how QM and GR melds together in 1

E

Ethernos D Grace

Registered Senior Member
from previous post, that the spacetime is actially a massless or smallest state of mass possible.clearly energy field. if a mass has centre 'O'. the energy distribution towards outward from 'O' to 'X' .i.e. max to min. X being last boundary of gravity field. the velocity also differs from 'X' to 'O' .i.e. minimum to max. so any object moving should change their direction towards 'O' since as per feynman shortest distance from 'X' to 'O', principle of least action. i also think photon must have mass since the photon has more energy than empty or vacuum space. more the energy it has in space more easier it is to travel through it. hope this makes sense please discuss.
 
dirac equation says that there are two energy state. negative and positive.since electron is a wave or sensitive particle spread over a space. there is bound to be fluctuation. the spin of all particle which is negative or positive depends on these energy fluctuations i.e. also negative and positive.if we design the geometry correctly we can achieve spinors.is this the correct world idk.also there might be internl geometry reacting with external geometry, i feel since quarks also have spin.there is bound to be energy fluctuations inside sub atomic parricles also.but the question is then is there energy fluctuation inside quarks?gluons might be transfer of wave or energy from one quark to another.colourless gluon might be superposition wave or fastest or highest momentum gluon since in superposition.if i had to measure the speed of entanglement it be like change of mountain shape of wave and depression shape wave changing simutaneously or atleast from an observer perspective.best example would be black hole spinning.the 12 oclock point of radius is considered 'a' and 6 oclock is considered 'b'. if a moves 90° b also moves 90°. but when in motion mass tends to stretch.that difference might show speed of entanglement.idk.this is just an idea. my question now is how would u physically or in a picture, define spinors,entanglement and superpostion? i know u might say its impossible but i would love to visualize it.
 
there is another way to derive superposition. that would be to imagine, take mass of earth assign a momentum or fluctuation in space when there is earth. if fluctuation were to proportionately increase with decrease in mass over time.the mass electron at size of these fluctuation would have greater chance of super position.so we can safely assume the mass at smaller size is moving faster. since quantum fluctuation itself is so fast that the negative and positive energy fluctuation happens so fast that the spin seems to be in super position...so super postion solved. LoL.
 
Ethernos 1997 said:
dirac equation says that there are two energy state. negative and positive.since electron is a wave or sensitive particle spread over a space. there is bound to be fluctuation. the spin of all particle which is negative or positive depends on these energy fluctuations i.e. also negative and positive.if we design the geometry correctly we can achieve spinors.is this the correct world idk.also there might be internl geometry reacting with external geometry, i feel since quarks also have spin.there is bound to be energy fluctuations inside sub atomic parricles also.but the question is then is there energy fluctuation inside quarks?gluons might be transfer of wave or energy from one quark to another.colourless gluon might be superposition wave or fastest or highest momentum gluon since in superposition.if i had to measure the speed of entanglement it be like change of mountain shape of wave and depression shape wave changing simutaneously or atleast from an observer perspective.best example would be black hole spinning.the 12 oclock point of radius is considered 'a' and 6 oclock is considered 'b'. if a moves 90° b also moves 90°. but when in motion mass tends to stretch.that difference might show speed of entanglement.idk.this is just an idea. my question now is how would u physically or in a picture, define spinors,entanglement and superpostion? i know u might say its impossible but i would love to visualize it.
Click to expand...

First highlight

Electron is the wave , but you have not explained the particle .

The Electron is meaningless if it just a wave which continues in space for infinity .

Second highlight ;

Disagree

The mass does not stretch . It just seems that way . Because of observation . To the mass , it has not stretched at all .
 
Last edited:
Ethernos 1997 said:
dirac equation says that there are two energy state. negative and positive.since electron is a wave or sensitive particle spread over a space. there is bound to be fluctuation. the spin of all particle which is negative or positive depends on these energy fluctuations i.e. also negative and positive.if we design the geometry correctly we can achieve spinors.is this the correct world idk.also there might be internl geometry reacting with external geometry, i feel since quarks also have spin.there is bound to be energy fluctuations inside sub atomic parricles also.but the question is then is there energy fluctuation inside quarks?gluons might be transfer of wave or energy from one quark to another.colourless gluon might be superposition wave or fastest or highest momentum gluon since in superposition.if i had to measure the speed of entanglement it be like change of mountain shape of wave and depression shape wave changing simutaneously or atleast from an observer perspective.best example would be black hole spinning.the 12 oclock point of radius is considered 'a' and 6 oclock is considered 'b'. if a moves 90° b also moves 90°. but when in motion mass tends to stretch.that difference might show speed of entanglement.idk.this is just an idea. my question now is how would u physically or in a picture, define spinors,entanglement and superpostion? i know u might say its impossible but i would love to visualize it.
Click to expand...
Interesting.

Please continue.
 
river said:
First highlight

Electron is the wave , but you have not explained the particle .

The Electron is meaningless if it just a wave which continues in space for infinity .

Second highlight ;

Disagree

The mass does not stretch . It just seems that way . Because of observation . To the mass , it has not stretched at all .
Click to expand...
first highlight:
yes electron continues as a wave over boundary of spacetime but all electron is seperated by as max planck describes it quanta or pack of energy.it may also be applicable for subatomic partcles. each electron is like a different system.the wave we see might its quarks interaction with field or fluctuation around it and quark itself might be something reacting with electron field.i feel like loosing my mind.so it might be a curvature in 4-D that curves on itself. i know i am being vague with current knowledge the output is low.
2nd highlight: i agree with u.

spinor might be the path electron takes when going from negative to positive to negative energy fluctuation. so the geometry it define may just define that path.
 
Ethernos 1997 said:
first highlight:
yes electron continues as a wave over boundary of spacetime but all electron is seperated by as max planck describes it quanta or pack of energy.it may also be applicable for subatomic partcles. each electron is like a different system.the wave we see might its quarks interaction with field or fluctuation around it and quark itself might be something reacting with electron field.i feel like loosing my mind.so it might be a curvature in 4-D that curves on itself. i know i am being vague with current knowledge the output is low.
2nd highlight: i agree with u.

spinor might be the path electron takes when going from negative to positive to negative energy fluctuation. so the geometry it define may just define that path.
Click to expand...
electron is like travelling(accelerating) in space time which creates a horizon that could be the wave (i doubt this one).i also think spin is product of consevation of angular momentum.lol..since energy goes negative and positive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top