• [deleted]

I just realised something that a short paragraph in my essay has been trying to tell me.

That paragraph is -

Another way of stating the previous sentence is: just as E=mc2 means energy must contain particles e.g. electromagnetic energy is composed of photons, E=m^1 plus 0 (see #12) means a computer in the hyperspace of the universe which is projected onto space-time must also be contained in the hyperspace of each particle and projected onto the space-time of each immaterial particle i.e. the entire universe is contained in (or unified with) every one of its particles.

My realisation is -

If strings exist, cosmic strings would too.

  • [deleted]

I recently fell in love with using my computer's Windows Movie Maker to express myself. This is in addition to my entry in the FQXi essay contest for 2011 and its associated posts. You've heard of "Star Trek" - now meet my film "Time Trek" (also called "2011: A Space-time Odyssey"). This movie on Amazon Studios (you can choose between a 28-minute version and a 73-minute version) has 2 purposes - 1) to be an outlet for some ideas I have about science in the future and how its reconciliation with religion will be achieved, as well as 2) combination of those serious ideas with pure entertainment and a good story. To watch it now (for free), go to

Please visit the Amazon Studios site

and scroll halfway down the page. Hope you like it!

7 days later
  • [deleted]

I know I can't submit another essay. I don't plan to - these are just some comments that came to mind after thinking about my essay. They don't seem very relevant to the topic "Is Reality Digital or Analog?" but writing them has given even more satisfaction than writing the essay, and I'm in the mood to share them with the whole world. So if you've got time to read them ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I fully realise that my essay doesn't sound like science at all. I can appreciate that many readers think it belongs to science fiction and fantasy. It does have saving graces though. I'm amazed at how well it fits in with the discoveries of the Microwave Anisotropy Probe and with string theory, culminating in the LHC's experimentally verified strings and my prediction of antistrings. Having said that, I must say this - it's very strange that the scientific world is so obsessed with mathematics (admittedly, my essay did dabble with it when offering a version of E=mc2 to suit the digital world - but I kept it very simple ... so simple it might be regarded as wrong). Math seems to be regarded as infallible, even though it leads to mistakes. The (partial) mistake I have in mind is string theory. I don't deny that there certainly is value in the theory, and in maths, but logic reveals shortcomings. Let me explain, after first writing a short section describing an unconventional approach to unveiling unification and offering an alternative to the Higgs boson that relies on gravitational waves.

ALTERNATIVE TO HIGGS BOSON

An important step might be to think of "... the grand design of the universe, a single theory that explains everything" (words used by Stephen Hawking on the American version of Amazon, when promoting his latest book "The Grand Design" - coauthored with Leonard Mlodinow, Bantam Books, 2010) in a different way than physicists who are presently working on science's holy grail of unification. The universe's underlying electronic foundation* (which makes our cosmos into a partially-complete unification, similar to 2 objects which appear billions of years or billions of light-years apart on a huge computer screen actually being unified by the strings of ones and zeros making up the computer code which is all in one small place) would make our cosmos into physics' holy grail of a complete unification if it enabled not only elimination of all distances in space and time, but also elimination of distance between (and including) the different sides of objects and particles. This last point requires the universe to not merely be a vast collection of the countless photons, electrons and other quantum particles within it; but to be a unified whole that has "particles" and "waves" built into its union of digital 1's and 0's (or its union of qubits - quantum binary digits). If we use the example of CGH (computer generated holography, these "particles" and "waves" could be elements produced by the interaction of electromagnetic and presently undiscovered gravitational waves, producing what we know as mass and forming what we know as space-time. Einstein predicted the existence of gravitational waves, and measurements on the Hulse-Taylor binary-star system resulted in Russell Hulse and Joe Taylor being awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1993 for their work, which was the first indirect evidence for gravitational waves. The feedback of the past and future universes into the unified cosmos's electronic foundation would ensure that both past and future could not be altered. Our brains and minds are part of this unification too - which must mean extrasensory perception and telekinetic independence from technology are possible, despite modern science's objections to these phenomena which appear to be based on non-unification.

* For more information on the universe's proposed electronic foundation, please see my article and postings at

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/814

STRINGS ARE ONLY PART OF MATTER'S BASIS

Space and time only exist in our experience. They are emergent properties, like wetness and mind. We experience wetness because it emerges from the building blocks of the hydrogen and oxygen atoms which make up water. We experience mind because it emerges from the building blocks of neurons composing the brain. And we experience space-time since it emerges from the building blocks making up the universe. These units are a combination of electromagnetic pulses (forming a cosmic computer which includes randomness and thus the potential to escape rigid preprogramming, and have a small degree of free will) as well as a cosmic hologram (this is produced by the interaction of electromagnetic plus gravitational waves and combination of the holographic aspect with the electronic aspect unifies general relativity with quantum physics). Every physical and nonphysical part of the universal hologram would be a receptor for the downloading of data from the cosmic computer which not only exists in the hyperspace of the large-scale universe but also in the hyperspace of each subatomic particle. (In other words, the holographic universe or spacetime we know is a screen for displaying data from the 5th-dimensional computer.)

It might be helpful to visualise time as the playing of a CD or video tape. The entire disc or tape obviously exists all the time. But our physical senses can only perceive a tiny part of the sound and the sights at any fraction of a second. I believe space and time are infinite, so it might be more accurate to visualise time as that HUGE number - in this case, of CDs or tapes - which some versions of string theory propose (10 exponent 500). My essay tells you exactly how to travel to the future, how to return home, and how to travel into our past. Neither future nor past can be altered (a blow to our belief that we have the free will to shape the future) and my explanation of travel to the past requires re-interpretation of the concepts of "multiverse" and "parallel universes". It also requires the ability to travel billions of light years INSTANTLY - no doubt many readers will instantly dismiss the essay because their preconceptions "know" this simply isn't possible. It indeed sounds like pure fantasy, but I outline an approach based on electrical engineering, General Relativity, and Miguel Alcubierre's 1994 proposal of "warp drive" that makes it logically possible.

My essay explains why the universe is a Mobius loop and how it is contained in, or unified with, each of its particles (relying on physical senses or 21st-century scientific instruments would make this statement ridiculous). Then each fermion and boson would also be composed of the 3 spatial dimensions, the 4th dimension of time, and the 5th dimension of hyperspace. Detectors like the Large Hadron Collider would be unable to "see" the time and hyperspace components of particles but could only see the small (maybe 5% of the whole) 3 spatial dimensions (the time component would be what we call dark matter), erroneously assuming particles are those small fractions of a Mobius loop that physics calls strings. "Dark matter" would exert a gravitational influence because time, being part of a curved Mobius loop (whether of quantum or cosmic scale), would push objects together in the same way Einstein's curved space-time pushes objects together. We can speak of the HST now - no, not the Hubble Space Telescope but Hyperspatial SpaceTime. We can visualise the Mobius loop as composed of a hyperspace computer which generates information on how things change from one presently undetectably tiny fraction of a second to the next (we call this time, and it's comparable to the frames in a movie) and transmits the data (transmits dark energy) to the insignificant portion of length, width and depth that makes up subatomic particles ... and the universe.

Preceding the Big Bang (which created this local section of the infinite, eternal universe ... or if you prefer, this subuniverse of the megauniverse) there would have been no space, matter or time in this subuniverse. No transmissions of dark energy (creating time and space/matter) would have occurred - therefore the dark-energy content of the universe would have been zero, increasing to the present 72% as more and more matter was created. How is matter created? Perhaps as cosmologist Alan Guth once suggested -

"You might even be able to start a new universe using energy equivalent to just a few pounds of matter. Provided you could find some way to compress it to a density of about 10^75 (10 exponent 75) grams per cubic centimeter, and provided you could trigger the thing ..."

At the time the Cosmic Microwave Background was emitted (less than a million years after the big bang), results from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe say the dark-energy content of the universe was negligible. Space/matter has been increasing since the big bang so transmissions from hyperspace computer (dark energy) which create them are increasing while the volume of the Mobius loop occupied by time/hyperspace (dark matter) has been shrinking as a result - according to the WMAP satellite, from 63% when the CMB was emitted to 23% today. Why isn't dark energy increasing at the same rate dark matter is decreasing? It must be because, as stated earlier, both time and hyperspace exert a gravitational influence, thereby mimicking space and matter to a degree. This mimicry causes the dark matter between the start of the CMB and the present to decrease by only about 40% while dark energy increases in the same period by about 70%. If we were dealing with a simple and ordinary loop, this similarity would cause dark matter and dark energy to be more or less equal and if there was any difference in their amount of decrease/increase, it would be in the same direction. But we're talking about Mobius loops which are like strips of paper that have been twisted 180 degrees before the ends are joined. This causes their variation to go in different directions (one increases, the other decreases) and the amount of variation is quite significant (+72%, -40%). My guess is that the real-life twist occurs in the temporal segment of the loop, enabling a traveller in time to go in different directions i.e. into the future or into the past. To replenish dark matter in billions of years, we merely have to extend Guth's proposal by using the knowledge of that time to create more matter.

A real-life Mobius is by no means a featureless loop, however. If, contrary to our impressions, the universe is unified with each particle it's composed of; the WMAP satellite's findings must apply to the quantum world. The figures 72%, 23% and 5% would not only describe the present universe's content of dark energy, dark matter and ordinary matter but also any particle's content of space or ordinary matter (5%), time or dark matter (23% - time is considered to be dark matter here because dark matter is regarded as ordinary matter invisible to us since it's present in another region of the dimension we call time, just as most of a sphere is in another dimension and consequently appears as a dot when first entering Edwin Abbott's 1884 exploration of other dimensions called "Flatland"), and hyperspace (72%: the transmissions from the hyperspace computer create space and matter, cause expansion of space on cosmic scales where there are no forces to overcome the expansion as there is in matter, and are known as dark energy - creating more matter causes that matter's repelling gravity to bring about accelerating expansion).

Look at a picture of a Mobius (thanks to the repeating scales of fractal geometry, the apparently empty interior and exterior of the Mobius universe would actually be the same as the visible loop). Imagine the space/ordinary matter to be situated immediately counterclockwise (perhaps on the bottom of the loop) to the hyperspace segment and the time/dark matter portion to be immediately counterclockwise to the space/ordinary matter (time/dark matter would, moving clockwise, be next to the hyperspace segment).

The hyperspace transmissions flow directly into space/matter (all motion - "flow" and "transmissions" - are actually comparable to individual frames in a movie but are spoken of in everyday terms of motion for convenience, like saying the sun rises and sets) and are responsible for the large and unimpeded 72% increase, since the CMB was emitted, of dark energy. This flow rate of 72% also enters the time/dark matter section adjacent to hyperspace ... but the loop's twist seems to be in the time section. If we were to cut the loop lengthwise with scissors, previously varying the number of half-twists results in things such as two rings linked together or a knotted ring. So we get barriers to motion and blockages. Returning to the normal loop and twist, matters are less drastic and motion is merely slowed, resulting in a 23% flow rate.

If we lived in a non-unified universe of materialism, this is how things would remain (dark matter would have increased so today's content would be a low 23%). On p. 179 of "The Grand Design" by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow (Bantam Press, 2010) it's stated "One requirement any law of nature must satisfy is that it dictates that the energy of an isolated body surrounded by empty space is positive ..."

The only problem with that sentence, in an "everything is everywhere and everywhen" universe, is the word isolated. There can be no such thing as isolated in our cosmic-quantum unification. Page 179 also says "... if the energy of an isolated body were negative ... there would be no reason that bodies could not appear anywhere and everywhere." Does this mean you and I (plus all things in time and space) are a union of both positive and negative energy, able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere? Dark matter, not being entirely positive, would be anywhere and everywhere as well as having decreased so today's content would be a low 23% (which is what WMAP says is the case).

If everything is a union of positive and negative energy, every matter particle and force-carrying particle would be too. And the strings the Large Hadron Collider might detect (being the parts of particles' Mobius loops it could see since those parts would be space/ordinary matter) might come in both positive and negative varieties. In 1928 English physicist Paul Dirac (1902-84) proposed that all negative energy states are already occupied by (then hypothetical) antiparticles (particles of antimatter). Building on this results in proposal of strings and antistrings.

My essay tells you how to travel into the future, how to return home, and how to take a trip into our past. Regarding travel beyond our start and into the past ... it can't be denied that these paragraphs imply the possibility of humans from the distant future time-travelling to the distant past and using electronics to create this particular subuniverse's computer-generated Big Bang. An accomplishment such as this would be the supreme example of "backward causality" (effects influencing causes) promoted by Yakir Aharonov, John Cramer and others. However, realising that we live in a cosmic-quantum unification with zero-separation and recalling Isaac Newton's inverse-square law and what it says about the force between two particles being infinite (does infinite mean 10 ^ 500, the HUGE number of universes proposed by some versions of string theory?) if the distance of separation goes to zero means there's still room for God (another bit of scientifically objectionable science fiction?) because God would be a pantheistic union of the megauniverse's material and mental parts, forming a union with humans in a cosmic unification.

--------------------------------------------------------

5 days later
  • [deleted]

According to the Community Ratings, my essay in the 2011 Essay Contest is sliding further down the ratings each day. But I'm having more luck with a science journal called General Science Journal - comments of mine inspired by the essay (which are nearly 20,000 words long and include comments about "The Nature of Time" as well as "Is Reality Digital or Analog?") were published in the Journal on Feb. 6 and may be viewed at http://gsjournal.net/ntham/bartlett.pdf

    • [deleted]

    Don't worry about the rating. The important thing is to have your work online for others to pick up on if/when they see something in it. Keep learning and developing your ideas, then try again.

    Rodney

    Gud on ya mate! I think you have it all sorted. Though just a few loose ends to tie up before you have to fly over for the Nobel prize.

    I do have to admit there are a couple of bits I'd like to see a bit more falsification of, but I do have an analogy for your mobius loop that works for me.

    It's a Tokamac. If you've never heard of one think continuous loop double helix. This is a real animal, from atomic physics up black holes, it's a toroid that spins on its (donut) planar axis but with a twin 'solenoid' em field that moves round the 'body' in both directions as it spins - a bit like your loop, but with a different purpose.

    Don't laugh.. it eats galaxies and spits us out again, (in both directions) recycling us as plasma. Forget the re-ionisation epoch, and chiral polarisation problems this resolves them all. Now of course if we go bigger still, it does bear some resemblance to this big bang we all heard a while ago.

    So there it is. Before the big bang (or 'whoosh!) was our predecessor universe. we've all done the Star Treck thing as we've been recycled and spat out at 7c at least once already (5bn years ago), and there must be life after death as time just flashes by once we're dead, and eventually our ionised bits will be part of some other organism! (if time is eternal). And all because light changes speed between 'discrete field' inertial frames. [the paper with lots of falsification has just been submitted].

    And don't panic, we don't get we don't get eaten again till after lights out, in about another 5bn years when the sun's about dead. So are we crazy or is it them? Do you think some of our imprinted data didn't get fully wiped on recycling?

    Best of luck

    Peter

    Forgot something;

    I've been playing with video's too, but this one has almost all of science packed into less than 2 minutes - including time dilation and lengthe contraction!

    http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/1_YouTube__Dilation.htm

    p

    • [deleted]

    Hi Philip,

    You're right - the important thing is to have my work online. I won't stop trying ... not ever! I often want to, because I don't enjoy controversy at all. But I always end up finding another place where I want to promote my ideas. I guess human nature makes it impossible to give up when a person has no doubt he or she is on the right track.

    Sometimes, what science accepts as fundamentals have to change. People once had a fundamental belief that the world was flat - and that space and time were absolutes which could never vary - and that traveling to the moon was simply fantasy. All those fundamental beliefs changed though, understandably, not without a fight (change is never easy). Now it's time for some more fundamental beliefs - both public and scientific - to change.

    best of luck,

    Rodney

    • [deleted]

    Hi Peter,

    I'm really glad you liked my essay and video. I liked your essay too - I haven't been able to watch your video yet cos each time I've tried, my computer told me "an error occurred". But I'm sure it'll be just as impressive as the essay when I finally am able to watch it.

    Going back to that email you sent me, I have to agree that I've "assembled some key parts of the space ship of the future, then gone and jumped off the Eiffel tower to see if they worked." I can be rather impulsive sometimes! That's the way people tend to be when they have no doubt they're on to something big. Today it's the Eiffel Tower ... tomorrow I'll jump right out of our planet's little patch of space and time. Before I go though, I'll wait around for that Nobel Prize (they'll have to mail it to me, cos I don't have a passport). I'm sure you could help me curb that impulsiveness. I'll add my 10 to your 10 and we'll make your essay (2020 vision) as well as my essay shoot to the top of FQXi's Ratings overnight!

    Rodney

    Rod

    I'll see if there's a video problem Georgina saw it ok. Thanks for the support. may be too obvious right this mo so I'll revert shortly.

    I thought they were letting you guys out for good behaviour these days lol! I can pick it up and fly out with it if you like.

    best wishes

    Peter

      • [deleted]

      Hi Peter,

      Still can't see your video. Maybe it just doesn't like Aussies.

      Sure, you can pick up my Nobel and fly out with it. That'll save me from having to buy a penguin suit, and from giving a speech, and from attending a formal banquet (I'm no good at any of those things - I'll stay in my room with my books and computer). You might have a hundred more birthdays before they decide to hand it over, though.

      Rodney

      7 days later
      • [deleted]

      CONCLUSIONS DERIVED FROM MY ESSAY AND POSTS (CLAIMING ESP IS POSSIBLE IN A UNIFIED UNIVERSE, THE LAW OF CONSERVATION HAS CONSEQUENCES FOR HUMAN BABIES, HOW HYPERSPACE COMPUTERS MAKE REALITY'S POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS, AND RETHINKING BOHR'S ATOMIC STRUCTURE)

      At the end of #8 in the essay -

      Change "Our brains and minds are part of this unification too - which must mean extrasensory perception and telekinetic independence from technology are possible" to:

      Our brains and minds are part of this unification too - which must mean extrasensory perception and telekinetic independence from technology are possible, DESPITE MODERN SCIENCE'S OBJECTIONS WHICH APPEAR TO BE BASED ON NON-UNIFICATION.

      FROM THE ESSAY'S FINAL PARAGRAPH -

      Change "... continuous "creation" (actually, recycling) of matter ..." to:

      "... continuous "creation" (actually, recycling - in agreement with the Law of Conservation which says neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed, only converted *) of matter ..."

      * So is it not possible that the newly fertilised egg which grows into a baby could ultimately be a conversion of matter and energy from the future, and the supreme example of "backward causality" (effects influencing causes). This justifies my statement in the next section (of a book I'm writing, called "Humans and their Universes") that "every person we see is ultimately from the future".

      ADD TO FEB. 2, 2011 POST IMMEDIATELY BEFORE POST'S FINAL PARAGRAPH -

      Building on this results in proposal of strings and antistrings - mathematics has positive and negative quantities, and computers (whether in hyperspace or not) generate maths, causing reality to be both positive and negative; and unconventional cosmologist Max Tegmark is correct when he says mathematical formulas create reality. So when matter and antimatter meet, the positive and negative quantities form zero and neutralise (destroy) each other; and the positive/negative components of everything must avoid direct contact - this separation can either be in space or in time because all things are able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation in space) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere (in time as well as space). Pauli's exclusion principle - which was discovered in 1925 and says 2 matter particles cannot have both the same position and the same velocity - does not apply to separation of matter/antimatter since it only applies in an objective, non-unified universe ... though programming in the "cosmic computer" does include it as applicable to the reality we perceive since that appears objective to us; and presents separation and solidity to our physical senses and their extensions, scientific instruments.

      Building on Mobius loops and negative energy also explains why electrons don't spiral into the nucleus of the atom when orbiting it like planets around a star would, according to the theories of Newton and Maxwell, cause the electrons to continuously emit electromagnetic radiation and this loss of energy would result in their crashing into the nucleus. As we've noted, fractal geometry tells us that what is outside or inside a Mobius loop is the same as the loop itself. So we can visualise an atom as a Mobius loop (the outside could be the universe and the inside could be a subatomic particle - with those two being One because of unification). We can imagine a 72% flow rate into the "dark matter" part of the atomic Mobius becoming not merely a 23% flow into the ordinary matter but, as discussed above, becoming a negative 23% flow. That is, energy is of course radiated - even from those special orbits or stationary states which Danish physicist Niels Bohr (1885-1962) said radiation would not be continuously emitted and wouldn't contribute to an electron-nucleus collision. But it isn't energy as we know it. There is no positive radiation emitted - the energy is "less than nothing" i.e. negative - according to the previous paragraph, mathematics has positive and negative quantities, and computers (whether in hyperspace or not) generate maths. Therefore, Bohr was correct to introduce the quantum into the atom and to "quantise" electron orbits - the "quantum jump" or "quantum leap" in which an electron's transition between orbits or energy levels occurs instantaneously without occupying the space between orbits is also explicable by computers in hyperspace generating mathematics and making electrons disappear from one orbit and instantly reappear in another orbit. Since E=mc2 means energy must contain particles and negative energy must contain antiparticles (e.g. electromagnetic energy is composed of photons), antiphotons are emitted from the electrons which are consequently not radiating energy and do not spiral into the nucleus. In his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time", Stephen Hawkjng says on p. 68 that "In the case of the force-carrying particles (like the photon), the antiparticles are the same as the particles themselves." Thus, the "photons" which are emitted during the quantum leaps of electrons from higher to lower energy levels could actually be antiphotons.

      • [deleted]

      I have more conclusions derived from my essay, this time regarding General Relativity's mass increase and Lorentz contraction and time dilation. To make things more easily readable (if anybody ever reads this), I'll post most of my conclusions in one essay instead of referring readers to different places.

      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      I fully realise that my essay doesn't sound like science at all. I can appreciate that many readers think it belongs to science fiction and fantasy. It does have saving graces though. I'm amazed at how well it fits in with the discoveries of the Microwave Anisotropy Probe and with string theory, culminating in the LHC's experimentally verified strings and my prediction of negative-energy antistrings. Having said that, I must say this - it's very strange that the scientific world is so obsessed with mathematics (admittedly, my essay did dabble with it when offering a version of E=mc2 to suit the digital world - but I kept it very simple ... so simple it might be regarded as wrong). Math seems to be regarded as infallible, even though it leads to mistakes. The (partial) mistake I have in mind is string theory. I don't deny that there certainly is value in the theory, and in maths, but logic reveals shortcomings. Let me explain, after first writing a short section describing an unconventional approach to unveiling unification and offering an alternative to the Higgs boson that relies on gravitational waves.

      ALTERNATIVE TO HIGGS BOSON

      An important step might be to think of "... the grand design of the universe, a single theory that explains everything" (words used by Stephen Hawking on the American version of Amazon, when promoting his latest book "The Grand Design" - coauthored with Leonard Mlodinow, Bantam Books, 2010) in a different way than physicists who are presently working on science's holy grail of unification. The universe's underlying electronic foundation* (which makes our cosmos into a partially-complete unification, similar to 2 objects which appear billions of years or billions of light-years apart on a huge computer screen actually being unified by the strings of ones and zeros making up the computer code which is all in one small place) would make our cosmos into physics' holy grail of a complete unification if it enabled not only elimination of all distances in space and time, but also elimination of distance between (and including) the different sides of objects and particles. This last point requires the universe to not merely be a vast collection of the countless photons, electrons and other quantum particles within it; but to be a unified whole that has "particles" and "waves" built into its union of digital 1's and 0's (or its union of qubits - quantum binary digits). If we use the example of CGH (computer generated holography, these "particles" and "waves" could be elements produced by the interaction of electromagnetic and presently undiscovered gravitational waves, producing what we know as mass and forming what we know as space-time. Einstein predicted the existence of gravitational waves, and measurements on the Hulse-Taylor binary-star system resulted in Russell Hulse and Joe Taylor being awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1993 for their work, which was the first indirect evidence for gravitational waves. The feedback of the past and future universes into the unified cosmos's electronic foundation would ensure that both past and future could not be altered. Our brains and minds are part of this unification too - which must mean extrasensory perception and telekinetic independence from technology are possible, despite modern science's objections which appear to be based on non-unification.

      * For more information on the universe's proposed electronic foundation, please see my article and postings at

      http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/814

      STRINGS ARE ONLY PART OF MATTER'S BASIS

      Space and time only exist in our experience. They are emergent properties, like wetness and mind. We experience wetness because it emerges from the building blocks of the hydrogen and oxygen atoms which make up water. We experience mind because it emerges from the building blocks of neurons composing the brain. And we experience space-time since it emerges from the building blocks making up the universe. These units are a combination of electromagnetic pulses (forming a cosmic computer which includes randomness and thus the potential to escape rigid preprogramming, and have a small degree of free will) as well as a cosmic hologram (this is produced by the interaction of electromagnetic plus gravitational waves and combination of the holographic aspect with the electronic aspect unifies general relativity with quantum physics). Every physical and nonphysical part of the universal hologram would be a receptor for the downloading of data from the cosmic computer which not only exists in the hyperspace of the large-scale universe but also in the hyperspace of each subatomic particle. (In other words, the holographic universe or spacetime we know is a screen for displaying data from the 5th-dimensional computer.)

      It might be helpful to visualise time as the playing of a CD or video tape. The entire disc or tape obviously exists all the time. But our physical senses can only perceive a tiny part of the sound and the sights at any fraction of a second. I believe space and time are infinite, so it might be more accurate to visualise time as that HUGE number - in this case, of CDs or tapes - which some versions of string theory propose (10 exponent 500). My essay tells you exactly how to travel to the future, how to return home, and how to travel into our past. Neither future nor past can be altered (a blow to our belief that we have the free will to shape the future) and my explanation of travel to the past requires re-interpretation of the concepts of "multiverse" and "parallel universes". It also requires the ability to travel billions of light years INSTANTLY - no doubt many readers will instantly dismiss the essay because their preconceptions "know" this simply isn't possible. It indeed sounds like pure fantasy, but I outline an approach based on electrical engineering, General Relativity, and Miguel Alcubierre's 1994 proposal of "warp drive" that makes it logically possible.

      My essay explains why the universe is a Mobius loop and how it is contained in, or unified with, each of its particles (relying on physical senses or 21st-century scientific instruments would make this statement ridiculous). Then each fermion and boson would also be composed of the 3 spatial dimensions, the 4th dimension of time, and the 5th dimension of hyperspace. Detectors like the Large Hadron Collider would be unable to "see" the time and hyperspace components of particles but could only see the small (maybe 5% of the whole) 3 spatial dimensions (the time component would be what we call dark matter), erroneously assuming particles are those small fractions of a Mobius loop that physics calls strings. "Dark matter" would exert a gravitational influence because time, being part of a curved Mobius loop (whether of quantum or cosmic scale), would push objects together in the same way Einstein's curved space-time pushes objects together. We can speak of the HST now - no, not the Hubble Space Telescope but Hyperspatial SpaceTime. We can visualise the Mobius loop as composed of a hyperspace computer which generates information on how things change from one presently undetectably tiny fraction of a second to the next (we call this time, and it's comparable to the frames in a movie) and transmits the data (transmits dark energy) to the insignificant portion of length, width and depth that makes up subatomic particles ... and the universe.

      Preceding the Big Bang (which created this local section of the infinite, eternal universe ... or if you prefer, this subuniverse of the megauniverse) there would have been no space, matter or time in this subuniverse. No transmissions of dark energy (creating time and space/matter) would have occurred - therefore the dark-energy content of the universe would have been zero, increasing to the present 72% as more and more matter was created. How is matter created? Perhaps as cosmologist Alan Guth once suggested -

      "You might even be able to start a new universe using energy equivalent to just a few pounds of matter. Provided you could find some way to compress it to a density of about 10^75 (10 exponent 75) grams per cubic centimeter, and provided you could trigger the thing ..."

      At the time the Cosmic Microwave Background was emitted (less than a million years after the big bang), results from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe say the dark-energy content of the universe was negligible. Space/matter has been increasing since the big bang so transmissions from hyperspace computer (dark energy) which create them are increasing while the volume of the Mobius loop occupied by time/hyperspace (dark matter) has been shrinking as a result - according to the WMAP satellite, from 63% when the CMB was emitted to 23% today. Why isn't dark energy increasing at the same rate dark matter is decreasing? It must be because, as stated earlier, both time and hyperspace exert a gravitational influence, thereby mimicking space and matter to a degree. This mimicry causes the dark matter between the start of the CMB and the present to decrease by only about 40% while dark energy increases in the same period by about 70%. If we were dealing with a simple and ordinary loop, this similarity would cause dark matter and dark energy to be more or less equal and if there was any difference in their amount of decrease/increase, it would be in the same direction. But we're talking about Mobius loops which are like strips of paper that have been twisted 180 degrees before the ends are joined. This causes their variation to go in different directions (one increases, the other decreases) and the amount of variation is quite significant (+72%, -40%). My guess is that the real-life twist occurs in the temporal segment of the loop, enabling a traveller in time to go in different directions i.e. into the future or into the past. To replenish dark matter in billions of years, we merely have to extend Guth's proposal by using the knowledge of that time to create more matter (or by creating more hyperspace which creates more space and more time).

      A real-life Mobius is by no means a featureless loop, however. If, contrary to our impressions, the universe is unified with each particle it's composed of; the WMAP satellite's findings must apply to the quantum world. The figures 72%, 23% and 5% would not only describe the present universe's content of dark energy, dark matter and ordinary matter but also any particle's content of space or ordinary matter (5%), time or dark matter (23% - time is considered to be dark matter here because dark matter is regarded as ordinary matter invisible to us since it's present in another region of the dimension we call time, just as most of a sphere is in another dimension and consequently appears as a dot when first entering Edwin Abbott's 1884 exploration of other dimensions called "Flatland"), and hyperspace (72%: the transmissions from the hyperspace computer create space and matter, cause expansion of space on cosmic scales where there are no forces to overcome the expansion as there is in matter, and are known as dark energy - creating more matter causes that matter's repelling gravity to bring about accelerating expansion).

      Look at a picture of a Mobius (thanks to the repeating scales of fractal geometry, the apparently empty interior and exterior of the Mobius universe would actually be the same as the visible loop). Imagine the space/ordinary matter to be situated immediately counterclockwise (perhaps on the bottom of the loop) to the hyperspace segment and the time/dark matter portion to be immediately counterclockwise to the space/ordinary matter (time/dark matter would, moving clockwise, be next to the hyperspace segment).

      The hyperspace transmissions flow directly into space/matter (all motion - "flow" and "transmissions" - are actually comparable to individual frames in a movie but are spoken of in everyday terms of motion for convenience, like saying the sun rises and sets) and are responsible for the large and unimpeded 72% increase, since the CMB was emitted, of dark energy. This flow rate of 72% also enters the time/dark matter section adjacent to hyperspace ... but the loop's twist seems to be in the time section. If we were to cut the loop lengthwise with scissors, previously varying the number of half-twists results in things such as two rings linked together or a knotted ring. So we get barriers to motion and blockages. Returning to the normal loop and twist, matters are less drastic and motion is merely slowed, resulting in a 23% flow rate into the space/ordinary matter section.

      If we lived in a non-unified universe of materialism, this is how things would remain (dark matter would have increased so today's content would be a low 23%). On p. 179 of "The Grand Design" by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow (Bantam Press, 2010) it's stated

      "One requirement any law of nature must satisfy is that it dictates that the energy of an isolated body surrounded by empty space is positive ..."

      The only problem with that sentence, in an "everything is everywhere and everywhen" universe, is the word isolated. There can be no such thing as isolated in our cosmic-quantum unification. Page 179 also says "... if the energy of an isolated body were negative ... there would be no reason that bodies could not appear anywhere and everywhere." Does this mean you and I (plus all things in time and space) are a union of both positive and negative energy, able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere? Dark matter, not being entirely positive, would be anywhere and everywhere as well as having decreased so today's content would be a low 23% (which is what WMAP says is the case).

      Acceleration (due to either approaching an appreciable fraction of light's velocity or experiencing massive gravitation, such as from a black hole) mimics the universe's expansion, no doubt because matter and space are both made of "space-time bits" i.e. they're both produced by the binary digits emanating from the hyperspace computer. There would inevitably be mass increase as some of the "dark energy" expanding the universe naturally becomes, according to mass-energy equivalence, particles of matter. More precisely, the increase in dark energy as our subuniverse expands (due to increased transmissions from hyperspace "creating" more space and time) is responsible for the extra particles. There would also be relative length (and volume) contraction since each particle would occupy a smaller proportion of our subuniverse's length/volume as expansion continues (and accelerates). We've seen that spacetime can be twisted into a Mobius strip - picturing spacetime as a length of paper in somebody's hands, it'd be twisted by applying forces in opposite directions viz. by turning one hand away from the body while simultaneously turning the other hand towards the body. In truth, twisting space-time would be a movie-like "special effect" accomplished by the hyperspatial computer. Though there would be an initial increase in time (as noted earlier in this paragraph), this would only be obvious in the so-called "dark matter" portion of the Mobius. The previous paragraph points out that if we lived in a non-unified universe of materialism, increase of time would be the norm but the twist - affecting all parts of a unified universe - means dark matter (time) decreases by the time it reaches the 5% of the Mobius that is the materialism our physical senses perceive (this "decrease of time" may also be termed "time dilation").

      If everything is a union of positive and negative energy, every matter particle and force-carrying particle would be too. And the strings the Large Hadron Collider might detect (being the parts of particles' Mobius loops it could see since those parts would be space/ordinary matter) might come in both positive and negative varieties. In 1928 English physicist Paul Dirac (1902-84) proposed that all negative energy states are already occupied by (then hypothetical) antiparticles (particles of antimatter). Building on this results in proposal of strings and antistrings - mathematics has positive and negative quantities, and computers (whether in hyperspace or not) generate maths, causing reality to be both positive and negative; and unconventional cosmologist Max Tegmark is correct when he says mathematical formulas create reality. So when matter and antimatter meet, the positive and negative quantities form zero and neutralise (destroy) each other; and the positive/negative components of everything must avoid direct contact - this separation can either be in space or in time because all things are able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation in space) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere (in time as well as space). Pauli's exclusion principle - which was discovered in 1925 and says 2 matter particles cannot have both the same position and the same velocity - does not apply to separation of matter/antimatter since it only applies in an objective, non-unified universe ... though programming in the "cosmic computer" does include it as applicable to the reality we perceive since that appears objective to us; and presents separation and solidity to our physical senses and their extensions, scientific instruments.

      Building on Mobius loops and negative energy also explains why electrons don't spiral into the nucleus of the atom when orbiting it like planets around a star would, according to the theories of Newton and Maxwell, cause the electrons to continuously emit electromagnetic radiation and this loss of energy would result in their crashing into the nucleus. As we've noted, fractal geometry tells us that what is outside or inside a Mobius loop is the same as the loop itself. So we can visualise an atom as a Mobius loop (the outside could be the universe and the inside could be a subatomic particle - with those two being One because of unification). We can imagine a 72% flow rate into the "dark matter" part of the atomic Mobius becoming not merely a 23% flow into the ordinary matter but, as discussed above, becoming a negative 23% flow. That is, energy is of course radiated - even from those special orbits or stationary states which Danish physicist Niels Bohr (1885-1962) said radiation would not be continuously emitted and wouldn't contribute to an electron-nucleus collision. But it isn't energy as we know it. There is no positive radiation emitted - the energy is "less than nothing" i.e. negative - according to the previous paragraph, mathematics has positive and negative quantities, and computers (whether in hyperspace or not) generate maths. Therefore, Bohr was correct to introduce the quantum into the atom and to "quantise" electron orbits - the "quantum jump" or "quantum leap" in which an electron's transition between orbits or energy levels occurs instantaneously without occupying the space between orbits is also explicable by computers in hyperspace generating mathematics and making electrons disappear from one orbit and instantly reappear in another orbit. Since E=mc2 means energy must contain particles and negative energy must contain antiparticles (e.g. electromagnetic energy is composed of photons), anti-photons are emitted from the electrons which are consequently not radiating energy and do not spiral into the nucleus. In his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time", Stephen Hawking says on p. 68 that "In the case of the force-carrying particles (like the photon), the antiparticles are the same as the particles themselves." Thus, the "photons" which are emitted during the quantum leaps of electrons from higher to lower energy levels could actually be antiphotons. (thanks to "QUANTUM: Einstein, Bohr and the Great Debate About the Nature of Reality" by Manjit Kumar - Icon Books, 2008)

      My essay tells you how to travel into the future, how to return home, and how to take a trip into our past. Regarding travel beyond our start and into the past ... it can't be denied that these paragraphs imply the possibility of humans from the distant future time-travelling to the distant past and using electronics to create this particular subuniverse's computer-generated Big Bang. An accomplishment such as this would be the supreme example of "backward causality" (effects influencing causes) promoted by Yakir Aharonov, John Cramer and others. However, realising that we live in a cosmic-quantum unification with zero-separation and recalling Isaac Newton's inverse-square law and what it says about the force between two particles being infinite (does infinite mean 10 ^ 500, the HUGE number of universes proposed by some versions of string theory?) if the distance of separation goes to zero means there's still room for God (another bit of scientifically objectionable science fiction?) because God would be a pantheistic union of the megauniverse's material and mental parts, forming a union with humans in a cosmic unification.

      • [deleted]

      I found a few inconsistencies and unclear sentences which I corrected this afternoon. I know submissions to FOXY (FQXi) have closed - and anyway, I can only make one - but my curiosity about nature's workings is still alive and well. This article addresses Einstein's Relativities (GR + SR), Bohr's Atomic Model, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Negative Energy And Modern String Theory/Unification In The Light Of The Concept of an Electronic and Holographic Universe Shaped Like A Mobius Loop. It has its beginnings in cellular automata (in mathematics and computer science, collections of cells on a grid that evolve through a number of discrete time steps according to a set of rules based on the states of neighbouring cells) and grew into a belief that the universe (electromagnetism, gravitation, space-time and, as we'll see, 5th dimensional hyperspace) has a digital (electronic) foundation. I'm amazed at how well it fits in with the discoveries of the Microwave Anisotropy Probe and with string theory, culminating in the LHC's possible verification of strings. It begins with a short section describing an unconventional approach to unveiling unification and offering an alternative to the Higgs boson that relies on gravitational waves.

      ALTERNATIVE TO HIGGS BOSON

      An important step might be to think of "... the grand design of the universe, a single theory that explains everything" (words used by Stephen Hawking on the American version of Amazon, when promoting his latest book "The Grand Design" - coauthored with Leonard Mlodinow, Bantam Books, 2010) in a different way than physicists who are presently working on science's holy grail of unification. The universe's underlying electronic foundation (which makes our cosmos into a partially-complete unification, similar to 2 objects which appear billions of years or billions of light-years apart on a huge computer screen actually being unified by the strings of ones and zeros making up the computer code which is all in one small place) would make our cosmos into physics' holy grail of a complete unification if it enabled not only elimination of all distances in space and time, but also elimination of distance between (and including) the different sides of objects and particles. This last point requires the universe to not merely be a vast collection of the countless photons, electrons and other quantum particles within it; but to be a unified whole that has "particles" and "waves" built into its union of digital 1's and 0's (or its union of qubits - quantum binary digits). If we use the example of CGH (computer generated holography, these "particles" and "waves" could be elements produced by the interaction of electromagnetic and presently undiscovered gravitational waves, producing what we know as mass and forming what we know as space-time. Einstein predicted the existence of gravitational waves, and measurements on the Hulse-Taylor binary-star system resulted in Russell Hulse and Joe Taylor being awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1993 for their work, which was the first indirect evidence for gravitational waves. The feedback of the past and future universes into the unified cosmos's electronic foundation would ensure that both past and future could not be altered. Our brains and minds are part of this unification too - which must mean extrasensory perception and telekinetic independence from technology are possible, despite modern science's objections which appear to be based on non-unification.

      STRINGS ARE ONLY PART OF MATTER'S BASIS

      Space and time only exist in our experience. They are emergent properties, like wetness and mind. We experience wetness because it emerges from the building blocks of the hydrogen and oxygen atoms which make up water. We experience mind because it emerges from the building blocks of neurons composing the brain. And we experience space-time since it emerges from the building blocks making up the universe. These units are a combination of electromagnetic pulses (forming a cosmic computer which includes randomness and thus the potential to escape rigid preprogramming, and have a small degree of free will) as well as a cosmic hologram (this is produced by the interaction of electromagnetic plus gravitational waves and combination of the holographic aspect with the electronic aspect unifies general relativity with quantum physics). Every physical and nonphysical part of the universal hologram would be a receptor for the downloading of data from the cosmic computer which not only exists in the hyperspace of the large-scale universe but also in the hyperspace of each subatomic particle. (In other words, the holographic universe or spacetime we know is a screen for displaying data from the 5th-dimensional computer.)

      It might be helpful to visualise time as the playing of a CD or video tape. The entire disc or tape obviously exists all the time. But our physical senses can only perceive a tiny part of the sound and the sights at any fraction of a second. I believe space and time are infinite, so it might be more accurate to visualise time as that HUGE number - in this case, of CDs or tapes - which some versions of string theory propose (10 exponent 500). My essay tells you exactly how to travel to the future, how to return home, and how to travel into our past. Neither future nor past can be altered (a blow to our belief that we have the free will to shape the future) and my explanation of travel to the past requires re-interpretation of the concepts of "multiverse" and "parallel universes". It also requires the ability to travel billions of light years INSTANTLY - no doubt many readers will instantly dismiss the essay because their preconceptions "know" this simply isn't possible. It indeed sounds like pure fantasy, but I outline an approach based on electrical engineering, General Relativity, and Miguel Alcubierre's 1994 proposal of "warp drive" that makes it logically possible.

      My essay explains why the universe is a Mobius loop and how it is contained in, or unified with, each of its particles (relying on physical senses or 21st-century scientific instruments would make this statement ridiculous). Then each fermion and boson would also be composed of the 3 spatial dimensions, the 4th dimension of time, and the 5th dimension of hyperspace. Detectors like the Large Hadron Collider would be unable to "see" the time and hyperspace components of particles but could only see the small (maybe 5% of the whole) 3 spatial dimensions (the time component would be what we call dark matter), erroneously assuming particles are those small fractions of a Mobius loop that physics calls strings. "Dark matter" would exert a gravitational influence because time, being part of a curved Mobius loop (whether of quantum or cosmic scale), would push objects together in the same way Einstein's curved space-time pushes objects together. We can speak of the HST now - no, not the Hubble Space Telescope but Hyperspatial SpaceTime. We can visualise the Mobius loop as composed of a hyperspace computer which generates information on how things change from one presently undetectably tiny fraction of a second to the next (we call this time, and it's comparable to the frames in a movie) and transmits the data (transmits dark energy) to the insignificant portion of length, width and depth that makes up subatomic particles ... and the universe.

      Preceding the Big Bang (which created this local section of the infinite, eternal universe ... or if you prefer, this subuniverse of the megauniverse) there would have been no space, matter or time in this subuniverse. No transmissions of dark energy (creating time and space/matter) would have occurred - therefore the dark-energy content of the universe would have been zero, increasing to the present 72% as more and more matter was created. How is matter created? Perhaps as cosmologist Alan Guth once suggested -

      "You might even be able to start a new universe using energy equivalent to just a few pounds of matter. Provided you could find some way to compress it to a density of about 10^75 (10 exponent 75) grams per cubic centimeter, and provided you could trigger the thing ..."

      At the time the Cosmic Microwave Background was emitted (less than a million years after the big bang), results from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe say the dark-energy content of the universe was negligible. Space/matter has been increasing since the big bang so transmissions from the hyperspace computer (dark energy) which create them are increasing. Time is also created by hyperspace and is thus also increasing but (see the next 3 paragraphs) the amount of time being transmitted to our material 5% of the universe is decreasing - according to the WMAP satellite, dark matter has reduced from 63% when the CMB was emitted to 23% today. Why isn't dark energy increasing at the same rate dark matter is decreasing? It must be because, as stated earlier, both time and hyperspace exert a gravitational influence, thereby mimicking space and matter to a degree. This mimicry causes the dark matter between the start of the CMB and the present to decrease by only about 40% while dark energy increases in the same period by about 70%. If we were dealing with a simple and ordinary loop, this similarity would cause dark matter and dark energy to be more or less equal and if there was any difference in their amount of decrease/increase, it would be in the same direction. But we're talking about Mobius loops which are like strips of paper that have been twisted 180 degrees before the ends are joined. This causes their variation to go in different directions (one increases, the other decreases) and the amount of variation is quite significant (+72%, -40%). My guess is that the real-life twist occurs in the temporal segment of the loop, enabling a traveller in time to go in different directions i.e. into the future or into the past. To replenish dark matter in billions of years, we merely have to extend Guth's proposal by using the knowledge of that future time to create more hyperspace (with its associated extra space, extra matter and extra time).

      A real-life Mobius is by no means a featureless loop, however. If, contrary to our impressions, the universe is unified with each particle it's composed of; the WMAP satellite's findings must apply to the quantum world. The figures 72%, 23% and 5% would not only describe the present universe's content of dark energy, dark matter and ordinary matter but also any particle's content of space or ordinary matter (5%), time or dark matter (23% - time is considered to be dark matter here because dark matter is regarded as ordinary matter invisible to us since it's present in another region of the dimension we call time, just as most of a sphere is in another dimension and consequently appears as a dot when first entering Edwin Abbott's 1884 exploration of other dimensions called "Flatland"), and hyperspace (72%: the transmissions from the hyperspace computer create space and matter, cause expansion of space on cosmic scales where there are no forces to overcome the expansion as there is in matter, and are known as dark energy - creating more matter causes that matter's repelling gravity to bring about accelerating expansion).

      Look at a picture of a Mobius (thanks to the repeating scales of fractal geometry, the apparently empty interior and exterior of the Mobius universe would actually be the same as the visible loop). Imagine the space/ordinary matter to be situated immediately counterclockwise (perhaps on the bottom of the loop) to the hyperspace segment and the time/dark matter portion to be immediately counterclockwise to the space/ordinary matter (time/dark matter would, moving clockwise, be next to the hyperspace segment).

      The hyperspace transmissions flow directly into space/matter (all motion - "flow" and "transmissions" - are actually comparable to individual frames in a movie but are spoken of in everyday terms of motion for convenience, like saying the sun rises and sets) and are responsible for the large and unimpeded 72% increase, since the CMB was emitted, of dark energy. This flow rate of 72% also enters the time/dark matter section adjacent to hyperspace ... but the loop's twist seems to be in the time section. If we were to cut the loop lengthwise with scissors, previously varying the number of half-twists results in things such as two rings linked together or a knotted ring. So we get barriers to motion and blockages. Returning to the normal loop and twist, matters are less drastic and motion is merely slowed, resulting in a 23% flow rate into the space/ordinary matter section.

      If we lived in a non-unified universe of materialism, this is how things would remain (dark matter would have increased so today's content would be a low 23%). On p. 179 of "The Grand Design" by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow (Bantam Press, 2010) it's stated

      "One requirement any law of nature must satisfy is that it dictates that the energy of an isolated body surrounded by empty space is positive ..."

      The only problem with that sentence, in an "everything is everywhere and everywhen" universe, is the word isolated. There can be no such thing as isolated in our cosmic-quantum unification. Page 179 also says "... if the energy of an isolated body were negative ... there would be no reason that bodies could not appear anywhere and everywhere." Does this mean you and I (plus all things in time and space) are a union of both positive and negative energy, able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere? Dark matter, not being entirely positive, would be anywhere and everywhere as well as having decreased so today's content would be a low 23% (which is what WMAP says is the case).

      Acceleration (due to either approaching an appreciable fraction of light's velocity or experiencing massive gravitation, such as from a black hole) mimics the universe's expansion, no doubt because matter and space are both made of "space-time bits" i.e. they're both produced by the binary digits emanating from the hyperspace computer. There would inevitably be mass increase as some of the "dark energy" expanding the universe naturally becomes, according to mass-energy equivalence, particles of matter. More precisely, the increase in dark energy as our subuniverse expands (due to increased transmissions from hyperspace "creating" more space and time) is responsible for the extra particles. There would also be relative length (and volume) contraction since each particle would occupy a smaller proportion of our subuniverse's length/volume as expansion continues (and accelerates). We've seen that spacetime can be twisted into a Mobius strip - picturing spacetime as a length of paper in somebody's hands, it'd be twisted by applying forces in opposite directions viz. by turning one hand away from the body while simultaneously turning the other hand towards the body. In truth, twisting space-time would be a movie-like "special effect" accomplished by the hyperspatial computer. Though there would be an initial increase in time (as noted earlier in this paragraph), this would only be obvious in the so-called "dark matter" portion of the Mobius. The previous paragraph points out that if we lived in a non-unified universe of materialism, increase of time would be the norm but the twist - affecting all parts of a unified universe - means dark matter (time) decreases by the time it reaches the 5% of the Mobius that is the materialism our physical senses perceive (this "decrease of time" may also be termed "time dilation").

      If everything is a union of positive and negative energy, every matter particle and force-carrying particle would be too. And the strings the Large Hadron Collider might detect (being the parts of particles' Mobius loops it could see since those parts would be space/ordinary matter) might come in both positive and negative varieties. In 1928 English physicist Paul Dirac (1902-84) proposed that all negative energy states are already occupied by (then hypothetical) antiparticles (particles of antimatter). Building on this results in proposal of strings and antistrings - mathematics has positive and negative quantities, and computers (whether in hyperspace or not) generate maths, causing reality to be both positive and negative; and unconventional cosmologist Max Tegmark is correct when he says mathematical formulas create reality. So when matter and antimatter meet, the positive and negative quantities form zero and neutralise (destroy) each other; and the positive/negative components of everything must avoid direct contact - this separation can either be in space or in time because all things are able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation in space) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere (in time as well as space). Pauli's exclusion principle - which was discovered in 1925 and says 2 matter particles cannot have both the same position and the same velocity - does not apply to separation of matter/antimatter since it only applies in an objective, non-unified universe ... though programming in the "cosmic computer" does include it as applicable to the reality we perceive since that appears objective to us; and presents separation and solidity to our physical senses and their extensions, scientific instruments.

      Building on Mobius loops and negative energy also explains why electrons don't spiral into the nucleus of the atom when orbiting it like planets around a star would, according to the theories of Newton and Maxwell, cause the electrons to continuously emit electromagnetic radiation and this loss of energy would result in their crashing into the nucleus. As we've noted, fractal geometry tells us that what is outside or inside a Mobius loop is the same as the loop itself. So we can visualise an atom as a Mobius loop (the outside could be the universe and the inside could be a subatomic particle - with those two being One because of unification). We can imagine a 72% flow rate into the "dark matter" part of the atomic Mobius becoming not merely a 23% flow into the ordinary matter but becoming a negative 23% flow (the variation in different directions caused by the twist need not be an increase and decrease of positive energy but may be the radiation of negative and positive energy). That is, energy is of course radiated - into atoms and from those special orbits or stationary states which Danish physicist Niels Bohr (1885-1962) said radiation would not be continuously emitted, and wouldn't contribute to an electron-nucleus collision. But it isn't energy as we know it. There is no exclusively positive radiation emitted - the energy is predominantly "less than nothing" i.e. negative - according to the previous paragraph, mathematics has positive and negative quantities, and computers (whether in hyperspace or not) generate maths. Therefore, Bohr was correct to introduce the quantum into the atom and to "quantise" electron orbits - the "quantum jump" or "quantum leap" in which an electron's transition between orbits or energy levels occurs instantaneously without occupying the space between orbits is also explicable by computers in hyperspace generating mathematics and making electrons disappear from one orbit and instantly reappear in another orbit. Since E=mc2 means energy must contain particles and negative energy must contain antiparticles (e.g. electromagnetic energy is composed of photons), anti-photons are emitted from the electrons which are consequently not radiating energy and do not spiral into the nucleus. In his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time", Stephen Hawking says on p. 68 that "In the case of the force-carrying particles (like the photon), the antiparticles are the same as the particles themselves." Thus, the "photons" which are emitted during the quantum leaps of electrons from higher to lower energy levels could actually be antiphotons. (thanks to "QUANTUM: Einstein, Bohr and the Great Debate About the Nature of Reality" by Manjit Kumar - Icon Books, 2008 for inspiring these thoughts)

      My essay "Humans and their Universes" tells you how to travel into the future, how to return home, and how to take a trip into our past. Regarding travel beyond our start and into the past ... it can't be denied that these paragraphs imply the possibility of humans from the distant future time-travelling to the distant past and using electronics to create this particular subuniverse's computer-generated Big Bang. An accomplishment such as this would be the supreme example of "backward causality" (effects influencing causes) promoted by Yakir Aharonov, John Cramer and others. However, realising that we live in a cosmic-quantum unification with zero-separation and recalling Isaac Newton's inverse-square law and what it says about the force between two particles being infinite (does infinite mean 10 ^ 500, the HUGE number of universes proposed by some versions of string theory?) if the distance of separation goes to zero means there's still room for God (another bit of scientifically objectionable science fiction?) because God would be a pantheistic union of the megauniverse's material and mental parts, forming a union with humans in a cosmic unification.

      12 days later
      • [deleted]

      A REVISION OF GRAVITATION THAT, USING POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ENERGY, EXPLAINS DARK ENERGY AND OFFERS A REINTERPRETATION OF MATTER'S REFRACTION OF LIGHT

      If everything is a union of positive and negative energy, gravitation would be too, and could thus either repel or attract like magnetism (causing either the accelerating expansion that occurs on a cosmic scale or the attraction within the solar system - we don't want the planets to be blasted away from the sun and escape into intergalactic space).

      Here's a way to visualise gravity causing cosmic expansion while, at the same time, pushing together planets in a star system (combined with this push, their orbiting speeds stabilise the system and produce the solar system we know). Imagine the universe to be an ocean and each star system to be an island. As ocean waves approach an island, part of the wave feels friction with the increasingly shallow sea-bed resulting in wave refraction or bending. This causes part of the wave to travel in the direction of the shore while part continues on parallel to the shoreline. In the same way, as gravitational waves approach a star system, part of the current in the cosmic ocean feels friction with the increasing mass experienced as planets orbit closer to their star. This causes gravitational refraction or bending in which part of the gravity travels in the direction of the star (this is called the negative component and pushes planets together) while the other part continues on (this is called gravitation's positive component and produces universal expansion when it eventually leaves the relevant group of galaxies). As the refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun passes a planet, part of it is once again diverted by the increased mass (the more mass, the more gravity is diverted) - this time towards the centre of the planet, giving the impression that objects on that planet are being attracted to the planetary centre. Space would be nothing if it was merely the distances between matter in the universe but can be something, and curved, because it's a product of binary digits from hyperspace. Being curved space, the portion of gravitation that's called dark energy (the portion responsible for universal expansion) would have an amplitude - displacement of a wave equal to half the distance from the top of the wave to the bottom - corresponding to the moving layers of the atmosphere which make the stars seem to twinkle.

      There are 2 effects from the unrefracted and refracted gravitational wave - 1) starlight does in fact twinkle in space. It won't be detectable anytime soon, though. The electric and magnetic fields of atoms in the atmosphere's air currents cause the electromagnetic twinkling observable to the eye, but this is approx. a trillion trillion trillion times greater than the gravitational twinkling in space, and 2) the refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun "captures" the light from distant stars that appear close to the rim of the sun before it's diverted to the centre of our star (string theory predicts that gravity's gravitons interact with light's photons). Acting as a gravitational attractor, the refracted wave carries the light with it as it bends towards the sun's centre. The light is not carried all the way but breaks free since photons have their own energy and momentum. However, the light is carried far enough to be deflected a tiny amount from its original path. According to Newton's 3rd Law of Motion (to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction), the light will be deflected toward the sun by an equal and opposite amount to the gravity wave's deflection to the solar interior. "Opposite" means the light wave travels away from the sun at approx. 186,282 miles per second and the gravity wave travels into the sun at the same velocity. "Equal" means, since experiments have shown the bending of starlight to be 1.75 seconds of arc (in geometry 60 seconds = 1 minute, 60 minutes = 1 degree, and there are 360 degrees in a circle), the refraction of gravitation from the solar rim is also 1.75 arcseconds (as density increases the deeper the gravity wave goes, the greater its refraction becomes).

      • [deleted]

      Special Relativity In The Light Of The Concept of an Electronic and Holographic Universe Shaped Like A Mobius Loop.

      A real-life Mobius is by no means a featureless loop, however. If, contrary to our impressions, the universe is unified with each particle it's composed of; the WMAP satellite's findings must apply to the quantum world. The figures 72%, 23% and 5% would not only describe the present universe's content of dark energy, dark matter and ordinary matter but also any particle's content of space or ordinary matter (5%), time or dark matter (23% - time is considered to be dark matter here because dark matter is regarded as ordinary matter invisible to us since it's present in another region of the dimension we call time, just as most of a sphere is in another dimension and consequently appears as a dot when first entering Edwin Abbott's 1884 exploration of other dimensions called "Flatland"), and hyperspace (72%: the transmissions from the hyperspace computer create space and matter, cause expansion of space on cosmic scales where there are no forces to overcome the expansion as there is in matter, and are known as dark energy - creating more matter causes that matter's repelling gravity to bring about accelerating expansion).

      Acceleration (due to either approaching an appreciable fraction of light's velocity or experiencing massive gravitation, such as from a black hole) mimics the universe's expansion, no doubt because matter and space are both made of "space-time bits" i.e. they're both produced by the binary digits emanating from the hyperspace computer. There would inevitably be mass increase as some of the "dark energy" expanding the universe naturally becomes, according to mass-energy equivalence, particles of matter. More precisely, the increase in dark energy as our subuniverse expands (due to increased transmissions from hyperspace "creating" more space and time) is responsible for the extra particles. There would also be relative length (and volume) contraction since each particle would occupy a smaller proportion of our subuniverse's length/volume as expansion continues (and accelerates). We've seen that spacetime can be twisted into a Mobius strip - picturing spacetime as a length of paper in somebody's hands, it'd be twisted by applying forces in opposite directions viz. by turning one hand away from the body while simultaneously turning the other hand towards the body. In truth, twisting space-time would be a movie-like "special effect" accomplished by the hyperspatial computer. Though there would be an initial increase in time (as noted earlier in this paragraph), this would only be obvious in the so-called "dark matter" portion of the Mobius. The previous paragraph points out that if we lived in a non-unified universe of materialism, increase of time would be the norm but the twist - affecting all parts of a unified universe - means dark matter (time) decreases by the time it reaches the 5% of the Mobius that is the materialism our physical senses perceive (this "decrease of time" may also be termed "time dilation").

      • [deleted]

      Niels Bohr's Atomic Model In The Light Of The Concept of an Electronic and Holographic Universe Shaped Like A Mobius Loop.

      If everything is a union of positive and negative energy, every matter particle and force-carrying particle would be too. And the strings the Large Hadron Collider might detect (being the parts of particles' Mobius loops it could see since those parts would be space/ordinary matter) might come in both positive and negative varieties. In 1928 English physicist Paul Dirac (1902-84) proposed that all negative energy states are already occupied by (then hypothetical) antiparticles (particles of antimatter). Building on this results in proposal of strings and antistrings - mathematics has positive and negative quantities, and computers (whether in hyperspace or not) generate maths, causing reality to be both positive and negative; and unconventional cosmologist Max Tegmark is correct when he says mathematical formulas create reality. So when matter and antimatter meet, the positive and negative quantities form zero and neutralise (destroy) each other; and the positive/negative components of everything must avoid direct contact - this separation can either be in space or in time because all things are able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation in space) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere (in time as well as space). Pauli's exclusion principle - which was discovered in 1925 and says 2 matter particles cannot have both the same position and the same velocity - does not apply to separation of matter/antimatter since it only applies in an objective, non-unified universe ... though programming in the "cosmic computer" does include it as applicable to the reality we perceive since that appears objective to us; and presents separation and solidity to our physical senses and their extensions, scientific instruments.

      Building on Mobius loops and negative energy also explains why electrons don't spiral into the nucleus of the atom when orbiting it like planets around a star would, according to the theories of Newton and Maxwell, cause the electrons to continuously emit electromagnetic radiation and this loss of energy would result in their crashing into the nucleus. As we've noted, fractal geometry tells us that what is outside or inside a Mobius loop is the same as the loop itself. So we can visualise an atom as a Mobius loop (the outside could be the universe and the inside could be a subatomic particle - with those two being One because of unification). We can imagine a 72% flow rate into the "dark matter" part of the atomic Mobius becoming not merely a 23% flow into the ordinary matter but becoming a negative 23% flow (the variation in different directions caused by the twist need not be an increase and decrease of positive energy but may be the radiation of negative and positive energy). That is, energy is of course radiated - into atoms and from those special orbits or stationary states which Danish physicist Niels Bohr (1885-1962) said radiation would not be continuously emitted, and wouldn't contribute to an electron-nucleus collision. But it isn't energy as we know it. There is no exclusively positive radiation emitted - the energy is predominantly "less than nothing" i.e. negative - according to the previous paragraph, mathematics has positive and negative quantities, and computers (whether in hyperspace or not) generate maths. Therefore, Bohr was correct to introduce the quantum into the atom and to "quantise" electron orbits - the "quantum jump" or "quantum leap" in which an electron's transition between orbits or energy levels occurs instantaneously without occupying the space between orbits is also explicable by computers in hyperspace generating mathematics and making electrons disappear from one orbit and instantly reappear in another orbit. Since E=mc2 means energy must contain particles and negative energy must contain antiparticles (e.g. electromagnetic energy is composed of photons), anti-photons are emitted from the electrons which are consequently not radiating energy and do not spiral into the nucleus. In his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time", Stephen Hawking says on p. 68 that "In the case of the force-carrying particles (like the photon), the antiparticles are the same as the particles themselves." Thus, the "photons" which are emitted during the quantum leaps of electrons from higher to lower energy levels could actually be antiphotons. (thanks to "QUANTUM: Einstein, Bohr and the Great Debate About the Nature of Reality" by Manjit Kumar - Icon Books, 2008 for inspiring these thoughts)

      Louis de Broglie (1892-1987) is the French physicist who answered "yes" to his question: if light waves can behave like particles, can particles such as electrons behave like waves? He was correct to say standing electron waves exist (the wave occupies every part of its orbit around the nucleus) and Niels Bohr was correct to impose the condition of allowed and forbidden electron orbits. My hypothesis is similar to Albert Einstein taking the wave theory of light and developing the light-quantum (photon) theory. I take standing electron waves and develop particles using negative energy. But the above does not try to invalidate wave-particle duality. It affirms it since it says an electron (or any particle), being a positive energy-negative energy hybrid, can display separateness/solidity/isolation (and appear as a particle) as well as possessing the ability to appear anywhere/anywhen and everywhere/everywhen (display as a wave - perhaps as a standing electron wave that surrounds an atomic nucleus).

      If we limit ourselves to an objective, "out there" reality; we'd mistakenly assume an electron occupies every possible spot around the nucleus and there are no forbidden orbits since the electron can be anywhere and everywhere (read about American physicist Richard Feynman's idea that the entire universe might consist of just one electron on pp. 277-279 of "Physics of the Impossible" by Michio Kaku - Penguin Books, 2009). This assumption is inaccurate because Bohr's model of the atom, with its allowed and forbidden electron orbits, accurately predicts spectral phenomena and chemical properties of elements in the periodic table. The accurate interpretation of electrons being anywhere and everywhere is that reality is not limited to our traditional way of looking at things but that we live in an "everything is everywhere and everywhen" universe i.e. in a cosmic-quantum unification.

      • [deleted]

      BREAKING THE SOUNDS OF SILENCE BY TALKING TO MYSELF -

      CONTINUING MY GRAVITATIONAL HYPOTHESES BY EXTENDING THEM TO MAGNETISM, A MORE PRECISE ACCOUNT OF PHOTON-GRAVITON INTERACTION, AND EXPLANATION OF THE FAILURE TO DATE OF LIGO ET AL.

      Here's a way to visualise gravity causing cosmic expansion while, at the same time, pushing together planets in a star system (combined with this push, their orbiting speeds stabilise the system and produce the solar system we know). Imagine the universe to be an ocean and each star system to be an island. As ocean waves approach an island, part of the wave feels friction with the increasingly shallow sea-bed resulting in wave refraction or bending. This causes part of the wave to travel in the direction of the shore while part continues on parallel to the shoreline. In the same way, as gravitational waves approach a star system, part of the current in the cosmic ocean feels friction with the increasing mass experienced as planets orbit closer to their star. This causes gravitational refraction or bending in which part of the gravity travels in the direction of the star (this is called the negative component and pushes planets together) while the other part continues on (this is called gravitation's positive component and produces universal expansion when it eventually leaves the relevant group of galaxies)*. As the refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun passes a planet, part of it is once again diverted by the increased mass (the more mass, the more gravity is diverted) - this time towards the centre of the planet, giving the impression that objects on that planet are being attracted to the planetary centre. Space would be nothing if it was merely the distances between matter in the universe but can be something, and curved, because it's a product of binary digits from hyperspace. Being curved space, the portion of gravitation that's called dark energy (the portion responsible for universal expansion) would have an amplitude - displacement of a wave equal to half the distance from the top of the wave to the bottom - corresponding to the moving layers of the atmosphere which make the stars seem to twinkle.

      In "E=m^1+0 IS E=mc2 FOR THE 21ST CENTURY", I said "...I'd regard gravity as repulsive instead of attractive (its energy would then be positive like matter's, matter and gravitational waves would be unified, and the universe could be more than a vast collection of the countless photons, electrons and other quantum particles within it; it could, as #8 proposes, be a unified whole that has particles and waves built into its union of digital 1's and 0's)". I must confess to being a bit lazy in that sentence - I should have pointed out that gravitation's energy is mostly positive (consider the vast amount of positive gravity in intergalactic space vs. the smaller amount of negative gravity holding together solar systems and galaxies) and matter's energy is mostly positive: the apparent asymmetry of particles (with their positive energy) and antiparticles (with their negative energy) may be due to, as stated in about 4 pages, the need for the "positive/negative components of everything (to) avoid direct contact - this separation can either be in space or in time because all (components in a unification) are able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation in space) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere (in time as well as space)". If gravity is forever pushing against matter, why don't gravitational-wave detectors pick up the waves literally all the time? In the sensitive LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory), a passing gravitational wave will slightly stretch one arm as it shortens the other - there are two arms which a laser beam travels along and is reflected by a mirror, the arms being 2-4 kilometres long and at a 90 degree angle - but only by a billionth of a billionth of a metre. The refracted gravitational wave, with its negative energy, meets matter with its predominantly positive energy ... and the two tend to cancel (since the meeting of total negativity and total positivity is required for complete cancellation, it remains possible for the incomplete cancellation of gravity and matter to produce some photons, and shrinkage on the order of 10^-18 metre). If we built a detector from antimatter, we'd cause an enormous explosion (unless we isolated it from the ground and air it was located in), but we'd have a far better chance of finding gravity waves.

      * Magnetism could operate in a similar way. When two like poles (north and north, or south and south) are placed close together, the lines of force - shown by sprinkling iron filings on a sheet of paper and placing the paper over the magnets - would repel each other because they resemble the unrefracted part of the gravitational wave which contributes to universal expansion. Two unlike poles (north and south) would attract because they resemble the refracted gravitational wave which feels friction - either with "magneton" particles composing magnetic waves, or with the opposing magnet itself, or with the lines of force between the magnets (thanks to mass-energy equivalence and magnetic waves behaving like particles) - and is diverted to a planet's, or another object's, centre. This divergence implies a very small angle of refraction at the planet's rim, followed by many increasingly large angles as interior density grows (see next paragraph) i.e. if we could see the wave, it would appear to curve and end in the planet's centre. So in magnetic attraction, we'd expect the lines of force between two magnets' ends to possess a curvature like that formed by successive angles of refraction (positive - a sphere has positive curvature). In magnetic repulsion, lines of force would curve like an unrefracted wave spreading out in the depths of space (the curvature would be negative or saddle-shaped). Sprinkle some filings on a sheet of paper and place magnets underneath - this is what you'll see (and if preferred, all this can be described in terms of directional flow).

      1) The unrefracted gravitational wave means starlight does in fact twinkle in space. It won't be detectable anytime soon, though. The electric and magnetic fields of atoms in the atmosphere's air currents cause the electromagnetic twinkling observable to the eye, but this is approx. a trillion trillion trillion times greater than the gravitational twinkling in space, and

      2) the refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun "captures" the light from distant stars that appear close to the rim of the sun before it's diverted to the centre of our star (string theory predicts that gravity's gravitons interact with light's photons*). Acting as a gravitational attractor, the refracted wave carries the light with it as it bends towards the sun's centre. The light is not carried all the way but breaks free since photons have their own energy and momentum. However, the light is carried far enough to be deflected a tiny amount from its original path. According to Newton's 3rd Law of Motion (to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction), the light will be deflected toward the sun by an equal and opposite amount to the gravity wave's deflection to the solar interior. "Opposite" means the light wave travels away from the sun at approx. 186,282 miles per second and the gravity wave travels into the sun at the same velocity. "Equal" means, since experiments have shown the bending of starlight to be 1.75 seconds of arc (in geometry 60 seconds = 1 minute, 60 minutes = 1 degree, and there are 360 degrees in a circle), the refraction of gravitation from the solar rim is also 1.75 arcseconds (as density increases the deeper the gravity wave goes, the greater its refraction becomes).

      * Gravitons and photons interact via mass-energy equivalence (described by E=mc^2). A gravitational wave acts as an attractor and captures light by feeling friction with the mass-energy of the photons. This causes gravitational refraction or bending in which part of the gravity travels in the direction of the centre of each photon in the light (once it reaches the centre, the 3rd Law of Motion accounts for the photons' reaction of being attracted to the gravitons). Compared to the other forces we know; gravity is incredibly weak and the equal but opposite reaction of heavy, macroscopic objects cannot overcome being pushed to a planet's surface and floating off towards the gravity doing the pushing. Photons, when pushed towards the surface, are so tiny and light that they do recoil from the push - saving us from perpetual darkness.

      8 days later
      • [deleted]

      COMBINING NEWTONIAN AND RELATIVISTIC GRAVITY WITH QUANTUM MECHANICS' PROBABILITY WAVES

      Here's a way to visualise gravity causing cosmic expansion while, at the same time, pushing together planets in a star system (combined with this push, their orbiting speeds stabilise the system and produce the solar system we know). Imagine the universe to be an ocean and each star system to be an island. As ocean waves approach an island, part of the wave feels friction with the increasingly shallow sea-bed resulting in wave refraction or bending. This causes part of the wave to travel in the direction of the shore while part continues on parallel to the shoreline. In the same way, as gravitational waves approach a star system, part of the current in the cosmic ocean feels friction with the increasing mass experienced as planets orbit closer to their star. This causes gravitational refraction or bending in which part of the gravity travels in the direction of the star (this is called the negative component and pushes planets together) while the other part continues on (this is called gravitation's positive component and produces universal expansion when it eventually leaves the relevant group of galaxies). As the refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun passes a planet, part of it is once again diverted by the increased mass (the more mass, the more gravity is diverted) - this time towards the centre of the planet, giving the impression that objects on that planet are being attracted to the planetary centre. The portion of gravitation that's called dark energy (the portion responsible for universal expansion) would have an amplitude - displacement of a wave equal to half the distance from the top of the wave to the bottom - corresponding to the moving layers of the atmosphere which make the stars seem to twinkle.

      Page 180 of "The Grand Design" says "Because gravity is attractive,

      gravitational energy is negative." Since there was no gravitation in our

      universe prior to the Big Bang (we didn't even have a universe), this

      sentence can be combined with the "backward causality" (effects

      influencing causes) promoted by Yakir Aharonov, John Cramer and others

      to explain that gravity's negative energy gives us no reason to think that

      bodies could not appear anywhere and everywhere - as Professors

      Hawking and Mlodinow put it "Bodies such as stars or black holes cannot

      just appear out of nothing. But a whole universe can." Maybe it's only

      playing with words, but I'd regard gravity as repulsive instead of attractive

      (its energy would then be positive like matter's, matter and gravitational waves would be unified, and the universe could be more than a vast collection of the countless photons, electrons and other quantum particles within it; it could be a unified whole that has particles and waves built into its union of digital 1's and 0's (generated in a 5th-dimensional hyperspace). And the article "Gravitation" by Robert F. Paton in World Book Encyclopedia 1967 agrees that gravity is repulsive -

      "Einstein says that bodies do not attract each other at a distance. Objects

      that fall to the earth, for example, are not 'pulled' by the earth. The

      curvature of space time around the earth forces the objects to take the

      direction on toward the earth. The objects are pushed toward the earth by

      the gravitational field rather than pulled by the earth."

      Repelling gravity would cause the universe to expand - as astronomer Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) confirmed in 1929 - and adding repelling gravity by continual "creation" of matter would cause the universe to expand at an accelerated rate - this acceleration was discovered in 1998 by observations carried out by the High-z Supernova Search Team and the Supernova Cosmology Project, has been confirmed several times and is claimed to be caused by mysterious "dark energy".

      I must confess to being a bit lazy in one of that paragraph's sentences - I should have pointed out that gravitation's energy is mostly positive (consider the vast amount of positive gravity in intergalactic space vs. the smaller amount of negative gravity holding together solar systems and galaxies) and matter's energy is mostly positive: the apparent asymmetry of particles (with their positive energy) and antiparticles (with their negative energy) may be due to the need for the positive/negative components of everything to avoid direct contact and consequently not appear to be in the same "place" e.g. we might appear to live in a universe dominated by matter - this separation can either be in space or time (one can't exist without the other, as we know from Relativity) because all (components in a unification) are able to display both separateness/solidity (isolation in space) as well as the potential to appear anywhere and everywhere (in time as well as space). If gravity is forever pushing against matter, why don't gravitational-wave detectors pick up the waves literally all the time? In the sensitive LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory), a passing gravitational wave will slightly stretch one arm as it shortens the other - there are two arms which a laser beam travels along and is reflected by a mirror, the arms being 2-4 kilometres long and at a 90 degree angle - but only by a billionth of a billionth of a metre. In the universe, the refracted gravitational wave, with its negative energy, meets matter with its predominantly positive energy ... and the two tend to cancel (since the meeting of total negativity and total positivity is required for complete cancellation, it remains possible for the incomplete cancellation of gravity and matter to produce some photons, and shrinkage on the order of 10^-18 metre). If we built a detector from antimatter, we'd cause an enormous explosion (unless we isolated it from the ground and air it was located in), but we'd have a far better chance of finding gravity waves.

      1) The unrefracted gravitational wave means starlight does in fact twinkle in space. It won't be detectable anytime soon, though. Since the electromagnetic force is 10^36 times the strength of the gravitational force, the electric and magnetic fields of atoms in the atmosphere's air currents cause the electromagnetic twinkling observable to the eye, but this is a trillion trillion trillion times greater than the gravitational twinkling in space, and

      2) the refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun "captures" the light from distant stars that appear close to the rim of the sun before it's diverted to the centre of our star (string theory predicts that gravity's gravitons interact with light's photons**). Acting as a gravitational attractor, the refracted wave carries the light with it as it bends towards the sun's centre. The light is not carried all the way but breaks free since photons have their own energy and momentum. However, the light is carried far enough to be deflected a tiny amount from its original path. According to Newton's 3rd Law of Motion (to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction), the light will be deflected toward the sun by an equal and opposite amount to the gravity wave's deflection to the solar interior. "Opposite" means the light wave travels away from the sun at approx. 186,282 miles per second and the gravity wave travels into the sun at the same velocity. "Equal" means, since experiments have shown the bending of starlight to be 1.75 seconds of arc (in geometry 60 seconds = 1 minute, 60 minutes = 1 degree, and there are 360 degrees in a circle), the refraction of gravitation from the solar rim is also 1.75 arcseconds (as density increases the deeper the gravity wave goes, the greater its refraction becomes).

      ** Gravitons and photons interact via mass-energy equivalence (described by E=mc^2). A gravitational wave acts as an attractor and captures light by feeling friction with the mass-energy of the photons. This causes gravitational refraction or bending in which part of the gravity travels in the direction of the centre of each photon in the light (once it reaches the centre, the 3rd Law of Motion accounts for the photons' reaction of being attracted to the gravitons). Compared to the other forces we know; gravity is incredibly weak and the equal but opposite reaction in heavy, macroscopic objects cannot overcome the heaviness, and cause the objects to float off towards the gravity doing the pushing. Photons, when pushed towards the surface, are so tiny and light that they do recoil from the push - saving we who have our eyes 5 or 6 feet above the surface from perpetual darkness.

      What type of wave can a gravitational wave be? There are 2 basic wave motions. Electromagnetic waves, such as light, consist of varying magnetic and electric fields vibrating at right angles to each other and to the direction of motion - they are transverse waves. Sound waves are transmitted by the vibrations of the particles of the medium (such as air) itself, the vibrations being in the direction of wave motion - they are longitudinal or compressional waves. Gravitational waves must share some properties with transverse waves, in order to travel through the vacuum of space (or space-time). Longitudinal sound waves cannot do this - nor can they undergo polarization (a state in which rays of light, or similar radiation, exhibit different properties in different directions - ordinary light vibrates in all directions, but polarized light vibrates in only one direction e.g. when they are passed through a crystal of the mineral tourmaline which transmits rays in which the vibrations are confined to a single plane).

      In this hypothesis, gravity is diverted to a planet's, or another object's, centre. This divergence implies a very small angle of refraction at the planet's rim, followed by many increasingly large angles as interior composition changes and density grows i.e. if we could see the wave, it would appear to curve and end in the planet's centre. The idea that gravity waves must end in a planet's centre comes from Isaac Newton's work which says gravity depends on the distance between the centres of objects. They could do so because any wave would meet others coming from different directions and if they were out of phase (with one at maximum amplitude in its cycle and the other at minimum amplitude, perhaps as a result of entering the planet's surface at varying altitudes or encountering different materials and densities during their journeys into the planet), they'd undergo destructive interference and cancel each other. Both transverse and longitudinal waves can undergo refraction and give rise to interference phenomena.

      Gravity waves might also share some properties with longitudinal waves. This idea comes from seismic (earthquake) waves. If a gravity wave travels to our planet's centre, it must pass through the liquid outer core to the solid inner core. The seismic Secondary or S waves are transverse in nature and vibrate rock from side to side, or up and down, or both - all motions that require the resistance of a solid. S waves cannot traverse liquids and the outer core. However, the seismic Primary or P waves are compressional (longitudinal) and can negotiate both solids and liquids.

      So gravitational waves seem to require both transverse properties (to travel through space [space-time] like electromagnetic waves) and compressional properties (to travel through Earth's outer core, like seismic P waves and sound). If we visualize such an oscillation, we'd see in our mind's eye a spring with regions that alternately compress and dilate (the longitudinal or compressional component) with the compressions rising to an amplitude several times higher than the dilated portion then falling to become the dilated portion (this would be the transverse component). Physicists call this a wave packet (or wave train) with no dispersion - a wave packet whose "envelope" (short burst of the wave that travels as a unit and has the large amplitude) changes or oscillates i.e. has dispersion would inevitably be out of phase with other gravity waves met in the planet's centre and would guarantee cancellation as well as confirmation of Isaac Newton's work which says gravity depends on the distance between the centres of objects. Quantum mechanics ascribes a special significance to the wave packet - it is interpreted to be a "probability wave" describing the probability that a particle or particles in a particular state will have a given position and momentum.

      15 days later
      • [deleted]

      Combining Newtonian and Relativistic Gravitation with Quantum Mechanics' Probability Waves

      (A New Theory of Gravity and a New Physics)

      Yes, I know many people won't regard this as a theory because it does not include mathematics. But if maths was infallible, science wouldn't be in the mess I see today (and many will say "What mess?")

      By Rodney Bartlett

      This reply to Astronomy's March 2009 issue: Is there something we don't know about gravity? by John D. Anderson theorises that gravity is actually a repulsive force capable of producing both attraction and "dark energy", and that matter is formed by its interaction with electromagnetism in the envelopes of wave packets - so gravitational energy would be unified with electromagnetism as well as matter and the universe could be more than a vast collection of the countless photons, electrons and other quantum particles within it; it could be a unified whole that has particles and waves built into something ... plausibly, its union of digital 1's and 0's. Gravitational waves are also unified with quantum probability waves and, since Einstein said gravity is the warping of space, with space and time (space-time). My article also attempts to specify exactly how gravitons interact with photons.

      Here's a way to visualise gravity causing cosmic expansion while, at the same time, pushing together planets in a star system (combined with this push, their orbiting speeds stabilise the system and produce the solar system we know). Imagine the universe to be an ocean and each star system to be an island. As ocean waves approach an island, part of the wave feels friction with the increasingly shallow sea-bed resulting in wave refraction or bending. This causes part of the wave to travel in the direction of the shore while part continues on parallel to the shoreline. In the same way, as gravitational waves approach a star system, part of the current in the cosmic ocean feels friction with the increasing mass experienced as planets orbit closer to their star. This causes gravitational refraction or bending in which part of the gravity travels in the direction of the star (this is called the negative component and pushes planets together) while the other part continues on (this is called gravitation's positive component and produces universal expansion when it eventually leaves the relevant group of galaxies). As the refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun passes a planet, part of it is once again diverted by the increased mass (the more mass, the more gravity is diverted*) - this time towards the centre of the planet, giving the impression that objects on that planet are being attracted to the planetary centre. Space would be nothing if it was merely the distances between matter in the universe but can be something, and curved, if it's a product of binary digits from a 5th-dimensional hyperspace (more about this later).

      * Similarly, there is more mass when ocean currents meet land (islands or continents) than when they exist in bodies of water (lakes or oceans). At the beach, we can see large waves but in Lake Superior, tides are only about 2 inches and are completely masked by changes due to wind and atmospheric pressure (an earthquake underneath the lake would produce large waves).

      Why do tides follow the moon in its orbit around Earth? It isn't because the moon pulls on the earth but can be explained this way -

      When the moon is at first or third quarter, gravitational waves heading towards the sun from the outer solar system push against the earth and keep the ocean's water level from rising too high (illustrated by the neap or lower tides). On the other side of the planet, a neap tide is experienced because of gravity waves from the opposite side of the solar system which were not diverted into the sun. They traveled past it and are able to push against Earth if they're diverted by the planetary mass. When at the full position, some of those gravity waves from the solar system's edge are diverted by the moon's mass into the lunar interior, and this decrease in gravity's push against the earth permits a spring (high) tide. At new moon, some gravity waves approaching Earth's satellite from the opposite side of the solar system would likewise allow a spring tide if they're diverted into the moon. This pushing from the edge of the solar system would cause the Pioneer spacecraft to be closer to Earth than predicted (they're about 7 billion miles away but still within the solar system). It could also cause the astronomical unit (Earth's distance from the sun) to increase since there would be no "pull" on the earth by the sun.

      I should point out that gravitation's energy is mostly positive (consider the vast amount of positive gravity in intergalactic space vs. the smaller amount of negative gravity holding together solar systems and galaxies) and matter's energy is mostly positive. If gravity is forever pushing against matter, why don't gravitational-wave detectors pick up the waves literally all the time? In the sensitive LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory); a passing gravitational wave, with its negative energy, meets matter with its predominantly positive energy ... and the two tend to cancel (since the meeting of total negativity and total positivity is required for complete cancellation, it remains possible for the incomplete cancellation of gravity and matter to produce some photons, and shrinkage on the order of 10^-18 metre). The refracted gravitational wave heading for the sun "captures" the light from distant stars that appear close to the rim of the sun before it's diverted to the centre of our star (string theory predicts that gravity's gravitons interact with light's photons**). Acting as a gravitational attractor, the refracted wave carries the light with it as it bends towards the sun's centre. The light is not carried all the way but breaks free since photons have their own energy and momentum. However, the light is carried far enough to be deflected a tiny amount from its original path. According to Newton's 3rd Law of Motion (to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction), the light will be deflected toward the sun by an equal and opposite amount to the gravity wave's deflection to the solar interior. "Opposite" means the light wave travels away from the sun at approx. 186,282 miles per second and the gravity wave travels into the sun at the same velocity. "Equal" means, since experiments have shown the bending of starlight to be 1.75 seconds of arc, the refraction of gravitation from the solar rim is also 1.75 arcseconds (as density increases the deeper the gravity wave goes, the greater its refraction becomes).

      ** Gravitons and photons interact via mass-energy equivalence (described by E=mc^2). A gravitational wave acts as an attractor and captures light by feeling friction with the mass-energy of the photons. This causes gravitational refraction or bending in which part of the gravity travels in the direction of the centre of each photon in the light (once it reaches the centre, the 3rd Law of Motion accounts for the photons' reaction of being attracted to the gravitons). Compared to the other forces we know; gravity is incredibly weak and the weak "equal but opposite" reaction cannot overcome the heaviness of macroscopic objects which consequently don't float off towards the gravity doing the pushing. Photons, when pushed towards the surface, are so tiny and light that they do recoil from the push - saving we who have eyes 5 or 6 feet above the ground from perpetual darkness.

      What type of wave can a gravitational wave be? There are 2 basic wave motions. Electromagnetic waves, such as light, consist of varying magnetic and electric fields vibrating at right angles to each other and to the direction of motion - they are transverse waves. Sound waves are transmitted by the vibrations of the particles of the medium (such as air) itself, the vibrations being in the direction of wave motion - they are longitudinal or compressional waves. Gravitational waves must share some properties with transverse waves, in order to travel through the vacuum of space (or space-time). Longitudinal sound waves cannot do this.

      Gravity waves might also share some properties with longitudinal waves. This idea comes from seismic (earthquake) waves. If a gravity wave travels to our planet's centre, it must pass through the liquid outer core to the solid inner core. The seismic Secondary or S waves are transverse in nature and vibrate rock from side to side, or up and down, or both - all motions that require the resistance of a solid. S waves cannot traverse liquids and the outer core. However, the seismic Primary or P waves are compressional (longitudinal) and can negotiate both solids and liquids.

      So gravitational waves seem to require both transverse properties (to travel through space [space-time] like electromagnetic waves) and compressional properties (to travel through Earth's outer core, like seismic P waves and sound). If we visualize such an oscillation, we'd see in our mind's eye a spring with regions that alternately compress and dilate (the longitudinal or compressional component) with the compressions rising to an amplitude several times higher than the dilated portion then falling to become the dilated portion (this would be the transverse component). Physicists call this a wave packet (or wave train) with no dispersion. Quantum mechanics ascribes a special significance to the wave packet - it is interpreted to be a "probability wave" describing the probability that a particle or particles in a particular state will have a given position and momentum.

      What happens to the gravity waves that are diverted away from the sun and towards a planet but are miles above that planet's surface, though still within its atmosphere? Where the in-phase waves converge and constructively interfere, we can imagine the gravitation acting as an attractor and combining with electromagnetic waves to produce the electron, proton, neutron etc. in the form of the envelope (short burst of the wave that travels as a unit) of a wave packet or probability wave. Building on the above paragraphs dealing with graviton/photon interaction*, this supposes matter acquires all its properties (including mass) by the superimposing of electromagnetic and gravitational waves - being so much more powerful than gravity, electromagnetism would be responsible for virtually all of an object's "heaviness" (and remember, gravity waves don't cancel out until they reach the middle of a planet). This is an explanation of how gravitational energy would be unified with matter (and positive like it) and the universe could be more than a vast collection of the countless photons, electrons and other quantum particles within it; it could be a unified whole that has particles and waves built into its union of digital 1's and 0's.

      * The section on photon-graviton interaction says "The light is not carried all the way but breaks free since photons have their own energy and momentum." Why do electromagnetic and gravitational waves combine here to produce matter and mass? It must be because this paragraph deals with in-phase gravity waves that converge from directly opposite directions and constructively interfere to produce a matter-forming wave packet's envelope i.e. a subatomic particle. When they converge, they act like 2 hands coming together and catching a ball. Actually, photons are absorbed and emitted just as in laser cooling but instead of a laser beam slowing down atoms, the envelope slows (and traps) the photons. Thus, some waves manufacture the particles composing a planet - a vital process in the nebula surrounding our sun nearly 5 billion years ago, as well as in the aftermath of the big bang of nearly 14 billion years ago - while some produce what we call gravitational attraction to the planet's centre. It's unlikely a wave could proceed beyond the centre (and even come out the planet's opposite side) since there are simply so many waves capable of cancelling it.

      Why is Earth's orbit the shape of a flattened circle - an ellipse?

      As gravitational waves travel from the outer solar system towards the sun (as a starting point, let's say they're coming from the lower right in this picture), they'd push the orbiting Earth (at aphelion, its farthest distance from the sun - 152 million km) to the upper left. But gravity waves are also coming towards the sun from that direction. So Earth's progress to the upper left is stopped and it follows the line of least resistance to waves pushing it from both the lower right and upper left - this corresponds to the path indicated by the arrow pointing left. When it reaches perihelion (its closest approach to the sun - 147 million km), the waves from lower right are pushing it back while waves from the upper left are pushing it forward. Our planet follows the boundary between waves assaulting it from opposite directions and its inertia compels it to follow the arrow pointing right. Upon reaching aphelion again, the tug-of-war (oops, I mean push-of-war) continues and Earth's momentum causes it to go left. We mustn't forget the waves that are coming from the outer solar system perpendicular to the waves already mentioned. They push Earth towards and away from the sun at its perihelion and aphelion points. The balance between these forces reinforces, using the explanation of lower-right and upper-left waves, the planet's tendency to stay in the illustrated orbit. The sun's position in the illustration is exaggerated - it should be closer to the centre of the ellipse since the difference between perihelion and aphelion is only about 3%. The existence of this difference might rely on the planet manifesting to us as a multitude of matter-forming wave-packet envelopes which divert some gravity waves to the interior - thus slightly upsetting the balance of gravity waves from opposing directions at Earth's particular location relative to the sun.

      Gravity waves don't cancel out until they reach the middle of a planet, so all the atomic particles between that middle and the highest atmosphere (or surface, in the case of airless planets) would be a product of gravitational/standing/probability waves and would be continuously replenished by those gravity waves. Being the product of binary digits, is it possible for these waves to be programmed to undo the damage caused by (or even to prevent) earthquakes, hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, nuclear accidents, shark and lion attacks, the time (in about 5 billion years) when the sun becomes a red giant that might swallow earth or at least boil away its water and blast most of its atmosphere into space, etc.

      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------