Vmedvil Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 You have secondary k and m where de sitter & anti de sitter spaces touch, not just where the normal d branes touch (p's & q's) Yeah, no I actually need a value for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 (edited) Yeah, no I actually need a value for it.The value of k & m (dark matter) must be directly related to p & q (dark energy), right? Afterall, without anti de sitter space, nothing separates the constants of parallel D-brane space times, & vice versa Edited November 12, 2017 by Super Polymath Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 (edited) The value of k & m (dark matter) must be directly related to p & q (dark energy), right? Afterall, without anti de sitter space, nothing separated parallel D-branes. No, read Dubblesoix's Freidmann Cosmology post I have defined Dark matter and Energy with this equation before in non partial form, it is not either of those. L ≠ H as earlier stated it is in the wrong state. http://www.scienceforums.com/topic/30491-friedmann-cosmology-with-rotation/ Edited November 12, 2017 by Vmedvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 (edited) No, read dubblesoix freidmann cosmology post I have defined Dark matter and Energy with this equation before in non partial form, it is not either of those.When parallel negative d branes merge, that's dark matter, that's gravity, that's black hole megers micro black holes to macro black holes. When parallel d branes merge, that's dark energy. The two events must be related. Edited November 12, 2017 by Super Polymath Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 No, read dubblesoix freidmann cosmology post I have defined Dark matter and Energy with this equation before in non partial form, it is not either of those.There's little of ample rotation in the CMB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 My ideas are not speculation, they were conforming to the evidence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 (edited) My ideas are not speculation, they were conforming to the evidence I dunno that k and m have to be for negative energy-mass as Dr Kaku calls it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6XAkVA7RmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWHC081B_Do Edited November 12, 2017 by Vmedvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 Just plug it in real quick, see if it works for the toy model without causing stack overflows in the approx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 Just plug it in real quick, see if it works for the toy model without causing stack overflows in the approx. Ya, it stacks upon calculating k and m. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 These D-mergers not only produce dark matter (gravity) in anti de sitter space, they produce dark energy (expansion with an added bonus of zero point energy in de sitter space), & - most paramount off all - vice versa. They have to be related for any of the modifications in this model of gravity to work. So just plugin the negative e's & M's above& beneath the planck length & I bet they work to predict wave collapses as well as the speed of weak entanglement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 Ya, it stacks upon calculating k and m.Show me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 (edited) These D-mergers not only produce dark matter (gravity) in anti de sitter space, they produce dark energy (expansion with an added bonus of zero point energy in de sitter space), & - most paramount off all - vice versa. They have to be related for any of the modifications in this model of gravity to work. So just plugin the negative e's & M's above& beneath the planck length & I bet they work to predict wave collapses as well as the speed of weak entanglement. So, again it stacks as it cannot understand the i term being a negative root, error upon i is all it says. Edited November 12, 2017 by Vmedvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 So, again it stacks as it cannot understand the i term being a negative root, error upon i is all it says.So, again it stacks as it cannot understand the i term being a negative root, error upon i is all it says.So, again it stacks as it cannot understand the i term being a negative root, error upon i is all it says.Really dude? You'll have to do better than that. Switching the - & plus signs of the x,y,z coordinates is not the same as adding a negative root. I now enough about math to call bs. No, I mean really show in the relationship written out fully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 (edited) Really dude? You'll have to do better than that. Switching the - & plus signs of the x,y,z coordinates is not the same as adding a negative root. I now enough about math to call bs. No, I mean really show in the relationship written out fully. Its right here in this equation. Secondly, I imagine it would stack here. Edited November 12, 2017 by Vmedvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Polymath Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 Its right here in this equation. that's not even where you change things to show anti de sitter space. You do that in the e=x,y,z. You say e=-(x,y,z) it's that simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 (edited) that's not even where you change things to show anti de sitter space. You do that in the e=x,y,z. You say e=-(x,y,z) it's that simple. Hold on I am trying to find a way to remove that i, in a way that the computer would understand, too bad it isn't i^2, I would just define it as -1, but it really doesn't like that e^i Edited November 12, 2017 by Vmedvil Super Polymath 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vmedvil Posted November 12, 2017 Report Share Posted November 12, 2017 (edited) that's not even where you change things to show anti de sitter space. You do that in the e=x,y,z. You say e=-(x,y,z) it's that simple. Wait, I found a math solution since. Edited November 12, 2017 by Vmedvil Super Polymath 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.