1 A Bio-Info-Digital Universe Model (BIDUM, version 1.0) inspired by a Teller’s large number hypothesis overlooked by the great majority of physicists (including Tipler, Barrow, Dirac and Einstein) but also Teller himself
* (Open development interval: 2008 – 2015 - ?)
*
Andrei Lucian Dr ăgoi 1,2,3
* Motto: "[God]: universe is nothing but a big copying machine, reproducing your thoughts [pure information] in physical form [energy/matter], that will be your experience” 4 (Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God, 3rd volume)
Abstract
„Edward Teller appears to have been the first who speculate that there may exist a logarithmic 2 -39 relation between the fine structure constant (α) and the parameter G ·mN /h ·c~10 of the form 2 -1 60 α~ln(G ·mN /h ·c) (in fact α =ln(3.17 x 10 and the formula is too insensitive to be of very much use in predicting exact relations)“ 5. I will try to demonstrate that Barrow and Tipler (but also the great majority of the physicists including those mentioned in the title) overlooked the possibility that Teller’s hypothesis (called “speculation”) may be much more inspired and profound than the Dirac’s large number hypothesis (DLNH) , as it can offer an elegant explanation both to the fine structure constant (FSC) and to DLNH (using FSC) and also can predict a Planck-like gravitational constants series and a big G series (a G “imprint” for every type of atom in any state) as a unified quantum-relativistic theory of quantum gravity that is experimentally testable. IDUM proposes an informational view on the universe in which all physical constants can be derived (at least theoretically) from just one parameter: the total information of the universe (a quantum fluctuation resulted from a huge informational input to a “nothing” 0D vacuum). In IDUM the mass-energy conservation (thermodynamics) and equivalence (Einstein) laws become the consequence of an information conservation law (which is fundamental in IDUM). IDUM tries to demonstrate that the universe can be modeled as a multi-processor quantum (gravity) computer in which all the fundamental forces are just the result of reading the same total information in different dimensional frames.
1 Romanian pediatrician partially self-educated in theoretical physics and IT 2 Email : [email protected] 3 Mailing Address : Str. Lucre țiu P ătr ăș canu, nr.3, bl. Y1, sc. 1, ap. 144, Bucharest, Romania 4 www.nytimes.com/books/first/w/walsch-god3.html 5 Barrow, John D., and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986, p.230 and ref. no. 37 from p.29: E. Teller, Phys. Rev. 73, 801, (1948) (www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle-Oxford- Paperbacks/dp/0192821474) 2 Part 1: A fine structure constant binary logarithm coincidence series overlooked by the vast majority of physicists
In the abstract mN stands for (free) nucleon (proton / neutron) rest mass. All the physical constants used in this article are based on CODATA 2012 recommendations and are all measured in SI units (see Table 1)
Table 1 . The abbreviations used in this article
Mn / Mp / Me (free) neutron/ proton/ electron rest mass tP / lP / mP Planck time / length / mass Qe / Ke / ε0 / the elementary charge (so that not to be confused with Euler number e) / Coulomb constant / vacuum c / Re permittivity / the speed of light in vacuum / classical electron radius α the inverse of fine structure constant 6 (abbreviation chosen for the simplicity and intelligibility of the equations): hr⋅ c α 137.036 Qe 2 4⋅π ⋅ε0 αG the inverse of gravitational coupling constant 7 (abbreviation chosen for the simplicity and intelligibility of the αGr= αG/2 π equations): 2 hr⋅ c MP αG 5.709× 10 44 2 Me G⋅ Me
G The DAH -based (for DAH see below) quantum variant of the Ne wtonian universal gravitational constant (G / QG or Gq: „quantum big G”); the classical experimentally determined G will be named as
GCODATA2012 h / hr / hrr Planck constant / the reduced Planck constant ( h/2 π) / the „double” reduced Planck constant ( h/4 π) ( 4π is a Moebius-like double-circle complete cycle on a 4D hypersphere: a possible trajectory of the gravitons/pair of interchanged gravitons ) Eph( λ) c the energy of a single photon: Eph ()λ h λ
NBE (average) nuclear binding energy (per each nucleon) (average nuclear mass defect per each nucleon) 8
ln (x) the e-base (natural) logarithm of x>0 log2(x) the 2-base (binary) logarithm of x>0. DLNH Dirac’s large number hypothesis NL -TH natural logarithm (variant of) Teller’s 9 hypothesis BL -TH binary logarithm (varian t of) Teller’s hypothesis DAH Dr ăgoi ’s alpha (constant) hypothesis (my hypothesis based on a binary logarithm subvariant of Teller ’s hypothesis) (B) IDUM (Bio -)Info -Digital Universe M odel (a model of the physical universe using DAH as main premise and based on the analogy with a multi-processor quantum computer) LMI locatio n-and -moment information LMIP location -and -moment information packs ACP (The) A nthropic Cosmological P rinciple 10 HUP Heisenberg Uncertainty principle
6 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_structure_constant 7 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_coupling_constant 8 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy 9 ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Teller 10 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe; 3 It is clearly that using natural logarithm in the Teller’s hypothesis is „ too insensitive to be of very much use in predicting exact relations ” (see Table 2)
Table 2. The „insensitive” NL-TH variant α = 137.036 h⋅ c ln 89.86 65.574 %⋅α 2 G⋅ Mn α 59 h⋅ c 1 α e = 3.266× 10 1.061× 10 39 e 2 22 G⋅ Mn 3.078× 10 %
Even if Teller himself overlooked the possibility of using binary logarithm (not natural logarithm) in his hypothesis mentioned in the abstract, it is quite strange that the vast majority of physicists also overlooked this possibility from 1948 until present (I have emailed a couple of years ago Mr. Barrow and Mr. Tipler on this BL-TH variant (see Tables 3 and 4) for their book next edition review, but never received any answer). This overlooking is quite similar to the background radiation prediction that had escaped unnoticed by the majority of physicists quite a few decades.
Table 3. The much more „sensitive” BL-TH variant h⋅ c log2 129.641 94.603 %⋅α 2 α = 137.036 G⋅ Mn
α 41 h⋅ c 2 = 1.786× 10 1.061× 10 39 0.594 %⋅2α 2 G⋅ Mn
Table 4. Other „striking sensitive” BL-TH subvariants h⋅ c log2 140.487 102.518 %⋅α α = 137.036 G⋅ Me ⋅Mp h⋅ c log2 140.485 102.517 %⋅α G⋅ Me ⋅Mn
hr⋅ c log2 137.836 100.583 %⋅α G⋅ Me ⋅Mp
hr⋅ c log2 137.834 100.582 %⋅α G⋅ Me ⋅Mn
α 41 hr⋅ c 2 = 1.786× 10 3.109× 10 41 174.055 % 2α G⋅ Me ⋅Mp
hr⋅ c 3.105× 10 41 173.816 % 2α G⋅ Me ⋅Mn
hrrc⋅ 1.555× 10 41 87.028 % 2α G⋅ Me⋅Mp 4
hrrc⋅ 1.552× 10 41 86.908 % 2α G⋅ Me ⋅Mn
The most striking “sensitive” BL-TH sub-variant (which I’ve called DAH in the abbreviation Table 1) (see Table 5) deserves a very special attention in my opinion as it may have great importance in formulating a quantitative description/prediction of gravitons and quantum gravity theory . I consider it very small the probability that this “too-elegant” numerical coincidence is “just” the result of pure chance. I don’t have any information from the physics literature 11 on a more sensitive theoretical numerical prediction of αg and a quantum G (including the Einstein’s famous 8 πG general relativity equation factor ) using only α (as an adimensional combination of almost all the physical constants fundamental to quantum mechanics theory). In this article I shall try to argue that the power of predicting a gravitational Planck-like constants (mass quanta) and a theoretical quantum G series (similar to the experimental G determinations and variations) makes DAH very probable to be a true non-coincidence due to a more profound undiscovered law of nature which I’ll try to demonstrate in my IDUM (a possible scale-invariance 12 law in a possible fractal universe 13 ). DAH non-coincidence suggests that FSC has a dual electrogravitational significance (with FSC being a both electromagnetic and gravitational constant). I also support Dirac’s famous quote that “if the [physical] equations are not simple and elegant, they are probably wrong.”: Koide coincidence is one (still debated) example that has successfully predicted the tauon mass within one standard deviation from its observed value. Similarly, DAH could offer an elegant explanation to DLNH.
Table 5. The most striking „sensitive” BL-TH subvariant: DAH h⋅ c log2 137.0304 99.996 %⋅α 3 α = 137.036 2 2 ()4⋅π ⋅α ()G⋅ Me
2α = 1.786× 10 41 h⋅ c 1.779× 10 41 99.613 %⋅2α 3 2 2 ()4⋅π ⋅α ()G⋅ Me 3 3 3 3 h⋅ c 2 hr⋅ c 2 α 2 α+1 hrr⋅ c 2 α ()4⋅π α ⋅2α 2⋅α ⋅2 α ⋅2 α ⋅2 2 2 2 G⋅ Me G⋅ Me G⋅ Me h⋅ c 8⋅π ⋅G 3 2 2 α ⋅2α −1⋅Me
11 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant 12 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_invariance ; en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_spiral 13 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_cosmology
5
3 3 3 hr⋅ c 2 2 hrr⋅ c 2 α αG 2α ⋅2α α ⋅2α+1 αGr α ⋅2 2 2 G⋅ Me G⋅ Me
Analogously to single λ-wavelength photon energy [ Eph( λ)], the gravitational energy of a 2 rest 2 electron/positron vacuum system (G·Me /λ) is the consequence of 2 “Ping-Pong” co-phase-graviton-packs interchange (with the speed of light in vacuum and wavelength λ) between the 2 rest electrons/positrons at the maximum frequency of emission for the electron/positron (1/ λ, with minimum λ close to the electron/positron diameter ): I shall name this pack of co-phase gravitons an electrograviton (eg ). The energy of an eg [Eeg(λ)] can be defined as a scalar analogous to the single photon energy using a theoretical/hypothetical electrogravitonic Planck-like constant (heg ) which is very plausible (as the gravitational analogue of electromagnetic Planck constant) and can be predicted using DAH (see Table 6) In IDUM heg (mass quanta) measures the granulation of the 4D-ST itself which may explain why all the other physical quantities (from all the other forces/fields) seem also discrete quantum/quantized when measured. Heg doesn’t measure the smallest granulation of the 4D-ST (as lP and tP are the maximum measurable resolution of that granulation), but the electrogravitational granulation/pixilation of 4D-ST. IDUM postulates an universal electrogravitational (non-maximum) granulation/pixilation of all 4D-ST “scene” and all its particle-“actors” (see also the superposing between string theory and quantum gravity theory 14 )
Table 6. DAH predicts a plausible electrogravitonic Planck-Dr ăgoi constant (heg) c c 2 Eph ()λ h h⋅ν Eeg ()λ heg heg ⋅ν G⋅ Me c λ 2⋅Eeg ()λ 2⋅heg ⋅ λ λ λ
2 G⋅ Me 2⋅heg ⋅c 3 3 h⋅ c h⋅ c 2 α h 2 ()4⋅π α ⋅2 ()4⋅π α ⋅2α 2 G⋅ Me 2⋅heg ⋅c 2heg h hr hrr hrr heg heg heg 3 3 3 3 2 2 α 2 α 2 α+1 ()8⋅π ⋅α ⋅2α 4⋅α ⋅2 2⋅α ⋅2 α ⋅2
The factor that connects h and heg constants can be named ” electrogravitational constant” (KEG) and offers a seductive scalar unification between electromagnetism and gravity . Although speculative, there is a good possibility that KEG may represent the electrogravitonic “granulation” factor of the photon (as the 4D-ST vacuum is granulated and the photon “borrows” that granulation as all quantum particles are 4D-ST vacuum phenomena): the (integer) number of co-phase linear ( λ -) egs in a single ( λ -)photon (NEgP). The possible “granular” structure of a photon (similar to a laser beam of co-phase linear (same) λ-egs) may explain the wave-particle duality of the photon and offers an interesting explanation 15 for the double slit experiment and for the de Broglie hypothesis. Similar to the photon, the electron may be
14 Matthias Blau, Stefan Theisen. String theory as a theory of quantum gravity: a status report (link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10714-008-0752-z)
15 Patrick J. Coles, Jedrzej Kaniewski, Stephanie Wehner. Equivalence of wave–particle duality to entropic uncertainty. Nature Communications, 2014; 5: 5814 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms6814 6 interpreted as a conglomeration of permanently moving circular eggs (that can explain the rest mass of electron as a moving energy of circular egs with a specific spin ): expressing classical electron radius (Re) as a function of heg constant shows that electron/positron mass (Me) can be interpreted as a multiple (integer) of the energy of a single circular eg (the number of co-phase circular [ λ –]egs in a single “classical” resting but “spinning” electron/ positron [NEgRE], in principle, even if Re isn’t the same with the real ray of a pinpoint electron/positron ). However, it is also well-known that Re is not the real physical ray of an electron. A much better approximation of an electron real ray ( Rre ) may be deduced from the proton ray ( Rp ) by starting with the premise that electron and photon have similar densities of matter/energy per unit of space volume: Rre~Rp/(Mp/Me) 1/3 . IDUM suggests that the ray of the spinning electron (even at rest) may vary between to 2 limits (as the subcomponent egs of the electron may vary their ray of rotation as function of eg-input of that particle in a specific interval of time): Rre (inferior limit) and Re (superior limit) . NEgRE may be formulated as a general function of the ray (r) of subcomponent-egs rotation so that Me (at rest) remains constant: NEgRE(r)=Me ·c2/Eeg(2 π·r). IDUM interprets both electron and photon as 2 great conglomerations of egs in 2 different possible states: circular (4D-torus 16 -like) (in the electron) and/or linear(4D cylinder-like) (in the photon) moving egs (super-string theory similarity) (photon-electron unified interpretation) (see Table 7-A). Besides explaining the rest mass of the electron and the movement mass of the photon, IMUD also conjectures that the circular egs composing a torus-like electron (at rest) can also explain the spin of the electron (½) and the photon (1) and also the charge of these 2 type of particles by the direction and the sense of the circular/linear EG movement in 4D: left-to-right or right-to-left on any 2D plane of the S-3D and past-to-future (typical particles like electrons) future-to-past (anti-particles like positron). It is very possible that the sub-particle egs to be organized in 3 groups compatible with the preon 17 /rishon 18 concepts (1/3eT rishons and neutral V rishons) (IMUD-preon/rishon model combination) (see the next figures). IDUM has an essential advantage on the rishon model: it also explains the “resting” mass of any particle as an informational mass flux generated by the circular movement of the subcomponent egs of the electrons(leptons)/quarks (and quark based particles). IDUM also conjectures that the 4 th dimension of ST is “hidden”/packed in the central hole of the torus like structure of any quantum particle (but also in the central holes torus-like pixels of the ST, as explained later): it’s possible that the holes of this torus- like entities to be populated with other types of particles (including gravitons, tachyons and other types of candidates for the dark matter and dark energies particle constituents) that can travel with faster- than-light speeds interconnecting at very long distances different particle (as quantum entanglement but also as the Coulomb force that seem to propagate instantly, no matter the distance 19 ;in this way synchronicity generated by the hidden phenomenon of the 4 th dimension can be masked by the apparent causality of the 3.xD-ST phenomenon).
16 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torus 17 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preon 18 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rishon_model 19 Calcaterra, A.; de Sangro, R.; Finocchiaro, G.; Patteri, P.; Piccolo, M.; Pizzella, G. (2012). "Measuring Propagation Speed of Coulomb Fields". arXiv:1211.2913 [gr-qc]; arxiv.org/abs/1211.2913; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb%27s_law
7
Based on the 4D circular movement of sub-particle egs/groups of egs, IMUD offers a possible unified explanation for the 3 intrinsic proprieties of any quantum particle (including the electron and the photon): rest/movement mass, spin and charge are 3 intrinsic proprieties of the electron. In IMUD, rest mass, charge and spin are 3 “faces” of the same phenomenon. The “egic” closed-torus like structure of the electron (and the open tubular/cylindrical structure of the photon) can offer a unified electrogravitational / electrogravity theory of the electron/photon and their inner structures. If the photon and the electron have an eg-granular structure, than we can hypothesize that electromagnetism is just a masked form of quantum gravity (as egs may be “hidden” in the space-time frames of the photons and electrons, but also in W and Z gauge bosons) (and this may be a way to unify the 2 forces [the electroweak and the gravity] with so similar scalars as I shall try to demonstrate in the next part of this article).
Table 7-A. Heg constant suggests a plausible photon-electron unified interpretation as linear/circular electrogravitons conglomerates 3 h h NEgP⋅ heg
2 heg ⋅c ⋅c NEgP() 8⋅π α ⋅2α NEgP ()2⋅π α ()2⋅π α Re Re h NEgP⋅ heg 2 2 (KEG) Me⋅ c Me⋅ c
NEgP NEgP c Eeg() 2⋅π Re heg ⋅ α α 2⋅π ⋅Re Me Me c2 c2 NEgREEeg() 2⋅π Re Me c2 8
2 43 Me⋅ c NEgRE NEgRE() Re 5.255× 10 NEgRE() r Eeg ()2⋅π ⋅r 43 NEgRE() Re = 5.255× 10
NEgRE() Rre = 1.336× 10 42
FSC (=1/ α) can be interpreted as the ratio between NEgRE and NEgP and logically expresses the probability(~1/137) of a resting electron to emit a photon as a function of the linear/circular sub-eggs number ratio between the photon and the electron (at rest) (see Table 7-B). Quantum G constant can be interpreted as a consequence of heg quantization of egs and can be express as a scalar function of the heg constant : by speculative induction I may conjecture that all physical constants may emerge from the quantization of 4D-ST and all its component gauge-bosons and non-gauge-bosons particles (as Ke is a consequence-function of h and quantum G is a consequence-function of heg). We can also observe that in contrast with NEP (which is constant, no matter the λ of the photon), the number of egs in a moving elecron (NEgME) can be generalized as a function of speed of the electron (which is the result of transfering X suplimentary egs to the resting electron, egs that bring kinetic energy to that electron). So NEgME is the sum: number of egs in the resting electron (NEgRE) + number of egs transfered to the resting electron (NEgTRE) as kinetic energy (Me ·v2/Eeg(any υ)). α can so be generalized as a function of NEgTRE (with a constant term NEgRE and a constant factor NEgP) (see Table 7-B) The eg would be NOT just the „cell” of any photon/lepton/quark/gauge-boson, but also „the brick” of 4D-ST itself (the unity between the “scene and the actor” that Einstein quoted as “beyond he wildest imagining”). As all the 4D-ST vacuum is also granulated/pixilated (similar to a “sponge” made of egs / eg-based quantum “foam”), it is possible that all the quantum subatomic particles-“actors” in the 4D-ST to ALSO have an eg-based inner structure (that explains the rest mass of any non-gauge-boson particle) : that might imply that all the 4 fundamental forces (or 5 if we consider a 5 th force that stabilizes all the inner structure of the quantum particles considered fundamental and irreducible as quarks and leptons) are eg-based and are all 4 (or 5) different subtypes of gravity at various scale of space and energy.
Table 7-B. α as function of NEgP and NEgME(v, λ,r) 3 2 Me⋅ v 2 α NEgTRE() v , λ NEgP() 8⋅π α ⋅2 (KEG) Eeg ()λ
1 NEgME() v , λ NEgRE+ NEgTRE( v , λ ) 2 NEgRE ()8⋅π ⋅α ⋅2α NEgRE() Re NEgME() v , λ , r := NEgRE() r ⋅ + NEgTRE( v , λ ) NEgRE() r
NEgP NEgP α ()v , λ α ()NEgME() v , λ NEgME() v , λ NEgRE+ NEgTRE() v , λ
NEgP NEgP αf() v , λ , r αf() NEgME() v , λ , r NEgME() v , λ , r NEgRE() Re NEgRE() r ⋅ + NEgTRE() v , λ NEgRE() r 9
NEgP α ()0 , λ 137.036 NEgRE NEgP NEgP NEgP αf ()0 , λ , r α ()0 , λ 137.036 NEgRE() Re NEgRE() Re NEgRE NEgRE() r ⋅ NEgRE() r
IDUM conjectures that Rre is the smallest possible rotation ray (bending ray) of an eg (and that the difference between the electrons(generally leptons) and neutrinos stands in the number of the subcomponent egs, not on a great difference in rays; as the eg is defined as a pack of co-phase gravitons, Rre is just an inferior limitation rotation ray of the eg, not of the graviton which is a much smaller energy quanta that can have a much smaller bending ray than an eg, possible close to a Planck length): based on this conjecture IDUM predicts that what is called “dark matter and energy” maybe the energy of 3D-ST vacuum itself 20 . IDUM also conjectures that the each “pixel” of the measured 3D-ST is composed of torus-like single-circular-egs “bricks”/”pixels” that create that 3D-ST (as the eg is the “pixel”/”cell” of ST vacuum). IDUM also conjectures that each single torus-like pixel is linked with all adjacent pixels with other torus-like perpendicular pixels in a chain-like 3D web (but with probably under 10% of their energy [perpendicular to our observable 3D-ST] measurable in our 3D-ST). IDUM calculates the energy of the total universe (Etu) (3D-ST-energy/mass+”white” particles + ”white” energy) as a function of the number of egs per ray of the observable universe (NEgRou=1.1 ·Rou/Rre) and of the energy of a single circular eg with Rre as ray of rotation (Eeg(2 ·π·Rre)) (see the next table). IDUM conjectures the 4 th ST dimension as “hidden” in each apparent “point” of the 3D-ST, as each apparent point/pixel is in fact a circle/ellipse (a single circular eg): no matter the eg moves on the surface of a sphere or a 4D hyper-sphere, the energy of this point(ST “pixel”)/circle remains the same -- Eeg( λ). IDUM predicts in this way that the “white” energy of the universe (Ewu~3.8 ·10 72 ) is about 4.5% of the energy of the total universe (Ewu+Edu), which is close to the 4.9% white matter and energy percent approximation in the present. With this idea, IDUM explains why the speed of light in vacuum (c) appears to be the maximum possible speed in the universe: c is in fact the fixed circular maximum speed of single egs in the “pixels” of the universe and it appears logically that a heavier (than one universe “pixel”) quantum particle cannot surpass that inner speed of a pixel, as the effect would be similar to a “c-sonic bang” in which the quantum particle would be blocked in its movement by the single-eg-pixels speed (similar to the sonic bang generated by supersonic planes). This single-eg-pixel inner speed may also explain the tendency that a body gains mass exponentially when approaching the c-limit speed (as the single-eg-pixels simply “condense” on that moving quantum particle and generates an enormous moving mass that tends to infinity and opposes to higher-than-c speed movement). In IDUM, c is in fact an indirect measure of the Rre-ST granulation: as the photons can move saltatory, from pixel-to-pixel (somehow like the bioelectric current in a neuronal axon with Ranvier nodes), the larger the pixel, the larger the speed (as the number of steps needed to reach for an initial point in ST to a final point in ST is less). IDUM also considers c as an indirect measure of υc=c/Rre, which is the highest possible frequency of a single-eg-pixel of ST: in fact υc is the frequency of the most rapid timer/clock of the universe (the time in which a single eg completes a 2 π rotation cycle with Rre as ray of rotation; that why c). As the single-eg-pixels of ST have intensely high-frequency interconnections with each other ST appears continuous: however the vacuum tends to generate (even for just short time intervals) only relatively
20 See also abstract no. 18 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2010abstracts.pdf 10 (un)stable (virtual) quantum particle-anti-particle pairs (the other highly unstable particle remaining undetectable as they “die” almost in the same time they are “born”, similarly to the evolutionary- intermediate organisms that are considered highly unstable by the evolutionism and that explains the rarity of this type of organisms today)
Table 7-C. IDUM predicts the nature of the dark-energy and dark matter as the energy of ST itself. IDUM also predicts the approximate percent of „white” matter and energy of the total estimated energy of the universe (~5%) Mp Rp 3 Rp Rre Rre = 2.543 % Me Rre 1 Re Mp 3 Re Me = 39.324 Rre c νc 4.184× 10 24 ⋅Hz Rre Rre = 4.434× 10 18 lP Rre log2 lP = 0.452 α Rou Eeg() 2⋅π Rre = 6.126 10 − 56 ⋅J NEgRou := 1.1 Rre 4 3 Edu ⋅π ⋅NEgRou ⋅Eeg( 2π ⋅Rre ) 3 73 72 Edu = 7.953× 10 J ( Ewu = 3.769× 10 J )
Etu Edu+ Ewu
Ewu = 4.525 ⋅% Etu
Starting from the conjecture that ST is “pixilated” in single-eg-rotating-micro-spheres with Rre as ray of rotation and that ST permits as eg-rotation-rays only multiple integers of this Rre, we can deduce than there may be at least 40 types of electrons (with the same rest mass Me), as combinations of different NEgRE(r) (from NEgRE(Rre)=1.336*10 42 to NEgRE(Re)=5.255*10 43 ), r (with r multiple integer of Rre in the interval [Rre, Re] ). This electron diversity explains (at least partially) the need of the theory of probability to predict an electron behavior (and also any other quantum particle behavior). As the gravitational force acts on any physical mass directly proportional to that mass (no matter if that mass is at rest or it is the result of additional inside movement kinetic energy like in the case of the hadrons like proton/neutron in which almost 99% of the “resting” hadron mass is due to the kinetic energy of the gluons interchanged between the internal quarks), it is reasonable to consider that quantum G is in fact a function of energy (the total energy of the particle) not of a resting mass: and that energy squeezes/”presses”/”stresses” the local ST like a sponge generating higher energy eg emissions (greater heg by modifying h and α, or shorter eg wavelength, BUT at the same frequency of emission) from that particle (but also from the ST matrix of that particle inner and surroundings) and also creating a pit trap for the egs emitted from other sources towards that mass/energy squeeze location and its surroundings. By “stressing” vacuum, 11 gravity can also constantly cause (apparently) “spontaneous” generation of virtual particle-antiparticle pairs (the Casimir effect) . In this way, IDUM offers a unified view of general relativity and quantum gravity (in which gravity is mediated both by ST squeezes and ALSO by egs emitted/received by that ST local squeeze). Another possible interpretation is that ST vacuum may be a huge quantum deposit of virtual egs with all the spectrum of wavelengths and energies that ST can heavily emit (as an instant reaction) if it is excited with any non-zero energy of any particle in that ST (in the context of dark energy and dark matter than can have an eg structure, this last interpretation is considered much more plausible in IDUM as “white” quantum particles behave more like ships on a huge ocean, “ships” that have a very small capacity to deform ST in which they lay and “ships” that also may be absorbed by large strong ST vortexes like the black-holes). IDUM considers both quantum and relativistic views are compatible to each other with a remark: the 4D-ST is similar to a quantum “sponge” which, if it is deformed, it would also generate higher energy egs. IDUM doesn’t exclude an universe with more than 4 dimensions, like a 5D-ST as the equation of G suggests it: in this case IDUM conjectures that time is 2D membrane with a 2nd time vector perpendicular to the physical time in which all the particle are interconnected instantly (resolving the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paradox and giving an elegant explanation to quantum entanglement). IDUM treats time as a (“very persistent”[Einstein]) illusion created by the living bodies and their extensions (measuring devices) (as any measurement of a system produces more entropy in the local universe generating the sense of the physical time from a lower-entropy past to a higher-entropy future) (the oriental religions/philosophies view): if man would build his science only using just experiments in the “time” of dreams (in which mind is partially freed from the physical senses input), the “science” would surely be very different. G is a direct proportionality function of a single eg energy (similar/analogous to Ke being a directly proportional function of a single photon energy). As c and Me (rest mass) are fixed constants, IDUM supposes that heg is a function of α and may vary directly proportional to ST level of “squeezing”, that’s why G is essentially a function of a variable heg, and G may vary directly proportional with heg (using Kg=c/Me 2 as a proportionality constant) (see Table 7-C). IDUM conjectures a G series based on a heg series, both functions of (eg-based) ST level of “compression”. In contrast with a resting electron which is composed from only circular egs, a moving electron could contain a mixture of circular si linear egs (a photon-resting-electron hybrid/transition state) and that may the explanation why it is more probable that a moving electron (which has more egs, some of which may be „already” the linear egs needed for a photon to form) to emit a photon than a resting low-kinetic- energy electron. There is a simplified quantum G sclar in the case of 2 electrons/positron at rest. We can also deduce a generalization of the quantum G sclar in case of 2 electrons in 2 different kinetic-energy states different from the resting state (as a superposition of 2 „ping-pong” egs) that may emit egs with lower energies/heg (variable) constants than the egs emitted by a resting electron (heg 1 21 For a possible exception see also 2 nd prize abstract from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf 12 Table 7-D. Quantum G as a function of a-single-eg energy (essentially a function of heg at constant frequency of eg emission) 3 c − 11 m G 2 ⋅heg ⋅ 6.648× 10 99.613 %G⋅ CODATA_2012 2 2 Me kg⋅ s c c5 c5 G 2⋅heg ⋅ 2⋅heg ⋅ 2⋅heg ⋅ 2 2 2 2 Me ()Me⋅ c Et() Me 5 1 1 G( Me 1 , Me 2) heg⋅ c ⋅ + 2 2 Et Me 1 Et() Me2 () 2 ⋅λ c 2⋅λ λ c λ G ⋅heg ⋅ ⋅Eeg (λ ) Ke ⋅h⋅ ⋅Ef (λ ) 2 λ 2 2 2 Me Me Qe ⋅()2⋅π ⋅α λ Qe ⋅()2⋅π ⋅α ` c 2 2c Kg G ⋅()heg⋅ c ⋅heg 2Kg ⋅heg 2 2 2 Me Me Me G Kg⋅ heg 1 + Kg⋅ heg 2 Kg⋅( heg 1 + heg 2) Photons and electrons may permanently emit (pulsated emission) egs with no sign of observable “tiring” at standard time intervals we can measure, as the photon and electron have a potential energy much larger than the maximum energy of a possible emitted eg. A photon can emit only egs at and with the same or lower frequencies than their global frequency (ph νmax =c/ λmin , with λmin comparable to 2 ·Re). An electron can emit only egs at and with the same or lower frequencies than their global frequency (which is the inverse of the classical electric circumference of the electron: eνmax =c/(2 π·Re)). Supposing that they would emit 22 ONLY one single eg at a time at their maximum frequencies (ph νmax and e νmax ) (in different directions decided by the electron spin that sweeps the 4D-ST) the time needed to completely dissipate their total energy into egs would be much more larger (with ~5, respectively ~3 orders of magnitude) that the age of the observable universe (Aou) of about 13.7 ·10 9 years. Table 7-E. Electrons and photons permanently emit egs (pulsated emission) with a superior limit of frequency given in this table below. It may took more that 10 3 to 10 5Aou (age of the present observed universe) for an electron or photon to completely „vanish” by this pulsated emission of egs. 1 1 ph νMax = 5.319× 10 22 eνMax = 1.693× 10 22 s s NEgP NEgRE = 3.11× 10 5 = 7.129× 10 3 Aou⋅ ph νMax ()Aou⋅ eνMax Given all the anterior facts and to avoid tautology we can suppose that NOT α[= α(0,λ)], but 2α[= α(0,λ)] (~1.8*10 41 ) is a „more” fundamental constant of the universe as it can be a natural integer 22 See also abstract no.12 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf 13 (because α, NEgP, NEgRE, heg, quantum G and Ke can be derived from 2 α) . Another striking coincidence is that 2 α is very close to the square root of the (mass-deduced) total number of the hydrogen atoms in the universe (total number of protons and neutrons, as the electrons have a small percentage contribution to the total „white” mass/energy of the universe) (a rough estimation if all the mass of the observable universe would be composed of only hydrigen atoms) (Eddington number): this would be an unexpected „secret” link between TH (DAH) and „old” and apparently obsolete Eddington universe model (with an obvious holographic/fractal accent in which the total number of particles in the universe is strongly related to the individual characteristic of each particle by a somehow default undiscoverd physicial law of the universe which I’ll try to demonstrate in IDUM). It would be more trustful to consider that α constant (with its very high precision measurement) would be an indirect unexpectedly IMPORTANT measure of the EXACT Eddington number and NOT viceversa: in the context that „white” matter-energy in the universe is roughly a 2D „dust” (|”compressible” in a 2D disk of spaced particles) in a 3D volume (and represents) (~5% of the estimated universe total mass). 2α may be considered the number of hypothetic hydrogen atoms per any diameter of the 2D „white” matter 2D compressed plane „disk” (NHAD). In the next table it is important to notice that NEgP and NegRE (and all the derived constants) are a special kind of linearithmic form with an greater than 1 exponent of the log(N). As a checkpoint conclusion, it is very probable that the real number of hydrogen atoms in the universe (RNHAU) (measured indirectly and intuitively using α) is the „most fundamental” constant of all until this stage of discussion. Table 8. The „inverse deduction” of the „classical” physical constants from h, Me and RNHAU (hydrogen atoms hypothetically organized in a 2D disc with 2 α atoms per any diameter): checkpoint review 2 α RNHAU α 41 2 82 NHAD 2⋅ 2 1.786× 10 RNHAU π ⋅ 2.506× 10 2 π α ()0 , λ α log2() NHAD 137.036 3 3 2 2 α 45 NEgP ()8 ⋅π ⋅log2() NHAD ⋅NHAD ()8 ⋅π ⋅α ⋅2 7.202× 10 1 1 2 2 NEgRE ()8 ⋅π ⋅log2() NHAD ⋅NHAD ()8 ⋅π ⋅α ⋅2α 5.255× 10 43 h heg NEgP c Eeg ()λ heg heg ⋅ν λ 2 Me⋅ v NEgTRE() v , λ Eeg ()λ NEgME() v , λ NEgRE+ NEgTRE( v , λ ) NEgP NEgP α ()v , λ α ()NEgME() v , λ NEgME() v , λ NEgRE+ NEgTRE() v , λ 14 c c G 2heg ⋅ Kg Me 2 Me 2 2 2c G ⋅()heg⋅ c ⋅heg 2Kg⋅ heg 2 2 Me Me G Kg⋅ heg 1 + Kg⋅ heg 2 Kg⋅( heg 1 + heg 2) h c hr c Ke ⋅ ⋅ ()2⋅π ⋅α 2 α 2 Qe Qe DAH and all the BL-TH variants (but also the original NL-TH) have an obviously quite strong similarity to the theory of information: as the binary logarithm is usually used to measure the quantity of information in a system of N possible states as log2(N). The physical universe may be considered a very large (but not infinitely large) 4D space-time (4D-ST) matrix computer in which all non-gauge-bosons- quantum-particles are parallel processors (with intrinsic information organized as code lines that implement all the laws of the universe generating reaction to any kind of action to that quantum particle) that permanently (but pulsated, NOT continuous) interchange small packs of information (location and momentum) (LMIPs=location-momentum information packs). Like any other kind of information, any LMIP can be measured in (physical) bits. IDUM views particle movement/colliding as LMIP interchange (similar to bytes transfer protocol between computers: TCP [transmission control protocol])23 . To differentiate the physical bit from the binary bit, I shall abbreviate the physical bit (p-(b)it) as “pit” (pit=k pit ·bit) (with kpit being a real number for the number of bits that the universe needs to store location and momentum information: LMIPs bits that mediate repulsive forces may be measured by negative k pit and LMIPs bits that mediate attractive forces may be measured by positive k pit ). Each type of gauge-boson and its anti-particle may be considered small LMIPs that non-gauge- bosons quantum particles can interchange with each other (4D-ST pulsated interchange). In this view, energy and matter are NOT fundamental, but they are just the result of measuring the LMIPs interchange between the observer and the physical system and between system components, interchange that is observed and measured in a well definite time interval (∆t=t 2-t1). LMIPs is truly fundamental in this model, and energy becomes just a “measure unit” for the number of LMIPS interchanged between the particles of an observed physical system per unit of time, and also between that physical system and the observer (including his measuring tools). What we perceive physically as the “energy of an observed system” (and/or through measuring tools which are body extensions) is the result of the capacity of the observed system to transfer LMIPs to the observer or the capacity of the observed system’s subcomponent to interchange LMIPs per unit of (subjective and/or objective) time. LMI is intrinsically a function of time by definition: LMI is strictly related to the time interval (∆t=t 2-t1=multiple integer of Plank time/interval= N∆t ·tP, with N∆t as positive integer: N∆t= ∆t/tP). In this informational view, Einstein’s equivalence principle E=m ·c2 becomes a consequence of the more general and profound information (LMI) conservation law (the “0 principle of thermodynamics” as Susskind names it when explaining black-holes: ”bits are indestructible”) and must be formulated 2 strictly related to time by definition: E ·∆t =(m · ∆t)·c IE(∆t) =I m·c2 (∆t) The LMI contained in a single λ-eg can be measured as a function of Eeg( λ): IEg( λ,∆t)= Eeg( λ)·∆t (where ∆t=t 2-t1=N ∆t ·tP is a specific time interval in which the eg is measured: for example the interval 23 See also: Alagoz, B. Baykant. Open Universe Modeling: Information Layer and Time Dilation (arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1010/1010.2365.pdf ); On gravitons as information carriers see also abstract no. 7 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf; 15 between the emission of the eg from a non-gauge-boson quantum particle and the absorption of that eg by another such quantum particle): IEg( λ,∆t)= Eeg( λ)· ∆t= Eeg( λ)· N∆t ·tP. Table 9-A. IDUM: the physical information (LMI) definition. ∆t t2− t1 N tP ⋅tP I() pit E() joule ⋅∆t( s) I() Physical_information() pits IE(), ∆t E⋅∆t EN⋅ tP ⋅tP E() Joules ∆t() time() s Information Energy ⋅Time 1pit() 1joule ⋅(1s) pit joule⋅ s kpit ⋅bit Total_I ()∆t intrinsec_I ()∆t + received_I ()∆t − emitted_I (∆t ) Total_I ()∆t intrinsec_I ()∆t + input_I ()∆t − output_I (∆t ) 2 2 E⋅∆t (m⋅ c ) ⋅∆t IE(), ∆t I( m⋅ c , ∆t ) IE()∆t I 2(∆t ) IE I 2 m⋅ c m⋅ c Ieg ()λ, ∆t Eeg ()λ ⋅∆t Eeg ()λ ⋅N ∆t ⋅tP h and heg constants are measurable in pits (as they are measured in joule ·seconds) and have a profound informational meaning in IDUM, as they can be interpreted as part of an apparently specific quantized informational transfer protocol of the universe. As h and heg have very small numerical values compared to 1 pit, it’s useful to imagine (similar to the complex imaginary number i) a binary logarithmic subunit (apparently atypical and a physical “non-sense”, as i factor is for the complex number):log2(pit)=lit(lpit) <=>pit=2 lit . The fact that when measured in lits, h and heg have numerical values close to adimensional α is an indirect argument for the possible non-coincidental truth of DAH. Based on the physical information definition above, we can estimate the total “white” information of the (observable directly and indirectly) universe (Iwu) from the total white energy of the universe (Ewu) (deducted from the total “white” mass of the universe [Mu(Mwu)] and the speed of light [c]) and the estimated age of the observable universe [Aou] (considered in doubled-temporal-sense as all the quantum charged anti-particles can be viewed as moving inversely, from the future to the past as Richard Feynman did in his famous diagrams describing the behavior of subatomic particles, “stealing” Wheeler’s idea from the one-electron universe hypothesis as he recognized it with humor and no animosity from Wheeler’s part): Iwu=Ewu·(2 ·Aou)=(Mu ·c2)·(2 ·Aou)=[RNHAU ·(Mp+Me) ·c2]·(2 ·Aou) (see both previous and next table). The total information of the 4D-ST universe (Itu) is the sum between the “white” information (Iwu) and “dark” information (the physical information stored in the measurable 3D-ST vacuum) (Idu= Etu ·(2 ·Aou)): Itu=Iwu+Idu. What we measure/name as “the total [white] energy of the universe” can be just the consequence of a large informational input (Itu) absorbed by the 0/1D vacuum (a possible “slice”/brane of an N- dimensional universe as in M-theory) at the Big-Bang “moment”: all the universe can be seen as large informational input fluctuation of that initial 0/1D vacuum. 16 Table 9-B. IDUM: h, heg and Iwu, Idu and Itu measurement using physical bits (pits) − 34 − 110.217 lit − 110.217 +lit h 6.62606957⋅ 10 pit 2 ⋅ 2 2 − 110.217 lit 1 − 262.553 lit heg pit 2 ⋅ 2 − 262.553 lit 2⋅()− 131.276 ⋅lit 1.087× 10 79 2 2 Iwu Eu ⋅()2⋅Aou (Mu⋅ c ) ⋅()2⋅Aou RNHAU⋅() Mp+ Me ⋅c ⋅(2⋅Aou ) Iwu 3.282× 10 90 pit 300.688 lit 2.194⋅() 137.036 ⋅lit Idu Edu ⋅(2⋅Aou ) Idu 6.925× 10 91 pit 305.087 ⋅lit 2.226 ⋅α ⋅lit Itu Idu + Iwu Itu 7.254× 10 91 ⋅pit 305.154 ⋅lit Idu = 95.475 % Itu Iwu = 4.525 % Itu As IDUM treats h/heg and other information quantities as central and fundamental (as a form of theoretical unification) , many physical quantities with no apparent meaning in SI (such as the square root of mass/force/energy as in the gravity and Coulomb universal laws, Koide coincidence etc.) have a precise meaning in IDUM measuring system. In the table below, IDUM defines mass as an informational flow (number of LMIPs measured in a specific time interval) per unit of area. In IDUM, the rest mass of any quantum particle isn’t explained just by the subcomponent circular moving egs (that also generates spin), but IDUM predicts that all the subcomponent egs of one particle come from the con-focal LMIP “radiation” of all the other quantum particles in the universe in a no-time 3D-framed 4D-ST universe: that’s why IDUM considers as legitimate (and NOT obsolete as the majority of mainstream physicist now consider) the Eddington’s intuition on a very strong relationship between one specific quantum particle and all the other particles in the universe (which is a both fractal and holographic principle: “the whole is present in all its parts and vice versa”). 17 Table 9-C. IDUM system of info-energy-mass measure units. LMIPs transfer has a specific direction and sense in a specific moment in time that’s why (physical) information quantity and all its derived physical quantities (including energy, force, mass) are considered essentially vectors in IDUM: the fact that LMI is a vector explains why force is also a vector, but IDUM imposes that all the SI scalar- considered physical quantities (such as energy and mass) are also vectors in essence (as LMIPs are proprieties of the 4D-ST vacuum itself) (Physical) Information (LMI) lit IE⋅∆t (pit 2 J⋅ s) quantity (I) (the spin of (the same measure unit as the spin of elementary particles / the classical angular momentum) elementary particles / the classical angular momentum) 2 lit 2 Information flow (IF) IF I⋅∆t E⋅∆t (pit⋅ s 2 ⋅s J⋅ s ) Energy (LMI interchange/transfer I pit 2lit E J speed) ∆t s s (Physical) Power (the variation of I pit E ∆t I s pit 2lit LMI transfer-speed with time; P W ∆t ∆t 2 s 2 2 LMI transfer acceleration) ∆t s s Force (the LMI transfer per unit I I E ∆t d I of distance [linear or circular F distance() d d ∆t d⋅∆t distance usually perpendicular on pit pit the direction of LMI transfer] per s m pit 2lit unit of time) N m s m⋅ s m⋅ s Square root of force (0.5D Cantor- I0.5 I0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 E ∆t d I fractal sampled LMI [1 of the 2 F 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 LMIP pair of the force field] distance() d d ∆t d ⋅∆t distributed per 0.5D Cantor- pit 0.5 pit 0.5 lit fractal sampled time and space) 0.5 0.5 0.5 s m pit 2 2 N0.5 (0.5D Cantor-fractal pulsated 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 m s m ⋅s m ⋅s force/LMI transfer) Mass (information flow [LMI E I F distance() d ∆t I⋅∆t IF M transfer flow] per unit of area [an 2 acceleration() a distance() d d d2 d2 2 area usually perpendicular to the ∆t 2 ∆t direction of LMI transfer]) 18 pit 2 N m⋅ s pit⋅ s pit⋅ s kg 2 2 m m m ⋅s m s2 s2 The rest mass of the electron can be understood as the informational flow (measured by number of egs in a minimal full rotation 2 ⋅π ⋅Re interval of time 1.096× 10 21 ⋅tP ) per unit of circular section area (supposing that the electron is a 4D c torus/hyper-sphere in which all the co-phase sub-egs circulary move through a section area, and this informational flow movement generates the rest mass, the spin and the charge of the electron). Square root of mass (0.5D Cantor- IF IF 0.5 M fractal sampled LMI flow [1 of the 2 d d 2 LMIP pair of the mass field in a 0.5 0.5 pit ⋅s 0.5D Cantor-fractal sampled time kg m interval] distributed per unit of distance/length [a linear/circular distance usually perpendicular to the direction of LMI transfer]) (0.5D Cantor-fractal pulsated LMI flow) Square of mass (informational 2D IF 2 M2 “super”-flow per unit of 4D hyper 4 d volume) 2 2 2 pit ⋅s ()pit⋅ s 2 kg m4 m4 Momentum (classical) IF d IF I p m⋅ v ⋅ (informational quantity d2 ∆t d⋅∆t d transferred per unit of m pit⋅ s m pit distance/length [a linear/circular kg ⋅ ⋅ s 2 s m distance usually perpendicular to m the direction of LMI transfer]) IDUM proposes Iwu as the single real fundamental parameter (physical “constant”) of the white universe with Mu (Mwu), c and Aou as 3 “faces”(inverse proportional to each other) of the same essential informational entity (Iwu=[Mwu·c2]·Aou=Ewu·Aou) that can be measured (at least theoretically) in any N-ST frame (with N being any positive real number of dimensions). Iwu has the potential of predict Ewu·Aou binomial, Mwu(RNHAU) ·c2 binomial, h, Me (the initial parameters considered in Table 8, from which all other physical constants were deduced) . h, heg , W/Z boson masses are LMIP constants that may be deduced from Iwu in a quite unexpected way. h can be deduced from another striking DAH-like (apparent) coincidence: log2(Iwu/h)/ α~3 h~ Iwu/NHAD3~Iwu/(2α)3 (with a very low probability to exist just by pure hazard). From this “unexpected” 19 relationship (which is related with TH and DAH) we can conclude that it is very possible that h measurement is in fact the result of the total Iwu measurement in a 3D-ST frame (the fractal principle that is a component of many models of fractal universes: “the whole is in each of the parts”). Based on this striking coincidence, we can calculate a h-corrected Iwu so that log2(Iwuc/h)/ α=3 Iwuc=h·NHAD 3= h· (2 α)3. Based on Iuc, both Ewu and/or Aou can be “corrected” in correlation with Iwuc. As Aou typically varies by definition (the time scale of the universe), it may be more inspired to calculate a corrected Aou (Aouc) based on Iuc. Aouc>Aou doesn’t necessary mean that Aou is inexact: Aouc may have a more profound meaning as it may be interpreted as half duration of an universe expansion-contraction full cycle (as if the known universe may have a negative accelerated expansion until the Aouc point and then enters in a contraction half-cycle 24 ). IDUM predicts a periodic expansion-contraction(e-c) cycle of the physical universe behavior, with 2*Aouc for a full e-c cycle. Based on Aouc, IDUM also estimates Iwuc and Iduc as the corrected white and dark information of the universe. Table 10-A. IDUM predicts Iuc, Aouc and h (as a function of Iuc). Iwu Iwu Iwu log2 h h 3 NHAD 3 = 2.999 NHAD = 86.912 % α h Iwuc h⋅23 ⋅α 115.058 % ⋅Iwu Iwuc Ewu Aouc 15.885⋅ 10 9years 115.058 % ⋅Aou 2 Iduc Edu ⋅()2⋅Aouc 7.968× 10 91 ⋅pits Iwuc Ewu ⋅()2⋅Aouc 3.777× 10 90 ⋅pits Ituc Iduc+ Iwuc ()Edu+ Ewu ⋅()2⋅Aouc 8.346× 10 91 ⋅pits Iwuc = 4.525 % Ituc When analyzing the quantity of information carried by a single W/Z boson (Ibwz=Mwz ·c2·Tbwz ) as function of W/Z boson mass (Mwz) and W/Z boson mean half-life 25 (Tbwz ~ 3·10 -25 s ~ 5.565*10 18 ·tP ~ 2 α/2 ·tP ), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence log2[Iwu/(Mwz ·c2·Tbwz)]/α~3 Ibwz~ Iwu/NHAD 3 ~ Iwu/(2 α)3 which supports the (already proved) theory that the weak nuclear force and the electromagnetic force are 2 “faces” of the electroweak force . Table 10-B. IDUM (retroactively) predicts the unity between electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces as part of the same ~3D-frame. Iu Iu log2 log2 2 2 ()Mbz⋅ c ⋅Tbz ()Mbw⋅ c ⋅Tbw = 2.99 = 2.992 α α 24 See also abstract no. 17 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf ; See also abstract no. 24 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2006abstracts.pdf ; See also abstract no. 4 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf; 25 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W_and_Z_bosons 20 Iuc Iuc log2 log2 2 2 ()Mbw⋅ c ⋅Tbw ()Mbz⋅ c ⋅Tbz = 2.993 = 2.992 α α In the case of the gauge bosons other than the photon and the (electro)graviton, there are 2 types of information associated to those quantum particles: 1) the intrinsic information (Iin) that can be calculated from the total energy of the particle (m·c2) and the medium time interval in which that gauge- particle is stable if it is isolated (at least theoretically) from all other particle in the universe for a sufficient time interval to observe decay (Tin) and 2) the extrinsic information (Iex) that can be calculated from the total energy of the particle (m·c2) and the (average) time interval in which that gauge-particle can be normally observed between 2-consecutive-emission-absorption cycle (Tex) by 2 non-gauge-bosons quantum particles. It can also be observed that in the case of eg, photon and W/Z bosons, Iin~Iex (as Td~Tex). When analyzing the extrinsic information of a single gluon 26 (Iex-gl=Mgl ·c2·Tbwz ) as function of gluon mass (Mgl~0,<0.0002MeV/c 2) and gluon very short emission-absorption cycle similar to W/Z boson half-life ( Tgl~Tbwz ), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence log2[Iwu/(Mgl ·c2·Tbwz)]/α~3 (Mgl ·c2) ·Tgl ~ Iwu/NHAD 3 ~ [Iwu/(2 α)3]. This coincidence offers IDUM the potential of offering at least a formal logical unification between the electroweak force and the strong nuclear force as they both share 3D- framed LMIPs (similar to Grand Unified Theories 27 ). Table 10-C. IDUM predicts the unity between electroweak and strong nuclear forces as part of the same ~3D-frame. Iu Iu log2 log2 2 2 ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Tbw ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Tbz = 3.2 = 3.2 α α Iuc Iuc log2 log2 2 2 ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Tbw ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Tbz = 3.202 = 3.202 α α When analyzing heg information quantity from the same perspective, we get another similar DAH- like coincidence log2(Iwuc/heg)/ α~4 heg~Iwuc/NHAD 4~Iwu/(2 α)4 from which we can conclude that it is very possible that heg measurement (even though it is just a theoretical plausible-but-indirect measurement) is in fact same Iwu(Iuc) measurement in a 4D-ST info-frame variant. This coincidence offers IDUM the potential of offering at least a formal logical unification between the electromagnetic force and gravity, as any 3D-framed LMIP can be decomposed in a quantum gravity 4D-info-frame. The hugeness of Iwuc, the 2 orders of magnitude of (the exponential index) α above 1 and the Iwuc-4D-framing of (electro)gravity (in contrast to the Iwu 3D-framing of the other 3 forces) also explains the huge exponential difference (over 39 decimal magnitude orders) in strength between gravity and the other 3 forces. 26 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon 27 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory 21 Table 10-D. IDUM predicts the unity between gravity and the other 3 fundamental forces (3D-framed) as gravity is the ~4D-framed variant of the same total universe information (Iwu, Iuc). Iu Iuc log2 log2 heg heg = 4.11 = 4.112 α α h = 7.202× 10 45 heg Checkpoint conclusion: IDUM offers an Iwu(3D/4D) unified info-frame for all the 4 known fundamental forces of nature (measured by heg, h, Iin/ex of W/Z bosons and Iex of gluons) (“theories of everything” 28 similarity). However, I shall try to demonstrate that IDUM also offers a potential explanation of leptons, photons, gluons and quarks inner forces and structures. As IDUM defines the eg as a (large) group of co-phase gravitons (in the same quantum state) (which all may act as a unity), we can inductively proceed in reading Iwuc in a 5D frame using the same algorithm: IDUM conjectures that the 5D frame is that of gravitons, the (~)1D “bricks” that build all the 5D-ST vacuum and also build the eg-based quantum particles (string theory similarity; Kaluza-Klein theory 29 similarity). Reading Iwuc in a 5D-α frame generates another (possible last) gravitonic Planck- like constant named hgr by IDUM. Hgr is defined as hgr=Iwuc/NHAD 5~Iwu/(2 α)5 log2(Iwuc/hgr)/ α=5. Based on the heg/hgr ratio, IDUM estimated that a single (circular/linear) eg (a physical byte) may contain a huge number of ~10 36 gravitons (physical bits) with the same wavelength (the granulation factor of an eg analogous to the granulation factor NEgP of a photon). Based on this informational constant (hgr) IDUM also defines the scalar of a single graviton with λ-wavelength as: Egr( λ)=hgr ·c/ λ=hgr ·υ. As Rre is considered a minimum bend-ray for a single circular eg, IDUM conjectures that lP is the minimum bend-ray of a single circular graviton so that a single 4D-ST single eg pixel may circumscribe ~10 18 single graviton inner subpixels (all the ~1.5D quantum particles including electrons and quarks may have an inner structure composed of at least 10 18 graviton-strings) (see the next table). The ~2D holographic character of a single eg 4D-ST pixel information is conserved when compared to a single graviton 5D-ST subpixel information (see the next table). As a single eg is a ~2D entity in a 5D-ST, a single graviton is a ~1D entity when Iwuc is read in a 5D-α frame (string theory similarity; see the next table). IDUM conjectures that gravity and electromagnetism have similar scalars because they both are graviton-based forces: photon is a pack of ~10 45 co-phase egs which is analogous to an eg being a pack of ~10 36 co-phase gravitons. IDUM conjectures that light bending is a consequence of the eg-based granulation of the photon that changes gravitons with the ST eg-based matrix. 30 . The gluon (~0eV), the electron neutrino (~2eV) 31 , the gravitino 32 (~1eV as defined in supersymmetric models) may be graviton based with rest energy defined as multiple of Egr(lP)=hgr ·lP/c. 28 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything 29 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaluza%E2%80%93Klein_theory ; See also abstract no. 4 (Bond ărescu, Mihai) from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2005abstracts.pdf 30 See also abstract no. 28 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf 31 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino 32 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightest_Supersymmetric_Particle 22 Table 10-E. IDUM predicts a gravitonic Planck-like constant (the informational constant of the graviton; the [physical] bit of the universe) by reading the same Iwuc in a 5D-α frame. Iwuc Iwuc hgr log2 5 hgr ()2α 5 α 1 heg hgr ⋅pit = 4.431× 10 36 4.815× 10 115 hgr h 2 NHAD 3.191× 10 82 hgr c Egr ()λ hgr ⋅ hgr ⋅υ λ Eeg() Rre Rre = 9.992× 10 17 = 4.434× 10 18 Egr() lP lP heg Eeg() Rre log2 log2 hgr Egr() lP = 1.965 = 0.965 Rre Rre log2 log2 lP lP When analyzing the intrinsic information of a single gluon 33 (Iin-gl=Mgl ·c2·Tgl ) as function of gluon mass (Mgl~0,<0.0002MeV/c 2) and the very large (mean) half-life of the gluon (as the gluon is as stable as the electron and the proton) (Tgl~Te, Tgl~Tp or Tgl~Aou, with Te=electron half-life and Tp=proton half-life ), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence: log2[Iwu/(Mgl ·c2·Te,Tp)]/α~2. The electron, the proton (and the intra-nuclear neutron), the up and down quarks (that form the nucleons together with gluons) also have 1.5-2D Iwu-framing (there are not just informational arguments, but also mass and dimension argumentative strong DAH-like coincidences related to log2(Mu/Me) and log2(Mu/Mp), but also between the ray of the observable universe [Rou] and the classical electron ray [Re] and the approximate proton ray [Rp]): Mu~Mp ·NHAD 2~Mp ·(2 α)2~- 2 α 2 α Me ·NHAD ~Me ·(2 ) ; log 2(Rou/Re)~ αRou~ Re ·NHAD~ Re ·2 ; α log 2(Rou/Rp)~ αRou~Rp ·NHAD~Rp ·2 . IDUM predicts and supports the 2D holographic universe theory by the DAH-like coincidence that Mu/Mp~(Rou/Rp)2~NHAD 2~(2 α)2. IDUM predicts and supports that quark based quantum particles and leptons are essentially ~2D branes (strong similarity with M-theory and subquantum theories 34 generally, especially to Bohm's subquantum potential 35 concept). From this point of view, IDUM invokes a 5 th force (similar to some preon/rishons theories) that assures the inner structure and stability of the 1.5-2D subatomic particles mentioned above. This 5 th force may be a type of very strong gravity (VSG) which may be active only on very short distances (close to Planck length): VSG is a good candidate for explaining the internal forces and the 2D inner structure of the black-holes. VSG may also explain Koide-like coincidences in which high symmetry can be reached at (just) apparently low energies (in fact 33 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon 34 www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/qm4.htm 35 arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0311244; www.metafysica.nl/holism/implicate_order_20.html 23 the inner forces and energy of the electron/quark may be very high on very small scales and may explain the striking symmetries in the rest masses of the leptons/quarks [as the one illustrated by Koide coincidence]) Table 11. IDUM predicts that the subatomic particles supposed to be „point-like” are actually ~1.5D to 2D-ST framed and may have a 1.5D to 2D inner structure stabilized by forces even stronger than the strong nuclear force (a possible very strong gravity: VSG). Iu log2 Iu Iu 2 log2 Mp⋅ c Tp log2 2 () 2 ()Me⋅ c Te = 1.548 ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Te = 1.683 α = 1.766 α Mu α Mu log2 Iu log2 Mp log2 Me = 1.997 2 = 2.077 α ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Tp α = 1.709 Rou Rou α log2 log2 Re Rp = 0.999 = 1.011 α α Mu Mu log2 log2 Me = 2.079 Mp Rou = 1.976 log2 Rou Re log2 Rp Rou Mu Iu log2 log2 lP Mp 2 = 1.489 = 1.024 ()Mqu_med⋅ c ⋅Tp α 2 = 1.611 Rou α Iu Re log2 2 ()Mqd_med⋅ c ⋅Tp = 1.603 α In conclusion, LMIPs (measured by h, heg, W/Z boson intrinsic information and gluon intrinsic and extrinsic information) may be the consequence of the the same Iwu (Iuc) and its “granularity” and spreading/escape in different (3D/4D)-ST frames of measurement. IDUM offers a simple elegant interpretation to all forces/fields as derived from a single parameter (Iwu, Iuc). IDUM is compatible with a potential universal law of force variation inverse proportional to the square of the distance (as distribution of the emitted LMIPs on the surface of a sphere with a ray equal to the distance between any 2 particles in the universe). IDUM can be simulated on any computer, using software specialized in parallel multiple particle manipulation. IDUM may generate interesting predictions that can be tested experimentally: the quantum G series prediction is a good example ( see Part 2 ). 24 Part 2 A heg series and quantum G series prediction for any atom, based on the nuclear binding energy (the nuclear mass „defect”) as a measure of ST level of contraction/”compression” at high nuclear internal „pressures”. The number of egs emitted by a specific subatomic quantum particle is directly proportional to the particle relativistic mass (rest mass+velocity/dynamic mass+/-mass „defect” if it’s the case). The number of egs emitted by an atom is directly proportional to the sum of all masses/energies of the subatomic particles (proton, neutron and electron). The protons total mass in an atom can be aproximated as a function of the number of protons ( NP ) and also considering the mass „defect”/ NBE of the protons in the atom nucleus (see PTM [protons total mass] function in the next table). The neutrons total mass in an atom can be aproximated as a function of the number of neutrons ( NN ) and also considering the mass „defect”/NBE of the neutrons in the atom nucleus (see NTM[neutrons total mass] function in the next table). The electrons total mass in a neutral (intact) atom can be aproximated as a function of the number of electrons (NE=NP ) and also considering the dynamic mass of the electrons in the atom’s electronic shell as a function of an average speed (as ) (see ETM [electrons total mass] function in the next table). The atom’s total mass (ATM ) is the sum of the 3 functions described before ( NTM , PTM and ETM ). For simplicity, IDUM considers a plausible simple grade I function to describe the relationship between NBE and the energy of a single emitted eg (Eeg=function(heg n); hegs n as directly proportional to ST level of contraction which is also relative to the initial free masses of the proton and neutron at rest, which differ slightly from one another). NBE measures the level of the strong nuclear force exerted on a nucleon in a specific nucleus, and the ST contraction/compression is directly proportional to that level of force (measured by NBE) . The level of the ST compression in a particle can be measured supra-unitary by the (inverse) ratio between a particle rest mass and the compressed particle mass (the rest mass minus mass defect): see PCR (proton compression ratio), NCR (neutron compression ration) and ECR (electron compression ratio) functions in the next table ( ECR is sub-unitary as the electrons have negative mass defects generated by their high relativistic average speed[as] in the atom ). In any atom, heg (and the single eg energy: Eeg( λ)) has a specific distorsion for any type of subatomic particle from that atom as function of PCR, NCR and ECR: hegP (intranuclear proton specific heg), hegN (intranuclear neutron specific heg) and hegE (atom’s electrons specific heg, moving with an average speed [as]) (see the next table). In fact, what it is measured as heg (by measuring G in different experiments) is the mass weighted average between these 3 separate specfic hegs: HegP, hegN and hegE. That’s why IDUM considers a heg series (named hegs) for all types of atoms in which each element (hegs n) is a a mass weighted avarage of all 3 specific heg of each subatomic particle in each type of atom (hegP, hegN and hegE). The G series (Gs) is a function of heg series (hegs): see Gs(NBE, NP, NN, as) function in the next table. IDUM considers that the experimental G is the result of measuring the interchange of 2 simultanously combined flows of egs (each characterized by a hegP, hegN and hegE weighted average combination) between 2 masses (characterized by 2 specific Gs for each mass: Gs 1 and Gs 2): see the general form of Gs(NBE, NP, NN, as) function in the next table. As it can be seen in the next table graphs, the theoretical Gs graph aproximates all the G results in the past over 100 years of big G determination experiments (Gexp [violet marks] : in a chronological order aproximating the rising accuracy of the devices used to determine G; Gexp2[light blue marks with connectig lines] : in an ascending order aproximating the NBE curve used to determine G), as a superior limit to the experimental G values suite. However, all the G results obtained on Earth are „contaminated” by the (already) curved ST of the Sun and the Earth in which the experiments take place. IDUM can aproximate Sun’s and 25 Earth’s specific G based on their chemical composition. Because of the Sun predominance and its abundance in hydrogen (a chemical element with a specific Gs smaller than CODATA 2012 G) (see the next table), the Sun’s specific quantum G is 99.613%·G. The Earth’s specific G is larger that CODATA 2012 G (100.497% ·G) and can be calculated based on the abundance of the chemical elements in the Earth composed mostly of iron (32.1%), oxygen (30.1%), silicon (15.1%) and magnesium (13.9%). When experiments are conducted into space, exprimental G will tend to be smaller (due to the influence of the hydrogen based quantum G of the Sun). When the experiments are conducted deep in the Earth’s layers (as one experiment that took place in 1km deep mines) they tnd to generate a larger experimental G. IDUM predicts that the G determination will depend on the altitude at which the experiment takes place, but also on the chemical composition of that specific Earth region in which the experiment takes place. IDUM has a prediction that is verifiable both retrospectively (by analizing the negative/positive altitude, the chemical composition of that region and of all the materials used in past 100 years G determination experiments) and in the future by using the same experimental device at different altitudes and in different regions and using metal spheres of different atoms or single atoms of at least 2 types and analyze the systematic differences 36 between the experimental G as function of all these chemical and physical variables. IDUM recommends Stephen Merkowitz’s method 37 and atom inferometry 38 . IDUM also predicts that any change in the relative position between the Sun and the Earth in the interval of the experiment can slightly influence the results (see the 1400ppm varation invoked in one experiment cited below). IDUM can also explain the Mikhail Gershteyn’s (MIT) discovery: his team has successfully experimentally demonstrated that the well known force of gravity between 2 test bodies varies with their orientation in space, relative to a system of distant stars. Their remarkable finding has been also been issued on the journal 'Gravitation and Cosmology'. George Spagna, a chairman of the physics dept at Randolph-Macon College, argued that Mikhail and his colleagues must provide theoretical justification to be convincing. IDUM proposes a plausible explanation to the apparent paradox of the divergent variation of experimental G values („despite” constant improvements of the measurement systems) as these measurement systems can now better differentiate between different chemical structures combined G imprints and Sun-Earth-star systems configurations (in 1999, CODATA decided to officially increase the uncertainty of the accepted value for G from 128 ppm to 1500 ppm). IDUM approximates the entire information that can be stored in a potential 3D-ST vacuum and also the inner (intrinsic/extrinsic) information of the particles in their existence, NOT just the information stored in the states of the particles (the main difference between IDUM and the other informational models of the universe: see the References). 36 See also abstract no. 25 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf 37 asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/Stephen.Merkowitz/G/Big_G.html 38 Schlamminger, Stephan (18 June 2014). "Fundamental constants: A cool way to measure big G". Nature. adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014Natur.510..478S 26 Table 12-A. Hegs series (hegs) and quantum G series (Gs) for any atom NBE NBE 2 PTM() NP, NBE NP⋅ Mp − NTM() NN, NBE NN⋅ Mn − Me⋅ as 2 2 ETM() NE, as NE⋅ Me + c c c2 ATM() NP, NN , NBE , as PTM() NP, NBE + NTM() NN, NBE + ETM( NP, as ) Mp Mn Me PCR() NBE := NCR() NBE := ECR() as := 2 NBE NBE Me⋅ as Mp − Mn − Me + 2 2 c c c2 hegP heg⋅ PCR( NBE ) hegN heg⋅ NCR( NBE ) hegE heg⋅ ECR( as ) PTM() NP, NBE NTM() NN, NBE ETM() NP, as hegs() NP, NN , NBE , as hegP ⋅ + hegN ⋅ + hegE ⋅ ATM() NP, NN , NBE , as ATM() NP, NN , NBE , as ATM() NP, NN , NBE , as c Kg ; Gs() NP, NN , NBE , as 2Kg⋅ hegs( NP, NN , NBE , as ) Me 2 Gs() NBE, NP , NN , as Kg⋅ hegs1() NBE, NP , NN , as + Kg⋅ hegs2( NBE, NP , NN , as ) Gs1() NBE, NP , NN , as + Gs2() NBE, NP , NN , as Gs() NBE, NP , NN , as 2 Figure 1. NBE variation with atomic mass (upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Binding_energy_curve_-_common_isotopes.svg ) 27 Figure 2. hegs as function of each atom’s specific NBE The hegs/heg ratio variation for the main isotope of each chemical element 1.01 1.008 1.006 hegs() NP, NN , NBE , as 1.004 heg 1.002 1 0.998 0 20 40 60 80 NP Z Figure 3. Gs as function of hegs. 28 Table 12-B. G variation evidence from readings spanning over 200 years (Source of the data and the comments: www.blazelabs.com/f-u-massvariation.asp ) Data Set % Deviation Author Year G (x10 -11 m3Kg -1s-2) Accuracy number from CODATA 1 Cavendish H. 1798 6.74 ±0.05 +0.986 2 Reich F. 1838 6.63 ±0.06 -0.662 3 Baily F. 1843 6.62 ±0.07 -0.812 4 Cornu A, Baille J. 1873 6.63 ±0.017 -0.662 5 Jolly Ph. 1878 6.46 ±0.11 -3.209 6 Wilsing J. 1889 6.594 ±0.015 -1.202 7 Poynting J.H. 1891 6.70 ±0.04 +0.387 8 Boys C.V. 1895 6.658 ±0.007 -0.243 9 Eotvos R. 1896 6.657 ±0.013 -0.258 10 Brayn C.A. 1897 6.658 ±0.007 -0.243 11 Richarz F. & Krigar-Menzel O. 1898 6.683 ±0.011 +0.132 12 Burgess G.K. 1902 6.64 ±0.04 -0.512 13 Heyl P.R. 1928 6.6721 ±0.0073 -0.031 14 Heyl P.R. 1930 6.670 ±0.005 -0.063 15 Zaradnicek J. 1933 6.66 ±0.04 -0.213 16 Heyl P.,Chrzanowski 1942 6.673 ±0.003 -0.018 17 Rose R.D. et al. 1969 6.674 ±0.004 -0.003 18 Facy L., Pontikis C. 1972 6.6714 ±0.0006 -0.042 19 Renner Ya. 1974 6.670 ±0.008 -0.063 20 Karagioz et al 1975 6.668 ±0.002 -0.093 21 Luther et al 1975 6.6699 ±0.0014 -0.064 22 Koldewyn W., Faller J. 1976 6.57 ±0.17 -1.561 23 Sagitov M.U. et al 1977 6.6745 ±0.0008 +0.004 24 Luther G., Towler W. 1982 6.6726 ±0.0005 -0.024 25 Karagioz et al 1985 6.6730 ±0.0005 -0.018 26 Dousse & Rheme 1986 6.6722 ±0.0051 -0.030 27 Boer H. et al 1987 6.667 ±0.0007 -0.108 29 28 Karagioz et al 1986 6.6730 ±0.0003 -0.018 29 Karagioz et al 1987 6.6730 ±0.0005 -0.018 30 Karagioz et al 1988 6.6728 ±0.0003 -0.021 31 Karagioz et al 1989 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019 32 Saulnier M.S., Frisch D. 1989 6.65 ±0.09 -0.363 33 Karagioz et al 1990 6.6730 ±0.00009 -0.018 34 Schurr et al 1991 6.6613 ±0.0093 -0.193 35 Hubler et al 1992 6.6737 ±0.0051 -0.008 36 Izmailov et al 1992 6.6771 ±0.0004 +0.043 37 Michaelis et al 1993 6.71540 ±0.00008 +0.617 38 Hubler et al 1993 6.6698 ±0.0013 -0.066 39 Karagioz et al 1993 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019 40 Walesch et al 1994 6.6719 ±0.0008 -0.035 41 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1994 6.6746 ±0.001 +0.006 42 Hubler et al 1994 6.6607 ±0.0032 -0.202 43 Hubler et al 1994 6.6779 ±0.0063 +0.055 44 Karagioz et al 1994 6.67285 ±0.00008 -0.020 45 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1995 6.6656 ±0.0009 -0.129 46 Karagioz et al 1995 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019 47 Walesch et al 1995 6.6685 ±0.0011 -0.085 48 Michaelis et al 1996 6.7154 ±0.0008 +0.617 49 Karagioz et al 1996 6.6729 ±0.0005 -0.019 50 Bagley & Luther 1997 6.6740 ±0.0007 -0.003 51 Schurr, Nolting et al 1997 6.6754 ±0.0014 +0.018 52 Luo et al 1997 6.6699 ±0.0007 -0.064 53 Schwarz W. et al 1998 6.6873 ±0.0094 +0.196 54 Kleinvoss et al 1998 6.6735 ±0.0004 -0.011 55 Richman et al 1998 6.683 ±0.011 +0.132 56 Luo et al 1999 6.6699 ±0.0007 -0.064 57 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1999 6.6742 ±0.0007 ±0.01 30 58 Richman S.J. et al 1999 6.6830 ±0.0011 +0.132 59 Schurr, Noltting et al 1999 6.6754 ±0.0015 +0.018 60 Gundlach & Merkowitz 1999 6.67422 ±0.00009 +0.0003 61 Quinn et al 2000 6.67559 ±0.00027 +0.021 -- PRESENT CODATA VALUE 2004 6.6742 ±0.001 ±0.0150 “The official CODATA value for G in 1986 was given as G= (6,67259±0.00085) x 10 -11 m3Kg -1s-2 and was based on the Luther and Towler determination in 1982 . However, the value of G has been recently called into question by new measurements from respected research teams in Germany, New Zealand, and Russia in order to try to settle this issue. The new values using the best laboratory equipment to-date disagreed wildly to the point that many are doubting about the constancy of this parameter and some are even postulating entirely new forces to explain these gravitational anomalies . For example, in 1996 , a team from the German Institute of Standards led by W. Michaelis obtained a value for G that is 0.6% higher than the accepted value ; another group from the University of Wuppertal in Germany led by Hinrich Meyer found a value that is 0.06% lower , and in 1995 , Mark Fitzgerald and collaborators at Mea surement Standards Laboratory of New Zealand measured a value that is 0.13% lower . The Russian group found a curious space and time variation of G of up to +0.7%. In the early 1980s, Frank Stacey and his colleagues measured G in deep mines and bore holes i n Australia. Their value was about 1% higher than currently accepted . In 1986 Ephrain Fischbach, at the University of Washington, Seattle, claimed that laboratory tests also showed a slight deviation from Newton's law of gravity, consistent with the Austra lian results. As it may be seen from the Cavendish conference data, the results of the major 7 groups may agree with each other only on the level 0.1 %. So, despite our great technology advancements in measuring equipment, we are still very close to the pre cision of 1% obtained by Cavendish in the 17th century. This controversy has spurred several efforts to make a more reliable measurement of G, but till now we only got further conflicting results.” “One such effort was that by J.P. Sc hwartz and J.E. Faller, who devised an experiment that uses gravity field of a one half metric ton source mass to perturb the trajectory of a free-falling mass. They used laser interferometry to track the falling object. This experiment does not suspend th e test mass from a support system, and it therefore rules out many of the systematic errors associated with supports in Cavendish-like setups. Below are the results gathered over 3 years. This is a plot of G results using the mentioned free fall technique. Error bars represent one formal standard deviation. The 1997 data was processed daily, giving values of G from 6.66E-11 to 6.71E-11. One day's observation consisted of approximately 7200 drop measurements. Again, data consistently shows that G varies over time, with an uncertainty of over 1400ppm, 31 despite the fact that all sources of possible experimental errors associated with the classical Cavendish setup, have been eliminated.[...] Just a couple of years ago, Mikhail Gershteyn, a visiting scientist at th e MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Centre and his colleagues have successfully experimentally demonstrated that the well-known force of gravity between 2 test bodies varies with their orientation in space, relative to a system of distant stars. Their remarkab le finding has been also been issued on the journal 'Gravitation and Cosmology'. George Spagna, a chairman of the physics dept. at Randolph-Macon College, argued that Mikhail and his colleagues must provide theoretical justification to be convincing.” “The collection of these new results suggests that the something is wrong or missing in our understanding of G. By the end of 1999, the international committee CODATA, decided to officially increase the uncertainty of the accepted value fo r the gravitational constant from 128 ppm to 1500 ppm. This remarkable step of increasing the uncertainty instead of decreasing was made to reflect the discrepancies between the mentioned experiments.” 32 Part 3 (B)IDUM synthesis: principles, explanations, final additional arguments, extensions and predictions 1. IDUM conjectures that the universe is essentially a finite unitary (electro)graviton(string)-based informational entity (homogenous on large scales and generally at high energies AND assymetrical on local scales and generally at low energies) with a fractal holographic nature (self- similarity from low microcosmic to large macrocosmic scales AND all-in-one and one-in-all holographic principle). This unitary info-universe reaveals itself by specific intrinsic laws also encoded in this informational entity. a. IDUM proposes an „inverse” description of the universe (unity-to-parts) with accent on the (subquantum) informational unity of the universe and its apparent (holographic) „separations”/dichotomies as described in quantum mechanics and general relativity. b. What is perceived and/or measured as „energy” and „matter” is in fact the result of a double-sense flow of information between at least 3 elements of the whole informational universe: the observer (with or without measurement systems extensions to his body) and at least 2 subcomponents of the observed physical system. The channel of observation (through which information is transfered bisense) is also the subject to the same laws of the same whole universe. c. „Physical” is in fact „informational” and IDUM sustains and includes Wheeler's "it from bit" principle. 39 (IDUM identifies the physical byte [as group of bits] with a single electrograviton, and considers that the electrograviton is a compact co-phase group of gravitons, with the graviton as a ultimate indivisible physical bit [sub-byte]) d. IDUM conjectures that ST is granular (no matter the number of possible euclidian/fractal dimensions) and all the quantum particles appear quantized as a consequence of this ST granulation. Moreover, IDUM conjectures that: i. The observed 3D-ST vacuum is granulized in single circular electrogravitons (egs) with the smallest possible ray of eg circular movement being approximative Rre. The eg-pixels rotate in 4D and are intrincated and reciprocally perpendicular as in the next image. 1. 2. In IDUM, the circular/linear gravitons are considered the physical bits of reality (for both the 3D-ST „scene” and quantum wavicles „actors”). 3. All the quantum particles are eg-based and that’s how IDUM explains the particle-wave double nature of quantum particles, as all the quantum particles emit/receive egs (in pulses). 4. All the quantum particles are „born” from the ST vacuum (which may be considered a sub-quantic 40 level of unity of all [at least the observable] universe) 5. ST and quantum particles interchange (physical) information in fractal pulsed mode and relatively fixed packs (LMIPs) and all the physical 39 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics#Wheeler.27s_.22it_from_bit.22 40 link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00670409 33 (quasi)invariants of any law of physics are an indirect measurements of those relatively fixed LMIPs. ii. What we name and measure as the „dark energy/matter” is in fact the 3D-ST vacuum total energy with a volume (at least) equal to the observable universe volume. 1. IDUM predicts a percent (4.5%) close to the observed „white” energy/matter percent (~5%), with the observation that IDUM’s prediction may be closer to reality, as the ray of the observable universe and the capacity to measure energy/mass both depend on the measurement systems that can become more sensible and accurate in the future and measure greater energies/masses (from larger distances than the present determined Ru). iii. Physical information is in fact an energy/matter-space-time unity that reveals itself in a triple dichotomy: the primary dichotomy 1) space-time (the „scene”: the „dark” energy/matter) and quantum particles (the „actors”: the „white” energy/matter); 2) the parallel splitting of the dark/”white” energy-matter into a dark/”white” energy-matter binome; 3) the gauge-non-gauge functional relative dichotomy of quantum particles. 1. The informational unity (energy/matter-space-time) concept reveals itsself also in the scalars used by IDUM: Information=energy · time=mass · speed 2 · time = mass · speed · distance =mass · distance 2 / time=mass · 2D area / time. IDUM defines physical information as the product between energy and time and measures it using physical bits (p-bits/pits, 1 pit=1 joule*1 second). In IDUM, the mass/energy equivalence principle is just a consequence (and an approximation) of a more profound (physical) information conservation law. a. IE⋅∆t (pit 2lit J⋅ s) 2 b. IE(), ∆t I( m⋅ c , ∆t ) c. See Table 9-A and Table 9-C from Part 1. 2. The fact that the particle decay is a stochastic process in which it cannot be predicted for sure (but just probabilistically) what is the next particle from a multi-particle system that will decay (only the mean lifetime can be calculated statistically) is and argument for the IDUM view that information is a unity that reveals itself with a grade of impredictibility measured by the HUP (Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle) 41 . e. The first-level arbitrary-parameters (finite by definition) in IDUM are Iduc (the total [corrected] dark ST „scene” information), Iwuc (the total [corrected] white quantum particles „actors” information) (as the 2 parts of a total [corrected] [dark and white] information of the universe Ituc), the arbitrary rotation speed of a single-eg-ST-pixel (the speed of light in vacuum, noted c) considered the superior speed limit of any quantum particle in the 3D-ST (but NOT necessarily in 4D-ST), ±Qe (the elementary electrical charge generated by the single eg rotation with the speed of light in the 4th dimension, in 2 possible senses: past-to-future and future-to-past) and NegRou (the number of single-eg- ST-pixels per ray of the observable universe; these pixels are considered to be organized in 41 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle 34 a 4D chain in which to adiacent pixel are perpendicular to each other creating a 4D-ST and only a small fraction [ ~10%] of S 2D T2D pixels can be measured indirectly as dark energy). As a conclusion, the first-level arbitrary-parameters in IDUM are pixels (with all their inner characteristics) and their distribution pattern and density (ST resolution). i. Ituc 8.346× 10 91 ⋅pits 1. Ituc Iduc + Iwuc 2. Iduc 6.925⋅ 10 91 pits Iduc a. 95.475 % Ituc 3. Iwuc 3.282⋅ 10 90 ⋅pits Iwuc a. 4.525 % Ituc − 19 4. Qe 1.602176565⋅ 10 C Rou 5. NEgRou = 6.767× 10 42 NEgRou := 1.1 ( Rre ) a. f. IDUM also conjectures that the total information of the universe (Itu) has the potential to be the first level arbitrary parameter of any TOE reliable model: IDUM argues that all the measurable physical parameters may be derived from this first level parameter. In other words, the theory of everything is that „everything” is... one (creating the illusion of diversity by different frames auto-reading, as life is a process in which the total information of the whole universe auto-splits in different ierarhycal dichotomies and reads itself simulaneously in different frames) i. Ituc is a holographic fractal unity that can be measured in any frame of reference (no matter how many dimensions) without losing its overall consistency/coeherence and unity. Ituc is the mark of a complex unitary system in which the separation between the RNHAU info-processing units is also an illusion (as a consequence of the (perceptual) illusion of space-time separation) ii. IDUM sustains Bohm subquantum holographic model in which the universe is an informational unitary entity in which the separation of any 2 quantum particle is essentially an illusion created by mind and its measurement tools. iii. IDUM proposes the binary logarithm time-measuring technique using NOT seconds, but the number of dedublation steps needed for an initial physical quantity/state of a system to reach a target physical quantity/state of the same mono-/poli-measured system: in this way time will be a necessary „illusion” only locally/unilaterally (multiple local times and a global illusion of an „uniform newtonian universal time flow”) iv. The mass of the universe (the sum between the white mass and the dark mass: Mwu+Mdu), the age of the universe and the speed of light (the speed of graviton/eg- pixel) are 3 physical measures reciprocally complementary to Ituc. 35 2 1. Ituc() Mdu+ Mwu ⋅c ⋅(2⋅ Aouc ) 2. In IDUM, mass (M) is a vectorial measured informational flow per unit of area (an area perpendicular to the flow vector) (area of a eg-based 2D surface which is ALSO essentially informational as it is composed of single- eg-pixels rotating with the speed c) E I F distance() d ∆t I⋅∆t IF a. M 2 acceleration() a distance() d d d2 d2 2 2 ∆t ∆t 3. In consequence, IDUM considers that time (and Aouc value) are illusions created by the fundamental binomial (Ituc, c, Qe, NEgRou). IDUM also considers that space (and also Ru and Rre) is also an illusion created by the same binomial (Ituc, c, Qe, NEgRou). IDUM considers that this binomial creates the ST-illusion by the c factor (which is a time-space hybrid physical measure) and the energy/mass reality by the Ituc factor. v. The second-level arbitrary-parameters of IDUM are: Ewu and Edu (as 2 faces of their sum Etu=Ewu+Edu). 1. Aouc can be derived from Iwuc (and/or Iduc) and c: Iwuc Iduc a. Aouc 2⋅Ewu 2⋅Edu 2. Edu can also be expressed as a function of NegRou and single-circular-eg- energy (as an anticipiation of the next explanation for heg and Eeg) a. Eeg() 2⋅π Rre = 6.126 10 − 56 ⋅J 4 3 b. Edu ⋅π ⋅NEgRou ⋅Eeg( 2π ⋅Rre ) 3 73 72 c. Edu = 7.953× 10 J ( Ewu = 3.769× 10 J ) Ewu d. Etu Edu+ Ewu = 4.525 ⋅% ( Etu ) 3. Mwu and Mdu can also be derived from Ewu, Edu and c: Ewu a. Mwu c2 Edu b. Mdu c2 vi. The third-level arbitrary-parameter of IDUM is RNHAU ([the approximate] real number of hydrogen atoms [proton-electron pairs/neutrons] in the universe: Eddington integer number equivalent, as the number of proton-electron pairs [the third-level dichotomy of the white matter] as the neutron can also be considered a compact confined proton-electron pair). 1. RNHAU = 2.506× 10 82 36 a. The proton-electron / neutron (information) processor-unity mass (Mpe~Mn) can be obtain from Mwu and RNHAU: Mwu i. Mpe RNHAU Mpe ii. = 99.917 % Mn b. As RNHAU can be organized as a 2D disk and 2 RNHAU π ⋅NHAR , NHAR ([approximate] number of hydrogen atoms per ray [of the universe]) can be deduced from RNHAU : RNHAU i. NHAR π c. NHAD (number of hydrogen atoms per diameter [of the universe]) is the double of NHAR i. NHAD 2⋅NHAR d. IDUM defines the photon as a fixed LMIP containing NEgP linear egs, with NegP defined as: the number of co-phase linear electrogravitons per each photon (the electrogravitational granulation factor of a single photon as a holographic projection of a 3/2 exponential information from all NHAD, as the photon is ~1.5D as the electron is): 3 2 i. NEgP ()8 ⋅π ⋅log2() NHAD ⋅NHAD 7.202⋅ 10 45 e. IDUM defines the resting electron as a fixed LMIP containg NEgRE egs, whith NEgRE defined as: the number of co-phase circular electrogravitons per each resting electron (the electrogravitational granulation factor of a single resting electron as a holographic projection of a 1/2 exponential information from all NHAD, as the resting electron is considered to have less degrees of [moving] freedom than a photon has): 1 2 i. NEgRE ()8⋅π ⋅log2() NHAD ⋅NHAD 5.255⋅ 10 43 f. IDUM defines the inverse FSC for an electron at rest ( α) as the ratio between NegP and NegRE which is exactly the formal quantity of white physical (extrinsic) information per diameter of white matter (organized in NHAD proton-electron modules) − 1 NEgP i. FSC α log2() NHAD 137.036 NEgRE g. IDUM also defines the natural logarithm of NHAD (αe) as a FSC derivative important in defining a scale invariance law in the ratio 37 between the ray of the visible universe (Ru) and the classical ray of the electron (Re): i. αe ln() NHAD α ⋅ln ()2 94.986 αe Re⋅ e ii. = 114.177 % Ru h. IDUM defines Planck constant (h) as an informational constant obtained from reading Iwuc in a 3D-NHAD-frame: Iwuc Iwuc i. h 3 3 NHAD ()2α ii. h 6.62606957⋅ 10 − 34 pit 2− 110.217 ⋅2lit i. Ke is essentially a function of Planck constant (h), Qe (which is a first- level free arbitrary parameter in IDUM), c (which is also a first-level free arbitrary parameter in IDUM) and α: h c hr c i. Ke ⋅ ⋅ ()2⋅π ⋅α Qe 2 α Qe 2 j. IDUM argues that boson W/Z total physical information (particle mass*mean half-life) can also be obtained from reading from the same Iwuc (Iuc) in a ~3D-NHAD-frame: Iuc log2 2 ()Mbw⋅ c ⋅Tbw i. = 2.993 α Iuc log2 2 ()Mbz⋅ c ⋅Tbz ii. = 2.992 α k. IDUM argues that gluon total physical information (particle mass*mean half-life) can also be obtained from reading from the same Iwuc (Iuc) in a ~3D-NHAD-frame: Iuc log2 2 ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Tbw i. = 3.202 α Iuc log2 2 ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Tbz ii. = 3.202 α l. IDUM defines an electro-gravitational Planck-like constant (used in the scalar definition of a single eg) for the photon as a group of a fixed number (NEgP) of co-phase egs (heg) as the ratio between h and 38 NEgP (as the photon information is splitted in a NEgP information quanta of each electrograviton in the photon): h i. heg NEgP 1 ii. heg pit 2− 262.553 ⋅2lit 1.087× 10 79 m. Note that heg is very close to the informational quanta generated when reading the same Iwuc in a 4D-NHAD-frame (the 2 orders of magnitude of α above 1 and the ~3D-α /~4D-α frame difference explains the major difference between gravity and the other 3 fundamental forces): Iwuc log2 heg i. = 4.112 α n. IDUM predicts that the gluon, the electron, the quark, the proton/neutron (quark-based) have ~1.5D-α inner eg-based structures (physical information) possibly stabilized by a 5th force, much stronger that the strong nuclear forces, named very strong gravity (VSG). IDUM conjectures that VSG is the main acting force in the inner cores of the large black-holes were single circular egs pixels (with Rre as ray of rotation) can be compressed to rays of rotation close to Planck length. IDUM also conjectures that there is a profund link between the ~1.5D dimension of an electron and the NegP scalar as a function of NHAD 1.5 . Iu log2 2 ()Mgl⋅ c ⋅Te i. = 1.766 α Iu log2 2 ()Me⋅ c Te ii. = 1.683 α Iu log2 2 ()Mqu_med⋅ c ⋅Tp iii. = 1.611 α Iu log2 2 ()Mqd_med⋅ c ⋅Tp iv. = 1.603 α Iu log2 2 ()Mp⋅ c Tp v. = 1.548 α Rou log2 lP vi. = 1.489 α 39 vii. [1,2)D dimensions suggest string (quasi)disks (spherical string „dust”) that do not cover a 2D (curved) plane/surface completely with possible (quasi)fractal structure (as spherical string „dust”) o. Simillary to the information reading frame, the masses of quantum particles (up/down quarks, proton/neutron, electron etc) are also the result of reading the mass of the white universe (Mwu[Mu]) in a ~2D- α frame: Mu log2 Me i. = 2.077 α Mu log2 Mp ii. = 1.997 α p. Simillary to the information reading frame, the standard rays of quantum particles (up/down quarks, proton/neutron, electron etc) are also the result of reading the ray of observable universe (Ru, which is also function of Iwuc and Mwuc/Ewuc) in a ~1D-α frame: Ru log2 Rre i. = 1.037 α Ru log2 Re ii. = 0.999 α Ru log2 Rp iii. = 1.011 α q. From analyzing the ratio between the dimensional frames of masses (2D-α) and lengths (1D-α) IDUM argues that this is the fundamental argument for which the energy-mass of the universe seems to have a ~2D holographic essence. The energy-mass of the universe and tof he black-holes have a strong common holographic character because of this ~2/1 dimensional ratio. Mu log2 Me i. = 2.002 Ru log2 Rre Mu log2 Me ii. = 2.079 Ru log2 Re 40 Mu log2 Mp iii. = 1.976 Ru log2 Rp iv. In fact IDUM predicts that the universe „scene” (all the ST eg- based pixels and graviton-based subpixels) and the actors (quantum particles and also conglomerates of quantum particle including living entities) are black-hole-like entities (1D-2D holograms) the constantly emit and absorb physical information (2 anabolic/catabolic alternate phases, similar to the biological entities). r. In contrast with energy-mass (which is a 2D-α hologram), the total information of the universe coded by the total number of egs in this universe is a ~3D-α hologram: Ituc log2 Eeg() Rre ⋅Aouc i. = 3.111 α Ituc log2 Eeg() Rre ⋅Aouc ii. = 3 Ru log2 Rre s. As it can be observed from all the previous α-dimensional arguments, the absolute values (in physical units) of different physical measures (information, energy, mass, length and durations) aren’t essential in IDUM: the single aspects essential in IDUM are the adimensional ratios between maximum and the minimum (information, energy, mass, length and durations). That’s why IDUM is essentially an info- mathematical model of the universe than can be simulated using pure adimensional real numbers/ratio constants). Aditionally, IDUM also conjectures that the universe evolves step-by-step by ST self- similarity with its previous past states (conserving the essential definitory adimensional ratio constants from the Big-Bang until the present day). IDUM conjectures (see the next arguments for BIDUM) that is very possible that even the „living” observes to be present (like being „precoded”/”preprinted” on film/genome) on a 2D surface of the pre-Big Bang singularity (like an apparently „dead seed” pre- created by a superior intelligent universe that contains its living „embryos” which will/may become the future observers): even if the universe continuously inflates, it remains essentially self-similar with its previous singularity as if this singularity co-existes as a superposed state with the present state of the universe (a possible explanation for subquantum unity hypothesis and a possible explanation for 41 synchronicity/quantum entalgement through that singularity; a vision simillar to Einstein’s eternal universe theory). i. Time may be an ilussion, a visual construction of the observer conscious mental part (with causality being just an apparent „mask” of the subquantum synchronicity): there a high probabilty that the universe may be a giant black-hole 42 as each of its subcomponents. ii. The global dynamic inflation-deflation cycle (keeping self- similarity by conserving the same ratios between maximum and minimum physical measures of the universe) creates the illusion of a global time (and global age of the universe) and projects the 4th sub-Planck micro-dimension into this illusory global (macro)time. The scene(ST)-actor(quantum particle) dichotomy also may create the illusion of movement (which may be indistinguishable from static if the universe were viewed from outside, like a „leaf” that grows self-similarly) t. As it can be observed, IDUM uncovers fractional α-dimension numbers close to integers (~1D, ~2D, ~3D, ~4D etc) which suggests a fractal nature of the universe. u. IDUM uses a scalar definition of a single eg, a sclar law c similar/analogous to the scalar of a photon (Ef ()λ h⋅ ) (the λ graviton is in fact the physical info-bit and the electro-graviton [eg] is the physical info-byte defined as a group of co-phase gravitons) c i. Eeg ()λ heg heg ⋅ν λ v. Based on the Eeg( λ) scalar, IDUM estimates the number of Egs transfered to an electron that moves from a resting state to a speed (v) state as: 2 Me⋅ v i. NEgTRE() v , λ Eeg ()λ w. Based on NEgTRE(v, λ) IDUM defines the total number of egs in a moving electron (NEgME(v, λ)) as: i. NEgME() v , λ NEgRE+ NEgTRE( v , λ ) x. IDUM generalizes α (FSC -1) for the moving electron as: NEgP NEgP i. α ()v , λ α ()NEgME() v , λ NEgME() v , λ NEgRE+ NEgTRE() v , λ 42 See also: Nassim Haramein , Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass ( resonance.is/wp- content/uploads/2013/05/1367405491-Haramein342013PRRI3363.pdf) 42 1 NEgRE+ NEgTRE() v , λ ii. FSC alpha α NEgP iii. As it can be seen, BIDUM offers a plausible probabilistic explanation for FSC: the probability that an electron will emit a photon is the ratio between the number of egs (bytes of the physical intrinsic information) of the moving electron (NegRE+NEgTRE[v, λ]) and the fixed number of egs (bytes of the physical intrinsic information) of the photon (NEgP). y. IDUM interprets the electron rest mass as generated by the circular movement of the number of circular egs in a resting electron (NEgRE) with Re as rotating ray (generalized as a larger variable NEgRE and variable rays smaller than Re) NEgRE Eeg() 2⋅π Re i. Me c2 ii. Apparently Me has a tautologic definition (as Re is already a function of Me). However, IDUM predicts Re from a global arbitrary parameter (Ru) similarly to Mpe, using α (log2[NHAD]), using another striking (non-)coincidence related to DAH: Ru 1. log2 = 136.845 Re Ru log2 Re 2. = 99.86 % α 3. Using a (globally) corrected classical electron ray (Rec), IDUM can predict Me with resonable accuracy (that can be also raised by adjusting NegRE) Ru a. Rec := 2α Rec b. = 87.584 ⋅% Re NEgRE() Re ⋅Eeg ()2⋅π ⋅Rec c2 c. = 114.177 ⋅% Me NEgRE() Rec ⋅Eeg ()2⋅π ⋅Rec c2 d. = 100 ⋅% Me 4. In fact, there are 2 other microcosmic lengths (Rre and Rp) that are close to Re and subject to similar DAH-like coincidences: Ru log2 Rre a. = 103.726 ⋅% α 43 Ru log2 Rp b. = 101.089 % α 5. The Ru-Re coincidence mentioned before suggests that the visible universe may have grown in a self similar way using the same exponential function of a specific logarithmic spiral: αe ⋅θ a. FRu() Re , θ Re⋅ e FRu() Re , 1 b. = 114.177 ⋅% Ru z. Proton beta constant ( βp) emerges from Mpe (predicted from Mwu and RNHAU) and Me as: Mpe− Me i. βp 1836.15 Me aa. IDUM also predicts the gravitational coupling constant ( αG/ αGr) as a function of log2(NHAD)(= α[Re,0]= α). This function (the DAH [non- ]coincidence) suggests that FSC has a dual electrogravitational significance (FSC being a both electromagnetic and gravitational constant by the 2 α [NHAD] factor). 3 3 hr⋅ c 2 2 i. αG 2α ⋅2α α ⋅2α+1 G⋅ Me 2 3 hrr⋅ c 2 ii. αGr α ⋅2α 2 G⋅ Me bb. As it can be observed until now, IDUM essentially focuses on adimensional constants (ratios) as they are considered essentially fundamental in IDUM but also in any plausible (informational) TOE.43 cc. As IDUM considers c fundamental, as I have already shown how IDUM predicts h, Me, heg from FSC, quantum G is considered a function of heg and Kg(=c/Me 2): c i. Kg Me 2 c ii. G 2heg ⋅ Me 2 43 See also abstract/article no. 10 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2010abstracts.pdf 44 2 2c iii. G ⋅()heg⋅ c ⋅heg 2Kg⋅ heg Me 2 Me 2 iv. As it can be observed, G is a function analogous to Ke function, as c/( α·Qe 2) is a constant (versus hr from the same equation) h c hr c 1. Ke ⋅ ⋅ ()2⋅π ⋅α Qe 2 α Qe 2 v. As the r 2 factor comes from the area of the sphere (4 πr2) on which a mass emits LMIPs perpendiculary to that sphere surface (until the LMIPs are absorbed by another mass), a gravitational permitivity( εG) can be defined analogously to ε0 (as Fg can be formulated analogously to the Coulomb force Fe): Q1⋅Q2 1 Q1⋅Q2 1 Q1⋅Q2 1. Fe Ke ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ 2 2 2 r 4⋅π ε0 r ε0 4⋅π ⋅r M1⋅M2 M1⋅M2 1 M1⋅M2 2. Fg G⋅ []G⋅()4⋅π ⋅ ⋅ 2 2 2 r 4⋅π ⋅r εg 4⋅π ⋅r 1 3. ()4⋅π G εg 4. DAH defines 4 πG as: h⋅ c a. ()4⋅π ⋅G 3 2 2 α ⋅2α ⋅Me 5. The gravitational permitivity ( εg) can be expressed using DAH as: 3 2 α 2 1 α ⋅2 ⋅Me a. εg ()4⋅π ⋅G h⋅ c dd. IDUM proposes a generalized quantum G as a combination of 2 types of egs (with heg1 and heg2 scalars) i. G Kg⋅ heg 1 + Kg⋅ heg 2 Kg⋅( heg 1 + heg 2) ii. G1, 2 Kg⋅( heg 1 + heg 2) ee. IDUM proposes a simple grade I function that describes how heg depends on NBE (nuclear binding energy as local stressor of ST). IDUM postulates that what is measured as G is in fact a combination of superposed eg flows with different specific hegs that are specific to each atom/isotope as a function of NBE (see tables, figures and the initial explanation from Part 2). 2. IDUM sustains a unitary informational holographic view of the universe with a single essential principle: „the whole in each part and each part as a [morpho-functional] reflexion of the whole” 45 (equivalent to „each component is bisense-connected to all other components from which it receives and to which it sends information” AND „each component is created by information received by all the other components, with [theoretically] 0 intrinsic isolated [un-connected] information”). In the next figure, each vertix of the regular poligon is a proton-electron processing unit (with the white universe being graphically simulated as a regular polligon with RNHAU/quark vertices). This model is similar to cyber scheme of the biological entities in which each effector receives information from all receptors and each receptor can theoretically transmit information to all the effectors („all for/from one AND one for/from all”) a. b. All types leptons, all types quarks etc are considered in IDUM nodal points of the same informational layer of the universe: the electron layer, the down -quark layer, the up- quark layer, etc (Wheeler’s one-electron hypothesis44 partial similarity). The non-nodal lines in the same level of informational interconnection hierarchy are the forces that interconnect the indentical particles (nodal points) from the same level. In a way, quantum particles can be interpreted as compact nodal points of this informational network and forces can be interpreted as „loose” line-nodes that can extend to infinity. In other word, IDUM conjectures that the universe is essentially a INFORMATIONAL CRYSTAL: A QUANTUM MIND/INTELLIGENCE (COMPUTER). IDUM promotes the principle that the universe is essentially a mind, an intelligence, a natural conciousness. A 5D info- „crystal” universe can explain the quantum entalgement between some quantum particles (as these seem to be connected by rigid force-lines). In IDUM, quantum particles and fundamental forces are indissolubly related as the particles are the result of forces and the forces are the result of quantum particles: in other words all particles (the „crystal faces”) and all forces (the „crystal edges”) are different compementary subforms of the same informational unitary (quasi)„crystal” that the universe is. Single gravitons and graviton packs (the egs and the photons) are LMIPs that have a „cable” function in BIDUM (similar to a computer RAM). As gravitons are the bits of ST vacuum itself but also the basic strings constituents of all quantum particles (gauge and non-gauge), they also function as a ROM memory (the hard-disk of the universe). The same gravitons have 2 different states: a LMIP state (the gauge particles: RAM of the universe and informational flow „cables”) and a condensed state (all the types of non-gauge quantum particles) (the ROM and the parallel microprocessors of the universe). Even if the real universe may be much larger 44 io9.com/5876966/what-if-every-electron-in-the-universe-was-all-the-same-exact-particle ; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One- electron_universe ; www.quora.com/How-plausible-is-the-idea-of-Feynmans-one-electron-universe-What-do-theoretical-and- experimental-quantum-physicists-think-about-that-idea; telescoper.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/the-theory/ 46 and heavier than the observed universe, IDUM conjectures that the universe behaves as a unity (in which the separation in observable subcomponents and dichotomies are essentially illusions: „the unity/whole in parts < i. Ru Rec ⋅2α 3 ⋅α ii. Ru lP ⋅2 2 e. The Ru~Re ·2α (Ru=Rec ·2α) coincidence is equivalent to: i. Ee() Qe, Qe , Ru ⋅2α Et( Me ) Ef []()2⋅π ⋅Ru Ee() Qe, Qe , Ru ii. ⋅2 Ee() Qe, Qe , Ru = 1.142 Et() Me iii. From the previous relations it results that the rest total energy of one single electron is the ~137th octave of the electromagnetic energy of 2 electrons at Ru distance from each other. Interstingly, the total rest energy of an electron can be obtained by summing all the electrostatic energies of any 2 charges of the same type (2 protons or 2 electrons) at Ru distance to one another on a hypothetical 2D particled diameter of a hypothetical universe (with NHAD particles per diameter): this suggests that each single electron rest mass may be an „electrical” hologram of all other electrons/protons on the same diameter (defined by NHAD proton-electron units). Ee() Qe, Qe , Ru ⋅NHAD 1. = 114.176 % Et() Me 2. Ee() Qe, Qe , Ru ⋅NHAD Et( Me ) 47 3. By induction, IDUM can also estimate a scalar for the graviton (the universal bit), not only for the electrograviton (eg). a. IDUM also predicts a gravitonic Planck-like constant (the informational constant of the graviton; the [physical] bit of the universe) by reading the same Iwuc in a 5D-α frame. Of course that IDUM speculates this 5th dimension (by analogy with the 1D, 2D, 3D-α, 4D-α „chain” of alpha coincidences) for the sake of mathematical beauty, simmetry, the experience with Kaluza-Klein universes etc, as IDUM can arbitrary choose any (fractional) value superior to 4 when calculating hgr. Iwuc i. hgr 5 ()2α Iwuc log2 hgr ii. 5 α 1 iii. hgr ⋅pit 4.815× 10 115 heg iv. = 4.431× 10 36 hgr h 2 v. NHAD 3.191× 10 82 hgr b. IDUM defines the graviton-energy scalar similarly to the photon and electrograviton scalars: c i. Egr ()λ hgr ⋅ hgr ⋅υ λ c. IDUM considers that a single circular graviton can be bent to a rotation ray equal to a Planck length (lP) so that a single circular eg ST pixel can be divided/transformed in other circular single-graviton subpixels with rotation rays between Rre and lP. Rre i. = 4.434× 10 18 lP Eeg() Rre ii. = 9.992× 10 17 Egr() lP d. IDUM considers the graviton ~1D-α string, Eeg() Rre log2 Egr() lP i. = 0.965 Rre log2 lP e. The eg is ~2D-α when dimensionally compared to a single graviton dimension (~1D-α) heg log2 hgr i. = 1.965 Rre log2 lP ii. In conclusion, the eg is a graviton-based ~2D-α hologram. 48 f. When the total physical information of the universe (Ituc) is compared to the extrinsic information of a single graviton, the informational universe reveals itself as a 4D-α hologram: Ituc log2 Egr() Rre ⋅Aouc i. = 4 α Ituc log2 Egr() Rre ⋅Aouc ii. = 3.856 Ru log2 Rre 4. IDUM anthropical/biological principle: a. As 4D(5D)-ST is a unity artificially splitted in 3D-S and 1D(2D)-T, IDUM considers that, if there exists even a single living cell in the universe, the whole universe may be considered („by bioinformation contamination”) a living entity at least in the interval of time in which that cell manages to survive (with all abiotic matter and energy serving as present and/or potential „future” deposits for the future development of that living cell, being just „a matter of time” until that cell would eventually spread its daughters throught the universe and access those deposits) i. The fact that life is proven to exist without interruption on Earth for the last 4 ·10 9 years (which is almost a 3rd of age of the universe [Aou[) is a strong argument for the bio-informational view of (B)IDUM. Even if somewhere else in the universe life would have existed in the past before the (13.7-4=9.4) ·10 9 years moment (and now is dissapeared), that life erase can pe interpreted as apoptosis/necrosis-like not a „full” death given the fact that life on Earth still exists (restarted from abiotic deposit, or somehow escaped but silenced from that previous form of life). ii. In conclusion „informational” is „bio-informational” (as „physical” is „informational”), the bit/byte is essentially a bio-bit/byte and IDUM is in fact a Bio- info-digital universe model (BIDUM). In other words, BIDUM conjectures that the universe is essentially a living very intelligent creature/being as BIDUM generally defines „life” as a combination between intelligence (intelligent design) AND free will. Quantum is essentially bio-quantum (as information is essentially bio- information, at least in our observed universe). iii. BIDUM is in fact a a combination between IDUM and some elements of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle (ACP). iv. BIDUM unifies evolutionism and scientific creationism in a mature integrated view, as it pushes the „natural selection” to a natural necessary „preselection” of atoms and molecules appropriate to life which profoundly depend on FSC and proton beta constant (Mp/Me) which were (apparently) randomly „decided” in the first moments (seconds?minutes?) after Big Bang (as they were demonstrated as constant for at least the last [10-12] ·10 9 years). v. Additionally, BIDUM speculates that the apparently „point-like” quantum particles (as the electron, gluon etc) are in fact ~1.5D-α quantum micro-computers (processor) that have a possible fractal/strange-attractor like eg-based inner structures and use egs/gravitons strings as ROM and RAM (having implemented line codes with all the universal laws of the universe). If true, it is legitimate to 49 conjecture that all the quatum particles are in fact quantum computers (processors) and the universe is in fact a quantum super-computer with a huge number (at least 10 82 „white” quantum particles) of parallel processors. 1. An indirect argument for the plausible complex inner structure and self organisation of quantum particles is the fact that any living cell can highly self-organize as a bio-information computer using a minimal 10 12 atoms as separate parallel processors: a single electron can contain at least 10 42 egs (and a lot more string-gravitons) that can theoretically be used to process input/output information received/emmited by any quantum particle. 2. Another indirect argument is that gravitons are spin-2 bosons that can occupy the same quantum state: egs have the same propriety as they are defined as co-phase gravitons packs. This assures the primary condition of a quantum computer: the possibility of quantum coherence in the inner structure of any quantum particle. 3. BIDUM sustains and shares (as an „inner” conjecture of BIDUM) the The Strong Free Will Theorem (John H. Conway, Simon Kochen)45 and uses this theorem as an indirect argument for the quantum-particle – quantum computer hypotesis/conjecture. As conclusion, BIDUM conjectures that the universe is a living (free will intelligence) entity (essentially informational) that reveals itsself in 3 faces: dark/white energy(matter), space (distance/surface) and time (interval/speed) AND that our universe is most probably created by a superior intelligence (identified with the Divine by all religions in the history of mankind). vi. BIDUM proposes the swarm intelligence (SI) algorithms 46 to shape the behaviours of multiple quantum particle systems in which each atom is a powerful self- organized quantum computer eg/info-connected to all the other particles of the universe in a fractal holographic manner (all-in-each and each-in-all). 5. BIDUM conjectures that an intelligence/mind (as our universe is) cannot appear from „nothing”, but it can only be created by another superior intelligence (such as a Creator intelligence, named the Divine). In conclusion, BIDUM sustains creationism, such as: all the intelligent informational „crystal” that the universe is (the universe as mind/intelligence) was created by a superior informational entity (a [Divine] Creator mind: that is essentially another universe- mind/intelligence ierachically superior to our universe). As our universe is considered a natural (alive) intelligence (a bio-intelligence), BIDUM considers the Creator Mind ALSO alive and superior as intelligence to our universe (a superior bio-intelligence, a super-intelligence intuitively deduced and defined as „the Divine” in all known human cultures from all known spaces and hystorical times) 6. BIDUM has at least 2 retroactive predictions in (informational) biology. a. Applying the BIDUM’s general principle in which the total intrinsic physical information of an entity is the product between the energy of that entity and its life (average) duration, organisms can be viewed as essentially unitary (bio)informational entities (not just information processors) which contain a relatively fixed quantity of information (as a global measure for their entire individual lifetime) generally genetically predetermined. 45 www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf ; www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/free_will_theorem.html ; arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0604079; arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0604079.pdf; 46 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarm_intelligence 50 b. As Bio(Physical)Information=energy*lifetime=(intrinsic energy + input energy) * lifetime=(intrinsic mass+input mass)*c 2*(maximum) lifetime(L), then BIDUM predicts that caloric restriction will generally prolonge the life of the living organisms (no matter the complexity of that bioorganisms) with the difference ∆L=L2- L1=I/{(BodyMass+[smaller]CaloricInput2/c 2)*c 2} - I/{(BodyMass+[larger] CaloricInput1 / /c2)*c 2}. c. BIDUM suggests that the biologicial information (tendence of) conservation law has a strong link with the fact/observation that very young organisms are very fragile but very regenerative versus older organisms which may have a much more robust anatomical and physiological structures/processes but have a much lower regenerative capacity. d. BIDUM will surely offer some other biological (retro)predictions/explanations in the next version 1.1. 7. BIDUM is a digital physics model candidate for TOE and has strong similarities with other informational models of the universe (see Refrences). BIDUM offers an integrated unitary bioinformational interpretation to both quantum mechanics (including quantum gravity) and general relativity. 8. BIDUM version 1.0 is still „under construction” and any email/comment feedback is welcome by the author as BIDUM v.1.0 still needs furher deductions/ inductions/ developments/corrections and also needs to generate more predictions to be more convincing in the future, at least in its strong parts: the DAH coincidence, the quantum G series predictions, the heg (and analogous hgr) series predictions. 51 Table 14. References (ordered by relevance for BIDUM, not alphabetically) No. Author Year Title Link(s) The Bio-Info-Digital Universe Model 1 Dr ăgoi, Andrei-Lucian 2015 version 1.0 (English variant of this andrei.dragoii.com/anexe/BIDUMv1.0.pdf article) (self-reference) arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0110141v1.pdf 2 Lloyd , Seth 2001 Computational capacity of the universe www.newscientist.com/blogs/culturelab/2010/03/the- universe-is-a-quantum-computer.html Gundlach, Jens H. and University of Washington: Big G 3 2002 asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/Stephen.Merkowitz/G/Big_G.html Merkowitz, Stephen M. Measurement www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/physics/2014/04/is- 4 Becker, Kate 2014 Is Information Fundamental? information-fundamental/ 5 Wikipedia article 2015 Digital physics en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics 6 Wikipedia article 2014 Classical unified field theories en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_unified_field_theories en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_philosophy 7 Wikipedia article 2014 Digital philosophy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_large_numbers_hypothesis 8 Wikipedia article 2015 Dirac large numbers hypothesis en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe www.astrosociety.org/publications/a-universe-from- 9 Wikipedia article 2015 Zero-energy universe nothing/ www.livescience.com/33129-total-energy-universe- zero.html en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_genesis 10 Wikipedia article 2015 Vacuum genesis en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_nihilo#Modern_physics 11 Wikipedia article 2015 Dark matter en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy 12 Wikipedia article 2015 Dark energy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle www.nature.com/news/simulations-back-up-theory-that- universe-is-a-hologram-1.14328 www.newscientist.com/article/dn26114-experiment-tests- 13 Links collection (2015) The holographic universe hypothesis whether-universe-is-a-hologram.html#.VOjbevl_uSp www.rense.com/general69/holoff.htm www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/myths-of-physics- 1-einste_b_5672842.html 14 Wikipedia article 2015 The Fined Tuned Universe en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle www.bluffton.edu/~bergerd/essays/impert.html 14 Wikipedia article/book 2015 The Anthropic Principle www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle- Oxford-Paperbacks/dp/0192821474 15 Wikipedia article 2015 Loop quantum gravity theory en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_quantum_gravity en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_theorem The Strong Free Will www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf 16 Links collection (2015) jamesowenweathe rall.com/SCPPRG/MenonTarun2009Man Theorem _FreeWillThm.pdf en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-go_theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theo ry en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_wave en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable_theory De Broglie–Bohm theory / Subquantum en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_hidden_variable_theory www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/qm4.htm 17 Links collection (2015) (fields) fluctuations / Hidden variables www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0375960191901 theories and related themes 16P link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00670409#page-1 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kochen%E2%80%93Specker_theore m