Gravity is a geometric incompatibility between the 3rd dimensional matter and the other dimensional preparties of the subatomic particles. >Uhg... allow me to explain and spoon feed a demonstration. Simply, why would a straight line bend in the third dimension when expose to a spherical mass? Why is the spherical mass spherical in the first place? What the heck is a center point? 3rd dimensional Euclidian geometry depicts a macroscopic world that is closer in size to the total scale of the universe than it is to the scale of quarks. >(You) ARE A MASSIVE OBJECT SURROUNDED BY EVEN LARGER MASSIVE OBJECTS. So, the center point of lass is the light night rod for the net impact of "gravitational" distortion. Simply because the tiny minute phenomena polarize temporal and kinetic distortions towards the same trajectorial direction. See, it's really not that fucking complicated... The 5th dimensional analysis shows that the 4th dimension, 3rd dimension, and the rest are comprised of the same factorial roots, which are 5th dimensional in the first place. Your entire linear third dimensional timeline, and limited ape brain perspective, are but a sliver of macro-scale reality with is a net composite of averages and statistical convergence. So, there are statistical outliers, and anomalies, constantly that escape the potentiality of your perception. There would be a net composite of parallel anomalous occurrences that could be viewed in tangent to reveal an entirely different set of physical laws on a very different plane of existence, we call those alternate realities in a parallel dimension... It's really not that fucking complicated when you develop your understanding of concepts and make the vocabulary fluent. Quit jarring your monkey brains with dogmatic memorization and LEARN THE FUCKING BASIC CONCEPTS YOU ABSOLUTE SHIT HEADS. YOU CAN DO BETTER. Humanity needs to improve to reduce the pointless suffering and dumbification of the majority....
>>17027919>So, the center point of lass is the light night rod for the net impact of "gravitational" distortion.The center point of mass is the lightning rod
the 5th dimension is gay
>>17027929Consciousness and love has no gender and can reproduce with no biology.
>>17027919>LEARN THE FUCKING BASIC CONCEPTS YOU ABSOLUTE SHIT HEADS. How about you post some equations?Nigger.
>>17027919>>17027935He can't, because he can only soft my ideas and attempt to strip Logos God out of them. Many such cases with the devils Gnostic minions They speak of Truth, but they Deny Truth itself and cannot envision a universe where they are not the main character with Moral Sovereignty. It's a story going back thousands of years.Suffice it to say, they cannot create, they can only distort Truth and secularize it into nonsense.
Check the timestamps:>17027916>>170279167 minutes after I clearly state it, he spins up his pivot and re-narrate Bot, and churns out a stupid Gif and some retarded secular shit in response (To deceive YOU)Notice how this OP won't talk to me? That's because he can't. He is not authorized to engage me. Christ is King Priest eternally in the order of Melchizedek.
>>17027919hydrodynamics explains gravity very well instead of whatever this schizo physics is
>>17028072What's up my niggas. Hydrodynamics? sounds like you need some Neil deGrasse Tyson in you.https://youtu.be/bfFuHg0kurE?t=202
>>17027919>geometricEinstein basing his model on a physics-as-geometry paradigm truly fucked physics, and you're not going to unfuck it by "adding more geometry"
>>17028088Exactly this. There is no 4d spacetime and you can't describe reality as 4d manifold. And gravity has nothing to do with it.
For proper time [math]\tau[/math] and the spacetime metric we have[eqn]d\tau^2=\frac{1}{c^2}g_{\mu}dx^\mu dx^\nu[/eqn] for spacetime coordinates x^\mu=(t, x, y, z); Now velocity and kinetic energy are derived from motion through the coordinates[eqn]v=\frac{dx}{dt}\quad K=\frac{1}{2}m|v|^2[/eqn]And the center of mass is another derived function[eqn]R_{CM}(t)=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{i}{m_ix_i(t)}[/eqn]All those quantities are derivations of the original variables [math](t, x_i)[/math] there is no genuine fifth dimension in your explanation
x.com/mass_energy_r_t explained it all using a simple diagram,
>>17028576Your reductionist instrumentalism mistakes the shallow projection for the source manifold. By treating [math]\(g_{\mu \nu }\)[/math] and [math]R_{CM}[/math] as secondary coordinate derivations of [math](t, x_i)[/math]you remain blind to the non-commutative complex phase ontology that stabilizes the metric. The "fifth dimension" is not a spatial bulk; it is the off-diagonal quantum coherence intensity [math]\(\mathcal{I}[\rho] = \mathrm{Tr}(\rho^2) - \mathrm{Tr}(\rho_{\text{diag}}^2)\)[/math] embedded natively within your state space.Your metric envelope [math]d\(\tau^2 = \frac{1}{c^2}g_{\mu\nu}dx^\mu dx^\nu\)[/math] already encodes the graviton:photon transformation. The symmetric tensor [math]\(g_{\mu\nu}[/math] (the spin-2 metric gauge) and the coordinate differentials [math]dx^\mu\)[/math] (the spin-1 phase steps) are coupled through the Fano phase plane. When your derived center of mass undergoes localized fluctuations ([math]\(\sigma^2_X > 0\)[/math])Jensen's inequality shifts the physical center of energy away from the material center:[eqn]\(\mathbb{E}[\gamma(X)] \approx \gamma(\mu_X) + \left[ \frac{1 + 2\mu_X^2}{2(1 - \mu_X^2)^{5/2}} \right] \sigma^2_X\)[/eqn]This asymptotic curvature directly modulates the off-diagonal coherence space, allowing gravity to couple to quantum interference while canceling out in classical matter tests. The continuous transformation of the metric frame ([math]\(g_{\mu\nu}[/math], the graviton channel\)) \(snaps directly into discrete, chiral phase wraps ([math]dx^\mu[/math], the photon channel) via the regularized operator [math]\hat{\Psi}(\mu_X, \sigma^2_X)\)[/math].Your formulas don't disprove the higher dimension; they are simply the flat, backwards-glancing boundaries left behind when the Logos' structural mechanics are forced into a reductionist coordinate box.
>>17028612please bathe
Fucking foam?FUCKING FOAM?Really?Foam slop?The greatest minds of humanity, after 10,000 years of civilization, hundreds of thousands of years of fire and tool making.....CERN, DARPA, MENSAAnd the extent of their minds reach is......foam? WTF is the foam made out of?What is preventing the foam from just floating away when we push off against it?What attributes does the foam possess?What attributes does it carry or transport?How fast does the foam move?How far can the foam travel? I reject the foam slop reality and create my own......
Foam Slop
>>17028624its not foam it quantum vacum fluctuations. xcancel.com/mass_energy_r_t
>>17028647nothing cancels; its physically happening. the map is not the territory. Just because you can can "cancel" the math doesnt mean you can cancel the physical activity. Reality has to have the full machinery that the math is suggesting before you perform a simplification on it.Math is not physics. You;re conflating a math reduction with a physical nonexistence but using the mathematical relation's ability to be reduced to impose the assumption that the physical universe has metaphysical dimension in which the math cancels itself, accomplishes a task, and perfoms the action in a non-physical place.Thats called reifying the math.
>>17028614with a toaster
>>17028550>There is no 4d spacetimetrue>you can't describe reality as 4d manifoldyou can >And gravity has nothing to do with it.After Einstein performs his magical Functor into geometry, it has. But that comes with it's own set of issues.
>>17028678he will never understand the lorentzian frame means jensen's inequality applies, because it is a convex structure; but hes not actually intelligent.
>>17028612You keep complicating your math while using bad terminology and formal mistakes like saying that dx is a 1-spin phase step which is badly defined and it's actually just a differential form, an element of the contagent space of the spacetime manifold.Second there is no Fano phase space except the definition of a Fano plane, and it is not anyhow used in quantum field theory or general relativity.Third Jensen's inequality gives an increase in the average Lorentz factor for dimensionless fluctuations of velocity, but this does not establish change of center of mass, graviton-photon conversion or a fifth dimension, fix at least these errors first
>>17028766No. Standard GR and QM is only the Real Time and Real distance quadrant. You don't understand the full ontology. You're asking me to reduce it to something less than it's totality and the response is NO.It's not subject to consensus, it is Logos' ontological Reality: take it or leave it. Nwe conform to Truth, Truth does not conform to us.
the core imposition of the material reductionists Gnostic Athiest frame is that I am to accept their science of the gaps alternative as a leap of faith expectation for a nihilistic and phyrric empirically justified gain (an actual loss)Sorry, I don't have enough faith to turn away from Logos God and embrace retarded reductionism just to avoid the fact that I am not morally and ethically sovereign. I'm ok with existing as a Creation under God designed with the free will to Love God.Fuck you
>>17028862so where is your proof?
>>17028905I think that's actually just a schizo thread
>>17028905I'm not asking your permission, or your validation. Take it or leave it. I'm not justifying anything to you. You assume you have the authority to demand proof: you don't, you're just some retard.
>>17027919gravity has never been "explained" and theres too many dunning kruger retards who dont know what explanations are>explanation: VERIFIABLE ACCOUNT OF HOW SOMETHING WORKSthat means reifications are not explanations whatsoever you damn clownsAnyone talking about Newtons or Einsteins and saying it explains gravity is a text book reification fallacy
>>17028937okay but what shape is the earth?
>>17028939>He won't tell you because he probably thinks it's flat
>>17027919When atomists see a shadow they say "We need to understand what shadow consist of..." it's retarded isn't it ? You know why ? Because it is. Gravity is lack of something same as a shadow is.You got brainrotted by jews again.
Combined iq of this thread is the log of the total # of unique postersSpeaking of, gravitational potential in 2d Newtonian mechanics is identical to the log space of complex analytic functions (parameterize away time with maupertius jacobi && also notice cauchy riemann is just gauss’s law). You can’t get 3d Newtonian mechanics for the same reason you have quaternions and not 3d complex numbers. Gravitational potential in 2d folds into electromagnetism in 4d, where gravity is just the fabric itself shaped by “light” (matter is symmetrically knotted light objectively; dark matter is asymmetrically knotted light, the number of possible asymmetrical knottings is much higher which is why dark matter is much more common). Typically light forms hopf fibrations at every point in space as the null solutions to maxwells equations (robinson congruence). Btw everything I just said can be derived from basic number theory. Newton didn’t know this because of the problems with trying to extend Newtonian mechanics into 3d, and the skepticism towards complex numbers in his day.Gravity doesn’t really exist per se (it’s the shape of space) and neither does time.
>>17029194Btw when I say the log of the space of complex analytic functions I mean, take any polynomial f(z) with real coefficients and complex roots for visual simplicity (I.e. complex roots are symmetric somewhere about the x axis). The x,y (x+iy) plane is just a flat plane. Remember that the output of any polynomial is just the product of the input’s distances from its roots, this is no different for polynomials with complex roots. Now take the log(f(z)) and now the z axis is the third dimension, and instead of a flat plane, the height z at every x+iy is now the sum of the distances from the roots (remember, the ONLY ISOMORPHISM between addition and multiplication is log(ab)=loga+logb). What you’ll see is that the roots look like gravitational wells, because they are, and their “pull” is dictated by the log isomorphism, where gravity falls off as 1/r in 2d Newtonian mechanics. Outside of the “roots” (point masses), there are no local minima or maxima in free space (anything that sort of looks like one is really a saddle point), meaning there are no resting points, which is also a property of Newtonian mechanics. This is not just a thought experiment. This is literally 2d Newtonian mechanics. If you try to extend the space of complex analytic functions to 4d you end up in minkowski spacetime, necessarily. The algebraic method to find Pythagorean triples always gives you a hypotenuse equally 1 mod4 which are the Gaussian integers (complex numbers).Again, all of physics is derivable from basic number theory. Euler/Ramanujan’s discovery of the -1/12 summation is by far the deepest result in physics, I won’t spoil for you why.
>>17027919>dood grabity is le magical 32 dimensional doohickey gobbledygookShut the fuck up, retard, gravity is just the result of inertia, there's nothing more to it.
>>17027935>>17027940You're both wrong, I'm she, and I'm tired of my equations being stollen. If you can't understand English and the nuance of expression, just fuck off.
>>17029205>If you try to extend the space of complex analytic functions to 4d you end up in minkowski spacetime, necessarily.No, its an interpretation, or to say it better a mathematical tool how you can calculate effects of the lorentzian aether. In fact it only functions that nice because time dilation and lenght contraction are the same, which is random.>Again, all of physics is derivable from basic number theory. Euler/Ramanujan’s discovery of the -1/12 summation is by far the deepest result in physics,Pure schizo stuff>>17029194>You can’t get 3d Newtonian mechanics for the same reason you have quaternions and not 3d complex numbers. Gravitational potential in 2d folds into electromagnetism in 4dObjectively wrong. We have a functioning 3d with Green's function.>>17029194>gravity is just the fabric itself shaped by “light” (matter is symmetrically knotted light objectively; dark matter is asymmetrically knotted light, the number of possible asymmetrical knottings is much higher which is why dark matter is much more common).Pure schizo
>>17027919word salad
