Serving the Quantitative Finance Community

 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Topic Author
Posts: 20253
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: 20, 000

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 22nd, 2021, 9:16 am

A while back we discussed the big bang parabolic pde when t > 0. Then what happens when t < 0? Some clever cookie suggested sticking on a hyperbolic pde. Worked great but the monster did not satisfy laws of thermos.
kats: can you remember its name? AFAIR the name contained "Einstein", duh.
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

July 9th, 2021, 11:17 am

General relativity theory cannot match more than maximum two properties (choose between matching mass OR length and time, OR acceleration etc...) of the Planck scale when linked to so called micro black holes (similar problems with Hubble scale), while collision space-time matches all properties of the Planck scale, and even tell what a black "hole" is..  3D collision space-time metric  

likely why Hawking and others have been so vague here, not discussing why they only had approximately Planck scale match, much misinformation here also, wikipedia and others tells Hawking first to suggest micro black holes linked to approx Planck mass in 1971, but the same had been suggested in soviet physics journals many years before Hawking suggested the same (but Hawking less mathematical).


Screen Shot 2021-07-09 at 1.10.26 PM.png
The Planck scale is the God Particle! 
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

November 1st, 2021, 11:55 pm

Let there be light: The H Universe:

\(H_0^2=\frac{4\pi G\rho}{3}\)

In the Friedmann universe (GR) there is the constant k in addition and also half the mass density prediction of the New Universe. When taking into account relativistic mass the k factor cancels out in the derivations as demonstrated, also I see no need for a cosmological constant and other fudge factors, in particular not as my model predictions give perfect match to supernova observations (without any tweak parameters), dark energy is fake energy. So my equation is not for a special case of the universe (the critical universe), it is for the One and only Universe!

Albert abandoned relativistic mass after invention of Minkowski space time. Well he had derived it wrong in end of his 1905 paper. Also Lorentz had got it correct already in 1899.

Taking into account relativistic mass leads to that a series of issues in astrophysics and cosmology gets much simpler and more logic (or actually just logic), first paper of several papers on this.
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

November 4th, 2021, 12:11 am

I refuse to live in Minkowski space-time! so many problems with time in it, they cannot even get a proper time operator in standard model, they do not even know if Heisneberg's energy time uncertainty principle is valid, Pauli objection and more, i need to give it a new run.

I live in 3D Space-Time   Feel free to stay in fake space-time as long as u want, until the walls of it collapses around u!

(PS a small typo in one of the derivations in a middle calculation, but the end result is off course correct, just to keep u awake when reading the paper, as off course all off u do! )
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

November 27th, 2021, 4:11 pm

One can derived the same universe equation as in the published paper further above (where used relativistic modified Newtonian mechanics) also from my new quantum gravity field equation. 

Unified Quantum Gravity Field Equation Describing the Universe from the Smallest to the Cosmological Scales
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

December 6th, 2021, 8:06 pm

notation was mess in last working paper, cleaning it up

just published 

"Measurements of the Planck Length from a Ball Clock without Knowledge of Newton’s Gravitational Constant G or the Planck Constant"


99.999% of physicists have not yet understood how to detect the Planck scale. A 30USD ball-clock will do as clearly demonstrated. 

Detection of gravity is detection of the Planck scale. Newton gravity is quantum gravity, but hard to see in the messed up 1873 modified Newton formula they use today. They should have studied Principa, and what book is it Principa refer to? One cannot read the English translation it is totally messed up in meaning, read the original if u want to understand the truth of this world.
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

March 4th, 2022, 8:57 pm

Planck Speed: the Missing Speed of Physics? Absolute Still Without Breaking Lorentz Symmetry!

Newton Did Not Invent or Use the So-Called Newton’s Gravitational Constant; G, It Has Mainly Caused Confusion

Unified quantum gravity field equation describing the universe from the smallest to the cosmological scales

Cet article présente une nouvelle équation du champ de la gravité quantique dérivée de l'espace-temps de collision. Il montre comment les changements d'énergie (collision-espace) sont liés aux changements de matière (collision-temps). Cette équation du champ peut être écrite sous plusieurs formes différentes. La gravité, au niveau le plus profond, est liée au changement d'énergie gravitationnelle au cours du temps de Planck. Selon nous, cela est lié à la collision entre deux particules indivisibles, et cette collision a une durée égale au temps de Planck, non par hypothèse, mais par calibrage. Nous montrons également comment une équation de l'univers, récemment dérivée de la théorie newtonienne relativiste, peut également être dérivée directement de l'équation unifiée du champ de gravité quantique présentée dans cet article. Cette équation donne une nouvelle explication au décalage vers le rouge cosmologique qui ne semble pas être lié à l'expansion de l'espace ou à l'hypothèse du big bang. De plus, les quelque 13,9×109 années du temps de Hubble ne semblent pas du tout être liés à l'âge de l'univers, mais au temps de collision agrégé des particules composant la masse dans l'univers observable.
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

June 17th, 2022, 9:55 am

Wormholes Do Not Exist: They Are Mathematical Artifacts from an Incomplete Gravitational Theory
General relativity community ignored and rejected Lorentz relativistic mass without properly investigating what incorporating it would lead to. Incorporating it seems to make wormholes (Einstein-Rosen bridges) mathematically forbidden, it also means one are able to match all aspects of the Planck scale, something general relativity theory clearly not can do.

https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2022.83037

"One should not only look for what a theory predicts and what is confirmed by observations, but also for what it predicts that not has been observed and also sounds very unlikely. If a theory predicts that pink elephants fly back and forth between the moon and the earth, then I cannot prove they do not exist as one could always claim there are only a few of them hiding somewhere in a jungle, but since they have not been observed and, in addition, they have properties that seem extremely unlikely, a theory that shows they cannot exist would perhaps be preferable? "
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

August 30th, 2022, 12:52 pm

Just published

Progress in the Composite View of the Newton Gravitational Constant and Its Link to the Planck Scale

"We can all imagine something that has length, for example, a cat, or something that has mass in terms of kilograms, for example, a cat..."    

cats know how to utilise gravity...Newton asked an apple about gravity, he should have asked a cat...
 
User avatar
Alan
Posts: 2958
Joined: December 19th, 2001, 4:01 am
Location: California
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

August 30th, 2022, 6:47 pm

Wormholes Do Not Exist: They Are Mathematical Artifacts from an Incomplete Gravitational Theory
General relativity community ignored and rejected Lorentz relativistic mass without properly investigating what incorporating it would lead to. Incorporating it seems to make wormholes (Einstein-Rosen bridges) mathematically forbidden, it also means one are able to match all aspects of the Planck scale, something general relativity theory clearly not can do.

https://doi.org/10.4236/jhepgc.2022.83037

"One should not only look for what a theory predicts and what is confirmed by observations, but also for what it predicts that not has been observed and also sounds very unlikely. If a theory predicts that pink elephants fly back and forth between the moon and the earth, then I cannot prove they do not exist as one could always claim there are only a few of them hiding somewhere in a jungle, but since they have not been observed and, in addition, they have properties that seem extremely unlikely, a theory that shows they cannot exist would perhaps be preferable? "

I don't understand it, but apparently wormholes or perhaps some sort of "mathematical wormholes" are important ingredients in some recent theories to resolve the Black-Hole information paradox: The Most Famous Paradox in Physics Nears Its End
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

November 2nd, 2022, 8:09 am

Just published 

Does Lorentz Relativistic Mass Make Dark Energy Superfluous?
Screenshot 2022-11-02 at 09.08.40.png
The general relativity community has ignored Lorentz relativistic mass before investigating what predictions it leads to. Incorporating it and the model is fully in line with supernova 1a observations. In other words there are no dark energy in the universe. The current world view is that 70% of the observable universe consist of dark energy.
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

November 8th, 2022, 9:06 pm

I heard about Hubble tension problem for the first time a few days ago. This is supposedly a big unsolved problem in modern cosmology. 

Here is what a recent review paper says in a top journal about the Hubble tension:

"a serious desperate crisis in cosmology"

In short using the full distance ladder of standardized cosmic candles, often supernova 1as one get Hubble constants of about 73 \pm 1.

When using only very low z supernovas or non distance ladder methods such as CMB or gravitaional waves one gets number roughly 68 \pm1

Two very reliable methods with lots of good observations give very different answers. 

Since incorporating Lorentz relativistic mass gets rid of dark energy, I though few days ago perhaps related to Hubble tension also. I did the calculations last night and were running it on one of largest supernova 1a databases, and at first run I got that Hubble constant is over estimated by about 4.19 when ignoring Lorentz relativistic mass. Also I get hardly any correction when only using all supernovas with z<0.05, which also is perfectly in line with findings. 

The HUBBLE TENSION IS GONE!  The physics community just ignored Lorentz relativistic mass without ever investigating what it lead to. 

Very dirty draft I just put out

The Hubble tension is solved!

When I get this published it will strongly improve my bet odds against Alan!! 
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 2572
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

November 8th, 2022, 9:46 pm

Hubble constant should be at about 68.5, will be overestimated to  approx 73 when not accounting for Lorentz relativistic mass and running the full distance ladder off cosmic candles. One recent paper claiming there likely had to be something wrong with Lambda-CMD model is clearly right, they ignored Lorentz relativistic mass and was throwing in Dark Energy and created also Hubble tension.

If my paper get some attention (after I clean it up a bit first) then I can perhaps stop the physics community to invent invisible Pink Hubble energy as their next fudge-explanation for the Hubble tension.