Get the Desktop App for Battle.net Now
- All your games in 1 place
- Log in once
- Automatic game updates
The Path to Understanding the Rational Universe (this is a synopsis of some work I am recompiling)
When Einstein looked through the Hooker 100 inch reflector at Mt. Wilson and realized his cosmological constant was incorrect; I suspect his realization was accompanied by a creepy feeling that even he himself could not quite pin down.
Consensus and assumptions can be difficult to overcome even with good reasoning. One must consider many things collectively to get on a path to a final answer regarding the true nature of our perceived universe. While a high mental capacity is always helpful, knowing how to separate marketing information from actual data when considering observations is indispensable.
A short list would include:
1. The necessity of dark energy and dark matter to model an intelligible cosmology based on cold war age thinking.
2. The nearly 50% metallicity discrepancy between what the big bang predicts and what is actually observed in the universe.
3. The homogeneity necessary for big bang hyper-inflation as assumed before the CMBR has no means to explain the formation of large scale structures observed in the early universe. There is no structure to create structure with, nor a means for structure to be created.
4. Blatant violations of the M Sigma relation being revealed on a nearly daily basis. Dwarf galaxies harboring super massive black holes remain impossible to explain within any iteration of big bang cosmology. Not to mention recently discovered globular galaxies, I do not recall big bang cosmologist predicting those.
5. The G, K, and M dwarf problems combined with contradictory star populations in both open and globular clusters.
6. Problems inherent to forming a hydrostatic equilibrium of plasma from a localized thermal nuclear ignition. A problem particularly difficult when considering large stars...
7. Gamma Ray bursts of impossible power and duration within the context of big bang cosmology.
8. Where does magnetism come from in Big Bang cosmology and how can the Big Bang create stars without it?
9. I could go on and on and on with this list... but this will suffice for now.
The individual expertise of the audience will be the determining factor in whether my ideas have any merit or lack of it. Please consider the following before continuing:
1. Inductive reasoning argues black holes exist. - Star S0-16 orbits within 600x the theoretical Schwarzschild radius of the Milky Way’s Super Massive Black Hole (SMBH) (Ghez, Salim, Hornstein, Tanner, Lu, Morris, Becklin, Duchene, 2004). The gas mass currently accreting into the Milky Way’s SMBH will come much closer and allow us to indirectly confine the Schwarzschild radius further. This would further strengthen the argument for the existence of black holes. Moreover, there is no currently known state of degeneracy pressure greater than that of Neutrons capable of halting a massive star core from collapsing into a black hole construct. While other states of degeneracy may yet be discovered preventing a black hole from forming, I choose to remain with current star mass and degeneracy scaling relationships as a guide.
2. Abductive reasoning suggests conserving physical information (quantum determinism and reversibility in the form of the quantum evolution operators) within the entropy of a black hole horizon occurs by a currently unknown method. Information conservation is necessary otherwise it could lead to information destruction whether by Hawking radiation (Hawking, 1975) or vanishing beyond the horizon forever. While a formal information conservation principle for the universe is still vigorously debated, I am clearly planting my flag in favor of one.
3. Based on this previous abductive reasoning I am making a further inductive argument. Specifically that there are implied consequences to conserving physical information in the entropy of a black hole horizon nobody has ever considered to my knowledge.
4. Following the inductive argument I make a number of deductions and a few predictions.
Assuming the existence of black holes, the number of possible quantifiable states of mass, entropy, and physical information within the construct seem fairly limited from our perspective as of now. It is indeed possible the worst case scenario in terms of human understanding turns out being the truth, that scenario being; there is no hawking radiation, horizons do not have entropy nor do they preserve physical information, and that everything beyond the horizon is irretrievably lost. I have not yet resigned myself to such a level of pessimism. I am not yet willing to accept that a perceivable universe is indeed not fully understandable without requiring one to commit certain suicide in effort to gain further knowledge. Moreover, a universe requiring one to commit certain suicide as the sole path to attain further knowledge would prove to be inherently irrational to any sapient life form. Just to be clear I am promoting a Rational Universe Theory defined as such:
Rational Universe Theory: All physical laws, forces, and properties governing a perceivable universe are capable of being fully understandable by a sapient being without requiring a sapient being to commit certain suicide in effort to gain further knowledge.
There is currently a growing scientific consensus that black holes preserve physical information in the entropy of their horizons by some unknown method. This is a precept of various holographic universe models. Ideas promoted by Susskind and others regarding holography led to a thought experiment resulting in a black hole merger paradox.
By "Physical information" I am referring to quantum determinism and reversibility in the form of the quantum evolution operators via some as of yet undiscovered method. While I am unaware of the leading current theory for maintaining physical information in a black hole horizon, all seem to include concepts regarding quantum gravitational fluctuations of the horizon membrane as the primary method.
Even without a formal theory of quantum gravity, there is a huge problem looming even if we indeed had one. If black holes preserve physical information in the entropy of their horizons it would be in a constant state of change. Material is constantly being added to a black hole so the horizon would always be preserving new physical information over time. Meaning all black hole horizons are utterly unique entities based on the black holes ever changing entropy, physical information, and mass which is being represented.
Allow yourself to imagine the entropy and information of a black hole horizon as a simple dataset. If black holes preserve datasets in their horizons, those datasets would be in a constant state of change. New data is constantly being added to the existing dataset maintained in a black holes horizon over time. Every black hole horizon dataset is a unique entity based on the black hole horizon’s ever changing dataset and the mass which is being represented.
Setting localization issues of the black hole horizons aside (black hole horizon localization issues are largely the result of assumptions that will be dealt with later) allow us to consider a black holes ever changing dataset taking the form of a sphere. What would be the point of maintaining a dataset in the form of a sphere be if the black hole was not representing something beyond the horizon boundary of the sphere?
If mass or anything else is represented beyond the dataset sphere of the horizon it implies a spatial and temporal separation between the dataset being maintained in the horizon and what it is being representing beyond it. Black holes in this respect share the unique characteristic of maintaining a dataset or identity inside out from our perspective. If this is the case there are two possibilities with regard to theoretical black hole coalescence events or merger attempts.
In the event gravitational wave signatures of black hole coalescence and ring down are discovered, I do not envy those attempting to complete the following task. To describe binary black hole inspiral and eventual coalescence accurately we would need to do the following. First it would be necessary to develop a formal theory of quantum gravity. With a formal theory of quantum gravity we would then need to mathematically create a black hole using that particular models space time.
This black hole would need to have a changing dataset in its horizon and mass beyond the horizon being represented. Then we would need to mathematically explain how the unique datasets from the separate horizons would scramble, merge, or coalesce datasets without the mass being represented interacting since they are spatially separated from the horizon. With datasets in the horizons scrambling or scrambled, we then must mathematically describe how the mass being represented merges and how this new entity sorts everything out in the end. Moreover, the only means by which to verify such a theory would require the certain death of an observer in the effort to gain information.
It seems to me black holes cannot have their cake and eat it too. Intuition suggests this to be a seemingly impossible event and utterly irrational in requiring an observer’s suicide to verify. This is the "Black Hole Merger Paradox" or "Black Hole Merger Problem". It is also worth noting that Cosmological singularities will also need to be explained using the same quantum gravity theory derived in this model.
Black Holes can never merge and will opt for entropy and physical information conservation through reassignment over the corruption of coalescence. Binary black holes must surrender entropy, physical information, and mass before their unique horizons can interact in this scenario. If black holes must abort each other by their very nature because it is rational to do so, you can see exactly where I am going with this. The universe did not begin with a single cosmological singularity failure or irrational self-destructing black hole (I am doing the “Standard Model” a favor here, this is one consensus they do not have a consensus on); I argue it was generated in a process by the abortion or synthesis of 2 or more black holes. Producing everything we see and concealing a process that has been until now out of mankind’s collective perception. The purpose of the following is to establish a new philosophy or way of thinking regarding black holes as a construct in the universe. This philosophical argument will be followed by further papers including mathematical models based on the ideas put forward here.
The 8th possible solution to the black hole information paradox revealed here involves physical information being preserved within black hole entropy only to be deterministically assigned later. If black holes must preserve physical information within the entropy of their horizons, black holes must opt for physical information reassignment over the corruption of coalescence. I feel I have argued for this fairly convincingly with my "black hole merger paradox". Black holes must abort one another before their horizons can interact for that would allow for the corruption of physical information preserved within them; this is how our perceived universe began. To verify this solution does not require the certain suicide of the observer, it can be simulated on the smallest theoretical scale possible. This brings into question, what exactly is a black hole?
Black holes are temporally neutral states of mass at temporally perceived infinite gravity simultaneously representing non temporal mass which is not governed by the inverse square law occupying a temporal volume. This is due to the fact that non temporal mass being represented by the temporally neutral black hole is outside our temporal horizon.
Moreover, non-temporal mass occupying a temporal volume and temporally neutral state of mass represented by the black hole are also both reflections of one another. The tidal interaction between 2 non temporal masses will be reflected in the temporally neutral horizon of the black holes represented. Sufficient distortion of the temporally neutral horizon will lead to temporally perceived singularity failure and the synthesis of all elements currently attributed to primordial big bang Nucleosynthesis. Non temporal mass is the force we perceive as magnetism occupying a volume of vacuum space. If I am correct, there should be something left in the vicinity of a Type 1a supernova progenitor roughly 341,505,466 km in diameter. This transparent object will gravitational lens light for it is the unfurled dynamo of the star that once was. In addition, all gamma ray bursts originating from a mature elliptical galaxy should have some commonality. For any 2GM/C^2 “Schwarzschild radius” will simultaneously be representing a 2GM/C “Vick radius” of magnetism.
What we temporally perceive as "dark energy" is actually resulting from black holes exiling temporal mass (temporally assigned magnetism) back into magnetism (non-temporal mass). A temporally perceived black hole gravitational radius will also not lens light, but the non-temporal mass (magnetism in a volume of space) which is represented and not governed by the inverse square law will. This is the temporally perceived galactic scale gravitational lensing currently attributed to temporally perceived dark matter. When black holes get to close to one another something special occurs and that is Singulosynthesis. The process by which physical information and entropy maintained in a black hole horizon is reassigned. It is how the universe began and is still occurring.
There are 2 possible paths to final solutions of the problem, first is a temporally centric version of the solution which was based on gravitational tidal effects of 2 or more temporally neutral horizons. The second is non-temporally centric version which is based on tidal effects of non-temporal mass being reflected into temporally neutral horizons. Reason suggests model 2 is the optimum path and is the one I am working on. Both will require simulation to verify which model is optimum. Regardless of which model is simulated, temporally neutral mass at temporally perceived infinite gravity has a mass density of roughly D = 2.56872778e^20 kg m^3 based on the best current observations and is the starting point. Some of the constants in physics really do need to be tightened up to make modeling easier... Nobody can really scoop this, but a collection of exceptional individuals could possibly figure it out together. The mass density figure listed above was derived in another paper of mine based on observation, reasoning, and no irrational assumptions.
The only path to a unified quantum theory of everything begins with a simulated replication of the deterministic process (Singulosynthesis) that governs the simulated universe we perceive and exist within on the smallest theoretical scale possible. I am well on my way in modeling this.
The Singulosynthesis universe began with 26.7865% dark matter (magnetism in a volume of space), 73.2135% matter (temporally assigned magnetism), and 0% dark energy. This accounts for the 46.427% metallicity discrepancy we observe based on predictions made by other more popular cosmological models. The universe never stopped producing big bang nucleosynthesis elements, we just never figured out how they were actually being produced.
The universe has been converting mass (temporally assigned magnetism) into non temporal mass (magnetism in a volume of space not governed by the inverse square law) since its beginning. All while reassigning physical information and entropy periodically when black holes venture too close to one another. This leads to the current composition of the universe being 15.5% matter (temporally assigned magnetism), 84.5% dark matter (magnetism in a volume of space), and 0% dark energy.
1 solar mass x .267865 = .267865 solar mass non fusible compacted magnetized volume of space: 53266 X10^30 kg
Our Suns has .732135 solar masses of fusible mass: 1.45589 X 10^30 kg
A temporally perceived gravitational radius is a temporally neutral representation of non-temporal mass as well (magnetized volume of space):
2GM/c^2 = Rs (Schwarzschild Radius)
(2 (6.67384e-11) (.53266 X10^30 kg)) / 299,792,458^2 = 791.069180m
7.10977523e19 / 299,792,458^2 = 791.069180m
Calculating minimum final degeneracy for temporal neutral mass at temporally perceived infinite gravity:
Volume of a Sphere= 4/3 Pi R^3
Volume of a Sphere = 4/3 Pi 495043536.1919463m
Volume of a Sphere = Pi 6.60058048e^8 m^3
Volume of a Sphere = 2.07363351e^9 m^3
Density = M/V
D = .53266e^30kg/2.07363351e^9 m^3
D = 2.56872778e^20 kg m^3
If you crushed the magnetic core dynamo at the center of our Sun into a temporally neutral horizon D = 2.56872778e^20 kg m^3 would be the temporally perceived mass density. The geometry of non-temporal mass is not governed by the inverse square law and leads to a Vick Radius where 2GM/c. The geometry of non- temporal mass also governs the temporal assignment of energy states.
Take the CMBR map and apply it to a sphere. Distort the sphere until the thermal gradient reaches a state of equilibrium. The shape revealed is the geometry of non-temporal mass (magnetism) when temporal energy states are assigned. Being temporally neutral, a temporally neutral horizon would have neutral entropy with potential entropy proportional to the surface area of the horizon.
This geometry will be the same for all synthesizing black holes regardless of mass. Improving our mapping of the CMBR will only help improve the model proposed. Ultimately, the geometry of non-temporal mass will be unified with the Higgs effect.
The only way to beat a black hole is simulation, but first you need to know what to simulate. Or, the universe inherently irrational to a sapient life form.
Ghez, A. M., Salim, S., Hornstein, S. D., Tanner A., Lu J. R., Morris M., Becklin, E. E., Duchene, G., Nov 2004, Stellar Orbits Around the Galactic Center Black Hole, UCLA Division of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1574, http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0306130v2.pdf (March 14, 2013)
Hawking, S.W., Particle creation by black holes, Commun. Math. Phys. 43 (1975), 199—220, http://prac.us.edu.pl/~ztpce/QM/CMPhawking.pdf (March 8, 2013)
(I have another 500 references or so in a list, I considered many observations collectively while coming up with this)
© 2013 Jimmy Vick
Ultimately there 3 possibilities:
1. Einstein is incorrect regarding the speed of light and observer reference frames.
2. The construct of a temporally perceived gravitational radius (what we now call a black hole) must not exist due to its influence on the propagation of light via the inverse square law throughout the universe.
3. Einstein and I are both correct and the deterministic process that governs the universe can be replicated only through simulation on the smallest theoretical scale possible.
Edited by Salsasweats#1112 on 7/10/2014 3:22 AM PDT
Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.
Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.
Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.