Is there a real chance that there is a multiverse?

[Alex K]

@bennyboy - my stagepiano allows to quickly change from equal temperament to various historic ones and just intonations, and playing a triad and switching from just intonation in the appropriate key to equal was indeed so striking, For a few seconds you think - wait that sounds wrong with all those beats, is that what we're usually using??? And after a few seconds, one is used to it again. Strange isn't it...

[Arkilogue]

My model predicts the expansive dark energy constant to within .5%
Predicts a slight negative curvature of space-time.
Predicts rapid initial inflation followed by slow plateau of increasing expansion.
Predicts 5 times more matter entangled with the creation of ours.
Predicts a six fold division of the CMB and hemispheric asymmetry.

Oh, I get it now.  You don't know what "pre-" means.

Okay, so Arki I can see that you have learned about wikipedia, and how links work.  This explains why some of your vocabulary sounds sciencey.  Now show us anything you HAVEN'T linked.  Show us your scientific and mathematical contribution to our understanding of the universe.  No more links, please, or vague talk about circles inscribed with transdimensional doohickeys.  Tell us, exactly, how you have arrived at your conclusions, and are so confidently sure of them that you have stated them as facts, even using words like "obviously."

"Predicts" in the same way a circular bucket of water predicts circular internal waves when the bucket is vibrating.

You mean how information works. Ever hear of the quantum nucleation theory of universe production? Neither had I till I refined my model and in further contemplation of metatarsal propagation, coupled with watching a video on ice crystal nucleation in super cooled water when struck, I put the two together and came up with the term "quantum nucleation"

So I looked up "quantum nucleation universe" and I found a lot....a whole lot. And that happens a lot.

https://www.classe.cornell.edu/rsrc/Home...litons.pdf
http://www.ctc.cam.ac.uk/outreach/origin..._three.php
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0110/0110012v2.pdf

"Transdimentional?" I'm fairly certain I've never used that word to describe anything in my model. You're more than welcome to quote me and prove me wrong. While you're at it, what exactly did I describe as "obvious" so I can give you a clearer answer?

My confidence comes from it's comprehensive predictive power of universal phenomena in the most elegant and self sufficient form I've ever seen. It uses known physics and processes to unfold an space patterned for specific internal wave-forms (micro-quanta) by larger membranes of space-time bent around them (macro-quanta).

I'm sure scholars of history would find very interesting that these very basic shape relationships are rife throughout ancient and modern religious iconography but I'm sure you're not interested.

---

As an interesting side note into the study of vibration, the naturally arising mathematic order in music gives us the 8 note octave with 12 semitones.  
http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~mrubinst/tuning/12.html

It does nothing of the sort.  The naturally arising "mathematic order" of sound very quickly leads to unacceptable levels of dissonance, and tuning systems are a (largely failed) attempt to reconcile the mathematical chaos.  It relies on the deliberate DE-tuning of notes in order to mediate a variety of harmonic and melodic functions in something like a piano keyboard, while still keeping close enough to harmonics that the ear will accept it.

It doesn't work very well, by the way.  The major/minor chords in a 12-tone system sound like total shit.  It's only because we hear this shit all the time that we've come to accept say a piano sound as "beautiful."  If you hear a scale tempered to a single key, and then listen to an equal-tempered piano, I guarantee you'll feel like throwing up.  The major and especially the minor thirds are noticeably sour, for example, and the leading tone, if derived from the V chord's natural harmonics, is pretty far from any of the harmonics of the tonic.

It seems to me you've been thinking about the numbers 8 and 12, and you want to make a numerological link to sound.  But you might as well start making numerological links to the number "10," on the basis that we have 10 fingers-- it's a useless relationship to draw, or to think about.

You are talking about the Pythagorean Comma and the spiral of fifths, yes?

The further division of space time within a universe lead geometrically to 4 circles of fourths and a fifth (prior) torus that spirals down through them.

And lmao that you mention the hand....make a fist.....it's a prior "5th" that vertically wraps around 4 horizontal fingers.

Also found in the structure of the heart 4 chambers (that are now pair specific) are surrounded both inwardly and outwardly by a spiral muscle.

Going even deeper in the structure of DNA: 4 nucleotides that are pair specific, wrapped on either side by a spiral structure.

And here is tying it up all together linking DNA structure with the vibrational order of the fabric of space-time through an ionized cloud of inert dust cooled in micro-G @ 4:01 (turn on subtitles)






Not really a big surprise that these stacking structures have a kind of fractal similarity (holon) at scale. The universe builds upon it's own patterns. The question is "what is the original pattern that is rendering all this regular information in formation?"

That's what I have sought.

[Alex K]

Neither does the BBT's singularity.
Matter? You do know that matter didn't form till after expansion started, right?

Exactly. Very unfortunate that it is always visually presented erroneously. Has anyone here ever seen the singularity represented from the inside? Because there is no outside....

The atomic matter we are familiar with didn't start forming until a few nano-seconds after inflation. Atomic "matter" is 99.9999999999996% empty space...even the protons and neutrons in the nucleus. There is a very very tiny amount of real substance, flung into and extremely specific and reliable nested structure basically described as a spherical border made by a point, flying around in probability field around a larger spherical center....which is also a spherical field of motion made by smaller points.

The fundamental substance of matter is neither created nor destroyed. The "creation" (unfolding, lofting, "prismation") of a universe simply flings it into atomic form and motion in a stabilized vacated space.

---

Don't be so impatient, I'm sure we'll see his maths outlining the matter creation soon enough

The model predicts the spatial patterning of matter. Matter creation is unnecessary.
Space "creation" for the fundamental matter to take atomic form and move (time) is what is necessary.

While part of me wishes I could spit it out to you in a neat mathematical sentence, the majority of me is glad i can't....for a number of reasons. I'm 100% certain it can be though.

---

Prediction of order in the Standard Model of particle generation:

In this model, the prior to inflation state is a field of matter (quagma, quark gluon soup) in gravitational equilibrium taking up all available space forever. The minimum geometry for a 3d space in tension equilibrium is a tetrahedron. 4 points, 6 lines.

A single quantum (finite measurable wave-form, single motion of action) of this unified state is a single universe, and to create that space, an equal/opposite reaction of the original substance occurs. This is a radial reaction...the substance moves both inwards and outwards to vacate space between two curved structures: A central sphere of absolute mater that is "still" and an outer sphere shell of absolute matter now flung into motion (between other universes). The finite space of a universe is between these two curved features and they both exert gravitational influence.

Because the substance moves relatively both outwards (up) and inwards (down), the new geometry of the field between the two is an upward tetrahedron superimposed over a downwards pointed tetrahedron. A "star-tetrahedron", it has 8 points and 12 lines. 8 "modes of change" and 12 "modes of expression". This would be the fields macro and micro unit cell like a lattice, not a single star-tet.

So if this star-tetrahedron describes the micro/macro field of the universe, inter-penetrating and surrounding all universal phenomena, I look to subatomic particle organization to see if there is any 8 or 12 fold structural order.

There are 12 fundamental fermions and 8 gluons that bind them together into atomic form.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Pa...luons.html

Also found "The Eightfold Way"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eightfold_Way_(physics)
In physics, the Eightfold Way is a term coined by American physicist Murray Gell-Mann for a theory organizing subatomic baryons and mesons into octets (alluding to the Noble Eightfold Path of Buddhism). The theory was independently proposed by Israeli physicist Yuval Ne'eman and led to the subsequent development of the quark model.

As an interesting side note into the study of vibration, the naturally arising mathematic order in music gives us the 8 note octave with 12 semitones.
http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~mrubinst/tuning/12.html

Ok I can't sleep so I can just as well answer.
Dude that may all sound completely compelling to you, but you can't construct a serious cosmological or particle physics model with a bunch of words and a few numbers thrown in. It may sound superficially like that's what people did, but that's not how it works. When you say I have a new geometry, where are the differential geometry calculations outlining it, or the group theory? A geometry of what exactly anyway? The many other words you use - if they have a clear scientific or mathematical definition, it is only known to yourself. How does your "star tetrahedron" describe or govern the field? Which field? How does it describe the field and how does this field square with the known symmetries of the standard model? Are you proposing a new discrete symmetry? If so is it quantitatively compatible with known particle masses and interactions? That's 10 pages of calculations right there.

One can propose geometric symmetries (so called flavor symmetries) on the fermions, but then you have to specify the group representations of all known fields, and how they are broken by some dynamical mechanism to yield the observed masses and quark and lepton mixing parameters. That's 10 pages of calculations without which you don't have a model. The problem is that you can vaguely throw together an infinite number of schemes which are all wrong. Only when it quantitatively fits with known physics in all detail does one have anything.

For instance, Gell-Mann and Zweig and all the others working on this in the 60s and later didn't just say, look, the number 8 looks promising, let's make it 8. They said, ok if we formally introduce three quarks (and the 8 fold way only employs the lightest 3, u d s, not the rest because they are to heavy for the scheme to work), they will exhibit a SU(3)xSU(3)xU(1)xU(1) partially conserved symmetry structure, and from the mathematical representations of these symmetry groups and the symmetry breaking, they could predict the light mesons and baryons, and calculate some of their masses. One of the structures appearing there is the adjoint representation of SU3 which happens to have 8 elements, but there are others with 6 or 10 etc... It's not a fundamental model though, just an old incomplete albeit very useful effective description of the bound states of the lightest three quarks. What I write here alone though is meaningless without the hundreds of pages of calculations establishing quantitatively what it all means.

To have a serious model for cosmic inflation, you need to specify the fields driving it and their dynamics and the analytic form of its potential from which you can derive parameters such as the spectral parameter and scalar to tensor, and then if you wish to address matter creation, a reheating process and numerical studies how baryon asymmetry is generated. This is a loooot of work.

[bennyboy]

You are talking about the Pythagorean Comma and the spiral of fifths, yes?

The further division of space time within a universe lead geometrically to 4 circles of fourths and a fifth (prior) torus that spirals down through them.

And lmao that you mention the hand....make a fist.....it's a prior "5th" that vertically wraps around 4 horizontal fingers.

Also found in the structure of the heart 4 chambers (that are now pair specific) are surrounded both inwardly and outwardly by a spiral muscle.

Going even deeper in the structure of DNA: 4 nucleotides that are pair specific, wrapped on either side by a spiral structure.

This is borderline schizophrenic. You are connecting ideas that should not be connected. You're also completely ignoring what I said about music-- there IS no natural order or progression to the sounds, it is our attempt to make order out of chaos which leads us to a variety of tuning systems. I've explicitly explained why you SHOULD NOT make a connection, and you've gone on to make more, even flimsier, connections.

You are not on a good path intellectually. You're about one Holy Book or one package of Kool-Aid from thinking you're the Messiah, I think.

I've asked before, but I really would like an answer for interest's sake-- have you been diagnosed for schizophrenia or anything like that?

[Alex K]

You are talking about the Pythagorean Comma and the spiral of fifths, yes?

The further division of space time within a universe lead geometrically to 4 circles of fourths and a fifth (prior) torus that spirals down through them.

And lmao that you mention the hand....make a fist.....it's a prior "5th" that vertically wraps around 4 horizontal fingers.

Also found in the structure of the heart 4 chambers (that are now pair specific) are surrounded both inwardly and outwardly by a spiral muscle.

Going even deeper in the structure of DNA: 4 nucleotides that are pair specific, wrapped on either side by a spiral structure.

This is borderline schizophrenic. You are connecting ideas that should not be connected. You're also completely ignoring what I said about music-- there IS no natural order or progression to the sounds, it is our attempt to make order out of chaos which leads us to a variety of tuning systems. I've explicitly explained why you SHOULD NOT make a connection, and you've gone on to make more, even flimsier, connections.

You are not on a good path intellectually. You're about one Holy Book or one package of Kool-Aid from thinking you're the Messiah, I think.

I've asked before, but I really would like an answer for interest's sake-- have you been diagnosed for schizophrenia or anything like that?

I'd be very careful and hesitant about the mental health conclusions because I've met plenty of people doing exactly the same thing, it's so common the theory institute here has a whole cupboard full of that stuff that was sent to them. It's just as you say, not a good intellectual path. It's all superficial flimsy connections based on lose associations, in essence akin to the cargo cult version of theoretical physics.

[bennyboy]

My childhood was strongly marked by a schizophrenic friend of my father's. He had the highest IQ of anybody I've ever met, and he made strange and wondrous connections that blew my mind as a child. In retrospect, I don't think they were good connections, but I became fascinated with thinking outside the box. I think Arki's IQ is similarly very high, but he is seeing too many meaningful figures in the Rorschach Test called life.

[Arkilogue]

My childhood was strongly marked by a schizophrenic friend of my father's.  He had the highest IQ of anybody I've ever met, and he made strange and wondrous connections that blew my mind as a child.  In retrospect, I don't think they were good connections, but I became fascinated with thinking outside the box.  I think Arki's IQ is similarly very high, but he is seeing too many meaningful figures in  the Rorschach Test called life.

Only a few meaningful ones: Sphere, tube, disk and torus...in that order. The star-tetrahedral field is also cuboctahedral. As seen in Rauscher's and Haramein's 3d solotion to Einstien's field equations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Rauscher



This is my rendition by completely different means.



The image is meant to be seen in 3d, the blue and gren circles are the cross sections of nested tori. The red spoked wheel is a disk dividing an upper and lower hemisphere. The purple object is a "pillar torus", the EM field of the universe....like my avatar.

[bennyboy]

Are your parents hippies by any chance? Gonna tell us now that the early Hindu and Buddhist art represents their secret knowledge of modern physics? Gonna go to "I'm not saying it's aliens, but. . . "? Where are we going with all this, bud?

[Alex K]

Arki, you are really going overboard with the analogies and connections. You need to try and stop, and learn to examine where actual real deep connections exist, and where it's just superficial similarities. By not filtering that, you just get lost in nonsense

[Arkilogue]

Nice mandala Benny, here is an original of the Hopi Medicine wheel.

What do you get if you spin it along the veriticle axis in 3d?

Here's the Celtic Cross:


What shapes do you get if you spin it along the vertical axis?

Here is the Dhal shield of ancient India which spread to Persia and surrounding countries.
https://www.google.com/search?q=dhal+shi...PyPnVbM%3A



I'm sure you get the picture.

---

Are your parents hippies by any chance?  Gonna tell us now that the early Hindu and Buddhist art represents their secret knowledge of modern physics?  Gonna go to "I'm not saying it's aliens, but. . . "?  Where are we going with all this, bud?

I don't know if Elizabeth Rauscher is a Hindu, a Buddist or an alien, but she is very well educated...and funny you mention hippies

Elizabeth A. Rauscher is an American physicist and parapsychologist. She is a former researcher with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the Stanford Research Institute, and NASA.[1]

In 1975 Rauscher co-founded the Berkeley Fundamental Fysiks Group, an informal group of physicists who met weekly to discuss quantum mysticism and the philosophy of quantum physics. David Kaiser argued in his book, How the Hippies Saved Physics that this group helped to nurture ideas which were unpopular at the time within the physics community, but which later, in part, formed the basis of quantum information science.[2]