[Milgrom's Law proves that Einstein-Fredkin general relativity theory is correct!] - A New Kind of Science: The NKS Forum
A New Kind of Science: The NKS Forum
Milgrom's Law proves that Einstein-Fredkin general relativity theory is correct!(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: David Brown
According to Einstein, “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” Make no mistake — physics is the one true religion, and M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine = physics. If you want to paint a good portrait of the multiverse, you must imitate Lao Tzu and Einstein.
Suppose F is gravitational force and the magnitude of the gravitational acceleration a is large relative to (µ * a(0) )/m. Let a(0) be Milgrom’s acceleration constant. We have
F = m * a * ((m * a)/(µ * a(0)))) if and only if
F * ( 1 / sqrt(1 – (2(µ * a(0))/(m * a))**2)) = m * a if only if
Einsteinian-redshift*(1 + Fredkin-redshift-correction-factor/2) = m * a,
provided that 2(µ * a(0))/(m * a) = Fredkin-redshift-correction-factor and we choose physical units in which gravitational redshift = Einsteinian gravitational acceleration due to gravitational force.
Therefore, Milgrom’s acceleration law proves that Einstein-Fredkin general relativity theory is correct and that the Wolframian updating paramater explains the space roar.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0107284v4 “How Cold Dark Matter Explains Milgrom’s Law”
Space and time may be doomed. — Edward Witten
The paradigm shift rate is doubling every decade. — Ray Kurzweil
Does the explanation of dark matter require an enormous paradigm shift in cosmology and the foundations of physics? Does the only valid explanation of dark matter consist of the valid physical interpretation of M-theory, whatever that valid interpretation might be? Is Wolfram’s automaton the way that nature builds space, time, real energy, and virtual energy from fundamental information below the Planck scale?
Since the beginning of 2009 CE, I have intensely pursued 3 questions: Does the valid interpretation of M-theory consist of the Fredkin-Wolfram multiverse based upon Fredkin’s concepts of information and Wolfram’s NKS Chapter 9? If X is to M-theory as Kepler’s laws are to Newtonian mechanics, then what is X, and, in particular, does X consist of paradigm-breaking photons that explain the GZK paradox? In physics, are there 3 fundamental concepts of time: Newtonian, Einsteinian, and Wolframian?
At present, the most common view is that dark matter is primarily non-baryonic, made of one or more elementary particles other than the usual electrons, protons, neutrons, and known neutrinos. The most commonly proposed particles are axions, sterile neutrinos, and WIMPs (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles, including neutralinos).
When I say "dark matter particles" I mean "dark matter particles excluding known neutrinos and/or neutrinos plausibly extrapolated from U(1) X SU(2) X SU(3) physics." I claim that dark matter particles are complete rubbish like phlogiston. Why? It’s the space roar! Explanation of the space roar demands new physics, and dark matter particles do nothing to help explain the space roar. I claim that space roar is the physical manifestation of the Wolframian updating parameter — this is the essential claim of my theory — … Can physicists prove that I am wrong?
How is it that dark matter particles help to explain the space roar, the GZK paradox, or dark energy? THEY DON’T EXPLAIN ANYTHING EXCEPT DARK MATTER, but do dark matter particles actually exist? In terms of U(1) X SU(2) X SU(3) physics, there are no dark matter particles in the model. Where does the new physics come from to explain dark matter particles? I have argued that dark matter particles are shot down by the space roar — no one has refuted my argument. My argument has simply been ignored.
What are dark matter particles really? They have difficult-to-detect inertial mass-energy and easy-to-detect gravitational mass-energy. I claim that dark matter is virtual mass-energy with zero inertial mass-energy and positive gravitational mass-energy. I say that the -1/2 in Einstein’s field equations needs to be replaced by -1/2 + FF/2, where FF is a constant very roughly equal to sqrt(60) * 10**-5. (My estimate could be off by a factor of 4π or more.) FF is needed because of Fredkin forces from alternate universes backed up by M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine. What are the alternative dark matter particle theories? Such theories involve huge unknown changes in U(1) X SU(2) X SU(3) physics, and it is very unclear how such theories could possibly explain dark energy and/or the space roar.
HYPOTHESIS FOR DARK MATTER: The only plausible way to explain dark matter is by means of the physical interpretation of some form of M-theory.
HYPOTHESIS FOR THE PHYSICAL INTERPRETATION OF M-THEORY: Space roar destroys the hope of a curling-up mechanism for M-theory as currently formulated and leads to 2 alternatives: (1) a hugely modified M-theory that supports dark energy stars in some form or (2) a modified M-theory that uses an information transfer mechanism from alternate universes.
Note that the a(0) in Milgrom's Law is about 10**-8 cm/sec**2 and the Pioneer anomaly acceleration is about 8.74 * 10**-10 m/sec**2. Can there be a reasonable doubt that Milgrom's Law explains the Pioneer anomaly? Milgrom's Law kicks in precisely one order of magnitude in acceleration below the Pioneer anomaly acceleration — this is what one would expect if the -1/2 in Einstein's field equations is replaced by -1/2 + FF/2, where FF/2 is very roughly sqrt(60/4) * 10**-5.
Forum Sponsored by Wolfram Research
© 2004-2013 Wolfram Research, Inc. | Powered by vBulletin 2.3.0 © 2000-2002 Jelsoft Enterprises, Ltd. |
vB Easy Archive Final - Created by Xenon and modified/released by SkuZZy from the Job Openings