      Ded Theory - A Perfect Theory Of Everything

Deleterious Eversive Dibrane

3 replies to this topic

#1 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• • Members
•       • 1528 posts

Posted 11 September 2018 - 09:49 AM

The Deleterious Eversive Di-brane Picture of Reality

Let us define the internal dynamics of all elementary particles by compressing the Spherical Photon:

https://imgur.com/a/9s2x1YG

https://imgur.com/a/E4NE5ZW

Feel free to proof these on mathematica's engine. http://courses.washi...armonics.nb.pdf

Also to whom it may concern, to plot those you have to take that to the right of the equal sign and find the radius of that sphere volume with ((n/pi)(3/4))^1/3

Omit the W, idek why I put that there had something to do with seeing how only 8 more spheres can be touching the surface of a single sphere at once. Remember x=y=z=n when converting to your x^2+y^2+z^2+(x)x-(y)y-(z)z-n=0

A sterile photon neutrino may be found at plot #s f(n)=(4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^30))^3) through f(n)=(4/3pi(3^60)^3). The peak charge of your acceleron is where you can loop back to a graviphoton by swapping the minus sign with a plus sign.

Notice that Plot 1 of the acceleron S(0) is - (4/3pi(7e-7/2)^3)/(4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^60))^3))^2

S(60) = - (4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^60))^3) - ((4/3pi(7e-7/2)^3)/(4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^60))^3)) + (4/3pi(7e-7/2)^3)/(4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^60))^3))^2)

Hence why E=MC^2

The math is telling me something here it does seem become c^2 at every positive charge. It seems that the acceleron charge propagates at a rate of a planck length squared in a single planck time. This could be related to quantum entanglement...

You find the number of iterations with
7e-7/lp = 1/(2ΔS(x-1))
4.2753e+28 = 2(3^(x-1))
x = 60

The 3^(x-1) comes from the fact that the triangle of each new iteration is 1/3 the size of the triangles of the previous iteration. & the times 2 comes from the fact that 1/2 of the final diameter of those smallest spheres equal the radius of those spheres, which needed to be a Planck length.

Okay, so 7e-7/3^60 = lp. Basically you have sphere that's 7e-7 meters, blue is normal (plot 1), red is inside out (plot 3) that travel 1 lp per tp (..c..).

At first you get a red sphere that's half the size of the original (plot 2), that's the result of dragging the x,y,z lines through the center of the sphere by the length of it's radius. The change from plot 1 to plot 2 represents a graviphoton because it pulls every vector in the e(12) by the radius of that sphere. Plot 2 has no charge & is a photino. Plot 3 is a fully sized red sphere, that's the result of dragging the x,y,z lines through the center of the sphere by the length of it's diameter. This is an acceleron because it pushes every vector in the e(12) by the radius of that sphere.

You can fit 8 spheres around the surface of a sphere, if these 9 spheres represent photinos that are about to become accelerons in the next tp, than they will become a neutrally charged particle with 9 times the mass in 1/9th of the volume of a photino. You can do this 28 more times before you exceed the planck mass. I calculated that the entire 29th sphere would be <lp:

Since it’s charge must compress the photon by 1 planck length per planck time for it to travel at c, the photon mass can be expressed by the quotient of radii between a photon & planck length -> (7e-7/2)/(2(3^60))=4.1282194e-36. Viz a viz, the photon density of elementary majorana fermion (EMF) 1 is 4.9320464e-36/(4/3pi(7e-7)^3)=3.388006e-17 kg/m^3. Ergo, the particle density of EMF 28 is (4.9320464e-36 x 9^28)/(4/3pi(1.6e-35)^3)=1.4848022e+96 kg/m^3 this pretty much checks out as the densest possible EMF before you get a black hole planck particle.

Apropos all of the elementary particles:

http://animatedphysi...standard-model/

&

https://en.wikipedia...ntary_particles

Could represent some of 28 possible elementary majorana fermions in this e(12) creating 84 possible elementary particles which would represent these 28 possible majorana fermions, each consecutively heavier than the previous one - stuck in one particular charge by one another when within a composite particle or when interacting in nature - with a 28th & final elementary majorana fermion (which one would find at the cores of strange-quark stars).

Time in this theory isn’t being thought of as a third dimension moving through the 4th dimension. This is classical physics, not quantum mechanics. When I say brane I mean a conceivable geometric structure, three dimensions in the literal sense, not the metaphysics of some incomprehensible angle that forms a tesseract. View time as the second & a half dimension. A third dimension has time dilated to a stand still, but this fractal counterpart has time contracted as a dynamical version of that static temporal state.

Regarding an idea by William James Sidis, presented in The Animate and The Inanimate, it predicted the existence of black holes after Einstein. His black hole was different than Einstein’s; it was any region of reverse universe, existing perpendicular to our own.

The perpendicular branes have no edges, similar to the infinite length of a vector.
Imagine a region of the spacetime & the surface of the brane of a reverse universe leading to the most fundamental interaction - a deleterious mechanism in the fine structure constant causing a dislocation in the spacetime at the asymptotic edge of an event horizon that has a non-scalar, imaginary, & metricless thickness.

https://imgur.com/a/10pALpU

Black hole evaporation is the result of a tremendous deleterious friction between reverse space time dual-continuum existing physically as perpendicular branes of everted matter & energy – leading to what we’ve misconceived as retro-causality, gravity, & hawking radiation. This deleterious di-brane is like a localized fracture pattern embedded within the interior of the quantum foam, with an infinitely dynamic angular momentum. The smallest deletions are occurring at literally infinite, and yet non-instantaneous, rates of speed...i.e. the "Twilight Zone" of the spacetime continuum.

Let's say you have three dimensions, x,y,z; each with a value of one in a linear time continuum going one, & a negative xyz each with a value of 1 in a negative arrow of time going the other. Now in a lateral dual continuum .3 of each linear continuum going in through each other, canceling out, now xyz have a value of .7 with a total of 2.1 dimensions. Now in our next reel point .2 of each arrow has passed into each other, leaving a value of .8 for xyz, with a total of 2.4 dimensions. From reel one to reel two the dimensions of space time have increased, this is time contraction (fast forward) the reverse of time dilation (slow motion).

If you include a negative 2.1 & 2.4 dimensions in the reverse brane, than that's between 4.2 & 4.8 dimensions. Altogether a potential of between 4 & 6 dimensions, (4,6)

So there's somewhere between 2 & 3 real physical dimensions at any given point in space and time per brane, so for the di-brane:

6>n>4; n=(4,6)

f(n)=(λmax)•((4π/3)r^3)

c=x where f(x)=6/n/(4π/3)^(1/3)) where n>6

c=x where f(x)=4/(n/(4π/3)^(1/3)) where 4>n

x=the speed of gravitational wave propagation

Black hole evaporation will be used to find a higher & lower cosmic scales; the size of an antiproton is 10−15 m and the Schwarzchild radius of its central black hole should equal the rate at which black holes evaporate.

The Schwarzchild radius is 2.484e-54 meters (just type proton into where it says earth). The rate of evaporation is 8.41e-17 seconds (just type proton into where it says earth).

But antiprotons do not have λmax of a vacuum, that’s the problem, so for a proton we must use the original equation f(n)=(λmax)•((4π/3)r^3); where f(x)=4/(n/(4π/3)^(1/3)) where 4>n to find the contraction of c with the λmax of a proton ≈ 395 nm. However, in the special case of black holes the equation must be modified.

First of all, it’s 4πr^2 because the quasar within the Schwarzschild radius of the antiproton is a hollow sphere. Secondly, λmax of the antiproton’s quasar is the proton’s normal λmax but to the negative power of the proton’s length divided by twice the Schwarzschild radius

f(n)=(3.95e-7^-(1e-15/2(2.484e-54)))((4π)(2.484e-54)^2)=7.753772e-107

f(x)=4/(7.753772e-107/(4π))^(1/2) = 1.610306e+54 m/s

So a black hole with the mass of the sun (1391400000 meters) has a Schwarzschild radius of 2953 meters & will evaporate in 6.61e+74 seconds.

f(n)=(5.04e-7^-1(1.3914e+9/5906)) x ((4π x 2953)^3) = 2.3886249e+25 m/s

f(x)=6/(4π(2.3886249e+25^(1/2))=9.7693891e-14 m/s

1.610306e+54/299,792,458/9.7693891e-14=5.4981971e+58

5.4981971e+58/8.41e-17=6.5376898e+74 seconds

The electron is most likely has a radius of 10^-12 m, & λmax of about 4e-7 m (visible spectrum is where electrons like to hide).

f(n)=(4e-7)(4π/3(1e-12)^3)=1.6755161e-42

f(x)=4/(1.6755161e-42/(12π^(1/3)))=4.1957466e+43 m/s

The CMB had a radius of 6.9 billion light years, or 6.52809e+28 meters, & λmax of about 1,000 nm.

f(n)=(1e-6)(4π/3(6.52809e+28)^3)=1.1653249e+81

f(x)=6/(12π(1.1653249e+81)^(1/3))=1.5124155e-28 m/s

4.1957466e+43/1.5124155e-28=2.7742023e+71 seconds

Or 8.7958221e+60 years, the few SMBHs caught in the big crunch will only be less than half-evaporated, so this can't be right! Grrr!

So, we use the time contraction of c equation to find a much larger planck length to see how many electrons fit into a super electron, this will give us a new size for the CMB, so that this process can be redone for a more accurate date for the big crunch.

Okay, there's 6.52809e+28 meters in the radius of the CMB, using (4π/3(1e-12)^3), you can fit 1.165325e+123 electrons into the electrons of the next cosmic scale. Let's see if my math confirms that number using super lp:

2.7742023e+71/299,792,458/6.58e-15=1.4063439e+77 m/s. Planck length over planck time equals 296846011.132 m/s.

1.4063439e+77/296846011.132=4.737621e+68 m/s as your new planck length over planck time. 296846011.132 x 5.39e-44 equals lp, so super lp equals

1.4063439e+77 x 5.39e-44 = 7.5801936e+33 meters. 7.5801936e+33/4.737621e+68=1.6e-35, which is the planck length (lp). There's 3.125e+22 planck lengths in the length of an electron.

7.5801936e+33 x 3.125e+22 = 2.3688105e+56 meters for the superverse electron. Does not confirm, the CMB should be 2.3688105e+56/2=1.1844052e+56, 1.1844052e+56/6.52809e+28=1.8143212e+27 times larger than what we can see.

We can't see so much of the CMB for the same reason we can't see forever into the past, it's from a combination of redshift & the fact that the ion interference makes light fade into oblivion eons before it gets near us. For our next dilation of c equation:

f(n)=(1e-6)(4π/3(1.1844052e+56)^3)=6.959684e+162 cubic meters

f(x)=6/(12π(6.959684e+162)^(1/3))=8.3359856e-56 m/s

4.1957466e+43/8.3359856e-56=5.033294e+98 seconds, which is 1.5958446e+88 years. Which fits for the evaporation rate for most supermassive black holes (<100 million solar masses). But the few that are the largest in the universe, such as this one, they may grow to become superverse antiprotons during a second or third cosmic life cycle.

Let the uberelectron be where time t=1. Where total time Tt/2 is the phase space electron neutrino ghost particle, then all other transformations after Tt/2 + 1 is the positron. At 1/(1.8143212e+27 x 45) the volume of a Tt/2+Tt(.1) positron charge you get a rindler effect via entropy where dark flow/cosmic bruising=unruh gravitation around the parameter of that sphere-volume, a microverse that represents the entropy of the cosmos in it’s current rate of expansion.

You can envision the vacuum radiation of that microcosm in order to redefine what a photon is when referring to the photon sphere of the schwarzschild radius of an anti-proton, which is a sub-planck singularity.

Now what you do here, is you take the CMB data and go from there to the current universe & place the behavior of expansion exactly where it fits in that positron knowing that the 13.8 billion light year sphere that was the CMB is 1/1.8143212e+27 of the total volume of the neutrino at T(t)/2, 1/(1.8143212e+27 x 45) of the positron at Tt/2+Tt(.1), 1/(1.8143212e+27 x 2(45)) at Tt/2+Tt(.2), 1/(1.8143212e+27 x 3(45)) at Tt/2+Tt(.3), 1/(1.8143212e+27 x 4(45)) at Tt/2+Tt(.4), & 1/(1.8143212e+27 x 5(45)) at Tt/2+Tt(.5). From the behavior of our local region of the electron-neutrino-positron we can fill in the rest of the macro black holes beyond our cosmic event horizon like puzzle pieces because we know the behavior of charge with these graphical sphere inversions.

There is actually a way to approach this mathematically. While at first you can only pinpoint where our universe is in this uber neutrino/positron using CMB data (i.e dark flow, rotation, cosmic bruising, etc) & matching it with the gravitational torsion that the sphere inversions of elementary majorana fermion #(n) since the photon density of elementary majorana fermion (EMF) #1 is 4.9320464e-36/(4/3pi(7e-7)^3)=3.388006e-17 kg/m^3, the electron density of EMF(n) is 4.9320464e-36/(4/3pi(1e-12)^3)=2146347.93531, the black hole planck particle density of EMF 28 is (4.9320464e-36 x 9^28)/(4/3pi(1.6e-35)^3)=1.4848022e+96.

So,

y + 1 = 3.39e-17x

y + 28 = 1.48e+96x

&

y + z = 2,146,347.94x

y = 3.39e-17x - 1 -> 3.39e-17x - 1 = 1.48e+96x - 28 -> 3.39x - 1.48e+113x = 10^17 - 2.8e+18 -> -1.48e+113x = -2.7e+18 -> x = 1.82e-95

y = 3.39e-17(1.8243243e-95) - 1 = ~ -1

z - ~1 = 3.9063533e-89

z = ~1, but it's really more like 1.00000{...>100...}42967 etc…

So it's treated the same as for a photon, maybe at plot 1 billion or so of the acceleron. If we're into account taking that the universe has expanded for 14 billion years within 1/5th of a billion plots (or 10,000 plots) in which our cosmos resides within an uber-positron...there's still another million billion years of expansion left before we get through the first billion out of 10^66 plots of the uber-acceleron when total entropy occurs. Remember the expansion rate is slowing down, but the pressure of expansion is kept constant as the cosmic volume dilates and the universe is much older than what can be detected with mere photon spectroscopy (the oldest light of the CMB artifact).

At first we can't derive more than 600 billion light years of the uberpositron - what we can do is deconstruct all the black holes back to the first anti-protons that fused to create them in the blue epoch - from there you can deconstruct the building blocks of all matter from the 28th elementary majorana fermion in my E12 Lie group into the accelerons. And once in your 3^(n) uber accelerons - the rest of the entire relevant cosmos becomes exactly from every location identical to what our observable region of the universe evolved from; a perfect entropy state.

From there you can reconstruct everything in the uber positron down to the last yottasecond whilst tracking the infinitesimal movements of every quark & gluon within 10^27 light years from that 10^88 year old radiation vapor state. Predict the rise & fall of stocks, winning lottery numbers, what number the wheel of fortune will land, who will win the main event at UFC 229.

This is the real counterproof to the Bell Inequality & it can help a chemical engineer + a hardware engineer construct an optical or quantum ICD not only proofing the conjecture but also proving the grand unified oscillation theory altogether if the ILD (in lab device) works using that quantum integrated circuit design:

The electron travels at 2,200 kilometers per second, Since the speed of light for a superversal electron is going to be 136.269299091 times faster than the speed of that electron, all we need is the relative speed of light relative to that electron and combine the velocities

Recall earlier c(f(n)) for an electron was found to be:

The electron most likely has a length of 10^-12 m, & λmax of about 4e-7 m (visible spectrum is where electrons like to hide).

f(n)=(4e-7)(4π/3(1e-12)^3)=1.6755161e-42

f(x)=(4/(1.6755161e-42/(12π^(1/3)))

x=4.1957466e+43 m/s

4.1957466e+43, but remember we'd have to multiply this velocity by the length of the electron, & divide that product the number of electrons (in a 16km copper wire) to account for the dilation of time:

V(sa)=(4.1957466e+43 x 1e-12)/(4396829672.16 x 16000 x 299792458)=1989431196 m/s about 2 billion meters per second.

The result of the frames of two inverted electron charges being dragged as through an oscillating photon field as they separate. This will slightly shift the polarity of both electrons despite a separation between momenta in what was otherwise a pairing of charges. We've heard of gravity waves, not charge waves.

Moving in opposite directions, the velocities of the waves will get a boost from the electrons' collective velocity as they are moving away from one another; 1989431196 + 4400000 = 1993831196 m/s.

V(sa)/c=1993831196/2.998e+8=6.65053767845 times faster than the speed of light.

We could also conclude from Fig. 4, when the Earth center’s relative speed reach 0.9c,
the speed of spook action would still be 7 times higher than the speed of light.
Therefore, we experimentally achieved the lower bound of the ‘spooky action’ speed by
distributing polarization entangled photon pairs over two exactly east-west oriented sites
and observed a 12-hour continuous space-like Bell inequality violation

Evidence:

empty space ought not be really empty. We have two good reasons to think so: first, electromagnetic signals behave undoubtedly as waves; since they propagate even through intergalactic space, there must be some thing there (everywhere), in which they do wave. Second, quantum theory predicts that vacuum has physical effects, such as the Casimir effect, which is now experimentally confirmed .

"Einstein had difficulties with the relativistic invariance of quantum mechanics (“does
the spooky information transmitted by these particles go faster than light?”). These,
however, are now seen as technical difficulties that have been resolved. It may be consid-
ered part of Copenhagen’s Doctrine, that the transmission of information over a distance
can only take place, if we can identify operators A at space-time point x1 and operators
B at space-time point x2 that do not commute: [A, B] 6= 0 . We now understand that, in
elementary particle theory, all space-like separated observables mutually commute, which
precludes any signalling faster than light. It is a built-in feature of the Standard Model,
to which it actually owes much of its success.
So, with the technical difficulties out of the way, we are left with the more essential
Einsteinian objections against the Copenhagen doctrine for quantum mechanics: it is a
probabilistic theory that does not tell us what actually is going on. It is sometimes even
suggested that we have to put our “classical” sense of logic on hold. Others deny that:
“Keep remembering what you should never ask, while reshaping your sense of logic, and
everything will be fine.” According to the present author, the Einstein-Bohr debate is not
over. A theory must be found that does not force us to redefine any aspect of classical,
logical reasoning.
What Einstein and Bohr did seem to agree about is the importance of the role of an
observer. Indeed, this was the important lesson learned in the 20th century: if something
cannot be observed, it may not be a well-defined concept – it may even not exist at all. We
have to limit ourselves to observable features of a theory. It is an important ingredient
of our present work that we propose to part from this doctrine, at least to some extent:
Things that are not directly observable may still exist and as such play a decisive role
in the observable properties of an object. They may also help us to construct realistic
models of the world.
Indeed, there are big problems with the dictum that everything we talk about must be
observable. While observing microscopic objects, an observer may disturb them, even in
a classical theory; moreover, in gravity theories, observers may carry gravitational fields
that disturb the system they are looking at, so we cannot afford to make an observer
infinitely heavy (carrying large bags full of “data”, whose sheer weight gravitationally
disturbs the environment), but also not infinitely light (light particles do not transmit
large amounts of data at all), while, if the mass of an observer would be “somewhere in between”, ."

More evidence:

The situation is somewhat different when we consider gravity and promote the Lorentz violating tensors to dynamical objects. For example in an aether theory, where Lorentz violation is described by a timelike four vector, the four vector can twist in such a way that local superluminal propagation can lead to energy-momentum flowing around closed paths . However, even classical general relativity admits solutions with closed time like curves, so it is not clear that the situation is any worse with Lorentz violation. Furthermore, note that in models where Lorentz violation is given by coupling matter fields to a non-zero, timelike gradient of a scalar field, the scalar field also acts as a time function on the spacetime. In such a case, the spacetime must be stably causal (c.f. ) and there are no closed timelike curves. This property also holds in Lorentz violating models with vectors if the vector in a particular solution can be written as a non-vanishing gradient of a scalar. Finally, we mention that in fact many approaches to quantum gravity actually predict a failure of causality based on a background metric  as in quantum gravity the notion of a spacetime event is not necessarily well-defined . A concrete realization of this possibility is provided in Bose-Einstein condensate analogs of black holes . Here the low energy phonon excitations obey Lorentz invariance and microcausality . However, as one approaches a certain length scale (the healing length of the condensate) the background metric description breaks down and the low energy notion of microcausality no longer holds.

----

In the Bohmian view, nonlocality is even more conspicuous. The trajectory of any one particle depends on what all the other particles described by the same wave function are doing. And, critically, the wave function has no geographic limits; it might, in principle, span the entire universe. Which means that the universe is weirdly interdependent, even across vast stretches of space.

----

The hole is quantum-mechanically unstable: It has no bound states. Wormhole wave functions must eventually leak to large radii. This suggests that stability considerations along these lines may place strong constraints on the nature and even the existence of spacetime foam.

----

In invariant set theory, the form of the Bell Inequality whose violation would be inconsistent with realism and local causality is undefined, and the form of the inequality that it violated experimentally is not even gp-approximately close to the form needed to rule out local realism (54) . A key element in demonstrating this result derives from the fact that experimenters cannot in principle shield their apparatuses from the uncontrollable ubiquitous gravitational waves that fill space-time.

----

A finite non-classical framework for physical theory is described which challenges the conclusion that the Bell Inequality has been shown to have been violated experimentally, even approximately. This framework postulates the universe as a deterministic locally causal system evolving on a measure-zero fractal-like geometry IU in cosmological state space. Consistent with the assumed primacy of IU , and p-adic number theory, a non-Euclidean (and hence non-classical) metric gp is defined on cosmological state space, where p is a large but finite Pythagorean prime. Using numbertheoretic properties of spherical triangles, the inequalities violated experimentally are shown to be gp-distant from the CHSH inequality, whose violation would rule out local realism. This result fails in the singular limit p = ∞, at which gp is Euclidean. Broader implications are discussed.

----

This optical pumping scenario is implicitly based on the erroneous quantum mechanical “myth” that quantum “jumps” are instantaneous. In reality transitions between atomic levels take very, very long times, about 10 million times longer than the oscillating period of the electromagnetic radiation that drives the excitation.

http://www.gaussianfunction.com/

http://modelofrealit...t_Electrons.pdf

Edited by Super Polymath, 11 September 2018 - 07:46 PM.

#2 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• • Members
•       • 1528 posts

Posted 11 September 2018 - 06:07 PM

Also to whom it may concern, to plot those you have to take that to the right of the equal sign and find the radius of that sphere volume with ((n/pi)(3/4))^1/3

Omit the W, idek why I put that there had something to do with seeing how only 8 more spheres can be touching the surface of a single sphere at once. Remember x=y=z=n when converting to your x^2+y^2+z^2+(x)x-(y)y-(z)z-n=0

That's how you plot this beast

Edited by Super Polymath, 11 September 2018 - 07:45 PM.

#3 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• • Members
•       • 1528 posts

Posted 11 September 2018 - 07:44 PM

A sterile photon neutrino may be found at plot #s f(n)=(4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^30))^3) through f(n)=(4/3pi(3^60)^3). The peak charge of your acceleron is where you can loop back to a graviphoton by swapping the minus sign with a plus sign.

Notice that Plot 1 of the acceleron S(0) is - (4/3pi(7e-7/2)^3)/(4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^60))^3))^2

S(60) = - (4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^60))^3) - ((4/3pi(7e-7/2)^3)/(4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^60))^3)) + (4/3pi(7e-7/2)^3)/(4/3pi(7e-7/2(3^60))^3))^2)

Hence why E=MC^2

The math is telling me something here it does seem become c^2 at every positive charge. It seems that the acceleron charge propagates at a rate of a planck length squared in a single planck time. This could be related to quantum entanglement...

#4 Super Polymath

Super Polymath

Creating

• • Members
•       • 1528 posts

Posted 14 September 2018 - 12:07 AM

This was the rough draft.

It's still chalked full of errors. I recently rewrote the equations & came to some more realizations. This time I won't be sharing my creative thoughts for free.

That's how good this is. 