Quantum Relativity

[michael.stahl]

Quantum Relativity - Linking General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics

Albert Einstein created his famous theory of general relativity using
equations that describe an analogue world.

Like Newton before him, he was able to describe the motions in the
universe but Einstein’s’ analogue equations become indeterminate when
division by zero gives an infinite answer - a singularity.

Quantum theory tells us that the actual nature of reality at the
smallest scale is not analogue, but digital. The reason that
Einstein’s equations break down is because an analogue equation cannot
exactly describe a digital world, only approximate it.

To model a digital universe requires logical bits and bit operations -
the mathematics of the digital world. Another way of describing this
is mathematics is information and transposition.

Infinity cannot exist in a digital universe, something mathematicians
have known for centuries. The very act of counting describes
information and transposition, the whole number set on which all
mathematics is based requires transposition from one state to the
next: 0 to 1, 1 to 2, 2 to 3 etc. The analogue world is approximated
in mathematics by ratios of whole numbers.

Einstein gives us two counter-intuitive insights into the nature of
reality that can be used to understand a digital quantum universe,
namely that:

“Energy is Matter” – I’ll call it Enatter and “Time is Space” I’ll call it Tace.

The Universe is a digital Enatter – Tace (ET) matrix.

Two well known fields permeate throughout the universe:
Electro-Magnetic and Gravity.

In digital terms, a scalar field can simply be described as patterns
of zero’s and ones. More ones represent greater field intensity, less
ones less intensity. In digital mathematics, transposition happens in
discrete quantum so fields must transpose in bits.

The fewest bits required to describe a relative field is 2. One bit
describes the strength of the first point, the other the second. Using
a bit-swap transition function gives 4 possible transitions to which I
have attached names:

0:0 – Stable Low, 0:1 – Increasing, 1:0 Decreasing & 1:1 Stable High.

This bit transition function works beautifully to describe a scalar
quantum field. The exchange of bits over time models the flow of
charge. It also sets a maximum possible speed for state transition –
The speed of light. Every part of the field is relative, there are no
absolutes. Charge propagates along the field in both directions.

In order to describe the two observed fields in the universe (Gravity
and Electro-Magnetic) using this standard model of a scalar field
doubles the number of bits required to model each quantum ET
coordinate from 2 bits to 4.

A 4 bit, 2 field matrix has 16 permutations within which to encode
information as follows:

00>00, 00>01, 00>10, 00>11
01>00, 01>01, 01>10, 01>11
10>00, 10>01, 10>10, 10>11
11>00, 11>01, 11>10, 11>11

The 16 properties of every ET coordinate can be given labels that
align with commonly observed phenomenon. Both the Gravity and
Electro-Magnetic forces we measure are vector forces with magnitude
and direction. Encoding two fields as vectors using 16 labels could be
done as:

Tace, Anti-Tace, Up, Down, Left, Right, Back, Front

Enatter, Anti-Enatter, Up, Down, Left, Right, Back, Front

From this it can be concluded that the three dimensions we experience
are an emergent property of the ET matrix. The use of Anti vectors
allows for the generation of vector pairs conserving overall
neutrality in the matrix.

Enatter in the observed universe is not evenly distributed. The number
of tace transpositions required to traverse an area of higher enatter
density is more than those required traversing an area of lower
enatter density – tace becomes distorted leading to the observed
effect of gravity.

In distorted tace, the shortest path for transition propagation
between two points is curved when viewed from a reference frame of
Enatter; switching reference frames to Tace will cause enatter to
become distorted and curved. We ourselves experience Enatter as lumpy
and Tace as smooth because we are composed of lumpy Enatter.

The propagation of information through the ET (And Anti-ET) matrix
causes patterns to appear. Some of those patterns form more complex
patterns until at the scale of the cosmos they create the phenomenon
we observe. These patterns are studied and described in the computing
science of “Cellular Systems”, the most famous example being John
Conway’s “Game of Life”.

Some complex patterns are self re-enforcing and lead to stable 3
dimensional wave like patterns of transitions within the ET matrix.
These are the particles. If the self-reinforcing transition is stable
in just two dimensions we call it light.

Higher enatter concentration gradients lead to greater distortion of
the tace. The observed circumference of the transition front decreases
leading to shorter observed transition wave lengths. This matches the
observed properties.

Enatter and Tace are both concepts that are foreign to us. We don’t
experience Enatter and Anti-Enatter we experience Energy and Matter.
Similarly we don’t experience Tace and Anti-Tace we experience Space
and time.

By changing the terms as follows:

Time, Space, Up, Down, Left, Right, Back, Front

Energy, Matter, Up, Down, Left, Right, Back, Front

We gain an insight into how space-time and energy-matter vary.

In quantum terms Tace can only take on the property of Space or Time,
not both and Enatter can only be Energy or Matter not both. The
distortion of Tace can be represented by the ratio of Time(t) to
Space(s) particles counted over a particular distance. Take the
following sequence t.t.t.s.s, in this case the distortion is 3/2. For
s.t.t.t.t the distortion becomes 4/1 and so on.

It is simple to imagine a sequence where Tace is composed of only time
as follows (t.t.t.t.t). The ratio becomes 1/0 which a digital model
can easily handle, in common sense terms the clock is ticking but
there is no motion. Reversing this logic, there must exist tace
sequences that are all space (s.s.s.s.s). This would mean that motion
is happening without time.

Frozen time and space are foreign to our real-world experience. The
quantum world is very, very small and so the world we experience is
composed of very large Tace displacements. The probability of
generating a repeating pattern of just time or just space sequences
halves with every additional tace quanta. Only objects existing in
extreme gravity fields such as Protons and Black Holes will contain
unusually long time sequences in the tace at their centre.

Just as time clumps under the force of quantum gravity, space should
clump under a force of anti-gravity. Gravity and Anti-Gravity forces
should cause Time and Space to repel each other explaining Dark
Matter, Dark Energy & Hyper Inflation.

Just as the centre of galaxies where time is most concentrated
contains black holes, the centre of Intergalactic space should contain
black holes in time where space is most concentrated.

Using the same logic to examine Enatter means that an Enatter
co-ordinate have either energy(e) or mater(m) but not both. This
concept is strange, but if we change the labels we give to these
properties to electricity and magnetism it makes sense of our
experience. Just as ratios in tace give rise to distorted space-time,
ratios in enatter give rise to distorted electro-magnetism.

The interplay in Tace and Enatter distortions creates the universe.

We measure atoms as being composed of mostly empty space, suggesting
that the Enatter is very lumpy at an atomic scale. This brings the
relativistic effects of quantum gravity into play and may explain how
particle stability is achieved.

The weak interaction of Neutrinos with Enatter could be explained if
they are “anti-light” (Space-Time radiation) and interact with Enatter
via the gravity/anti-gravity forces only.

The evolution of the Universe is explained by propagation of
complexity (Entropy) within the ET and Anti-ET matrix. The distortion
of ET at all scales is fractal in nature.

The universe cannot be deterministic because infinite possible states
cannot be contained within a finite set.

I instinctively believe that this is also a theory of prime numbers
but I don’t yet know how to prove that.

Quantum relativity unifies physics’ two greatest theories - General
Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.

Michael Stahl

[apg]

Infinity cannot exist in a digital universe, something mathematicians have known for centuries.

There are aleph-null finite configurations in Conway's Game of Life. How is this not 'infinity'? (Indeed, any universal Turing machine must have an infinite memory store.)

[michael.stahl]

The possible outcomes are infinite, but the matrix itself is not. The pattern simply reflects back on itself creating ever more complex interactions.

[michael.stahl]

Clarification:
The matrix only explores the most complex pattern space in the infinite range of possibilities. It is that property that I believe links this theory to prime numbers.

[michael.stahl]

Taking the concept further, one might reasonably guess that given enough time the universe will eventually become a black - (anti-black hole) matrix.

Doesn't that structure describe the creation of matter in the early universe? Protons are Black Holes, Neutrons are Black-Hole anti-black-hole pairs, and the rest of the observed atomic and molecular properties are the interactions of this pattern. Sub atomic particles are created when we smash these awesome objects into each other and scatter the time they contain once more through relativistic space.

Furthermore, the interaction of these particles would occur in relativistic time, so we being an order of several magnitudes less dense than atoms would experience atoms as moving incredibly fast.

I instinctively believe that each jump in scale (Atomic to Galactic) is a single cycle in the pattern matrix.

[Tropylium]

On the off chance you're not just a regular timecuber (although eg. starting from qualitative results of Einstein, without any of that silly math, is not filling me with hope), I'd like to note you are not making much sense. What are "anti-black holes"? Are you aware that leptons exist, and are a kind of matter independant of nucleons?

Or skipping back to the OP, for a few things, your system of "16 labels" is also confusing: why are there two sets of spatial directions? What do spatial directions have to do anyway with what appears to be a listing of possible states of your scalar quantum field? What does "switching reference frame from spacetime to mass-energy" (not "matter-energy", BTW!) mean? Reference frames are intrinsically a spacetime thing, after all. You may also note that "particles" is not an antithesis of "light".

"Spacetime sequences" (s.t.t...) smacks of attempting to quantize the concepts of timelike and spacelike curves. I wouldn't say there's anything particularly foreign in either, however. This naive approach here (if that really is what you are doing) also appears to run into a whole load of problems with special relativity, since in essence you seem to be working with a model that has one absolute time dimension and one absolute space dimension.

Your "just as" paragraphs I'm not even going to touch…

[michael.stahl]

I can sense scepticism - good, I want a discussion so that these ideas can be vigorously tested.

Analogue mathematics is not silly, it is elegant but unsuited to processing digital information. My insight probably came because I have been pondering the meaning of both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics for most of my life, yet I make money in the IT industry as a Data Miner/Information architect. I am excellent at logic but suck at the sort of maths physicists use.

Changing reference frames from analogue to digital may be what has been holding everyone else back because following Einstein's' always means following his mathematics.

Yes I am aware of leptons. I mention two of them (Light and Neutrinos). The theory explains the absolute speed limit imposed on leptons (Speed of light) and also speculates why neutrinos are so weakly interacting.

The sub-atomic world is bewildering in its complexity, but then so are the patterns in Conways game of life. The 14 quarks when we add space and time exactly match the 16 "Lables" that I have concluded are required to build everything

Anti-Black holes are strange, but just as the strange concept of warped space-time came out of Einstein's equations, Anti gravity and therefore anti-black holes come from the logical framework I describe.

[michael.stahl]

Further to my last.

When I ponder time and space I can say that space is a place and time is a transition.

Time dense particles are massive and small because it takes a lot of "ticks" of the Quantum clock for them to transition from one place to another. (Remember transition vectors are quantum too)

Space dense particles are low-mass and big because they transition from place to place very quickly.

The area around an Anti-black hole would appear to us as a vast area of empty space. The fact that quantum states cannot exist in space and time simultaneously explains why in the quantum world particles appear and disappear and cannot be defined in both space and time..

Digital data only has 2 states (0,1) and so to explain something as complex as the universe we need more than 1 digit. 4 digits give 16 defined "States" or unique combinations that can be given meanings that make sense to us.

The model is not time or space centric, but our experience is. In order to explain it in terms that make sense of our experience, I need to take our frame of reference. It was changing reference frames to Electro-Magnetic that lead me to conclude that Anti-black holes must exist.

It also predicts that the Higgs-Boson doesn't exist because mass is an emergent property of the frame of reference we use.

[michael.stahl]

Overnight I have just had an insight that might make all this easier to understand.

Interpreting the time-space bit in the Universal Cellular automata matrix is relatively straight forward.

Lets use a relative view at 5 matrix transition cycles. (Its the number of cycles the defines a relative state so in this case 5:1).

A sequence of "t,t,s,t,s" would have a mass of 2 (s) and a distance of 3 (t). That gives that (5 cycle) point in space/time a net distance property of 3(t) - 2(s) = 1 quantum distance unit. A sequence of "s,s,s,t,s" has a mass of 4 and a size of 1. This time the space/time co-ordinate have a net mass property of 4(s) - 1(t) = 3 quantum mass units.

The electromagnetic bit works just the same. A sequence of "e,e,m,m,e" would have an electric field strength of 3, and magnetic field strength of 2 resulting in a net Electric field of 1 quantum field unit.

Interpreting the up/down gives net displacement in one dimension so "u,u,u,u,d" would be 4 quantum displacement units up, "d,d,d,u,u," is 1 quantum displacement unit down etc.

The right/left bit and back/forward bit work the same way.

Using the 4 bits together we define Mass/Size , The Electro-Magnetic Field Strength, vertical displacement, horizontal displacement, and back/forward displacement (what is that called?). That pretty much defines our surroundings.

Just as described in General Relativity, Adjoining matrix cells with different net space/time values will distort space time leading to gravity and anti-gravity just as adjoining cells with different electro-magnetic values will lead to electro-magnetic field flux.

Over the next few weeks I will begin building the cellular automata model. Seeing these rules in action will be worth thousands of words of explanation, but if one of you clever people do it first you could make history - or prove me wrong.

[apg]

Right, how does your model explain the following (in increasing order of difficulty)?


1. Rotational invariance (isotropy) -- it is impossible to tell which direction you're pointing in an empty universe.

2. Lorentz invariance -- it is impossible to tell how fast you're travelling through an empty universe.

3. Shor's algorithm -- it is possible to factorise integers in polynomial time in our universe, but there is no known method of duplicating this feat in a cellular automaton.

4. Thermodynamics -- entropy necessarily increases.


You should be able to solve (1) with little effort, if you're familiar with lattice gases. I don't think any CA researcher has yet overcome (2). If your model can explain (3), then you have automatically rendered RSA cryptography useless, which would probably win you several Nobel prizes, Fields medals and a Blue Peter badge. Finally, explaining (4) is impossible: how can entropy increase when all bounded CA configurations become cyclic?

[michael.stahl]

Thankyou for the enguagement and intelligent questions.

1. Rotational invariance (isotropy) & 2. Lorentz invariance
The problem with the first two questions is the very concept of an "Empty Universe".

The 16 properties I describe are emergent from the quantum matrix created by the Electro-Magnetic and Gravitational fields. These properties do not exist outside of the matrix (Universe)

The only "Empty Universe" I could envisage existing within the quantum matrix is where the flow of information has ceased and all relitive field states are the same. For that to happen, both the Electro-Magnetic and Gravitational fields would need to become precisely uniform.

I can't really get my head around that concept, but there could not be an internal observer as there is nothing to observe (No information exchange). From outside the universe (Say I was god looking at the bit patterns in the universal Cellular Automina program) the pattern would look uniform.

3. Shor's algorithm & 4. Thermodynamics
I suspect that the matrix favours the creation of prime patterns because of the way that patterns combine and interfere. I'll need to do some more thinking and possibly modelling before I can give a more complete answer. Hope to have more detail in a day or two. If this is true, it also explains entropy (Increasing complexity & disorder).

[michael.stahl]

I've just tossed the concepts around and I have the answer but I might start with Entropy first.

The universe is a ticking clock going tick tock tick tock, space, time, space, time from the big bang until now and will go on expanding and cooling.

Every tick is a new number added to the slow and steady count to (infinity -1). It's been counting very fast and for a long time. Far too long for us to count to that number, but long enough to conceptualise it using polynomial mathematics. That is why mathematics describes the universe, mathematics is the universe.

So Entropy (Probability Space) is increasing with every tick of the clock.

So what started it all, the big bang etc. a 1 bit ripple in the quantum matrix. The ripple is propagating through space-time and we are along for the ride.

So far as prime numbers go, I the theory confirms that our e-dollars are safe for now. The universe is counting by ones, the slow, tedious and unstoppable way. The only way to find a prime number is to look for them in the number set. No Nobel prize then hey?

[Tropylium]

Yes I am aware of leptons. I mention two of them (Light and Neutrinos).

Err... photons (eg. light) are not leptons, they are (gauge) bosons.

The model (...) also predicts that the Higgs-Boson doesn't exist because mass is an emergent property of the frame of reference we use.

Bosons don't work like that, I'm afraid. There are plenty of non-elementary bosons known, like the pions, which even moonlight in mediating the nuclear force (which can be viewed as an emergent force based on the strong interaction); or your everyday ¹²C nucleus.

You might want to up your understanding of particle physics, knowing what you're talking about generally helps in trying to develop a new model of the world.

Over the next few weeks I will begin building the cellular automata model. Seeing these rules in action will be worth thousands of words of explanation, but if one of you clever people do it first you could make history - or prove me wrong.

The space of possible CA rules is unimaginably vast. I don't quite see your conceptualization, or anything along those lines, offering sufficient information to stumble on an assumed one correct model. You've 16 states there; even with an 1D neighborhood (you've been talking of a "matrix" - would that imply a 2D automaton?), that amounts to about 256 different neighborhoods, and thus 16^256 = over 10^300 different rules. Good luck with that.

For that matter, saying that "spacetime is emergent" is easy. Suggesting some general mechanism underneath is feasible. Actually showing how exactly spacetime with the known properties emerges out of something is the hard part.

I've just tossed the concepts around and I have the answer but I might start with Entropy first.

The universe is a ticking clock going tick tock tick tock, space, time, space, time from the big bang until now and will go on expanding and cooling.

This does not seem compatible with time as some kind of an emergent property. If time and space are "calculated separately" (sequently or not), and if we start from a simple perturbation, then you'll get cooling and expansion only in the time direction. Anytime your system comes back to calculating anything that is a long space distance away and a short time distance away, it's Big Bang all over again.

And if you don't treat everyday time as distinct from the "universal" time, you run into a whole slew of problems since there is no absolute everyday time. You have some kind of a grasp on special relativity, right? A lot of in-depth particle physics is difficult to understand purely qualitatively, but special relativity is entirely graspable.

[apg]

Anyway, how can a CA (deterministic model) possibly explain quantum mechanics (a partially non-deterministic phenomenon)?