Science Forums

## Recommended Posts

I have decided to continue my Quaternionic Equation from the original Wormhole Metric Thread = https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/111607-wormhole-metric-how-is-this-screwed-up/

This is mainly to check all the variables in the differential Equation to make sure that they all solve correctly and to make sure the Quaternion is anomaly free and solve the equation for (x,y,z,t,ωsp,M,I,k,φ,S,X,Z,μ,Y,q,a,β)

∇'(x,y,z,t,ωsp,M,I,k,φ,S,X,Z,μ,Y,q,a,β) = (d2/((ħ /(2Erest/C2)) 3a =1 (d2/d((C2/Erest)Ni = 1 MiRi)2) + (1/2)3a,β = 1  μ(PΠa)(Pβ - Πβ) + U - (ħ2/2)3N-6s=1(d2/dq2) + V)((|(Log(DgDaDψDφ-W)(((2ħGC2))Rs - (1/4)FaμvFaμv + i(ψ-bar)γμ(((Lghost QE  - gfabc(δμ (c-bar)a)Aμbcc) / (c-bar)aδμca) + ig(1/2)τWμ + ig'(1/2)YBμ)ψi +(ψ-bar)iLVijφψjr + (aji) - (μ2((φ-Dagger)φ) + λ((φ-Dagger)φ)2)/-(((Lghost QE   - gfabc(δμ (c-bar)a)Aμbcc) / (c-bar)aδμca) + ig(1/2)τWμ + ig'(1/2)YBμ)2)|)-e2S(r,t)/h)) - ((Erest/C2)ωs((((8πGTab/C4) + Λgab  - Rab) * gab-1))1/2 + (S/ (((3G(Erest/C2))/2C2Rs3)(RpVp) + (GIs/C2Rs3)((3Rp/Rs2)(ωRp) -ωp ))))Rs2/2))) / (ħ2/2(Erest/C2))))1/2(((1-(((2(Erest/C2)G / Rs) - (Isωs((((8πGTab/C4) + Λgab  - Rab) * gab-1))1/2 + (S/(((3G(Erest/C2))/2C2Rs3)(RpVp) + (GIs/C2Rs3)((3Rp/Rs2)(ωRp) -ωp )))))/2(Erest/C2))+ (((8πG/3)((g/(2π)3)∫(((Erelativistic2 - Erest2 / C2((Ar(X) + (ENucleon binding SNF εμ/mu) - Ar(XZ±)/Z) / mu)2)(1/2)(1/e((ERelativistic  - μchemical)/TMatter)±1)(ħω + ħωs) - ((ksC2)/ Rs2) + (((8πGTab/C4) + Λgab  - Rab) * gab-1))1/2(ΔxKiloparsec)))2/(C2)))1/2)

(d2/∇') - (Ctp) = ds2

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(d%5E2+%2F+%E2%88%87%27)+-+(C+t)%5E2

(Universe Volumetric Planck State @ size of universe in radius) =(4/3)π((RUniverse/(tpC))Luniverse

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(4%2F3)+%CF%80+L+((R%2F(t+C))+)%5E3

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%87+d+(4%2F3)+%CF%80+((R%2F(t+C))%5E3

Luniverse = (Charge,∇Color,∇flavour,∇gravity  - ∇Dark Energy)

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%E2%88%87+d

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(%E2%88%87+g)+-+(%E2%88%87+d)

Charge possible states per point (1,2/3, 1/3, 0,-1/3,-2/3,-1)

Color Possible states per point(R,B,G,0,antiG,antiB,antiR)

Flavour possible states per point (I,II,III,0,darkIII,darkII,darkI)

Gravity/Dark Energy possible states per point of space (Energy,Mass,Spin,0,-spin,-mass,-Energy)

Atleast the graphing equation and Equivalence principal are in working order having A.I. do the work.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

I have decided to use this equation for a proton instead of the entire universe as it would be too much data to ever complete.

(Universe Volumetric Planck State @ size of universe in radius) =(4/3)π((RUniverse/(tpC)) (Charge,∇Color,∇flavour,∇gravity  - ∇Dark Energy)

RUniverse = RProton = 10-15 meters

The Equation Yields a Planck State of 9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 1059 (Charge,∇Color,∇flavour,∇gravity  - ∇Dark Energy)

So a Field with 9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 1059 cubes that are a Planck length  with states of (+1/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+1/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+1/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) if the proton is at rest.

The Strong Nuclear Force or color Map will look something like this which is the only thing over the 3-D field that varies in a proton. If the Proton is in motion let's say moving in a particle accelerator at 8 Tev then the State is 7.6171932283964837631558879969576 * 1057 (+1/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (8000000/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+1/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (8000000/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+1/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (8000000/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

All of the Information being within the equation with a smaller color field of the same picture being less Planck Lengths within the particle due to length contraction. The Graphing Equation displays all possible properties of the particle or substance to an qauntized amount of a Planck Length being exact without error, I could write the entire Tensor for each substance but it would take the big number amount of states. These were done assuming Dark Energy was not existent and a non expanding universe which are the zero terms. There is only one unknown in these equations which is the Spin number of Dark Energy particles being the final zero in the spin term, the graph is over d/dx + d/dy  + d/dz the big number shows the number of planck lengths that the fields manifest for a proton at rest versus in motion for these examples.

This shows this equation to be in working order and accurate to reality.

This equation is actually more complex than the long equation as it gives a single state for everything rather than a large number of multiple Planck States like this one.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

If you wanted more detail of the Quarks within the Proton you could graph the equation with the same set of coordinates including the quarks with the same result.

For the Rest proton with quarks in finer detail.

9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 1059  (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

Now the charges varies given the details of the quarks within the proton which as now the charges vary you will have two varing graphs one for the Strong Nuclear Force or Color and one for the Electromagnetic Force or Charge being the (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz))  + (+2/3 /(dx + dy +dz), B/(dx + dy +dz)) + (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz), G/(dx + dy +dz)) = (+1/(dx + dy +dz),RGB/(dx + dy +dz))

Charge Map Color Map The equation can be used to whatever detail you would like it to be this being a more exact map of the proton next would be to add gluons if you wanted or even more protons and neutrons to construct an atom, but it is always exact to the planck length, no matter what detail is used.

Overlapped Charge and Color Map, (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz))  + (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz), B/(dx + dy +dz)) + (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz), G/(dx + dy +dz)) = (+1/(dx + dy +dz),RGB/(dx + dy +dz)) Which solves perfectly making the graphing equation even physically correct next we will try something more challenging like a Feynman diagram using this equation, it should be able to graph anything in the universe to the planck length is the test.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

The Feynmann Diagram we are going to test this on is Beta Decay of Carbon 14 into Nitrogen 14 to start off with the calculations need to be done for the planck state of an Electron and Neutron as beta decay is P+ > N + e- + Ve , so we willl start with mapping the quarks within the proton which a proton's state is  9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 1059  (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

Then the neutron can be described as a Planck State too which is

9.9023511949154288921026543960449 * 1059  (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

The electron has a smaller state 1.1998578848809383445875560276978 * 1051 (-1/(dx + dy +dz),0/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz), .511/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

The Neutrino has State of 28722.600151171579743008314436886(0/(dx + dy +dz),0/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz), .2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))  being much smaller than all of them

This Completes the Feynmann Diagram for Beta minus decay and satisfies  P+ > N + e- + Ve

9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 1059  (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

9.9023511949154288921026543960449 * 1059 (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

1.1998578848809383445875560276978 * 1051 (-1/(dx + dy +dz),0/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz), .511/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

28722.600151171579743008314436886(0/(dx + dy +dz),0/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 0/(dx + dy +dz), .2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))\

All properties have been conserved. This shows the volume of the neutron to be slightly smaller in size to the proton by .0000002%.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

This calculator can also be used to find the effects of Dark Energy on the particle in question for a proton you could solve the amount of Dark Energy on the particle on Nucleon, we can find that Dark Energy has a velocity currently of 54 meters per second using a simple equation E = (1/2)MV2 , V = 54 m/s . The Mass of the Dark Energy Particles are unknown so I will use a mass of electron or mass of proton. Giving each section of space a energy of 1.458 Kev outward with the push of Dark Energy if mass of electron or mass of proton it would be 1.313 Mev , now we can write the proton effected by Dark Energy.

9.9023511969154288921026543960449 * 1059  (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),R/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 1.45/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)938.28/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (+2/3/(dx + dy +dz),B/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 1.45/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)938.28/(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz))) , (-1/3/(dx + dy +dz),G/(dx + dy +dz),I/(dx + dy +dz), (0/(dx + dy +dz) - 1.45/(dx + dy +dz),938.28/(dx + dy +dz)938.28 /(dx + dy +dz),1/2/(dx + dy +dz)- 0/(dx + dy +dz)))

Now the Proton is displaying the expansion of Dark Energy upon the Proton.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites
• 1 month later...

It has been shown that this graphing tool can be used to graph anything that is contained with the universe using the information about its dimensions, so this test has been concluded about the graphing equation as successful, but I wanted to note that (dx2 + dy2 +dz2) = (Planck State) being R2 in Planck lengths which is why the dimensions are divided by (dx + dy +dz) and that the planck state( C ) data is used being the dimensions that the field is over being the Complex Manifold. The manifold of space (Euclidean Space) is being used as  (dx + dy +dz) which can also be (dx' + dy' +dz') if you wanted to directly start to use special relativity (Minkowski space) on it where as the Field dimensions are from Quantum field theory to be put over the manifold which is a type of quantum gravity when used that way. Next will be a proof of the big equation which will take longer to test which will give a ds2 value based on a complex system which can be used with the graphing equation to graph the actual state of the entire universe exactly without error based on a complex set of 18 variables or kept in its natural state for a ds2 value which is a Grand Unified Field equation that takes in account the Strong Nuclear Force, Weak Nuclear Force, Gravity and Electromagnetism all in one equation yielding E8 Killing Vectors. This Metric takes in account General Relativity, Special Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and Quantum Field Theory to arrive at the solution in Killing Vectors which are then placed in Minkowski space.

∇'(x,y,z,t,ωsp,M,I,k,φ,S,X,Z,μ,Y,q,a,β) = (d2/((ħ /(2Erest/C2)) 3a =1 (d2/d((C2/Erest)Ni = 1 MiRi)2) + (1/2)3a,β = 1  μ(PΠa)(Pβ - Πβ) + U - (ħ2/2)3N-6s=1(d2/dq2) + V)((|(Log(DgDaDψDφ-W)(((2ħGC2))Rs - (1/4)FaμvFaμv + i(ψ-bar)γμ(((Lghost QE  - gfabc(δμ (c-bar)a)Aμbcc) / (c-bar)aδμca) + ig(1/2)τWμ + ig'(1/2)YBμ)ψi +(ψ-bar)iLVijφψjr + (aji) - (μ2((φ-Dagger)φ) + λ((φ-Dagger)φ)2)/-(((Lghost QE   - gfabc(δμ (c-bar)a)Aμbcc) / (c-bar)aδμca) + ig(1/2)τWμ + ig'(1/2)YBμ)2)|)-e2S(r,t)/h)) - ((Erest/C2)ωs((((8πGTab/C4) + Λgab  - Rab) * gab-1))1/2 + (S/ (((3G(Erest/C2))/2C2Rs3)(RpVp) + (GIs/C2Rs3)((3Rp/Rs2)(ωRp) -ωp ))))Rs2/2))) / (ħ2/2(Erest/C2))))1/2(((1-(((2(Erest/C2)G / Rs) - (Isωs((((8πGTab/C4) + Λgab  - Rab) * gab-1))1/2 + (S/(((3G(Erest/C2))/2C2Rs3)(RpVp) + (GIs/C2Rs3)((3Rp/Rs2)(ωRp) -ωp )))))/2(Erest/C2))+ (((8πG/3)((g/(2π)3)∫(((Erelativistic2 - Erest2 / C2((Ar(X) + (ENucleon binding SNF εμ/mu) - Ar(XZ±)/Z) / mu)2)(1/2)(1/e((ERelativistic  - μchemical)/TMatter)±1)(ħω + ħωs) - ((ksC2)/ Rs2) + (((8πGTab/C4) + Λgab  - Rab) * gab-1))1/2(ΔxKiloparsec)))2/(C2)))1/2)

(d2/∇') - (Ctp) = ds2

One solved solution for this equation already is for ∇' being d2/dx'2 + d2/dy'2 + d2/dz', The original solution for the equation was LGhost QE  Which states that Quantum Entanglement is the same as creating a wormhole between two spaces or universes, and that theoretically if you did quantum entanglement on matter between universes you can transmit matter just like is often done across space during standard Quantum Entanglement experiments.  Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites
• 8 months later...

The Algebra of this equation can be scary as there are many variables however it was constructed from several accurate theories merged together, it paints a accurate field of all 4 field dimensions including Entanglement and Dark Energy, it is easier to solve it in parts to paint a accurate description of each field like the other equation which is much simpler however the other equation does not show the behavior of the forces based on the equation only graphs the forces from known geometries of space and particle dimensions, however both are accurate presentations of the universe based on equations commonly used in Quantum Mechanics, General Relativity, Quantum Field theory, and etc. It shows a model of the compression of space as if they field were lines that stretched and compressed much like General Relativity views curvature, but without all the terms the equation would be incorrect as many of them are from other equations which have been proven accurate to remove even a simple constant or variable makes the entire equation incorrect. I guess this is me apologizing for how large the second equation is compared to the first, but the produce a accurate model of the entire universe many variables must be taken in account exactly as they are in "Real Universe".

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

Worm holes are merely speculative and perhaps not even real, why spend so much time calculating a speculative idea? To be honest they don't even know what is inside a black hole, and apparently there's new evidence that they got it all wrong? See:https://www.latimes.com/health/la-xpm-2012-nov-28-la-sci-huge-black-hole-20121129-story.html

Edited by devin553344
##### Share on other sites

Worm holes are merely speculative and perhaps not even real, why spend so much time calculating a speculative idea? To be honest they don't even know what is inside a black hole, and apparently there's new evidence that they got it all wrong? See:https://www.latimes.com/health/la-xpm-2012-nov-28-la-sci-huge-black-hole-20121129-story.html

It is a model of the universe in essence, wormholes are just a consequence of the model because of entanglement of areas with high gravity and curvature. It happens to predict wormholes and is not necessarily all about wormholes, rather it describes a model of the universe. I know you cannot recognize the equations but many commonly used and highly proven correct equations are mixed together in this model.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

It is a model of the universe in essence, wormholes are just a consequence of the model because of entanglement of areas with high gravity and curvature. It happens to predict wormholes and is not necessarily all about wormholes, rather it describes a model of the universe. I know you cannot recognize the equations but many commonly used and highly proven correct equations are mixed together in this model.

To be completely honest, I don't believe space is that complex. I think your equations, if they in fact describe reality, would be quite simple. Space is not a complex machine in my opinion. It can't be complex, it's just space-time.

##### Share on other sites

To be completely honest, I don't believe space is that complex. I think your equations, if they in fact describe reality, would be quite simple. Space is not a complex machine in my opinion. It can't be complex, it's just space-time.

Simple equations do not describe the universe accurately as they are simplified, it takes a big equation to describe it as it is and exactly.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

Simple equations do not describe the universe accurately as they are simplified, it takes a big equation to describe it as it is and exactly.

I've reviewed a lot of different physics theories, and I have yet to see something complex that didn't involve waves or fields. And those break down to simple equations. Given the black hole metric is a bit complex. But still breaks down to 2Gm/rc^2 which is a simple idea.

##### Share on other sites

I've reviewed a lot of different physics theories, and I have yet to see something complex that didn't involve waves or fields. And those break down to simple equations. Given the black hole metric is a bit complex. But still breaks down to 2Gm/rc^2 which is a simple idea.

It is the entire universe as a single equation accurate to the planck length, i don't think it does, it describes all the universe as a wave-particle not just one segment or force but everything.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

It is the entire universe as a single equation accurate to the planck length, i don't think it does, it describes all the universe as a wave-particle not just one segment or force but everything.

I see. The problem with your idea I think is that for relativity to exist (frames of reference), space-time must originate from each and every particle instance. So in fact the universe does not technically exist, particles exist. And the interaction between particles is then distance and time.

Perhaps your theory equation can describe a single particle instead of the entire universe. Then it might fit with relativity. I see that you applied it to the proton, which is good! Cheers :)

##### Share on other sites

I see. The problem with your idea I think is that for relativity to exist (frames of reference), space-time must originate from each and every particle instance. So in fact the universe does not technically exist, particles exist. And the interaction between particles is then distance and time.

Perhaps your theory equation can describe a single particle instead of the entire universe. Then it might fit with relativity. I see that you applied it to the proton, which is good! Cheers :)

It does take in account that in the (((8πG/3)((g/(2π)3)∫(((Erelativistic2 - Erest2 / C2section of the equation, you don't have to take in account the energy of every particle separate it only warps space based upon energy density contained on the object or objects as kinetic particle motion. Technically this equation could be even longer if you considered the (1- V2/C2)1/2 , but it is implied that one would know how to take relativistic energy if they use this equation. It is a form of this equation, that segement of the larger equation.

as Energy Relativistic is just

It was shortened to that term as it assumed people would know that.

It is termed again in ((Ar(X) + (ENucleon binding SNF εμ/mu) - Ar(XZ±)/Z) / mu)2)(1/2)(1/e((ERelativistic  - μchemical)/TMatter)±1) when the chemical energy is calculated for the temperature of the molecules, which is again kinetic energy upon a object or objects.

The individual reference frames don't matter as the kinetic energy is used to calculate the generalized frame of all the particle and atomic movement.

P.S. This is something that I think Ralfcis if he ever visits this thread would take interest in or should take notice of.

Edited by VictorMedvil
##### Share on other sites

OK I've had a quick look, can you define some things more clearly, like, what kind of metric are you using, how you come to the conclusions with reasonable parameters... I haven't checked these units yet but will do if you can appease that.

## Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.