Merging Gr And Qm Across Reimann Curvature

[Vmedvil2]

I had a inspiration with how to merge QM and GR this time across the Riemann Curvature/Ricci Tensor, there was a previous attempt in the (http://www.scienceforums.com/topic/36198-merging-quantum-mechanics-with-general-relativity/)thread which the definition I used for the trace of Scalar Curvature in 4-D time-space was not accepted as exact enough, however I can use one of the exact definitions of Riemann Curvature and still merge them into a Quantum Gravity Equation.

 

First as always we started with the fundamental equation of quantum mechanics being the Schrodinger Equation then reverse solve it for ∇² = d²/dx² + d²/dy² + d²/dz². 

 

 

Which 

Solves as -(2m(iħ(dΨ/dt) - VΨ)/Ψħ)^1/2 = ∇_{Quantum Mechanics}

 

Now for General Relativity the defintion of the Reimann Curuvature I will be using is

 

R(X,Y)Z = ∇_X∇_YZ - ∇_Y∇_XZ - ∇(x,y)Z where X = u ,Y = v , Z = W

 

Now Einstein's General theory of Relativity is as follows

 

Now we must solve that equation for R_uv or R_xy which solved for the Ricci Tensor is R_uv = (8πG/C⁴)T_uv + (1/2)Rg_uv + Λg_uv which is also R_xy = (8πG/C⁴)T_xy + (1/2)Rg_xy + Λg_xy Now we can take that entire equation and substitution that in for R(X,Y)Z  being the same as R_uv or  R_{xy ,} so (8πG/C⁴)T_uv + (1/2)Rg_uv + Λg_uv = ∇_X∇_YZ - ∇_Y∇_XZ - ∇(x,y)Z , now we must solve that for ∇(x,y)Z which is the same as saying ∇(x,y,z). then -((8πG/C⁴)T_uv + (1/2)Rg_uv + Λg_uv + ∇_Y∇_XZ - ∇_X∇_YZ) = ∇(x,y)Z and also equals -((8πG/C⁴)T_uv + (1/2)Rg_uv + Λg_uv + ∇_Y∇_XZ - ∇_X∇_YZ) = ∇_{General Relativity}

 

 

Lastly, ∇_{General Relativity}  - ∇_{Quantum Mechanics} = ∇_{Quantum Relativity}

 

_Or

 

 -((8πG/C⁴)T_uv + (1/2)Rg_uv + Λg_uv + ∇_v∇_uW - ∇_u∇_vW) + (2m(iħ(dΨ/dt) - VΨ)/Ψħ)^1/2  = ∇_{Quantum Relativity}

 

_or 

 

-((8πG/C⁴)T_uv + (1/2)Rg_uv + Λg_uv + ∇_v∇_uW - ∇_u∇_vW) + (2m(iħ(dΨ/dt) - VΨ)/Ψħ)^1/2  = (d²/dx² + d²/dy² + d²/dz²)^1/2

Edited May 17, 2020 by VictorMedvil

[Vmedvil2]

Stop using your crackpipe before posting plz

Unlike your theories which are clearly wrong, my equations are actually correct and make sense using proper mathematical definitions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature#Generalization_to_affine_connections and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_curvature_tensor). That's what you don't understand physics isn't just a mixture of Star Trek and Star Wars, it is applying mathematics to physical phenomena from known definitions in mathematics and physics. Basically, I know it works as the mathematics definitions work, you can't just make stuff up and that's why you are a crank. This is why 90% of the equations on this site from cranks are useless as they use improper geometries and equations that flat out don't work and anyone with a mathematics or physics degree just laughs at them because they know that it is just incorrect.

Edited May 20, 2020 by VictorMedvil