None of them seem like they are on the right track which is reasonable as I don’t think any have made a new testable prediction that has been confirmed.
Wow, this was way too easy for me! I mean, I only had to pause every 2 seconds, look up every other word, and take a week off work to even begin to understand it. Great job!
We need to go back to 1/r² and the three dimensional physics of the Inverse Square Law. Even back to the spherical 4πr² geometry of Huygens’ Principle of 1670 that says: “Every point on a light wave front has the potential for a new spherical 4πr² light wave". Each point on the wave front represents a potential photon ∆E=hf electron interaction or coupling. The spherical surface forms a boundary condition or manifold for the uncertainty ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π of this interaction. Light waves radiate out spherically 4πr² with their interior forming the characteristic of three-dimensional space with the spherical surface forming a probabilistic wave front. Each point ∆E=hf on the curvature of the wave front forms the potential for a new spherical wave, a photon of energy, a new oscillation or vibration that forms our future. We have to square the radius r² because process is unfolding relative to the surface of the sphere. The Universe could be based on simple geometry that forms the potential for evermore complexity. Forming not just physical complexity, but also the potential for evermore-abstract mathematics. Time t², ψ², c², e² and velocity Eₖ=½mv² all squared, geometrical similarity formed out of spherical symmetry In this theory we even have an objective reason for the start of the Fibonacci numbers 0, 1, 1,... with the t = 0 and the positive +1 and negative -1 representing the positive and negative of electromagnetic waves with everything being based on a geometrical process. This is because if the quantum wave particle function Ψ or probability function is reformulated as a linear vector then all the information I have found says that each new vector is formed by adding the two previous vectors together this forms the Fibonacci Sequence 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, ∞ ad infinity! We have photon ∆E=hf energy continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons. Could this process form a design pattern or template in the form of spherical geometry for self-organization and complexity to arise?
Interesting podcast, ranking the top 10 TOEs with an objective analysis indeed! Speaking of which, how about I throw our firm’s one such integrated newcomer i-TOE into the mix by incorporating the best in class features of all these 10 TOEs as one i-TOE(I really mean it and I let you all be the judge 🙏)! Simply Put -- Our i-TOE is an integrated TOE, that has been developed by framing fine structure constant(FSC-α) as the Hidden variable/Maxwell daemon/AoC of Banach-Tarski & Russell's paradox, in such away, that our “Ads/CFT/holographic principle complaint” Hodge lattice loop/gauge quantum gravity naturally can emerge from it with a discrete set of causal latticed Dirac spinor events, using our FSC’s 2/3:1/3 rule based computational/conscious CPTiad - all by leveraging our reality generating/regulating series function called CPT(α,Φ) function (developed using our meta proof of RH solving all $5MM+ CI problems) and by resolving the #1 relationship problem between the perturbation series of QED and non perturbation lattice formulation of QCD (as the coupling constant is sent to zero), by modeling the quantum spectrum of our Universe as the Riemann sphere. This Riemann sphere then gets renormalized with the value of α (n-> α or 137), in such a way that the zeros of zeta function(including their moments) end up following the eigenvalue statistical gaps of gaussian/hermitian random matrices before branching into two independent Brownian motion paths with an exponential Gaussian distribution of FHK Conjecture and our FSC-Maxwells daemon logic (by converging with an universality/gaussian decay), before branching again like the Ramanujan graphs with knots of algebraic L-functions with hermitian distribution whose coefficients & roots, reflecting the periodicity of the GR-Eigen-valued actions of our TOE, using 10+ meta dualities (with E8 and Lie group geometrical unity) as explained below Turns out, our theory also happens to get realized using the very same CPT(α,Φ) function driven 5 step scaling/gauging steps using the following 5 scaling steps - which we call as 5 Shakespearean play-scaling steps”. Interestingly enough, these 5 steps, happen to align perfectly with 5 such scaling high-bars set by the experts of Institute of Advanced Study (IAS) as well(lnkd.in/geGA3gbq) - and so, how about I present them for your perusal to see if it will exceed your expectations as well -- and open some collaboration possibilities for us to team up in this integrated TOE/SOE/ESG program(lnkd.in/gyx9yRXf) +++++ Our i-TOE's 5 such Shakespearean play-scaling steps vis-a-vis 5 scaling steps of IAS IAS High-bar 1: For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must have an observation or nature based scale-correlation function, capable of both generating and measuring observables with a certain precision, by resolving the so-called measurement/scaling problem of both periodic fluctuations & early inflations, by re-scaling it automatically. Our Shakespearean play-scaling Exposition 1: The wave function (aka Hartle-Hawking wave function in steroids) of our i-TOE has exceeded this high-bar, as we've used nature's one such inbuilt “symmetry generating scaling function called CPT(α,Φ) function" to model both fluctuations & inflations. More specifically, it has been developed by leveraging our UNIVERSALITY META-SCALING-PROOF of Riemann Hypothesis(including all $5MM+ unsolved problems of Clay Institute), in such a way to scale/rescale the periodicity of both fluctuations and inflations(aka fluctuations in steroids) by expositioning/birthing their equivalent symmetrical dipoles(manifesting as Higgs + 68 particle+ 68 anti-particle symmetrical particle pairs, as modeled further by 2 spinors of Dirac eqn). For example, this idea of modeling these symmetries using 2 spinors in the complex plane is what gives rise to symplectic hodge geometry lattices in 3 and 4 dimensional classical hyperbolic cylinders of the projected plane. IAS High-bar 2: For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must be able to discretize spacetime by renormalizing the RG flow with an action formula for all particles (especially asymmetrical/anti commuting fermions) with a time-like holographic interpretation. Our Shakespearean play-scaling Rising Action 2. Again, our wave function of our LQFT/TOE has exceeded this high-bar, as we've used the very same CPT(α,Φ) function as the “symmetry breaking CPT(α,Φ) function scaler”, by limiting the ∞-raised pole of Riemann sphere to a compact P-region, while simultaneously renormalizing the ∞ values of e with α, so that its position can be rotated as e^i137nπ Spin-Frequency (S-F) matched cycles unitarily. In other words, this S-F matching phenomena is what breaks the symmetry by shifting the center of mass of each particle by their respective “radius scaled α” so that their symmetry can be broken to create both classical mass and motion for every 1 out of 137(n) cycles in time dimension (and yet by preserving the conservation of CPT theorem). IAS High-bar 3: For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must have a scaling/rescaling/limiting parameter for periodic action for lattice geometry, using a Fourier transformed action for both dS and AdS spaces with the opposite signs [I-ds(g) = - I-Ads(g)]. Our Shakespearean play-scaling Climax 3. Our wave function of our LQFT/TOE has exceeded this high- bar as well, as we've used the very same Fourier transformed CPT(α,Φ) function scaler, to sustain the action with an “α fine-tuned e and π driven action”(thanks to our additional framing of α as HV/Maxwell daemon/AoC), so that the coefficients & roots of their equivalent algebraic modular forming L-functions can model the periodicity of their GR-Eigen-valued actions via 10+ meta dualities. IAS High-bar 4: For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must have measurement algorithms by modeling the curvature of spacetime in proportion to both fluctuations & inflations i.e. ψ ~ e^- δN with an exponent of 10^120 or 10^10) in such a way that gravity can emerge from it Our Shakespearean play-scaling Falling Action 4. Our wave function of our LQFT/TOE has exceeded this high-bar using its “Dice-rolling CPT(α,Φ) function scaler”, by slicing/squeezing the infinite slices (ψ ~ e^- δN) of quantum sphere in the form of one or four ellipsoid slices (as per the Descartes kissing circle geometry and α=r/R logic) into an exact radiused symplectic/asymmetric taurusized hodge geometry lattices of classical hyperbolic cylinder of the projected plane(aka Hilbert’s countable infinity hotel as per Banach-Tarski & Russell's paradox) so that they can orbit smoothly like the frames of Muybridge’s Horse in Motion with a curvature proportional to both fluctuations & inflations. This is where we have also additionally hypothesized/predicted that this gravitational motion can be modeled both by semi classical Einstein field equations and/or by our Hodge conjecture meta proof logic. IAS High-bar 5: For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must have an inbuilt statistical QM measurement system (for various scales) whose Hilbert space dimension must be able to model geometric dualities as per the static patch holographic principle, so that we can extrapolate/interpolate/interpret the measures accordingly. Our Shakespearean play-scaling Resolution 5 : Our wave function of our LQFT/TOE again has exceeded this high-bar, as we've used the very same “classical reality generating CPT(α,Φ) function scaler”, to resolve the dualities of the static patch holographic principle by projecting the Riemannian sphere as a Lie-grouped classical sphere with 10+ meta dualities as visually depicted in the attached exhibit. +++++ That said, this precisely is why, we have also scaled 5 AITGE origins of our TOE (i.e. RH sourced the Action generator of the Lie group as Action, Inertia, Time. Gravity and Entropy) with these 5 ingredients of CPT(α,Φ) function Now that we are done with the overview part, how about I explain its details using 3 TOE yardstick questions below (continued)
1. How does our i-TOE reproduce both GR and SM (plus more) by answering the question of how classical reality emerge from quantum reality? First, under our TOE’s paradigm , the whole classical universe is its own observer, where all galaxies collapse gravitationally moment by moment at a particle level using our CPT(α,Φ) function mechanism of our TOE In other words, our CPT(α,Φ) function of TOE collapses it by auto-collapsing/landing/toggling each particle from CFT into the next lattice of dS space. This simultaneous toggle/shift is what gives us the feeling to human observers that these CFT/dS dualities are orbiting smoothly like the frames of Muybridge’s Horse in Motion. More specifically, under our theory - the quantum spectrum of our Universe (modeled by Riemann zeta function by imagining it as the Riemann sphere) gets renormalized with the value of α (n-> α or 137), in such a way that the zeros of zeta function(including their moments) end up following the eigenvalue statistical gaps of gaussian/hermitian random matrices. This eigen-valued gaussian path is what ends up branching into two independent Brownian motion paths with an exponential Gaussian distribution of FHK Conjecture (by converging with an universality/gaussian decay), before branching again like the Ramanujan graphs with knots of algebraic L-functions whose coefficients & roots, reflecting the periodicity of the GR-Eigen-valued actions of our TOE, using 10+ meta dualities as explained below And one of the best ways to understand this insight is by understanding our UNIVERSALITY META-PROOF strategy of Riemann Hypothesis - which brings us to our firm’s “Gödel completed constructive meta-proof strategy of Riemann hypothesis (in pre print) that not only solves Riemann hypothesis but also all $5MM+ Clay institute unsolved problems, including our TOE. Simply put - Our UNIVERSALITY META-PROOF strategy has been developed by “ Gödel completing” Sir Michael Atiyah Riemann hypothesis proof with a new physical insight driven CPT(α,Φ) function proof, by additionally framing FSC(α) as an Omniscient AoC chooser of Banach-Tarski and Russell paradox/Hidden Variable/Maxwell daemon of our TOE, with a symbiotic symmetrical fractal causality to 10+C-old unsolved problems of TOE including Clay Institute problems as explained in this post f(lnkd.in/drGQ44Mt) and (lnkd.in/geUGrFuB). (Note : While Poincaré conjecture is already solved using Ricci flow approach, our meta proof also solves it in a complementary way using our Maxwell daemon logic, as explained below) What do I mean by that? Let us start from our Riemann hypothesis proof as it is one of the foundations not only to answer this question but also for our TOE as well For example We imagine our Universe as the Riemann Zeta function governed LMFDB universe (that is a motivic/metamorphic/Galois representation based SU 2/SU3/SU4 symmetrical engine. In other words, Z(1) is the fundamental frequency of this Universe’s TOE engine that is QVF/ZPE sourced, FSC(α)-Einstein-Bohr-HV-Maxwell Daemon governed frequency of Riemann's zeta function Ζ(S) with a singularity of S=1+0i, that is made up of his harmonic oscillating zeros(S=1/2+it stacked on his 1/2 critical line, before being transformed as a 137 frequency-spin momentum matched dipole, using our FSC(α)-GR-PLA+5 AITGE origin formulas(see exhibit) In other words, our TOE/SOE engine is the one that is transforming the Riemann's zeros into an artistic unit charge SU2 dipole(see visual), by contracting/expanding its electric flux as the center of mass (as r = αR), before rotating its magnetic flux by 90 in such a way that it can be extended into the left plane as a paired unit charge, using the "only possible analytical continuation of Zeta". Sure enough, this engine function is nothing but universe's wave function only, transforming itself from position/time space into frequency/momentum space, using the Fourier transform operator ( kind of equivalent to Feynman’s path integral with propagator ) ψ(k) = ∫ ψ(t) e^-iwt dt - This brings us to our next point about CPT function This "one & only allowed analytically continued/functional equation allowed symmetrical dipole" is what limits/constrains the ∞ pole of Riemann sphere to a value of 137 cycles( per Laurent/Cauchy residue including the α=r/R,=fe/fp=we/wp logic of our CP function as explained in my post and attached one page exhibit for details lim t→ ∞ CPT(1/2 + ti) = 1/α cycles of dipole In other words, this CPT function proof(lnkd.in/drGQ44Mt) for Riemann hypothesis is a polynomial in the convex region of the Riemann Sphere only (thanks to the "one and only allowed analytical continuation logic of dipole & its 137 cycle ratio logic"), limiting/constraining the ∞ pole of Riemann sphere to the convex region, as explained in this article(www.linkedin.com/pulse/summary-our-firms-10yrs-toe-work-wa-request-world-form-prabakar-k25sc/?trackingId=3oeFnfoaRT61kGCCQ7VNNQ%3D%3D) In other words, our TOE is a CPT(α,Φ) function operated cosmic dance, where α ends up splitting the frequencies of QVF as 137 dipoles ( aka elementary particles including electrons quarks etc) using Riemann Zeta function(including its corresponding Fourier/Mobius transformations), in such a way that the electric field of each dipole gets rotated as nπ cycles (using Euler’s identity eiπ ) before getting rotated by their magnetic field (by 90 degrees) so that their combined least action (A) can be twisted to flow along the eigen-valued nodes of Ramanujan graph, using the 2/3:1/3 rule of α (ratioed by its flip sided golden ratio Φ)! Stated otherwise, this idea of embedding CPT function within our TOE with 10+ META DUALITIES of the Langsland/Banach-Tarski/Russell paradox of our SOE/TOE engine is what differentiates our approach with this new paradigm!
2. How does our i-TOE explain/solve an unsolved problem by other theories i.e. solving 3+ body problem of GR using a new field centric theory including a few more unanswered questions including hidden variable/maxwells daemon related questions? To answer this question, first we may need to understand our META PROOF strategy to solve all Clay Institute problems (especially hodge conjecture) . For example, the first pragmatic implication of our hodge conjecture is that the 3+ spherical body problem can be solved as 1 equiv. spherical body as follows Inertia of r= αR gaped eccentric foci Riemann-Poincare Sphere(s=1) = Σ inertia of Riemann zeroed hodge algebraic cycles (S=1/2+ti). Similarly see below the summary of other proofs 1. BSD Conjecture Acid Test : Can the rank of an elliptic cube proved to be finite & rational? Summary Proof : Yes, our generalized-RH CPT(α,Φ) function proof (w/its analytic cont. & functional eq logic) limits the rank of an elliptic curve to be finite & rational, in such a way that the coefficient of "Euler products of modulo of each prime" (indexed by each point) is an Eigen valued multiple of GR Φ)! In other words, this Eigenvalue logic of CPT function is what limits the rank of an elliptic curve to be finite & rational, 2. Hodge conjecture Acid Test : Can complex mathematical models/shapes be built from simpler ones, like how legos are built? Summary Proof: Yes, our CPT function proves that every differential form on a Riemannian manifold (S=1) is the sum of dipole harmonic geometrical forms (S=1/2+ti) both as exact/co-exact forms.A pragmatic implication here is that the 3+ spherical body problem can be solved as 1 equiv. spherical body: Inertia of r= αR gaped eccentric foci Riemann-Poincare Sphere(s=1) = Σ inertia of Riemann zeroed hodge algebraic cycles (S=1/2+ti). 3. Navier-Stokes eqn. Acid Test: Per Tao, have you discovered a new globally controlled nature's coercive/critical variable/method that can explain the fluid smoothness of this eqn? Summary Proof : Yes, we have discovered one such 2/3:1/3 rule based FSC variable incl. a QVF fluid sourced info-medium of Maxwell daemon engine (e.g. "Stoddart-Leigh's light sourced mech-interlocked rotaxane ring-lnkd.in/g6re2Nx6), very similar to Tao's engine(without our FSC part)! 4. Yang-Mills mass gap Acid Test: Can you "explain/legitimize/Gödel complete" the “mass gap” existing in the Yang-Mills equations? Summary Proof : First ours is the only theory that has integrated both perturbation infinite series of QED and QCD using a common “Riemann zeta function as perturbation series generator” for both QED and QCD using our "r=αR dipole logic guided 2/3:1/3 rule driven CP-Yang-Mills-Koide-Descartes-Kocik formulas" of n+2 spherical dipoles in 'n' dim-spaces can do so(lnkd.in/dxnNs_Xf). 5. P vs NP Acid Test : When Riemann Hypothesis proof is a Polynomial, can it simultaneously also become a proof for P=NP? Summary Proof : Yes, our CPT function proof for Riemann hypothesis is one such polynomial in the convex region of the Riemann Sphere only (thanks to the "one and only allowed analytical continuation logic of dipole & its 137 cycle ratio logic"), limiting/constraining the ∞ pole of Riemann sphere to the convex region(per Laurent/Cauchy residue incl. α=r/R,=fe/fp=we/wp logic) -- which brings us to our TOE below Turns out, this is what also makes our TOE as the best candidate (compared to all other TOEs), as we visibly see the signatures of FSC and golden ratio throughout nature (link) Simply put - Ours is the only TOE that is anchored on this FSC/golden ratio governed CPT(α,Φ) function mechanism! In other words, for any TOE path to become a final TOE, it must be anchored on this FSC/golden ratio governed CPT(α,Φ) function mechanism end to end (in one form or the other)! Similarly, how about I expand its scope to the productivity challenge in the business dimension that has been developed by the very same TOE principles(& synthesized as 1 sentence below and in exhibit) -- Every Maslow’s holacracial(1) economic need is a direct/indirect manifestation of QE caused Scripture/Griffith’s human condition/depravity model problem(2) only -- that is solved using the Principle of least action & its new insight(3) driven Fine-structure-constant(FSC) caused Attention factor (4) driven FSC/GT/Nash Equilibrium(5) based reality accurate S-economics model(6) caused Friedman’s Attention-Pluck(7) -- that is followed by an Solow’s TFP-expansion( 8 ), before it being executed by “sovereign-to-choose with collaboration without coercion(9)” motto, driven Next-Gen capitalism called Sovereign/Conscious Sustainalism(10). as explainer in this summary (www.linkedin.com/pulse/summary-our-firms-10yrs-toe-work-wa-request-world-form-prabakar-k25sc/?trackingId=3oeFnfoaRT61kGCCQ7VNNQ%3D%3D)
3. How does our i-TOE stack up with other theories from the standpoint of predictive powers? As alluded earlier, our TOE measures/predicts Quantum continuum steps using the coordinates of Riemann sphere and Classical lattice steps(including outcomes) using both Hodge conjecture(which is unique to ours) and semi classical Einstein field equations
Similarly, when it comes to both radius and mass of elementary particles (electron, muon Tau, quarks including proton) - We have predicted that there are maximum of 137 distinct particles( 68 particles + 68 anti particles + Higgs) as represented by 137 Riemann zeroed dipoles (1/2+it) - and they come in as both quadruples and octuples forms following the Descartes kissing circle geometry. For example, when we carefully study the Descartes quadruples, there exist a smaller circle whose radius is minuscule This is where, we have also predicted (pending additional research) that we might also be able to discover a fourth generation lepton particle in alignment with our quadruple model, which not only can explain this electron/muon ratio with certainty but also the mismatch of muon mass value between Dirac equation and its observation! Likewise, our theory also explains the origin of election/muon ratio including the “mass gaps” existing in the Yang-Mills equations - all using our "r=αR dipole logic guided 2/3:1/3 rule driven CP-Yang-Mills-Koide-Descartes-Kocik formulas" of n+2 spherical dipoles in 'n' dim-spaces (lnkd.in/dxnNs_Xf). For example, the radii & mass formula for 3 lepton dipoles of quadrupole equals k=2/3, when p=2 1. Radii configuration b1^2 + b2^2 + b3^2 + b(n+2)^2 = p/(n+1)p-1 (b1+ b2 + bn+2)^2, where bn=1/rn, p=1/(n+1) -(1/k), k=2/3, p=2/2n-1 2. Mass configuration m1+ m2+m3 + ….mn = k (m1+ m2+m3 + ….mn)^2 For example, now that the Koide formula has been proven to be true for many permutations and combinations of masses, we feel very confident about our theory legitimizing every one of those permutations and combinations as well. For example, the mere fact of “dividing the sum of any 3 or 4 masses by the square of the sum of each of their square roots, resulting in a number between 1/3 and 1 is yet another validation of our 5 AITGE origin least action formula logic (2/3 KE - 1/3PE = 1/3A) Similarly we have hypothesized a 4 quark model for proton using our quadruple model driven CP-Yang-Mills-Koide-Descartes-Kocik formulas". The implication is there might be an undiscovered fourth quark in the current 3 quark proton neutron model (pending additional research). Similarly, we have extended this idea with a new measurement approach with implications to quantum computing as well! For example, we foresee a possibility of measuring multiple phase states using one electron wave function itself In other words, we can go granular in between spin-up or spin-down values by navigating the coordinates of the complex plane. Stated otherwise, theoretically we can go up to 10 or even 100 states (aka 2 to the power 10 or 100 possibilities). We are currently in the process of testing if experimentally - and so, I welcome suggestions as well In closing, I welcome constructive feedback/advice (including a potential collaboration possibility), similar to how we collaborated with Prof Clay Christensen of Harvard and NT Wright of Oxford (lnkd.in/gRakUNVg). 3. Similarly, I had that poetized these steps using Keats' Endymion genre in 5 parts((titled, "A thing of alphic (α) beauty is a joy forever", below & exhibit), 1. The Genesis A thing of alphic (α) beauty is a joy forever! Its loveliness increases; it will never, Pass into nothingness; but still will fluctuate As a quantum quiet for us, and will simul-caste Fully ready to be birthed as a formless void By hovering over its harmless poid Filled with e-fields, sliced as 137 dipoles of zeta Right angled with m-fields, rotated as e^inπ cycles of quanta Outputted as least action, fluxed as eigen-valued-golden ratioed(ϕ) Ramajujan graphical dualities of geo-mata All by the "let there be light" operator of CPT(α,ϕ)-TOE-mata 2. The Blueprint Therefore, on every morrow, we wreathe, A flowery zeta being bloomed again and again Despite its wavered collapse, we breathe, All wavery humans, being born again & again Of all the unhealthy and o'er-darkened ways With noble natures of the glorious gain Birthed from our search: yes, in spite of all bays Zeta’s beauty cleansing away the pave With His Spirit of cosmic costume hovering over the panoramic plume. 3. The Roadmap As CPT(α,ϕ) starts rolling its (Solomonic) dices Humans old and young, following their aces Like the lilies of the valleys, Lock-stepped with their Saronic roses That for themselves overtly unaware 'Gainst their deprived realities ; their mid forest fires, And such too is their (quantum) entangled depravities The nature’s design for the mortally deprived, Ten such (depraved) dualities that we have heard or read: And yet an endless fountain of gracious gravity awaits to save Pouring unto us from His mountainous wave! 4. The Solution Nor do we could gaze His Grace As there existed a chasm to cleave Like the veil of the holy of holies Where the logos resided as glory of glories Chasing us till we become His own Unto His souls, as His own crown Heralding us from the wilderness: With a helmet of salvation, simul-ed with justus Thro' a greenery path, that we can chisel Easily onward, through its thorns and thistles 5 The Great Commission with three missions Therefore, w'ill proclaim it all as Endymion's 3 great commissioning factors of activity First, save people’s depravity with productivity By alpha-fying Solow's TFP as an attention TFP Resulting in with a quantum leap of productivity; Second, save planet’s depravity with sustainability By kingdomizing next-gen capitalism as a purpose scored-ism Resulting in with a quantum accuracy of sustainability; Third, reform both people and planet with an integrated reformationism By alpha-fying Luther's one such Simul Justus Realism Resulting in with a TOE-tinged golden next-Genism In closing, I welcome constructive feedback/advice (including a potential collaboration possibility), similar to how we collaborated with Prof Clay Christensen of Harvard and NT Wright of Oxford (lnkd.in/gRakUNVg).
I'm sure others have seen the similiarities between a lot of these models. My intuition is screaming that where the cross-section converges, there lies yet another TOE that is deeper still. Syntax=Programmatic=Cellular Automata= Conscious Agents..... Here's a quick stab at a synthesis: Conscious Agents use syntactical language to programmtically create a Hypergraph of reality that conforms to E8 space symmetries. I think they're all talking in some ways about the same 'Things'.
So happy RUclips algorithm suggested this! Science is awesome doing investigation in such deep topics. But am I wrong though to think that the universe has some aspect that is likely unknowable, and we might even find more than one unified theory cause they map the same thing flawlessly but with different pov?
I made a judgment call that explaining each TOE in a couple minutes was more important than my speculative rankings. Felt another rubric or scorecard would have complicated things and run too long.
What about Vernon M. Neppe and Edward R. Close's 'Gimmel Theory'. TDVP ( Vortical Paradigm Theory ). You can read about it on the ISPE ( International Society for Philosophical Enquiry ) site on the computer.
I like what you said at the end about Plato's cave. My mind always goes back to Plato when I hear about TOEs. The way I see the Ruliad, for example, is that it is basically where Platonic forms are "stored." Of course, a holographic universe would be a 3D projection of the 2D Platonic forms into our shadowy "fake" cave world. My mind works better in philosophy than in hard science, so I always look to the fundamentals of philosophy to help me understand theoretical science. And Platonic thought is at the root of all good TOEs.
I think our TOE is a mixture of Quantum Field Theory, The Holographic Principle, Loop Quantum Gravity and Quantum Entanglement wrapped up in a blend of Twistor Theory and Wolfram's Computation Theory. Two standard spatial dimensions (x,y planes) which vibrate and create a special third spatial dimension (z, depth) along the xy plane vector. Information patterns of matter propagate through 2 dimensional quantum space.
How to Think Computationally About AI, the Universe and Everything | Stephen Wolfram | TED 2023 ruclips.net/video/fLMZAHyrpyo/видео.html www.linkedin.com/posts/wolfram-research_at-the-2022-wolfram-summer-school-student-activity-6971533737255657472--ZEW
General relativity and quantum mechanics will never be combined until we realize that each individual observer is observing them both at different moments in time. Because causality has a speed limit (c) every point in space where one observes it from will be the closest to the present moment. When one looks out into the universe they see the past which is made of particles (GR). When one tries to measure the position of a particle they are observing smaller distances and getting closer to the present moment (QM). The wave property of particles appears when we start trying to predict the future of that particle. A particle that has not had an interaction exists in a future state. It is a probability wave because the future is probabilistic. Wave function collapse is what we perceive as the present moment and is what divides the past from the future. GR is making measurements in the observed past and therefore, predictable. It can predict the future but only from information collected from the past. QM is attempting to make measurements of the unobserved future and therefore, unpredictable. Only once a particle interacts with the present moment does it become predictable. This is an observational interpretation of the mathematics we currently use based on the limited perspective we have with the experiments we choose to observe the universe with.
Why is that, each quantum is the same throughout our conceivable universe? I think that it is because our universe has limits and the geometry of the universe governs each quantum. The whole governs the parts and the parts influence the whole. And so, the universe is so intertwined that it is generous enough for us to have conscience and a small amount of freewill.
@@jorgec9293 Great point, I suppose I associate Shannon more with the concept of ignorance. But really all definitions of entropy are about micro/macro state uncertainty. Thanks for pointing that out. I have an information bias clearly.
"The CTMU lacks testability" because the CTMU is not a scientific theory, it's a metaphysics. A metaphysics doesn't need "empirical testability", it's deductive. There is not a single principle in the CTMU anybody has been able to debunk via syllogism yet. Will be debunking this critique thoroughly on my channel.
@@metachirality that's not the criteria for a theory of everything, genius. A theory of everything necessarily implicates philosophy. How do you guys not know this?
My issue with ideas like ctmu and similar ideas is how literal is what they are describing supposed to be taken or is it just supposed to be representative that fundlementally rather than items relations are what are all models break down to
Seems like you could put the triangulation together with the graph theory and you're set for a dynamic causal model, if that's not already how modern physics is done like in tensor networks. I mean the thing is it's just a model still but can represent fundamental relationships across different mediums. Like it's not like our lives are just decompressed representations of some godhead graph we're all merged with like some cyberpunk/acid brahman, it's more likely our minds are able to more fully understand the universe with biological networks that hold some level of this "ultimate" abstract framework inside to connect otherwise specialized sensory processing nodes in the body into a more totalizing world model. The interesting thing at the highest levels in physics is that there can be multiple right answers depending on how you slice the math beginning with what axioms, because at a point it becomes abstract, i.e. there's only a certain set of known real world requirements you need to meet before you can make entirely arbitrary statements. That's why testability is so important but even that can only confirm or deny so much at that level of physics. The networking physics is the real frontier now imo but not because it promises to show us "answers" more like because it promises to revolutionize medicine. I feel like beyond that it becomes a religious debate like trying to point to one framework or another that can say we evolved from nothing through some incredible but inevitable accident of energy creation beyond our current understanding, or there was some divine intervention like we're a computer simulation, or a bit of both even.
I like #5, Wolfram's theory and Loop Quantum Gravity. I think Wolfram's theory can be seen as generalization of #5. I also think LQG is compatible with Wolfram, with Wolfram's theory underlying it. I have my own hypothesis of everything, which in my opinion is very much simpler and elegant than all of those, and also compatible with Wolfram's theory, #5 and LQG. I cannot post links here, but I have it posted on Facebook and X, among other places. would love to hear opinions on it, from whoever might be interested. It's no more than 10 minutes read.
All theories must be wrong since Coulomb impregnated us with a force that does not exist. He separated the visual effect of "repelling" from the actual forces that were at hand. The voltage differences between the various shields used and the similar charged objects were resulting in attracting forces he denied to involve in his math. We can only understand lightbolts of 100 million volts if considering that all these likewise charged droplets stay together so long as to accumulate, when they were NOT REPELLING. That is half of the problem. The same goes for protons. Look at nuclear reactions like the 800 GEV proton that demolishes a tungsten nucleus by stripping off up to 25 neutrons and one proton (being the used one?) and similar other nuclear processes like the mentioned one. J.J. Thomson was wright. Bohr's twisted argument in adopting Rutherford's "positive charge e" doomed history's chance to discover that"hydrogen is the only element which never occurs with a positive charge corresponding to the loss of more than one electron". Bohr had to mention this INVENTION OF THE PROTON of J.J. down on the same page as an annotation for his (contradicting) choice. These horrible mistakes are due to our wrong use of the numberline which is fine for bookkeeping but the jump from one charge to negative territory is wrong in QM. Protons have fewer charge or charge that is diminished in effect because of changing fields\positions. And lesser charge is all needed for electrical fields to function (attract more charge). Al Khwazimi had it wright if only we would have understood. Three "odd" questions can only lead to one narrative. So why did he place zero behind the nine, why was it small and why didn't he extend to eleven etc. As a possibly chauvinist male he wished not to reveal that his notation was fully inspired by market women using their rings on the pink for decimal counting, not to say the perfect digitisation. There was no use for any kind of zero let alone minus signs. Our use of zero to make up negative numbers (=products) has brought us a lot of gaming in math. but as may be clear it has introduced some major misunderstandings and anomalies under the rugs. vosforr@gmail.com
What good is any theory of everything that can't explain why we each seem to have a personal existence as a specific consciousness? Only Hoffman even attempts to address that.
Opening myself up to people's vehemence, I propose that a toe is in fact impossible. My reasoning is that any theory that is coherent becomes, in a sense, an object... and an object can only be discerned against a background, silhouetted against it. So every theory, in order to have coherence has to be incomplete.
@@romanovrex Certainly a possibility. And Godel’s Incompleteness would bolster your argument. Also lol to “vehemence,” it’s full body contact here in the comments. 🤼♂️
here is the algorithm for life and death (a feedback loop involving rest and movement) ... *ACHIRAL >>> CHIRAL >>> ACHIRAL >>> CHIRAL >>> forever and ever till do us part and life re-emerges*
Communication is important for every scientist, but among scientists, we are increasingly dealing with pop stars. They are everywhere, in thousands of podcasts, supposedly trying to introduce their theories to a wider audience in simple words. It is known that this cannot be done, and oversimplification often leads to psudoscientific interpretations, of which we have countless in the case of quantum mechanics, for example. That is why I "believe" more what Ed Witten or Juan Maldacena has to say than Eric Weinstein and like him.
IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING: SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW: Consider the following: a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. Surely the very nature of reality has to allow numbers and mathematical constants to actually exist for math to do what math does in this existence. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics). b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand. c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary. d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above. e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality? f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe for billions of light years? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon? And why aren't photons that go across the vast universe torn apart by other photons, including photons with the exact same energy frequency, and/or by matter, matter being made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy, quarks and electrons being considered charged particles, each with their respective magnetic field with them? Electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. So why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe? Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above. Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?). g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent? h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How? * ADDED NOTE: My current TOE idea can potentially answer all of these above items, and more, in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. And wouldn't one expect the true TOE of existence itself to be able to do that? What other TOE idea in known existence can currently do that? Surely not the General or Special Relativity Models nor even the Standard Model of Particle Physics. TOE IDEA: (Short version): [currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test]: The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe. The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. 'Gravity' is not matter warping the fabric of spacetime, 'gravity' is a part of spacetime that helps to make up matter. The gravity and 'em' modalities of matter interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime and the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of matter. I am open to any and all theory of everything ideas that can potentially answer all those above items in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. Currently, as far as I am currently aware of, there are no others but my own. GRAVITY TEST: (Short Version): Direct a high powered laser 90 degrees through an electric field and magnetic field polarized as such to nullify the 'em' of the laser. "IF" my current TOE idea is correct, a gravitational black hole would become evident. (The 'gem' photon being the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything else in existence in this existence.)
Neutron decay cosmology A homeostatic universe maintained by the reciprocal processes of electron capture at event horizons and free neutron decay in deep voids. Gravity gathers mass to event horizons All matter is made neutrons at event horizons because of electron capture Infalling neutrons (going at c?) drop off their kinetic energy as mass for event horizon The neutron takes an EinsteinRosen bridge from highest energy pressure conditions to lowest energy density point of space where the quantum basement is lowest and easiest to penetrate. Neutron out in a deep void somewhere soon decays into amorphous monatomic, proton electron soup, Dark matter. The decay from neutron 0.6fm³ to 1m³ of amorphous hydrogen gas is a volume increase of around 10⁴⁵. Expansion. Dark energy. In time this amorphous hydrogen stabilizes first into monatomic hydrogen, large clouds of which are found around galaxies, and then into H2 and all the other elements The entire time falling down the gravity well towards an event horizon. Loop 🖖
खोजों अंदर, मिल गए अपने असली आप से, तो सब भूल जाओगे, नाचते फिरोगे, जब पता चलेगा, मैं नहीं है, नहीं ही असली मै है, 🙏OPEN NAINA❤️AAKHE KHOLO🙏SIDDHARTHA GOLDYIE CHAKRANEY, ओपन नेना❤️आंखे खोलो🙏गोल्डन नट I AM NOTHING❤️NOTHING IS I AM
I disagree with your comments on the CTMU. If anyone wants to learn more about it, they can see my content. Carlos, if you delete my comment again, I will report your unauthorized use of my animations in your video to RUclips.
@@Carlos.Explains It is generally considerate and polite to attribute the originators of any media used in a video. If this is forgotten, then those originators should be allowed to make sure they are referenced under the video in some way, so that anyone interested can find the original source of the content used.
Isadore M. Singer Laurent Beaulieu Hiroaki Kanno Edward Witten Nathan Seiberg James Simons Nima Arkani-Hamed Stephen Wolfram Stephon Alexander Peter Woit
Your video was so great, and then u have to spout the BS at the last seconds about dark energy/matter making up 95% of stuff. Come on man! The reason we need that atm is cuz our theory is wrong. The TOE is supposed to account for and get rid of the need for both of those. They are just an addition to our current theory to make them match observations. Very disappointing ending. U still earned my subscription tho. GL on future videoes!
My personal theory is that neither "dark matter" nor "dark energy" exists. Rather, they are artifacts derived from Einstein's flawed understanding of the true nature of the universe, including the fixity of the speed of light.
It is gratifying to observe the increasing prominence of Donald Hoffman's fusion of consciousness theory. From my perspective, it possesses a robust foundation. Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge the inherent beauty and utility of all theories in comprehending various phenomena.
@@infiniteone11 I’ve been a fan of Don’s for over a decade! I have a 3-part series on his Fitness Beats Truth Theorem too: ruclips.net/video/kiO2vKx6pcI/видео.htmlsi=_lsFtjI9sj43GlqT
I would love E8 to be true, but I am inclined towards, Loop Quantum Gravity*. Why is string theory, even a thing anymore? Admittedly, I've never liked it, but it has simply gotten more and more lost and twisted up as the decades have passed, rather than towards any certainty. They all (and some, much more than others) to some degree, cry out, "...., but WHY, 'the quantum'?' *Heaven help your algorithmic feed, if you start searching 'Quantum Gravity', rather than, 'Loop Quantum Gravity'; your 'WooWoo*' alarms will be going off constantly. *WooWoo, as in pseudoscience, para-psychological, consciousness as universe, type material; not, - the noise your alarms make.
Langham is close but he let's Christianity taint his work causing him to confuse the god of the Bible with the God of reality. Everything. Or infinity. While the Goddess and first cause is actually, absolute nothingness. But Chris Langham is right about the fact that it is a language or data or information at the heart of reality as the framework for everything else to be built upon. This is a language that is above computation, as computation itself could not add qualia and emotion, this is something that comes from a different type of language and mathematics. It's also a way of computing cardinality in infinity and translating it to the physical through things like the speed of light and the Planck unit as well as the number zero and zero degrees temperature. Roger Penrose is close as well. But they don't realize the significance of objectivity and subjectivity as the first thing to arise out of nothingness as mind discovers itself.
1 to 10 - not even close to the truth. The truth is not a TOE but instead a MOE - Model of Everything. Theories are merely people playing around with thoughts of highly improbable causations and with little practical value or application. That includes currently accepted theories such as Newtonian gravity and General Relativity - both of which cannot produce an anomaly free gravitational model for Earth. No theory has been able to do that.
What's your favorite theory of everything?
Could it be "galaxies hosting blackholes" are blackholes, hosting galaxies and we don't know the difference between blackholes and white holes?
None of them seem like they are on the right track which is reasonable as I don’t think any have made a new testable prediction that has been confirmed.
I guess my favorite TOE is not in the top ten. Nice video!
@@Mentaculus42 Don't keep us in suspense! What is it?
@@rezadaneshi I'm open to the concept of white holes! 😀
Wow, this was way too easy for me! I mean, I only had to pause every 2 seconds, look up every other word, and take a week off work to even begin to understand it. Great job!
@@illogicmath I did promise it would be simple.
But he did pause, look it up, and come back😛
this channel hit my recommendations at just the right time! thinking about these almost 24/7 nowadays. Great videos. Thank you for making them!
@@taygavural780 Thanks Tayga!
I recall hearing Hoffman saying his theory is more idealist at an IIT conference ( I believe), and then in numerous podcasts.
@@gkannon77 Great point, it is more idealist than panpsychic. Thanks for the clarification. 👍
BRILLIANT VIDEO!!! Grateful you made and shared this video to RUclips. 👍
Carlos I am very grateful for your high quality fascinating content. Thanks, Alex
Thank you, Alex! 😁
We need to go back to 1/r² and the three dimensional physics of the Inverse Square Law. Even back to the spherical 4πr² geometry of Huygens’ Principle of 1670 that says:
“Every point on a light wave front has the potential for a new spherical 4πr² light wave".
Each point on the wave front represents a potential photon ∆E=hf electron interaction or coupling. The spherical surface forms a boundary condition or manifold for the uncertainty ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π of this interaction. Light waves radiate out spherically 4πr² with their interior forming the characteristic of three-dimensional space with the spherical surface forming a probabilistic wave front. Each point ∆E=hf on the curvature of the wave front forms the potential for a new spherical wave, a photon of energy, a new oscillation or vibration that forms our future. We have to square the radius r² because process is unfolding relative to the surface of the sphere.
The Universe could be based on simple geometry that forms the potential for evermore complexity. Forming not just physical complexity, but also the potential for evermore-abstract mathematics. Time t², ψ², c², e² and velocity Eₖ=½mv² all squared, geometrical similarity formed out of spherical symmetry
In this theory we even have an objective reason for the start of the Fibonacci numbers 0, 1, 1,... with the t = 0 and the positive +1 and negative -1 representing the positive and negative of electromagnetic waves with everything being based on a geometrical process. This is because if the quantum wave particle function Ψ or probability function is reformulated as a linear vector then all the information I have found says that each new vector is formed by adding the two previous vectors together this forms the Fibonacci Sequence 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, ∞ ad infinity!
We have photon ∆E=hf energy continuously transforming potential energy into the kinetic Eₖ=½mv² energy of matter, in the form of electrons. Could this process form a design pattern or template in the form of spherical geometry for self-organization and complexity to arise?
Amazing quality and focus to this, thank you!
This was awesome Carlos!
Thanks Scott! Hope all is well in paradise. 😀
Interesting podcast, ranking the top 10 TOEs with an objective analysis indeed!
Speaking of which, how about I throw our firm’s one such integrated newcomer i-TOE into the mix by incorporating the best in class features of all these 10 TOEs as one i-TOE(I really mean it and I let you all be the judge 🙏)!
Simply Put -- Our i-TOE is an integrated TOE, that has been developed by framing fine structure constant(FSC-α) as the Hidden variable/Maxwell daemon/AoC of Banach-Tarski & Russell's paradox, in such away, that our “Ads/CFT/holographic principle complaint” Hodge lattice loop/gauge quantum gravity naturally can emerge from it with a discrete set of causal latticed Dirac spinor events, using our FSC’s 2/3:1/3 rule based computational/conscious CPTiad - all by leveraging our reality generating/regulating series function called CPT(α,Φ) function (developed using our meta proof of RH solving all $5MM+ CI problems) and by resolving the #1 relationship problem between the perturbation series of QED and non perturbation lattice formulation of QCD (as the coupling constant is sent to zero), by modeling the quantum spectrum of our Universe as the Riemann sphere. This Riemann sphere then gets renormalized with the value of α (n-> α or 137), in such a way that the zeros of zeta function(including their moments) end up following the eigenvalue statistical gaps of gaussian/hermitian random matrices before branching into two independent Brownian motion paths with an exponential Gaussian distribution of FHK Conjecture and our FSC-Maxwells daemon logic (by converging with an universality/gaussian decay), before branching again like the Ramanujan graphs with knots of algebraic L-functions with hermitian distribution whose coefficients & roots, reflecting the periodicity of the GR-Eigen-valued actions of our TOE, using 10+ meta dualities (with E8 and Lie group geometrical unity) as explained below
Turns out, our theory also happens to get realized using the very same CPT(α,Φ) function driven 5 step scaling/gauging steps using the following 5 scaling steps - which we call as 5 Shakespearean play-scaling steps”.
Interestingly enough, these 5 steps, happen to align perfectly with 5 such scaling high-bars set by the experts of Institute of Advanced Study (IAS) as well(lnkd.in/geGA3gbq) - and so, how about I present them for your perusal to see if it will exceed your expectations as well -- and open some collaboration possibilities for us to team up in this integrated TOE/SOE/ESG program(lnkd.in/gyx9yRXf)
+++++ Our i-TOE's 5 such Shakespearean play-scaling steps vis-a-vis 5 scaling steps of IAS
IAS High-bar 1:
For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must have an observation or nature based scale-correlation function, capable of both generating and measuring observables with a certain precision, by resolving the so-called measurement/scaling problem of both periodic fluctuations & early inflations, by re-scaling it automatically.
Our Shakespearean play-scaling Exposition 1:
The wave function (aka Hartle-Hawking wave function in steroids) of our i-TOE has exceeded this high-bar, as we've used nature's one such inbuilt “symmetry generating scaling function called CPT(α,Φ) function" to model both fluctuations & inflations. More specifically, it has been developed by leveraging our UNIVERSALITY META-SCALING-PROOF of Riemann Hypothesis(including all $5MM+ unsolved problems of Clay Institute), in such a way to scale/rescale the periodicity of both fluctuations and inflations(aka fluctuations in steroids) by expositioning/birthing their equivalent symmetrical dipoles(manifesting as Higgs + 68 particle+ 68 anti-particle symmetrical particle pairs, as modeled further by 2 spinors of Dirac eqn). For example, this idea of modeling these symmetries using 2 spinors in the complex plane is what gives rise to symplectic hodge geometry lattices in 3 and 4 dimensional classical hyperbolic cylinders of the projected plane.
IAS High-bar 2:
For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must be able to discretize spacetime by renormalizing the RG flow with an action formula for all particles (especially asymmetrical/anti commuting fermions) with a time-like holographic interpretation.
Our Shakespearean play-scaling Rising Action 2.
Again, our wave function of our LQFT/TOE has exceeded this high-bar, as we've used the very same CPT(α,Φ) function as the “symmetry breaking CPT(α,Φ) function scaler”, by limiting the ∞-raised pole of Riemann sphere to a compact P-region, while simultaneously renormalizing the ∞ values of e with α, so that its position can be rotated as e^i137nπ Spin-Frequency (S-F) matched cycles unitarily. In other words, this S-F matching phenomena is what breaks the symmetry by shifting the center of mass of each particle by their respective “radius scaled α” so that their symmetry can be broken to create both classical mass and motion for every 1 out of 137(n) cycles in time dimension (and yet by preserving the conservation of CPT theorem).
IAS High-bar 3:
For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must have a scaling/rescaling/limiting parameter for periodic action for lattice geometry, using a Fourier transformed action for both dS and AdS spaces with the opposite signs [I-ds(g) = - I-Ads(g)].
Our Shakespearean play-scaling Climax 3.
Our wave function of our LQFT/TOE has exceeded this high- bar as well, as we've used the very same Fourier transformed CPT(α,Φ) function scaler, to sustain the action with an “α fine-tuned e and π driven action”(thanks to our additional framing of α as HV/Maxwell daemon/AoC), so that the coefficients & roots of their equivalent algebraic modular forming L-functions can model the periodicity of their GR-Eigen-valued actions via 10+ meta dualities.
IAS High-bar 4:
For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must have measurement algorithms by modeling the curvature of spacetime in proportion to both fluctuations & inflations i.e. ψ ~ e^- δN with an exponent of 10^120 or 10^10) in such a way that gravity can emerge from it
Our Shakespearean play-scaling Falling Action 4.
Our wave function of our LQFT/TOE has exceeded this high-bar using its “Dice-rolling CPT(α,Φ) function scaler”, by slicing/squeezing the infinite slices (ψ ~ e^- δN) of quantum sphere in the form of one or four ellipsoid slices (as per the Descartes kissing circle geometry and α=r/R logic) into an exact radiused symplectic/asymmetric taurusized hodge geometry lattices of classical hyperbolic cylinder of the projected plane(aka Hilbert’s countable infinity hotel as per Banach-Tarski & Russell's paradox) so that they can orbit smoothly like the frames of Muybridge’s Horse in Motion with a curvature proportional to both fluctuations & inflations. This is where we have also additionally hypothesized/predicted that this gravitational motion can be modeled both by semi classical Einstein field equations and/or by our Hodge conjecture meta proof logic.
IAS High-bar 5:
For any quantum gravity theory to be a TOE caliber theory, it must have an inbuilt statistical QM measurement system (for various scales) whose Hilbert space dimension must be able to model geometric dualities as per the static patch holographic principle, so that we can extrapolate/interpolate/interpret the measures accordingly.
Our Shakespearean play-scaling Resolution 5 :
Our wave function of our LQFT/TOE again has exceeded this high-bar, as we've used the very same “classical reality generating CPT(α,Φ) function scaler”, to resolve the dualities of the static patch holographic principle by projecting the Riemannian sphere as a Lie-grouped classical sphere with 10+ meta dualities as visually depicted in the attached exhibit.
+++++
That said, this precisely is why, we have also scaled 5 AITGE origins of our TOE (i.e. RH sourced the Action generator of the Lie group as Action, Inertia, Time. Gravity and Entropy) with these 5 ingredients of CPT(α,Φ) function
Now that we are done with the overview part, how about I explain its details using 3 TOE yardstick questions below (continued)
1. How does our i-TOE reproduce both GR and SM (plus more) by answering the question of how classical reality emerge from quantum reality?
First, under our TOE’s paradigm , the whole classical universe is its own observer, where all galaxies collapse gravitationally moment by moment at a particle level using our CPT(α,Φ) function mechanism of our TOE
In other words, our CPT(α,Φ) function of TOE collapses it by auto-collapsing/landing/toggling each particle from CFT into the next lattice of dS space. This simultaneous toggle/shift is what gives us the feeling to human observers that these CFT/dS dualities are orbiting smoothly like the frames of Muybridge’s Horse in Motion.
More specifically, under our theory - the quantum spectrum of our Universe (modeled by Riemann zeta function by imagining it as the Riemann sphere) gets renormalized with the value of α (n-> α or 137), in such a way that the zeros of zeta function(including their moments) end up following the eigenvalue statistical gaps of gaussian/hermitian random matrices. This eigen-valued gaussian path is what ends up branching into two independent Brownian motion paths with an exponential Gaussian distribution of FHK Conjecture (by converging with an universality/gaussian decay), before branching again like the Ramanujan graphs with knots of algebraic L-functions whose coefficients & roots, reflecting the periodicity of the GR-Eigen-valued actions of our TOE, using 10+ meta dualities as explained below
And one of the best ways to understand this insight is by understanding our UNIVERSALITY META-PROOF strategy of Riemann Hypothesis - which brings us to our firm’s “Gödel completed constructive meta-proof strategy of Riemann hypothesis (in pre print) that not only solves Riemann hypothesis but also all $5MM+ Clay institute unsolved problems, including our TOE.
Simply put -
Our UNIVERSALITY META-PROOF strategy has been developed by “ Gödel completing” Sir Michael Atiyah Riemann hypothesis proof with a new physical insight driven CPT(α,Φ) function proof, by additionally framing FSC(α) as an Omniscient AoC chooser of Banach-Tarski and Russell paradox/Hidden Variable/Maxwell daemon of our TOE, with a symbiotic symmetrical fractal causality to 10+C-old unsolved problems of TOE including Clay Institute problems as explained in this post f(lnkd.in/drGQ44Mt) and (lnkd.in/geUGrFuB).
(Note : While Poincaré conjecture is already solved using Ricci flow approach, our meta proof also solves it in a complementary way using our Maxwell daemon logic, as explained below)
What do I mean by that?
Let us start from our Riemann hypothesis proof as it is one of the foundations not only to answer this question but also for our TOE as well
For example
We imagine our Universe as the Riemann Zeta function governed LMFDB universe (that is a motivic/metamorphic/Galois representation based SU 2/SU3/SU4 symmetrical engine.
In other words, Z(1) is the fundamental frequency of this Universe’s TOE engine that is QVF/ZPE sourced, FSC(α)-Einstein-Bohr-HV-Maxwell Daemon governed frequency of Riemann's zeta function Ζ(S) with a singularity of S=1+0i, that is made up of his harmonic oscillating zeros(S=1/2+it stacked on his 1/2 critical line, before being transformed as a 137 frequency-spin momentum matched dipole, using our FSC(α)-GR-PLA+5 AITGE origin formulas(see exhibit)
In other words, our TOE/SOE engine is the one that is transforming the Riemann's zeros into an artistic unit charge SU2 dipole(see visual), by contracting/expanding its electric flux as the center of mass (as r = αR), before rotating its magnetic flux by 90 in such a way that it can be extended into the left plane as a paired unit charge, using the "only possible analytical continuation of Zeta".
Sure enough, this engine function is nothing but universe's wave function only, transforming itself from position/time space into frequency/momentum space, using the Fourier transform operator ( kind of equivalent to Feynman’s path integral with propagator )
ψ(k) = ∫ ψ(t) e^-iwt dt -
This brings us to our next point about CPT function
This "one & only allowed analytically continued/functional equation allowed symmetrical dipole" is what limits/constrains the ∞ pole of Riemann sphere to a value of 137 cycles( per Laurent/Cauchy residue including the α=r/R,=fe/fp=we/wp logic of our CP function as explained in my post and attached one page exhibit for details
lim t→ ∞ CPT(1/2 + ti) = 1/α cycles of dipole
In other words, this CPT function proof(lnkd.in/drGQ44Mt) for Riemann hypothesis is a polynomial in the convex region of the Riemann Sphere only (thanks to the "one and only allowed analytical continuation logic of dipole & its 137 cycle ratio logic"), limiting/constraining the ∞ pole of Riemann sphere to the convex region, as explained in this article(www.linkedin.com/pulse/summary-our-firms-10yrs-toe-work-wa-request-world-form-prabakar-k25sc/?trackingId=3oeFnfoaRT61kGCCQ7VNNQ%3D%3D)
In other words, our TOE is a CPT(α,Φ) function operated cosmic dance, where α ends up splitting the frequencies of QVF as 137 dipoles ( aka elementary particles including electrons quarks etc) using Riemann Zeta function(including its corresponding Fourier/Mobius transformations), in such a way that the electric field of each dipole gets rotated as nπ cycles (using Euler’s identity eiπ ) before getting rotated by their magnetic field (by 90 degrees) so that their combined least action (A) can be twisted to flow along the eigen-valued nodes of Ramanujan graph, using the 2/3:1/3 rule of α (ratioed by its flip sided golden ratio Φ)!
Stated otherwise, this idea of embedding CPT function within our TOE with 10+ META DUALITIES of the Langsland/Banach-Tarski/Russell paradox of our SOE/TOE engine is what differentiates our approach with this new paradigm!
2. How does our i-TOE explain/solve an unsolved problem by other theories i.e. solving 3+ body problem of GR using a new field centric theory including a few more unanswered questions including hidden variable/maxwells daemon related questions?
To answer this question, first we may need to understand our META PROOF strategy to solve all Clay Institute problems (especially hodge conjecture) . For example, the first pragmatic implication of our hodge conjecture is that the 3+ spherical body problem can be solved as 1 equiv. spherical body as follows
Inertia of r= αR gaped eccentric foci Riemann-Poincare Sphere(s=1) = Σ inertia of Riemann zeroed hodge algebraic cycles (S=1/2+ti).
Similarly see below the summary of other proofs
1. BSD Conjecture
Acid Test : Can the rank of an elliptic cube proved to be finite & rational?
Summary Proof : Yes, our generalized-RH CPT(α,Φ) function proof (w/its analytic cont. & functional eq logic) limits the rank of an elliptic curve to be finite & rational, in such a way that the coefficient of "Euler products of modulo of each prime" (indexed by each point) is an Eigen valued multiple of GR Φ)! In other words, this Eigenvalue logic of CPT function is what limits the rank of an elliptic curve to be finite & rational,
2. Hodge conjecture
Acid Test : Can complex mathematical models/shapes be built from simpler ones, like how legos are built?
Summary Proof: Yes, our CPT function proves that every differential form on a Riemannian manifold (S=1) is the sum of dipole harmonic geometrical forms (S=1/2+ti) both as exact/co-exact forms.A pragmatic implication here is that the 3+ spherical body problem can be solved as 1 equiv. spherical body: Inertia of r= αR gaped eccentric foci Riemann-Poincare Sphere(s=1) = Σ inertia of Riemann zeroed hodge algebraic cycles (S=1/2+ti).
3. Navier-Stokes eqn.
Acid Test: Per Tao, have you discovered a new globally controlled nature's coercive/critical variable/method that can explain the fluid smoothness of this eqn?
Summary Proof : Yes, we have discovered one such 2/3:1/3 rule based FSC variable incl. a QVF fluid sourced info-medium of Maxwell daemon engine (e.g. "Stoddart-Leigh's light sourced mech-interlocked rotaxane ring-lnkd.in/g6re2Nx6), very similar to Tao's engine(without our FSC part)!
4. Yang-Mills mass gap
Acid Test: Can you "explain/legitimize/Gödel complete" the “mass gap” existing in the Yang-Mills equations?
Summary Proof : First ours is the only theory that has integrated both perturbation infinite series of QED and QCD using a common “Riemann
zeta function as perturbation series generator” for both QED and QCD using our "r=αR dipole logic guided 2/3:1/3 rule driven CP-Yang-Mills-Koide-Descartes-Kocik formulas" of n+2 spherical dipoles in 'n' dim-spaces can do so(lnkd.in/dxnNs_Xf).
5. P vs NP
Acid Test : When Riemann Hypothesis proof is a Polynomial, can it simultaneously also become a proof for P=NP?
Summary Proof : Yes, our CPT function proof for Riemann hypothesis is one such polynomial in the convex region of the Riemann Sphere only (thanks to the "one and only allowed analytical continuation logic of dipole & its 137 cycle ratio logic"), limiting/constraining the ∞ pole of Riemann sphere to the convex region(per Laurent/Cauchy residue incl. α=r/R,=fe/fp=we/wp logic) -- which brings us to our TOE below
Turns out, this is what also makes our TOE as the best candidate (compared to all other TOEs), as we visibly see the signatures of FSC and golden ratio throughout nature (link)
Simply put -
Ours is the only TOE that is anchored on this FSC/golden ratio governed CPT(α,Φ) function mechanism!
In other words, for any TOE path to become a final TOE, it must be anchored on this FSC/golden ratio governed CPT(α,Φ) function mechanism end to end (in one form or the other)!
Similarly, how about I expand its scope to the productivity challenge in the business dimension that has been developed by the very same TOE principles(& synthesized as 1 sentence below and in exhibit)
-- Every Maslow’s holacracial(1) economic need is a direct/indirect manifestation of QE caused Scripture/Griffith’s human condition/depravity model problem(2) only -- that is solved using the Principle of least action & its new insight(3) driven Fine-structure-constant(FSC) caused Attention factor (4) driven FSC/GT/Nash Equilibrium(5) based reality accurate S-economics model(6) caused Friedman’s Attention-Pluck(7) -- that is followed by an Solow’s TFP-expansion( 8 ), before it being executed by “sovereign-to-choose with collaboration without coercion(9)” motto, driven Next-Gen capitalism called Sovereign/Conscious Sustainalism(10). as explainer in this summary (www.linkedin.com/pulse/summary-our-firms-10yrs-toe-work-wa-request-world-form-prabakar-k25sc/?trackingId=3oeFnfoaRT61kGCCQ7VNNQ%3D%3D)
3. How does our i-TOE stack up with other theories from the standpoint of predictive powers?
As alluded earlier, our TOE measures/predicts Quantum continuum steps using the coordinates of Riemann sphere and Classical lattice steps(including outcomes) using both Hodge conjecture(which is unique to ours) and semi classical Einstein field equations
Similarly, when it comes to both radius and mass of elementary particles (electron, muon Tau, quarks including proton)
- We have predicted that there are maximum of 137 distinct particles( 68 particles + 68 anti particles + Higgs) as represented by 137 Riemann zeroed dipoles (1/2+it) - and they come in as both quadruples and octuples forms following the Descartes kissing circle geometry.
For example, when we carefully study the Descartes quadruples, there exist a smaller circle whose radius is minuscule
This is where, we have also predicted (pending additional research) that we might also be able to discover a fourth generation lepton particle in alignment with our quadruple model, which not only can explain this electron/muon ratio with certainty but also the mismatch of muon mass value between Dirac equation and its observation!
Likewise, our theory also explains the origin of election/muon ratio including the “mass gaps” existing in the Yang-Mills equations - all using our "r=αR dipole logic guided 2/3:1/3 rule driven CP-Yang-Mills-Koide-Descartes-Kocik formulas" of n+2 spherical dipoles in 'n' dim-spaces (lnkd.in/dxnNs_Xf).
For example, the radii & mass formula for 3 lepton dipoles of quadrupole equals k=2/3, when p=2
1. Radii configuration
b1^2 + b2^2 + b3^2 + b(n+2)^2 = p/(n+1)p-1 (b1+ b2 + bn+2)^2, where bn=1/rn, p=1/(n+1) -(1/k), k=2/3, p=2/2n-1
2. Mass configuration
m1+ m2+m3 + ….mn = k (m1+ m2+m3 + ….mn)^2
For example, now that the Koide formula has been proven to be true for many permutations and combinations of masses, we feel very confident about our theory legitimizing every one of those permutations and combinations as well.
For example, the mere fact of “dividing the sum of any 3 or 4 masses by the square of the sum of each of their square roots, resulting in a number between 1/3 and 1 is yet another validation of our 5 AITGE origin least action formula logic (2/3 KE - 1/3PE = 1/3A)
Similarly we have hypothesized a 4 quark model for proton using our quadruple model driven CP-Yang-Mills-Koide-Descartes-Kocik formulas".
The implication is there might be an undiscovered fourth quark in the current 3 quark proton neutron model (pending additional research).
Similarly, we have extended this idea with a new measurement approach with implications to quantum computing as well!
For example, we foresee a possibility of measuring multiple phase states using one electron wave function itself
In other words, we can go granular in between spin-up or spin-down values by navigating the coordinates of the complex plane. Stated otherwise, theoretically we can go up to 10 or even 100 states (aka 2 to the power 10 or 100 possibilities). We are currently in the process of testing if experimentally - and so, I welcome suggestions as well
In closing, I welcome constructive feedback/advice (including a potential collaboration possibility), similar to how we collaborated with Prof Clay Christensen of Harvard and NT Wright of Oxford (lnkd.in/gRakUNVg).
3.
Similarly, I had that poetized these steps using Keats' Endymion genre in 5 parts((titled, "A thing of alphic (α) beauty is a joy forever", below & exhibit),
1. The Genesis
A thing of alphic (α) beauty is a joy forever!
Its loveliness increases; it will never,
Pass into nothingness; but still will fluctuate
As a quantum quiet for us, and will simul-caste
Fully ready to be birthed as a formless void
By hovering over its harmless poid
Filled with e-fields, sliced as 137 dipoles of zeta
Right angled with m-fields, rotated as e^inπ cycles of quanta
Outputted as least action, fluxed as eigen-valued-golden ratioed(ϕ) Ramajujan graphical dualities of geo-mata
All by the "let there be light" operator of CPT(α,ϕ)-TOE-mata
2. The Blueprint
Therefore, on every morrow, we wreathe,
A flowery zeta being bloomed again and again
Despite its wavered collapse, we breathe,
All wavery humans, being born again & again
Of all the unhealthy and o'er-darkened ways
With noble natures of the glorious gain
Birthed from our search: yes, in spite of all bays
Zeta’s beauty cleansing away the pave
With His Spirit of cosmic costume
hovering over the panoramic plume.
3. The Roadmap
As CPT(α,ϕ) starts rolling its (Solomonic) dices
Humans old and young, following their aces
Like the lilies of the valleys,
Lock-stepped with their Saronic roses
That for themselves overtly unaware
'Gainst their deprived realities ; their mid forest fires,
And such too is their (quantum) entangled depravities
The nature’s design for the mortally deprived,
Ten such (depraved) dualities that we have heard or read:
And yet an endless fountain of gracious gravity awaits to save
Pouring unto us from His mountainous wave!
4. The Solution
Nor do we could gaze His Grace
As there existed a chasm to cleave
Like the veil of the holy of holies
Where the logos resided as glory of glories
Chasing us till we become His own
Unto His souls, as His own crown
Heralding us from the wilderness:
With a helmet of salvation, simul-ed with justus
Thro' a greenery path, that we can chisel
Easily onward, through its thorns and thistles
5 The Great Commission with three missions
Therefore, w'ill proclaim it all as Endymion's 3 great commissioning factors of activity
First, save people’s depravity with productivity
By alpha-fying Solow's TFP as an attention TFP
Resulting in with a quantum leap of productivity;
Second, save planet’s depravity with sustainability
By kingdomizing next-gen capitalism as a purpose scored-ism
Resulting in with a quantum accuracy of sustainability;
Third, reform both people and planet with an integrated reformationism
By alpha-fying Luther's one such Simul Justus Realism
Resulting in with a TOE-tinged golden next-Genism
In closing, I welcome constructive feedback/advice (including a potential collaboration possibility), similar to how we collaborated with Prof Clay Christensen of Harvard and NT Wright of Oxford (lnkd.in/gRakUNVg).
I'm sure others have seen the similiarities between a lot of these models. My intuition is screaming that where the cross-section converges, there lies yet another TOE that is deeper still. Syntax=Programmatic=Cellular Automata= Conscious Agents..... Here's a quick stab at a synthesis: Conscious Agents use syntactical language to programmtically create a Hypergraph of reality that conforms to E8 space symmetries. I think they're all talking in some ways about the same 'Things'.
So happy RUclips algorithm suggested this! Science is awesome doing investigation in such deep topics. But am I wrong though to think that the universe has some aspect that is likely unknowable, and we might even find more than one unified theory cause they map the same thing flawlessly but with different pov?
i like how transparent you are about your methodology
I made a judgment call that explaining each TOE in a couple minutes was more important than my speculative rankings. Felt another rubric or scorecard would have complicated things and run too long.
Great work, as always!
Thanks Brendan!
This was so good! Keep up the great work!
so happy you also love Hoffman’s theory !
Got 6 more videos on the channel on Hoffman if you're interested!
@@Carlos.Explains yes i’ve seen one already and am a subscriber keep up the great work
What about Vernon M. Neppe and Edward R. Close's 'Gimmel Theory'.
TDVP ( Vortical Paradigm Theory ).
You can read about it on the ISPE ( International Society for Philosophical Enquiry ) site on the computer.
Excellent, thank you . I like quantum gravity and , hologram is ???
@@martinfarfsing5995 thanks!
I like what you said at the end about Plato's cave. My mind always goes back to Plato when I hear about TOEs. The way I see the Ruliad, for example, is that it is basically where Platonic forms are "stored." Of course, a holographic universe would be a 3D projection of the 2D Platonic forms into our shadowy "fake" cave world. My mind works better in philosophy than in hard science, so I always look to the fundamentals of philosophy to help me understand theoretical science. And Platonic thought is at the root of all good TOEs.
@@mygirldarby Love this! Very cool idea. 😀
I was struck by Wolfram's theory. Wild.
I think our TOE is a mixture of Quantum Field Theory, The Holographic Principle, Loop Quantum Gravity and Quantum Entanglement wrapped up in a blend of Twistor Theory and Wolfram's Computation Theory. Two standard spatial dimensions (x,y planes) which vibrate and create a special third spatial dimension (z, depth) along the xy plane vector. Information patterns of matter propagate through 2 dimensional quantum space.
Where did you get the visualizations 17:37 and 18:21?
How to Think Computationally About AI, the Universe and Everything | Stephen Wolfram | TED 2023 ruclips.net/video/fLMZAHyrpyo/видео.html
www.linkedin.com/posts/wolfram-research_at-the-2022-wolfram-summer-school-student-activity-6971533737255657472--ZEW
Very good 👍👍
Wait...swervature? I'm in.
Weinstein's term, I swear!
1:50 Observers are what prove the formless energy exists and energises everything else into motion.
General relativity and quantum mechanics will never be combined until we realize that each individual observer is observing them both at different moments in time. Because causality has a speed limit (c) every point in space where one observes it from will be the closest to the present moment. When one looks out into the universe they see the past which is made of particles (GR). When one tries to measure the position of a particle they are observing smaller distances and getting closer to the present moment (QM). The wave property of particles appears when we start trying to predict the future of that particle. A particle that has not had an interaction exists in a future state. It is a probability wave because the future is probabilistic. Wave function collapse is what we perceive as the present moment and is what divides the past from the future. GR is making measurements in the observed past and therefore, predictable. It can predict the future but only from information collected from the past. QM is attempting to make measurements of the unobserved future and therefore, unpredictable. Only once a particle interacts with the present moment does it become predictable. This is an observational interpretation of the mathematics we currently use based on the limited perspective we have with the experiments we choose to observe the universe with.
What about CIG Theory? It's not a Top Ten List without CIG Theory. I did Subscribe though. Great Job. CIG explains Dark Energy and Dark Matter.
@@thedouglasw.lippchannel5546 Thanks! First I’ve heard of CIG, I’ll look into it. 🙇♂️
Didn't know Whitehead was into panpsychism, his colleague Russell published his own flavour of it though
Damn, that was good.
Why is that, each quantum is the same throughout our conceivable universe? I think that it is because our universe has limits and the geometry of the universe governs each quantum. The whole governs the parts and the parts influence the whole. And so, the universe is so intertwined that it is generous enough for us to have conscience and a small amount of freewill.
Shannon information theory? I would approach it from Von Neumann entropy (quantum) instead of Shannon (classical)
@@jorgec9293 Great point, I suppose I associate Shannon more with the concept of ignorance. But really all definitions of entropy are about micro/macro state uncertainty.
Thanks for pointing that out. I have an information bias clearly.
"The CTMU lacks testability" because the CTMU is not a scientific theory, it's a metaphysics. A metaphysics doesn't need "empirical testability", it's deductive. There is not a single principle in the CTMU anybody has been able to debunk via syllogism yet. Will be debunking this critique thoroughly on my channel.
K nigga im waiting
K homeboy im all up
Less go smarty pants
In any case, it shouldnt be on the list because it doesnt actually predict what physical phenomena we should expect.
@@metachirality that's not the criteria for a theory of everything, genius. A theory of everything necessarily implicates philosophy. How do you guys not know this?
My issue with ideas like ctmu and similar ideas is how literal is what they are describing supposed to be taken or is it just supposed to be representative that fundlementally rather than items relations are what are all models break down to
Meine Meinung dazu : Es existiert eine Raumkorrespondenztheorie.
Seems like you could put the triangulation together with the graph theory and you're set for a dynamic causal model, if that's not already how modern physics is done like in tensor networks. I mean the thing is it's just a model still but can represent fundamental relationships across different mediums. Like it's not like our lives are just decompressed representations of some godhead graph we're all merged with like some cyberpunk/acid brahman, it's more likely our minds are able to more fully understand the universe with biological networks that hold some level of this "ultimate" abstract framework inside to connect otherwise specialized sensory processing nodes in the body into a more totalizing world model.
The interesting thing at the highest levels in physics is that there can be multiple right answers depending on how you slice the math beginning with what axioms, because at a point it becomes abstract, i.e. there's only a certain set of known real world requirements you need to meet before you can make entirely arbitrary statements. That's why testability is so important but even that can only confirm or deny so much at that level of physics. The networking physics is the real frontier now imo but not because it promises to show us "answers" more like because it promises to revolutionize medicine.
I feel like beyond that it becomes a religious debate like trying to point to one framework or another that can say we evolved from nothing through some incredible but inevitable accident of energy creation beyond our current understanding, or there was some divine intervention like we're a computer simulation, or a bit of both even.
I like #5, Wolfram's theory and Loop Quantum Gravity. I think Wolfram's theory can be seen as generalization of #5. I also think LQG is compatible with Wolfram, with Wolfram's theory underlying it. I have my own hypothesis of everything, which in my opinion is very much simpler and elegant than all of those, and also compatible with Wolfram's theory, #5 and LQG. I cannot post links here, but I have it posted on Facebook and X, among other places. would love to hear opinions on it, from whoever might be interested. It's no more than 10 minutes read.
Please share!
@@Carlos.Explains How can I contact you?
@@Carlos.Explains Alright, I emailed you a link.
All theories must be wrong since Coulomb impregnated us with a force that does not exist. He separated the visual effect of "repelling" from the actual forces that were at hand. The voltage differences between the various shields used and the similar charged objects were resulting in attracting forces he denied to involve in his math. We can only understand lightbolts of 100 million volts if considering that all these likewise charged droplets stay together so long as to accumulate, when they were NOT REPELLING.
That is half of the problem. The same goes for protons. Look at nuclear reactions like the 800 GEV proton that demolishes a tungsten nucleus by stripping off up to 25 neutrons and one proton (being the used one?) and similar other nuclear processes like the mentioned one.
J.J. Thomson was wright. Bohr's twisted argument in adopting Rutherford's "positive charge e" doomed history's chance to discover that"hydrogen is the only element which never occurs with a positive charge corresponding to the loss of more than one electron".
Bohr had to mention this INVENTION OF THE PROTON of J.J. down on the same page as an annotation for his (contradicting) choice.
These horrible mistakes are due to our wrong use of the numberline which is fine for bookkeeping but the jump from one charge to negative territory is wrong in QM. Protons have fewer charge or charge that is diminished in effect because of changing fields\positions.
And lesser charge is all needed for electrical fields to function (attract more charge).
Al Khwazimi had it wright if only we would have understood. Three "odd" questions can only lead to one narrative. So why did he place zero behind the nine, why was it small and why didn't he extend to eleven etc.
As a possibly chauvinist male he wished
not to reveal that his notation was fully inspired by market women using their rings on the pink for decimal counting, not to say the perfect digitisation. There was no use for any kind of zero let alone minus signs.
Our use of zero to make up negative numbers (=products) has brought us a lot of gaming in math. but as may be clear it has introduced some major misunderstandings and anomalies under the rugs. vosforr@gmail.com
IPI Letters, Feb. 2024: `Consciousness is every(where)ness, expressed locally´, Downloadable
What good is any theory of everything that can't explain why we each seem to have a personal existence as a specific consciousness? Only Hoffman even attempts to address that.
Opening myself up to people's vehemence, I propose that a toe is in fact impossible. My reasoning is that any theory that is coherent becomes, in a sense, an object... and an object can only be discerned against a background, silhouetted against it. So every theory, in order to have coherence has to be incomplete.
@@romanovrex Certainly a possibility. And Godel’s Incompleteness would bolster your argument.
Also lol to “vehemence,” it’s full body contact here in the comments. 🤼♂️
Thanks a lot bro...that helps
@@inkoscienza glad you enjoyed!
More, please!
here is the algorithm for life and death (a feedback loop involving rest and movement) ... *ACHIRAL >>> CHIRAL >>> ACHIRAL >>> CHIRAL >>> forever and ever till do us part and life re-emerges*
@@islandbuoy4 interesting, I need to explore this…
Communication is important for every scientist, but among scientists, we are increasingly dealing with pop stars. They are everywhere, in thousands of podcasts, supposedly trying to introduce their theories to a wider audience in simple words. It is known that this cannot be done, and oversimplification often leads to psudoscientific interpretations, of which we have countless in the case of quantum mechanics, for example. That is why I "believe" more what Ed Witten or Juan Maldacena has to say than Eric Weinstein and like him.
All of this theories are behinds my theory. I am the first to speak about this.
IN THE INTEREST OF FINDING THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING:
SOME THINGS MODERN SCIENCE DOES NOT APPARENTLY KNOW:
Consider the following:
a. Numbers: Modern science does not even know how numbers and certain mathematical constants exist for math to do what math does. Surely the very nature of reality has to allow numbers and mathematical constants to actually exist for math to do what math does in this existence. (And nobody as of yet has been able to show me how numbers and certain mathematical constants can come from the Standard Model Of Particle Physics).
b. Space: Modern science does not even know what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually warp and expand.
c. Time: Modern science does not even know what 'time' actually is nor how it could actually warp and vary.
d. Gravity: Modern science does not even know what 'gravity' actually is nor how gravity actually does what it appears to do. And for those who claim that 'gravity' is matter warping the fabric of spacetime, see 'b' and 'c' above.
e. Speed of Light: 'Speed', distance divided by time, distance being two points in space with space between those two points. But yet, here again, modern science does not even know what space and time actually are that makes up 'speed' and they also claim that space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary, so how could they truly know even what the speed of light actually is that they utilize in many of the formulas? Speed of light should also warp, expand and vary depending upon what space and time it was in. And if the speed of light can warp, expand and vary in space and time, how then do far away astronomical observations actually work that are based upon light and the speed of light that could warp, expand and vary in actual reality?
f. Photons: A photon swirls with the 'e' and 'm' energy fields 90 degrees to each other. A photon is also considered massless. What keeps the 'e' and 'm' energy fields together across the vast universe for billions of light years? And why doesn't the momentum of the 'e' and 'm' energy fields as they swirl about not fling them away from the central area of the photon? And why aren't photons that go across the vast universe torn apart by other photons, including photons with the exact same energy frequency, and/or by matter, matter being made up of quarks, electrons and interacting energy, quarks and electrons being considered charged particles, each with their respective magnetic field with them?
Electricity is electricity and magnetism is magnetism varying possibly only in energy modality, energy density and energy frequency. So why doesn't the 'e' and 'm' of other photons and of matter basically tear apart a photon going across the vast universe?
Also, 'if' a photon actually red shifts, where does the red shifted energy go and why does the photon red shift? And for those who claim space expanding causes a photon to red shift, see 'b' above.
Why does radio 'em' (large 'em' waves) have low energy and gamma 'em' (small 'em' waves) have high energy? And for those who say E = hf; see also 'b' and 'c' above. (f = frequency, cycles per second. But modern science claims space can warp and expand and time can warp and vary. If 'space' warps and expands and/or 'time' warps and varies, what does that do to 'E'? And why doesn't 'E' keep space from expanding and time from varying?).
g. Energy: Modern science claims that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it's one of the foundations of physics. Hence, energy is either truly a finite amount and eternally existent, or modern science is wrong. First Law Of Thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed." How exactly is 'energy' eternally existent?
h. Existence and Non-Existence side by side throughout all of eternity. How?
* ADDED NOTE: My current TOE idea can potentially answer all of these above items, and more, in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. And wouldn't one expect the true TOE of existence itself to be able to do that? What other TOE idea in known existence can currently do that? Surely not the General or Special Relativity Models nor even the Standard Model of Particle Physics.
TOE IDEA: (Short version): [currently dependent upon the results of my gravity test]:
The 'gem' photon is the eternally existent energy unit of this universe.
The strong and weak nuclear forces are derivatives of the electromagnetic ('em') interactions between quarks and electrons. The nucleus is a magnetic field boundary. 'Gravity' is a part of electromagnetic radiation, gravity acting 90 degrees to the 'em' modalities, which of course act 90 degrees to each other. 'Gravity' is not matter warping the fabric of spacetime, 'gravity' is a part of spacetime that helps to make up matter. The gravity and 'em' modalities of matter interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime and the gravity and 'em' modalities of spacetime interact with the gravity and 'em' modalities of matter.
I am open to any and all theory of everything ideas that can potentially answer all those above items in a logical, coherent and inter-related manner. Currently, as far as I am currently aware of, there are no others but my own.
GRAVITY TEST: (Short Version):
Direct a high powered laser 90 degrees through an electric field and magnetic field polarized as such to nullify the 'em' of the laser. "IF" my current TOE idea is correct, a gravitational black hole would become evident. (The 'gem' photon being the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything else in existence in this existence.)
if i asked someone what the best toe is, theyd probably say big toe...
Monist - fundamental is similarity
Neutron decay cosmology
A homeostatic universe maintained by the reciprocal processes of electron capture at event horizons and free neutron decay in deep voids.
Gravity gathers mass to event horizons
All matter is made neutrons at event horizons because of electron capture
Infalling neutrons (going at c?) drop off their kinetic energy as mass for event horizon
The neutron takes an EinsteinRosen bridge from highest energy pressure conditions to lowest energy density point of space where the quantum basement is lowest and easiest to penetrate.
Neutron out in a deep void somewhere soon decays into amorphous monatomic, proton electron soup, Dark matter.
The decay from neutron 0.6fm³ to 1m³ of amorphous hydrogen gas is a volume increase of around 10⁴⁵.
Expansion.
Dark energy.
In time this amorphous hydrogen stabilizes first into monatomic hydrogen, large clouds of which are found around galaxies, and then into H2 and all the other elements
The entire time falling down the gravity well towards an event horizon.
Loop 🖖
❤❤❤
INTERESTING
खोजों अंदर, मिल गए अपने असली आप से, तो सब भूल जाओगे, नाचते फिरोगे, जब पता चलेगा, मैं नहीं है, नहीं ही असली मै है,
🙏OPEN NAINA❤️AAKHE KHOLO🙏SIDDHARTHA GOLDYIE CHAKRANEY, ओपन नेना❤️आंखे खोलो🙏गोल्डन नट
I AM NOTHING❤️NOTHING IS I AM
M-THEORY?
@@ngumzakwanza8495 …love it or hate it?
I disagree with your comments on the CTMU. If anyone wants to learn more about it, they can see my content.
Carlos, if you delete my comment again, I will report your unauthorized use of my animations in your video to RUclips.
@@ctmuist I haven’t deleted any of your comments. I can’t even recall the last time I deleted a single content on this channel, maybe once last year?
@@Carlos.Explains It is generally considerate and polite to attribute the originators of any media used in a video. If this is forgotten, then those originators should be allowed to make sure they are referenced under the video in some way, so that anyone interested can find the original source of the content used.
@@ctmuist Your video is now referenced in the description. I recommend interested parties to learn more about the CTMU from your channel.
@@Carlos.Explains Thank you, Carlos.
None of them compare to my theory of everything. Each of these 10 can be refuted logically.
Realy I like this video its interestyng
@@ioanbota9397 thank you!
3:19 Dimensions are infinite.
💕👏🏻 Amazing
I’m with Terrence 🍄🍄🍄
Bring those 3 and I'm with you!
1:05 Supported by FEW! Who are the “few”? And don’t say his buddy as he doesn’t count.
Isadore M. Singer
Laurent Beaulieu
Hiroaki Kanno
Edward Witten
Nathan Seiberg
James Simons
Nima Arkani-Hamed
Stephen Wolfram
Stephon Alexander
Peter Woit
@@____uncompetative
You are kidding with that list, there are definitely some on that list that I know who don’t support his ideas. So no.
Your video was so great, and then u have to spout the BS at the last seconds about dark energy/matter making up 95% of stuff. Come on man! The reason we need that atm is cuz our theory is wrong. The TOE is supposed to account for and get rid of the need for both of those. They are just an addition to our current theory to make them match observations. Very disappointing ending. U still earned my subscription tho. GL on future videoes!
That are no metaphysical theories. That is all hard physics...
What do you mean? Metaphysics is not real?
@@timherz86 metaphysics is not about physicals
@@metamurk do you think our metaphysics is influenced by our physics
My personal theory is that neither "dark matter" nor "dark energy" exists. Rather, they are artifacts derived from Einstein's flawed understanding of the true nature of the universe, including the fixity of the speed of light.
Holonomic female AI!
It is gratifying to observe the increasing prominence of Donald Hoffman's fusion of consciousness theory. From my perspective, it possesses a robust foundation. Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge the inherent beauty and utility of all theories in comprehending various phenomena.
@@infiniteone11 I’ve been a fan of Don’s for over a decade! I have a 3-part series on his Fitness Beats Truth Theorem too: ruclips.net/video/kiO2vKx6pcI/видео.htmlsi=_lsFtjI9sj43GlqT
Awesome!
10 toes on my feet 🤣
Wolfram shouldn't be at 2. Peace ✌️ 😎.
I would love E8 to be true, but I am inclined towards, Loop Quantum Gravity*. Why is string theory, even a thing anymore? Admittedly, I've never liked it, but it has simply gotten more and more lost and twisted up as the decades have passed, rather than towards any certainty. They all (and some, much more than others) to some degree, cry out, "...., but WHY, 'the quantum'?'
*Heaven help your algorithmic feed, if you start searching 'Quantum Gravity', rather than, 'Loop Quantum Gravity'; your 'WooWoo*' alarms will be going off constantly. *WooWoo, as in pseudoscience, para-psychological, consciousness as universe, type material; not, - the noise your alarms make.
Langham is close but he let's Christianity taint his work causing him to confuse the god of the Bible with the God of reality. Everything. Or infinity. While the Goddess and first cause is actually, absolute nothingness. But Chris Langham is right about the fact that it is a language or data or information at the heart of reality as the framework for everything else to be built upon. This is a language that is above computation, as computation itself could not add qualia and emotion, this is something that comes from a different type of language and mathematics. It's also a way of computing cardinality in infinity and translating it to the physical through things like the speed of light and the Planck unit as well as the number zero and zero degrees temperature. Roger Penrose is close as well. But they don't realize the significance of objectivity and subjectivity as the first thing to arise out of nothingness as mind discovers itself.
Could they all be true?
idk man i think theyre all true
1 to 10 - not even close to the truth. The truth is not a TOE but instead a MOE - Model of Everything. Theories are merely people playing around with thoughts of highly improbable causations and with little practical value or application. That includes currently accepted theories such as Newtonian gravity and General Relativity - both of which cannot produce an anomaly free gravitational model for Earth. No theory has been able to do that.
Idealism is not panpsychism
That's correct, Idealism should replace Panpsychism on that slide. Hoffman's related it to panpsychism before but Idealism is more accurate. Thanks!
None of them is consistent, no fundation at all.
Coool...,p
@@francescoghiretti1239 coolio daddio
lqg? more like lqbs
You rank Sting Theory at 3rd place? No.
@@percheroneclipse238 Should it be higher or lower and why?
Have you seen non-scientific 4th place?
@@paskaziemia5347 Fusions of consciousness? I’ve heard other idealist theories.
L
@@JuanR-i2w M