Registered: May 2009
Does virtual mass-energy obey Einstein's equivalence principle?
Is M-theory without the insights of NKS Chapter 9 an empirically unsatisfactory theory? What does M-theory predict? Consider two hypotheses:
Hypothesis Alpha: M-theory with the minimal modification incorporating Wolfram’s cosmological principle explains dark matter, dark energy, and the GZK paradox.
Hypothesis Omega: M-theory with no additional physical hypothesis has too many mathematical models and therefore cannot predict anything beyond a unification of quantum field theory with general relativity theory.
What is Wolfram’s cosmological principle?
THE MAXIMUM PHYSICAL WAVELENGTH EQUALS THE PLANCK LENGTH TIMES THE FREDKIN-WOLFRAM CONSTANT.
What does Wolfram’s cosmological principle imply under the assumption that informational mass-energy exists spread across alternate universes?
VIRTUAL PHOTONS POSSESS POSITIVE GRAVITATIONAL MASS-ENERGY AND ZERO INERTIAL MASS-ENERGY.
Consider 3 hypotheses:
(1) Alternate-universe virtual photons enter our observable universe and cause violations of Einstein’s equivalence principle and also violations of energy conservation in Einstein’s field equations.
(2) Dark matter (as opposed to unobserved standard mass-energy) is the gravitational effect of the failure of Einstein’s equivalence principle for virtual mass-energy.
(3) M-theory is the explanation of the fundamental principle of the multiverse: Informational substrate makes Nambu digital data makes digital physical reality, where the 11-dimensional supersymmetric model is the smoothing of the totality of the Nambu digital data over Nambu spacetime and Nambu energy.
On page 84 of Einstein’s “The Meaning of Relativity”, the equation (96) has the form Term1 – ½ (Term2) = Term3. Replace -1/2 by -1/A because of the violation of energy conservation by virtual mass-energy from alternate universes. On page 89 of “The Meaning of Relativity”, Einstein wrote, “We see that the Newtonian gravitational constant <capital kappa>, is connected with the constant <small kappa> that enters into our field equation by the relation
(105) <capital kappa> = <small kappa> (c-squared) / (8π)”
Write 2/A = 1 – f(div)/2. If we follow Einstein’s mathematical analysis, we should for empirical predictions systematically replace <small kappa> by <small kappa> / (1 – f(div)/2). Equivalently, for empirical predictions, replace <small kappa>/2 by <small kappa> / (2 – f(div)). A rough guess might be that 10**-6 < f(div) < 10**-4.
On page 88 of “The Meaning of Relativity”, Einstein suggests that, for most purposes, cosmologists can use <small sigma>, “the density of matter at rest, that is, the density of the ponderable matter, in the ordinary sense, measured with the aid of a unit measuring rod, and referred to a Galilean system of co-ordinates moving with the matter.”
According to the f(div) theory of modified general relativity theory, an Einsteinian reference frame is a valid model for standard mass-energy ; however, the gravitational component of virtual mass-energy leaves a gravitational effect that appears as dark matter, while the inertial component of virtual mass-energy is identically zero. Therefore, <small sigma>, the energy-density of standard matter, needs to be replaced by <small sigma> plus the energy-density historical average of dark matter (i.e., the gravitational mass-energy of virtual mass-energy). The preceding ideas might be a valid way for understanding dark matter at non-relativistic speeds; however, the relativistic theory would require the mathematical depth of M-theory. The f(div) theory, if correct, would be essential in understanding a variety of astronomical phenomena.
Last edited by David Brown on 05-16-2010 at 01:16 PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged