the same for what is the dark matter and the dark energy, we have no proof of what they are really, we have just models and ideas, assumptions. We have not solved the QG, the gluons problems, the constant cosmological problem, this and that, in fact it is mainly due to this prison that I explained, we must think beyond the box of this GR and photons alone, I don t understand what is the problem but maybe the thinkers forget to see farer than all this.

You speak about the renormalisation of this QG, you see well that we cannot sort the divergences and these3 infinities if wqe consider the GR and photons, the problem is to consider like I said this pseudo riemanian variety and the GR and the fact to consider that these gravitons are the quanta of these gravitational waves. The problem is philosophical in trying to unify G c and h and in considering the gravitation like a curvature of this spacetime like a deformation of this spacetime due to a energetical sources and so in the case of gravitons like quanta of these gravit waves so more you add gravitons more the curvature appears but it is not possible simply philosophically and in a pure renromalisation point of vue because they interact with themselves infinite;lly and all has been tries. That implies that this QG has nothing to do with our actual QFT and the works of feynman or dirac shall not change the fact this non renormalibility.

It is the same with the singularities for example they don t exist in fact and the confusion is still due to this GR like general primary essence . The same for the planck scale wich is a mathematical extrapolation simply where the laws are broken, so the aim is not to unify G c and h, it is more deep than this , and this DM and DE are there to help.

PS the foundamental problem is so the non renormalisation due to fact all source of E creates so consiedring this GR a gravitational field and so these gravitons interact with themselves at infinitelly and all mathematical tools invencted to solve this even the nmon commutativity cannot solve the problem simply because the general philosophy is false , are you conscious of this.

If you told me that thees biphotons , the gravitons have been renormalised steve D , see this proof mathematical where I have corrected the divergences and where this quantization appears, I could accept, but no , nobody has proved this. And furthermore I repeat , the non sense for me is to consider this GR like I told you with the gravitons like the quanta of gravit waves but also to consider these gravitons massless, it is purelly not possible considering our standard model , and it is really this interpretation of Einstein the problem , einstein if for observationsat high velocoties, he has never told that newton was false.

Well... it seems you are really triggered by my butt-simple quantum gravity. Once again, since biphotons are what a gravity graviton is, renormalization is no longer an issue.

Renormalization is only an issue in space and time, not in matter and action. Gravity affect space and time and so the singularity that is a spacetime graviton goes to infinite energies. A matter-action graviton does not have this problem because in matter action coordinates, the equivalence of energy and matter is implicit.

Space and time do not really exist in matter action, just quantum phase exists, and so there is Lorentz invariance.

The real issue is how to test my bold theory of everything. Fortunately, Science will very soon have the tools needed to measure the collapsing matter-action universe.The Standard Model is already consistent with QED and so quarks and gluons are still okay with matter action.

Photons are not the essence of matter action, aether is the essence of matter action and aether makes up the whole universe. Photons are just a particular manifestation of aether as are quarks and gluons.

Dark matter and dark energy are simply placeholders right now for what Science does not yet know. Since matter action explains galaxy rotation and gravity lensing, I think it will take care of large scale structure and dark energy as well.

Any more questions?

You have not answered nor given the proofs that I asked. I repeat what is the proof that we have only this GR ands photons like primary essence of the universe.What is the proof of your reasoning too.

Ps for the TOE that does not exist due to limitations in knowledges, we name this the humility in front of all the unknowns that we have still to discover.

the matter action is limited too, we don t know really the foundamental objects and all this puzzle .Sorry but it is a fact.

For the aether it has been abandoned due to several problems .....

You know steve A, the problem is there , the lack of humility, because you affirm assumptions like if your model was true for all the assumptions that you have, you affirm too much without proofs even your general universal philosophy you affirm it, it is not like this that the sciences act and that a real searcher speaks .Wwe can have our assumptions, it is not a problem, the problem is when we affirm them like if you explained all with your model, it is not the case, your model is just a model not proved , and for the TOE I repeat a real seracher is humble and don t name a model like this , sorry but it is true

My technical paper is out there and describes this in math... DiscreteAether .

However, you are not very technical and so it is a challenge to explain QED quantum gravity to you in simple terms. I will try...

The CMB photon emissions bond each blackhole into the universe wavefunction with an eternal collapse into black hole event horizons. So the exchange interaction between BH1 and BH2 involves entangled photon pairs, entangled by creation. Therefore, BH1 and BH2 seem to attract each other as the universe collapses into its final blackhole destiny.

The same gravity attraction of course occurs for all bodies, not just blackholes.

Don t ty, first of all I will ^publsish soon and I am more technical than you, for your information I was in maths sciences strong in secondary , 9h of maths and 9H of sciences by weeks and 4 of labs, and after I was at university in geology and I have stopped due to a coma epileptic, I cannot stop to rank the maths and sciences since the age of 19 , I am 47 years old, you believe what that my theory is fallen from the sky, no it is a long long works of reasearchs and rankings and studies, you cannot compete, and you don t imagine what I have studied and read, so the persons like you make me laugh, you cannot nor compete in all humility , nor impress me, I am impressed by penrose or wilczek, not you with your papers where i n faqct you repeat the things already known, the difference my friend between you and me is that me it is innovative my theory and I am going to publish and me I have invencted a mathemtical inno vative tool the spherical geometrical spherical algebras, and so don t try, you are a common thinker, educated a littloe bit that is all wanting to be recognised, but you shall not be recognised and on wickipedia, me maybe I don t know but I don t care, So your small model with your small technical things, frankly not with me, you affirm too much and you beleive too much your are special and and that your model is revolutionary, it is not, just a common idea mixing things known, and no you have not quantified this QG, and not your general philosophy and antiverse and aether are not proved, and not your boiphotons are not proved to be thes egravitons, and furthermore you have mot even a proof of what are the foundame ntal objects, so please maybe make an other passion than the theoretical ^physics because we don t see really innovative interesting things , sorry I am frank,Don t try to compete or don t try to even ive lkessons in maths or physics, you cannot in fact dude simply , you are just for me and it is just my opinion a common educated physicist wanting to be what he is not, like this it is said . And do n t try to give lessons about the maths I repeat ,even the geomtrical algebras, or the padics analysis or the imaginairies or the non commutativity or the QFT and all the known mathematical tools, I know them and better than you , on this be the force with you jedi of the sphere and spherically yours too, to you

ps I have read your ether, just a common idea, I have a friend on facebook , him franck delplace is far more relevant than you even if I don t agree with all, and his spuperfluidity for the spacetime, learn form the persons but don t teach dude

ps and a real relevant technical thinker in maths and phycis, 1 improve the things known and utilised with proofs or 2 invent new mathenmatical tools, it is not your case, you just mix assumptions and tools known and after you affirm and furthermore the maths must be utilised with prudence because sometimes they imply confusions too , there are persons made to invent and create , others to repeat , make what you are made to do, your problem is for me is that you are not general, you have forgotten the generality of sciences and the philosophy, so how could you really create a relevant innovative revolutionary theory, your toe is for me total non sense with a repeatition sometimes of things known, you try to convice who in fact. Sorry to be frank Steve A but it is true , you affirm too much and you seem frutsrated even, you must be more humble and more general and less affriming your assumptions.

you see Steve A, sometimes it is better to not insist or speak you know, the real relevance of the theory of game of von neumann is the points of equilibrium and the disuasion, not the competition. I have read your paper and frankly it is some maths, some physics and an affirmation of assumptions, it is not like this that a real general thinker acts.Only the proved laws, axioms, equations are accepted, and a real seracher does not affirm his assumptions simply, I don t know who you try to impress and convice, but your general idea about this QG is not proved and your general philosophy it is the same , so why you insist, it is the question in fact. You have began by frustration so don t be surprised to have a retrun, the person slike you are irritated by better models than your model and innovative theories, they are even not able to recognise the relevance of these innovative ideas just by jealousy and vanity. Many are like this, they are even isolated and alone, and it is stupod because mit is in team and in skilling complemetarity that we ponder revolutionary papers, your paper is not revolutionary due to many parameters forgotten. Regards

I have taken the time steve A to read quietly your matter time aethertime on your blog on internet, It is respectable in the sense that you try to link several foundamental and that yoiu have taken a long time to create this blog, I respect thi. But it is true the entangled photons biphotons are an assumption and you ahve not solved the problem of this QG.

What you tell about the BHs and the cycle , it is an assumption too, nobody knows actually what they are really and if we must go farer than this GR and even if the singularities exist. You affirm so predictions and it is not proved.

You tell for example that The graviton noise of the universe is what makes all wavefunctions collapse and so is what makes reality real. It is still an affirmation not proved.

You speak after about the predictions of the discrete ether pulse , you explain some cosmological things and this and that but they are limited and not proved.

How it is possible to tell that the Single Photon Resonance as Fundamental Action is a truth and you tell the universe is a spectrum of this ether and you utilise thelorentz anmd fourier, frankly it is odd generally about what is our universe philosopjically.And the emmiter and absorbers are not the problem, the proble is our deepest unknowns to superimpose to the photons and this GR.

after you consider the qubit for this universe and you link with the uantum computing , but it seems that we have qutrits generally speaking.Furthermore the qubit and binar codes are a human invenction, the universe is more complex about the codes and informations, so I find this odd too.

You general midea about the qubit and the quantum computingt is an add of several known works where you conclude your own line of reasoning not proved still.

Sfter you speak about the strings, loops and branes for the anglual momentum spin, for your information we don t know the foundamental objects, we don t know is the lopps are correct or the points or the strings or the 3D spheres like in my theory, So it is still an assumption and there too you mix several physics like dirichlet, after the dbranes and the dimensions but all this are assumptions too.You speak about reasonances but in fact we retrurn still about the philosophical origin not known, we don t know is the oscillations and resonances of these photons are the key of this reality, so still you affim things not proved.

In fact you mix the works of Einstein, some maths and phycis and after some ideas about the strings and branes and you concloude your own model siuperimposing all these ideas ,

After you make the same for the BHs and the QG, like I explained here before and you affirm still these assumptions.You have made the same with the antiverse .

I liked that said the double slit diffraction for a btter understand of these photons but that does not imply they are the only one prinmary essence of the universe.

No, I am not on ResearchGate... I am on Academia.edu...

I get the feeling that you definitely do not like my QG, but it is not clear to me why that is. If you have a technical issue, you should say what that technical issue is.

You mention photon absorption and emission, which is of course fundamental to what happens, as being "fundamental action as truth", which is true. Why that is a criticism is not clear to me...

Hi Steve A, I have nothing agiant you, it is not that I don t like your QG works , it is just that it is not renormalised or solved , I have explained why , I resspect that said your researchs and the time taken to do it .It is that said too a road that is I repeat respectable, regards

Here is why , imagine that we consider only this GR and photons like I told you and that we try to solve these divergences implying the problems of renormalisation.

Imagine that we consider these gravitons increasing in number like penrose told us and that they are so mlinked with the torsions and the curvature. and so we consider translations.

Now let s consider your matter action and we can even correlate with cartan and make couplings with the works of levi cicivita for these couplings , you can so consider gauges .

Now let s consider for this method the lie groups, and consider for example 2 E8 and the lorentz group too, so you can play with groups, subgroups, the vectors, scalars....and even the associativity, the non associativity, the commutativity, the non commutativity and after you consider many different partitions with the reals and imaginaries and the padics analysis

All this so permit to rank the symmetries, the geometries, the topologies.....wity the klein or carrtan geometries even for example.

You have so a framework, now let s consider your ide3as superimposed with the matter action amd let s consider yout idea of biphotons and so after this lets consider the fields and let s try to solve the divergences of the gravitons interacting with themselves and let s consider the unification of G c and h in considering these gravitons like the quanta of gravitational waves aqnd lets assume they are massless, and let s take your matter action and let s consider a matter coupling with the cartan connection for example and the levi civita coupling.

So we try to make a kind of improvement of this GR in trying to renormalise this QG , but that does not permit to solve with all the mathematical possibilties.You can utilise even the works of Noether for the translations or others , or the wworks of Connes and all the partitions possible , that does not solve .

all this to tell that is you consider that gravity arises from this gauge work of translations and thqt you consider different partitions and constriuctions with field gauges coupled with the matter actions and matter fields in an minkowski reasoning for example , you don t obtain the possible resolution for this gravitation even under all the translations possible and partitions even with the E8 and the non commutativity.....

so yes I insist on the fact that the problem is mainly philosophical about the origin of this universe , the problem is really to consider that these photons are the primary essence and that this GR is the cause of our standard model with the fields but in fact I believe that the error is due to fact that we have photons encoded in this SM and so they create these electromagnetic fields and so the thinkers thought that this GR and the EFE so are the cause of this baryonic matter and the SM.

Einstein was famous but he has created a philosophical prison and now all the thinkers are persuaded that this GR and the photons and now the strings or points in 1d inside these photons oscillating vibrating in 1d are the truth for all our reality but like I said there are many problems philosophical about this reasoning and furthermore we cannot solve the deepest unknowns, mainly this QG and the constant cosmological problem.

The fact too that they are massless these gravitons and the quanta of gravitational waves is an enormous problem and it is there that all they trurn in round in this philosophical prisoin trying since more than 70 years to renormalise in this logic this QG.

Cool. I am also a member of Academia. Perhaps we can have a productive dialogue there.

It is appropriate that you are skeptical about renormalization, but that is exactly why a biphoton graviton works so well... since charge force is due to photon exchange with an infinite sea of virtual oscillators, renormalization removes that infinite energy. The action-centered photon exchange removes the 1/r^2 singularity of matter-centered charge force. Note that the virtual oscillators of QED is my aether and they are not virtual anymore, but real.

Instead of an infinite energy, aether is finite, but just very large and so it photon exchange with the aether field that is charge force. Since a biphoton graviton uses this same aether field, there are no singularities with gravity force. Instead of gravity being a force between bodies, my TOE makes gravity a force between each body and the rest of the finite universe.

Quantum forces are then all due to photon exchange, but the Hilbert space has the dimensions of matter and action and quantum phase. The universe is a wavefunction pulse in that space and that wavefunction decay gives us a cosmic or Connes time. A hydrogen atom (and all atoms) wavefunction gives us atomic time, but is also subject to cosmic time.

This means while blackholes are singularities with their 1/r^2 Newtonian gravity in spacetime, blackholes are just a transition to a different matter action outcomes beyond space and atomic time. Blackholes are simply the destiny of all matter, but are all decaying matter and growing action in cosmic time until the next antiverse cycle of growing matter and shrinking action.

Sure. Academia.edu encourages commentary on papers and I have commented on many different papers.