Registered: May 2009
Posts: 172

Can any competent M-theorist understand the reason that Wolfram is an amazing genius once the LIGHTBULB goes on? The basic reason that M-theorists have not yet made awe-inspiring empirical predictions is VERY, VERY simple.
M-theorists need to ask themselves this question: Is the problem with M-theory that a new physical hypothesis is needed or MERELY that a new mathematical technique is needed? Wolfram understands the necessity of M-theory but the point of Wolfram’s NKS Chapter 9 is that a new physical hypothesis is needed in M-theory. This new hypothesis is that nature is finite and digital or, equivalently,
THE MAXIMUM PHYSICAL WAVELENGTH IS THE PLANCK LENGTH TIMES THE FREDKIN-WOLFRAM CONSTANT.
In contemporary M-theory without the Fredkin-Wolfram constant, if empirical predictions could be made, then the average expected lifetime of an observable universe would be infinite. By incorporating the Fredkin-Wolfram constant into the computational method for M-theory, the average expected lifetime of an observable universe becomes finite and all sorts of wonderful empirical predictions emerge. IT’S REALLY AS SIMPLE AS THAT … lightbulb, lightbulb, lightbulb.
**********************
Are there paradigm-breaking photons emerging from black holes? Consider 3 hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1. Near the boundary of a Mathur-Lunin fuzzball, there is a nonzero probability that a ‘t Hooft-Polyakov monopole encounters its antimatter partner and undergoes annihilation. This annihilation is the physical basis of paradigm-breaking photons.
Hypothesis 2. Appearances of ‘t Hooft-Polyakov monopoles and their antimatter partners are the result of a physical process modeled by an anomalous Ward-Takahashi identify for monopoles. The anomaly is a chiral anomaly caused by alternate universes.
Hypothesis 3. The Fredkin Finite Nature Hypothesis is correct so that M-theory is an approximation to some optimal lattice gauge/gravity correspondence model that is a better approximation than M-theory itself.
*************************************
Is a guardian magnetic monopole the digitized version of a 't Hooft-Polyakov monopole? Are paradigm-breaking photons the explanation of the GZK paradox?

Last edited by David Brown on 05-02-2010 at 09:20 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Posts: N/A

Thank you so much for this wonderful illustration

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged