Registered: May 2009
What is the physical meaning of M-theory?
STEPHEN WOLFRAM CAN JUSTLY CLAIM TO BE A SERIOUS RIVAL TO ISAAC NEWTON AND ALBERT EINSTEIN.
WOLFRAM’S IDEAS ABOUT INFORMATION BELOW THE PLANCK SCALE ARE ESSENTIAL FOR EMPIRICAL PREDICTIONS FROM M-THEORY.
PARADIGM-BREAKING PHOTONS ARE TO M-THEORY AS KEPLER’S LAWS ARE TO NEWTONIAN GRAVITATIONAL THEORY.
Am I wrong?
Consider 2 hypotheses:
(1) If paradigm-breaking photons do not exist, then I am a crackpot.
(2) If paradigm-breaking photons do exist, then I am THE CRACKPOT MESSIAH.
"But what is string theory? It may well be the only way to reconcile gravity and quantum mechanics, but what is the core idea behind it?" — Edward Witten
If Ed Witten is one of the greatest theoretical physicists in the history of science then why hasn’t he made any testable empirical predictions to prove the value of M-theory for experimental physics? Does M-theory describe the informational symmetries of black holes and the multiverse?
Consider some conjectures:
(1) THE MULTIVERSE IS FINITE AND DIGITAL.
(2) THERE ARE A HUGE, BUT FINITE, NUMBER OF ALTERNATE UNIVERSES.
(3) THE MAXIMUM PHYSICAL WAVELENGTH CONSISTS OF THE PLANCK-LENGTH MULTIPLIED BY THE FREDKIN-WOLFRAM CONSTANT.
Let us assume the 3 preceding conjectures (CRAZY AS THEY SOUND) for the sake of argument. Is M-theory the mathematical smoothing-out of the Fredkin-Wolfram information process that is the digital essence of the multiverse? Is M-theory the bridge between Wolfram’s mobile automaton and theoretical physics in the form of quantum field theory and general relativity theory? Do M-theorists need to incorporate the Fredkin-Wolfram constant into M-theory?
Consider the following conjecture:
The core idea behind M-theory is to mathematically unify quantum field theory and general relativity in a physically valid way using Newton’s gravitational constant, the speed of light, and the Planck length. M-theory without the Fredkin-Wolfram constant allows string-like entities to vibrate with infinitely many degrees of freedom, contrary to the way nature really works. By using the Fredkin-Wolfram information process and the Fredkin-Wolfram constant, M-theorists can embed a computational structure into the mathematically smoothed-out structure of M-theory. By using the computational structure, M-theorists can then predict the valid empirical probability distribution for paradigm-breaking photons. Additionally, M-theorists can explain dark mater, dark energy, and perhaps other cosmological phenomena.
Is the preceding a lot of crackpot nonsense? Remember this:
STEPHEN WOLFRAM RECEIVED HIS PHYSICS PHD FROM CAL TECH WHEN HE WAS 20 YEARS OF AGE.
Last edited by David Brown on 05-01-2010 at 06:41 AM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged