# I'm Developing A New Unified Theory

19 replies to this topic

### #1 AmishFighterPilot

AmishFighterPilot

• Members
• 84 posts

Posted 19 May 2017 - 01:01 PM

I am new here, but I think I have come up with a unified theory that explains why gravity causes rotation, why energy moves in straight lines, what actually causes time dilation, why Bohrs and Einstein were both right about the math but wrong about the cause, what up and down quarks actually are(and why their names are backward), what white and black holes actually are, why electrons form shells and why they don't attract themselves into protons, how waves work, what causes motion, what time actually is, the reason conservation of energy works, and what "dark matter" and the Higgs Field are. I think I also know why there seems to be inconsistencies between quantum, Newtonian, and Einsteinian physics; and why there's actually no inconsistencies at all. I have a pretty good idea how to make fusion work the easy way, and I have an idea how to make transistors output several instructions instead of just 0-1. I have no research budget and am really just trying to save our cat sanctuary right now. I really want to get out on a farm where they'll be safe and I can conduct my research.

So the theory is pretty simple:
"down" quarks are small white holes, and "up" quarks are actually black holes. The electrons constantly spew out what we think of as quantum matter, and the protons constantly consume it. The flow is spirals in though, so it creates thicker areas in the space between them, in fact it defines that very space. It is sort of a pressure wall if you want to think of it that way.The matter that doesn't end up consumed by the protons fans out across the galaxy and becomes neutral particles called "dark matter" as well as populating the "Higgs Field" from which all particles arise. The barrier walls between orbits is the source of the energy releases when an electron is knocked from one orbit into another. The event horizon cuts across its own output matter, displaces it into the field as a wave.

Here is where the theory gets interesting. I started trying to figure out how electrons could possibly spew a uniform output of quantum matter, and it occurred to me that if all these rifts in the field were connected, the electrons of every point in the universe must be connected. Not just that, but what if they are connected to..... black holes. Regular ones on our scale. So all the black holes on our scale are gobbling up matter, and regurgitating it back up as what we call quantum matter. So that means all that quantum matter being gobbled up by every proton is being spewed out into the universe at a large scale through white holes.

Gravity is caused by a "suction" effect caused by the flow of quantum matter toward the white holes. The protons are constantly draining it out so to speak and this causes a natural flow of it toward them. Magnetism and electromagnetic waves are products of oscillation within this flow, with the magnetic field lines of a "permanent" magnet being a trick of polarizing materials with just the right imbalance of "charge"(which is ultimately just quantum particles) so part of the flow spreads outside the normal constraints of the matter.

So time is easy to explain. Its simply the exchange of these flows, limited by the principal of conservation of energy. That is to say, its it seems to be a one-in-one-out universe. Things go in really small, come out huge, and go in huge and come out really small. Think about what a black hole actually does; things get so super huge, it compresses them down so tiny they break out of space time "into"(through perhaps?) the non-Euclidean space that connects all the particles. So its an interconnected Einstein-Rosen bridge between the super massive and the super micro with a steady flow from one to the other. This completely explains quantum entanglement. Once their spins are linked, they remain that way until interfered with because in the non-euclidian space within their event horizons, there's effectively no distance at all between them or any other quarks. Motion, as we know it, is just the polarization of this flow in a specific direction, This is why energy is only needed to accelerate, but an object will continue to gain distance once in motion; because time and energy are the same exact thing, and energy is matter, so matter is just localized "time" loops.

So this might explain a lot about why Laniakea and Perseus-Pisces Superclusters look like field lines around a big invisible "something" called the Taurus Void. Its just a tiny particle on a larger scale(which is actually also a smaller scale at a radically different time dilation)

Also, I believe electrons actually do orbit more like the classical model suggests, though not precisely so simple. They still follow orbital constraints so statistical analysis works on them, but I suggest that the particles are just moving at such an extreme dilation relative to us that we can't accurately track them. Its like trying to watch something filmed at 1000 frames per second at only 30 frames per second. Each frame you get will show everything in a certain position, but by the next frame it has all changed significantly. We measure time at the edge of the atom, but as you go closer to the nucleus, time dilates.

Energy flows in straight lines, and gravity causes rotation. This is not because gravity curves, but because of the overlapping vectors. Think of an electron as a shower head, and a proton as a drain and it will make way more sense.

### #2 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 19 May 2017 - 07:04 PM

My

Sentiments

Exactly.

With one correction needed:

"White-holes" are actually destabilized evaporating black holes.

I've heard someone in high school say that the universe is inside an atom, not sure but I think I've heard of physicists say this much. & It's quite natural to assume that space-time is not discrete and that each atom is as complex in its inner worlds as the entire universe & that the scales are endless, not to mention there's plenty of astronomical evidence that can be pulled from our telescopes.

I don't think this is a new theory, but until our transhuman descendants have totally mastered miniaturization by transforming Mercury into a bunch of hematite solar-focusing laser beams powerful enough to construct evaporating artificial black holes to play with these anti-QM ideas will always remain speculation for reasons you explain, that we don't have the tools to measure these trans-Planckian interactions.

Which means we live in a type 1 multiverse, a static one at that, which means that since matter/energy can only rearrange itself in so many ways, there's another setup like our solar system out there that has another human civilization with a few hundred or million year head-start on us. Given exponentially special relativity, their sub-Planck technology's "radically different time dilation" would allow for "relatively superluminal" sub-Planck space travel without the need for a warp drive. In fact they could reconstruct atomic structures to create anthropic universes such as ours so that tinier civilizations can further miniaturize, which gives these cosmomorphs influence over evolution without the need to travel out into space at all. But I'd figure they'd be doing both as the construction of trans-Planckian "fractal space-crafts" only requires the exponentially special relativistic effects on matter occurring within event horizons of artificial black holes I.e. Kugelblitz engines which are basically free energy sources as all you need is a partial Dyson Swarm. We can't play with black holes up close & personal yet, & even if we could, we wouldn't be able to make sense of the data without Strong AI, too many interactions are occurring.

Edited by Super Polymath, 01 June 2017 - 11:06 AM.

### #3 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 19 May 2017 - 11:22 PM

Its important to note that my only criteria for a space craft is that it has a velocity and can send pieces of it to and froe as in it can communicate, change form, and use materials in its destination to build and self-replicate. We are talking about quarks as evaporating black holes and electrons and protons as galactic super clusters so sub-planckian crafts are basically timed & preprogrammed cosmological events throughout an oscillating subatomic environment (think of a game of pool,or like dominoes). In order to go superluminal you need to be lighter than a photon, the gravity of the subatomic world needs to slingshot you ftl until you merge and gain enough mass to form nanotechnology at your destination. Basically, its mostly information, so this needs to be operated using godlike calculations. I understand if I lost you when I brought up futurist technologies based on this kind of inner-worlds theory.

Edited by Super Polymath, 20 May 2017 - 12:54 AM.

### #4 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 12:38 AM

The problem is mathematicians. Quantum mechanics contradicts astronomical evidence so much because it was designed to make the math easier, but Cantor's infinity does not make math easier, it makes it harder. We need either IA (intelligence amplification) or AI (artificial intelligence) for astrophysics; preferably both, because one enriches the other. The smartest person is tripping & insane, the smartest is way too sane. You need to set up an equilibrium for the concepts and the mathematics to harmonize.

Edited by Super Polymath, 20 May 2017 - 01:18 AM.

### #5 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 01:17 AM

But the concepts are definately the dominating variable. To be clear, you need to conceptualize the nature of a system before applying any math to it. & I guarantee you the math that comes out of unique concepts will seem overpoweringly beautiful in simplified form. However, old concepts are inherently mathematically ugly. & that is contrary to modern physics, but modern physics models yield no results, so.

Edited by Super Polymath, 20 May 2017 - 01:41 AM.

### #6 AmishFighterPilot

AmishFighterPilot

• Members
• 84 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 03:25 AM

I've heard someone in high school say that the universe is inside an atom, not sure but I think I've heard of physicists say this much. &amp;amp; It's quite natural to assume that space-time is not discrete and that each atom is as complex in its inner worlds as the entire universe, that the scales are endless, not to mention there's plenty of astronomical evidence that can be pulled from our telescopes.

Thanks for your replies. I want to be clear though that I am not proposing each atom has a discrete universe, or that there are multiple universes. I am claiming that it loops. There are only so many possibilities and combinations of possibilities in the universe. Sure, the options may be vast, but they are limited. Just like how snowflakes actually will repeat if given enough incidents of them.

I'm more convinced than ever lately that superluminal motion within regular space-time is simply not logical or possible. Wormholes, on the other hand, seem quite likely; I just have doubts about how we could actually utilize them. You either have to make things so tiny they could slip into a proton, or so huge that they could traverse a black hole. I strongly suspect that going somewhere specific by going "through" this non-euclidian space may not even by practical. I'm really starting to worry we're never going to be able to explore the galaxy at superluminal velocities or even tunnel through it in any practical sense. We may just have to extend our lifespans and get used to long car rides

Edited by AmishFighterPilot, 20 May 2017 - 03:26 AM.

### #7 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 07:43 AM

Thanks for your replies. I want to be clear though that I am not proposing each atom has a discrete universe, or that there are multiple universes. I am claiming that it loops. There are only so many possibilities and combinations of possibilities in the universe. Sure, the options may be vast, but they are limited. Just like how snowflakes actually will repeat if given enough incidents of them.
I'm more convinced than ever lately that superluminal motion within regular space-time is simply not logical or possible. Wormholes, on the other hand, seem quite likely; I just have doubts about how we could actually utilize them. You either have to make things so tiny they could slip into a proton, or so huge that they could traverse a black hole. I strongly suspect that going somewhere specific by going "through" this non-euclidian space may not even by practical. I'm really starting to worry we're never going to be able to explore the galaxy at superluminal velocities or even tunnel through it in any practical sense. We may just have to extend our lifespans and get used to long car rides

We have opposing viewpoints about the nature of reality. You're talking about circular but finite (in that subatomic particles loop to different points but are discrete in nature in that you can't break them apart or make them smaller which to me seems unlikely) spacetime, I'm talking about linear but infinite (from the endlessly small to the endlessly big) spacetime.

Now, I suppose our models are mathematically similar in some regards, at least more so than QM. however, my theory is more mathematically complex, in fact it's infinitely complex. I suppose with reverse and linear flow your circular spacetime implies unnecessary dimensionality, which would be impossible to perceive, yet you leave computers doing math based on this assumption that spacetime is circular or curves at all.

You see the non-flat spacetime is what we get when we try to conceptualize the physical source of gravity as a mechanism, trust me, my flat spacetime does as well because empty space has tiny webs of invisible micro-worlds that operate the mechanics of gravity, it's a game of dominoes, if you follow me.

Gravity, space & time don't require all that circularity & string mumbo jumbo. Why does it have to loop at a certain point? Completely untangle superstring theory and you get my theory. There are only 3 dimensions required. You drag a dot & you get a line, you expand a line & you get a square, you raise a square & you get a cube, the next step is a square changing its location over time,at one point in time its here, the next there, if your in both times at once it's still just two 3 dimensional squares.

& by the time I become small enough to slip into a proton I will have self-replicate enough & propagated outward enough that I'm covering such a large surface area that a black holes gravity doesn't effect me much. We start by miniaturizing integrated circuit designs, then we replace the neurons in our brains with artificial neurons without disrupting the synaptic connections. Now we have more processing power in less space, so to speak.

Edited by Super Polymath, 20 May 2017 - 10:58 AM.

### #8 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 11:21 AM

Okay I think you'll have a good idea of what I articulated in those hyperlinks now, you should. It's easy to imagine but difficult to describe.

### #9 AmishFighterPilot

AmishFighterPilot

• Members
• 84 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 04:34 PM

We have opposing viewpoints about the nature of reality. You're talking about circular but finite (in that subatomic particles loop to different points but are discrete in nature in that you can't break them apart or make them smaller which to me seems unlikely) spacetime, I'm talking about linear but infinite (from the endlessly small to the endlessly big) spacetime

That isn't what I'm talking about at all. There is only a limit to the division within this space time scale. The quantum matter that flows as streams of particles too small to exist on this scale. They have to combine to fit in or flow back through non-euclidian space as is. The quantum data is both infinite and finite, in that there are limits to the variables, but not limit to their reemergence

### #10 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 04:52 PM

That isn't what I'm talking about at all. There is only a limit to the division within this space time scale. The quantum matter that flows as streams of particles too small to exist on this scale. They have to combine to fit in or flow back through non-euclidian space as is. The quantum data is both infinite and finite, in that there are limits to the variables, but not limit to their reemergence

Yes, I'd absolutely agree with that as being the most rational way to picture nature.

Now, in order to go "warp" or "beam aboard" we need strong AI & to see it happen to a black hole up close & personal. Now I believe I've proposed methods of doing so with references. Also, you need that conception for the proper special relativity to account for certain rescaled interactions & to time cosmic events to reemerge your technology on a smaller cosmic scale or to go a certain distance. This is omega point technology, but it depends on that concept & mathematics for that ever-working grand unification model!

### #11 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 07:41 PM

Now, I believe we have everything necessary to proceed, we have this theory to test, we have M theory, etc.

We have a way to test these simplified formulas, or put them to the test. We further miniaturize information technology & dice mercury (using von neumann probes) into a partial dyson swarm for kugelblitz engines. This is all mathematically & scientifically plausible.

That's not the issue, the issue is that in order to build strong ai & von Neumann probes we'd need intelligence amplification for every citizen, which means we'd need to change our nature. Issue, ethics, law, the whole justice system, monetary & academic institutions, entire cities & nations would need to be abolished to accomplish this.

Carl Sagan says it best:

Edited by Super Polymath, 01 June 2017 - 11:07 AM.

### #12 AmishFighterPilot

AmishFighterPilot

• Members
• 84 posts

Posted 24 May 2017 - 11:42 PM

I was watching an interesting video on photons earlier and it got me thinking about something. When a photon is absorbed by an orbital electron, it accelerates that electron to the next orbit up. What fills that space to allow that wider orbit? "Space" itself creates that wider orbit. So a photon is made up of space? Oh but it can transfer force too, but transfer of force also creates expansion or contraction of space. When a space ship moves through space, it must only transfer energy while accelerating. Despite this, it will continue to get farther from its starting point without an addition of energy. So time and energy are directly related. Energy as we know it is a polarization of time flow, like the cable that turns the throttle valve in an engine, allowing flow. The valve can only turn so far until it reaches a maximum open state(which in this case is the speed of light).

### #13 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 08:16 PM

I was watching an interesting video on photons earlier and it got me thinking about something. When a photon is absorbed by an orbital electron, it accelerates that electron to the next orbit up. What fills that space to allow that wider orbit?

Well if you think about what a photon & electron ring actually is in this theory, it's quite obvious. The photon with it's periodic wavelength (explained by scattering & micro gravitational attraction) is being dragged by gravity as it falls along the orbit of the electron rings around their nuclei. It's all explained in my iterations.

It becomes apparent when you look at gravity as nothing but relativistic causal interactions of matter & energy, the "empty space" is filled with smaller matter & energy, or dormant hyper-dispersed material, that add to the causal chain reactions of matter known as gravity that works like dominoes. Nothing can expand if space is infinite, so everything is just moving around. That atomic nuclei are switching places with the electron rings as evaporating black holes ignite the surrounding dormant matter from what was previously galaxies & stars (that have expanded into oblivion) into a bunch of electron clouds such as the blob we see in the cosmic microwave background which themselves expand into galactic superclusters which eventually become more evaporating hypermassive black holes.

The "tugs from beyond" of the CMB, the FRB signals we pick up, are all evidence of this phenomenon.

Edited by Super Polymath, 31 May 2017 - 08:27 PM.

### #14 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 31 May 2017 - 08:45 PM

Because if a photon's wavelength is the scattering of that photon beneath the Planck length, than as matter becomes smaller than a photon (light) than it must interact with other sub-photon matter faster than light. So naturally a smaller world, with a different cosmological constant (to adjust for trans-Planckian interactions), would automatically resemble our cosmos at its largest - no matter what it's made out of. The smaller material has to conform to a more confined space than the Planck length by adopting a superluminal cosmology.

Edited by Super Polymath, 31 May 2017 - 08:49 PM.

### #15 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 01 June 2017 - 02:21 PM

This theory can actually be tested mathematically with observational evidence using the time-frame from the CMB blob to the current observable universe. Then you take the speed of light ( C ) to the power of the speed of light (C^C) & you rescale time (13 billion years converted into a rescaled cosmological time-frame) using C^C.

We then use this descaled speed of light in our simulation of expansion from the CMB to the time when the last black holes evaporate according to this model's adjusted rate of expansion (several googol years on our scale) after finding the point of the atom in which the nucleus & the electron ring of the atom replace each other using a specialized distance formula based on the area of that atom. Issue is we can't actually see that many frames to see the nucleus of an atom move at the rate in which it would be moving, or account for that many interactions to prove if theorem holds true or false using many different kinds of atoms to find your average which should follow with an adjusted approximation of this model. I'm sure there's a way, but it would probably involve nano or femto-tech, way more algorithmic data than we possess, & artificial black holes (not micro-black holes) up close & personal just as you would if you were looking for gravitons, an evaporating black hole is like a magnifying glass that allows you to see atoms in a way you would otherwise be unable to see.

​When you can get an atom that follows our cosmic expansion cycle exactly, as opposed to an adjusted approximated average of atoms in general, you'll know that it has a humanity within it. Which is more in the realm of sub-Planck tech that I was referring to earlier.

Edited by Super Polymath, 01 June 2017 - 08:16 PM.

### #16 Turtle

Turtle

Member

• Members
• 15451 posts

Posted 02 June 2017 - 04:33 PM

The primary particle of creation is couscous of course course as revealed to me through the noodly touch of Her Majesty the Great Spaghetti Monster during a night of heavy drinking and relativistic piratical candy distribution. Mathematically this is expreseed as $FSM=pasta*pie*sauce^2+meatyballs/ \sqrt {corncandy}$

### #17 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• Members
• 1195 posts

Posted 02 June 2017 - 05:01 PM

The primary particle of creation is couscous of course course as revealed to me through the noodly touch of Her Majesty the Great Spaghetti Monster during a night of heavy drinking and relativistic piratical candy distribution. Mathematically this is expreseed as $FSM=pasta*pie*sauce^2+meatyballs/ \sqrt {corncandy}$

All of you argued against me, taking the stance that gravity had no velocity.

Ya'll aught to start taking my thinking process more seriously, as it's obviously better than all of yours.

Edited by Super Polymath, 02 June 2017 - 05:03 PM.