Why So Complicated?

From: Danish researchers looking to crowdfund ‘Theory of Everything’

Never to be a jerk about it, but I’m already dissuaded, based upon the annotation under the main post image there…

“Far more complicated than even Newton could have fathomed”

There’s nothing ultimately complex about (inclusively the fundamental and sole pattern of) reality.

Reality’s an undefinable extreme resulting from the phase cancellation (or destructive interference, if you prefer) of all sinusoidal possibilities (the sine wave is that sole pattern).

While that ‘theory of everything’ result can be expressed in one sentence, my burden here is to scientifically (and reasonably briefly) explain how anyone reaches that purely logical result — one that literally doesn’t conflict with any well-established science.

The reason why I’m alone on this front is there’s only a formal scientific press for a relatively complex base due to certain preferences by everyone else in scientific circles (e.g. basing an approach upon well-established mathematical constructs), so nobody — obviously except for this entertainer and science enthusiast (and preferably you too) — is looking at this problem from this angle.

What I love about the scientific method is the pure insistence upon logic.

It doesn’t matter that I don’t have a PhD (or such) establishing my formal scientific credentials, because logic never discriminates.

Here’s a little more from the prompting post…

The elusive Theory of Everything, which has been sought after by physicists for decades, would finally reconcile Einsteinian relativity with quantum mechanics.

And these two Danes may have finally cracked the code: they claim they have discovered a mathematical principle that they believe explains quantum gravity. They call their theory quantum holonomy and are now looking for the funds to continue working on it and to be able to support themselves with a modest salary.

Their theory is based on loop quantum gravity, which is string theory’s lesser known but main rival.

Unlike string theory, which is more concerned with the matter that inhabits space-time and conceptualises everything as being composed of tiny ‘strings’, loop quantum gravity focuses on the quantum properties of space-time itself, studying it as made up of tiny, indivisible chunks.

Scientists for generations have done a brilliant job digging deeper into reality (now to a depth at which observation itself impacts the observed result).

However, my theory — Reality Waveform Theory (RWT) — is built upon an anchor certainty (a logical construct that cannot be undermined), so meets current science from the ground up.

Let’s examine that anchor certainty…

Factually speaking, there has literally never been any scientific evidence proving the existence of even one objective boundary.

Any boundary is purely subjective, based upon the best application of quantum physics — which describes the subatomic particle realm as a “quantum foam” with “fuzzy” particle distinction, and even one prominent physicist (Dr. Edward Witten) described a particle as a “blur”.

There’s only one reality (or totality of existence, if you prefer), and with that conclusion comes a simple explanation of objective reality.

Relativity cannot possibly exist at the extreme scope of reality itself due to that oneness (relativity obviously requires comparison), so everything that requires relativity (size, shape, central point, definition, boundaries, and whatever else I may be missing) logically disappears at that extremeness.

Objectively speaking, we’re left with an undefinable extreme, which leaves us with the need to explain the definable aspects within reality as we clearly experience them.

Mass is condensed energy, as demonstrated by the application of Einstein’s most famous equation (e.g. nuclear explosion). Without objective distinction, space (including time) must also be energetic.

That means space (including its properties such as dimensionality) modulates in all possible ways, but scientists instead continue to believe in a relatively simplistic and fixed number of dimensions (e.g. 11 in M Theory), because that rigidity/linearity in a reality demonstrably without pure linearity fits the well-established mathematics of relativity and quantum physics.

I have nothing against the tried-and-true areas of mathematics, but math is only a frame lined up with reality to predict reality beyond human understanding. Relativity and quantum physics are brilliant by explaining reality within a certain context, but neither frame is complete (because then they’d obviously be the same thing).

In a purely energetic reality that requires balance for stability, all energetic possibilities must meet the supreme version of phase cancellation due to that balance, which logically reinforces the aforementioned undefinable extreme.

Phase cancellation is an audio term, but it means the same thing as destructive interference in physics. It’s a simple process that’s unfortunately a challenge to convey in words (albeit the first animated image at the relevant Wikipedia entry illustrates the process with simple sine waves — when the red sine wave ‘flat lines’, that’s phase cancellation). If I play an audio waveform that includes an overlay of that same waveform with reversed polarity (inverted phase), both waveforms cancel each other out, so silence remains.

That’s apparently how noise cancelling headphones work. Microphones on the outside of the headphones are constantly recording the outside noise, but as quickly as possible, that recording is phase inverted and played back with the incoming signal to produce silence (noting any external sound you still hear likely comes from the inevitable latency of that inversion process).

As my degree in music synthesis at Berklee College of Music helps me credibly attest, any audio waveform is completely sinusoidal in construct. The only fundamental pattern in audio is a sine wave. Combining sine waves produces literally all of the complexity of sound that you can hear, but that logically extends to include energy waveforms in general.

The fundamental and sole pattern of reality is the sine wave, but its shape is contingent upon perspective — and this is where scientists remain strongly challenged, because of their dig down approach from a relatively complex base.

A loop is a sine wave. An energetic string is a sine wave. Scientists are clearly honing in on where RWT already rests patiently, but they cannot get there by digging down into a reality without objective boundaries. RWT explains why that is, but I withhold that here for brevity.

Without objective distinction/boundary, everything can only be logically described as physical energy (again, as demonstrated by mainstream science).

Your mind is pure energy, so observation is pure energy.

Based upon that scientific conclusion, the double-slit experiment in quantum physics is no longer odd.

Despite the common belief otherwise in formal scientific circles, there’s no particle/wave duality, because particle distinction has never been proven to exist.

There’s particle resonance that physically and seamlessly resonates with observation, which makes common sense. If you focus upon something, that something resonates to your attention. It’s the exact same thing at the quantum level.

In short, a resonance is still a wave, so no duality.

Scientists need to take distinction less seriously, but distinction is obviously needed for scientific leverage — the fundamental and perpetual scientific conflict.

They need to understand that science itself is energy.

RWT provides a guiding scientific light regarding how to navigate that fundamental and perpetual scientific conflict.

The complexity of reality comes via relativity with human perception — and that perception is purely energetic.

The shape of your limitations of perception forms the shape of reality (including all of its wondrous complexity).

There’s objective reality, but to avoid current scientific confusion, everyone must understand there’s also a pseudo-objectivity, which is equal to all human beings only possibly honestly perceiving the same result (but that result can deviate outside of that perception).

The relevant Danish research apparently serves to extend the boundary of human perception, and I’m not trying to discourage that from my relatively obscure base here. Their work may lead to important advancements for human survival and “thrival” — and may indeed mathematically united relativity and quantum physics in an experimentally provable way.

One of my favorite parts of RWT is the validation of Einstein’s instincts against quantum physics — without disproving the experimentally validated areas of quantum physics.

The sine wave is simple and elegant (as Einstein would have loved, at least based upon the documentaries I’ve seen on the matter), and the logical notion of modulating the overall sinusoidal volume with an undefinable extreme (i.e. sine waves exist, because observation is sinusoidal) is equally simple and elegant.

If you ever want to read the full set of details, then you can freely conveniently read Reality Waveform Theory without needing to leave this journal.

I maintain the document containing RWT is logically sound, but I periodically refine the language there to hopefully increase attractiveness (including removing potential audience confusion), so the theory ultimately receives fair scientific scrutiny.

If you’re confused by RWT in part or whole, or if you can debunk it, then feel free to drop a comment.

It’s not enough that I understand RWT. I need to communicate the theory in a way that only says one logical thing without any possible confusion (thus the need for meticulous word selection).

If you’re convinced that RWT is valid, then join me in responsibly raising public awareness of this genuine theory of everything/nothing/something.

I'm an honest freak (or reasonably responsibly balanced "misfit", if you prefer) of an entertainer working and resting as my careful contribution to help improve society. Too many people abuse reasoning (e.g. 'partial truth = whole truth' scam), while I exercise reason to explore and express whole truth without any conflict-of-interest.

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Keep It Objective

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Welcome
a couple of images of yours truly "There are some things so serious you have to laugh at them." – Niels Bohr

Feel free to join us in seamlessly riding our boundless community waves.

Fun through serious, my carefully formed results are honest and usually offer a freshly unique view.

As a fairly complex person, I cover many interests, so for your convenience, I separate them into "RSS-able" branches...

Follow Spirit Wave Journal on WordPress.com
Thank You
To those of you making up the number in the box above (and informal followers elsewhere -- e.g. tapping into my RSS feeds here), I thank you for your undeniably necessary role for (and as part of) my beloved 3Fs (family, friends, and fans).
Help Needed

Helping raise awareness and any other constructive way to participate in our growing community is equally appreciated.

Legal Disclaimer
Spirit Wave ("entertainer" herein) disclaims that entertainer only publicly posts content ("entertainment" herein) for entertainment purposes only. You (the reader of this sentence) agree to the fullest extent permissible by law that entertainer is not liable for any damage. Moreover, entertainer never advocates breaking the law, so any expression involving drug use is addressed solely to anyone capable of lawfully engaging in that use. Since this journal is a part of the All Sines entertainment ecosystem, you (the reader of this sentence) agree to be bound by the All Sines legal disclaimer located @ http://allsines.life/legal-disclaimer
%d bloggers like this: