After reading the paper on the origin of space and time, I found myself strongly resonating with the author’s main thesis. The paper emphasizes that spacetime is not a priori background to the universe, but rather an emergent phenomenon arising from deeper physical structures. This is highly consistent with the core view of my Vibrational Vacuity Unified Field Theory: space and time are, in essence, the result of specific distributions and dynamic tunings of the etheric (holographic information) field under certain conditions, rather than independently existing entities.

Regarding space, I see it as a mapping of the etheric field’s information density, fundamental frequency, spin, and other multidimensional parameters onto the physical world. The dimensions and structure of space are entirely determined by how the holographic information of the etheric field is organized and tuned. The paper’s proposal that space can emerge from more fundamental structures directly supports my perspective.

As for time, I have always maintained that it is the evolutionary trajectory of the etheric field’s fundamental frequency—a path length in the parameter space of the holographic information field. The paper’s emphasis on time as an emergent product of quantum structure and information flow aligns perfectly with my understanding that “time is a measure of changes in energy and information states.”

The paper also discusses various theories—such as string theory, quantum gravity, and causal dynamical triangulation—that attempt to explain the emergence of spacetime from more fundamental quantum structures or information units. I would go further and point out that the emergence of spacetime is actually the result of the self-organization of the etheric field’s multidimensional parameters and holographic feedback, highlighting the roles of holography and dynamic tuning.

In addition, I would like to add a few points. First, space and time are not only emergent from the information field, but also possess holographic and nonlocal properties. Any local change in information can, through holographic mechanisms, influence the overall structure of spacetime—this provides a physical basis for explaining phenomena such as quantum entanglement and nonlocal correlations. Furthermore, I believe that the observer’s consciousness itself acts as a higher-order resonance interface of the information field, capable of participating in and even influencing the process of spacetime emergence. This viewpoint offers a new explanatory angle for the relationship between subjective experience, measurement, and physical reality. Moreover, the structure and evolution of spacetime are not static, but are continually adjusted as the parameters of the etheric field dynamically change. Under extreme conditions, spacetime can even “dissolve,” “increase in dimensionality,” or “reorganize,” which provides a theoretical foundation for understanding extreme phenomena such as the early universe, black holes, and singularities.

I believe that the strength of this kind of theory lies in its ability to describe space, time, matter, energy, and consciousness within a unified framework of the etheric field’s holographic information. The relevant formulas can be linked with observational data such as the cosmic microwave background, redshift, and gravitational waves, allowing for testable physical predictions. It also enables dialogue with mainstream theories like string theory and quantum gravity, enriching the mathematical and physical content.

In summary, I see the origin of space and time as the emergent result of the etheric field’s holographic information structure and energy flow. This view not only aligns closely with the “spacetime emergence” concept proposed in the paper, but also further emphasizes the importance of holography, dynamic tuning, nonlocal feedback, and the participatory role of observer consciousness, providing a more complete and profound theoretical foundation for understanding the nature, structure, and evolution of the universe.

Robert McEachern
Rob,

You say that there are 2 original categories: something and nothing. But in order to have a mathematical system, you need 3 things: categories, relationships between the categories, and numbers that apply to the categories. Where are the relationships coming from, and where are the numbers coming from? Where is the mathematical or logical proof that these missing basic mathematical aspects, i.e. relationships and numbers, can “emerge out of pure chaos”?

(And where is this chaos coming from anyway? Because mathematically, the both the thing labelled “chaos”, and the thing labelled “order”, emerge out of underlying, genuine, mathematical and algorithmic order. There is no such thing as order out of chaos: there is only the superficial appearance of order emerging out of pre-existing underlying genuine mathematical and algorithmic order.)

Also, how does the mathematical system know itself? I.e. how come the system has the ability to detect/ distinguish something from nothing; the ability to detect/ distinguish one category from another category, to detect/ distinguish one relationship from another relationship, and the ability to detect/ distinguish one number from another number? As you have acknowledged, a system can’t exist without the ability to detect/ distinguish. I.e. a system can’t exist without a basic type of awareness/ consciousness of itself.

Another issue is: once you’ve got your categories and relationships, why are the numbers moving at all (whether “chaotically” or non “chaotically”)? But it is not just numbers: these numbers apply to the categories. I.e. some aspect of the mathematical system is not only jumping the numbers, but this aspect of the mathematical system is also assigning the numbers to the categories. If the world ever moves in any way, or continues to move in any way, then there needs to be an aspect of the system that causes number movement, and number movement is actually quite a complicated thing because it involves both categories and numbers.

    Robert McEachern
    Yes, it is true that "Reality does not need a mathematical system".

    But like it or not, we continue to symbolically represent the low-level world mathematically because, when the world is measured, and when the numbers that apply to the measured categories are analysed, relationships have been found to exist between the measurable categories. Our only way of trying to understand the low-level world is to talk in terms of these categories, relationships and numbers, and in terms of a mathematical system. However, these categories, relationships and numbers are merely the way we need to think about, and symbolically represent, what actually exists.

    Also, I'm saying that we can logically conclude that it IS necessary for this low-level mathematical system to be able to detect/ distinguish (what we would symbolically represent as) its own actual categories, relationships and numbers from the very large number of possible categories, relationships and numbers that could theoretically, potentially exist. In other words, low-level reality/ the low-level world needs to be able to detect "what is true", and to distinguish what is true from what is not true.

      Lorraine Ford

      "But like it or not, we continue to..."

      Only you and the physicists, continue to ignorantly do that...

      Communications engineers ceased doing that, generations ago; and thereby changed our world, forever...

      Because, 80 years ago, Shannon proved, that when you no longer bother with even trying to "symbolically represent the low-level world" with measurable numbers, and instead, represent it with totally unmeasurable, but PERFECTLY detectable, long sequences of random, white noise, then there is no longer any "measurement problem" whatsoever, no longer any uncertainty in any measured quantity, and no significant possibility of ever making an error in any Yes/NO decision, about whether or not, the sequences being looked for, were, or were not, successfully detected, at the exact location of the detector.

      It is only after you have detected those unmeasurable, noise-encoded symbols, with no errors whatsoever, and only then, that you can start to use mathematics and numbers, without having to worry about all the "measurement" errors, trashing all your subsequent calculations, and thereby inducing generations of quantum physicists to propose all sorts of absurd "interpretations", of their trashed results.

      Mother Nature appears to have discovered this amazing "trick", eons before Shannon ever did. And that is what made it possible for, deterministic "cause and effect" to ever emerge, from an otherwise chaotic environment.

        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:

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

        • ϕ\phi = potential eigenstate

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

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

        • α\alpha = coefficient modulating collapse sensitivity to expectation

        Then:

        Pcollapse=ϕΨ2[1+αE(Fi)]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:
        tn=t0+nδtwhereδt1012,st_n = t_0 + n \cdot \delta t \quad \text{where} \quad \delta t \approx 10^{-12} , \text{s}

        During high-belief collision:

        ΨnΨn,A,Ψn,B\Psi_n \rightarrow \Psi_{n,A}, \Psi_{n,B}

        Each path retroactively generates coherent causal memory per branch.

        Conflict collapse field:
        C=i=1NE(Fi)\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=11+βCS = \frac{1}{1 + \beta \cdot |\mathcal{C}|}

        Higher C\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

        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) = M2/3 (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 kg2/3
          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 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 kg2/3
          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 kg2/3
          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 kg2/3
          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 kg2/3
          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 kg2/3
          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 kg2/3
          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 kg2/3
          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 M2/3 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. M2/3 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) × M2/3 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.

            Robert McEachern
            Could you please stick to the actual subject, not to an analysis of my mind?

            …………………..

            Shannon’s Theory of Communication should more properly be called:

            • “Shannon’s Theory of Communication using man-made, human-devised electronic symbols” or perhaps
            • “Shannon’s Theory of Communication using man-made, human-devised symbols, whether these symbols are written, spoken or electronic”.

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

              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”.

                  Lorraine Ford
                  Explaining "matter" is of little consequence, if matter only behaves chaotically.
                  Shannon explained, not "matter", but a "process", that may not be necessary, but which is sufficient, to enable non-chaotic, deterministic "cause and effect", to emerge into existence, from chaos.

                  In order to perfectly replicate an effect, it is sufficient to perfectly replicate its cause. And perfectly replicating a cause, is what Shannon's theory is ultimately all about.

                    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

                    O(x)=dKdx1r2χ(x)ϵ{O}(x) = \frac{dK}{dx} \cdot \frac{1}{r^2} \cdot \chi(x) \geq \epsilon