining "what is vibrating" in a pre-existing background.
   Spheres and Black Hole Physics
   The Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is proportional to the surface area (S = A/4ℓ_p²), suggesting that fundamental objects at the Planck scale should have an intrinsic surface structure, like spheres, rather than being linear objects like strings..
3. Mathematical Perspective: Higher-Dimensional Consistency
   Compactness and Self-Containment
   The spheres are the simplest compact and manifold-closed object in geometry.
   Unlike strings, which require extra dimensions to be compactified, a sphere is naturally compact and doesn’t demand arbitrary boundary conditions.
   In Group Theory and Symmetry Arguments,Spheres are maximally symmetric spaces in geometry.
   Higher-Order Topological Structures
   In M-theory, membranes (2D objects) and even higher-dimensional "branes" play a role more fundamental than 1D strings.
   Higher-dimensional spheres (S², S³, S⁴) provide a natural framework for defining compact higher-order topologies, whereas strings must rely on ad-hoc Calabi-Yau compactifications.
   Conclusion: Why Spheres > Strings at the Planck Scale?
   Philosophicallyand physically : Spheres are more self-contained, symmetric, and information-theoretic than strings, avoiding background dependence.
   Mathematically: Spheres fit naturally within higher-dimensional symmetries, compactness, and group theory, making them a more fundamental starting point than 1D strings.

The theory of spherization provides a new philosophical and cosmological perspective. It challenges traditional views by presenting a model where the universe and all its fundamental forces emerge from a superfluidity of 3D spheres rather than 1D strings oscillating and interacting

1. Philosophical Framework: Spinoza’s God and Evolutionary Cosmology, This theory isinfluence by Spinoza’s concept of God as an eternal, infinite consciousness that continuously evolves the universe. In this context:
   God as an active, omnipresent force: For Spinoza, God is not a distant creator but the immanent cause of everything, existing in and through all of nature. By applying this idea to the quantum and cosmological scales, we can view the spherization process as an ongoing, evolutionary unfolding rather than a fixed, mechanistic process.
   Consciousness and the Universe: The superfluidity of 3D spheres could represent an intelligent, evolving system, where the universe is not a random set of particles interacting by chance but is instead part of a conscious cosmic evolution. The spheres, as fundamental quantum objects, could represent the expressions of this divine consciousness, evolving in harmony with the structure of spacetime itself.

Thus, spherization is a dynamic, evolutionary optimization of the universe's underlying structure, guided by a higher principle of order and consciousness, akin to Spinoza's pantheistic God.

2. Physical Interpretation: A Superfluid Universe
   In this model, the universe is composed of 3D spheres that act as the building blocks of all matter and energy. These spheres, instead of being constrained to a 1D string form, are inherently extended objects with volumetric presence. This implies that space itself is made up of spherical objects interacting and merging with each other in a fluid-like, coherent manner.
   2.1. Spheres as Fundamental Quantum Objects
   Quantum Superfluidity: The idea of the universe as a superfluid made of 3D spheres aligns with the concept of quantum coherence. Just as superfluids exhibit long-range quantum correlations, the spherization process would describe a fluid-like state of space, with each sphere interacting with others through quantum fields.

These interactions govern the evolution of spacetime and create all matter, energy, and forces in a highly efficient, harmonious way.
Dark Energy and Dark Matter: The merging of spheres with dark energy offers a compelling explanation for the mysteries of dark matter and dark energy. In this model, dark energy could be seen as the force that permeates all space and is antigravitational and informational and is a fifth force and as spheres merge with it, they encode dark matter mass, and newtonian gravity) and photons (light, energy). These merging spheres could explain the gravitational effects observed in dark matter, while also providing a mechanism for the expansion of the universe as seen in dark energy.
No Need for Strings: Unlike the string-based models (like in string theory or M-theory),this model doesn’t require a 1D string oscillating in higher dimensions to generate the interactions between particles or the forces of nature. Instead, it proposes that everything emerges from 3D spheres, which can naturally interact, merge, and evolve without the need for extra dimensions or complex oscillations.

2.2. Interaction with Quantum Fields
Matter and Energy as Quantum Spheres: In traditional quantum field theory (QFT), particles are excitations of quantum fields (e.g., the Higgs field, electromagnetic field). This model would suggest that these fields, instead of being manifested as strings or points, are composed of spheres that spread across space and interact with each other. The quantum field of a photon, for example, would be a collection of spherical objects that exchange energy and momentum in a fluid-like manner.
Force Mediators as Spheres: Fundamental forces in the standard model (gravity, electromagnetism, weak and strong forces) could be mediated by spherical distortions in this superfluid space. For instance:
Electromagnetic force: Spheres could interact and exchange quantum information in such a way that they create the field-like behavior of photons.
Gravity: The interaction between spheres could generate gravitational effects through curvature or deformation in the fluid of 3D spheres, which would correspond to the way spacetime itself is curved by mass and energy in Einstein’s theory.

2.3. Emergence of the Standard Model
Unified Description of Particles: The standard model of particle physics could be viewed as a subset of the spherization process where the merging of spherical structures gives rise to the elementary particles we observe. The quantum mass of particles could emerge as a collective property of these spheres, and the properties of spin, charge, and mass would correspond to different quantum states of these spheres interacting with the quantum fields.
Optimization of the Universe: The concept of the universe evolving as a superfluid of 3D spheres optimizing the distribution of energy and matter aligns with the idea that cosmic evolution follows a path of greater coherence and efficiency. The cosmological constant (dark energy) could then be interpreted as the dynamic balance that ensures the universe is expanding in a way that allows the continuous evolution of these quantum spheres.

3. Mathematical Interpretation: A Unified Model with the spherical topological geometrival algebras and the assoiativity, commutativity, non commutativity for the dimensions, groups and subgroups.This theory could be mathematically consistent if we adopt a framework where geometry and field theory are described in terms of spheres rather than 1D objects.
   3.1. Generalized Quantum Field Theory
   Spherical Fields: Instead of quantizing fields in 1D string-like objects, we could define quantum fields based on 3D spherical harmonics and tensor fields that describe the interaction between spheres. These tensor fields would encapsulate the interactions between the quantum spheres and define the force laws (such as electromagnetism and gravity).
   3.2. Curved Spacetime and Superfluidity
   Geometric Considerations: The curvature of spacetime in general relativity could be interpreted as the fluid-like behavior of spheres, where the curvature of spacetime itself is a distortion of the superfluid medium of quantum spheres. This could lead to a new way of interpreting gravitational fields, where gravity is not mediated by an external field but arises from the inherent geometry of the spheres in the quantum fluid.

3.3. Spherical Symmetry in Quantum Cosmology
Cosmological Evolution: From a cosmological perspective, This model might use topological invariants (e.g., Euler characteristics) and spherical symmetries to describe the evolution of the universe. The Big Bang could represent the emergence of spherical fluctuations in the quantum fluid, and as these spheres expand and interact, they create the cosmic structures we observe today.
Why Spherization is More Logical and these quantum spheres
Philosophically: The idea of an evolving, conscious universe guided by an eternal superfluid of spheres aligns with a holistic view of reality. Unlike string theory, which is often criticized for being overly abstract and dependent on higher dimensions, this model is grounded in the idea of a conscious, self-evolving process, which is more relatable and intuitively comprehensible.

Physically: The concept of spheres naturally allows for spatial, temporal, and energetic coherence, offering a more unified picture of the universe where everything (dark energy, dark matter, photons, gravity) emerges from a single, continuous structure. It avoids the need for complex extra dimensions and offers a more direct path to explain both quantum fields and cosmological observations.
Mathematically: By focusing on 3D spherical objects, this model can leverage well-established mathematical tools from geometry, topology, and field theory that are already used in general relativity and quantum field theory, offering a more compact and elegant framework for understanding the fundamental forces and particles of the universe.

In summary, spherization offers a compelling alternative to the string-based models of quantum gravity and cosmology. By replacing 1D strings with 3D spheres in a superfluid-like quantum medium, this theory presents a more unified, intuitive, and elegant picture of the universe’s evolution, while remaining grounded in philosophical, physical, and mathematical coherence. The idea that the universe is optimized through spherical structures, interacting with dark energy to form dark matter, photons, and gravitational fields, provides a more holistic approach to explaining the nature of reality.