Nicholas,

Real physical presence consists only of unified infinite visible surface that is always illuminated by infinite non-surface light. Please stop writing unreal codswallop about supposedly finite invisible quanta.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Absolutely beautiful work here @Sean Carroll http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.08444v1.pdf

/ http://arxiv.org/abs/1606.08444

Now combine H-spaces with lie-algebra and n-dimensional fourier to get space-time complete with wave/particle and the reason for the observable speed-of-light.

The isometric result will astound you as it emerges.

    The works of Garret Lisi The E8 seems interesting but of course it is just a simple mathematical tool.That said the lie algebras are interesting.Like Hopf,Clifford or others.I amasking me what could be the results about my theory of spherisation in inserting the Quantum 3D speres and the serie of volumes correlated with p adic numbers.The dimensions are always in 3D.The lie algebras are a simple 3D tool permitting a fractalisation.That said it is a good tool.But frankly don't say me that it is toe.Regards sky Leach ,fourier analysis and serie can be relevant for the oscillations and fréquences.with of course the good persiodicities and substitutings.The fourier coefficients and the euler formules can be inserted with my humble équations and the three motions of 3D sphères.Now see also The volumes and the central biggest volume and insert the primes.Trigonometry Inside the 3D sphere with the good parametrrs.Convergences must appear in logic if you resect the theorem of developments.Parseval can help.See also that it exists a bridge for gravitation and that oscillations must be relative for this gravity because it is not bosonic nor baryonic.So special relativity, standard model, electromagnetism,heat and thermo are not sufficient so we have a bridge also for the oscillations of the 3D spheres.You like my theory of spherisation Mr Sky?Regards

    You know Mr Sky,I work actually about my spherical algebras (I have invented them like I love maths :) )I search the correct formalism to formalise my theory of spherisation with quantum sphères and cosmological sphères Inside an uniqueuniversal sphere in spherisation optimisation of matter energy on an irreversible entropical Arrow of time.My équations are inserted of course.Thhe serie of uniqueness is a finite serie for the gravitational serie from the singularity.The number is the same in logic at two scales.One produces, theothers encode.But our nuclei do not encode only bosons photons ,particles of gravitational also more far towards our quantum singularities.The planck wall seems interesting to analyse like the zero absolute at 10^-35 m.The bridge is there giving the road towards our quantum BH and their volumes increasing towards the central biggest 3D sphères.The standard model is encircled by gravitation at the two scales, quant and cosmol.Regards

    Operators, theorems,algebras, subalgebras,correct serie, finite or infinite ,....Dirac, Clifford,.......all is a question of good parameters and domains.See the central sphere and my équations with the motions of sphères.The dimensions are in 3D ,its is just a fractal of our 3D from the central Sphere,the number 1.How can we converge and solve the problems of commutativity ?The operators and eigenvalues ?I study actually a work of Harvard about the geometrical algebras.It is interesting.It is always a question of good parameters and domains and axioms of choice.The computing is one thing ,the real universe and its foundamental laws an other.I will continue about this ,I like :) Regards

    The works of Hilbert and Dirac are interesting.I am asking me how I can extrapolate the bridge for this gravitation with my équations.ml² is towards entire entropy and l tends to infinity with the central BH where they are produced.I search the spherical operators and after I must prove them with the others operators and existing theorems.It is not easy in fact.Have you ideas ?Who have ideas ? All ideas arewelcome,we search the correct serie of uniquenss, quant and cosm.The number is the same for th stable gravitational serie.The cosmol serie produces in a simplistic vue and nuclei encode.Spin rotations can be imrpoved with spherical volumes and also orbital.Clifford seems interesting for this research.Cartan,Kac-Moody,Chevalley .....are all interesting Tools if the the spherical 3D volumes are inserted in differenciting spherons and photons.E=mc²+ml² and mlosV=constant.l o and s are the 3 motions of 3D sphères,it coud permit to see this gravitation encircling the standard model.See that ml² is the road towards entire entropy and l tends to infinity to this central sphere ,cosmological where spherons are produced.The 3D spherical volumes are essential it seems tome, now there is a big conclusion at all this reasoning, the photons are not the primordial quantum of E, a photon is encircled by gravitation and the heat and thermo are just a necessary tool for evolution of matter energy.The gravitation is the main chief orchestra because spherons are the main piece...The aethers are gravitational and the aether from the centra BH is the biggest ....The generalisation formalisation normalisation spherisation can be made.Regards

    You knowthe aim is not to break our laws or to insert irrational road.The real relevance is to continue the road quietly towards our singularities and corrletad fields.The gravitation is a wonderful travel towards our truths and truth.

    Yes. The goal is to create a predictive model capable of yielding insight sufficient for engineering technology based on unified predictive outcomes.

    It is interesting Mr Sky, could you tellmemore about your Tools and operators about the binar codes.Simulations and prédictions are relevant for climate or this or that.I am asking for example what could be the results if we make the composting at big global scale more the vegetal multiplication and harmonisation of ecosystems.More of course some adapted solutions for the social comportments or the enterprise comportments polluting.We must change our global system.Now of course simulations are interesting but it is well also to act on ground if I can say.Could yoy tellme more about the predictive algorytms and simulations pleae,it seems interesting.I don't know well computing, Iknow the principle with the cellular automata and binar codes with the turn on turn off and the pixels and the algorytms but in practice, I am not really good in computing.Explain me a little .Regards

    Steve and Sky,

    One real observable Universe must consist only of one unified observable infinite physical surface that is always illuminated by infinite non-surface light. This utterly simple truth is of course completely unscientific.

    Endless conjecture about invisible entities are all unrealistic.

    Joe Fisher, Realist

      It is crazy.I knew that the crazyness is the begining of the wisdom but there you are more far than me Mr Fisher.How can we have détails of your surface ?:)I am going to pray to have détails ....You you speak to God My friend :)

      Well my own model is based on python and c. I'll list some of the tools I use.

      https://www.scipy.org/

      https://www.blender.org - used for importing slices of time as matrices and rendering evolution over time for viewing... working on some custom changes in c for this

      also I use a stochastic programming model. Events are non-deterministic using probability of observation and vector named pipes.

      I use amazon AWS 'extra process' distribution for running suites of tests that require many hundreds of FlOPs. Even then I can only model some of the possible outcomes.

      Steve,

      It is NOT MY DOING. One real observable Universe must consist only of one unified observable infinite physical surface that is always illuminated by infinite non-surface light. This utterly simple truth is of course completely unscientific. BUT SCIENCE DEALS ONLY WITH GUESSWORK ABOUT INVISIBLE ACTIVITY.

      Joe Fisher, Realist

      On Friday June 24, 2016, I announced to the New York Times that Einstein's Theory of Relativity: Special and General, was incorrect, and I submitted documented proof to the newspaper why this was so. This proven important scientific revelation was ignored. At 6 AM EST The New York Times reported that Loretta Lynch, the Attorney General of the United States of America had announced that she would not interfere with the Hillary Clinton private email server FBI investigation (perhaps because Bill Clinton had requested that she not do so when they met privately in Phoenix) and all of the mostly cable news expert talking heads opined this was the most awful thing that the Clintons had ever done in their entire lives.

      Steve,

      Unified infinite surface only has one detail, it is always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

      Joe Fisher, Realist

      It seems very relevant for probabilities and prédictions when we play with parameters.I will learn more,thanks in all case.These stochastic models can be relevant applied to many things.I study a little in the same time.I see that these models, stochastic can be applied to economy or engineering...and even for AI,statistics,probabilities and results can be harmonised.It is fasciating in fact Mr sky.I d like to learn more.Thanks for sharing,I am asking me how we can interpret the creativity and free will with the stochastic models and statistics.The hazardous can be compute like the psychology ?It is intriguing in fact considering AI.Regards

      In the theory of probabilities the events can be or cannot be.p=1/n and we play with the implications due to probabilities of events with p=m/n if it equal to zero of course it not possible for the event A equal to p.Logic.Now if we want to add or X or this or that ....we arrive so at the relevance of hazards and free wil leven if we fgo more far with creativity and gravitational informations but it is an other story.Gauss and Laplace are not sufficient even if their theorems ofprobablities are relevant.It is the same with the theory of bernouilli about numbers.It is intriguing because how can we interpret so the errors when we consider a general dterministic system ?The line time and the hazards in a gravitational point of vue seems far of us about the synchros superimposings or sortings.If the errors and thehazards are a reality for our scales, is it really a reality when we consider these gravitational codes ?It is relative in fact about the categorifications of informations and events correlated with hazards and gravity.And still we don't speak about photons,it is still an other story.The spherical volumes are relevant when we consider the stabilities of informations.Best Regards

      In theory all is predictable if and only if of course all the parameters are encoded.Of course that implies limits of prédictions due to our limits of scales whe we want to predict the quantum scale and the cosmological scale towards the main singularities.The roads are very complex and far of us ,even the numbers are difficult for us to perceive like our imagination.Sometimes I imagine the earth, I travel in the solar system by my mind and I try to see the galaxy with its millions of billions of stars turning around our central supermassive BH,we are limited even with the our mind.That said we can find a kind of universal logic about sphères and their number finite.It is of course for the uniqueness serie.Probably the same at the two scales.It is easier to find the gravitationalserie than to calculate the number of bosonic photonic informations and spheronic of gravitation.It seems not possible.The events and ancodings can be harmonisedof course but frankly it seems so difficult even for a computer.The quantum computing is intriguing in this line of reasoning.The predictons ofour climate is one thing, the prédictions of our universe an other.We must be so humble in front of this immensity above us and these numbers in our quantum series.Some things are predictables, others no at this moment.That said it is relevant for the checked systems permitting to predict the future in economy or engineering or climate.I am curious to see the results if we increase the vegetal multiplication and composting in océans and on grouns,soils.The system can reach the equilibriums, but it is now that we must do it for the gobal ecology.Now hope that with yourspredictions, the future is not finished due to volcans or due to this or that.Because if it is the case, we must now create a Wheel in space and find adapted solutions for all people on this sphere earth.How are we going also to nourrish all,and the water and the jobs, and the energy ???In fact we must change radically our global system now and in accelerating the adapted technologies and inventions.Mars,the wheels in space(furtermore it produces energy and not need of fuel)....We must accelerate all this quicly it seems to me because if you insert all the global actual parameters, frankly I am supposing that results are not good deaR Jedis of the SPHERE.

      I don't believe it is predictable, or rather, it is impossible to know all of the causal frames, since observing them and measuring their state would invariably change their state, which would require that the whole of any mass group be observed at the same time and in such a way that the observation itself causes no change in state, and thus must also include the observer. Since the recording of knowledge requires a state change, there is no possible way for all to be known in advance without changing the state of the whole group and introducing uncertainty.

      The entire model is based on independent causalities for each entangled set (fair to call them lie groups, as they are represented so in the model) within it's own Hilbert space. The expressions of boundaries along our 4-dimensions of space (3) and time (1) are carried merely by the propagation of the wave form harmonic. The internal state change can be predicted only insofar as probability mechanics can take us based on the knowledge of the properties of the closed set. That would be a function of its stable mass.

      Indeed ,it is intersting for the categorifications of harmonic wave forms and so the informations.The spherical volumes are relevant for the steps and groups.

      Algorythms can be applied respecting our mathematical laws peritting to sort,to superimpose or to synchronise.The spherical volumes are important it seems to me humbly.The internal state of these volumes can permit to see the good predictionswhen these volumes are respected with theirintrinsic laws ,deterministic if I can say with of cours the uncertainty principle.The functions appear.

      You say Since the recording of knowledge requires a state change, there is no possible way for all to be known in advance without changing the state of the whole group and introducing uncertainty.Indeed ,it is logic in fact simply.And like we are not the creators of this universal 3D sphère and its quant and cosm sphères turning still and always towards this eternity ,so we must accept our human limits.That said we appraoch all days but we are still so far of all our universal laws and its détails.The universal mechanic, newtonian for me and gravitational ,is a so incredibla puzzle in its détails that we must accept humbly our human limits.That said our postulats and équations permit to write the universal partition of spherisation.Thanks for sharing Mr Sky.Could you predict if my theory of spherisation will be inserted in computing If my equaions are correct, it is relevant in all humility.Best Regards