David Brown
Registered: May 2009
Posts: 176 
Does the Koide formula empirically confirm Mtheory?
What is the physical meaning of Koide’s formula? If Mtheory is a fundamental part of the way that nature works and the Koide formula is not a numerical coincidence, then does Mtheory need to explain Koide’s formula?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koide_formula
Can Mtheorists use Mtheory to explain the mathematics found in Gerald Rosen’s paper “Heuristic Development of a DiracGoldhaber Model for Lepton and Quark Structures” and the mathematics found in Carl Brannen’s “The Lepton Masses”?
http://home.comcast.net/~geraldrosen/heuristicmpla.pdf Gerald Rosen's paper
http://www.brannenworks.com/MASSES2.pdf
Can Mtheory predict elementary particle masses by means of the following idea?
Use AdS/CFT correspondence and ideas of Piotr Zenczykowski on the HarariShupe preon model to embed into Mtheory the mathematics used by Koide and the preonmotivated mathematics used by Gerald Rosen, Carl Brannen, and others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdS/CFT_correspondence
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008arXiv0803.0223Z “The HarariShupe preon model and nonrelativistic quantum phase space”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preon
Does Mtheory as originally formulated by Witten lead to an explanation of elementary particle masses, even if Mtheorists reject the theory of modified Mtheory with Wolfram’s automaton? Does the Koide formula empirically confirm two mutually exclusive theories: (1) Mtheory with a curlingup mechanism and (2) modified Mtheory with Wolfram’s automaton and an information transfer mechanism from alternate universes?
Is Mtheory the way of solving the problem of the infinite selfenergy of the electron under the assumption that time is continuous? Is Wolfram’s concept of time correct? Is modified Mtheory with Wolfram’s automaton the way that nature solves two problems: the infinite selfenergy of the electron and the ambiguous selfenergy of the electron?
If Wolfram’s automaton is the underlying deterministic theory for quantum field theory, then why does Wolfram need Mtheory? Deriving the mathematics of quantum field theory and general relativity theory from a finite automaton seems profoundly difficult and Mtheory seems to be the only suitable candidate for such a derivation. Why do the Mtheorists need Wolfram’s automaton? Could space roar be the empirical proof that Wolfram is correct and that Mtheorists need Wolfram’s automaton?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_roar
Besides space roar, what might be another argument in favor of Wolfram’s automaton? According to quantum field theory, the vacuum energy should make our universe ordersofmagnitude noisier and hotter than observations indicate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_catastrophe
Is the vacuum catastrophe a strong indication that Wolfram is correct?
http://wolframscience.com/reference/quick_takes.html
FUNDAMENTAL CLAIM: Mtheory as originally formulated has too many models because it is the ambiguous limit of modified Mtheory with Wolfram’s automaton as the FredkinWolfram constant approaches infinity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mtheory
Is spacetime fourdimensional because the quaternions are the only mathematical structure supporting a consistent physics with linear time and noncommutative geometry?
Claim 1. Mtheory is the only plausible path to the unification of gravitation with U(1) X SU(2) X SU(3) physics. However, space roar and dark energy indicate that any new particles that are predicted by Mtheory can be predicted by quantum field theory without Mtheory.
Claim 2. Space roar is the physical manifestation of the Wolframian updating parameter. In NKS Chapter 9, Wolfram has created a new concept of time that empirical evidence seems to confirm. Wolfram’s cosmological principle, THE MAXIMUM PHYSICAL WAVELENGTH IS THE PLANCK LENGTH TIMES THE FREDKINWOLFRAM CONSTANT, is needed for a valid theory of cosmology.
Claim 3. Dark matter is virtual massenergy that has zero inertial massenergy and positive gravitational massenergy. Dark matter is empirical evidence that alternate universes exist.
Claim 4. Dark energy is virtual massenergy that has zero inertial massenergy and negative gravitational massenergy. Dark energy is empirical evidence that alternate universes exist.
What empirical evidence do I have to support Claims 14? I have posted quantitative explanations of space roar, the Rañada effect for the Pioneer anomaly, and Milgrom’s Law. I think the odds of each explanation being a numerical coincidence might be 10 to 1 against, so I think the odds are 1,000 to 1 against my theory being rubbish — HOWEVER, I COULD BE QUITE WRONG! Weird forces from alternate universes require superabundant empirical evidence in their favor.
What is the explanation for the generations (or families) found in particle physics?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genera...rticle_physics)
Quaternionic Deterministic Mtheory Hypothesis: In quantum field theory, virtual energy has only one virtual energydensity level. In modified Mtheory with Wolfram’s automaton, virtual energy has 3 energydensity levels: low, medium, and high. Virtual energy is a digital approximation to quaternionic energy spread across alternate universes. Real energy is virtual energy that is implicitly or explicitly measured by Wolfram’s automaton. Quantum field theory is 100% accurate unless spacetime breaks down. Modified general relativity theory has 3 distinct epochs based upon virtual energy from alternate universes: the cosmological constant epoch with a nonzero cosmological constant and 1/2 in the field equations replaced by 1/2 +FF/2, the inflation epoch with the cosmological constant replaced by the inflationepochconstant and 1/2 replaced by 1/2 + inflationepochfactor/2, and the grand unification epoch with the cosmological constant replaced by the grandunificationconstant and 1/2 replace by 1/2 + grandunificationfactor/2. In terms of quantum field theory, the cosmological constant epoch is U(1) X SU(2) X SU(3) physics, the inflation epoch is SU(5) physics, and the grand unification epoch is SU(8) physics.
Mtheoretical Virtual Energydensity Hypothesis (FredkinWolfram Version): There is a mathematical formulation of Mtheory that justifies thinking about the 11dimensional fundamental domain of Mtheory as consisting of matter time, antimatter time, 3space with low virtual energydensity level and virtual energy operator Op1, 3space with medium virtual energydensity level and virtual energy operator Op2, and 3space with high virtual energydensity level and virtual energy operator Op3. The 3 generations of particle physics are caused by the Nambu transfer machine. Mtheory is a smoothing of the Nambu transfer machine, which uses Nambu digital data created by the Fredkin delivery machine. In Mtheory with Wolfram’s automaton, SU(8) physics presents approximate unifications of each set of 3 generational versions of the same particle. Given a unified particle P in SU(8) physics, trace(Op1(P) + Op2(P) + Op3(P)) represents the frequency of the unified 3generational particle P, while sqrt(Op1(P)**2 + Op2(P)**2 + Op3(P)**2) represents the generalized gravitational acceleration of the unified 3generational particle P. The Koide formula is a consequence of the generalized gravitational force law for the unified 3generational particle P, where P is formed from the 3 charged leptons.
Mtheoretical Virtual Energydensity Hypothesis (SeibergWitten Version): There is a mathematical formulation of Mtheory that justifies thinking about the 11dimensional fundamental domain of Mtheory as consisting of matter time, antimatter time, 3space with low virtual energydensity level and virtual energy operator Op1, 3space with medium virtual energydensity level and virtual energy operator Op2, and 3space with high virtual energydensity level and virtual energy operator Op3. The 3 generations of particle physics are caused by the curlingup mechanism which explains how to predict paradigmbreaking new particles from Mtheory. The curlingup mechanism takes the 3 levels of virtual energydensity levels and averages them into standard matter, sterile dark matter, and dark energy. In Mtheory with the curlingup mechanism, SU(8) physics presents approximate unifications of each set of 3 generational versions of the same particle. Given a unified particle P in SU(8) physics, trace(Op1(P) + Op2(P) + Op3(P)) represents the frequency of the unified 3generational particle P, while sqrt(Op1(P)**2 + Op2(P)**2 + Op3(P)**2) represents the generalized gravitational acceleration of the unified 3generational particle P. The Koide formula is a consequence of the generalized gravitational force law for the unified 3generational particle P, where P is formed from the 3 charged leptons.
Last edited by David Brown on 01242011 at 04:42 PM
Report this post to a moderator  IP: Logged
