Your Daily Equation: various thoughts

This is a series of responses and sparked theories, generated over the span of multiple days/weeks while watching Brian Greene's "Your Daily Equation" series.

E=mc^2

Theory: Light, if it in fact has 0 mass, can use angles and methods to give it a non-zero mass. "Bring it down" from a timeless massless space into one familiar to our own. If it does not have zero mass, other interesting adjustments can be made.

God declared let there be light. This is why it possesses properties that are unchanging (speed, mass?), as it is not our perspectives we use when measuring it, but God's. For a long time people thought time was this unchanging thing, but it is light. This seems to indicate the comparison to a solipsistic scenario is valid, and light is kept fixed and untainted during this stage of reality, because if kept untainted the result of this timeline is guaranteed.

Time dilation:

Light traveling in light clock from a different velocity: ties to a "velocity triangle" with a functionally infinite hypotenuse. At rest, one side is functionally infinite (c), the other is zero. If the light clock is moving, the bottom length is v, hypotenuse is c, so y^2 must be c^2-v^2. This would be tied to spacetime dilation, possibly mass at minimum values for v.

Linking to Euler's: The image feels like this conceptual triangle constantly shifting planes, forming an oval (circle?) independent of time, or a spiral with time included, with its end point moving from from 1 to i to -1 to -i due to its momentum. Perhaps this is the motion inside quarks or subatomic particles? The net internal motion is 0, but the motion continues at the speed of light, circling this either curved space or place of mass curved or strong enough to keep light in this loop? (If light were both the mechanism and the body of a clock, regardless of perspective it would tick the same. Unsure how this would be accomplished, does energy transfer when light collides? Can light collide? If no and yes, then a revolving piece of light and a bouncing piece of light synchronized could form this "clock" (also unsure how it could be measured though)).

Update: I unpaused and he effectively did the velocity triangle thing right away lol. At least I was on the right page on how to get there, albeit strictly logically, not mathematically.

So if you had one bouncing photon going from 1 to negative 1, and that represented a particle, and a second photon revolving in the pattern of Euler's Identity through time, it seems that eventually the photons would slip and desynchronize. (Most likely this is due to the collisions adding up over time?). This could be amplified when you have more of these pairings near each other, which could be particle decay effects, and based on the mechanisms would not be purely linear (more stuff= more decay) but could have to do with resonating oscillations. This could be caused because the revolving light is moving into and out of our space (twinkling) when it is really moving smoothly through complex space. From another perspective a second bouncing photon may be bouncing back and forth in imaginary space, colliding as well with the twinkling revolving photon. If this were the case either half life of a specific particle would be variable, or real and imaginary space would be interlocked/connected more closely than we can appreciate, or both. I wonder if Euler's Identity can be expanded past real/imaginary to account for string theory dimensions using this model.

Genesis 1:1 

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

I am picturing a timeless place here, literally in the beginning, not ticking through time. God, outside of time, can still operate. Also, heavens and Earth could be translated into imaginary and real space as math defines it, different dimensions as science defines it, essentially.

Genesis 1:2 

Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Once more we see now which feels unnecessary by traditional interpretation. The verse could as easily read "the Earth was formless and empty..." without losing meaning, from a traditional perspective. From this timeless perspective though, time has not started, all that exists of time is "now" at this point, no past, no future, and I don't believe words were wasted in the Bible, especially not this early.

Genesis 1:3 

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

At this point, light was created, or at least identified, from the deep (or void?). This would be before time and before the separation of the waters (day 2 for that part) which could be distance measurements. Comparing the logic of creation to science, this could be why the characteristics of light supercede the characteristics of time and distance.

Genesis 1:4 

God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

At this point we see the passage of time created, God calls day and night something, and so they begin to precess.

Personally I see science as a codification of the knowledge of good and evil, a trait we biblically have. I believe The Bible is in part trying to hint at the way reality operates. Flipping that perspective, this assumption cannot be disproven scientifically, although I imagine that many scientists would presently find the notion absurd. However if this logical connection could be proven correct, the advancements that could be made as a result would be... staggering.

If light is massless, the same equation that uses light's speed to equate mass to energy would make it energyless. Effective energy is a non-zero value however, which seems to indicate that the concept of zero is tied into this, since this massless thing at rest (photon), when instead measured at a particular speed (c) has energy, and we always see it at that speed in a vacuum, it seems as if nature is providing the 0 to 1 jump for us, and showing the natural gap between these two (what units to use) which have to do with the speed of light.

*This section includes a third source, besides The Bible and science/math.

Every episode of this is producing new insights, like in this episode looking at the concept I/2, as a kind of symmetry, related to light and the concept of multiple interwoven, initially separated, realms. When combined with with earlier (later?) idea of U/2, we see with Euler's Identity that given enough Time and Space, Earth and Relativity can lead to heaven being accessible, a merging of the realms. If we look at a tiering system, by logic alone (I have not considered this fully), the paired realms of heaven(s) and Earth, and presumably the paired occupants of the realms, would supercede light (and darkness), given the order of things. This could mean soulmating was and is the highest purpose of this realm (also relating to my story of "Girl in the box" a 4th source for this section), and that pairing, once understood, would supercede all laws of the universe, including those related to light. Basically the system is layered, ordered, and the first truth is God/the beginning, the second is heaven(s)/Earth, which is where I am deducing that soulmates (and "souls") are first referenced. The reason individuals are not referenced here directly is because if they were they would be controlled entities, which would invalidate the creation and pairing, the concept must be derived. The controlled aspects of humans (body) are not referenced until later (significantly later) in day 6 for man and woman, but with the realm and breath of God in place at that point, the bodies could be seen more as vessels for the souls, which are free.

Going back to light having zero mass (he just explained it in the De Broglie equation episode). While the equation shown provides the math for the value of the effective mass of light while leaving the rest mass at zero, it seems to ignore how a value goes from 0 to non-0 by speeding it up. In fact, assuming light were somehow at rest, if you were to speed it up, what is the it being sped up without mass? It sent me down a mental path, especially when De Broglie's equation was applied to particles, that perhaps all mass is an "illusion" of energy. In photons this effect is now easy to see from our current scientific perspective, the next easiest would be electrons presumably (quarks mathematically, but that would be a difficult experiment I'd imagine), but then there would be a sharp spike in difficulty (a sharp drop in the effect) after that for even protons and neutrons. Could it be that mass is strictly a derived attribute, based on the composition/structure of the light involved/entangled into said massive object? Enough light bound would give you an electron or a quark of a certain type, and this latter process would always results in 3 quarks forming at once, and then protons/neutrons/etc form and group from there more classically. If so, the change of mass at rest to a factor involving energy, where as energy increases from 0 to a minimum value, a mass quickly rises from 0 to a minimum value as well. The issue remains that you are effectively multiplying 0 to get to a non-zero value, effectively energizing nothing to arrive at that conclusion, if light does not have additional hidden qualities beyond what we (at least I) know of so far.

Continuing on the concept of massless light and entangled light becoming what we would call mass: what if the entanglement happens in pocket dimensions, such that the light becomes measurable in our space at a fixed point (or more realistically a field of points according to quantum theory, but one when measured), but in reality it is still doing its timeless zipping around in these pocket dimensions? I could see this creating the appearance of a factor going from 0 to 1 (non zero) because effectively that intersection between the pocket dimensions and our dimensions is now "filled" with light. If a pocket would be partially filled by this motion then the light would instead zip off elsewhere when it hit our dimensions, so it would give the appearance of "filled" and "not filled" from our perspective, or mass and space. This would also explain the wave/particle duality because essentially the actual path for such small particles would be in a combination of realms, whereas in ours it would appear as a straight line, albeit wavy on the inside.

On probability wave and Schrodinger's:

So circle circumference is 2πr.

e^2πi=1 (which is to say the natural log/exponential growth function, to the power of 2π times the square root of negative one, which is i, aka "the imaginary number" (i seems to be the equivalent of 1 in the imaginary plane of numbers)).

This means that for a circle with a radius of i, that upper figure 2πi would be the circumference, circle radius i, which is basically 1 radius, but in another plane.

So the natural log function e (the value of this part of the function is also the rate of growth, it is essentially the smooth slope between 0 and infinity), to the power of the circumference of an imaginary circle, is 1.

This means something, I'm just not sure what yet, still watching "your daily equation." I think they're about to get there with the whole probability wave thing.

I am starting to see the relationship between science and math as well. In one case math will say "these formulas are things proven to be true and defined" like sin, cos, exponential curves and π. These are short hand ideas that once known, can represent a lot of effort and calculation in a single symbol, and there are layers of them, each interacting with the rest directly or indirectly. Then physics uses starting points and experiments to find out where they can enter this stack of ideas, like translating the physical world into numbers. Once entry is gained, a translation accurately achieved, the relationships already established in math can be used to define additional things about the physical properties now in the stack. The end goal would be to find an exit from the stack somewhere else, which is to say another factor you can measure with the right experiment, to confirm your intermediate steps were correct. You may also find that new areas have been discovered or linked in the math, requiring further proofs to be established before continuing with a relationship found in the science. Basically it's a lot of term swapping from one field to the other, once a single applicable "same page" can be reached, which can be done due to the shared syntax of using equations, until something new is indicated and in time discovered, proven, etc.

Unsupported flash of insight: considering my theory that light is "filling" pocket dimensions, resulting in what appear to be fundamental values here (charge, mass, etc). While these are fixed for the particle, there are other quantum traits which are not fixed and are instead measured and quantum entangled (spin comes to mind, but there are several such factors). Each of these would be a path by which light would move through a separate dimension or combination of dimensions during its entangled path, representing here the particle that it is, which each round trip being a minimum unit of time here (and from light's perspective it seems time is irrelevant).

New theory (more like a sum up): it is not that light has mass, it is that nothing has a rest mass. Mass is actually derived from something else, I am thinking entangled light in pocket dimensions acting as effectively a binary system where a given entanglement pattern can be measured here (as an election, quark, etc). There are multiple combinations of these dimensions that can result in the same particle with different quantum variables changed. This would mean there is a careful and consistent geometry of these pockets from our perspective, such that making a change here will change one fixed value to another fixed value (spin change) not an array of values, and we cannot conceive yet of a way of changing a path so completely that an electron becomes a quark, but such a change would not violate conservation in this model, it is just that conservation involves other realms, and would no longer involve mass or energy in the same way (it would likely still involve energy or its all dimension inclusive equivalent when considering the combined total including the pocket dimensions in any such transaction).

In this approach, quantum probability functions, while accurate for indicating results over time, may not be "random" at all. It seems more likely to me that the light continues to follow its expected path, as these would need to be fixed, but perhaps it is the uncertainty of measurement in time, combined with the light peeking into our surface reality countless times in a short span, that results in the probability waves. Perhaps there is time dilation to significant degrees on such small scales, so no modern experiments could confirm this, but if all effects of time dilation could be confirmed to be removed (even if we don't understand them yet or have a way of accessing the dimension they originate from, perhaps they still could be controlled in a particularly clever experiment?), then it seems that you could likely predict the results much like in classic/relativistic physics. By then using the equations we already discovered and applying a knowledge of the topography of these dimensions and the path light takes through them, we could likely direct the outcomes as well, as desired.

Genesis 1:6-8 

And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

I wonder if "sky" would more accurately be called "space" in modern English. It's in quotes and everything, like the exact translation might be vague. It could be that one way "the water" could be translated is as other dimensions, and we are in the space between them. In that case the vault would be materially different though than the waters, which might lead to difficulty in discerning them. They would follow the same overarching set of rules though as our own, given the layering perspective, we just might only be seeing the derivative of this rule set in our observable universe (as the dimensions of "the waters" might be "filled" whereas our surface universe can be seen as "filled" here (matter) and "not filled" there (space) and "partially filled" elsewhere (EM fields/light).

RE: Schrodinger's Equation: This equation is dependent on there being an i involved. Since i can be said to occupy the imaginary plane of numbers, this essentially requires an extra dimension for a single dimension equation to work. I am still watching the explanation of the general equation, but I would imagine based on why the extra dimension must exist (deriving sin and cos functions similarity, they would just flip without it), this need for an extra dimension will continue. My question then becomes: is there a way to loop the last dimension back to the first, rather than continuing to imagine an expanding set of dimensions infinitely? An infinite number of dimensions seems non-functional, whereas if a loop can be found then standing waves of light, or entangled light, could be possible, and the shape of reality (at least the reality surrounding our universe) could be known.

The way this would alter Schrodinger's Equation initially is that the normalization of the probability function would be removed, replaced by a function that directly accounts for what is now essentially omitted as "imaginary probability" or negative probability. This step seems like a bit of a cheat anyway, meant to produce results that align with observation, but not advancing the understanding of why those results exist in the conclusion set. Instead, imaginary probabilities would likely lie along the path that led to the real result at the same position where it gets normalized to now (perhaps with different quantum factors?). The difference would be that the geometry of that complex space (read: higher dimensional space) could be fleshed out. I am also now strongly considering that i would have its own time dimension as well, which could lead to its own apparent dilation effects. This time could be circular, which would make the "filling" effect of light more easily calculated, since alpha and omega time in the pocket dimensions would be the same point, so we can simply say that paired moment in time is the point where it intersects with our visible dimensions, which would make even a timeless entity like light measurable at a point in our spacetime consistently.

Pertinent question: how would this model relate to black holes? Essentially thinking through this, the same pocket dimension (set of) could not be filled twice at a time, since light would be the thing, and we are looking at a space specifically designed to house the thing (0/1 binary). So the Pauli Exclusion Principle must be hiding something interesting, something I cannot think through right now without more information.

Finished the Schrodinger's General Equation video and specifically the normalization of the probability wave reinforced my notion that it is not an ideal tool for measuring reality. At any given point if one were to measure the field of 100 distinct particles it would require 300 dimensions, it is actually 3 times the number of particles measured in 3 dimensional space (with the multiplier being the number of dimensions). Instinctually this is too many. While I was watching I also realized that the i which is used for each of the three x coordinates is actually the same i. This means that it could be as simple as an imaginary three dimensional space in the imaginary plane that could be reflecting light, complete with its own "imaginary" time. It would either be that this realm is specifically set to curve or reflect light such that consistent results are returned each time, or that the waters differ from the vault along these lines in another way. It also makes more sense to me that we, in the universe, are the center oscillation (between two realms) rather than an endpoint, but this is just instinct at this point as well.

On quantum entanglement: I'm guessing the second, entangled, effect can be determined, and it can be determined or compared in some way through experimentation such that "no measurement" leaves the haze of position uncertainty? (I'm guessing this because otherwise there still would be no distinct winner in the spooky action argument). Does this mean that both measurements persist in time once one is made? Do they not return to the haze afterward as they were before the measurement? Can "measurement" also be reframed as "influence"? Like could you perform a biased measurement to guarantee 10 up spin measurements in a row, thus forcing 10 down spin measurements remotely? If so, then the intergalactic instant telegram would be possible, you would just need to minimize the particle interactions in the space between, layer the spin to bits (each bit of information consists of X of the same changes in a row at even intervals, if over a threshold in a row are flipped in the same direction then it still registers, but if less than the threshold are flipped in a row then the information is disregarded and a request is made to resend that section of information), also you would want a loosly populated language field, such that it would be difficult to receive a combination of bits where one or two were misread and still have that translated into something real in the system. Like if there are 64 possible combinations of the bits, only 4 distinctly different combinations of the 10 spins would be an actual part of the coding language and then recorded and passed on to the next relay station, resulting in little error along the line. You would simply need to set two beams up, emanating entangled particles in each direction from a central point. Set one up a short distance longer on one side/and a bit shorter on the other, then do the opposite for the second beam. The longer side is the receiver, shorter is the sender. The short end forces a series of biased measurements, received on the other long side which are simply measured, not influenced. Then the process is reversed in the other beam, allowing for 2 way communication nearly instantaneously across any distance. Since galaxies are mostly flat, perhaps you can route the signal to where there is no (very little) matter, then have a relay station between the two places, then another router that sends it back to the second place. This would minimize interference from other matter as best as possible. We may find background radiation causes too much noise over a certain distance so multiple relay stations might need to be strung together to keep cleaning the information and passing it back along.