How Does General Relativity Encode Universal Energy into Mass?

sirchasm
Messages
94
Reaction score
0
Einstein's remainder encodes (= formulates) a universal energy background as mass, in terms of a limit for this energy in discrete terms; the limit represents a bound for the other two components, the e and u that modulate spacetime M; time is then generated by a linear transform of these components as a binary wave, in spacetime.

(first up, is E=mc^2 a remainder? It's certainly invariant)

Is the remainder a one-way function? Can the structure of the universal spacetime be recovered from a universal mass term and universal energy? Can a transform be built that is Turing-complete?
We know the transforms we use might be universal, but when we encode the physical constants that appear to be the limits of our local frame = (G,h,c), the results don't connect to the apparent distant limits when we use the same constants, so we see a lot more energy in this large space than there should be (apparently).

(what does Turing-complete mean in this context)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think it has to do with another e, not charge but exponentiation of charge.
Because e is a series and an integral (it has a geometry too), it encapsulates enumeration, sum and product and curvature, it's a complete yet infinitely-scaled value, of numbers, or a number.

That is, e is gauged ( = measured, calculated) by 1 and infinity.

c, the special velocity of light is too; since the m in E=mc^2\, is too, or is at least molar, it doesn't inform the low end except exp doesn't ever vanish. The GR scale is: "to molarity and beyond"
 
Last edited:
So we don't see, generally, anything unless it's made out of a lot of atoms, or an atom 'emits' something a lot of times (over a small time).
This is the molar gauge, which we might envisage as a point of intersection, which can't be "the point = e", since e counts, both atoms and single atom 'events', it defines a series, and the sum of a series (it's a countable infinity)

When we do use 'single' atoms and control their 'positions' with electric fields and their internal spin-energies with magnetic fields, they vanish from what we call a thermodynamic state and 'resonate' in place together, they self-assemble or condense in a strictly non-Avogadrian way,

Avogadro has to take his number and leave the room for a while.
 
Thread 'LQG Legend Writes Paper Claiming GR Explains Dark Matter Phenomena'
A new group of investigators are attempting something similar to Deur's work, which seeks to explain dark matter phenomena with general relativity corrections to Newtonian gravity is systems like galaxies. Deur's most similar publication to this one along these lines was: One thing that makes this new paper notable is that the corresponding author is Giorgio Immirzi, the person after whom the somewhat mysterious Immirzi parameter of Loop Quantum Gravity is named. I will be reviewing the...
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...
Back
Top