Klee Irwin - The 20-Group Twist

Klee Irwin of Quantum Gravity Research discusses some geometric details about the 20-Group, a structure that is a fundamental part of the quasicrystalline spin network, our conjectured point space on which we aim to model physics.

What is so interesting about this shape, the 20-Group, for unification physics? It relates to higher dimensions, just as the mathematics of modern gravitational and particle physics does. Like a shadow, a quasicrystal is a projection of a crystal shape in one dimension to a lower dimension. The number of parallel edges, faces or volumes in the projection cannot be greater than in the higher dimensional shape. Our physics model is related to the algebra and geometry of the E8 lattice. We project it to a 4D quasicrystal made of 3D tetrahedra that are in groups of 20, which share a vertex. This 20-group in 4D also has 10 sets of parallel faces. So the importance of our 3D 20-group of tetrahedra that are golden ratio twisted in the way shown is that it maps to or encodes information of the eight-dimensional E8 lattice right here in our ordinary 3D physical reality. And this, we will show, is necessary for fundamental unification physics.

[TheParadoxOfParadox]

The universe always has this weird synchronicity about it; myself happening to gain this information at this time, when it most makes sense, and when it most compliments my current thoughts. Thank you for all the hard work you do in crafting these videos! The production quality is immense and the knowledge you share changes lives, or at least it has definitely changed one.
Thank you :)

[jaik]

I have always wondered if the "inside" vertices (and "inside" sides (and "inside" edges)) of a set of 20 tetrahedra mounted inside an icosahedron of equal face size would just touch, or whether there would be "overlap", or whether the inside vertices (and inside faces and inside edges) would have gaps. Phrasing the question in the reverse manner, I.e. "If we touch the inside vertices, there will be gaps between the all the faces and edges of the tetrahedra" answers this question I have had since 1992

[flaviogutierrez-willer]

Thanks for let me better undestand the representación of E8 un puede 3D Word. I am puzzled how Youtube can deduct or lnfer the physical constants and las, such as the speed of light, elementales participes, etc.

[ManolisChristodoulou]

I don't have the mathematical background to follow this theory in details, but I find it the most complete from the epistemological perspective. I have a question: How come in a regular icosahedron all the regular tetrahedra share the same center vertex and still leave gaps at the periphery? Then they must not be regular tetrahedra. Can you explain it to me? Thank you.

[TheDavidlloydjones]

Lovely graphics, a lot of nice math that I didn't know about, and a great deal of fun! It's great to run across you.

I look forward to hearing more from all of you -- but of course warn everybody of the Terror of the Math Grad Students' Lounge, the "Hey, I just found a new math this week, now I know how the Universe (multiverse, genetics, banking system...) works!" guy.

You know the guy will find another mathematics next week, and he'll be back with a whole new set of Revelations about Everything.
:-)

[phxmarker]

Does this solve any of the unsolved problems or point to "new" phenomena?

[aaronmuller]

Hello Quantum Gravity Research! I'm one of the 26 people who have happened to like this video. I just want to say that I think your work is pretty awesome. I'm only sixteen and hardly understand any of this stuff but I find it quite interesting that there is a group of people working on weird things like 4D patricle physics and how big a concious system can be. Keep up the amazing work

[serenitytemple]

Very good, I study the Universe, I love, I had imagined for the structure of the universe a Fractal Field of Bubbles, from the smallest particles to great cosmic stars inside bubbles, bubbles inside bubbles, I am studying physics, and writing A book about building the reality of information only, like what I saw in a video of you, I'm one of those who agree that reality is formed of information, I wanted to understand your work more, I'm Brazilian, it's complicated English for a while.

[QuantumGravityResearch]

Keep your eyes peeled for our new E8 documentary - coming soon!

[dekay]

The concept of E8 is interesting since it is 248 dimensions.  This is 8*31=248
There are 31 great circles that can be spun on the sphere, via the axis of the points, faces and edges of an icosahedron.  The 12 points yield 6 great circles.  The 20 faces yield 10 great circles and the 30 edges yield 15 great circles.
6+10+15=31 great circles.
These great circles intersect and have central angles defining the arcs of them.
R Buckminster Fuller showed these in his Synergetics Volumes 1 & 2.


I have mentioned on other comments to these investigators this rather obvious and important point, but I suppose since it is only 3 dimensional it is of no importance,

The central angle 22.23875609596496º is the arccos of Ø^2/(2√2).  This angle is approximated in the figure referenced above, in DMS at 22º 14' 19.51".  There is another angle in the figure, 7º 45' 40.5".  The two angles described add to 30º.  This is 1/12 of a great circle of which there are 10.  There are 5 sets of 4 of these great circles that define a spherical cuboctahedron.  One may ponder why there isn't 20, but there is an overlap or second usage of each of these great circles to use 4 at a time.

Interestingly, Fuller's Synergetic has the tetrahedron as unit volume, so 20 regular tetrahedron have a volume of 20.  The same is true for the cub octahedron of the same edge.  It equals 20 tetrahedral units.  Even more interesting is that the value of Ø^2/(2√2) = .925614793410958 is the volume of 1/20 of the icosahedron that has the same surface edge length of the 20 tetrahedron or the edge of the above mentioned cuboctahedron.  To get to tetrahedral volumetric units one simply multipies the cubic unit value by 6√2, when the edge is 1 unit.

So, when all the dimensional games are played on a board that we can all play on, it is really the conundrum of R Buckmister Fuller's Jitterbug model transforming the VE (cub octahedron) to the icosahedron.  There is a volumetric difference that seems to defy symmetry logic as it goes from four to five-fold symmetry.  The defiant number is the √2.

One may say then how does one explain the 8 in 8*31=248.  I do not have a definitive answer, but there are two orientations of the 31 great circles on a sphere that are 90º to each other, within that there are two directions the jitterbug may go, the"left or right" direction and there is the overlapping usage of the 10 great circles to making 5 cuboctahedra.  But I may be redundant here.

[flaviogutierrez-willer]

sorry the spelling. But muy spanish corrector Jeep changing words

[sophiafaithlove]

ea=f=3, same triangular pattern as "S"

[QuantumGravityResearch]

If you've watched this video and still need more science, check out our new film Hacking Reality!


Is there an 8-dimensional "engine" behind our universe? Join Marion Kerr on a fun, visually exciting journey as she explores a mysterious, highly complex structure known simply as 'E8'--a weird, 8-dimensional object that for some, strange reason, appears to encode within it all of the particles and forces of our 3-dimensional universe.

[alexswage]

Quantum.mechanics physics in electromagnetics for warp dimensional bubbles multi dimensional universes are in !
the Quantum mechanics physics in electromagnetics runs and rules the MULTI dimensional universes and parallel multi dimensional universes!

[tombarker]

All very nice. All very exciting.
Ok so you get the math all right and you actually are able to accomplish this.
What is your estimated outcome? What are you trying to accomplish?
Because from my view you are taking a very big bite of the apple.
How do we even manipulate these forces and laws?
I think perhaps because of the deep talent you have, that in the excitement you may have gotten ahead of yourselves.
I mean we are talking about manipulation of dark matter and energy at best. At worst even smaller and unknown.
I really think that it's not numbers but the geometric shape itself that will create the math that is exact enough, not that has so many decimal points of numbers that computation of that number can't be instant.
Only fractal geometry can describe this with instant precision.
I'm sure that's your key. Until you get their. I think you will find interesting tidbits. However if you want the whole apple you need to see it as it is. Even if I'm wrong. I'm still right about the fact our old ways of processing numbers won't work.
Using math that was created to explain our visible universe isn't going to work outside the cup.