wolframscience.com

A New Kind of Science: The NKS Forum : Powered by vBulletin version 2.3.0 A New Kind of Science: The NKS Forum > Applied NKS > Space roar proves that M-theory is empirically valid!
  Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread    Post A Reply
David Brown


Registered: May 2009
Posts: 176

Space roar proves that M-theory is empirically valid!

***
UPDATE ADDED 26 JAN. 2014 C.E.
D. Brown, "Are the Graviton, the Inflaton, and the Axion the Only Fundamental Particles that Remain to be Discovered?”, vixra.org, (18 Jan. 2014) http://vixra.org/abs/1401.0134
D. Brown, "Is the Space Roar an Essential Clue for Quantum Gravity?", vixra.org, (13 Jan. 2014) http://vixra.org/abs/1401.0101
D. Brown, "Is the Space Roar an Empirical Proof that the Inflaton Field Exists?", vixra.org, (24 Dec. 2013) http://vixra.org/abs/1312.0193
P. Kroupa, M. Pawlowski, and M. Milgrom, “The failures of the standard model of cosmology require a new paradigm”, vixra.org, (16 Jan. 2013) http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.3907v1.pdf
The preceding 4 references describe a coherent theory of quantum gravity with 3 decisive empirical tests. String theory with the infinite nature hypothesis suggests the string landscape. String theory with the finite nature hypothesis suggests 3 decisive tests.
END OF UPDATE
***Does M-theory solve the problem of the infinite self-energy of the electron but leave the problem of the ambiguous self-energy of the electron unsolved?
One consequence of replacing world-lines of particles by world-tubes of strings is that Feynman diagrams get smoothed out. — Edward Witten
http://www.sns.ias.edu/~witten/papers/Reflections.pdf
Does M-theory derive from the smoothing out of the Nambu transfer machine? Does the Nambu transfer machine take information from a multitude of alternate universes and tranfer such information into approximations of physical reality? Have M-theorists made the mistake of believing in the concept of infinity? Is infinity just as bogus as the concept of God? Is infinity just as unmeasurable as God? What is the only physically valid way to solve the problem of the ambiguous self-energy of the electron? Is it Wolfram’s automaton?
Is M-theory the only plausible way to unify gravitation and quantum field theory? Is Wolfram’s automaton the only plausible way to provide a new concept of time below the Planck scale? Does every Big Bang recycle in about 81.6 billion years according to hidden determinism? Does Einstein’s concept of hidden determinism replacing quantum theory point to Wolfram’s automaton?
If X is to M-theory as Kepler’s laws are to Newtonian mechanics then what is X? Is the answer the precise probability distributions of paradigm-breaking photons that escape from black holes? Are M-theorists entirely sure that the Bekenstein-Hawking radiation law is 100% empirically correct? Is it possible that the Bekenstein-Hawking law is the limit of modified M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine as the Fredkin-Wolfram constant approaches infinity?
Consider some hypotheses:
(1) The mathematics of M-theory guarantees that it is the only way to unify gravitation and quantum field theory.
(2) M-theory must have a physical interpretation that explains dark energy. There are only 3 basic ways to explain dark energy: weird new particles, weird forces from alternate universes, or dark energy stars in some form. The approach of weird new particles is modified M-theory with a curling-up mechanism — this cannot explain the space roar. The approach of dark energy stars in some form cannot explain the space roar and also runs counter to M-theory. The winner by default is weird forces from alternate universes.
(3) Einstein’s equivalence principle is completely true for real mass-energy.
(4) Einstein’s equivalence principle is true for virtual mass-energy if and only if there do not exist weird forces from alternate universes. (THIS IS A KEY POINT because, unless the equivalence principle fails, the original field equations cannot fail and the model does not allow dark energy. THEREFORE, in order to allow modified M-theory to explain dark energy, weird forces from alternate universes must actually exist to explain the nonzero cosmological constant.)
(5) Virtual mass-energy is spread out across a huge but finite number of alternate universes. Real mass-energy is virtual mass-energy that is implicitly or explicitly measured by Wolfram’s automaton.
(6) All virtual mass-energy in the multiverse is virtual mass-energy that is connected with weird forces from alternate universes. Dark matter is virtual mass-energy that has zero inertial mass-energy and positive gravitational mass-energy. Dark energy is virtual mass-energy that has zero inertial mass-energy and negative gravitational mass-energy. Any plausible alternate explanation of dark matter and/or dark energy is refuted by the space roar.
(7) Modified M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine predicts the f(div) theory, the space roar profile, and the existence of paradigm-breaking photons. Any other plausible modified M-theory is refuted by the space roar.
(8) Modified M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine predicts that alternate universes occur in matter/antimatter pairs, thereby explaining the preponderance of matter over antimatter in our observable universe, which is a tiny part of the multiverse.
(9) The concept of the Wolframian updating parameter is valid if and only if it has a dramatic physical manifestation.
(10) Given plausible hypotheses about the approaches to the physical interpretation, modified M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine is the only plausible possibility for the physical interpretation of M-theory. SPACE ROAR essentially proves that M-theory is empirically valid.
CAVEAT ABOUT PREVIOUS POSTINGS by David Brown — I have only quite recently (since 12-07-2010) convinced myself on point (10). Until I read Chapline’s ideas on dark energy stars I did not really understand my own theory. Only this posting and the previous posting entitled “What are the Kepler’s laws of M-theory?” derive from my latest thinking. (The point that was not clear in my mind was the preceding (4). Chapline’s theory of dark energy stars is definitely wrong because it runs counter to M-theory.)
**********
SUMMARY of the situation:
(A) Some form of modified M-theory is guaranteed to be correct because nature unifies gravitation and quantum theory and because mathematics demands that M-theory is the only plausible way to carry out such a unification.
(B) Space roar rules out every possible physical interpretation of a modified M-theory except one interpretation which is modified M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine.
(C) Modified M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine demands that the only way to explain dark matter is that nature replaces the -1/2 in Einstein’s field equations with a constant which is very nearly -1/2. In other words, dark matter is the physical manifestation of alternate universe forces that attract ordinary matter.
(D) Modified M-theory with the Nambu transfer machine demands that the only way to explain dark energy is that nature uses a nonzero cosmological constant in Einstein’s field equations. In other words, dark energy is the physical manifestation of alternate universe forces that repel ordinary matter.

Last edited by David Brown on 01-26-2014 at 08:52 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 12-08-2010 03:19 AM
David Brown is offline Click Here to See the Profile for David Brown Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Post New Thread    Post A Reply
  Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread


 

wolframscience.com  |  wolfram atlas  |  NKS online  |  Wolfram|Alpha  |  Wolfram Science Summer School  |  web resources  |  contact us

Forum Sponsored by Wolfram Research

© 2004-14 Wolfram Research, Inc. | Powered by vBulletin 2.3.0 © 2000-2002 Jelsoft Enterprises, Ltd. | Disclaimer | Archives