ENTROPY-POTENTIAL ENERGY, How it related to spacetime

Hi!
Here is that NASA link concerning Black holes, Superluminar jets, neutron stars etc.
I don't see any conflict with what I presented. (Of course, since I'm prejudice, I might be blinded and cannot see the conflict).
Do you see any conflicting evidence?
jal
superluminar jets
black holes

"BLACK HOLES
Black holes are the result of the collapsing of the 3d configuration of space back to its previous 2d configuration. Since Black Holes are recycling 3d space back into the 2d space and since the universe is suppose to be expanding then the conclusion is that there is more 2d space being made into 3d space then what is being recycled to 2d space by the black holes. Not all information is lost."

COOL STUFF!!!!

WaterBreath... your link to Dark Energy Stars is one that I could not pass.

It's another possible reason that could explain "DARK MATTER", gamma ray and what I have been presenting.
jal

Hi!
It is time to bring these 3 threads together with matter/particles.
HOW GRAVITY AFFECTS THE SHAPE OF SPACETIME/SPOT

What would be the shape of spacetime in gravity? We have been told that spacetime is bent by gravity. We have been told that photons are red shifted by gravity. We have been told that lenght increases as you get closer to a black hole. Therefore, what would be the shape of spacetime that would cause these observations? (THE QUESTION THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASKED.)

See the shape of spacetime in progressively increasing gravity. (space, earth, sun, big sun, and black hole. Or, if you like, no particle to progressing to more particles.) Therefore, there should be some observations in quantum physics.

It becomes obvious that there should be red shift perpendicular to the horizon and that there should be blue shift horizontal to the horizon. The blue shift cannot be detected. However, the bending is detected.

There should be variations in the experimental observations of the Inverse Square Law. The RADIUS IS DIFFERENT (X,Y,Z), THE SURFACES AREA IS DIFFERENT (X,Y,Z). SPACE IS NOT A SPHERE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF GRAVITY. Therefore, space MUST have an internal structure. THE EVENT HORIZON OF A BLACK HOLE IS 2 DIMENSIONAL.
The reason that we do not detect a difference when measuring forces that depend on the Inverse Square Law, is because of the internal structure of the packed "spots". In 3d there are still 12 "kissing numbers".

However, when space is close to the event horizon of a black hole the 3d dimension is squashed and the event horizon is 2 dimensional and the kissing numbers are reduced to 6.


The bending of light by a gravitational body was predicted by Einstein (1912) a few years before the publication of General Relativity in 1916. For a point mass the defection can be calculated and is one of the classical tests of general relativity.
See
Deflecting of light by a gravitational field
Here is how the packing of spots would look like in gravity.


Comments on these presentations are appreciated.
Is GR and SR being violated or being explained?
jal

Hi!
It appears that the Heim's Theory has a "Big Bang" version similar to mine.
Introduction to Heim's Mass Formula

jal

Do you mean this, or some "kissing spheres" model?

Hi!
It appears that the Heim's Theory has a "Big Bang" version similar to mine.
Introduction to Heim's Mass Formula

I mean which only consists of a dynamics of geometrical area quanta.

Let's talk about your theory in your thread
jal

Hi!
It appears that the Heim's Theory is a version similar to mine.
He used the hexagonal lattice (6 sides) which is the densest packing of circles in the plane.
see CirclePacking
The largest number of unit circles which can touch a given unit circle is six. For spheres, the maximum number is 12.

See the following
protosimplex/summary

Here is my visual interpretation (to be modified as I improve my knowledge)

You can chose more than one way to view the topology. However, the packing is the same. In 2d there are 6 comunication paths. In 3d there are 12 communication paths.

Here is how I visualize the dynamic flux elements.

This is the voids in the center of the spot.
jal
edit: added ref to hexagonal lattice

Hi!
I will try to give my simple explanation of the 12 dimensions found in the protosimplex/summary.
protosimplex/summary

He used the hexagonal lattice (6 sides) which is the densest packing of circles in the plane.
Expanding that to 3d you then have cubes or sphere packing which has 12 connections. ( do a search on circle packing and sphere packing). You can think of those connections as being the 12 dimensions existing in 3d.
I reject cubes for the reason that solitons are not cubic. That leave only sphere that will pack in a 3d hexagonal lattice.
Each point of contact in 3d, (there are 12), can be thought of as doing a dual role.
Connecting to a lower dimension. Yes, .... I mean lower. Do not think of higher, hidden or curled up. You'll lose your way.... just like everyone else.
We are all familiar with 2d. You won't get lost.
The dual role that is played by each of those contact point is to link to the 2d and to give homogeneity to 3d. There cannot be less than one contact at any one time.
There cannot be more than 6 contact at any one time. Why 6? Because 2d has only 6 contact points.
The contact point do not need to be the same ones all the time. They can rotate among the 12 contact point in 3d.
There does not need to be 6 contact points at all times.
The contact points from 3d do not need to connect to the same contact points in 2d. Movement/rotation is permitted.
I cannot show you an image of this 3d statement. However, you can see it in the 2d image in the previous post where I divided the time and space into a 4X4 grid. In 2d you can see the the metron/spot/circle has 4 lens. The 4 lens make up the soliton. The solitons are dynamic.
In 3d, the best image that I can do, for now, is the following:
(If you make a better one.... can I borrow it?) (Not yours Zephir. They are only good for preschoolers)
Jal

Hi jal

When I compare time dilation from SR and time dilation from GR I get the following formula.

(1) V^2=2GM/R where

V is velocity of ?
G is gravitational constant
M is mass of ?
R is radius ?

Converting this into a density function (of space ?) I get

(2) Density = V^2/2(pi)RG

The thing is that this density is only a two dimensional function.

A one dimensional density (D1) is mass divided by a point (singularity).
A two dimensional density (D2) is mass divided by an area.
A three dimensional density (D3) is mass divided by a volume.

Didn't your spot idea start out as a two dimensional object?

This may lead to nothing but I found it interesting.

Hi! Montec!...
Now that I found a partners....eh..eh... with the math.
protosimplex/summary discusses gravity, area of interaction etc. with a circle which shows less and less possible interaction as you get toward the middle. ( I think)
I must study/learn more about how it all fits together.
You should have asked me before I discovered H.T. with the math. now I am probably saying something that is not tenable.
My present thinking (under review/change) what we call gravity (G) is because of the shape of spacetime. (in the extreme ... a black hole (a 2d surface) )
Matter is sitting in a dip in the smooth structure of space time. This would give us the short range forces (W) which get stronger the farther they go from the center. (like going up a hill... you need more energy to go higher as the hill gets steeper.)

Which to me, is a connection to the lower dimension (2d).
As far as GR and SR. I think.... spacetime=spacetime'. In order to achieve that then space OR time must increase/decrease. depending on which side of the equation you are (frame of reference.)
I hope that you are interested in studying the meanings of this new theory with me. That could be fun. Better than s.f.
( It has the math. to be called a theory)
From my first posts I was asking if someone knew if the math was out there.
All I had was an understanding and sound logic going for me. Now I got to examine if I have a theory.
Have you got any pictures that we can share for explaining "spots"/metrons?

Jal

I had a PM from someone too shy to post here.
“How do the 12 “kissing” points of 3d connect to the 6 “kissing” points of 2d?”
Here goes a very simple explanation.
1) Follow the energy flow. Potential energy at 100% to the succeeding levels. There is more energy locked up in 2d then in 3d.
2) Follow the complexity. Entropy which is no movement in no dimension to more movements in more dimensions.
3) Make the smallest package possible. A circle.( a spacetime quanta)
4) Fill that package with as much energy as possible.
5) Put all those packages together. First, like packing pennies. (2d) Second, like filling a container with balls. (3d)
6) See... the touching points are the only ways that energy can go from one place to another place . Pennies, 2d, has 6 ”kissing numbers”. Balls, 3d, have 12 “kissing numbers.
7) Our universe is filled with these quantas of energy. We cannot notice the majority of them.
This has been studied for the last 50 years and there are still no answer.
Therefore, imagine that you have a ball on the table. Look under it. It is touching the table at only one point.
Roll the ball on the table. Still one point. Now image that the ball has 12 little dimples on it and that the table is a grid of dimples. In this situation if you roll the ball the dimples on the ball and the tables must line up. If they don’t line up then everything is going to go BUMP PETY BUMP BUMP PETY BUMP. ( GEE!!... SHAKING EVERYTHING UP AND MAKING WAVES).
How the 12 dimples in 3d line up/cycle with the 6 dimples of 2d is where the math is needed to describe OUR universe.
If there are no dimples on the ball then the ball would fall through (fall off the edge of the table). The ball would be in free fall. The ball would be empty. That was the easiest to figure out ( 50 years ago). It’s called a deSitter universe.
If you want more than one kissing point, at the same time, with the table and the ball then things get hard.
Solution
Slide a piece of paper between the ball and the table. The piece of paper will represent the 2d. Yes,… you got it…. Fold the paper so that two dimples will line up. Three dimples….
Notice that 3d ball has not changed. The change is occurring in the paper which is the 2d level.
The next possibility
Could the shape of the ball be changed to get more than one dimple touching?
Einstein said, yes. In that case the ball would be like a blob of jelly where there is an accumulation of matter . An accumulation of matter is an accumulation of energy. When you accumulate as much energy in the same place it could be equal or more than the energy locked up in the 2d. So,… We would see that the energy could go back to the 2d surface. (horizon). These are improperly called “Black Holes”. The opposite is also happening. Energy is coming back from the 2d and into our 3d universe. We first notice the energy coming into our universe and we mistakenly called it “The Big Bang”. We mistakenly described the coming of that energy as “Expansion” and “inflation”. Now, if there is more energy coming into our universe than what is leaving then it is growing bigger. Supernovae explosions, gamma ray bursts, positron emission etc. could also be adding more energy from the 2d and into our 3d universe. However, the math would be able to tell.
Is this REALLY the way it is? My answer is … The math can figure out all of the possibilities but we must select the one that represents OUR universe.
It’s hard to do because everything is moving so fast it is very hard to actually see or to measure what is happening.
That is why there are so many ideas. They are trying to describe what is “reality”.
The best ideas come from, “Mrs. SUSY, MR. SLINKY, MR SLIM AND NOW FROM METRON SPOTS ”.
It would be nice if THEY could understand each other. THEY don’t have to believe, just understand.
I think this PRESENTATION should be understandable for the ordinary people, even for a 12 year old.
Yours truly,
Simple Jal

Hi!
The protosimplex/summary suggest that the piece of paper is being deformed.

"....While the are always bounded by geodesics, their area remains constant in a deformed lattice. The metronized state function then describes the projection of a deformed R6-lattice into any Euclidian reference space, where the metrons now appear in distorted or "condensed" form, in analogy to the projection of a curved lattice onto a plane sheet, or to lines of constant altitude on a map providing information on the level structure of a mountain range. In this respect there seems to exist a certain analogy to Regge poles. ..."

Guest_guest...
Thank you for highlight that point.
It will be interesting to see how the Burkhard Heim's Particle Structure Theory will be handling the energy tranfer from one dimension to another.
jal

Hi!
my post was
Hello everyone!

from last lines at protosimplex
My model (spots) should be considered as a starting visual. Not the final version.

Therefore, here is my arguement.
I’m not egoistic enough to think that since Einstein said that spacetime was something that out of the thousands of universities, that out of the thousands more of professors, that out of the thousands more of students, that I, me, thought of the following facts:
1) That the simple math of probability clearly shows that we can communicate with 2d (6 paths) and that it can communicate with our 3d. However, 10d (336 paths) cannot communicate with our 3d (12 paths). The energy is too diffused to come back to the 3rd dimension. You cannot put Humpty Dumpy back together again.
2) If you stand in front of the ocean (more dimensions) and give a shout, the energy will have too many ways to go and you will not get an echo. No conservation of energy.
3) Going to more dimensions is a losing proposition. You’ll never get anything back. It’s a one way street. It’s like water going over a cliff.
4) On the other hand, going to fewer dimensions has interesting possibilities.
If you face into a wall (2d) the energy will echo. You will have conservation of energy.
The only requirements are that a lot of kinetic energy needs to be built up to reach it.
5) You got to build a mountain of energy (not dig a hole ie. Black hole). Once you got your mountain built, putting more energy into your mountain becomes a losing proposition. It disappears into the structure of 2d (the horizon).
6) If you want energy from the 2d structure then you got to dig a hole (remove some "spots" from the 3d structure). A big explosion could do that digging for you.
I don’t think that I’m that smart that I could be the first.
jal