The Art of Math

Lawrence,

Do you mean equivalent or dual? It's impossible for quantum mechanics and general relativity to be equivalent in any theory. I can only see them dual under isomorphism in a scale invariant background space. I don't see how category theory can solve the problem of background independence.

Tom

It does sound crazy to speculate that general relativity and quantum mechanics are equivalent in some ways. To say they are dual is another way of maybe saying equivalent. In an S-dual setting with a magnetic monopole the electric and magnetic fields are completely equivalent in form.

Cheers LC

I think, as you suspect, that if you design these two theories into a categorical system they could be made equivalent. That system may be able to "unify" these two apparently different descriptions of matter, however, it obviously wouldn't be able to unify matter itself. Thus, that equivalence would be akin to simply saying that matter is matter. The real trick, in my opinion, is to find some kind of relationship between quantum mechanics and general relativity that can be rendered as something that is measurable--rather than trying to find a way to equate these two models.

Lawrence,

I don't think isomorphism allows the kind of equivalence that one finds between orthogonally propagating fields. Because category theory is a theory of isomorphic relations, it assumes that relation is more fundamental than equivalence. I mean, specifically: an equation assumes properties of equality, reflexivity and transitivity. An isomorphic relation does not assume transitivity--consider Lee Smolin's view of a pure relational model*:

"R1: There is no background...

R2: The fundamental properties of the elementary entities consist entirely in relationships between these elementary entities...

R3: The relationships are not fixed, but evolve according to law. Time is nothing but changes in the relationships, and consists of nothing but their ordering..."

So things in relation are not necessarily equivalent.

Isomorphisms are static representations, but one would need demonstrate an evolutionary principle that obviates a background and drives sytem change in a self-organizing manner. This is the view I personally favor, and which led me to the conclusion that time (the least action principle) is the only fundamental property driving change in the universe. I agree in principle with Fotini Markopoulou that "Space does not exist, so time can." That's why my model is purely algebraic in real (Lebesgue measure) terms, crossing over from analysis by deriving from the complex plane a numerically precise epsilon term (eq. 4, ICCS 2006), that inserted into an otherwise perfectly ordered set of n-dimension Euclidean kissing spheres ("time barrier" preprint), leads to a dissipative n-dimensional system. This comports with the Jacobson-Verlinde model of entropic gravity, where gravity and (physical) information are identical. In my model, time, gravity and information are _all_ identical.

There is no background, because point-line duality and the Bekenstein-Mayo result that black holes form a 1-dimension information channel** support self organization independent of background space, requiring only a single quantum fluctuation in imaginary time, and allowing that the time metric is n-dimensional continuous, on a random, self avoiding walk.

Tom

*[2005 preprint] "The case for background independence." arXiv:hep-th/0507235v1

** "Black Holes are One-Dimensional." General Relativity

and Gravitation 33;12, December (2001)

Time exists, time is real,

Time is numerical order of change.

Time is exclusively a mathematical quantity.

Mathematic is real......Attachment #1: 1_Time_measured_with_Clocks_12.10..pdf

The categorical equivalency I think that might exist is between a discrete system of quantum mechanics and light cones. The discrete system of QM is the addition of paths, similar to a Feynman path integral, and concatenations of field configurations on paths. These are an algebraic field (,*). The AdS spacetime under a quotient with a discrete Klienian group has a similar structure. The categorical equivalency might exist on a certain logic level. Clearly there is no equivalency between QM and GR with regards to their differential equations. The Fotini paper has some relevance to this.

I think the Smolin background independence argument has been superseded by the AdS/CFT developments. In other words the "background" is given by the structure of elementary particles, which exist on the boundary of the AdS. The conformal completion of the AdS is then an Einstein spacetime or a de Sitter spacetime of one dimension lower. In other words the background is determined by the physics of elementary particles.

Cheers LC

Has Lee Smolin conceded this case?

I get confused over the common interchangeable use of "correspondence" and "duality" as if they are the same thing. I can't wrap my mind around that -- duality, e.g. point-line duality in geometry, is a closed relation. If correspondence were such a closed relation, it would be duality. I don't see the identity.

The key point, I think, is Smolin's emphasis on "... the real meaning of background independence, which is that fixed classical fields or global symmetries play absolutely no role in the formulation of the dynamics or observables of the theory" in his response to Joe Polchinski's response to Smolin's The Trouble with Physics here

That criticism is answered in my own theory by the introduction of non-local measure criteria. True nonperturbative correspondence would be the duality of dynamically interacting fields. We've had this discussion before, about the gulf between geometric symmetry and physical dynamics. Einstein overcame it -- isn't it time for an encore?

Tom

Of course nobody has conceded anything. Yet the natural background does appear to be based on the AdS spacetime. Why this is so probably requires understanding string theory at the Hagedorn temperature. At that temperature T ~ 1/L_{string} strings merge into a "gemish," which mimics the physics of quark-gluon plasmas. So the occurrence of the AdS is due to a phase transition, probably a quantum critical point. This would mean in analogue with a QCD meson, two quark connected by a flux tube of gluons, that D0-branes, partons or particles underlie string theory.

Cheers LC

The natural background is still the background. Background independence would require dynamically interacting spacetime, to preserve relativity. I sincerely would like to see string theory succeed; however, unless there is a higher order of mechanism than phase transition or symmetry breaking, I can't see that we have more than a static representation of physics with the action artificially inserted, as in that classic cartoon: "Here, a miracle happens."I have the same problem with Garrett Lisi's program (or any lattice symmetry) -- geometric models are just not self actualizing.

Dynamic self organization of space and time based on least action eliminates such assumptions. The range of the action is self limiting within the domain of the observables; i.e., what we see is the least of all possible particle trajectories, at any arbitrarily chosen moment. Let string theorists design a thought experiment that incorporates least action on the boundary of the hyperbolic string domain and the disjoint parabolic surface, and I think unique solutions will be easier to come by. (My own n-dimensional Euclidean kissing spheres model is a step in that direction.)

Tom

Tom,

The underlying question is whether gravity can at all be quantized in a complete form. To be honest I don't think so. The AdS spacetime, with its Einstein spacetime boundary and equivalent QCD or CFT physics, I think emerges as a phase transition. The AdS spacetime in two dimensions is an SL(2, R) group, the conformal group of quantum mechanics, and which defines classical flows that obey the sine-Gordon equation. Zamolodchikov proved how this system is S-dual to Fermi-Dirac Lagrangian with a quartic potential. The quartic potential defines Bogoliubov coefficients, which define the thermodynamics of Hawking radiation. If this is the case gravitation is formally only a semi-classical field, computable to a small finite loop order. String theory tends to reflect this to a degree, where the string defines a quantum correction to a background. The loop variable approach runs into some difficulty as well, where the Imirzi-Barbero parameter ambiguity with gamma = 3/8 instead of 1/4, and the break up of Lorentz symmetry at small distances (ruled out observationally) suggests that something funny is going on as well.

Underneath the string are D0-branes or partons. For an open strung the endpoints are analogous to quarks in a meson and the string is composed of D0-branes analogous to gluons. The closed string is analogous to a glue-ball observed in di-jet hadron scattering. String theory emerged as a way of working hadron physics, where the Hagedorn temperature was the phase transition to the quark-gluon plasma phase. Similarly the Hagedorn temperature T = 1/L_{string} is a phase transition temperature from the underlying structure of partons, partons as Fermi-Dirac particles plus bosons --- a sort of SU(N) QCD theory, to the extended structures as strings and Dp-branes for p > 0.

As for Lisis' theory, the biggest problem is that he frames the graviton with other fields in a way the Coleman-Mandula theorem rules out. Lisi's theory is clever in a formal sense with representation theory, but it suffers from this and other difficulties. The only way to frame the graviton with other fields is with supersymmetry, which is a compelling reason for thinking SUSY is real physics.

Cheers LC

At the risk of making some mistake I am going to extraploate things a bit. The background turns out to be somewhat fixed, or determined by other physics. The AdS/CFT correspondence holds that the AdS_{n+1} has a boundary defined by a horizon-like condition on one of the time variables. This construction is an Einstein spacetime E_n with a conformal quantum theory that has the same content as the AdS. The AdS_4 and AdS_5 are particularly interesting, but let me look at AdS_4. This has a boundary that is a 2 space plus time boundary. The BTZ black hole in 2+1 spacetime has zero entropy with maximal BPS charge. In the interior of the AdS_4 spacetime the BTZ black hole has a correlated extremal black hole with AdS_2xS^2 structure. This is the extremal condition on an ordinary black hole in 3+1 spacetime. The AdS_2 ~ SL(2,R) which is the elementary s = ½ conformal group of quantum mechanics. Further, the AdS_2 spacetime, the Poincare disk defines geodesics which preserve volume in a manner that obeys the sine-Gordon equation. The dual to this is a Thirring model of a Fermi-Dirac field. This is very interesting, for it means there is naturally embedded in the AdS spacetime a supersymmetric structure that is inherited at the boundary. In fact Maldecena's theory is naturally N = 4 supersymmetry.

The boundary of the AdS_{n+1} is a spacetime of zero or positive constant curvature. If the boundary has zero curvature the AdS spacetime is a cylinder, where the boundary is the spacetime and the interior the holographic content. The soliton and Fermi-Dirac field contents are projected onto the boundary as supersymmetric partners. These fields have enormous quantum fluctuations near the Planck scale, and this leads to the 120 order of magnitude problem with the cosmological constant. However, these enormous quantum fluctuations may only exist in this interior region. A particle may access this enormous quantum vacuum by transforming to its supersymmetric partner, but it transitions through supersymmetry space or equivalently through this interior. This only happens at 10^{-17}cm or the TeV scale in energy. At lower energy physics on the boundary does not interact with these quantum fluctuations because supersymmetry is broken and decoupled from this vacuum gemish. Supersymmetry generators Q are such that Q^2 = 0, for they are fermionic. Q^2 = 0 defines a cohomology, so there is some topology here. The breaking of supersymmetry is equivalent to a surgical change in topology, and the violation of an Euler index. The Euler index is a quantum number, and if we are to presume quantum numbers (information) is conserved it must be countered elsewhere. It is assumed on the boundary in the transition of the spherical space to a flat space. So the can is peeled open and the outer boundary stretched out into an infinite spacetime. The AdS Poincare disk is rolled out onto the Poincare half-plane.

Cheers LC

Lawrence,

I think we are very close, though our mathematical methods differ.

If you mean by Euler index, the Euler characteristic (Xi) or Euler number, then sidebar 2 (pp 32-35) in "time barrier" explains the internal quantum fluctuation and topology with surgery that you describe:

With the 6 points of a 3-ball embedded on the 10 dimensional manifold, just a single quantum fluctuation at the sub Planck scale on the interior point of the 3-axis intersection (which we may interpret as a quantum field potential at the string scale) is destabilizing, resulting in an interior split of the Xi = -3 object (hyperbolic)into a normalized Xi = 2 2 (parabolic) by the Banach-Tarski construction. We find then that the interior plane, by fixed-point hyperbolic projection is open (flat, infinite) and the external manifold (Xi = 2) is closed (finite, bounded at the Planck energy), implying particle properties. So we have a fully relativistic model of spacetime-particle dynamic interaction, with quantum field string energy in the 10-dimension limit.

The deeper implication is that spacetime structure itself originates at the sub Planck scale. IOW, we don't need the assumption of an infinitely dense matter state at the origin (big bang). All we need is a self organized state of space and time; i.e., spacetime is a structure of measure zero in an n-dimensional scale invariant quantum field. This gives the big bang cosmology a probability 1.0, independent of any specific spacetime point. Which means that time alone seeds particle action at the string scale -- the 2 2 topology of disjoint 3-balls is self-sustaining in a scale invariant evolving complex system, finite and unbounded, consistent with GR. I show a very slight information loss by n-dimensional dissipation, because time (and gravity) is identical to physical information and the time metric is n-dimension continuous by analytic continuation.

I am pretty confident that my model can also deal with the mass hierarchy problem. Randall and Sundrum have already shown that the problem can be met by an extradimensional theory in a fully relativistic theory. And that's where I think we're all in agreement -- that any comprehensive unity of QM and GR has to be fully relativistic. My own aesthetic sense is closer to Smolin, though -- I want full background independence as well.

Tom

I had this idea at one time about using Banach Tarski theorem to duplicate Planck volumes and the like. I still speculate that exactly at the Planck scale physics in a sense ends and maybe there is that sort of complete chaos.

Cheer LC

I think complete chaos is actually the beginning of physics. Perfect randomization, after all, guarantees at least one ordered sequence. We know by Brouwer's fixed point theorem that however scrambled the topology, we can count on a point set.

Tom

The Brouwer fixed point theorem tells us there is some constant point of a space under a map, and this holds no matter how folded up or deformed that space is.

The idea I had about this was that Planck units of volume are Q-bits that have no code. In other words if you have a lattice system in the space, and there is some fundamental lattice, say the 24-cell, this defines an algebra (B_4, D_4 and F_4) that is the quantum code. So the lattice under this minimal sphere packing has a unique discrete set of roots that are "letters," or quantum bits that transform amongst each other. On the scale of just the Planck volume there is no code, in fact any such set of Planck volumes with physics described only on that scale is pure chaos. So the idea was that Planck volumes duplicate themselves in a Banach-Tarski manner. This duplication of Planck volumes then generates more space or Planck volumes which reverses the microscopic view of space to a larger scale.

This idea is an attempt to describe what might be total chaos right at the Planck scale, which might demand that scale parameterization that focuses inwards must reverse the scale factor at the Planck scale.

Cheers LC

All has a code !

at the Planck Scale also.

Steve

To continue the discussion about the distinctions among duality, equivalence and independence:

Having just finished _The Grand Design_ by Stephen Hawking and Len Mlodinow (it's a good book, and the following is an observation, not a criticism) -- I had marked a passage early on where the authors, explaining their concept of model-dependent realism, implied the "duality" of classical and quantum theories (p. 58), "Dualities like this -- situations in which two different theories accurately describe the same phenomenon ..."

Classical relativity and quantum mechanics do not, however, describe the same phenomenon. Relativity describes continuous spacetime; quantum mechanics describes discrete events in which time plays no role. The theories are independent, not equivalent or dual.

I think that what makes this other than nitpicking, is that dualities that actually do "describe the same phenomenon" -- such as point-line duality in projective geometry, the duality of differentiation and integration in the calculus, and string theory dualities among types -- are invertible; i.e., one gets smoothly from one mathematical description to the other.

Though I appreciate Hawking's concept of model-dependent realism as a useful tool for crafting mathematically consistent theories within given domains -- I think it gives too little credit to mathematical ingenuity, in which we have seen as in the above examples, a progressive unity of methods.

Tom

Time is Numerical Order of Material ChangeAttachment #1: Time_is_a_Numerical_Order_of_Material_Change.pdf

skip to main | skip to sidebar

BLOG THE BOOK 2

Sunday, February 21, 2010

BLOG THE BOOK 2

If as I believe my thoery is true and it will be accepted by one compentant judge it will be a considerable step in science.Charles Darwin............No that I say Darwinism is right just that I think this quote applies equally to a thoery of ex-nihilo creation.

My theory of everything for WASP..

Steve Jeffreys collary to the law of non contradiction.

Opposite particles X and Y cannot be in the SAME STATE at the SAME TIME in the SAME PLACE THE EXCEPTION PRIOR TO THE BIG BANG...

FOUR STATES ARE ONE PRIOR TO THE BIG BANG AND THE FOUR FORCES DEPEND ON THE FOUR STATES SO THEY ARE ALSO ONE.

E=MC^2 depends on momentum an momentum is determined by state.

This is a means for a Big crunch to store the potential energy of a prexisting universe and release it as Kinetic energy in the big bang.

The mechanism is super critical non newtoinan fluids or four states of matter in one.....................

This give you a mechanism for the big bang you can use WASP To calculate the potential energy of the prexisting universe and the kinetic energy of the big bang.

You asked me to give you a thoery it is simplified it does not include determinism.

Determinism in the early universe maks it too complicated.Suffice to say qantum effects did not kick in until after the Big Bang everything prior to that was determinism rather than randomness.

The reason being is as you go back in time order or reverse entropy increases and becomes infinite.

I can argue there is no need for God but I don't want to.

And that is the characteristic of every true believer they want to believe.

Steve.

The universal energy equation is 2+2=4 Over a cycle the big bang and the big crunch have to balance 2+2=4.

But due to thermodynamics a little energy is lost with each cycle like a bouncing ball.

And to balance 2+2 so that it equals four we have to increase mass as it goes backward in time.

So that with infinite time we have infinite mass.Which EInstein said was a dealbreaker.............

Infinite mass is an impossibility.

And since it is the only way to make 2+2=4 balance.

Then there is another way that is for energy to be fetched like a bucket of water from dimension X nihilo.

Creative energy is fetched from ex-nihilo making the big bang balance for the universal energy equation 2+2=4.

Einsteins second equation for mass approaching the speed of light includes momentum.

And momentum is determined by state so when four states are one E=MC^2 is a different equation for prior to the big bang.

The universe doesn't balance it cannnot balance because it is an impossibility for mass to increase as you go backward in time.

Until it becomes an infinite mass universe..............

That means 2+2 does not equal four for the big bang.......The difference from four can be axactly calculated.............

And equations don't balance for 2+2=4 E=MC^2 doesn't balance for 2+2=4.

And maybe this is an atrifact of the original non balancing equation for energy...................

Of course there are three alternatives creaton exnihilo where the equation balances with energy from outside the universe.

A balanced universe where mass increases with energy lost from the bouncing ball.

An unbalanced universe where energy is lost but is not replaced...............

And for my money it is an unbalanced universe.

And that would be a bad bet.

But if you want to believe 2+2 does not equal four for the energy of the universe.

Then it is a good bet for an evolutionist.

That all equations should not balance but need an adjustment.

To get a thoery of everything.

So go ahead adjust 2+2=4 to agree with the universe.

And see if all equations make sense in one big unbalanced theory of everything.http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/bounce/energy.html

2+2=4 does not balance for 2 bounces+ 2 bounces= 4 Bounces.

Because energy is lost as heat.

Hence the ball eventually stops bouncing.

We can apply this to the occillatng universe theory....................

for 2+2=4 for the cycles of the universe big crunch big bang.Mass has to increase as you go backward in time..........

And with time that goes on forever there has to be infinite mass..

You have to start with 100% mass.

And it will eventually reach zero......................If the equation balances.

Two answers for everything can't be right because the bible said that two is the number of enmity with God.

So it could hardly be the answer to everything.

So it muts be possible to add two answers in 1/3s to get one answer.............

1/3 YING+ 1/3 YANG+ 1/3 YANG= 1

There is nothing wrong with the 1/3rd equation except that it makes two equations one.

And sometimes this is juts not possible. QM AND GR will work in tandem 2+2=4 for all but a few equations involvng the graviton.....................

Maybe it is possible to use the third equation to unify even these equatons involving the graviton into one equation for everything.

1/3 STRING THEORY+ 1/3 QM+ 1/3 GR= 1

This makes the three major thoeries not three seperate theories but one super theory.

Steve.

A model is a good model if it.

1. is elgant.

2.Contains few artbitrary or adjustable elements.

3. Agrees with and explains all existing observations.(including inflation)

4. Makes details predictions about future observations that can disprove or falsify the model if they are not borne out.

Hawkings model of 10^500 different universes with different laws cannot be observed so only one universe can be observed which my thoery explains adequately.

A particle such as a primordial atom cannot both be born and die at the same time without having a half life.

The particle started out as four states in one and it muts have started out as four states which became one in the big crunch.The thoery is when four states are one four forces also unify.Thus potential energy of the big crunch is converted into kintetic energy of the big bang.Or potential energy ex-nihilo creates one state of matter that is four states in one.That is the description of the primordial atom.

And in the big bang since there is no time it dies before it is born the concepts birth and death of the particle and half life have no meaning and are all mixed togther.

Time is mised togther past presnet and future.

Time must have existed from the very begining.

The paricle reaches a point whee times arror begins where it cannot go back and do it all over again

It can't go back to it's state of non existance it has to live and therefore it has to die.

There is a point where it can still return to the void from which it came............

It is TESTABLE because there is a point where the four states are two states in one.

And where they are four states in one 2+2=4.

/4=1

Gravity then reverses and becomes a superforce.

The direction of gravity can change back for a time then it becomes critical and it reaches the point where it cannot go back to the previous four states without an explosion of the primodordial particle.

Time in this case is the direction of gravitys arrow and time runs backwards beyond this point to the big crunch.

The blog is great.

And I really like it.

It is so good that I will end it right here.

And it has only just begun.

Because it one mans seearch for everything.

And it is a blog book and it can be as long as I want it to be.

Or as short as I would like it to be.

And that is as short as it is already.

Because I already have a blog book.

And my blog was deleted.

And there is no point in writing a blog if it gets deleted.

And maybe I could fin it on some disc.

But Jessu doesn't want a parrot I can always start another blog.

And it will be juts as good.

But people will always encroach upon my style.

They will always say he has no sense of appropriateness.

And I cannot even spell it.

And my grammer is bad it is just so utterly boring.

And that is intelligent design it is so boring I don't even want tgo think about it.

It is so utterly boring.

And that is what my blog is.

It is utterly and completely boring.

Without a little help from jesus.

He is my rock.

And he is my fortress.

In Him will I trust.

And I don't need to be a parrot anymore adn think that that is what God wants from me just someone to write books.

Gods gift is for my love and my pleasure is to help one I love.

And God helps me to help myself.

And that is a great thing.

Because if anyone knows he exists I do yet I waste my time chasning rainbows.

That is what a thoery of everything really is.

It is chasing ghosts or windmills it is a glorious and futile quest.

God has already told us it came out of nothing.

And ex-nihilo is a satisfactory explaination for how the universe began.

And they don't like it because they believe in the big bang.

And they don't.

And I'm not sure that the big bang is what the bible means when it says ex-nihilo.

I'm pretty sure the problems with the big bang as as big as making something out of nothing with noone in charge.

And if you ever tried to make something with no one in charge you will know you don't get anything worthwhile.

You need a teacher to help you to make something.

Otherwise you just get a footstool for someones foot.

That is not very good.

And it is great if you have done it yourself.

And that is what this blog is all about I have done it myself with a little help from the Lord.

And it has been like a parrot and it has been like a footstool.

It is has been my own work.

ANd God helped me to think clearly about the big bang.

And no one ever thinks clearly about it.

And my heor is John hartnett who thnks clearly about everything.

He thinks about whether the bible is true.

And if it is is true how does that effect the thoery.

And his book about the big bang is just about the best book I have ever read.

Except for Hawkings when he believed there was a God.

But his latest book is juts bable.

bable to 10^500th power that is how much nonsense it takes to make a multiverse.

And thi skind of nonsense is what my computer porgram produces.

So I have succeeded in physics but not as I have hoped I have shown string thoery to be nonsense and not the answer to heaven and hell.

Because there is limbo and that makes 4 dimensions + 3 and that is 7.

And that is a good thoery because it agrees with all the observations.

And it is elegant.

And above all this blog is elegant.

It is a thoery of everything in a nutshell.

It is consise and doesn't contain ambigiuities.

Stating it simply and explaining everything is what science does.

It is occams rasor.If it is the simplist explaination it is probably right.

And that is why science is always wrong.

Because the simplist explaination is that God did it.

And He wants to show us how to work it out.

And He doesn't.

He wants us to have faith faith is all the proof we need.

And after examining the big bang cross examining the witnesses it is clear that they are blind dumb and stupid and that they have seen nothing.

And that the bible when it is sais nothing.

Means someone.

Not something.

We just may leave it there.We won't be a parrot.But we will will use this blog to explain our theory of everything.The circular dimensions include time.

And to convert four into three you use my time formula which converts 0 eccentricity into 0.02..............

And my forumula is very accurate within six minutes per year of sidereal time...................

So converting string theory is a matter of converting a circular orbit of 360 days in ten dimensions to an eliptical orbit of 365 days and three dimensions.....................

Then you can put string theory together with Einsteins like twister theory.

Draw a 360 day circular earth orbit in 10 dimensions with an eccentricity of zero convert to an eccentricty of 0.002 using my time formula.

Then the ten dimenesions will be expressed in three dimensions.

The devil doesn't want God to make it right.

And God can take any lemon and make lemonaide.

And God can take any situation and make it right.

And faith without work is dead and it was never intended to discourage.

But it be a sawhorse that if you don't have work you can't make a difference.

And of course you can do whatever comes to hand.

And whatever you find that you are good at you should do with all of your heart.

And if you find anything to do.

You should just quit.

And that isn't life to give up.

There is always something to do that matters.

Like blogging which does not matter even a little bit.

If I blog or don't blog life goes much the same.

And life always goes better with a blog.

I searched for everything and I found a theory of everything.

But it did not go to plan.

I expected others would share my passion.

And that they would take an interest in what I was doing.

They did not share my passion and they did not take an interest.

So what is the point of telling the world in a blog.

How dissapointed Iam.

Iam dissapointed that no one understands.

And I should not expect anyone to understand my blog because I speak in tongues.

And I might speak my heavenly fathers own language.

And it makes no sense to unbelievers.

And that means to born again christians because they don't understand tongues anymore than anyone else.

Tongues of angels and they don't understand my lack of love.

And if they had been alone for all these years they would understand.

As God understands that lonelyness is hard to overcome.

Because the lonely don't make good friends.

And other people ar lonely and they want someone to be their friend.

But you have to want more than just a friend.

And life is like that you have to be interested in more than one thing.

And Iam only interested in little things.

That interest me.

And that is just the way Iam.

I like one little thing and not a lot of things.

But I could try to like other things but then there would not be time for the things that interest me.

And there is all the time in the world for the things Iam interested in.

But no time for anything that is outside my little universe.

1/ Einsetins dice can make QM and GR one by unifying classical theories like Maxwells and EInsteins with QM.Making randomness orderely

2/ 2+2=4 program produces one equation for everything.

3/ Clock equation makes 10 dimensions 3 dimensions.

The hope of doing somethign that matters is just a hope.

But it keeps people from unhappiness.

And it kept me bored and unhappy.

So what is hope is it hope for the future.

or is it hope for the present.

We can hope that here is something for us right now.

Rather than hope for something in the future that never will come to pass.

They say that girls were wrong to play ping pong and they didn't know that they were chineese girls and everything in the chineese language is reversed is reversed.

And that means we can convert Einsteins theory of eliptical orbits of the earth into a circular orbit of ten dimensions effectiviely converting Eintein to string and back again.

And this Steves most excellent fudge.

And clock is a memorial stones to the God is Israel who proved hawking wrong for the final time.

And there is no hawking.

Because there is a God of israel.

And the God of israel has declared war on Stephen hawking.

And it is the other way around.

God still loves Stephen and has done everything to make his life better.

And he is not grateful instead he blames God for his sickness.

And he has never said that God is to blame.

But he feels hurt that God has not made him better.

And maybe one day it will be nnot as Stephen haking Hopes.

Because life can be like that.

It can be not as we have hoped but we still succeed we still overcome.

And Hawking has to accept that it will be not as he had hoped but it be even better.

because it may be better than he had hoped.

New technolgy may mean he can control his computer with his mind.

And he may not be finished with his books.

It may be not as God hoped for the next one one to prove 2+2=4 right.

Becaus ehis next one will prove God wrong.

And if it does prove God right that it will be not as Hawking had hoped.

But he can't deny the evidence.

And that is exactly what I hope that the evidence form my computer program is so convincing that even Hawking will admit there is a God.

And my thoery o converting a ten dimnsional circle into an elipse.

Is impossible and if it is imnpossible then my clcok doesn't make sense.

And that is quite possible that my clock is not more accurate than sidereal time.

But six minutes out.

and if it is out it is not a conversion of a circle into an elipse.

But if it is not out then the six minutes is significant.

ANd makes a difference when you convert a ten dimesionsional circle into a 3 dimensional elipse.

But it is imossible M theory is impossible and it might because you CANNOT convert Ten dimensions into three.

If you could then Einstein could be converted into ten dimesions.

And that would be just as I had hoped.

That it is impossible.

And it might not be I might have hoped M theory could make sense in four dimensions.

being a fan of twister theory at least I know what I like.

And four dimensions is what I like...........

I don't like ten I can't understand ten so I don't believe they exist I cannot observe them therefore they are not science.

I can observe four dimensions of an eliptical orbit.

And all of the orbits in other universes must be circular.

And if they are then the other universes are unstable and will fall apart.

But they must be circular if they contain more than three dimesions.

And hawking has not thought this through.

And I have on his behalf.

We can convert one dimension and that is time.

Time can be in ten dimensions and it is still 360 days.

But if the orbit is unstable the number of days is not the same.

And when we convert it to an elipse it is an orbit which never could exist

If we convert the nine other dimenisons from circular to eliptical then we would be cooking with gas.

We wuold have the formula to convert Einsteins thoery to string theory and back again.

But we ccan't convert none dimesions like we can the one dimension of time.

Time really can be converted from circular to eliptical the number of degrees equals the number of days.

And this orbit in unstable and it might be a much more stable orbit than the earth is actually in.

Because it is perfect.

Whereas the earths orbit involves a wobble.

Which may not always have existed before the flood.

Th eearth is tilted if it were not tiled maybe my clock would be 100% accurate.

Because it is a theoretical perfect elipse based on a prefect circular orbit.

And it measn nothing.And it just might mean everything.

The fact that it is so close to sidereal time.And that is just a coincidence.

But if you getvthe right answer any other time is it a coicidence or is your working right.I think my working is right.

And if it is a coersion of time then it is alos a conversion of space.

That is one thing that is very clear baout converting a circle into an elipse it is converting time and space.

So it is converting dimension as well.

If the circular dimension is more than three then converting to an elipse will convert it to three.

And it must be some kind of mistake or an impossibility.

And maybe converting dimesions form ten to three is impossible.

And it might totally as easy as jujst converting time.

That may convert space as well.

Then my clock is a thoery of everything.

And that is what the clock always has been Newtons theory of everything.

And Newton is dead but he still speaks through the clock.

Because this kind of orbit was his idea.

And it goes back to another man.

Who lived a long time ago.

Becaus eorbits have been calculated from the year dot.

And they have been converted from before time itself.

So it not going to lead to a time machine.

There I ahve said it now it is not going to happen.

And I could take that attitude that be mentioning that you convert then dimensions to three that means you can travel through other dimensions.

And it might mean just that.

If man were that clever that he could figure out how to travel through time/space.

And if he is meant to travel faster than light then one day someone will come ujp with a better theory about how to do it.

But my theory is just to convert dimensions on paper.

And it is a map.

of the universe.

And iof ten dimesions are unstable then the eleipse genereated from an unstable circular orbit will also be unstable.

And an elipse is not an unstable orbit.

But it can be wrong.

But a perfect orbit cannot really exist.So it is only a hyothetical.

And it is a really good fusge.

Because there a better way to convert a circle into an elipse and that is eccentricity.

And if it works why hasn't someone thought about it before.

No one has because you can't convert a perfect circle into a perfect elipse.

And you can't convert a perfect circle into an imperfect elipse.

It is all about perfection myt time equation is 100% right.

Where the earths orbit is slightly wrong.

And the earth orbit must be right just the way it is.

Then my clock is six minutes out and the six minutes will be shown to be an important calculation taht has to do with imperfection.

Because the earth will be more perfect that a conversion of a circle into an elipse.

Perhaps it is ID that six minutes it is necessary on a bike that is a bell.

ANd is that six minuets necessary in earths orbit it sure is necessary.

So if the clock is wrong there is not much point is trying to convert space as well as time.

Because it will give the right answer for space.

And nothing could be closer to the truth.

It may not be the right answer for the earth but it will be the rigth answer for time/space.....

Take the clock and shove it.

I would if it knew where to put it because it doesn't suit the mantle of any university.

They don't want to know about a bible Pi clock because you can't use Pi or the bible to calculate time.

let alone both.

And it is both and it is right.The earth may have had a circular orbit in the begining which dcayes into an eliptical one.

And that is very possible if you know what you are talking about.

because the more you know about orbits the better off you would be.

But a circular orbit cannot decay into an elipse.

And if it can why can't it be true.

That the earth started about at 360 days in duration.

So we have five days difference and that is not six minutes.

But you can convert a circular orbit into an elipse.

And that is just it.

You can.

Now at the begining of the 21st century faced with scienitfic claims like neo-Darwinism and the multiverse (many universes) hypothesis in cosmology invented to avoid the overwhelming evidence for puprose and design found inmodern science the Catholic Church will again defend human nature by proclaiming the the immanent deisgn in nature is real Archbishop of Vienna.Quote fromHawkings book page 163.

The book is finished.

And it really is.

I have no more to say about the subject.

And Iam going to end the book.

Because a blog book does not need to bevery long.

It can be very interesting.

If it is kept short.

And the best thing about my blog book is everything I have written.

Because ntohing that I have written has been greater than a blog.

And everything I have written has just been the greater gift of blogging.

And everythig is right about blogging.

It means the glory goes to God.

And everybody who reads this blog shall enjoy it.

A unstable circular orbit in ten dimensions can be covnerted to a stable eliptical orbit in three dimensions.

If as the experts believe this equation is not reversible and Einsteins four dimensions of space time cannot be converted to ten.

Then string theory is proved wrong by the law of reversibility a thoery has to work in reverse for it to work at all.

Correct me if Iam wrong but I think this is like Jesus is the way the truth and the life something undeniable.

This proves the multiverse wrong also that hawking believes in instead of God.

Because it requires ten spacial dimensions to work.

ALexander hardigan had lost emma he no longer cared about life.

And that is what you have to be like to try to build a time machine.You have tyo be tired of living.

And alexander knew the patent clerk.

And he had an equation E=MC^2.

And that was in three dimesions.So he thought of adding a fourth dimension time.

And then reversing the equation for conversion of a circular 360 day orbit of the earth to an eliptical 365 day orbit.

Where the circular orbit is in higher dimesions and unstable.

But when it is converted to an eliptical orbit it is stable.

And it is instabilty which makes time travel possible.

Now it is aload of twaddle but we have to make a movie and we have to have stuff on a blackboard.

So ALex doesn't define time like Einsteins but as an eliptical orbit using Newtons equations.

Because time is absolute and he has a clock that proves this.

And that is is what movies are all about.

The scientist has a clock that proves you can travel in time.

ANd of course it proves the opposite.

So he has to reverse the equations so he can reverse time.

I need not have worrried I can't stop anyone from building a time machine and I can't help themdo it either.

If they built it by it'svery nature it would be something that is meant to be and could not be changed before the fect.

Because causualty would be in the future and it would strech back to when that phone call was smade.

And nothing could cause the phone call to not be made.

Except ereasing Alexs blackboard.

And so very serious Alex has a blackboard with pictures of an eliptical orbit and a circular orbit in ten dimensions.And has equations that convert ten dimesions of time/space to four dimensions.

And it is nonsense.

And it really might be nonsense just somehting I thought up to go along with the clock.

The clock must prove something.

And it might as well prove it all.

And anything thta is a little toe can prove it all.

Einsteins dice can prove it all Alexander could have had Einsteins dice.

And they obey classical rules like 1 ODD THROW+1 EVEN THROW= 2 ODD THROWS.

and 2 ODD THROWS+2 EVEN THROWS=4 EVEN THROWS.

And this unifies quantum mechnanics randomness with Einsteins order.

And thus you can predict the future of particles.

And if you can predict the future maybe you can travel into it.

And that is what Alexander put on the blackboard.........

and it is just for fun and it is not fun that is when it gets crazy when it is no longer fun to go back.

When it an obessession with changing something like Emmas death.

Then it very dark.

And it is a question about why he can't change it.

And the Morlock gave the answer that in the future he had with emma it was another universe where the timemachine did not exist.

So the timemachine caused emmas death.

and that is as positive as you can be about time travel it will cause the very thing you are trying so hard to prevent.

And that is negative.

It will change something but what is it that you are going to change.

is it the whole thing.

Or is is just emmas death.

Alex hardigan added two circular orbits in ten dimesions to two eliptical orbits in three dimension and got four dimensions.

he got an extra dimension which is time.

And nobody cna answer the question what was on ALexs Blackboard becaus eno one can actually travel through time.

I will reserve my judgement on the quantum telephone whethe rit works and cannot change anything.

But it must work by going two ways which means reversing the equation and converting four diemnsions into 2 lots of ten and 2 lots of three.

Which is a total of 26 dimensions.

and this the number of Alex hardigan if he ever builds his quantum telephone.

I would prefer to believe it is a delusion of granduer and that timetravel even quantum is impossible.

But the fact that a telephone is a quantum device as well as a classical one takes it out the realm of science fiction.

But it would ruin everything.And it might ruin all kinds of things.

Or maybe the nature of things is that it could change nothing.That nothing could be corrected.And that everything would already have happened.

ANd thats hard to understand because when the future and the past are joined by a telphone.The future is fixed like in revelations it is written and cannot be changed.

because you cna write it down at the other end of the telphone.

So I hope Iamnot runing everything by talking about my experiences with telephone calls from the future.I know that I cannot remember anything about the future.

And maybe that is just the right thing that I don't remember what I was told.

Because if I did remember I would try to change history.

And it cannot be changed.

And that is for the best...................

Dailtone wrote a script about the quantum telephone and it was a great script.

People needed to know when they would die.

So perhaps the call from the future was made after my death.

That would make sense because then notghing could be changed.

It is ineviatble that they will call people after they are dead.

Because peoplewho are bad wants to talk with the dead.

And the bible forbids this kind of communicatioon.

And quantum telephones are ruled out because of Einsteins theory of relativity.

And they might require absolute time as with newtons equations.

And that is the best science science that rules it out.

I would rule it out too as a mental abberation or a hoax.

And either is possible.

A girlcan be so right that she is wrong...............She is 100% right for you so she is 100% wrong as well.

That is what my theory of four states in one and four forces being one as a consequence.

It is so right to believe the equation for the universe must balance.

That is wrong.

And the way on which it is wrong is exnihilo.

Everthing must come form nothing which is an unbalanced thermodynamic equation.

But if energy comes fromanother dimension that it can balance with matter.

As E=MC^2 so energy is equal to matter..

And the delaer deals the cards and the delaer has dealt the cards that Iam playing with.

And maybe it is a bad hand.

But I will make the most of it that is all anyone can do.

I have been dealt a bad hand that is what faraday could have said that I don't have any skill at math.

But he didn't say he could not do science.

Just because he could not do experiments.And I can only do thought experiments.

But they are good and they are enough to make a thoery work.

And that is just it this is a bad hand.

And you have been dealt a better hand so share someof your cards with me.

That is what people never think of doing because they are competitive.

and don't let me start on Hamburger University it is a university where they study all kinds of Physics without the MATH.

It is Faradays Hamburger University where kids that are B level students can study and get a degree in physics.

An associate diploma. And they can go from B-A and study a graduate diploma where some of the math is attempted at a B level.

And you can't teach math to a dog and that is the joke that they made on the elegant universe.

And can make an attempt to teach physics maths at a B level.

ANd anything is possible.

There could be another faraday.

And lets hope so but it will be not as we have hoped........

And it always is more than we expect.

And often it is less than we expect.

But Faradays university of B level physics is for average students to take physics as far as it possible for them to go.And take it no further than their abilities allow.

It is a dream that is a nightmare.

For practicing physics professors.

Because they want you to learn everything BEFORE You study physics.

And that is totally right so right that it is totally wrong.

YOu don't have to learn everything before you make up your first theory.

You shoud make up your first theory in physics on day one.

And always remember that it was wrong.

Because further study willprove it right and it may that is what theories are all about.Turings mother said she had a scientist in the family who invented the electron he belonged to the royal society.

Turning pointed out to mumthat noboyd invented the electron it just exists.

The two equations that nobody invented and that no one cna take credit for are 2+2=4.

And the Green Salad Equation 1/3 APPLE+ 1/3 APPLE+ 1/3 APPLE= 1 APPLE/ORANGE.

God gets the glory when they are put togther.

1/3+1/3+13* 2+2=4= 4/3+4/3+4/3= 12/3= 4............Reverse the equation and you get one from 4.

There were 12 diciples and Jesus calculated 24 hours in the day to be 12 hours of daylight and 12 hours of night.

So 12 is Gods number and 24 is the exact opposite of 42 Douglas Adamsons number for the universe"A series of experiments using CERN's lead beam have presented compelling evidence for the existence of a new state of matter 20 times denser than nuclear matter, in which quarks, instead of being bound up into more complex particles such as protons and neutrons, are liberated to roam freely,'' it said.

"Such a state must have existed just a few microseconds after the Big Bang, before the formation of particles of matter as we know them today,'' it added.

It is great to be proved right.

But a quark gluon plasma soup may be not as I had hoped.

and it may be a new state of matter one that is four in one.

And if that is right my theory of the big bang is proven right.

But I don't believe the big bang.

I believe creation ex-nihilo there are Big problemsin little China.

And that is the title of this blog.

BIG problems with the little Big Bang.

For a start it contradicts aristotles laws.

And the universal energy equatioin doesn't balance for energy and matter.

And it can be made to balance but it leads to impossibilities that is infinities as you go back in time masss must increase and become infinite to balance energy.

And this is nonsense but CERN may not think so.

Cern may be detemrined to explian how the machine works.

Because I say it doesn't work.

And to have a mechanism that doesn't work is no better than having no mechanism at all.

1/3 APPLE+ 1/3 APPLE+ 1/3 ORANGE= 1* (2+2=4) 4/3 APPLE+ 4/3 APPLE+ 4/3 APPLE=12/3

=4.

Reverse the equation to convert 2+2=4 to an eqaution for one.

Aristotle can't be the problem can he.?

He can't or maths is wrong for the big bnag.

Which means we cna never know the answer with the tool we are using we need a new tool of a new type of contradictory maths to understand the big bang.

And maybe maths doesn't come in that color.

So we can never understand the maths for the begining.

A 2+2=4 univers eis one where the laws are random and they are equations added at random 2+2=4.

The other 10^500 universes must all be clones of that hypothetical random universe.

Our universe is the anti universe of the 2+2=4 universe where the laws are not random.

You can't arrive at a non random universe by using the laws of randomness.

And this is the greatest law of all you can't get non randomnesss by using random laws.

A non random universe is the opposite of a random one.

And all random universes have laws where everythign goes.

Where every possibility is expressed in the one universe the other 10^499 universes are just clones of the 2+2=4 universe.

OK I don't know what Iam talking about but isn't that a great theory.

There are only really two kinds of universes one where everything is random and one where everything is non random.

So you see where this is leading random laws mean a universe where orbits are unstable.

Where galaxiies stars and planets cannot exist.

And that is something Hakwing has not understood.

There is no such thing a s a universe with random laws it is simply a fairy tale.

There is only our universe with laws that are designed.

How about a warp engine that converts Einstein 4 dimesional space time into ten dimesions.

Sounds impossible.

But it is possible on paper.

The secret is anew definition of space/time we need an Einstein/Newton eqaution for the liptical orbit of the earth.

We have to define time as an eliptical orbit.

Then what the experts say that four dimensional space time equations cannot be converted to ten dimensions.

Just is not so.

And it if it not so string theory is true.But maybe not with a multiverse.

Iam hoping that it rules out the multiverse.

String theory can only be correct if the equation to convert a circular orbit of higher dimensions to an eliptical orbit of four dimensions can be reversed.

And experts will tell you the equation cannot be reversed because of the way Einstein defines time/space as a warping of space.

But for the earth to travel around the sun in an elipse space has to warp.

So Iam confident we can write an Einstein Newton equation for time space in three dimesions.

The trick is that an elipse is alays in three dimesions whereas a circle can be in as many as 11 deminsions.

My forumula means you can convert a circle into an elipse.

And this is very clever.

It is the cleverest thing I have ever come up with.

The clock takes the cake and the prize for the most advanced clock of it's kind.

And it leads to a new definition of time.

WHich is what Einstein did with Newton now it what newtons has done with Einstein.

If we add newtons equations for time 2+2=4 with Einsteins space time we get space time for an eliptical orbit of the earth.

And it so tremendous I want to cry because no one has said anything positive about it.

And Amey my engineer has said that it is completely unknown to science.

And it isn't if you read Hawkings book.

Hawking desreves much of the credit.

And it is only that I had alre3ady built the clock.And the clock makes a huge difference to the way you see things.....

There is no telling what EInsteins theory can do in ten dimensions.

It may be what they are looking for and I will bet that is not what they are hoping for.

But it something that proves I ahve dedicated my work to God.

So it will prove GENESIS.

And there will no way to disprove GENESIS.

OUT OF NOTHING CANNOT BE WRONG.

AND IT CANNOT BE NOTHING.

THEN IT IS SOMETHING AND THEN IT ISN"T RIGHT.

The clock converts a circular year to an eliptical one.That is converting 360 days to 365 days.

And our conversion formula converts with an accuracy of plus or minus six minnutes per year.

And this a very large figure if it is calculated onver 78 billion light years.

It is almost the smae figure as 13.6 billion in seconds.

This makes it a job for a supercomputer.

And Cosmos ius up to the job and is working on the clock even as we speak.

It is right to think so even though it may not be as we have hoped.

Maybe Swinburne is using the clock for astronomy.

But it is right to expect results as we have dedicated our work to God.

And when we convert a circle into an elipse we can convert any orbit of any planet from a circle into an elipse.

That makes it universal and not local time.

We can try it on our solar system.

And it will give accurate time for any of the planets..............

And it is not so.

It is false and it is out by six minutes.

But what if the six minutes are a greater degree of precision.

Then it is more accurate than an atomic clock programmed with sidereal time.

That means we any astronomy the flash clock will be more accurate than the C clock.

And the C clock is just as accurate as the flash clock when we convert one to the other.

And that applies to all clocks if we convert time we can use our clock for any other clock.

And get more accurate time by six minutes per year.

And we convert any circle in 10 dimesions to an elipse in three dimesions.

If it is an orbit it is something you can draw and EInstein equation for.

The equation for earths orbit is too complicated to be reversed into 10 dimensional time.

BUt if we could do it then we could unify string theory with Einsteins thoery and both would be right.

BUt because we cannot we must doubt that string theory is correct.

Since Einsteins thoery is not in ten dimensions and cannot be.

And that is a big cannot because the experts say Einsteins thoery cannot be converted to ten dimesions.

But I think it can be.

If a person is clever enough to define time as the orbit of the earth.

Einsteins definition of time is not the same as newtons...

If we use newtons definition of time we may get an error.

And if we use Einsteins definition of time for earth orbit we may get an accurate time.There is a difference in believing in the big bang theory and being able to completely and fully explain it at the same time. Name one thing that is extremely complicated that can be explained 100%. Take weather for example, we have a good understanding of weather but that doesn't mean we can always predict what the temperature will be the next day, or whether you need to bring an umbrella to work. Does that mean that weather doesn't exist, or that what we believe causes weather doesn't exist? No, it just means that we need to look deeper into our understanding of weather to continue understanding it.

There is a lot of evidence that suggests that the big bang happened, such as the cosmic radiation background and that galaxies are basically all moving away from each other. No one really knows what caused the big bang, or what happened before the big bang, but that doesn't mean you can't believe in it. No one can prove with scientific evidence that God exists, but that doesn't mean you can't believe in God.

I believe in the big bang and the evidence that scientists around the world have discovered, and I also believe in God. My belief is that God created the big bang and created the building blocks for humans to have emotions such as love, hate, compassion, family and understanding that all came from some big bang. So I don't think that God and the big bang conflict. Anyone that says that something didn't happen or doesn't exist because we can't fully explain it is an idiot.

Now I disagree with this.

The big bang has a time dilation problem like starlight and time.

78 billion years observable universe verses 13.6 billion for the big bang age of the universe.

There is the inflation problem and the horizon problem ( informity of temperature of the universe).

Needs more time is 78 billion years enough.

Can't be reconcilled with the big bang..............

Hawkings thoery of the big bang requires a physics version of The biologicall theory of spontaneous generation.

Which has the odds stacksed against it I don't believe this becaus eof probability.

And if 10^500 universes all have different random laws like my computer program.

The other unvierses require higher dimesions which mean circular orbits since eliptical orbits like the earths can only exist in three dimensions.

This is a totally new idea my brains combined with Hawkings latest book Grand design..

You just get bable if you combine random laws not a auniverse

Lets talk about it on Google Talk....................

The mechnism of the big bang must be the one state of matter where the four forces are one.

And that must have exploded turning potential energy into kinetic.

There are major problems with this 2+2=4 doesn't equal four for a bouncing ball or the cycles of the universe.

And if you loose energy mass must increase by the speed of light slowing down or speeding up.

If mass increases as you go back in time it become infinite with infnite time and maybe even with finite.Thats new manna.

The universe can be finitely old and mass will still become infninite.

The other mechanism of the big bang is inflation and it is proven to be just a fudge like Einsteins cosmological constant.There are very strong arguements against inflation including the horizon problem..

There is a starlight and time problem with the big bang in that the observable universe is 78 billion years old where the big bang says the universe is only.

The mirror chamber experiment shows that light travels a vast distance between two mirrors reflected to infinity.

In only a very short time.To the observor but if you were on the mirror millions of years would have passed................

The speed of ight slows in the mirror and adds up to 99% of the speed of light when you add u all the iamges.

So light has an infinite speed on the mirror chamber.

It will repay further study by creation science.The universe could have gone pear shaped very quickly if something had gone wrong with the big bang.

But nothing can go wrong when four states of matter become one and then explode to form four again......................

I noticed your pain it runs deep share it and become stronger by the sharing.

And Judge Judy said if a thing doesn't make sense it is probably not true................

And the God of shakaree is probably not true.

And the God of the big bang is not true either.

Because energy equation has to balance thats what they say in Hong Kong.

And energy does not balance for the big bang energy is borrowed against the uncertainty principal and paid back by gravity.

And this is hogwash it just doesn't make sene to get a free lunch.

My mechanism is the only proposal that makes sense and it is ruled out by infinite mass.

Use Einsteins dice to predict the strng theory of gravity with quantum mechanics.

And then convert string theory of gravity of r a circula robit in 11 deimnesions to a 4 D EInstein spce time for an eliptical orbit..

That way we have a quantum thoery of gravity in 11 demensions converted to the 4 dimesions of EInsteins space time.

And we cna reverse the equation to get the quantum theory of gravity from Einsetins 4D space time equations.

And Steve this is just so much nonsense you cannot do what you are suggesting.

The maths is just too hard.

But if the math sis very hard does that mean it is worth doing.

Because if it is too easy it is probably not a theory of everything.

When we reverse the penrose eqaution for a rotating black hole in a time contradiction Godle universe we get non contradictory time in our universe.

And do we.

That is what theory is all about we don't know what we will get when we reverse penrose equation in a Godel universe..................

It is just a positivistic model we are not sayng the big crucnh is a godel just that th eequations for the big bang in our universe are contradictory this is a way of making them make sense.

They should not have meaningless infinities.

And we should be able to eliminate them by rounding off Pi.

Then they will be finite we can also use the third equation add add infinities to get one.

1/3 APPLE+ 1/3 ORANGE+ 1/3 oRANGE=1 APPLE/ORANGE.

ANd you don't have to know everything to talk off the wall you just have to know something and start talking.

That is more important that readng.

If I read now I come wit new ideas because I started out by speaking.

And unless you have a thoery there is no point in doing the math otherwise you will just end u a maths tutor and not a theoretical physisist.

De Brogle determinism applied before the big bang using my Einsteins dice.

And you could predict all the outcomes for the universe if it were possible to reverse it to before the big bang.

Because it is not it is impossible to predict the universe with absolute determinism..

We can only speculate that determinism and Einsteins theory applied before the big bang and quantum randomness after the big bang at the atomic level.

But it is good specualtion.Call this thoery out of information in the begining was the word and the word was with God and the word was God.

But anyway the bible said ex-nihilo out of nothing rather than out of something so I will believe for another explaiantion other than quantum determinism.

If we use Einsteins dice to produce a virtual universe on the computer using the standard eqaution added 2+2=4.

Then we can predict the outcome for any particle maybe even %50 or higher.

And if we know what the future is going to be in this virtual universe on computer then it is quite different to make predictions about our universe which uses random dice.

Is it even possible to know random outcomes beforehand.

If it can be done then this is the way to do it and maybe De Brogels eqautions are the way to do it.

And they may not work with these dice.

And maybe they both work togther like good and bad cops...............

It is a marvellous toy and thats all and that is what a determined universe is it is a marvellous toy it tells us it would be like in a universe where everything is determined.

ANd the reason why our universe is not so.

But quite different to that obviously we can know some things about the future like the weather. and not everything can be undermined.

That is why it may be more than a toy.

But I think children will love the dice and adults will love to predict horses based on the dice.

And roulette.

And any kind of dice game of which there are over 100.

Kids cna play any dice game with EInsteins dice and the game will be predictable.

And that does not mean it is easy to win against a computer.

With a computer playing 100 games of dice it can be very hard to beat the computer.

And we are finished blogging.

And we might be.

But let go on to take possession of it for we shall surely overcome it.

And that is what the devil means about us that he will take possession of us.

And we should be not be afraid of our enemies for we will take possession of them.And they will be utterly defeated.

Steve

Posted by STEVE at 12:58 AM 0 comments:

Post a Comment

Home Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom) PLAN B FOR DAMPT OR 2 FOR THE MONEY AND THREE FOR THE SHOW

▼ 2010 (1)

▼ February (1)

BLOG THE BOOK 2

About Me

STEPHEN JEFFREY

View my complete profile