On the computability of the cosmic matter density from first principles by Shawn Halayka

Shawn Halayka

I made a short PDF about the collapse of the system-wide edge length histogram:

Shawn Halayka

Shawn Halayka re-uploaded the file Halayka_bezier_escape.pdf for the essay entitled "On the computability of the cosmic matter density from first principles" on 2020-03-19 22:21:26 UTC.

Shawn Halayka

The essay has been replaced.

The new title is 'On the computability of the cosmic dark matter density from first principles'.

The new abstract is 'The tetrahedral tessellation of space is considered for the 3-sphere. It is found that there is a dark matter density $Omega_{DM} = 0.284$ associated with the curvature of the 3-sphere.'

Shawn Halayka

This was fixed in version 2.0.

Shawn Halayka

This was fixed in version 2.0.

Shawn Halayka

This was fixed in version 2.0.

Shawn Halayka

This was fixed in version 2.0.

Paul Butler

This is a copy of my comment to you in response to your comment to me on my paper's site on Mar. 16, 2020.

Dear Shawn,

I looked at your paper and in it you express a desire to understand the density of dark matter. I presently concentrate on the structure of normal matter and once that is understood it is then possible to get an understanding of what is actually being detected and being interpreted as dark matter and how that works. That being said, gravity is a large scale field generated at the lowest level by the cyclical flow of field particles as they are channeled through matter particles by the three-dimensional enclosed cyclical motion path of the photon that is contained to travel through that path by the particles fifth- dimensional motion's cyclical transfer of motion into each of the particle's lower three dimensions, which causes the photon's motion path to change from a straight line path in some direction at the speed of light to a curved three-dimensional enclosed path, which we call a matter particle. This flow of field particles through the matter particle is modulated by the photon's fourth-dimensional motion, which effectively causes it to vary from a zero-field flow density to a maximum flow density and back to a zero density in a continuous cyclical pattern. The net effect of this is to create a series of field particle spheres outward from the surface of the matter particle that vary from a zero density to a maximum density and then back to a zero density as you travel either directly toward the particle from any direction or away from the surface of the particle in any direction. The field flow through the matter particle has an input on one side of the particle and an output on the other side, but the input and output continually change their positions on the particle's surface as they follow the photon as it travels around its enclosed three-dimensional path. This field is the matter particle's internal field and it is what keeps matter particles in the nucleus of an atom from directly interacting with each other and the variable density field spheres make up the matter particle's external field structure. The innermost high-density sphere contains the matter particles of an atom and keeps them from escaping. The other spheres capture and contain electrons in the low-density areas between the high-density spheres. When two protons approach each other with enough kinetic motion to pass though each other's external fields into the center low density area, but do not have enough kinetic motion to go back out through the other side of the external field spheres, their external fields combine together to form a single external field around them and they are contained by the innermost high-density field sphere of this external field. Thus, an atom is born. When two atoms that have outer electron spheres that are not filled come together to form a molecule, their outer field spheres are joined together down to and including their outer electron spheres. This allows the outer electrons to flow between the two atoms, which aids in the joining of the atoms together into a molecule. Larger scale fields are also created that keep larger scale objects joined together to form them into larger structures. Even extremely large structures, such as galaxies contain large scale field structures as can be seen in the arms of spiral galaxies, etc. Gravity fields are merely extensions of these large-scale field structures. As you can see there are many cyclical processes that take place in the production of field structures from those at the matter particle scale to those at the galaxy level and beyond. And, yes, when these processes interact with each other they do cause changes in the motions of the entities involved.

Time is not a dimension as many believe. It is merely a comparison of motions, which may contain different motion amplitudes (speeds) in their passage through distances. We live in a motion continuum. All of the field particles, energy photons, and matter particles are composed completely of motions. We always live in the present, which is the current positions of all of the motions in the universe. The past is all of the sets of motions that were once the current motions, but they no longer exist because all of the motions have now moved from those past positions to their current present positions, so you cannot go back into the past. The future is all of the sets of motions that do not yet exist, but will exist when the motions have moved from where they are now in the present into one of those future sets of positions. You cannot go into the future because the motions aren't yet positioned into those places. When you begin to look at the complexities that you would get into if there were actually a time dimension it soon becomes clear that it would be impractical. As an example, if any one motion in the whole universe changed from one position in space to its next position, there would have to be a whole new complete copy of the universe made to store that time when that motion change occurred to allow anyone to go back or forward in time to when those specific motion conditions existed. This would produce at least an almost infinite number of universe copies. Where would all of the motion come from to produce these universe copies? If all of them were produced at the beginning of the creation, then we have no free choice because we are just parts of the frames of a form of movie. In order to be able to go into the future, all of those future motion condition sets would need to already be there from the beginning, so a very early time traveler could go to anywhere in the future. There are, of course, a great many more such problems with the concept, but I will stop there for now.

I will give you one interesting concept to ponder on, however. As you increase the kinetic motion of a matter object to nearer and nearer the speed of light more and more of that kinetic motion gets transferred to the matter particle's fourth and fifth dimensional motions. The increase in the fourth-dimension motion increases the frequencies and decreases the wavelengths of the photons in the matter particles. The increase in the fifth-dimensional motion increases the curvature of the photons as they travel in their enclosed paths, thus resulting in the particles getting smaller. If you traveled fast enough to become one tenth of your normal size and you took a measuring stick with you, you can see how a foot to you would be much smaller than it was before you started increasing your speed. Since time is measured in one way or another by motion through a distance, you would also measure time differently.

With Love,

Paul

Shawn Halayka

Dear Paul,

Thank you so much for reading my paper, and for sharing your thoughts.

I will read your post again and again until I fully understand it. Once I understand, I'll send you a reply. :)

- Shawn

Paul Butler

This is a copy of my comment to you in response to your comments to me on my paper's page on Mar. 22, 2020.

Dear Shawn,

I looked at the papers at the link that you provided to me, but they did not mention time. They were all different iterations on the topic "The curvature and dimension of a closed surface".

I may be somewhat familiar with the "light clock experiment", but tell me how you understand it to be done and the outcome results and your interpretation of what the results tell us.

With Love,

Paul

Paul Butler

This is a copy of my comment to you in response to your comments to me on my paper's page on Mar. 23, 2020.

Dear Shawn,

It is true that there was no time at the beginning of the universe because time is a measure of motion through a distance (D= MT, Where D= distance, M= motion content or speed, and T=time, so, T=D/M. Instead of using a rate such as D/T like miles per hour, which includes time in it also, I use a standard motion content for comparison. You could choose for convenience a unit of motion content that equals a familiar current unit like 1 mile per hour to equal 1 unit of motion content. I call a motion's motion content its motion amplitude as that expresses its quantity value within the overall range of motions. So more correctly M= motion amplitude. If all motions contained the same motion amplitude, there would be no need to consider time at all. If someone asked how long it took you to get to a meeting with him, you could just say five miles because all trips of five miles distance would be equal. Time is mainly needed to compare motions of different amplitudes. That is why until motions were introduced into the universe there would be no time because time would= distance, which might have existed in the dimensional structure divided by motion content, which would be zero. Any number divided by zero=zero. Time would, therefore, = zero. It is easy to see that time is not some self-existent entity because it requires a spatial system with at least one dimension for it to contain distance and motion within that spatial system to exist and as I mentioned earlier it is of no practical use unless the motions do not all contain the same motion amplitude. This means there must be at least two motions of different motion amplitudes for time to be useful. As you can see, there is no need to consider time as being a separate dimension. No one has been able to go back in or forward in time to bring anything back or to even look into the past or the future from the present. There is no real observable evidence of time being a dimension. Things like the light clock experiment do not show going back or forward in time, they merely show a difference in the measurement of time due to a change in distance. As a matter particle's velocity increases toward the speed of light, some of the added motion is transferred to its fourth and fifth dimensional motions. The fifth dimensional motion is important here because it determines the curvature of the photon that is traveling the cyclical three-dimensional path that creates the matter particle. The greater the fifth dimensional motion is, the greater is the curvature of the photon's path. This effectively makes the matter particle smaller. This means that any large-scale object composed of matter particles also becomes smaller. Someone on such an object would still measure the speed of light as about 186,000 miles per second, but his miles would be smaller than it would be for the observer that is not traveling. Energy photons and field particles do not contain the fifth vector velocity, so they are not affected in this way. If a person were to look at a beam of photons that were all of the same frequency and then speed up toward the speed of light, he would see that the frequency of the photons in the beam was decreasing because he would be getting smaller compared to their wavelength. There would also be changes in his relationship to fields, but I won't go into that at this time, but it is important to understand in the long run. That is all that I can give out on that topic for now, so I will have to hope you can figure it out for yourself from here. Just remember that a slowdown in the mechanics of a clock does not equal proof of a time dimension. If there were a time dimension it would have to contain complete copies of the universe for every change that occurs in any motion anywhere in the universe. All of these copies would need to have been created in the beginning in order for anyone to be able to travel to anywhere in the past or the future. This means that every motion that we make in our lives is already recorded in the time dimension, Therefore, we have no free will or ability to do anything except what is already recorded. This could only occur if it was preplanned by someone with great intelligence and power. Which would mean that God does exist and created it. Not only that, for him to not only create the very large universe that we see, but also to create an almost infinite number of copies of it with just one motion's position changed in each of them from the previous one, he would have to be very great to be able to control the manufacturing of it and to supply all of that material to build it. There would also need to be other mechanisms to control the sequencing through the universe copies from the beginning to the end, since we don't see all of the universe copies or frames that we are in at once, but just sequence through them from beginning to the end. Since we don't see things just popping in and out of existence randomly, but all things that we see move, do so in an orderly manner that we can measure, etc., the sequencing has to be of whole frames in order into and then out of what we call reality. Since we don't normally see things randomly speed up or slowdown the sequencing through frames must continue at the same rate. Since the sequencing is of whole frames, there would be no way to separate the motions that you are made of from the frame that you would be in at any point in the sequence and go to any other frame. If in some way you could do that, the frame that you went to would not be activated by the sequencer, so it would be a still frame. If in some way you could change anything in that copy, it would not change anything in other copies because they would not be joined except by the sequencer. if you went into the past, the sequencer would not go there again. If you went into the future it might change things when the sequencer got to that frame, but they would be changed back when the next frame was displayed. There are many hypotheses about these things, but I have not seen any that would actually work. Remember that a satellite that shows slower time has not disappeared and gone back to the past and then later come back to the present, but has continued to be in the present and the slow down is just due to its greater velocity. This means that there is something about traveling at a greater velocity that slows down the motions of things that travel that fast. Of course, the time dimension concept goes contrary to the concept that nature choses the easiest and most direct path to accomplish anything. A motion continuum is much simpler and more direct and certainly requires much less material to build.

Paul

Steve Dufourny

Hello Mr Halayka,

Interesting that you speak about the spheres, you could like my theory of spherisation, an optimisation evolution of the universal sphere or future sphere with coded 3D quantum spheres and cosmological spheres, don t hesitate to ask details, I have improved a lot my theory since more than 10 years and mainly here on FQXi, I have shared it on Facebook also. I formalise all this puzzle with the mathematics also that I study all Days. These 3D spheres, spheroids, ellipsoids seem foundamental at all scales and it become relevant when we superimpose 3 E8 with finite series of 3D spheres replacing the points or strings of the geometrical algebras, one main coded E8 for the vacuum space, and the two others for the fuelds if I can say, the photons and the Dark matter cold, that permits to create all geonetries, topologies, properties of matters with the poincare conjecture, the lie derivatives, the thurston geometrisation conjecture, the Ricci flow, the Hamilton Ricci flow, the assymetric Ricci flow that I have invented for the unique things, the topological and euclidiam spaces, this and that in maths. The deformations of 3D spheres seem relevant like their properties , angles, senses of rotations, densities, volumes, motions, moments, this and that, we can rank them when we consider specific finite series at this planck scale, coded having the same finite number than our cosmological spheres, they play between the zero absolute and the planck temperature for me and they distribute in function of coded insider the particles, see the difference with the strings at this planck scale and the 1D main Cosmic field creating the physicality, I dont consider that all is Waves but that the codeds are inside the particles in a superfluid aether gravitationa vacuum, the Waves particles duality is respected also because they oscillate and are in a superfluid in contact.

Regards

Shawn Halayka

Dear Steve,

Thank you for your comments.

I'm not really familiar with the mathematics of which you speak. I'm afraid that I"m at a loss for words about some of the more complicated maths that you write about. :(

In any case, thanks again for reading my essay. I really appreciate it.

- Shawn

Steve Dufourny

You are welcome,

these Tools are not very complicated generally. The E8 is an exceptional Lie Group, you can see its geometry on internet, it is relevant. It is a geometrical algebras in fact and a good tool to rank. It is utilised in strings theory also and for the geometrodynamics with points, they permit to better understand the topologies and geonetries.

The poincare conjecture is a conjecture about the sphere and the charcterizations if I can say and it is about the homeomorphisms of 3 sphere , perelman has proved this conjecture and it is relevant about the deformations of spheres. I consider it important in my theory.

The lie derivatives are for the vectors fields and tensors fields,the Lie derivative is the differential of the representation of the diffeomorphism group on tensor fields,and they are correlated with Lie algebras, so see also the links with the E8 and my fractal of spheres considering the finite primordial series and the 3 E8. The spinors can be correlated also.

The topological spaces are a set of points and if you consider the spheres instead of points for the E8 , that becomes relevant for the convergences topological and geonetrical and even algebrical. You can study the works of Euler also, they are relevant and permit to converge like the works of Gauss about the curved spaces.

The euclidian space is a classical geometry simply and that becomes very relevant considering the 3D , that converges with the topological spaces, here we consider mainly the angles, distances, lenghts and when you converge with the other Tools that I have cited, it becomes very relevant to rank generally the spheres.

The Ricci flow is about a kind of deformation of spheres and I consider mainly the 3D spheres , Hamilton is relevant for this Ricci flow and it is the tool mainly utilised by Perelman to prove the poincare conjecture. The relevance in my model is that we can create all geonetries with these spheres in 3D and also we consider a main intrinsic code inside the particles , it is totally different than for the strings considering a main field and strings at this planck scale creating all our geonetries, topologies, properties of matters.The codes are inside the gfinite series, primordial of these 3 E8.

Hope that helps, don t hesitate to ask questions,

regards

Shawn Halayka

Hi Steve,

Thanks for your enlightening words. I am interested in these things that you talk about. Why a sphere? Why not a string; isn't that what string theorists do is make sure that a particle has some extent at the most fundamental level?

This is kind of what my model is. If the string is of the Planck scale in diameter, then the waves upon that string must be sub-Planckian. My math is good for modelling these waves, because my model is specifically designed to tessellate sub-Planckian detail.

- Shawn

Steve Dufourny

Hi,

I repect the strings theorist but I have remarked that it was like a fashion like also the fact to consider only photons like primordial essence. Maybe Einstein and Witten have created a kind of prison for the thinkers and they don t Think beyond the box, I consider 3D coded spheres in my model , but we cannot affirm in fact, nor me nor the strings theorists. The main problem is philosophical about the origin of our universe. The strings, Branes consider that all come from Waves, fields like if something that we cannot define oscillate the photons and strings to create the topologies, geometries and properties of matters, I see diffrently in my model considering these particles coded like a superfluid sent from the cosmological central sphre, it is there for me that this infinite energy, this thing that we cannot define transforms the energy in matters, it codes there at this center, but I cannot affirm, the same for the strings theorists, they cannot affirm or the same for the points and geometrodynamics. The main foundamental problem is philosophical about the main cause, origin and about these foundamental mathematical and physical objects at this planck scale. It d be very odd to pretend that we know, the only one thing that we can after all is to understand our physicality in accepting our limitations with humility, it is a kind of unpredictability, general of our physicality.

Regards

Shawn Halayka

Dear Steve,

Thanks again for your words.

When you say sphere, you're talking about a 2-sphere, right? Or...?

- Shawn

Shawn Halayka

P.S. Do you have an essay submission? I can't find you on the page.

Steve Dufourny

You are welcome, not really ,3D spheres mainly and we can play in maths with the homotopy groups of spheres and the hopf fibrations but my main reasoning is about the deformations mainly of 3D spheres with the Ricci flow intrinsic with the codes inside these particles.

Regards

Steve Dufourny

For the essay, I don t know, maybe I will do it, I have some ideas but I am not well organised lol , but if I focus maybe yes ,

Shawn Halayka

Well, if you do write an essay, please make sure that it has lots of images. If you need help with that, I know OpenGL. :D

- Shawn

Steve Dufourny

Hi, Ok thanks,I will tell you if necessary , I don t know if I will do it , my girlfriend insists , maybe indeed I must do it , regards

« Previous Page Next Page »