Theory of Everything: The Greatest Mystery of Physics

Explore the Theory of Everything: The Greatest Mystery of Physics, as we delve into the quest to unify all cosmic laws.
Einstein's General Relativity breaks down at very small scales such as at the center of black holes or during the initial moments of the Big Bang. Quantum Mechanics, which excels in these minuscule domains, offers more detailed insights. However, a significant challenge arises because quantum theory does not align with the principles of General Relativity.
Scientists have developed theories like loop quantum gravity and string theory to unify General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. However, both theories face significant conceptual and mathematical challenges. Loop quantum theory posits that space-time is composed of discrete loops, which contradicts Einstein's General Relativity where space-time is perceived as a smooth, continuous fabric.
The same issue arises with string theory which, despite its mathematical beauty, struggles to predict phenomena that can be tested experimentally. Once humanity discovers the essential link between these two giant theories, it could potentially unify not only all the fundamental forces of nature but also reveal deeper cosmic truths. This is called the theory of everything.
holographic principle symmetry michio kaku dimension dimensions of the universe gravity quantum gravity schrödingers cat quantum field theory dirac theory theory of everything theory of relativity general theory of relativity einstein special relativity theory of relativity explained physics spacetime universe isaac newton galileo electromagnetism magnetic field electric fields energy string theory superstring theory quantum mechanics holographic universe quantum field theory quantum theory quantum physics quantum mechanics quantum gravity quantum loop gravity what is quantum loop gravity god equation god equation michio kaku string theory what is string theory cosmos space holographic universe holographic principle
#space #science #cosmos #astrophysics #universe

[PeterRice-xhcj]

Imagine mixing a handful or infinite amount of pinballs the same size together and you still end up with one pinball the same size. Zero dimensional points are the intersections of two one dimensional lines crossing paths. You can’t see them because they are zero dimensional, but are used for locating areas on a map. Like the pinballs, you could keep mixing an infinite number of zero dimensional points together forever and still end up with one zero dimensional point.
Let’s say there is one zero dimensional point composed of twenty individual zero dimensional points mixed together. Imagine an individual zero dimensional point mixing with the one composed of 20, it would be still the same as two individual points mixing together. As this individual point mixes with the point composed of 20, as it mixes in it will make the point composed of 20 half as different as it was, then the individual point will become meaningless, because it is now part of one zero dimensional point that was composed of 20. You can’t say there is a certain number of zero dimensional points mixed with each other because there is no order in one zero dimensional point.
This individual zero dimensional point that has mixed in with the zero dimensional point composed of 20 individual zero dimensional points, has made the point composed of 20 points half as different as it was then the individual point has become meaningless because it is now part of the 20 individual points to make one single point. So the individual zero dimensional point has made the zero dimensional point of 20 individual points half as different as it mixes in, because even though a point of 20 is mixing with one, it would still be the same as two individual zero dimensional points mixing together. Or could this individual point completely devour the point of 20 as it mixes with it so the point of 20 is like one individual point mixed in with the individual point that has mixed with it, following by the individual point becoming meaningless because it is now one point mixed in with 20 that is now twice as different as it was.
As the individual point mixes in with the multi point point, it makes the multi point point half or twice as different, then becomes meaningless itself because it is now mixed in with the multi point point. It is like there is no evidence of something mixing in with the multi point point to make it half or twice as different. Could this be the result of the multi point point being two points in one, being one point that is in its original spot, and being another point that has come from its original spot. Or could this phenomenon be a result of an empty space meeting up with the multi point point. Don’t think of the individual point that has made the multi point point twice or half as different as being another system or an empty space, because the individual point is now mixed in with the multi point point to become meaningless once it has made the multi point point twice or half as different as a result of mixing.

The other text about the circular week, I thought I had a pretty good point. It is not a fact but it involves logic and reasoning.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

Continuing on from the latest comment, perhaps when we are looking at the empty spaces from above the court we are looking at the two colours that don’t exist the other side of the court which is why we can’t see them. When we looking at the two spaces from below the court we see the two spaces as the two fillings or points, because by observing we could have caused them to cross over the net.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

Let’s say you have two colours that exist on one side of the tennis court, and the other side of the net you have two colours that don’t exist. Each colour one side of the net could each be part of two systems. Each colour that exists could also be a colour that was originally a colour that never existed that has has already crossed over the net from the other side to become a colour that does exist. So the two colours that exist could be part of two systems. The two colours that don’t exist the other side of the net could also be part of two systems. If we look at the two colours that exist from above the court with our head pointing away from the other side of the court, we may see red on the left and blue on the right. But we don’t see the spaces they take up because the spaces don’t contain any colour. What if the space the red colour was in on the left was the blue colour on the right, and the space the blue colour on the right was in was the red colour on the left. And what if the empty spaces thought they were the colours and the colours were the empty spaces they were filling up. Their is on point to make here. Both the empty spaces and colours that are filling them up are both from two systems, the empty space originating from the other side of the net as a colour that does not exist to cross over the net to become a colour that does exist, and the colour that is filling the spaces up is part of the system that is home on the side of the net it’s on. There is also two colours that don’t exist the other side of the net that is also part of the same two systems. The reason the empty space the red colour on the left is in could be the blue colour on the right, is because a colour can’t fill up a space that is the same colour as it is. So we are looking down at the two colours that exist with the top of our head Pointing away from the other side of the net, and we see a red square on the left and blue square on the right. Now if we look at the two colours that exist from underneath the tennis court still with the top of our head pointing the same direction, could we now see a blue square on the original left and red square on the original right, now seeing the empty spaces being the actual visible colours. Now when the two colours switch spaces with each other, in a way the spaces are moving to because they are now entering different colours thinking they are different spaces. A way we can see the two colours one side of the net and spaces they fill all move together without seeing the spaces still, is if the two colours move over the net in a straight direction, and the two spaces they leave move diagonally over the net to the other side of the court. But shouldn’t the two colours now be two colours that don’t exist? If the two colours and new spaces they are in turn into each other once they cross the net, the colours now being spaces will have to change colours because a colour can’t fill an empty space that is the same colour. The side of the net the colours and spaces have crossed over to becoming each other in the process are meant to be for colours that don’t exist, but now becomes the side of the net for colours that do exist. The original two colours that don’t exist and the spaces they fill, and the two colours that do exist along with the spaces they fill, have all crossed the the net to opposite sides, thus the opposite becoming original sides.
So if we look down on the court and see red on the left and blue on the right, then we look from underneath the court and see blue on the original left and red on the original right because we are now focusing on the empty spaces as being the colours, is that because by actually observing from underneath the court we are causing the colours and spaces to cross the net turning into themselves. When we see some thing cross the net we observe the outcome. But by observing the two colours from underneath the court and seeing the outcome (if) the two colours cross over the net, could we be actually causing the two colours to cross over the net. Therefore by looking underneath the court, we are actually looking across the net to other side of the court. The structure of the theory is an empty space can’t be the same colour as the colour that fills it up. If we look at the two colours from above the court, could the reason that we can’t see the empty spaces be that we are looking at the future where the other side of the net is on, and where the two colours that don’t exist are located. which are two colours that don’t exist that are at the other side of the net as the two colours that do exist are on their side of the net. They say particle physics is based on symmetry. What kind of symmetry? If you have 10 different things, what makes them the same thing is that they are all in the same category as being a different thing. All numbers are really just a digit one a certain way up the number line. But the gaps or boundaries in between the numbers look like a truly different thing altogether. Logic is based on numbers, but can we create a new kind of logic based on gaps and boundaries in between numbers.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

Imagine 20 squares forming a circle, being red red blue blue red red blue blue and so on. And each square can only switch spaces with the different coloured square next to it.
Let’s say that these red and blue squares forming a circle are each separated by building blocks of time between them. If a red square switches with a blue square on the right, the red square next to it would be switching with the blue square on it’s left at the exact same time, because the same coloured squares jumping opposite directions are also separated by a building block of time. Each red and blue square forming the circle would switch with each other at the same time because each would be separated by a building block of time.
So instead of saying there is 20 squares, could we say there is only two colours switching spaces with each other.
What if there was an odd number of squares forming the circle. If one of those squares kept switching spaces with the rest infinitely fast with out stopping, the rest of the squares would have to mix to become one single square to fit into the space of the individual square that is moving the opposite direction infinitely fast. And the individual square would have to become 4th dimensional to fit into the spaces of the rest of the squares it’s switching with. So what happens is the rest of the squares become the individual square their switching with, and the individual square that’s switching becomes the rest of the squares.
If all the squares are still, it would be that individual square in its own space instead of the other squares. One the individual square switches spaces with the rest, the rest become one instead of the rest.
How can we say that not 20 squares exist, but only two colours. What If the building blocks of time were only separating the individual square from the rest. If that is so, the rest can’t be separated by each other, but be one 4th dimensional thing that is separated from the individual square by a building block of time. So now we can still say that there are only a red and blue colour separated by a building block of time that can switch spaces with each other. Each colour could even have a different sense of time seeming faster or slower.
Can we create a new kind of logic based on the boundaries between numbers. The number can be red, and the boundary can be blue.
Maybe at the quantum level you can’t count the boundaries between numbers nor numbers. If you theorise 40 scattered points, maybe the 120 or so other points you’re mixed with also each think their the ones theorising 40 scattered points, therefore your part of one point with a consciousness of 40.
As what was mentioned in the previous text, can our sense of colour, distance, numbers, and time, be all combine to form one single zero dimensional point, that is either a number or a boundary in between.
If we know we exist, would that mean we are counting one thing.

Zero dimensional points are the intersections of two one dimensional lines. Or locations on a map. You could keep mixing an infinite amount of zero dimensional points points together forever and still end up with one zero dimensional point without any dimensions.
If you mix one individual zero dimensional point with another zero dimensional point that is composed of 26 individual points, it would be the same as mixing two individual points together. Now if one individual point mixes in with the other point composed of 26 individual points, the individual point that is mixing in would have to make the multi point point its mixing in with half as different, then the individual point that’s mixing in would become meaningless because it would be now mixed in with the other 26 to make one single zero dimensional point.
Or could the individual point completely take over the point of 26 making the 26 as meaningless as one mixed in with the 26, as well as the individual point taking over the rest becoming meaningless because it to would become one mixed in with 26. If this happens would the point of 26, now 27 points become twice as different.
Let’s say there are only two zero dimensional points exist and only two that don’t exist. For the zero dimensional points that exist to turn into each they would both have to become twice as different as they are now. If they both become half as different as they are now they would both swap with the two that don’t exist, and the two that don’t exist would become half as different to swap with them.

Zero dimensional points may not be in any particular space or not separated by any space, but separated by time.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

If space was made out of building blocks you wouldn’t be able to see those building blocks because a building block of space would not contain any space. A building block of time also would not contain any time.
Imagine two groups of people separated by a building block of time. People in these two groups are constantly switching between the two groups so each group will constantly have one person leaving to enter the other group and one person entering from the other group.
These two groups are separated by a building block of time, so there is no time in between these two groups. Now if one person leaves group A to enter group B, some one from group B would leave their group to enter group A at the exact same time, because there is no shorter time interval than what the two groups are separated by. This is like some one saying it’s either this or that, there is no third choice.
And let’s say only two colours exist, no other colour exists. If one of these colours changed, it would turn into the other colour, and the other colour would turn into it at the exact same time because two colours constantly exist not one. Could these two colours be separated by a building block of time.
These two groups and two colours are like a number, and a boundary in between a number. All numbers are are really just a digit one a certain way up the number line. And all the gaps in between numbers are the same. So it makes sense to say that a numbers and boundaries in between are like the only two colours that exist, or the only two choices you have, each separated by a building block of time.
Let’s say twenty people were individual zero dimensional points all mixed together to make one single zero dimensional point. Because every one is now one zero dimensional point, every one would agree with what number they are focusing on. But if five of the twenty agreed with what colour the numbers were but the remaining fifteen did not, would the five form a seperate zero dimensional points all agreeing with what colour they are focusing on.
Let’s say the digit one a certain way up the number line to make a number and the boundaries in between numbers are the only two things that exist. Now let’s say only two zero dimensional points exist, nothing else. How do we make this a true statement.
First of all, why does one second feel like one second and not like one minute, hour, day, or so on. Now what makes four four. Four is made of two twos with each two being made of two ones, there’s three twos we are seeing, yet we are saying that we’re looking at this thing called four. The same with colour, what makes red red, blue blue, or orange orange.
These things disused with what makes a number a number, a colour a colour, and one second feeling like one second, are all like their part of the same thing. So to keep every one part of the same zero dimensional points, could we combine a number, combine the distance away the numbers are, and combine the colours the numbers are, to all form one thing. That way no one could form a seperate point because they disagreed with what colour the numbers were or how far away they are.
If you wanted to leave one point to get to enter the other you would have to disagree with the other points you’re mixed with on something. Would you have to forget the number you’re focusing on.
The two points could each have their own sense of time, one second feeling like one second to one point, and one second feeling like one hour or week to the other point.

If one week felt like one second to us, but one second felt like one second to the person standing next to us, according to the person standing next to us our sense of being does not exist.
According to us a weather system does not have a sense of being.

One second feeling like one second to us, is joined together by time intervals that are too fast for us to take any notice of, so how on earth is it possible to have a sense of being now.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

One week goes around in a circle, repeating itself after completing the circle. If you have an appointment booked for Friday and gets changed to the Thursday before, Friday and Thursday have switched places with each other in a blink of an eye or an infinitely fast split second. The two days have switched places with each other but have not taken any time to do so.
Imagine if the 7 days of the week forming the circle were still or frozen, so each of the 7 days were just 3 dimensional spaces that don’t involve any time going by. The week involves time, but because the 7 days that make up the circular week are still 3 dimensional spaces, they don’t involve any time.
If an appointment for Friday gets changed to the Thursday before, Friday has switched places with Thursday infinitely fast. If Friday keeps switching places with the 6 other days around the circle infinitely fast non stop, Friday would take up all the other days spots up at the same time. All the 7 days around the circle are still or frozen 3 dimensional spaces, so if Friday is taking up the 6 other day’s places up all at once, Friday would now be made up of time turning it from 3 dimensional to 4 dimensional. And the six other days would have to all fit into Friday’s space all at once forming one 3 dimensional day.
So we have Friday switching places with all the other days infinitely fast non stop taking filling the 6 other days places all at once becoming 4 dimensional, and the 6 other days are not switching around the circle but they would all have to all make one 3 dimensional day to fit into the space Friday is leaving behind. So Friday is forming a 4 dimensional day, and the six other days are making one 3 dimensional day.
Let’s say the 7 frozen 3 dimensional days forming the circle all stay in their places, not switching with other days. If Friday was separated by the 6 other days by time, but the 6 other days were not separated by each other by time, the 6 other days would form one 4 dimensional entity because they are not separated by time. The 6 other days are only separated from Friday by time. So the same thing is now happening as if Friday were switching spaces with the 6 other days around the circle infinitely fast non stop. When Friday stay’s in its space, Friday is the 3 dimensional day and the 6 other days make the 4 dimensional thing. When Friday switches places with the 6 other days infinitely fast non stop the other 6 days become one 3 dimensional day and Friday becomes 4 dimensional.
When the 7 frozen 3 dimensional days forming the circle remain in their places, because the 6 other days are not separated by each other by time, the 6 make one 4 dimensional thing. But because the 6 are separated by Friday by time, Friday makes the 3 dimensional day.
The 4 dimensional thing can be red and the 3 dimensional day can be blue.
Let’s say there are two zero dimensional points, and these two zero dimensional points are the only two colours that exist, each being red and blue. Let’s say each of these two zero dimensional points are themselves composed of individual zero dimensional points mixed together. If the two zero dimensional points both split apart so the individual zero dimensional points that made them are dispersed, you might think the two colours that the two zero dimensional points were don’t exist any more. But if all these dispersed points formed a circle like the 7 day week with frozen 3 dimensional days, the two colours could still exist even though the two zero dimensional points have split apart.

If you walk through a brick wall, you will end up on the other side. The concept sounds logical, but the brick wall is a real thing in the macroscopic world you can’t walk through. The 7 day week with frozen 3 dimensional days may not be a real thing in the macroscopic world, but could be a real thing in an area more microscopic than space itself.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

They say particle physics is based on symmetry. Close to the Big Bang the weak force and electromagnetic force were part of the same force before loosing their symmetry. So in QHT theory all the forces have different geometries that are related to each other.
In the standard model of physics, the left half of the equation having a guess I think has something to do with particles moving around before they became more ordered, and the right side of the equation had something to do with I think becoming the complex atomic structures now. Both halves of the equation are meant to be mirror images of each other. And if a theory doesn’t fit this symmetry, it is pointless.
Emmy Nother said an electric charge is neither created nor destroyed. Picture a tennis court with a team of two on each side. On one side you have two points which are the only two colours known to exist, and on the other side of the net you have two squares, which are the only two colours that don’t exist. Each team mate has to become half as different to turn into each other thereby switching spaces with each other. If each team mate becomes half as different, they turn into a colour that tdoesn’t exist, thereby swapping places with their opponents directly in front of them. Once the team mates become half as different again, they cross over the net again onto their original sides, but now that they have become half as different again, they are twice as different, thereby being in their team mate’s original space. Now what if the two points one side of the net (that are the only two colours known to exist), each made up to points in one. Each point could be part of two systems, one system where a point originated from the other side of the net that was originally a colour that doesn’t exist that became half as different to move across the net and become a colour that does exist. At the same time the point could be a point that is on its original side before it becomes half different, as a colour that does exist. So you have two systems in one. The same is true for the two squares the other side of the net, that are the only two colours known not to exist. They can be swapping with the points the same way simultaneously. So each point is two points from two systems. The point from one system might think the point from the other system is the empty space is the empty space it’s filling up. Now picture a red square on the and blue square on the right. They switch spaces with each other so there is a blue square on the left and red square on the right. You might think the empty spaces are still, but they are entering the different squares. Picture the two squares one side of the tennis net. As the two squares switch with each other without crossing over the net, it would be the same as them crossing over the net diagonally, and the spaces crossing over straight. This is the same pattern we saw the two teams moving before. But how can the two points do this without becoming two colours that don’t exist. If each space becomes the player that is filling and it and each player becomes the space they are filling after crossing the net, instead of each two in one system becoming half as different, they will become twice as different, being their original colours. So we see two points one side of the tennis net, but not the spaces they are filling up, because we are focusing on one system. What would happen if we looked at the two points from underneath the court. If we saw the left point on the right and right point on the left, does that mean we now see the two empty spaces as the two points. We saw how the two points could cross over the net and still be their original selves by changing into their spaces and and the spaces changing with them, as the spaces cross over the net straight, and the points cross over diagonally. So if we look at the two points from underneath the net and see the right point on the left and left point on the right, seeing the empty spaces as the points, does that mean by observing the points from underneath the court, they have actually crossed over the net, and we are actually looking the other side of the net. If the two points cross over the net that’s the reason we observe it happening, but couldn’t looking from underneath the court make that happen. There is two squares one side of the net and two points the other side, they swap places but they always stay points or squares. If you have say five different things, you still have five of the same thing. The reason is because they are all in the same category of being a different thing. The way to escape this is to get a completely different category is if you look at the gaps or boundaries in between numbers, which are different to the digit ones each side of them. All logic is based on numbers, but can we create a new kind of logic based on boundaries or gaps in between numbers.
If you had to cars next to each other. One had just come from Texas, and the other had just come from Iowa. If the one that had come from Texas turns into the one that came from Iowa, would now saying it had come from Iowa be a lie or the truth. If the two cars change into each other so they come from different places than they really have come from, they would have to change into each other infinitely quick. The reason is if they change into each other gradually, they will turn into an infinite number of cars that don’t exist before turning into each other. Then the cars can’t say they have come from where they have really come from. QHT theory involves all the different routes you can take to get somewhere being related to each other. If the world never came to an end, babies could keep on getting born forever. Does that mean there must be an infinite number of people who haven’t been born yet. Our sense of being is zero dimensional and you can have an infinite amount of zero dimensional points making up one point. What if we died 500 years ago before we became babies again. If we did not have a sense of being during that 500 years, that 500 years would go like a flash.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

If there was a red square on the left and blue square on the right, the empty space the red square is in could be the blue square on the right and the empty space the blue square is in could be the red square on the left. So if you looked at the two squares from the other side, you might see the spaces their taking up as the squares, so you may still see a red square on the left and blue square on the right. The red square is on the left stationary continuously. If theses two squares swapped spaces infinitely fast, the red square would be on the right infinitely fast for the briefest amount of time as it switches before been on the right continuously still. You Might think as the red square switches spaces it will be in the space it leaves infinitely fast to, but the blue square taking its space up infinitely fast before being still will make up for that. Imagine if the two squares sat in their spaces still, then sat in them infinitely fast for an infinitely short amount of time, then back to continuously still, without switching spaces in the first place. It would be like they had just switched spaces even though they hadn’t. So do you think what would happen is the squares would turn into the spaces they are in, and the spaces they are in would turn into them. Imagine two zero dimensional points, and these two points were not in any particular space, or not separated by any space, but separated by time. Imagine two groups of people were separated by the shortest length of time there is. If one person leaves the group they are in and enters the other group, some one from the other group will do the same thing simultaneously, because there is no shorter span of time than what the two groups are separated by. Think of the two groups as the two squares. If there was a circle of squares each separated by the shortest amount of time possible, if one square swaps with the one next to it, all the other squares would do the same thing, each swapping with the different coloured square next to them. Now think of the two groups as the two zero dimensional points, each consisting of 20 individual zero dimensional points. There is no number because all the individual points are mixed together. If one individual point leaves the point of 20 points it’s in and enters the point of 20 points, it would be still like 2 individual points mixing together. So the point that’s entering the point of 20 will make the point of 20 half as different, at the same time the individual point will become meaningless because it is now one point mixed in with many points. Or could the individual point that’s entering completely take over the other 20, so the other 20 become as meaningless as one point mixed in, following by the individual point becoming meaningless (as it too is one point mixed in), with the whole multi point point becoming twice as different. Imagine if these two points were the only two colours that existed. To change into each other they would have to both become twice as different as themselves. If they become half as different they would turn into a colour that dost exist. If 20 people were each individual zero dimensional points that were all mixed in to make one single zero dimensional point, would everyone agree with what number they are looking at, how far away the numbers are, and what colours they are. Because everyone would be one. Our sense of being is zero dimensional, so would that make us an individual zero dimensional point. We can’t experience a billionth of a second, so in that short time frame we can’t exist be a zero dimensional point, but we might be a falling line of dominos. Could we be an individual point, or multiple points if we have a different opinion from the points we’re mixed with on what colour the numbers are. What if only two multi point points exist. One was the digit one that all numbers up the number line really are, and the other was a gap or boundary that separates numbers. How do we stop more than 2 points existing. Now let’s say there are 20 scattered points. Now you are an individual point with a consciousness of 20, so by imagining these 20 scattered points you are looking at yourself as a an individual point with a consciousness of 20. Now let’s say there are 90 other individual points mixed in with you. The 90 other points might also think their the ones theorising 20 scattered points. Now let’s say there are a number of scattered points you don’t know how many. You can’t count something you don’t know is there, neither can you count infinity. You can mix an infinite number of zero dimensional points points together because they are zero dimensional. So if you don’t know how many scattered points there are, dose that mean you a looking at the point your in not as a number conscious point, but looking at it as the fact there might be an infinite number of individual points mixed in. How do you define magic. Magic is when something happens with out a legitimate cause. What causes the first cause? If nothing causes the first cause does that mean the first cause is magic. If there was a non human intelligence that was able to make things happen without a legitimate cause, the would have to be a reason or cause for the intelligence to do that. If a robot had a spirit, it would have to have a personality. Our personality is like a strong current we suddenly get sucked into. And if a robot had a spirit, would 1 second be like 1 second to it, or would 1 second be a lot faster or a lot slower to it.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

If space was made out of building blocks you wouldn’t be able to see those building blocks because a building block of space would not contain any space. A building block of time also would not contain any time.
Imagine two groups of people separatede by a building block of time. People in these two groups are constantly switching between the two groups so each group will constantly have one person leaving to enter the other group and one person entering from the other group.
These two groups are separated by a building block of time, so there is no time in between these two groups. Now if one person leaves group A to enter group B, some one from group B would leave their group to enter group A at the exact same time, because there is no shorter time interval than what the two groups are separated by. This is like some one saying it’s either this or that, there is no third choice.
And let’s say only two colours exist, no other colour exists. If one of these colours changed, it would turn into the other colour, and the other colour would turn into it at the exact same time because two colours constantly exist not one. Could these two colours be separated by a building block of time.
These two groups and two colours are like a number, and a boundary in between a number. All numbers are are really just a digit one a certain way up the number line. And all the gaps in between numbers are the same. So it makes sense to say that a numbers and boundaries in between are like the only two colours that exist, or the only two choices you have, each separated by a building block of time.
Let’s say twenty people were individual zero dimensional points all mixed together to make one single zero dimensional point. Because every one is now one zero dimensional point, every one would agree with what number they are focusing on. But if five of the twenty agreed with what colour the numbers were but the remaining fifteen did not, would the five form a seperate zero dimensional points all agreeing with what colour they are focusing on.
Let’s say the digit one a certain way up the number line to make a number and the boundaries in between numbers are the only two things that exist. Now let’s say only two zero dimensional points exist, nothing else. How do we make this a true statement.
First of all, why does one second feel like one second and not like one minute, hour, day, or so on. Now what makes four four. Four is made of two twos with each two being made of two ones, there’s three twos we are seeing, yet we are saying that we’re looking at this thing called four. The same with colour, what makes red red, blue blue, or orange orange.
These things disused with what makes a number a number, a colour a colour, and one second feeling like one second, are all like their part of the same thing. So to keep every one part of the same zero dimensional points, could we combine a number, combine the distance away the numbers are, and combine the colours the numbers are, to all form one thing. That way no one could form a seperate point because they disagreed with what colour the numbers were or how far away they are.
If you wanted to leave one point to get to enter the other you would have to disagree with the other points you’re mixed with on something. Would you have to forget the number you’re focusing on.
The two points could each have their own sense of time, one second feeling like one second to one point, and one second feeling like one hour or week to the other point.

If one week felt like one second to us, but one second felt like one second to the person standing next to us, according to the person standing next to us our sense of being does not exist.
According to us a weather system does not have a sense of being.

One second feeling like one second to us, is joined together by time intervals that are too fast for us to take any notice of, so how on earth is it possible to have a sense of being now.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

Every one says there needs to be someone observing a colour in order for it to exist, but not as many say we need observe a colour in order for our sense of being to exist, which is true.
A colour has to exist first before there is any sense of time moving on, any sense of being, or before there is any number.
Let’s say we are visualising plain red. This plain red needs us to visualise it for it to exist, and at the same time we need it for our sense of being to exist. We need to be seeing something or thinking about something, which is made of colour to have a sense of being and get a sense of time moving forward.
This plain red we are visualising is not changing. If we speed time up it will still look the same. First of all, without time moving forward this colour red would not exist. So could this non changing red be itself time.
Now let’s talk about us observing this red. At extremely short time spans we have no sense of being, at the same time, if our thoughts sped up we would be faster than our sense of being therefore loosing our sense of being.
If this non changing red sped up or slowed down, it still wouldn’t change. Now if our thoughts were longer or shorter than our sense of being, we would have no sense of being. This same symmetry indicates that this non changing red we are visualising must be us when we have no sense of being.
Could there be other beings that think we are the colour they are looking at and the colour red we are looking at is them.
People may think of time as some sort of physical movement or action happening. Now this non changing red colour we’ve been talking about, if we speed it up it won’t change. If this non changing red is itself time. It makes sense, because we can’t speed time up or slow it down, but we can feel like it’s slower or faster. Now this steel ball rolling down a hill, or anything that is moving, still involves colours that aren’t changing. So things moving may not be time, but the colours their made of are.
So we could be ourselves observing the non changing red, and at the same time be our non conscious selves as the non changing red. There could be other beings thinking the non changing red is them observing us as a colour as their unconscious selves.
You can’t see what a building block of time is made from because a building block of time would not contain any time. Imagine a bullet and tablet making one. You can’t see what this one thing is made from because the thing that makes the bullet doesn’t make the tablet and the thing that makes the tablet doesn’t make the bullet. So it doesn’t matter if the bullet or tablet are next to each other or miles apart, they could still make a non changing colour of time.
The physical environment changing could be like beings in the super symmetric dimension changing their thoughts or choices.

If there were two things separated from each other by time but both exist simultaneously, where one second feels like one second to one, but one second feels like one hour to the other, that would make sense as to why the two things are separated from each other by time but both still exist simultaneously.

If there were to colours the exact same that were both separated from each other by time, it would make one 4 dimensional colour.
Let’s say you had a purple made from pink and blue. Now let’s say there is another purple separated by time that is not made from any other mixed colours. It would not be possible, nor would it be possible for both purples to form a 4 dimensional purple.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

We could be part of one zero dimensional point where one second seems like one second. A physical system like a hurricane or falling line of dominos could be an intelligent being and be another zero dimensional point where one week feels like one second. The two zero dimensional points we are part of and the physical system are part of can be two zero dimensional universes separated by time, but both still existing simultaneously. If we are a zero dimensional point where one second feels like one second, and another intelligence is part of another zero dimensional point separated by time, where one week feels like one second, it makes sense for both points to be separated by time but still both exist simultaneously.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

One millionth of a second is too fast for us to remember or experience, so it’s fair to say that in that short span of time we have no sense of being or our sense of being doesn’t exist. The span of time we can remember or be aware of is joined together by spans of time that are too fast for us to be able to take any notice of, so how is it possible to have a sense of being at all.
Let’s imagine an atom moves an extremely short distance. The span of time it takes for this atom to move this extremely short distance is too short of a time interval for us to be aware of anything, so where were we, or where was our sense of being.
To us, the universe, a hurricane, or an infinitely long line of dominos that are falling down does not have a sense of being according to us. Say one day feels like one second to us, but one second just feels like one second to the person standing next to us, then according to the person standing next to us our sense of being does not exist.
So what if we as conscious beings are both ourselves, as well as the universe. We can be ourselves where one second feels like one second, and at the same time we can be the universe, which solves the problem as not consciously existing at extremely short time spans.
At extremely short time spans that are too fast for us to be aware of anything, we can’t say that we are different individuals because we don’t exist. Every one could be the universe.
Imagine two zero dimensional points. These two zero dimensional points are not in any particular space, or are not separated by any space but are separated by time. Nonetheless, even though these two zero dimensional points are separated by time, they both still exist simultaneously.
Let’s say one second was like one second to one of these zero dimensional points, but one second was like one day to the other one. That would make perfect sense as to why the two points are separated by time but still both exist simultaneously. So everyone could be their individual selves, and at the same time every one makes the universe. All numbers are the same because all a number really is is just the digit one that is a certain way up the number line, but the boundaries in between numbers really are different to the digit ones each side of them. So one of these two zero dimensional points that are experiencing time different from each other could be a boundary in boundary in between numbers, and the other could be a digit one that makes a number. Our sense of being may not be zero dimensional but four dimensional. We need to be focusing on a colour to have a sense of being, even if we are just imagining it, which involves time going by. If one hundred years went on while we had no sense of being, it would be like a flash to us.
Let’s say we were each individual zero dimensional points all mixed together to make one single zero dimensional point where one second feels like one second. At the same time, in a span of time that is too short for us to be aware of or exist, we could all make the universe or another zero dimensional point where one week feels like one second. You see, we are saying the universe doesn’t have a sense of being, and in an extremely short span of time we are saying our sense of being doesn’t exist, so in that short span of time we could all make the universe or we could all make another zero dimensional point where one week feels like one second.
If one second feels like one second to the zero dimensional point on the right, but one week feels like one second to the zero dimensional point on the left, we would see the zero dimensional point on the right as being us. In a super symmetrical way, what if there were other beings that thought the zero dimensional point on the left was them.
If 20 people were all individual zero dimensional points that were mixed together to form one single zero dimensional point, the 20 would all agree on what number they are looking at because the 20 zero dimensional points would make one single one. But if 5 of the 20 disagreed with what colour the numbers and background were, the distance away the numbers are, and how far they are spread apart, would that 5 of the 20 form a seperate zero dimensional points point or individual zero dimensional points as well as the one they are part of.
Imagine if how many, what colour, how far away, how far apart, all mixed to form a sense of how fast time is moving. Then if every one was part of one zero dimensional point where one second feels like one second, then no one could form separate zero dimensional points because they disagreed with what colour the numbers are or how far away or apart they are.
If every one was part of the right zero dimensional point where one second feels like one second, they could be part of the left zero dimensional point at the same time, where one week feels like one second, because no body’s sense of being exists at extremely short time intervals. To us, a hurricane or the weather doesn’t have a sense of being. Our sense of being can’t be joined together by extremely short time spans that we can’t take any notice of, so everyone can be the one universe at the same time.
If there were two things separated by time but both exist simultaneously, where one second feels like one second to one, but one second feels like one hour to the other, that would make sense as to why the two things are separated by time but both still exist simultaneously.

[kanteshlamani]

I have written a theory which unifies all forces and explains all phenomena with one law.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

The point I was trying to say is if there is a group of people blind folded forming a circle, and each person was separated by each other by a building block of time. Each person blind folded forming the circle is separated by a building block of time, so there is no shorter interval of time than what each blind folded person is separated by. If someone that is blue chooses to switch spots with the red person next to him, the red person next to him would choose to switch switch spots with him at exactly the same time, because there is no shorter time interval than what they are separated by. So each blue and red person forming the circle would switch spots with their different colour at exactly the same time, because each person is separated by a building block of time which contains no possible shorter time interval. Even though the same colours are moving opposite directions to each other, they are still choosing to move at exactly the same time.
Now let’s say there is an odd number of people forming the circle. If one of those people are switching spots with every one else infinitely fast non stop it would have to become 4th dimensional to take all the other people’s spots all at once, and all the other people would have to combine to form one person to fill up the spot of that one person that’s switching with the rest of them.
Instead of this system, every one can be still, but one person in the circle can be separated by every one else in the circle by a building block of time. So everyone else in the circle is not separated from each other by building blocks of time, just from this one person in the circle. So if every one else in the circle is not separated by each other by building blocks of time, then every one else would form one 4th dimensional person. So the same thing is happening as if one person in the circle is switching places with every one else in the circle infinitely fast non stop. So blue can be the 4th dimensional entity every one else makes up and one person can be just one person.

Let’s say there are only two zero dimensional points that exist, one being red, and the other being blue. Each zero dimensional point is made up of individual zero dimensional points. Let’s say these two points breaking up forming individual points that are scattered around. Even though the two points have broken apart, if the scattered points form the circle that has been discussed, we can keep the blue and red colours existing.

All numbers really are are just a digit one a certain way up the number line. And the boundaries in between are different. Can we say that blue is a boundary in between numbers, and red is a digit one a certain way up the number line.
So have we created a system that is based on boundaries in between numbers. What if the reason we can’t unify spaces time and quantum mechanics together, is because quantum mechanics is based on boundaries in between numbers.
When you start to focus on an area extremely tiny, or focus on a building block of space, how many of something there are might be meaningless.
In the macro world you might be able to count the boundaries in between numbers, but in the micro world they might be countless.

Let’s say there are two colours that exist one side of the tennis court, and on the other side of the net there are two colours that don’t exist. Each two of the colours that exist are two colours in one. One colour that has already been from the other side of the net as a colour that doesn’t exist, that has already crossed the net to be a colour that does exist. Each colour can also be a colour that has not yet crossed the net to become a number that doesn’t exist, remaining a colour that does exist.
So the system where the colour is on its original side as a colour that exists might seem like the empty space to the system that was the other side of the net as a colour that does not exist but has already crossed the net to become a colour that does exist. So each systems might think their the dominant colour, but we are focusing our attention to one system being the dominant colour.
There are also two colours that don’t exist the other side of the net with the exact same two systems.
Now let’s picture the two colours that exist switching spaces with each other, therefore turning into each other. As the two colours switch spaces with each other the empty spaces are now entering different squares but they seem to remain still. As the two colours switch spaces with each other, the way we can see the two colours and spaces they are in all moving, is if the two colours cross over the net straight across, and the empty spaces they are in crossings diagonally across the net to join the other colour that fills it.
The two spaces are now on their original side of the net back to being a colour that doesn’t exist, so how can the two colours that have crossed the net from their original side filling up the spaces avoid becoming a colour that doesn’t exist. So as the two colours and spaces they are filling up cross the other side of the net to the side that is for colours that don’t exist, if the spaces become the colour that’s filling them up and colours become the spaces they are filling, it would be like the two colours are on their original side they were on as a colour that exists.



Let’s say we are looking at the two colours from above, and see red on the left and blue on the right. Now we look at the two colours from below and see blue on the original left and red on the original right. Now we are looking at the empty spaces being the dominant colour.
So by observing the two colours from underneath, we would observe what would happen if the two colours switch when we are observing above, therefore observing what would happen if they cross the net carrying the same parallel switch symmetry.
So by observing the two colours from underneath seeing what would happen if they crossed over the net, could we actually be causing them to cross over the net. So if we observe the two colours from underneath, could we actually be facing the other side of the court, because by observing the two colours from underneath we have caused them to cross.
The reason why we might see the empty spaces colourless as we observe from above, is because we are looking at two colours that don’t exist which are currently the other side of the net with the same two systems. The two colours that are the other side of the net are also a kind of future that exists simultaneously, but a future the to colours that do exist will never turn into.

Is the reason why we can’t unify spaces time with quantum theory be because it involves a logic that is based on gaps in between

[PeterRice-xhcj]

One billionth of a second is to fast for us to experience, so I guess it’s fair to say that in that amount of time time we are not conscious. Matter and atoms move a distance that is so small, that we are not conscious while they are covering that tiny distance. The time frame we are conscious of is made up of time frames where we are not conscious, so how can we be conscious at all. Now let’s imagine that we are forever looking at a screen that never change’s colour. That screen would continuously be in the present, or would it. You see, our consciousness involves time, like a moving environment or clock. We get a personal sense of how long we’ve been staring at this unchanging screen, and our thoughts are changing. So now this is the opposite as mentioned above. Our consciousness is moving forward in time, but the screen we are staring at is unchanging, nonetheless the screen has to be moving forward in time because our consciousness is. We also need to visualise a colour to be a conscious being, whether we look at or imagine it. Now let’s say this screen we are looking at is what we are imagining and there’s no physical thing we are looking at. If so, then this screen we are imagining becomes the physical thing we are looking at. If for the whole time we are looking at this unchanging screen we were not conscious, it would seem to us that the screen would change to another colour in the blink of an eye, because we don’t have any memory of being unconscious (such as in a billionth of a second). If a group or infinite amount of people were zero dimensional points that mixed together to form one single zero dimensional point, every one would agree with what number they are looking at because every one would be one. But would everyone agree with what colour the numbers are, or how far away they are. For numbers to exist, you need a three dimensional space between your vision and the numbers, you need colour, and you need gaps or boundaries in between the numbers. All numbers are made of the same digit one, but the gaps and boundaries in between numbers truly are different from the digit ones that make numbers. Now, because every one is now one point, does that mean every one is now agreeing with the same number. Let’s say five points from that group saw the numbers as a different colour, does that mean they will form a different point of the same colour consciousness. They say during the Big Bang, different forces made one single force. Would it be possible for a colour conscious point, number conscious point, distance conscious point, to make one single point. Why does an hour seem like an hour to us and not one second or one year. If one week was like one second to an infinitely long falling line of dominos, would it feel like it’s acting at its own free will. Imagine if you kept mixing pinballs together forever that are the same size, and you still end up with one pinball exactly the same size. That’s what would happen if you kept on mixing zero dimensional points together, you would still end up with one single zero dimensional point without any dimensions. Let’s say 20 zero dimensional points are mixed together to make one single zero dimensional point, and one individual zero dimensional point mixes in, it would still be like two individual points mixing together. This individual zero dimensional point that has mixed in with the zero dimensional point made of 20 individual points, would make the point made of 20 points half as different, then after having done that, it would be meaningless because it would now be mixed in with the other 20 points and be part of one single point. Or would this individual point devour the 20 others, so the 20 others would become as meaningless as one individual point mixed in, followed by this individual point that devoured the 20 others becoming meaningless as it to would be one point mixed in with the rest.
If a number of points are mixed together to make one single point, would all the points agree with what number they are looking at. If you were part of another point because you disagree with the other points on what colour the number is in the point you’re in, you would be in two seperate points at once. When we’re not conscious (such as in a billionth of a second), we don’t exist. If we’re in two points at once, it’s faster than our consciousness, because it’s the same as shifting between two points of consciousness infinitely fast. Our sense of being is zero dimensional, so does that mean we’re each a seperate zero dimensional point. When we don’t have a sense of being such as in a billionth of a second, we are nothing, so we can’t be a zero dimensional point. If we’re in one point we are conscious but we are mixed in with the other points to make one single point, so we exist but don’t exist.
All numbers are just the digit one that is a certain length up the number line. What makes four four or nine nine. Four is made of two twos so are you looking at four or two. Nine is made of three threes so are you looking at three or nine. When we look at two or three things we know there is two or three without counting them. When we have to count something we are not conscious of how many a there, a bit like like not being conscious of what happens at a billionth of a second (if we were we would experience time going a lot slower). If all numbers are the same digit one, do we get an illusion of how far up the number line they are. We need two different colours for numbers to exist. Like numbers could all colours be the same digit one but we just have a dilution of how far up the number line they are. If we are zero dimensional points mixed in with a heap of other zero dimensional points, we would all agree with the other points on what number we are focusing our attention on because we would all be one point. But if we disagreed on what colour the numbers or background was, would we form our own seperate point. If we swapped the numbers we are focusing on for the colours the numbers and background are, would that do anything. What if the point was made of 20 individual points, then split to form 20 individual points. You are now theorising the existence of 20 individual points, so now you yourself are an individual point with a consciousness of 20, so by looking at these 20 scattered points you are looking at yourself. If there are multiple other points mixed in with you they all to would get the illusion they are seeing 20 scattered points. If one point consisted of multiple points, it wouldn’t consist of a number of points because there would be no order. You could keep mixing an infinite number of zero dimensional points points together forever and still end up with one single zero dimensional point. If there were different points scattered around because every point had different opinions of what colour the numbers were, and we don’t know how many individual points are scattered around, we theorising this would be an individual point with a consciousness of infinity or nothing. If only two multi point points exist, one good way to leave the point we’re in and enter the other multi point point would be to disagree with the other points we’re mixed with on what number we are focusing on, or forget what number we are focusing on.
If you have say five different things, even though they are different things what makes them the same is they are in the same category of being a different thing. To escape this to truly get not just a different thing but a different category, is if we look at the gaps or boundaries in between numbers because they are different to the digit ones that are either side of them.
If we have a red square on the left and blue square on the right, and they switch places infinitely fast, what happens is the blue square is on the left infinitely fast then on the left continuously. Could the two squares remain in their spaces, then remain there infinitely fast followed by continuously, without leaving their spaces in the first place.
You can’t see what space is made of because the blocks or material the make space would not contain space. Imagine a nut and jellybean made one. You can’t see what the jellybean and nut are made from because the stuff that makes the jellybean doesn’t make the nut, and the stuff that makes the nut doesn’t make the jellybean. What if the jellybean and nut was overall space, not mattering if they were both next to each other, or miles or light years apart, because they both make up overall space. Just as the building blocks that make space wouldn’t contain space (making you blind towards them), you can’t see what both the jellybean and nut are made from, because the stuff that makes the jellybean doesn’t make the nut and the stuff that makes the nut doesn’t make the jellybean. Think of a tank filled with jellybeans and nuts. The jellybeans and nuts would be the cause of the stuff inside the tank to exist, at the same time the jellybeans and nuts (being overall space) could be outside the tank, each having their own seperate causes of existence by the stuff that makes them. So if time stops, the cause doesn’t stop. A domino that is falling over will cause the one next to it to fall over, followed by the one next to it. But if time stops, so everything freezes, the cause of something doesn’t stop, because what something is made of causes it to exist.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

If a number of people were zero dimensional points that were mixed together to form one single zero dimensional point, every one would agree with what number they are looking at because every one would be all one zero dimensional point. No one could have a different opinion. Imagine if you keep mixing an infinite number of pinballs that are the same size forever, and you still end up with one pinball that is the same size. That’s what it would be like if you kept mixing zero dimensional points together, you would still end up with one zero dimensional point without any dimensions. These zero dimensional points may not be in any space, or separated by any space, but be separated by time. One way to leave the point that you and the other points are part of and enter the other multi point point would be to disagree with the other points you’re mixed with on what number you are looking at. Or another way would be to just forget the number. If one individual point mixed in with another point composed of a number of points, it would still be like two individual points mixing together, so this individual point would make the multi point point its mixing into half as different then the individual point would become meaningless because it would now be part of one point. Or could this individual point completely take over the multi point point so the multi point point becomes as meaningless as one point mixed in with a multi point point, following by the individual point that is taking over (as it to is now part of a multi point point. What makes four four or what makes nine nine. Four is made of two twos, so are you looking at four or two. Nine is made of three threes so are you looking at nine or three. All numbers are really just the digit one that is a certain length up the number line. What if all colours were the digit one a certain way up the colour line. If every point in the multi point point agreed on a number, but switched the number for the colours of the number and background.
Our sense of being zero dimensional, so could we theoretically be zero dimensional points. Would we be one individual point. Or would we be a number of points scattered around mixed in with other points and separated at the same time. We can not experience a billionth of a second, so during this short time frame we don’t exist. We need to be focusing on a colour to have a sense of being, wether we are imagining it or looking at it physically. If we were not focusing on a colour, or did not have a sense of being for 100 years, the 100 years would go by like a flash, because we wouldn’t have any memory of not having a sense of being (such as a billionth of a second). If you had say 9 different thing, the reason they would not be different is because they would all be in the same category of being a different thing. To escape this and get something that is a different category, you have to look at the gaps or boundaries in between numbers, the are different than the digit ones each side of them that make numbers. Could we just have two multi point points, one being a digit one, and the other being a boundary in between numbers. Could you really count boundaries in between numbers, could we develop a new kind of logic based on boundaries in between numbers. You can’t see what space is made of because the blocks or material the make space would not contain space. Imagine a nut and jellybean made one. You can’t see what the jellybean and nut are made from because the stuff that makes the jellybean doesn’t make the nut, and the stuff that makes the nut doesn’t make the jellybean. What if the jellybean and nut was overall space, not mattering them both being next to each other, or miles or light years apart. Just as the building blocks that make space wouldn’t contain space (making you blind towards them), you can’t see what both the jellybean and nut are made from, because the stuff that makes the jellybean doesn’t make the nut and the stuff that makes the nut doesn’t make the jellybean. Think of a tank filled with jellybeans and nuts. The jellybeans and nuts would be the cause of the stuff inside the tank to exist, at the same time the jellybeans and nuts (being overall space) could be outside the tank, each ones existence being caused by what ever they are made out of. So if time stops, and every thing freezes, the cause of something doesn’t stop because the existence of things is caused by whatever they are made out of. Imagine if you keep mixing hundreds or an infinite amount of pinballs together that are exactly the same size, and you still end up with one pinball the same size. That is what would happen if you kept mixing zero dimensional points together. Our sense of being is zero dimensional, so would it be theoretically possible to all be mixed together not physically, but as zero dimensional points. Say you have one zero dimensional point composed of a large number of zero dimensional points which is still one point, and one individual point is mixed in. That individual point would make that group of points half as different, and then be countless as it is now mixed in with the group of points. Or would this one point devour the group of points making them twice as different and take over so the group of points become countless along with the individual point. If these two points were the only two colours that existed, they would have to each become twice as different to turn into each other, and have to both become half as different to turn into two colours that don’t exist. If there’s a red square on the left and blue square on the right, and both squares switch places infinitely fast, both squares would be on opposite sides infinitely fast before being on opposite sides continuously. Would it be possible for the squares to stay on the sides they are on, then suddenly be on the sides they are on infinitely fast without switching sides in the first place. If they did that it would be like they had suddenly switched sides even though they haven’t, like a sort of lie.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

If there’s a red square on the left and blue square on the right, and both squares switch places infinitely fast, both squares would be on opposite sides infinitely fast before being on opposite sides continuously. Would it be possible for the squares to stay on the sides they are on, then suddenly be on the sides they are on infinitely fast without switching sides in the first place. If they did that it would be like they had suddenly switched sides even though they haven’t, like a sort of lie.

[PeterRice-xhcj]

I hope I’m not annoying you, you might just have to stop replying. I can’t keep on sending texts every day because I will just keep babbling on about nothing.
I didn’t do that well at school, my enter score wasn’t fantastic, but I still like to read about things.
Quantum theory and space time theory are meant to both contradict each other. No one can unify the two theory’s together, but I think the closest we’ve come so far is quantum hollonomy. Quantum hollonomy involves all the forces having different geometries that are related to each other, because during the Big Bang, the weak force and electromagnetic force were part of the same force. According to Quantum hollonomy, the universe is quantum, and the Big Bang was actually a big bounce.
What I’m enthused about is if they test the magnetic field of a neutron, and the magnetic field of its entangled partner acts the same way, the will be able to tell if gravity is a quantum thing.
Scientists try to find what the heart of reality is, but what is behind our sense of being.
On the movie ghost, with Patric Swacey, the people who die see their dead bodies laying down. This seems unlogical because you wouldn’t be able to see your dead body or the surrounding environment because you wouldn’t have any eyes, they would be left behind in your body.
We can’t remember where we were before we were born, so does that mean we just simply didn’t exist. If 100 years went by while we never had a sense of being, that 100 years to us would seem like a flash because we wouldn’t have any memory of not having a sense of being.
Let’s say we never had a sense of being forever. Would that infinitely long period of time be like a flash to us. Well if an infinitely long period of time existed it would be impossible to measure a finite period of time against it.
I think the only way our sense of being can not exist, is if instead of 1 second feeling like one second, and 1 hour or 1 month felt like a second, our sense of being would not exist to someone who 1 second was like 1 second to. So if 1 week felt like 1 second to us, but 1 second felt like 1 second to the person standing next to us, according to that person standing next to us our sense of being does not exist.
So if 1 week is like 1 second to us, would that mathematically be the same as our sense of being not existing for ever, ever and ever.
To us, a hurricane, wave, or falling line of dominos doesn’t have a sense of being, but from what has been discussed is that really true.
The only way to find out for your self what happens when you die is if you actually die.
I think once you have a sense of being it can never be lost.
Our sense of being is zero dimensional so could we theoretically be zero dimensional points.

[i-ska]

Any theory of Everything must explain the double slit experiment, alpha137, beta decay, exactly what energy is, how matter is created, give a model of physics that unifies and explains everything from the quantum to cosmological level. Almost all proposed ToEs online propose to be maybe a ToE one day explaining none of these. There only is one.

The Theory of Everything is already here with videos on the channel Science not Dogma on youtube and odysee and the full ToE on weebly however members of the big bang particle model cult keep having it removed, if it was nonsense why would they bother?
It unifies everything into one model one field(the space time fabric dark matter lattice) one force(pressure). However getting someone to look at a few minutes of mathematics and logic to acknowledge it is the real problem, people tend to assume if that was the case it would have won a Nobel prize. With Roger Penrose winning a Nobel prize for scifi mathematics which ignores the Planck limit, particle physicists twisting Bells Theorem which proves the particle model is the wrong interpretation of QM into saying BT proves the Universe isn't real one can start to see how messed up science is.

What a tragedy physicists have lost their sense of integrity to test what at 1st may seem unexpected. That's why we have experiments, then again that another problem, money, if it isn't funded who is going to put their hands into their own pocket and test, so far no one and if it is funded with the potential to provide free energy and multiply matter(an end to all need for competing for resources) and liberate everyone from the control of the complex, if they are the funders would it reach the public?.

When the proof to a loop being impossible in the Collatz conjecture was put on Reddit someone(who is too distracted to follow Basic algebra) put it through chat gpt. One return from ai was "it makes unsubstantiated claims like every 4n+1×3+1 is a 12n+4" if ai can't even think to follow kids level math unless it is pre programmed in a specific format and people are depending on it to do the thinking for them it's a scary time for mankind(both proofs have been removed from Reddit along with the previous youtube channel with 160 videos made over 4 years, closed for no specific reason and no way to appeal).

For those facing the reality of the onslaught against nature, and a cosmology model in absolute confusion & crisis, we may be at risk of losing all the technological advances scientists have worked so hard for over the last few centuries in a natural apocalyptic disaster or breakdown of the environment and/or human infrastructure.

Goldbach conjecture has been proven, so has a loop been proven impossible in the Collatz conjecture and the Theory of Everything thing is here, the saddest most tragic thing is people who call themselves scientists would read a comment and laugh Dunning Kruger that such breakthroughs like this could be blocked from reaching the public. Its probably the worst travesty ever in scientific history and certainly a moment with the most danger and potential for a bright future ever simultaneously staring mankind in the face

[PeterRice-xhcj]

If we had a sense of self being during an extremely short length of time such as a billionth of a second, would we not then experience time as moving along a lot slower. The speed of time we are familiar with is made up of extremely short amounts of time we cannot experience, in other words, extremely short amounts of time where we don’t have a sense of being. So if the speed of time we are familiar with is made up of these short amounts of time, how do we have a sense of being at all. Imagine a falling line of dominos that went on forever. If one week was like one second to this forever falling line of dominos, would it have a sense of being, feeling like it’s acting at its own free will. Our sense of being is zero dimensional, so during a span of time that is too fast for us to experience, could we be like a falling line of dominos, at the same time being a zero dimensional point at a span of time we have awareness or a sense of being. If one second was like one second to us, but it was like one hour to someone next to us, that person next to us would still be next to us, but not responsive, like a falling line of dominos. You can’t see what space is made of because the blocks that make space would not contain space. Imagine if a jellybean and nut made one. You can’t see what this one is made of because the stuff that makes the jellybean doesn’t make the nut and the stuff that makes the nut doesn’t make the Jellybean. What if the jellybean and nut were overall space, not mattering how close together they are or how far apart they are. If time stops and everything freezes, the cause of something doesn’t stop, because a still objects existence would be caused by what ever it is made from. Imagine a tank filled with jellybeans and nuts. The jellybeans and nuts is what would be causing the stuff inside the tank to exist. Now if the jellybeans and nuts in the tank being overall space, they could also be outside the tank having their seperate cause of existence by the stuff that makes them, at exactly the same time each being inside the tank causing the stuff in the tank to exist. These aren’t facts, just ideas. What is mentioned at the start i think involves reason.