/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10864340

Relativity is what happens when you invert Newtonian physics and normalize so that space is proportional to its energy density; within this framework, particles ARE their warpings in spacetime, so the image you posted is incorrect, all that exists is the gravity well, and this is why relativity cannot be reconciled with particle physics. PARTICLES DONT EXIST, only their wells exist.

Its actually very easy to prove this, but what is difficult is proving it without the Academic Mafia jumping on you like a pack of hyenas and threatening to hunt you down and force you into homelessness, since the "mystery" of incomplete physics is what drives their funding. Once we have UBI it will be much easier for these people to engage in rational discussion like normal people.

>>10864340
So, what's your alternative, faggot? I'm listening

>>10864527

How about instead of just telling you the answer, I lead you to it? Are you interested in having a conversation?

>>10864542
I was actually going to sleep, but I guess I can have a talk if it's interesting

>>10864549

What do you know to actually exist?

>>10864554
The things around me, the objects I can see and measure

>>10864554
Are you one of those Feynman freaks who thinks he has everything figured out?

>>10864557

Okay, so things, energy and distances, right? Do you believe that things (mass) are just energy?

>>10864514
based and redpilled

What advancements specifically have been impeded by GR?

>>10864527
>faggot
Why the homophobia?

>>10864561
Yes sir I do

>>10864527
C L A M P E D
L
A
M
P
E
D

THIS is why they CLAMP everyone.

>>10864340
string theory implies that spacetime is emergent. it is not easy to see but a good look at string theory implies that not only the topology but also the geometry of spacetime follows logically from the string framework.

>>10864514
fuck off schizo

>>10864570
fell for the schizo meme. sad!

>>10864580

I agree. Really all that exists are distances (space) and energy. there is some rule(s) driving the distribution of this energy through space, and everything is emergent from that underlying principle or principles. Would you agree with that?

>>10864340
Maybe instead of being salty about it, you could try studying the theory to find out why people respect it.

>>10864585
>string theory

>>10864561
I believe that energy is a useful mathematical quantity to which we have a name because it doesn't change under some circumstances. Mass is another mathematical value that can describe how an object reacts to a force and to gravity. Then, after observing that electromagnetic waves behaved differently than "common" things, we introduced the relativistic energy, γmc^2, that is still conserved under some interesting circumstances. I don't believe that everything is energy. Energy is a concept we created to describe how things work. Whether energy exists per se or not is a philosophical question, rather than a scientific one. I believe it's still a very interesting question, but it can't be answered with scientific methods

>>10864595
haha, a “string theory is wrong” shiller. with no argument. care to make one? oh, no argument? typical

>>10864597
Do you believe its possible that there is a single algorithm / equation that emergently generates all material reality? A unified equation of everything?

>>10864577
No homophobia, it was just a friendly greeting

>>10864601
Go fuck yourself in one of a minimum of 10 spatial dimensions with one added imaginary dimension.

>>10864602
I don't know, I hope so but I can't really tell. But if it exists, it surely is a differential equation

>>10864602
not that anon but it’s called the “Nambu—Goto action”

>>10864608
haha good larp. just state absolutely false shit about string theory and declare victory!
>imaginary dimension
where did you even hear this? /r/holofractal? some pseud site like that?

laughable

>>10864610

A differential equation. I agree, but lets talk as simply and fundamentally as possible.

Of there is a unified equation, what properties must it have based on your observation of how the Universe works? Im not talking about radial theoretical physics, I mean common sense stuff... what would we expect of how this "algorithm" is being "computed" by the Universe?

>>10864622
>”common sense stuff”
>proceeds to make posts about general relativity
do you even think about your posts before making them?

>>10864622
I don't really know how it would be computed, I can only tell that it would have to explain all observations we made, including non-deterministic states of small objects and existence of an upper limit to the speed of things

>>10864617
You're the larping faggot, time is an imaginary dimension in the mathematical sense. Imaginary in mathematics is not the same as imaginary in colloquial meaning you fucking nigger.

>>10864639
the guy you are (You)info is a pseud. if you have a real science question the please repost it

>>10864622
Look man, when you're talking about the Universe, you have to VISUALIZE it, you know, as a whole, not the sum of its parts.

>>10864645
I know he is a pseud, I just wanted to waste some time listening to strange ideas about physics. Anyways it's 5 am here, so I'll go get some sleep. It was nice talking to you OP, please study some real physic and math, you will enjoy it

>>10864642
>hurr durr wick rotations are physically meaningful and not just a math trick

no, you are not only wrong, you go beyond wrong. you are shilling for nonsense. if i can indulge in your schizophrenia, i think you are saying that time, as a measurable quantity, takes on complex values. or, more concisely, time has two parameters, not one:

this is just typical schizo shit. if you want to learn about multiple time dimensions, then learn F theory instead of being a larper

>>10864639

I was driving, so sorry for the delay. I am thinking about locality, symmetry, consistentcy, conservation... do you agree these are probably hardwired into the equation some how?

>>10864639
The universe is deterministic under many-worlds interpretation of QM, which is consistent with everything we can so far see

>>10864662
time is a concept. So you can't move objects with it

>>10864677
oh okay, innumeratefag tries to have meaningful input.

okay. so GR is a meme because your verbal argument. care to improve on it with better quantitative predictions?

oh wait i forgot humanities majors couldn’t pass calc 1

>>10864662
How many spatial dimensions are there according to string theory?

>>10864689

>>10864676

This is correct. The Universe is determanistic, and randomness comes out of our inability to compute infinite depth. This is easily provable, but like I said, the trick is finding a forum to speak that is safe from... well take a look at the kind of people in this thread crawling out of the woodwork

>>10864689
science doesnt predict. gr is a flat earth or flat universe theory. but you cant explain what encapsulates teh big bang or the black stuff behind your "universe". you cant think of a better theory becuase your not creative enough. they have gave science over to numbnuts so they can get a bread and butter degree while shilling for the establishmenet on every thing they poop out.
humanity major couldnt pass calculus 1? math has nothing to do with science. their theory GR doesnt even begin to matter as they havent worked out the kinks,l which you always say they eventually will first.

>>10864695
the word infinity needs to be stopped being used.
it just means insistent counting. if i spelled that right. its been tricked into people thinking its endless,

if you used the word endless which you would agree is a synonym for infinite and said a sentence you use infinite in and replaced it with that word instead. you will see, in time that its irrational

>>10864700

I mean endless. I mean infinite.

>>10864698
>gr is a flat earth or flat universe theory.
objectively and laughably wrong.

back to >>>/x/ brainlet

>>10864700
>>10864707

Not only are the calculations infinite and impossible for any computer no matter its processing ability, but the depth is also infinite. Uncertainty principle us easily seen in our unified model. We can actually watch the particles dance unpredicably, all through exact and determanistic computations.

>>10864707
i said use it in a sentence. stop using infinite then.
cuase you will sound like a moron. like i said.
>>10864710
no, quantum relativity / its the same shit. they dont explain objects. they claim the universe the earth, is flat. they never explain the functioning of any objects. they claim concepts are objects. they move objects with concepts.

in my own words put up or shutup. show any phenomena explained for instance gravity with GR.

a 2d canvas is weighed downwards???
a 2d canvas why doesnt it go upwards?

its a 2d description religion not a 3d physics theory.
math doesnt belong in physics and you cant do physics with out an object first rule

How fucking many faggot

>>10864716
22/7
there. metrics is stupid noone cares man. thats the ponit. you know enough. w e can never get anything perfect ever. it doesnt matter on any scale.
22/7 is pie. we can get it as good as we can get it. counting it doesnt matter.

>>10864717

No, infinite is perfectly descriptive, but so is endless. Semantics tire me to be frank. Its a refuge for small minds.

>>10864720

Correct. However, we know what the equation is. The equation is perfectly knowable, and determanistic. But it is impossible for finite beings to perfectly compute.

The truth is far more amazing than anything they could have dreamed up.

>>10864721
there is no such thing as infinite. you dont know. would you? anyway i odnt and i dont care.

>>10864721
there is no such thing as infinite. you dont know. would you? anyway i odnt and i dont care.

>>10864717
>n my own words put up or shutup. show any phenomena explained for instance gravity with GR.
gravitational waves, that picture of a black hole, how gps works. the precession of mercury, light bending

honestly i pity you. you fell for the electric universe meme right?

>>10864733
You do understand that those phenomena are not incontrovertible proof that spacetime is exactly as described by general relativity, r-right?

>>10864733

Electric universe? No.

What we have done is we have found an equation that can simulate all 4 forces of physics when computed.

>>10864744
Excuse me what the fuck
is this actually gary after all?

>>10864744

I want to be clear. We have already done this. We are not looking for funding to prove it. Its proven. We can move on from this boomer era nonsense if we want now.

>>10864741
yeah. as i said before, string theory explains those proven phenomena more satisfactorily.
>>10864744
fuck off optitard. gary is a scammer shill who’s been thoroughly debunked

>>10864744
>>10864750
are you talking about 2 strings wrapped around each other and the "wave" of torsion on two points between any 2 atoms in the universe?

>>10864747

If you already understand that theory then why tf were we even having this conversation? There are better questions to ask now other than boring proven shit like unified physics.

>>10864757
>>10864753
>>10864750
>>10864747
this is what im talking about. string nigger u brain washed
you didnt show shit

>>10864758
oh okay. red pill is on optimumtard theory. not really

>>10864760
i don’t expect innumerate gary to understand equations.

this thread is already confirmed gary crap

>>10864760
Holy shit this is so schizo it's not even funny. Get help man

>>10864771
string theory has never showed any explaination of any mechanisms of any phenomena.
tldr gravity
how light works.
go on and give us a lecture. id like to hear you explain any mechanism of any of those phenomena using a string.

calling people crazy when you claim things like black holes that you cant even see.

>>10864775
string theory reproduces quantum field theory and at the same time naturally predicts gravitons that explain general relativity. and not because it is forced; string theory grew out of studies of meson physics.

anti-string shillers are for sure brainlets

>>10864775
black holes have been proven to exist with countless experimental date
just because they don't jibe with your jesus and your angels doesn't make them not real

>>10864775
No I'm not stringfag I'm hydrinotard. I actually thought that stringfag posted that /x/ tier graphic, sorry Gary. Your theory is totally /x/ tier though, sad to say.

>>10864775
You really don't know a thing about the topic you hate so much. The biggest draw of string theory is that a quantum mechanical description of gravity just naturally comes "for free," so to speak, out of the base framework.

>>10864794
How many faggot

>>10864797
How many what?

>>10864583
Are you the same kid that posts "clamped" in ever thread I read?

>>10864801
How many spatial dimensions are there?

>>10864797
animefags are cancer

>>10864794
actual smart anons are based

>>10864805
>can’t into compactification
back to >>>/a/

>>10864805
Three extended, six compactified (seven for M theory). It is experimentally testable, just not directly at anywhere near modern capabilities. Nature has made no promise to us that her revelations will come easily. Also with further study, indirect methods of testing will be developed.

>>10864595
This is the actor that will play Paul Dirac in the film coming in 2022 "Delta".
It's the moustache lol. Perhaps Jude Law or someone else is a better fit but this is the candidate so far.

>>10864819
>hurr durr i’m from /a/ and never passed calc 1 so string theory debunked hurr durr

>>10864819
> Nature has made no promise to us that her revelations will come easily. Also with further study, indirect methods of testing will be developed.

nice cope dork

>>10864831
he’s right though. string theory in its current (i.e. infancy, where we don’t know much at all) is kind of ambiguous pending future progress. but there are possible things we could see, like cosmic strings, which would be a huge push for string theory, even accounting for the uncertainties that exist

LIGO could provide that sort of evidence any day now

>>10864819

Can you show me a computation that shows the string theory algorithms reproducing material reality? How about just something as simple as em waves or the vectors of electromagnetism?

>>10864848

A theory posted to 4chan, with zero budget, made more progress in physics within 2 months than spring theory has in 50 years, and they want 50 more years of funding.

Better idea, give us UBI and string theoriests can wok out their ideas on their own time of they actually thibk they have value (LO fucking L) laughing because no one will work on these fake ideas without funding. The entire thing is a funding scam.

>>10864848
There is absolutely no indication that greater than 3 spatial dimensions exist, no phenomena that could even be attributed to such dimensions. It is a dead giveaway that string theory is wrong. The notion that they are "compactified" and so undetectable is so absurd and laughable I seriously pity you for defending it. Eat my hairy neet ass you complete and utter faggot.

>>10864849
it is basically trivial in string theory at this point to reproduce gauge theories like the standard model of particle physics.
the bigger challenge that exists is that it can produce plenty of other theories too, ones with particles that contradict with what we know, so the problem we are left with is much more technical than what you are suggesting

>>10864867

Pretty much! Yep! String theory is a boomer era funding scam.

>>10864861
fuck off optitarx
>>10864867
einstein himself was enamored with higher dimensional theories. he loved kaluza-klein stuff. so i argue that if einstein thought it was plausible, then people who disagree need to prove they’re smarter than einstein

>>10864870
>it is basically trivial in string theory at this point to reproduce gauge theories like the standard model of particle physics.

THEN SHOW US!!!!! Even the Optitard theory had an automaton that a 5 year old could program that shows the 4 forces!!!! You have. Fucking. Nothing!!!!

>>10864849
You'd be best reading a foundational paper on string theory. Electromagnetism, like the rest of the standard model, falls out from the internal symmetries of Calabi Yau manifolds (or the manifold of choice in a particular flavor of string theory).

>>10864804
...
...
...
That's enough oxygen, it's what I feel like today....
>Clamp
:^)
:^)
:^)

>>10864878

Optitarix is fucking badass. Stealing that for a future username, my 1 trillionth.

>>10864878
>Appeal to authority
Dude Einstein is just another faggot. Nobody is infallible. Why are normal fags so susceptible to appeal to authority?

>>10864881

Hahahahhahaha!!!!

You have nothing!!!!

You think we are retards who cannot understand anything outside the confines of a $100,000 University???

Explain to us right here and now how string theory explains more than even the retarded Optimum Theory!!!

>>10864886
Pdf: https://www.google.com/url?q=https://math.berkeley.edu/~kwray/papers/string_theory.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjp0tis8-rjAhXQGs0KHV0ZBqcQFjAAegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw3-nU133F0-eyEZJZST43xl

Unlike Optimum Theory's trippy pictures, string theory's framework can provide a mathematical derivation of general relativity and the standard model.

>>10864885

Because string theory is literally a religion by strict definition. All they have is logical fallacy and deflection, and then when they get called it they resort to violence. Notice how they always lavel people as "schizo" for asking even basic questions? Its because that is one of the only lavels that can get someone black listed from employment, just like someone posted earlier in this thread about these cultists coming after the livelihood of anyone who disagrees with them. They have no logic, so violence becomes their tool. These are people who would soon have your family starve on the street than engage in a rational debate.

>>10864340
>general relativity

U Remember Some Chap Name Galileo ?
When He drop 2 stone that is diff in masses.
this is what actually happen
1. Heavy Stone Drop Faster than Lighter Stone (Newtonian)
2. Heavy Stone bend space-time more than Lighter Stone , So Time Flow of Heavy Stone is move slower than Lighter Stone (Einstein general relativity)
3. You use your own Flows of Time and Distance to measurement both Heavy and Lighter Stone

ding dong calculate form me is look like this
98m/s x 0.1sec for Heavy Stone
0.98m/s x 10 sec for Lighter Stone
both drop to the ground at 9.8 m/s square by your measurement (9.8 m/s x 1 sec)
this is why all of you were wrong.
I use all of major physic technology at the same event.
this is what ? ToE and Gravity supported to be.

>>10864891
General relativity and the standard model both fail to correctly describe the motion of matter and energy at most scales.

>>10864885
>>10864886
>>10864891
>>10864893
buttblasted brainlet pseuds

>>10864904
Bro you can label Gary with whatever, he's the easy target, but you don't want to tangle with me. I will seriously defeat you in rhetorical battle.

>>10864901
Completely incorrect. General relativity reduces to Newton's law of gravity in the low density, low speed limit. Likewise, the standard model reduces to atomic physics, maxwell's laws, and mechanics in the low energy, low speed, high particle number limit. These have been established for much longer than you've been alive.

>>10864910
>rhetorical
back to >>>/his/

>>10864913
>established belief vs logical deduction
who will win I wonder

>>10864916
The theories most consistent with experimental evidence have won, which are GR and SM. You can cope all you want but those two have undeniably won the consistency-with-observation game.

>>10864916
donno, but string theory wins either way

you know, because it is real science

>>10864891

The Optitard theory simulates both GR and particle physics. String theory cannot even do that.

If you could you would show us a simulation. Do... do you have a simulation using your equations? Youve had 50 years to work on this...

>>10864927
Simulations don't mean shit without quantitative predictions. It's all just pretty pictures which you can make believe shows the four forces. Read the pdf I posted and you'll find plenty of quantitative results and predictions.

>>10864920
>>10864922
Thank you Doctor Reddit

>string theory explains these phenomena more satisfactorily
>string theory provides a derivation of GR and SM

pick one.

>>10864934

Wtf are you talking about? A simulation is the ultimate predictive tool!!!! You dont even need to "make predictions" with a sim because you can just query the fucking sim directly!!!!

Where is your sim?!?!?!

Are your equations even logical enough to be computable?!?!??!?!

>>10864941
There is no way, even hypothetically, to map the motion of objects in greater than 3 spatial dimensions. String theory shills will say this is because of the limitations of computational power afforded to their research. MFW

>>10864941
Query the sim for the half life of a muon from a 50 GeV beam and I'll start to pay attention.

>Are your equations even logical enough to be computable?!?!??!?!
Yes, read the pdf

>>10864934

For better or worse, the optitard autonaton is completely descriptive. It contains all the data need to falsify or confirm itself. It simulates literally everything. Now is it correct? Who knows. Its a planck scale sim so to scale it up to even the size of an atom would require a computer the size of a fucking planet, but guess what...

Even those morons have a sim, and acting like they are are just "guessing" about what their sim means is pure deflection. They know what their sim is supposed to me and show. Their not reading patterns in tea leaves like you string theory religious fundamentalists.

>>10864946

You can simulate that shit easy in the Optitard autonaton. You want to pay up for the super computer time to do it?

Oh, cool, your theory can make a sim? Show us! Post a youtube link!

>>10864952
Look "not Gary," until you can actually scale up the sim and show testable consequences, nobody outside of these threads is going to give a shit.

>>10864954
https://www.millsian.com/

>>10864954
Here you go: https://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4789

>>10864956

The optitard autonaton predicts a hierarchical universe. As above, so below. You dont need to even scale it up to see particles at planck and their interactions.

>>10864961
>As above, so below.
Now you done it boy they gon direct you to /x/ now m8

>>10864961

Furthermore, you can see gravity and electromagnetic forces even in the optitard planck scale sim. Quantum fucking gravity.

Show me a string theory sim showing quantum gravity, or even an electromagnetic wave, because the optitards have done that too.

>>10864959

No i want to see sims directly from string theory principles. We've seen fucking molecular sims before. Where is a sim that uses a string theory unified equation to simulate a molicule

>>10864966
I could post a closeup video of boiling water and claim it simulates the four forces at the planck scale. A simulation is worthless without quantitative predictions.

>>10864966
I don't know that the optimum sim actually corresponds with reality so I have to assume that this argument is invalid. Like the string-for-brains said, unless you can scale it up it proves exactly nothing.

>>10864960

You directed me to an article about a lattice sim. Where is the video?

You know the Optitard autonaton IS LItERALLY A LATTICE SIM, right???? And they have videos. Where is your video?

>>10864973
Don't be so picky you fuckk, besides I'm hydrinotard

>>10864974

You realky dont get this. The optitard automaton IS A SIMULATION is not just a fucking video. How low iq are?

>>10864983
>How low iq are?
Oh no no no no no no
look at this dood

>>10864977
It's far better than posting a video: they're giving you an in-depth view of how they set up the simulation and how they're extracting actual quantitative results from the computation.

>>10864975

You can literally derive the gravity equations from the optard equation and see it with your own teo mother fucking eyes in the simulation as the particles fucking attract by thevsquare of their fucking mother fucking distance.

Where is your fucking string theory sim that even shows, idk, just show me fucking 2 particles attracting? Can string theory even do that????

>>10864983
Conway's game of life is a simulation. You could tell me that it actually simulates planck scale physics and that if you scale it up you'll find unified physics, but I would have no reason to believe you.

>>10864989

Oh, cool, so you cannot actually show the sim. We need to take your word for it that its tots real. Sounds legit

>>10864992

Oh cool! Can CGL do this? Can it show us fucking gravity from its source code without some high level trickery?

https://youtu.be/BlvEqVK6rHc

>>10864991
You are talking to two different niggerfaggots that have completely opposite theories to shill, again I am hydrinotard. I should think you might recognize me by now Gary. Anyways, post maths proofs for the derivation plz

>>10864996

Fyi that not only "looks like gravity" it is fucking gravity in the sense that the equation derives the gravity equations. That is why the particles attract by the square of their distances, and fyi, that dame equation, in the same fucking sim simulates particles, with electron clouds with electromagnetic mother fucking fields.

Its pure moron shit, and yet String Theory cannot do it!!!

What I see Michelson experiment boiling down to is that you cannot decribe nothing. There was a prediction theory made. The experiment instead churned out zero. There was simply no result outside of miniscile instrumental error. There was simply nothing to measure.
An act of description is an act of substitution of that which is with a combination of those which were. An attempt to describe nothing is an act of substitution of nothing with something, essentially thus fictional. In other words, any field theory ever, at the end of the day, is simply a lie.

Want to simulate a particle? Plug in the fucking mass, spin, energy, whatever the fuck you want, and simulate it!!! Can string theory do that???? I dont thing so!!!!!

https://youtu.be/VxigjcomloM

>>10865012
Based
M-M btfo
eat shit qft

>>10864340
these days, a very limited audience, mostly just adults without diapers

>>10864899

>>10865012

Michelson and morely was Flat Earth levels of incompetence. You cannot get above the aether on a fucking moutain!!!!!!!


Loloololollollkollkkkkklkkoloolojajajajajajajjajajajaja!!!!!!!!!!

YOU CANNOT EVEN GET ABOVE THE FUCKING AMOSPHERE ON A MOUNTAIN HOW DO YOU PEOPLE EVEN TIE YOUR FUCKING SHOES??????????!?!?!??!!!!!

>>10865024

"We are gunna get above da aether on a mountain."

Not a single person was like, "hey we cannot even get above the atmosphere on a mountain".

Like am I the only adult here????

>>10865015
What your obsession with AnKoS-derived models reminds me of is Ancient Greek geometrical constructions by means of ruler and compass.

Sad thing is, their kind of science got eternally BTFOd by means of method of infinite descent, a particular case in their anthiparesis procedure devise for finding the largest common divisor of the two given intervals. Sometimes shit just Didn't Fucking Resolve regardless of however many steps, and simply went non-trivially recursive.

Is your beloved AnKoS-type mode completely recursion isulated, I wonder?

>>10865033

Wtf are you on about? Thr Optitard Autistiton is based on the work of Stephen Wolfram and John von Neumann and it absolutely does assert infinite depth. Ideally you would be able to zoom into the sim forever.

>>10865033

And if you want a sim like this with greater depth then pay up for one. Super computer time does not come free.

>>10865033

The algorithm behind the dim is stupidly simple. Its hang your head against a brick wall simple. The only limit is processing power. We could scale the sim up to the size of a galaxy by this time tomorrow if you have computation budget for it.

>>10865038
What if your system degenerates into switching between state A and a sharply distinctive from it state B, and will then oscillate like ABABABABABAB(AB). Like what if the state of the system under given initial conditions doesn't eventually converge? What if it will firce you to choose between proclaiming A for the answer, proclaiming B for the answer, ptoclaiming whatever combination of them you happen to fancy for the answer. Won't such a situation strike you as a case of wishful thinking on your part?

>>10865046

What the hell???

Do you know anything about the optitard (Optimum Theory) equation????

There is zero mystery. It is literally just averaging real numbers on a grid by their neighbors, then subtracting the difference between concurrent time steps, then point a vector at the greatest change. THATS IT. And they add color codes to make it all more visual, and yet you can see with your own eyes it generates simulated gravity, particles, waves, fields... it is infinitely scale. People have made the sim in fucking minecraft. Its a level of elegance and simplicity that physicists would be drooling over if they still had any integrity left

>>10865049
The question still stands. What if the model bifurcates with odd steps forming one branch, and even ones forming another with no continuity values-wise with the first?

>>10865058

The entire thing happens in simultaneous timesteps. I have no idea what you are on about. The calculations happen simultaneously. It is not calculating sequentially.

>>10865061
Odd phase - state A of the system, even phase - state B of the system. Then, on timestepping, it goes like ABABABAB...

Or, odd phases give you states ... -> Ai -> Aj -> Ak -> ... , even phases give you states ... -> Bi -> Bj -> Bk -> ... , and overall on timestepping simulation state goes like ... -> Ai -> Bi -> Aj -> Bj -> Ak -> Bk -> ... ?
In other words, what if your simulation forms several divergent, explicitly distinct, versions of the solution, switching between those "branches" based simply on the parity (divisibility) of the number of the current step?

>>10865021

Strange.. Isn't it?

>>10865079

It doesnt. Thats literally how the Optitard automaton computes. It alternates between two timestates

>>10865085
I am not talking about implementation, I am talking about the recorded history of simulation's output. Is it possible for it to branch into at least two distinct "timelines", rapidly switching one with another each step?

>>10865079
>>10865085

R u understanding this? There is 0 probability of the bifercation happening. Each Optitard timestep is computing base on a save state of the previous timestep. It alternates by design

>>10865099
>>10865094

>>10865094

Absolutely not. There is only one possible timeline in the autonaton that I can conceive of or that is simulatable by this method.

Is it possible that in reality something else happens and branches are possible?

Sure. Optitards are very upfront that their work is only simulation and that what is rruly happening in or Universe is beyond the comprehension of finite beings.

>>10865103

One of the greatest ironies of those criticizing optitards is they call them arrogant or naricistic for saying the unified physics by the established goal posts, and yet Optitards are by far the most upfront that their theory is a only a simulation and they even go further to say that human beings will never be capable of reproducing the Universe in 1 to 1 terms, not ever. Poetically, Optitards say, "we are not God, and we never will be, not ever."

>>10865094

It would be easy to create an Optitard sim that has diverging timelines, would take only a small mod to the autonaton. Could be done in an afternoon.

>>10865103
What if your only possible timeline begins jumping/switching between two, or more, divergent versions/branches of itself, VALUES-WISE? With continuity of succession of values preserved on each single such a branch, but absolutely NOT preserved on between-branches switches with each timestep?

>>10865112

Have you programmed the automaton?

>>10865115
>>10865112

I ask because I have programmed it, and I dont see how your scenario is possible.

>>10865103
In other words, what if the total difference, value-wise, between state10546 and state10548 ends up being WAY LESS than either total difference between state10546 and state10547 OR the total difference between state10547 and state10548?

In other words what if it would become possible to state that states 10546, 10548, 10550, 10552 and so on form a sort of a "continuity" between them on their own, and that states 10547, 10549, 10551, 10553 and so on form another instance of similar sort of "continuity" between them on their own - all the while there being impossible to state that steps 10546, 10547, 10548, 10549, and so on, form any sort of such "continuity" in that particilar sense, between them? What if the system splits into two switching branches values-wise?

>>10865124

Not possible.

Program the automaton and you will see why

>>10865124

I mean semantically, sure? But each state is based on the state preceding it. If you want to think of it as two timelines that would be a schizo thing to do and I dont really see what the purpose would be

>>10864698
>math has nothing to do with science
where did i hear that before \

>>10864936
>i have no argument

>>10864340
if you can propose an alternate theory that is fully falsifiable, then I suggest you submit a whitepaper on the subject, otherwise you're just armchair quarterbacking the subject

>>10865168
that submit place is a religous place that doesnt take dissidents to their religion of qr/gr.
falsifiable also doesnt belong in science. you explain things rationally. wtf is wrong with you people. go on and tell me how fuckign nothing can be figured out if its rational while youy let the jews run a central bank in america.
godamn fucking stupid asses.

>>10865173
Good thing for you I'm a lazy person otherwise I'd feel compelled to write out all the logical fallacies you committed just now, it would be ten times the text you wrote just to list them all.

>>10865173
oh and also you can't spell your grammar is atrocious you can't capitalize properly and apparently you're drunk. Go to bed.

>>10865168
It's not that general relativity is wrong, it's that it's such an experimentally verified theory that people don't bother trying to dig into it.
To take newtonian physics as an example, it was so experimentally verified that people for a long time supposed that its basis (everything has mass, for starters) must be correct as well - until people discovered phenomena that cannot be explained by newtonian physics (the propagation of light).
We sure as hell have a lot of phenomena that can't be explained using GR right now (everything at abelow atomic level, dork matter), as such it's about time people started looking at some of the assumption of GR ("space and matter are separate things" is being examined by >>10864514 )
Personally I think the "space collapses into matter when space reaches a certain density" has some merit for investigation - we already have a mass gap, why not an energy gap below which energy "jumps" to vacuum?

>>10865177
submit a paper is the first one you did.
dont give a fuck
dont give a godamn fuck

why do you expect other people to "like" what you write.
falsification isnt part of science

go ahead debunk me but you wont you cant you WOULD spew 10 pages of dogshit that noone could read or gives a shit about and then you would walk off "feeling accomplished" and call that a win. dumb ass

>>10865189
you make up theories yuo dont experiment

>>10865192
if I propose some I can call myself a theorist tho.
For example, for the energy gap experiment, I'd attempt to examine whether low temperature (range from say, 10 to sub 1 kelvin) affects the output of particle collisions.
If space collapses into energy, then any massless thing being cooled should exhibit behaviour that try to bypass this.

>>10865201
i cant follow what the hell your saying and i dont want to look it up.
lets try the slit experiment.
maybe you have something to say about it.

>>10865203
No, I don't.
Particle wave duality is exhibited in fine matter (such as sand) too.

>>10865173
>falsifiable also doesnt belong in science
Are you a fucking retard?

>>10865207
how does one particle pull on another?
>>10865208
yea like u cant make up stories cuse only stories can be false. thats not what science is about making up stories. its called theories, not stories

>>10865211
I already said I don't have anything to say on it, why are you trying to get me to elaborate on what's already a tangent?

I don't get why are people arguing that string theory is wrong. Is it the same way Galileo was treated ? Why wasn't Einstein treated in a similar fashion or was he also only glorified post mortem?

We should look at further application and try to develop on its practical side, that's my engineering side speaking. Quantum computers are a reality and I would believe most progress in this field might have been made through string theory application. This is a pure guess.

What other actual application of it could you deduce ?

>>10865213
i done told you i dont care about figuring out what you were tlaking about. why do you insist on carrrying on on only your shit you bring up and ignoreing what everyone tells you about it, and also denying talking to them like ur higher annd mightier ur such a faggot all of you people always are act like this. I just dont really give a fuck.
I could tell you you are brainwashed and show you but you wouldnt care. as long as those bread and butter bucks comes rolling in you will shill for your shit not matter what

you just then spoke abotu particles. i said something about the double slit experiement
Im corrrect in assumgin that was about teh double slit experiment. I didnt say anything aobut YOUR claim of what it is, proposal, at all. I asked what you thought about the
fucking thing , the function that happens.

you said particles.

i asked a question

you then again ignore it.
fuck off then.

i made my statement now go eat shit with ur buddies. when ur fake money system goes down you will starve.

>>10865218
>quantum computers are reality
you guys dont even talk about nothing here. its just a fucking echo chamber.
thats a lie, but i dont expect you to go and look it up
ever heard of logic? logic computers? quantum, no. logic is what computers are made from.

>>10865211
Verificationism is for retards. Falsification works as our understanding expands through a framework. Finding the bounds of a previous framework, we can try and account for newly observed phenomena that older frameworks could not. In this was, our understanding expands iteratively, and doesn't fall for the shitty positivist meme.

>>10865221
framework?????
i dont ever understand through a "framework". my understanding doesnt come like that. im afraid you have seen a smart person do something and attempted to copy him and only speak his words or speak of his actions to pretend to be smart.
tldr i would know im a smart man

>>10865219
That's the thing. Quantum computer outputs odds.

>>10865231
odds? an odd? you mean a random number generator. you cant have a computer output something it isnt programmed to do.

>>10865219
Quantum computers probably won't be used by themselves partly due to being discovered after classic computers. They allow to solve a wide array of new problems and introduce a way for a computer to actually feel.

>>10865233
That's the breakthrough mate. There is no true random number generator in a classic computer.

>>10865230
>I dont have to work with axioms
Yeah, you do, and they form a framework. You fucking retard.

>>10865240
yes they do. random isnt random godamn u peopole have no sense. well im out fuck this stupid worst board on here. random isnt random. ok make one godamn rational statment the entire time i come to here or reply to me any of you. except pelple who agree wth me. there is nothing to talk about i brought my shit i said it im gonna hop out this place is for idiots who are dumber than retards in teh retard class

you cant make random shit happen on a computer ever. it doenst happen and its not random. keygenerators genreate random keycodes. but they are 100% totlaly guessable you dont have to pinpoint it down. you just have to know the sequence.
>>10865244
nothing that you have any control of whatsoever to call it anything

>>10865248
>nothing that you have any control of whatsoever to call it anything
Nice gobbledegook structure you mouthbreathing monkey.

>>10865237

Quantum computers will be needed for brain emulation.

>>10865258

Brain is not a sequential computer. Computes simultanious like an automaton. Quantum computers will be best for this

>>10865252
you have no right to call any thing i have used any names, you cant use any words for it. naming.
you guys have so much trouble with basic words. i say what i mean and you cry and whine that its not according to your specifications that your owners have gave you. you have let your speakign be controlled so much that you are complete robots. you are unable to be communicated with and when you re led to the fucking truth or some new revelation, you immediately withdraw from it horrified and you bring up some random robot pitch line to attack it and try to make yourself seem better than the person talking

you dont even attempt to understand or even ask any questions. shut ur nigger monkey mouth on my shit. you have stole from people like me and added stupid shit words to pretend you are smart as you play out the actions of pretending you are performing any fucntion but you dont care as long as you look like it so you can show off to your owner who is pleased their propooganda message is pushed out but still nobody gives a shit
>>10865258
random doesnt exist
black holes dont exist.

>>10865263
>you dont even attempt to understand or even ask any questions
This entire thread is people asking you questions and you avoiding them. If brains were gunpowder you wouldn't have enough to blow your nose.

>>10865266
Don't feed the troll.

>>10865266
>>10865268
i could jus always blame the random number generator for why i dont give a fuck.
ok? your questions re either dumb or your the one avoiding questions. as the guy who gave his theory on slit expericment then claimed he didnt to then insult me

>>10865273
I like your schizo on the fact that you take it on others instead of yourself. It might help me cope too and it is a good assumption in order to preserve your self-esteem. It might also be what's wrong with society and caused us to glorify idiots and muppets instead of scientists and engineers.

>>10864762

Oh I almost forgot, Gary is a Liiiiiiberal. What are, a fucking Boomer? You still give a fuxk about that fucking bullshit? What if Gary supported Hillary? What if he even raised money for her? Would that trigger you? What if he did it because hes been an advocate of UBI for over a decade and thought the Dems would be better positioned to enacted it, and he also k oew rhat immigrants were just a scapegoat for automation???

You fucking simpletons. Even Tucker Carleson supports UBI over Trumps Boomer horseshit.

Maybe Gary is more Conservative and Liberal than you could ever hope to be, simultaneously. Maybe hes schrodingers Gary.

Doesn't matter. It's common knowledge that the universe is practically 100% devoid of life, except for one planet. Earth. And there was a survey conducted at a major educational research institute that proves it.

>>10865306

Well I can see how you could drive a woman insane, and not in a good way...

>>10865311

Maybe you are right, sock puppet counter point, maybe you are right.

>>10864514
Fucking based.

>>10865316

DAMN RIGHT!

>>10864514
Nice. I thought I was the only one who figured that out. Can't find shit about this idea when I google it. Just some references to atoms being knots in the ether from the 1800s.

You come up with this yourself or is there some source or more discussion about it anywhere?

Particles being warped space also quite possibly explains motion and a number of other mysteries when you start to get into it.

Talk some? MagicalSkyMan @
https://discordapp.com/invite/N5jVwsg

>>10865365

Talk some? Absolutely! I will be in touch. All my idea? Is any idea original? I stand on the shoulders of giants like everyone else. Cheers

>>10864573
fusion energy
relativity is a form of fission Φ

>>10864573
fusion energy
relativity is a form of fission Φ

>>10865021

I get an idea why Einstein switch with his car chauffeur to explained his Theory for all of you

my technology is ahead forward in the future about 300 years calculate from Newtons Era.

Maybe I am the one who truly understand the thing you called "Gravity and Space-Time".
read it that is the actual logic of ToE that all of you wainting for.

>>10865403

Cool, then lets hear it. Lol. Also prepare to get fucking wrecked, poser. Good thing u are anonymous, lol. Your rep would never live this down in meatspace

>>10865189
It's not experimentally verified, if anything it has been disproven by experiment. Every test for relativity is either bogus, as in the case of GPS, or was misleading, poorly executed, or based on a misinterpretation of data. Popular proofs like the Hefele-Keating experiment have been disproven by others like the Sagnac Experiment, but no gets taught about this. Worst of all, relativity has no real world applications. It is a fraud, perpetrated by jewish scientists to prevent you from questioning and exploring alternative truths that would give you too much power, and therefore make you less easy to control.

>>10864791
Blacks holes have never been adequately been proven. But since their existence was theorised prior to Einstein's theory of relavtivity, they could exist with or without relativity being true.

>>10864791
Also thanks for revealing that you are motivated by religious/political concerns rather than a scientific search for truth.

>>10865571

Am Jew blood and for some time thought that this horseshit must be perpetrated by Christian scientists.

Came to think that they are just trying to divide us, and the fuckery is being perpetrated by a clan no so easily labeled

>>10865585
>is jewish
>automatically lays blame on Christians without proof
Y ARE THEY TRYING TWO DIVIDE US???

>>10864716
It's Gary.

>>10864819
>Nature has made no promise to us that her revelations will come easily. Also with further study, indirect methods of testing will be developed.
Holy fuck based Witten quote.

Relativity is correct. We already have unity, its ER=EPR, and will be throughly proven this decade.

>>10865133
Okay, yeah, semantics. Sorry for the delay, Internet was out on my end.

Anyway, let's see this simple checkered pattern, okay?

Let's call the topmost dot, the initial state, state 0.(cont)

>>10866027
Now, let's review the growth of odd state numbers only. See the gif
<-
See, the growth appears alongside vertical lines, two dots appending to the ends of the previous odd state to form next odd state.

>>10866027
Now, let's review the growth of the even state numbers only. Again, the gif
<-
Same conclusions as before.

>>10866027
Now let's splice the two gifs above together.
<-
What a mess.

>218 replies
>36 unique IPs
Curious how these threads always seem to be nothing but schizophrenic samefagging.

>>10865133
What I mean, is that discrete automaton is meant at the end of the day to somehow describe/model continuous reality.
However, the moment we introduce any external notion of continuity whatsoever (basically the very same semantics you are talking about), we basically introduce the possibility of the automaton's states splitting into numerous divergent branches, which are perfectly continuous alongside any given branch, but not at all continuous between successive steps. The final state of the machine just might therefore cease to be singular (or rather converging onto anything singular - the notion of "convergence" having been built on top of the notion of "continuity"). Basically, your system becomes ambiguous (continuously cycling between a set - or maybe ever-growing! - number of branches, and being incapable to stop on every single one), in the general case, the moment it stops being treated as perfectly discrete (which makes sense, considering at the end of the day it is meant to model continuous reality).

What this is, is essentially reduction to absurdity.

>>10866073
>the notion of "convergence" having been built on top of the notion of "continuity"
Actually, this right here I am very much in doubts about. Notions of continuity and convergence definitely seem to me to be intimately connected to each other, in a manner that dates back all the way back to the incommeasurability proof and the emergence of the method of infinite descent, but the exact nature of that connection is, as of this moment, extremely unclear to me. It seems, at the very least, that the choice of the externally enforced criterion of continuity, at the very least, if VERY far from being completely arbitrary. Anyway, I should maybe shut the fuck up right now and maybe go and read some Knorr.

>>10865604

You must understood. Meant that people are trying to pit Jews and Christian against each other who probably are not aligned with either. Was responding to someone blaming Jews for the fuckery that is Academic physics by saying that I used to blame Christians for that fuckery until realizing that tribalism is an easy trap they set for us - a trap probably set by the Muslims. I'm kidding. Everyone knows it's the Irish.

>>10866042

I sort of get where you are coming from. That's more of a traditional Wolfram automaton.

The Optimum Automaton has real number cell states. Every cell can have an infinite number of states. It's not binary. The First 20 minutes of Optimum Theory: The Unified Theory of Everything (the main video) explains how and why it works. www.optimum.center

>>10866236

Gary spent a year trying to get physics unified with binary automaton before realizing the cell states need to be infinite,

>>10866073
>What I mean, is that discrete automaton is meant at the end of the day to somehow describe/model continuous reality.

I just answered this, but here is the rub, the Optimum Automaton does not have discrete states. It is a continuous automaton. The cell states are infinite and based on real numbers. We add graphical layers to those real-numbers to make the data more discernible - vector arrows etc.. The bifurcating error you are talking about is not possible in the Optimum Automaton.

Jeez, people still on string theory. Move on, M theory is where its at. It explains why only 4 dimensions uncurled from the original Calabi Yau Manifold. It indicates that there are no time dimensions, and it indicates that the fate of the universe may be that when the energy density of the universe reaches a certain low point, the next dimension will uncurl, reforming the Universe as 5D, and a whole new ballgame.

>>10866104
>incommeasurability proof and the emergence of the method of infinite descent,

These principles are both aspects of the Optimum Automaton. You can learn how and why the Optimum Automaton works at www.optimum.center It was developed over 20 years and is, frankly, impressive and based af... and is probably exactly what it claims to be. Einstein & Wolfram's finished work: the unified theory of everything. It's so complete as an idea... I cannot even imagine how it can be improved upon... This isn't a string theory scenario where "in 50 years it will be done, etc..." Optimum Theory is DONE. it is complete af and the only holes anyone can now find in it are nitpicking character flaws in its creator rather than the theory itself

>>10866261

Physics is already unified, it was done by Optimum Theory. We can move on from this boomer horseshit now. We have better questions to answer now, like "why is energy-matter lumpy instead of equal across space?" And what is the deeper algorithm behind that distribution? But as for the actual algorithm of the Universe? That work is done. The algorithm is energy being divided by space. It really is that simple, and you can even reproduce it in simulations.

oh wow gary, good job shilling for 26 straight hours, you get an honorary PhD from Glow in the Dark University

>>10866292
>Optimum Theory is complete af and the only holes anyone can now find in it are nitpicking character flaws in its creator rather than the theory itself

>>10866303
lol, Gary is the one who uses the "i can't make any actual predictions yet, cuz my excel is so 1337 math bros, plz plz gibz money for supercomput0r for opt1mum aut-hurr-durr-aton"

>>10866311

Gary has been giving away the complete theory for free for like 6 months now. Only considered selling to raise money for super computer time, until a based Anon created a super computer sim.

And basically everything in the garybrain meme is shit that Gary probably injected into the conversation himself just to clown his haters.

>>10866315
not this again.

>then make one single quantitative prediction
nope, still don't have one? how bout now? now?
>REEE MUH AVERAGE SO H-HARD NEED ZUPORC0MPUTOR

>>10866320

This "make a prediction" nonsense is something you are getting from lesser theories.

Optimum Theory is COMPLETE. You can literally query the automaton yourself YOU DONT NEED TO PREDICT THINGS like your a fucking gypsy reading tea leaves lol!!! THE AUTOMATON WILL FUCKING JUST GIVE YOU THE ANSWER! No prediction needed!!!

>>10864340
>I don't even have a degree and I'm a complete joke, but it is not my fault! The jews are out to get me and are lying about general relativity
lmao

>>10866327
oh, okay, so why don't YOU simulate it and tell me what anything equals.

>ZOUPERGOMBUTOR REEEEEE

>>10866334

Because thats a fillabuster move. You know the questions in the Universe are infinite. You could keep me busy for literally infinity asking questions. QUERY THE AUTOMATON FOR YOUR SELF!

>>10866276
See, there is a problem. My current point of view, Einstein just refurbished theory of aether, hypothetical impossible material became "geometry of spacetime itself".

I don't think you understand Michelson's angle either. Think about it. The guy was an experimental physicist, working, and he goes to PAINS in his lectures to illustrate it, with the instruments that were tremendously precise AND expensive, thousands of dollars and qualified man-hours. In order to leave his mark he had to have access to that equipment, and to the possibility to requisite custom equipment - which was paid for with SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY. Michelson couldn't have possibly conduct his experiments out of his own pocket, he was on the bleeding edge at his time.

Before that someone who paid for equipment and owned it, Michelson had to retain the image of credibility and trustworthiness. He had to make it seem he worked for that person's benefit and prestige, in order to get allowed to continue his work.

In other words, he had to be accepted by scientific community as /owrguy/, not as a schizo pariah. In yet other words, some of his statements were clearly political in nature. Namely, his apparent endorsement of aether theory, which was a point of widespread consensus at the time. Also, his words about the aether being captured by materia were simply a statement of ad hoc Fresnel's hypotheses to fit facts into his theories.

Michelson didn't by and large check out HIS hypotheses. He largely tried to debunk others' wishful thinking under the guise of being a good boy and "I'm just gonna verify that with greater precision... Oooooooooops, who could've known that", I highly doubt he EVER expressed his actual worldviews anywhere even remotely Academia-related. He rather took others ill-argumented fantasies they had to pass for facts to get more scientific influence, read power, and he clashed them together until something cracked, and then he went like (cont)

>>10866339

Yep. I completely agree. Watch the Optimum Theory video. You will love it. Michelson Morely are in it, and your interpretation would fit in well.

>>10866337
no, YOU "queery teh optom0tron133tz0r" and tell me ONE number you can get out of it. anything. example: the nucleus of hydrogen is approxomately 1.6 femtometers across. that's an example, PICK LITERALLY ANYTHING. ONE SINGLE THING

how is this so hard for you Dr. M-Muh1337excelBTFOstringtheory

>>10866339
"Oops, who could've possibly foreseen this". In other words despite doing others' bidding, he seemed to have ulterior motives, and in order to follow on those ulterior motives he had to have access to his bleeding edge equipment. Meaning, being like "Suuure, I like totally agree, good work, just let me check out this little thing right here" so that not to become a target of someone's vengeance as a consequence for the actual results of his actual actions.

I mean, take his "Light Waves and Their Uses", the last chapter is called simply "Ether" (it is there, where he outright states aether carryover hypothesis being Fresnel's "invention"). Half the chapter he utterly consistently debunks it as ridiculous pile of horseshit it is using facts he himself discovered, exactly the midpoint he like "That being said I am TOTALLY ALL FOR Aether Theory, and it's not like we understand materia any better, actually, much worse, and actually materia could be nothing more than little vortexes of Aether. SURE. 100%. Uh-huh." With which the book ends. I mean, yeah, that was totally not sarcastic in any conceivable way.

Also, his second book, I haven't read yet, has "Theory of Relativity" as a penultimate chapter, so.

>>10866356

Physics is massively political. Thats part of the game, unfortunately.

>dude no one takes my retarded b8 seriously anymore
>I know... I'll just argue with myself and get ALL the (You)'s
>No one will EVER notice!
Is it a bot, or unironic mental illness? Either way can the mods just rangeban this retard?

>>10866405
gary is a scammer with a mental disorder. worst samefagger i’ve ever seen trying to push his meme crap so brainlets send him patreon buxx

>>10866415

His Patreon is deactivated. Is there even anyway to send Gary money?

>>10866292
Wait Gary hangs on out Hossenfelder's blog? Fucking hell he's more retarded than I thought.

>>10864559
what are feynman freaks?

>>10866428
> Is there even anyway to send Gary money?

QUERY THE AUTOMATON AND FIGURE IT OUT FOR YOURSELF BOZO