Time and the Multiverse

Ray,

My sphere kissing model answers the question of why n dimensions > 3 (a consequence of the time metric being continuous over n-dimension manifolds, d > 4), and the question of why we observe only 4 large dimensions (I provide numerical evidence that the 4 dimension horizon is identical to the 10 dimension limit). The model also accounts for the low inertial content of our observed universe.

"On breaking the time barrier"

Tom

Dear Tom,

I started reading that paper once before, but never got all the way through it. I see your kissing number considerations begin on page 29. I'll print it up, and see if I can work through it over the weekend.

Have Fun!

Ray,

Because this dialogue sounded familiar to me, I retraced my steps back to the article on Erik Verlinde, where I commented 27 April 2010, reproduced below:

"Lawrence/Ray,

"Lubos is right.

"It is exactly the case that interference patterns between observers are _not_ conserved that is explained by eqn. 5 of my "time barrier" paper that we discussed earlier.

"This tiny amount of lost information is significant only when the forces of gravitation are summed over the entire universe.

"Lubos is also right about the return to determinism. A model that allows reversible and chaotic time flows in 4 dimensions, and demands dissipative action in d > 4, restores classical determinism in an extra dimension theory. Every increase in order in d =< 4 is at the expense of increased disorder in d >= 4.

"The price we pay for this model is imaginary time, introducing complex analysis to classical physics.

Tom"

I know that equation 5 is strange (and looks stranger because I made a mistake in notation; escape velocity should be represented as V_e rather than E_v as I have it; I am dyslexic, and as careful as I try to be in editing, these errors sometimes slip through). Nevertheless, the terms are all consistent. Because in principle, every point of spacetime is characterized by a unique escape velocity in a gravity field, it is well demonstrated that the projections of 3-dimension quantum energy exchange on 2-dimension areas between points differ by a tiny but nonzero amount.

Tom

Our posts crossed. Thanks, Ray.

T

Dear Tom,

OK - I just made that notational change on my copy of page 12, although notation really doesn't matter as long as you are self-consistent.

I think I largely overlooked that prior conversation because it sounded too philosophical to interest me. Sorry - I have a short attention span. We do our best despite our shortcomings.

I also recall having a small misunderstanding or disagreement with your use of Cardinal numbers. I am using other geometrical/ numerical patterns. But I need to reread your paper. I had to read Lisi's E8 paper three times before I understood most of it. I had to think on El Naschie's papers for nearly two years before I found what I consider his critical flaw. I've read Lawrence's papers many times, and still don't understand all of his ideas. How does he absorb all of these ideas? I'm only human...

Have Fun!

p.s - And I agree that Real and Imaginary Time both exist (maybe even Quaternionic Time as well). Is the Time that we experience and measure real or imaginary? I think the Wick rotation and the Minkowski metric imply that our time might be the imaginary time...

Ray, I can't fault you for your attention span. I am well focused when on task for a problem or a paper, but social interaction is often awkward and sometimes painful for me, so that I am easily distracted as well.

Anyway, I went back and read all through the Verlinde ("myth of gravity") posts, and there seems to be a pretty continuous and informative train of thought there on all our (you, me, Lawrence) parts.

Most all physicists who use analysis, I think, won't find the concept of imaginary time controversial, even if they deem it non-physical. It's pretty easy to see, as Hawking puts it, that one cannot travel "north of the north pole." Taking C* with its one simple pole at infinity, it's obvious that a trajectory over that point becomes something other than a real point on R_, where we measure increments of time by the Lebesgue standard. I do expect that, by my construction, the conclusion that imaginary time implies negative mass may be controversial -- it's easy to dismiss time, which in the classical sense is not (by itself) physical; it is not easy to accept that negative mass is not only physical but nonlocal, and necessitates a physical definition for the time metric itself, to boot. That takes "spooky action at a distance" to a whole 'nother level. Nevertheless, the conclusion is unavoidable if my model is self consistent.

Tom

Dear Ray,

It's the life indeed, the complexities of society and its excesses do not facilitate things for good people.

But .........should we not look above us before thinking and acting .....all is there....

I still believe in the man you know Dr Cosmic Ray, I still believe in spite of disappointments and setbacks.

We're all from the same essence, babies of evolution in fact.BUT BUT UNFORTUNALLY

some people reveal themselves in full transparency, the heart and soul does not disappoint, never

Pseudos are plagiarist of the fundamentals we see this in all centers of interest, that to satisfy their vanity .... it is life .... I involves only little interest in these vanities.

They strut, and hurl compliments, I have only a sincere compassion.HIHIHI

Thank you Ray for the hope of re-founding a business, I do not bother me really you know Ray, I am aware of the discovery of my theory.

But I am conscient of human nature and these sharks, greedy and arrogants everywhere in this society, around us dear Ray, always these people who cause the global problems, and the strategy to win monney and this and that, grrr I am very angry about this, it's a sad global problem these sharks.....money money money ......dedicated to disappear but at this moment it's a tool....chaotic or harmonic....to be or not to be that's the question No ?,,,,,

Yes I have my guitar , thanks, I give some curses for the youngs of my little city, they begin but they are gifted, they learn quickly.

Thanks Ray and don't forget....3D and a time constant for the correct polarisation of evolution.....

Friendly

Steve

Dear Tom,

Perhaps it depends on our perspective. If we were to translate "Conservation of Energy" into "Conservation of Mass" via the mass-energy equivalence theorem, then anti-matter should be considered "negative mass" - shouldn't it? People don't normally talk about anti-matter that way, but the mathematics seems consistent.

In Relativity, our conserved quantity usually involves mass-squared, such as E^2=m^2c^2+p^2c^4. What about negative mass-squared? Of course, the Higgs boson is expected to have a negative vev (equivalent to a negative mass-squared) of -(246 GeV/c^2)^2. That implies imaginary mass and tachyons that always travel faster than the speed of light. You are exactly right about the implications of tachyons with "spooky action at a distance".

Dear Steve,

Better technolgy has not made mankind a better people. We might as well put the wealth of Wall Street and the killing-power of the Hydrogen bomb in the hands of teenage bullies.

Have Fun!

to meditate....hihihi a bizare planet ...where is the universal commision ....it's our future ....we evolve Ray we evolve ,the local system the Earth....in this short period ....is just a step of evolution....

It exists Ray ,bad and good people everywhere, it's only simple like that .

Regards

Steve

Hello dear Amrit,

I can understand ,indeed ,Like I explained before, I think your ideas are so spirituals what it's difficult for the majority to encircle your wall between the physicality and the unknown.

Indeed The Universe behind this wall is timeless , of course because the physicality is part of this unphysicality, but dear Amrit already people have difficulties with our real 3D , thus you imagine why they do not understand this timeless and the time constant of the physicality.

It's logic their critics ,simply .

I agree it's a concept of the mind and we need to adapt correctly the serie of physical evolution.But the datas show us the road also .The physical referential seems with time constant and the unknown without.....I say that for the persons who want some eplainations.The ultim code seems timeless also ........in all case all your ideas are relevant.

The secrets of the Universe are so splendids .The wall of our perception ....and the universality like our sister of truth.

Best Regards

Steve

Ray,

Antimatter is not the same as negative mass (or energy, doesn't matter). Antimatter is ordinary matter of reverse sign.

What I'm talking about -- you'll find your equation above in my paper (p. 7), written as E^2 = m^2c^4 (pc)^2, to represent a particle of positive energy with zero momentum -- is negative mass/energy of nonlocal physical effect. IOW, a way to bring a quantum version of Mach's Principle via complex analysis into classical relativity.

Tom

Dear Tom,

I'm sorry. I don't quite get your point. Maybe this was where I put your paper down and scratched my head in wonder.

I think that anti-matter could be represented by negative mass, although I can't think of any references that consider it such. But if we simultaineously require conservation of Energy-squared, and mass in the production of an electron-positron pair, then we would write:

initial E^2 = 2(hv)^2 = 2m^2c^2+2p^2c^2 = final E^2, and

initial mass = 0 = m-m = 0 = final mass.

If you mean negative mass-squared, then that is equivalent to imaginary mass.

My TOE model has imaginary time, imaginary energy, imaginary mass, and maybe even imaginary space, where "imaginary" is based on the number i^2=-1. Is my mathematics right or wrong? At least it is self-consistent.

Have Fun!

Ray,

You don't think mass and charge are the same thing, do you? That's would be the consequence of identifying antimatter with negative mass/energy.

No, what I mean is a locally asymmetric relation between positive rest mass m_ and negative mass/energy m_- of an accelerating universe. Pp 9--12 outlines the mathematics, concluding a mass continuum M equivalent to i. i^2 is on the real line, so while positive mass can be measured in real terms regardless of sign, quantum configuration space cannot be mapped onto what we consider physical space without a nonlocal model.

So ultimately, I mean that positive mass is a small fraction of the kinetic energy feedback of an accelerating universe, exactly equivalent to the low inertial mass (4.6% of that required to have a gravitationally closed universe) that we actually observe, by WMAP results.

Tom

in block time universe time is run of clocks....not even that there is no time at all, with clocks we measure numerical order of material change....the trouble is you do not get that because you experience universe in mind model of time "past-present-future"

this is my last letter in this summer....watch your mind and you will discover origin of time

see you in September

Dear Tom,

I don't think that mass and charge are the same thing. If you analyze the quantum numbers that I obtain from a multi-dimensional kissing spheres approach, you will see that electric charge is one of those quantum numbers associated with Spacetime, and mass is one of those quantum numbers associated with the 5-brane of Hyperspace. I think that positive, negative and imaginary mass are all possible on the 5-brane, but the holographic transfer of quantum gravity on the 5-brane to geometrical gravity in Spacetime simplifies what we are able to observe. I still think that "conservation of rest-mass" - if it exists - would make sense out of the gamma-gamma -> electron-positron transition, but "inertia" still acts like a positive value (because positrons and electrons move in opposite directions in a magnetic field).

A quick look at your paper reminds me that there were a couple of things in your model that didn't quite "feel right" to me. But I still don't fully understand your model, so I need to reread it. Perhaps "negative mass" accounts for the as-yet-unknown mirror fermions that Lisi put in his E8 TOE, but I still think that Lisi counted his degrees of freedom wrong because he didn't include Supersymmetry.

Dear Amrit,

Enjoy your Summer! I still think your numerical ordering of the block sounds like a time-like contraption. How do we experience time? Perhaps it is via the mind (Amrit), or the consciousness (Klingman), or the dream (FMD). It is slightly disturbing that physics cannot connect "self" to experience other than through the five senses of sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell.

Have Fun!

The fundamental discrete symmetry of QFT is CPT = 1. So time reversal is a transformation identified with the change in charge and parity. So there is little reason to think that anti-matter has negative mass. There might be some reason to think that the breaking of CP symmetry and the preponderance of matter in the universe over anti-matter is involved with the positive nature of mass and the lack of anti-gravity and some of these quirkly spacetimes that violate the weak energy condition T^{00} >= 0.

Cheers LC

Hi Ray,

My sphere kissing model is n-dimension Euclidean space (consistent with the space in which the n-dimensional sphere kissing problem is conjectured). What space are you in? I don't see how you can reconcile general relativity with your model when you speak of a "multi-dimensional kissing spheres approach" -- I don't know what you mean by that.

No, mirror fermions are not negative mass/energy. Supersymmetry is not an assumption of my model, but a result of the finding that the 4 dimension horizon is identical to the 10 dimension limit. This is straightforward numerical calculation.

Tom

Dear Friends,

I was thinking about this the wrong way. There cannot be such a thing as "conservation of rest mass" - the atomic bomb is a clear violation of that idea. In the case of gamma-gamma -> electron-positron, it is sufficient to use conservation of lepton number and energy-squared.

I think that negative mass could exist on the 5-brane. We do not observe negative mass in Spacetime. Perhaps finding an independent negative mass is difficult like finding an independent quark. Perhaps all of the "negative mass" in our Spacetime is bound up with "positive mass" - Would that behave like a powerful photon? Lisi still needs his mirror fermions...

Tom, my model has Spacetime and Hyperspace. They are separate branes, and have separate physics. Einstein's General Relativity applies to the geometrical gravity of Spacetime, and does not apply to the quantum gravity of Hyperspace.