View
5
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
A Bio-Info-Digital Universe Model (BIDUM, version 1.0) inspired by a Teller’s large
number hypothesis overlooked by the great majority of physicists
(including Tipler, Barrow, Dirac and Einstein) but also Teller himself
*
(Open development interval: 2008 – 2015 - ?)
*
Andrei Lucian Drăgoi1,2,3
*
Motto: "[God]: universe is nothing but a big copying machine, reproducing your thoughts [pure information]
in physical form [energy/matter], that will be your experience” 4
(Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God, 3rd volume)
Abstract
„Edward Teller appears to have been the first who speculate that there may exist a logarithmic
relation between the fine structure constant (α) and the parameter G·mN2/h·c~10
-39 of the form
α~ln(G·mN2/h·c) (in fact α
-1=ln(3.17 x 10
60 and the formula is too insensitive to be of very much use in
predicting exact relations)“5.
I will try to demonstrate that Barrow and Tipler (but also the great majority of the physicists including
those mentioned in the title) overlooked the possibility that Teller’s hypothesis (called “speculation”) may be
much more inspired and profound than the Dirac’s large number hypothesis (DLNH), as it can offer an
elegant explanation both to the fine structure constant (FSC) and to DLNH (using FSC) and also can
predict a Planck-like gravitational constants series and a big G series (a G “imprint” for every type of
atom in any state) as a unified quantum-relativistic theory of quantum gravity that is experimentally
testable.
IDUM proposes an informational view on the universe in which all physical constants can be derived
(at least theoretically) from just one parameter: the total information of the universe (a quantum
fluctuation resulted from a huge informational input to a “nothing” 0D vacuum). In IDUM the mass-energy
conservation (thermodynamics) and equivalence (Einstein) laws become the consequence of an information
conservation law (which is fundamental in IDUM).
IDUM tries to demonstrate that the universe can be modeled as a multi-processor quantum
(gravity) computer in which all the fundamental forces are just the result of reading the same total
information in different dimensional frames.
1 Romanian pediatrician partially self-educated in theoretical physics and IT
2 Email: dr.dragoi@yahoo.com
3 Mailing Address: Str. Lucrețiu Pătrășcanu, nr.3, bl. Y1, sc. 1, ap. 144, Bucharest, Romania
4 www.nytimes.com/books/first/w/walsch-god3.html
5 Barrow, John D., and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986, p.230
and ref. no. 37 from p.29: E. Teller, Phys. Rev. 73, 801, (1948) (www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle-Oxford-
Paperbacks/dp/0192821474)
2
Part 1: A fine structure constant binary logarithm coincidence series
overlooked by the vast majority of physicists
In the abstract mN stands for (free) nucleon (proton / neutron) rest mass. All the physical constants used
in this article are based on CODATA 2012 recommendations and are all measured in SI units (see Table 1)
Table 1. The abbreviations used in this article
Mn / Mp / Me (free) neutron/ proton/ electron rest mass
tP / lP / mP Planck time / length / mass
Qe / Ke / ε0 /
c / Re
the elementary charge (so that not to be confused with Euler number e) / Coulomb constant / vacuum
permittivity / the speed of light in vacuum / classical electron radius
α the inverse of fine structure constant6 (abbreviation chosen for the simplicity and intelligibility of the equations):
αhr c⋅
Qe2
4 π⋅ ε0⋅
137.036
αG
αGr=αG/2π
the inverse of gravitational coupling constant7 (abbreviation chosen for the simplicity and intelligibility of the
equations):
αGhr c⋅
G Me2
⋅
MP
Me
2
5.709 1044×
G The DAH-based (for DAH see below) quantum variant of the Newtonian universal gravitational constant
(G / QG or Gq: „quantum big G”); the classical experimentally determined G will be named as
GCODATA2012
h / hr / hrr Planck constant / the reduced Planck constant (h/2π) / the „double” reduced Planck constant (h/4π) (4π is a
Moebius-like double-circle complete cycle on a 4D hypersphere: a possible trajectory of the
gravitons/pair of interchanged gravitons)
Eph(λ) the energy of a single photon: Eph λ( ) h
c
λ
NBE (average) nuclear binding energy (per each nucleon) (average nuclear mass defect per each nucleon)8
ln (x) the e-base (natural) logarithm of x>0
log2(x) the 2-base (binary) logarithm of x>0.
DLNH Dirac’s large number hypothesis
NL-TH natural logarithm (variant of) Teller’s9 hypothesis
BL-TH binary logarithm (variant of) Teller’s hypothesis
DAH Drăgoi’s alpha (constant) hypothesis (my hypothesis based on a binary logarithm subvariant of Teller’s
hypothesis)
(B)IDUM (Bio-)Info-Digital Universe Model (a model of the physical universe using DAH as main premise and
based on the analogy with a multi-processor quantum computer)
LMI location-and-moment information
LMIP location-and-moment information packs
ACP (The) Anthropic Cosmological Principle10
HUP Heisenberg Uncertainty principle
6 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_structure_constant
7 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_coupling_constant
8 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy
9 ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Teller
10 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe;
3
It is clearly that using natural logarithm in the Teller’s hypothesis is „too insensitive to be of very
much use in predicting exact relations” (see Table 2)
Table 2. The „insensitive” NL-TH variant
α 137.036= ln
h c⋅
G Mn2
⋅
89.86 65.574 % α⋅
eα
3.266 1059×=
h c⋅
G Mn2
⋅1.061 10
39×1
3.078 1022× %
eα
Even if Teller himself overlooked the possibility of using binary logarithm (not natural logarithm) in his
hypothesis mentioned in the abstract, it is quite strange that the vast majority of physicists also overlooked this
possibility from 1948 until present (I have emailed a couple of years ago Mr. Barrow and Mr. Tipler on this
BL-TH variant (see Tables 3 and 4) for their book next edition review, but never received any answer). This
overlooking is quite similar to the background radiation prediction that had escaped unnoticed by the majority
of physicists quite a few decades.
Table 3. The much more „sensitive” BL-TH variant
α 137.036=
log2h c⋅
G Mn2
⋅
129.641 94.603 % α⋅
2α
1.786 1041×=
h c⋅
G Mn2
⋅1.061 10
39× 0.594 % 2α⋅
Table 4. Other „striking sensitive” BL-TH subvariants
α 137.036=
log2h c⋅
G Me⋅ Mp⋅
140.487 102.518 % α⋅
log2h c⋅
G Me⋅ Mn⋅
140.485 102.517 % α⋅
log2hr c⋅
G Me⋅ Mp⋅
137.836 100.583 % α⋅
log2hr c⋅
G Me⋅ Mn⋅
137.834 100.582 % α⋅
2α
1.786 1041×=
hr c⋅
G Me⋅ Mp⋅3.109 10
41× 174.055 % 2α
hr c⋅
G Me⋅ Mn⋅3.105 10
41× 173.816 % 2α
hrr c⋅
G Me⋅ Mp⋅1.555 10
41× 87.028 % 2α
4
hrr c⋅
G Me⋅ Mn⋅1.552 10
41× 86.908 % 2α
The most striking “sensitive” BL-TH sub-variant (which I’ve called DAH in the abbreviation Table 1) (see Table 5) deserves a very special attention in my opinion as it may have great importance in
formulating a quantitative description/prediction of gravitons and quantum gravity theory. I consider it very
small the probability that this “too-elegant” numerical coincidence is “just” the result of pure chance. I don’t
have any information from the physics literature11
on a more sensitive theoretical numerical prediction of αg
and a quantum G (including the Einstein’s famous 8πG general relativity equation factor) using only α (as
an adimensional combination of almost all the physical constants fundamental to quantum mechanics theory).
In this article I shall try to argue that the power of predicting a gravitational Planck-like constants (mass
quanta) and a theoretical quantum G series (similar to the experimental G determinations and variations) makes DAH very probable to be a true non-coincidence due to a more profound undiscovered
law of nature which I’ll try to demonstrate in my IDUM (a possible scale-invariance12
law in a possible
fractal universe13
). DAH non-coincidence suggests that FSC has a dual electrogravitational significance
(with FSC being a both electromagnetic and gravitational constant). I also support Dirac’s famous quote
that “if the [physical] equations are not simple and elegant, they are probably wrong.”: Koide
coincidence is one (still debated) example that has successfully predicted the tauon mass within one
standard deviation from its observed value. Similarly, DAH could offer an elegant explanation to DLNH.
Table 5. The most striking „sensitive” BL-TH subvariant: DAH
α 137.036=
log2h c⋅
4 π⋅( ) α
3
2⋅ G Me
2⋅( )
137.0304 99.996 % α⋅
2α
1.786 1041×=
h c⋅
4 π⋅( ) α
3
2⋅ G Me
2⋅( )
1.779 1041× 99.613 % 2
α⋅
h c⋅
G Me2
⋅4 π⋅( )α
3
22
α⋅
8 π⋅ G⋅h c⋅
α
3
22
α 1−⋅
Me
2⋅
hr c⋅
G Me2
⋅2 α
3
2⋅ 2
α⋅ α
3
22
α 1+⋅ hrr c⋅
G Me2
⋅α
3
22
α⋅
11
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant 12
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_invariance; en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_spiral 13
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_cosmology
5
αGhr c⋅
G Me2
⋅2α
3
22
α⋅ α
3
22
α 1+⋅ αGrhrr c⋅
G Me2
⋅α
3
22
α⋅
Analogously to single λ-wavelength photon energy [Eph(λ)], the gravitational energy of a 2 rest
electron/positron vacuum system (G·Me2/λ) is the consequence of 2 “Ping-Pong” co-phase-graviton-packs
interchange (with the speed of light in vacuum and wavelength λ) between the 2 rest electrons/positrons at the
maximum frequency of emission for the electron/positron (1/ λ, with minimum λ close to the
electron/positron diameter): I shall name this pack of co-phase gravitons an electrograviton (eg). The energy
of an eg [Eeg(λ)] can be defined as a scalar analogous to the single photon energy using a
theoretical/hypothetical electrogravitonic Planck-like constant (heg) which is very plausible (as the
gravitational analogue of electromagnetic Planck constant) and can be predicted using DAH (see Table 6)
In IDUM heg (mass quanta) measures the granulation of the 4D-ST itself which may explain why
all the other physical quantities (from all the other forces/fields) seem also discrete quantum/quantized
when measured. Heg doesn’t measure the smallest granulation of the 4D-ST (as lP and tP are the
maximum measurable resolution of that granulation), but the electrogravitational granulation/pixilation
of 4D-ST. IDUM postulates an universal electrogravitational (non-maximum) granulation/pixilation of
all 4D-ST “scene” and all its particle-“actors” (see also the superposing between string theory and
quantum gravity theory14
)
Table 6. DAH predicts a plausible electrogravitonic Planck-Drăgoi constant (heg)
Eph λ( ) hc
λh ν⋅
Eeg λ( ) hegc
λheg ν⋅ G Me
2⋅
λ2 Eeg λ( )⋅ 2 heg
c
λ⋅
⋅
G Me2
⋅ 2 heg⋅ c⋅
h c⋅
G Me2
⋅
h c⋅
2 heg⋅ c⋅4 π⋅( )α
3
22
α⋅
h
2heg4 π⋅( )α
3
22
α⋅
hegh
8 π⋅( ) α
3
2⋅ 2
α⋅
heghr
4 α
3
2⋅ 2
α⋅
heghrr
2 α
3
2⋅ 2
α⋅
hrr
α
3
22
α 1+⋅
The factor that connects h and heg constants can be named ”electrogravitational constant” (KEG)
and offers a seductive scalar unification between electromagnetism and gravity. Although speculative,
there is a good possibility that KEG may represent the electrogravitonic “granulation” factor of the photon
(as the 4D-ST vacuum is granulated and the photon “borrows” that granulation as all quantum particles
are 4D-ST vacuum phenomena): the (integer) number of co-phase linear (λ -) egs in a single (λ -)photon
(NEgP). The possible “granular” structure of a photon (similar to a laser beam of co-phase linear (same)
λ-egs) may explain the wave-particle duality of the photon and offers an interesting explanation15
for the
double slit experiment and for the de Broglie hypothesis. Similar to the photon, the electron may be
14
Matthias Blau, Stefan Theisen. String theory as a theory of quantum gravity: a status report
(link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10714-008-0752-z)
15 Patrick J. Coles, Jedrzej Kaniewski, Stephanie Wehner. Equivalence of wave–particle duality to entropic uncertainty. Nature
Communications, 2014; 5: 5814 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms6814
6
interpreted as a conglomeration of permanently moving circular eggs (that can explain the rest mass of
electron as a moving energy of circular egs with a specific spin): expressing classical electron radius (Re)
as a function of heg constant shows that electron/positron mass (Me) can be interpreted as a multiple
(integer) of the energy of a single circular eg (the number of co-phase circular [λ –]egs in a single
“classical” resting but “spinning” electron/ positron [NEgRE], in principle, even if Re isn’t the same with
the real ray of a pinpoint electron/positron). However, it is also well-known that Re is not the real physical
ray of an electron. A much better approximation of an electron real ray (Rre) may be deduced from the proton
ray (Rp) by starting with the premise that electron and photon have similar densities of matter/energy per unit
of space volume: Rre~Rp/(Mp/Me)1/3
. IDUM suggests that the ray of the spinning electron (even at rest) may
vary between to 2 limits (as the subcomponent egs of the electron may vary their ray of rotation as function of
eg-input of that particle in a specific interval of time): Rre (inferior limit) and Re (superior limit). NEgRE
may be formulated as a general function of the ray (r) of subcomponent-egs rotation so that Me (at rest)
remains constant: NEgRE(r)=Me·c2/Eeg(2π·r).
IDUM interprets both electron and photon as 2 great conglomerations of egs in 2 different
possible states: circular (4D-torus16
-like) (in the electron) and/or linear(4D cylinder-like) (in the photon)
moving egs (super-string theory similarity) (photon-electron unified interpretation) (see Table 7-A).
Besides explaining the rest mass of the electron and the movement mass of the photon, IMUD also
conjectures that the circular egs composing a torus-like electron (at rest) can also explain the spin of the
electron (½) and the photon (1) and also the charge of these 2 type of particles by the direction and the
sense of the circular/linear EG movement in 4D: left-to-right or right-to-left on any 2D plane of the S-3D
and past-to-future (typical particles like electrons) future-to-past (anti-particles like positron). It is very
possible that the sub-particle egs to be organized in 3 groups compatible with the preon17
/rishon18
concepts (1/3eT rishons and neutral V rishons) (IMUD-preon/rishon model combination) (see the next
figures). IDUM has an essential advantage on the rishon model: it also explains the “resting” mass of any
particle as an informational mass flux generated by the circular movement of the subcomponent egs of
the electrons(leptons)/quarks (and quark based particles). IDUM also conjectures that the 4th
dimension
of ST is “hidden”/packed in the central hole of the torus like structure of any quantum particle (but also
in the central holes torus-like pixels of the ST, as explained later): it’s possible that the holes of this torus-
like entities to be populated with other types of particles (including gravitons, tachyons and other types
of candidates for the dark matter and dark energies particle constituents) that can travel with faster-
than-light speeds interconnecting at very long distances different particle (as quantum entanglement but
also as the Coulomb force that seem to propagate instantly, no matter the distance19
;in this way
synchronicity generated by the hidden phenomenon of the 4th
dimension can be masked by the apparent
causality of the 3.xD-ST phenomenon).
16
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torus 17
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preon 18
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rishon_model 19
Calcaterra, A.; de Sangro, R.; Finocchiaro, G.; Patteri, P.; Piccolo, M.; Pizzella, G. (2012). "Measuring Propagation Speed
of Coulomb Fields". arXiv:1211.2913 [gr-qc]; arxiv.org/abs/1211.2913; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb%27s_law
7
Based on the 4D circular movement of sub-particle egs/groups of egs, IMUD offers a possible unified
explanation for the 3 intrinsic proprieties of any quantum particle (including the electron and the photon):
rest/movement mass, spin and charge are 3 intrinsic proprieties of the electron. In IMUD, rest mass, charge and
spin are 3 “faces” of the same phenomenon. The “egic” closed-torus like structure of the electron (and the open
tubular/cylindrical structure of the photon) can offer a unified electrogravitational / electrogravity theory of the
electron/photon and their inner structures.
If the photon and the electron have an eg-granular structure, than we can hypothesize that
electromagnetism is just a masked form of quantum gravity (as egs may be “hidden” in the space-time frames
of the photons and electrons, but also in W and Z gauge bosons) (and this may be a way to unify the 2 forces
[the electroweak and the gravity] with so similar scalars as I shall try to demonstrate in the next part of this
article).
Table 7-A. Heg constant suggests a plausible photon-electron unified interpretation as
linear/circular electrogravitons conglomerates
NEgP 8 π⋅( )α
3
22
α⋅
(KEG)
hegh
NEgP
h NEgP heg⋅ Re
h
2 π⋅( )αc⋅
Me c2
⋅
Re
NEgP heg⋅
2 π⋅( )αc⋅
Me c2
⋅
Me
NEgP
αheg
c
2 π⋅ Re⋅⋅
c2
Me
NEgP
αEeg 2 π⋅ Re( )
c2
MeNEgREEeg 2 π⋅ Re( )
c2
8
NEgRE r( )Me c
2⋅
Eeg 2 π⋅ r⋅( )
NEgRE NEgRE Re( ) 5.255 1043×
NEgRE Re( ) 5.255 1043×=
NEgRE Rre( ) 1.336 1042×=
FSC (=1/α) can be interpreted as the ratio between NEgRE and NEgP and logically expresses the
probability(~1/137) of a resting electron to emit a photon as a function of the linear/circular sub-eggs
number ratio between the photon and the electron (at rest) (see Table 7-B). Quantum G constant can be
interpreted as a consequence of heg quantization of egs and can be express as a scalar function of the heg
constant: by speculative induction I may conjecture that all physical constants may emerge from the
quantization of 4D-ST and all its component gauge-bosons and non-gauge-bosons particles (as Ke is a
consequence-function of h and quantum G is a consequence-function of heg).
We can also observe that in contrast with NEP (which is constant, no matter the λ of the photon),
the number of egs in a moving elecron (NEgME) can be generalized as a function of speed of the electron
(which is the result of transfering X suplimentary egs to the resting electron, egs that bring kinetic energy
to that electron). So NEgME is the sum: number of egs in the resting electron (NEgRE) + number of egs
transfered to the resting electron (NEgTRE) as kinetic energy (Me·v2/Eeg(any υ)). α can so be generalized
as a function of NEgTRE (with a constant term NEgRE and a constant factor NEgP) (see Table 7-B)
The eg would be NOT just the „cell” of any photon/lepton/quark/gauge-boson, but also „the brick” of
4D-ST itself (the unity between the “scene and the actor” that Einstein quoted as “beyond he wildest
imagining”).
As all the 4D-ST vacuum is also granulated/pixilated (similar to a “sponge” made of egs / eg-based
quantum “foam”), it is possible that all the quantum subatomic particles-“actors” in the 4D-ST to ALSO
have an eg-based inner structure (that explains the rest mass of any non-gauge-boson particle): that
might imply that all the 4 fundamental forces (or 5 if we consider a 5th
force that stabilizes all the inner
structure of the quantum particles considered fundamental and irreducible as quarks and leptons) are
eg-based and are all 4 (or 5) different subtypes of gravity at various scale of space and energy.
Table 7-B. α as function of NEgP and NEgME(v,λ,r)
NEgP 8 π⋅( )α
3
22
α⋅ (KEG) NEgTRE v λ, ( )
Me v2
⋅
Eeg λ( )
NEgRE 8 π⋅( ) α
1
2⋅ 2
α⋅
NEgME v λ, ( ) NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+
NEgME v λ, r, ( ) NEgRE r( )NEgRE Re( )
NEgRE r( )⋅ NEgTRE v λ, ( )+:=
α v λ, ( ) α NEgME v λ, ( )( )NEgP
NEgME v λ, ( )
NEgP
NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+
αf v λ, r, ( ) αf NEgME v λ, r, ( )( )NEgP
NEgME v λ, r, ( )
NEgP
NEgRE r( )NEgRE Re( )
NEgRE r( )⋅ NEgTRE v λ, ( )+
9
α 0 λ, ( )NEgP
NEgRE137.036
αf 0 λ, r, ( )NEgP
NEgRE r( )NEgRE Re( )
NEgRE r( )⋅
NEgP
NEgRE Re( )
NEgP
NEgREα 0 λ, ( ) 137.036
IDUM conjectures that Rre is the smallest possible rotation ray (bending ray) of an eg (and that
the difference between the electrons(generally leptons) and neutrinos stands in the number of the
subcomponent egs, not on a great difference in rays; as the eg is defined as a pack of co-phase gravitons,
Rre is just an inferior limitation rotation ray of the eg, not of the graviton which is a much smaller
energy quanta that can have a much smaller bending ray than an eg, possible close to a Planck length):
based on this conjecture IDUM predicts that what is called “dark matter and energy” maybe the energy
of 3D-ST vacuum itself20
. IDUM also conjectures that the each “pixel” of the measured 3D-ST is
composed of torus-like single-circular-egs “bricks”/”pixels” that create that 3D-ST (as the eg is the
“pixel”/”cell” of ST vacuum). IDUM also conjectures that each single torus-like pixel is linked with all
adjacent pixels with other torus-like perpendicular pixels in a chain-like 3D web (but with probably
under 10% of their energy [perpendicular to our observable 3D-ST] measurable in our 3D-ST). IDUM
calculates the energy of the total universe (Etu) (3D-ST-energy/mass+”white” particles + ”white” energy)
as a function of the number of egs per ray of the observable universe (NEgRou=1.1·Rou/Rre) and of the
energy of a single circular eg with Rre as ray of rotation (Eeg(2·π·Rre)) (see the next table). IDUM
conjectures the 4th
ST dimension as “hidden” in each apparent “point” of the 3D-ST, as each apparent
point/pixel is in fact a circle/ellipse (a single circular eg): no matter the eg moves on the surface of a
sphere or a 4D hyper-sphere, the energy of this point(ST “pixel”)/circle remains the same -- Eeg(λ).
IDUM predicts in this way that the “white” energy of the universe (Ewu~3.8·1072
) is about 4.5% of the
energy of the total universe (Ewu+Edu), which is close to the 4.9% white matter and energy percent
approximation in the present. With this idea, IDUM explains why the speed of light in vacuum (c)
appears to be the maximum possible speed in the universe: c is in fact the fixed circular maximum speed
of single egs in the “pixels” of the universe and it appears logically that a heavier (than one universe
“pixel”) quantum particle cannot surpass that inner speed of a pixel, as the effect would be similar to a
“c-sonic bang” in which the quantum particle would be blocked in its movement by the single-eg-pixels
speed (similar to the sonic bang generated by supersonic planes). This single-eg-pixel inner speed may
also explain the tendency that a body gains mass exponentially when approaching the c-limit speed (as
the single-eg-pixels simply “condense” on that moving quantum particle and generates an enormous
moving mass that tends to infinity and opposes to higher-than-c speed movement). In IDUM, c is in fact
an indirect measure of the Rre-ST granulation: as the photons can move saltatory, from pixel-to-pixel
(somehow like the bioelectric current in a neuronal axon with Ranvier nodes), the larger the pixel, the
larger the speed (as the number of steps needed to reach for an initial point in ST to a final point in ST is
less). IDUM also considers c as an indirect measure of υc=c/Rre, which is the highest possible frequency
of a single-eg-pixel of ST: in fact υc is the frequency of the most rapid timer/clock of the universe (the
time in which a single eg completes a 2π rotation cycle with Rre as ray of rotation; that why c). As the
single-eg-pixels of ST have intensely high-frequency interconnections with each other ST appears
continuous: however the vacuum tends to generate (even for just short time intervals) only relatively
20
See also abstract no. 18 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2010abstracts.pdf
10
(un)stable (virtual) quantum particle-anti-particle pairs (the other highly unstable particle remaining
undetectable as they “die” almost in the same time they are “born”, similarly to the evolutionary-
intermediate organisms that are considered highly unstable by the evolutionism and that explains the
rarity of this type of organisms today)
Table 7-C. IDUM predicts the nature of the dark-energy and dark matter as the energy of ST
itself. IDUM also predicts the approximate percent of „white” matter and energy of the total
estimated energy of the universe (~5%)
Mp
Me
Rp
Rre
3
RreRp
Mp
Me
1
3
Rre
Re2.543 %=
Re
Rre39.324=
νcc
Rre4.184 10
24× Hz⋅
Rre
lP4.434 10
18×=
log2Rre
lP
α0.452=
NEgRou 1.1Rou
Rre:=
Eeg 2 π⋅ Rre( ) 6.126 1056− J⋅=
Edu4
3π⋅ NEgRou
3⋅ Eeg 2π Rre⋅( )⋅
Edu 7.953 1073× J= ( Ewu 3.769 10
72× J= )
Etu Edu Ewu+
Ewu
Etu4.525 %⋅=
Starting from the conjecture that ST is “pixilated” in single-eg-rotating-micro-spheres with Rre as
ray of rotation and that ST permits as eg-rotation-rays only multiple integers of this Rre, we can deduce
than there may be at least 40 types of electrons (with the same rest mass Me), as combinations of different
NEgRE(r) (from NEgRE(Rre)=1.336*1042
to NEgRE(Re)=5.255*1043
), r (with r multiple integer of Rre in
the interval [Rre, Re]). This electron diversity explains (at least partially) the need of the theory of probability
to predict an electron behavior (and also any other quantum particle behavior).
As the gravitational force acts on any physical mass directly proportional to that mass (no matter if that
mass is at rest or it is the result of additional inside movement kinetic energy like in the case of the hadrons like
proton/neutron in which almost 99% of the “resting” hadron mass is due to the kinetic energy of the gluons
interchanged between the internal quarks), it is reasonable to consider that quantum G is in fact a function of
energy (the total energy of the particle) not of a resting mass: and that energy squeezes/”presses”/”stresses”
the local ST like a sponge generating higher energy eg emissions (greater heg by modifying h and α, or
shorter eg wavelength, BUT at the same frequency of emission) from that particle (but also from the ST
matrix of that particle inner and surroundings) and also creating a pit trap for the egs emitted from
other sources towards that mass/energy squeeze location and its surroundings. By “stressing” vacuum,
11
gravity can also constantly cause (apparently) “spontaneous” generation of virtual particle-antiparticle
pairs (the Casimir effect). In this way, IDUM offers a unified view of general relativity and quantum
gravity (in which gravity is mediated both by ST squeezes and ALSO by egs emitted/received by that ST
local squeeze). Another possible interpretation is that ST vacuum may be a huge quantum deposit of
virtual egs with all the spectrum of wavelengths and energies that ST can heavily emit (as an instant
reaction) if it is excited with any non-zero energy of any particle in that ST (in the context of dark energy
and dark matter than can have an eg structure, this last interpretation is considered much more
plausible in IDUM as “white” quantum particles behave more like ships on a huge ocean, “ships” that
have a very small capacity to deform ST in which they lay and “ships” that also may be absorbed by
large strong ST vortexes like the black-holes).
IDUM considers both quantum and relativistic views are compatible to each other with a remark:
the 4D-ST is similar to a quantum “sponge” which, if it is deformed, it would also generate higher energy
egs. IDUM doesn’t exclude an universe with more than 4 dimensions, like a 5D-ST as the equation of G
suggests it: in this case IDUM conjectures that time is 2D membrane with a 2nd time vector
perpendicular to the physical time in which all the particle are interconnected instantly (resolving the
Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paradox and giving an elegant explanation to quantum entanglement). IDUM
treats time as a (“very persistent”[Einstein]) illusion created by the living bodies and their extensions
(measuring devices) (as any measurement of a system produces more entropy in the local universe
generating the sense of the physical time from a lower-entropy past to a higher-entropy future) (the
oriental religions/philosophies view): if man would build his science only using just experiments in the
“time” of dreams (in which mind is partially freed from the physical senses input), the “science” would
surely be very different.
G is a direct proportionality function of a single eg energy (similar/analogous to Ke being a
directly proportional function of a single photon energy). As c and Me (rest mass) are fixed constants,
IDUM supposes that heg is a function of α and may vary directly proportional to ST level of “squeezing”,
that’s why G is essentially a function of a variable heg, and G may vary directly proportional with heg
(using Kg=c/Me2 as a proportionality constant) (see Table 7-C). IDUM conjectures a G series based on a
heg series, both functions of (eg-based) ST level of “compression”.
In contrast with a resting electron which is composed from only circular egs, a moving electron could
contain a mixture of circular si linear egs (a photon-resting-electron hybrid/transition state) and that
may the explanation why it is more probable that a moving electron (which has more egs, some of which
may be „already” the linear egs needed for a photon to form) to emit a photon than a resting low-kinetic-
energy electron. There is a simplified quantum G sclar in the case of 2 electrons/positron at rest. We can
also deduce a generalization of the quantum G sclar in case of 2 electrons in 2 different kinetic-energy
states different from the resting state (as a superposition of 2 „ping-pong” egs) that may emit egs with
lower energies/heg (variable) constants than the egs emitted by a resting electron (heg1<heg and
heg2<heg, as the moving electron has a negative mass „defect”, in contrast to the nucleons from the
multiple nucleons nucleus [see also Part 2]). This quantum G sclar formula may predict the gravitational
force between to isolated electrons in any energetic state, at any distance/scale (including atomic scale: as
it is practically quasi-impossible21
to measure G at atomic scales, as G was tested in the lab only from
distances ranging from 1 cm to a couple of meters).
21
For a possible exception see also 2nd
prize abstract from
www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf
12
Table 7-D. Quantum G as a function of a-single-eg energy (essentially a function of heg at
constant frequency of eg emission)
G 2 heg⋅c
Me2
⋅ 6.648 1011−×
m3
kg s2
⋅99.613 % GCODATA_2012⋅
G 2 heg⋅c
Me2
⋅ 2 heg⋅c
5
Me c2
⋅( )2⋅ 2 heg⋅
c5
Et Me( )2
⋅
G Me 1 Me 2, ( ) heg c5
⋅1
Et Me 1( )2
1
Et Me2( )2
+
⋅
`
G2 λ⋅
Me2
hegc
λ⋅
⋅2 λ⋅
Me2
Eeg λ( )⋅
Keλ
Qe2
2 π⋅ α⋅( )⋅h
c
λ⋅
⋅λ
Qe2
2 π⋅ α⋅( )⋅Ef λ( )⋅
Kgc
Me2
G2
Me2
heg c⋅( )⋅2c
Me2
heg⋅ 2Kg heg⋅
G Kg heg1⋅ Kg heg2⋅+ Kg heg1 heg2+( )⋅
Photons and electrons may permanently emit (pulsated emission) egs with no sign of observable
“tiring” at standard time intervals we can measure, as the photon and electron have a potential energy
much larger than the maximum energy of a possible emitted eg. A photon can emit only egs at and with the
same or lower frequencies than their global frequency (phνmax=c/λmin, with λmin comparable to 2·Re). An
electron can emit only egs at and with the same or lower frequencies than their global frequency (which is the
inverse of the classical electric circumference of the electron: eνmax=c/(2π·Re)). Supposing that they would emit
ONLY one single eg at a time at their maximum frequencies22
(phνmax and eνmax) (in different directions
decided by the electron spin that sweeps the 4D-ST) the time needed to completely dissipate their total energy
into egs would be much more larger (with ~5, respectively ~3 orders of magnitude) that the age of the
observable universe (Aou) of about 13.7·109 years.
Table 7-E. Electrons and photons permanently emit egs (pulsated emission) with a superior
limit of frequency given in this table below. It may took more that 103 to 10
5Aou (age of the
present observed universe) for an electron or photon to completely „vanish” by this pulsated
emission of egs.
phνMax 5.319 1022×
1
s=
NEgP
Aou phνMax⋅3.11 10
5×=
eνMax 1.693 1022×
1
s=
NEgRE
Aou eνMax⋅( )7.129 10
3×=
Given all the anterior facts and to avoid tautology we can suppose that NOT α[=α(0,λ)], but
2α[=α(0,λ)]
(~1.8*1041
) is a „more” fundamental constant of the universe as it can be a natural integer
22
See also abstract no.12 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf
13
(because α, NEgP, NEgRE, heg, quantum G and Ke can be derived from 2α) . Another striking
coincidence is that 2α is very close to the square root of the (mass-deduced) total number of the hydrogen
atoms in the universe (total number of protons and neutrons, as the electrons have a small percentage
contribution to the total „white” mass/energy of the universe) (a rough estimation if all the mass of the
observable universe would be composed of only hydrigen atoms) (Eddington number): this would be an
unexpected „secret” link between TH (DAH) and „old” and apparently obsolete Eddington universe
model (with an obvious holographic/fractal accent in which the total number of particles in the universe
is strongly related to the individual characteristic of each particle by a somehow default undiscoverd
physicial law of the universe which I’ll try to demonstrate in IDUM). It would be more trustful to
consider that α constant (with its very high precision measurement) would be an indirect unexpectedly
IMPORTANT measure of the EXACT Eddington number and NOT viceversa: in the context that
„white” matter-energy in the universe is roughly a 2D „dust” (|”compressible” in a 2D disk of spaced
particles) in a 3D volume (and represents) (~5% of the estimated universe total mass). 2α may be
considered the number of hypothetic hydrogen atoms per any diameter of the 2D „white” matter 2D
compressed plane „disk” (NHAD). In the next table it is important to notice that NEgP and NegRE (and
all the derived constants) are a special kind of linearithmic form with an greater than 1 exponent of the
log(N).
As a checkpoint conclusion, it is very probable that the real number of hydrogen atoms in the
universe (RNHAU) (measured indirectly and intuitively using α) is the „most fundamental” constant of
all until this stage of discussion.
Table 8. The „inverse deduction” of the „classical” physical constants from h, Me and
RNHAU (hydrogen atoms hypothetically organized in a 2D disc with 2α atoms per any
diameter): checkpoint review
RNHAU π2
α
2
2
⋅ 2.506 1082×
NHAD 2RNHAU
π⋅ 2
α1.786 10
41×
α 0 λ, ( ) α log2 NHAD( ) 137.036
NEgP 8 π⋅( ) log2 NHAD( )
3
2⋅ NHAD⋅ 8 π⋅( ) α
3
2⋅ 2
α⋅ 7.202 1045×
NEgRE 8 π⋅( ) log2 NHAD( )
1
2⋅ NHAD⋅ 8 π⋅( ) α
1
2⋅ 2
α⋅ 5.255 1043×
hegh
NEgP
Eeg λ( ) hegc
λheg ν⋅
NEgTRE v λ, ( )Me v
2⋅
Eeg λ( )
NEgME v λ, ( ) NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+
α v λ, ( ) α NEgME v λ, ( )( )NEgP
NEgME v λ, ( )
NEgP
NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+
14
G 2hegc
Me2
⋅ Kgc
Me2
G2
Me2
heg c⋅( )⋅2c
Me2
heg⋅ 2Kg heg⋅
G Kg heg1⋅ Kg heg2⋅+ Kg heg1 heg2+( )⋅
Keh
2 π⋅( ) α⋅
c
Qe2
⋅hr
α
c
Qe2
⋅
DAH and all the BL-TH variants (but also the original NL-TH) have an obviously quite strong
similarity to the theory of information: as the binary logarithm is usually used to measure the quantity of
information in a system of N possible states as log2(N). The physical universe may be considered a very
large (but not infinitely large) 4D space-time (4D-ST) matrix computer in which all non-gauge-bosons-
quantum-particles are parallel processors (with intrinsic information organized as code lines that
implement all the laws of the universe generating reaction to any kind of action to that quantum particle)
that permanently (but pulsated, NOT continuous) interchange small packs of information (location and
momentum) (LMIPs=location-momentum information packs). Like any other kind of information, any
LMIP can be measured in (physical) bits. IDUM views particle movement/colliding as LMIP interchange
(similar to bytes transfer protocol between computers: TCP [transmission control protocol])23
.
To differentiate the physical bit from the binary bit, I shall abbreviate the physical bit (p-(b)it) as “pit”
(pit=kpit·bit) (with kpit being a real number for the number of bits that the universe needs to store location and
momentum information: LMIPs bits that mediate repulsive forces may be measured by negative kpit and
LMIPs bits that mediate attractive forces may be measured by positive kpit).
Each type of gauge-boson and its anti-particle may be considered small LMIPs that non-gauge-
bosons quantum particles can interchange with each other (4D-ST pulsated interchange). In this view,
energy and matter are NOT fundamental, but they are just the result of measuring the LMIPs interchange
between the observer and the physical system and between system components, interchange that is observed
and measured in a well definite time interval (∆t=t2-t1). LMIPs is truly fundamental in this model, and
energy becomes just a “measure unit” for the number of LMIPS interchanged between the particles of
an observed physical system per unit of time, and also between that physical system and the observer
(including his measuring tools). What we perceive physically as the “energy of an observed system” (and/or
through measuring tools which are body extensions) is the result of the capacity of the observed system to
transfer LMIPs to the observer or the capacity of the observed system’s subcomponent to interchange LMIPs
per unit of (subjective and/or objective) time.
LMI is intrinsically a function of time by definition: LMI is strictly related to the time interval
(∆t=t2-t1=multiple integer of Plank time/interval= N∆t ·tP, with N∆t as positive integer: N∆t= ∆t/tP).
In this informational view, Einstein’s equivalence principle E=m·c2 becomes a consequence of the
more general and profound information (LMI) conservation law (the “0 principle of thermodynamics” as
Susskind names it when explaining black-holes: ”bits are indestructible”) and must be formulated
strictly related to time by definition: E·∆t =(m· ∆t)·c2���� IE(∆t) =Im·c2(∆t)
The LMI contained in a single λ-eg can be measured as a function of Eeg(λ): IEg(λ,∆t)= Eeg(λ)·∆t
(where ∆t=t2-t1=N∆t ·tP is a specific time interval in which the eg is measured: for example the interval
23
See also: Alagoz, B. Baykant. Open Universe Modeling: Information Layer and Time Dilation
(arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1010/1010.2365.pdf); On gravitons as information carriers see also abstract no. 7 from
www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf;
15
between the emission of the eg from a non-gauge-boson quantum particle and the absorption of that eg
by another such quantum particle): IEg(λ,∆t)= Eeg(λ)· ∆t= Eeg(λ)· N∆t ·tP.
Table 9-A. IDUM: the physical information (LMI) definition.
∆t t2 t1− N tP tP⋅
E Joules( )I Physical_information pits( )( )
∆t time s( )( )
I pit( ) E joule( ) ∆t s( )⋅
I E ∆t, ( ) E ∆t⋅ E N tP⋅ tP⋅
Information Energy Time⋅ 1pit 1joule( ) 1s( )⋅
pit joule s⋅ kpit bit⋅
Total_I ∆t( ) intrinsec_I ∆t( ) received_I ∆t( )+ emitted_I ∆t( )−
Total_I ∆t( ) intrinsec_I ∆t( ) input_I ∆t( )+ output_I ∆t( )−
E ∆t⋅ m c2
⋅( ) ∆t⋅
I E ∆t, ( ) I m c2
⋅ ∆t, ( ) IE ∆t( ) I
m c2
⋅∆t( ) IE I
m c2
⋅
Ieg λ ∆t, ( ) Eeg λ( ) ∆t⋅ Eeg λ( ) N∆t⋅ tP⋅
h and heg constants are measurable in pits (as they are measured in joule·seconds) and have a
profound informational meaning in IDUM, as they can be interpreted as part of an apparently specific
quantized informational transfer protocol of the universe. As h and heg have very small numerical values
compared to 1 pit, it’s useful to imagine (similar to the complex imaginary number i) a binary
logarithmic subunit (apparently atypical and a physical “non-sense”, as i factor is for the complex
number):log2(pit)=lit(lpit) <=>pit=2lit
. The fact that when measured in lits, h and heg have numerical
values close to adimensional α is an indirect argument for the possible non-coincidental truth of DAH.
Based on the physical information definition above, we can estimate the total “white” information
of the (observable directly and indirectly) universe (Iwu) from the total white energy of the universe
(Ewu) (deducted from the total “white” mass of the universe [Mu(Mwu)] and the speed of light [c]) and
the estimated age of the observable universe [Aou] (considered in doubled-temporal-sense as all the
quantum charged anti-particles can be viewed as moving inversely, from the future to the past as
Richard Feynman did in his famous diagrams describing the behavior of subatomic particles, “stealing”
Wheeler’s idea from the one-electron universe hypothesis as he recognized it with humor and no
animosity from Wheeler’s part): Iwu=Ewu·(2·Aou)=(Mu·c2)·(2·Aou)=[RNHAU·(Mp+Me)·c
2]·(2·Aou) (see
both previous and next table).
The total information of the 4D-ST universe (Itu) is the sum between the “white” information
(Iwu) and “dark” information (the physical information stored in the measurable 3D-ST vacuum) (Idu=
Etu·(2·Aou)): Itu=Iwu+Idu.
What we measure/name as “the total [white] energy of the universe” can be just the consequence
of a large informational input (Itu) absorbed by the 0/1D vacuum (a possible “slice”/brane of an N-
dimensional universe as in M-theory) at the Big-Bang “moment”: all the universe can be seen as large
informational input fluctuation of that initial 0/1D vacuum.
16
Table 9-B. IDUM: h, heg and Iwu, Idu and Itu measurement using physical bits (pits)
h 6.62606957 1034−⋅ pit 2
110.217−2
lit⋅ 2110.217− lit+
110.217− lit
heg1
1.087 1079×
pit 2262.553−
2lit⋅ 262.553− lit 2 131.276−( )⋅ lit⋅
Iwu Eu 2 Aou⋅( )⋅ Mu c2
⋅( ) 2 Aou⋅( )⋅ RNHAU Mp Me+( )⋅ c2
⋅ 2 Aou⋅( )⋅
Iwu 3.282 1090× pit 300.688 lit 2.194 137.036( )⋅ lit⋅
Idu Edu 2 Aou⋅( )⋅
Idu 6.925 1091× pit 305.087 lit⋅ 2.226 α⋅ lit⋅
Itu Idu Iwu+
Itu 7.254 1091× pit⋅ 305.154 lit⋅
Idu
Itu95.475 %=
Iwu
Itu4.525 %=
As IDUM treats h/heg and other information quantities as central and fundamental (as a form of
theoretical unification), many physical quantities with no apparent meaning in SI (such as the square root of
mass/force/energy as in the gravity and Coulomb universal laws, Koide coincidence etc.) have a precise
meaning in IDUM measuring system.
In the table below, IDUM defines mass as an informational flow (number of LMIPs measured in a
specific time interval) per unit of area. In IDUM, the rest mass of any quantum particle isn’t explained just by
the subcomponent circular moving egs (that also generates spin), but IDUM predicts that all the subcomponent
egs of one particle come from the con-focal LMIP “radiation” of all the other quantum particles in the universe
in a no-time 3D-framed 4D-ST universe: that’s why IDUM considers as legitimate (and NOT obsolete as the
majority of mainstream physicist now consider) the Eddington’s intuition on a very strong relationship between
one specific quantum particle and all the other particles in the universe (which is a both fractal and holographic
principle: “the whole is present in all its parts and vice versa”).
17
Table 9-C. IDUM system of info-energy-mass measure units. LMIPs transfer has a specific direction
and sense in a specific moment in time that’s why (physical) information quantity and all its derived
physical quantities (including energy, force, mass) are considered essentially vectors in IDUM: the fact
that LMI is a vector explains why force is also a vector, but IDUM imposes that all the SI scalar-
considered physical quantities (such as energy and mass) are also vectors in essence (as LMIPs are
proprieties of the 4D-ST vacuum itself)
(Physical) Information (LMI)
quantity (I) (the spin of
elementary particles / the classical
angular momentum)
I E ∆t⋅ pit 2lit J s⋅( )
(the same measure unit as the spin of elementary particles / the
classical angular momentum)
Information flow (IF) IF I ∆t⋅ E ∆t2
⋅ pit s⋅ 2lit s⋅ J s
2⋅( )
Energy (LMI interchange/transfer
speed) E
I
∆t
pit
s
2lit
sJ
(Physical) Power (the variation of
LMI transfer-speed with time;
LMI transfer acceleration)
PE
∆t
I
∆t
∆t
I
∆t2
pit
s
s
pit
s2
2lit
s2
W
Force (the LMI transfer per unit
of distance [linear or circular
distance usually perpendicular on
the direction of LMI transfer] per
unit of time)
FE
distance d( )
I
∆t
d
I
d
∆t
I
d ∆t⋅
pit
s
m
pit
m
s
pit
m s⋅
2lit
m s⋅N
Square root of force (0.5D Cantor-
fractal sampled LMI [1 of the 2
LMIP pair of the force field]
distributed per 0.5D Cantor-
fractal sampled time and space)
(0.5D Cantor-fractal pulsated
force/LMI transfer)
FE
0.5
distance d( )0.5
I0.5
∆t0.5
d0.5
I0.5
d0.5
∆t0.5
I0.5
d0.5
∆t0.5
⋅
pit0.5
s0.5
m0.5
pit0.5
m0.5
s0.5
pit0.5
m0.5
s0.5
⋅
2
lit
2
m0.5
s0.5
⋅N
0.5
Mass (information flow [LMI
transfer flow] per unit of area [an
area usually perpendicular to the
direction of LMI transfer])
MF
acceleration a( )
E
distance d( )
distance d( )
∆t2
I
∆t
d2
∆t2
I ∆t⋅
d2
IF
d2
18
N
m
s2
pit
m s⋅
m
s2
pit s2
⋅
m2
s⋅
pit s⋅
m2
kg
The rest mass of the electron can be understood as the informational flow (measured by number of egs in a minimal full rotation
interval of time 2 π⋅ Re⋅
c1.096 10
21× tP⋅ ) per unit of circular section area (supposing that the electron is a 4D
torus/hyper-sphere in which all the co-phase sub-egs circulary move through a section area, and this informational flow movement
generates the rest mass, the spin and the charge of the electron).
Square root of mass (0.5D Cantor-
fractal sampled LMI flow [1 of the
2 LMIP pair of the mass field in a
0.5D Cantor-fractal sampled time
interval] distributed per unit of
distance/length [a linear/circular
distance usually perpendicular to
the direction of LMI transfer])
(0.5D Cantor-fractal pulsated LMI
flow)
MIF
d2
IF0.5
d
kgpit
0.5s
0.5⋅
m
Square of mass (informational 2D
“super”-flow per unit of 4D hyper
volume)
M2 IF
2
d4
pit2
s2
⋅
m4
pit s⋅( )2
m4
kg2
Momentum (classical)
(informational quantity
transferred per unit of
distance/length [a linear/circular
distance usually perpendicular to
the direction of LMI transfer])
p m v⋅IF
d2
d
∆t⋅
IF
d ∆t⋅
I
d
kgm
s⋅
pit s⋅
m2
m
s⋅
pit
m
IDUM proposes Iwu as the single real fundamental parameter (physical “constant”) of the white
universe with Mu (Mwu), c and Aou as 3 “faces”(inverse proportional to each other) of the same essential
informational entity (Iwu=[Mwu·c2]·Aou=Ewu·Aou) that can be measured (at least theoretically) in any
N-ST frame (with N being any positive real number of dimensions). Iwu has the potential of predict
Ewu·Aou binomial, Mwu(RNHAU)·c2 binomial, h, Me (the initial parameters considered in Table 8,
from which all other physical constants were deduced). h, heg, W/Z boson masses are LMIP constants that
may be deduced from Iwu in a quite unexpected way.
h can be deduced from another striking DAH-like (apparent) coincidence: log2(Iwu/h)/α~3���� h~
Iwu/NHAD3~Iwu/(2
α)3 (with a very low probability to exist just by pure hazard). From this “unexpected”
19
relationship (which is related with TH and DAH) we can conclude that it is very possible that h measurement is
in fact the result of the total Iwu measurement in a 3D-ST frame (the fractal principle that is a component of
many models of fractal universes: “the whole is in each of the parts”). Based on this striking coincidence, we
can calculate a h-corrected Iwu so that log2(Iwuc/h)/α=3���� Iwuc=h·NHAD3= h· (2
α)3. Based on Iuc, both
Ewu and/or Aou can be “corrected” in correlation with Iwuc. As Aou typically varies by definition (the
time scale of the universe), it may be more inspired to calculate a corrected Aou (Aouc) based on Iuc.
Aouc>Aou doesn’t necessary mean that Aou is inexact: Aouc may have a more profound meaning as it
may be interpreted as half duration of an universe expansion-contraction full cycle (as if the known
universe may have a negative accelerated expansion until the Aouc point and then enters in a contraction
half-cycle24
). IDUM predicts a periodic expansion-contraction(e-c) cycle of the physical universe
behavior, with 2*Aouc for a full e-c cycle. Based on Aouc, IDUM also estimates Iwuc and Iduc as the
corrected white and dark information of the universe.
Table 10-A. IDUM predicts Iuc, Aouc and h (as a function of Iuc).
log2Iwu
h
α2.999=
hIwu
NHAD3
Iwu
NHAD3
h86.912 %=
Iwuc h 23 α⋅⋅ 115.058 % Iwu⋅
Aouc
Iwuc
Ewu
215.885 10
9⋅ years 115.058 % Aou⋅
Iduc Edu 2 Aouc⋅( )⋅ 7.968 1091× pits⋅
Iwuc Ewu 2 Aouc⋅( )⋅ 3.777 1090× pits⋅
Ituc Iduc Iwuc+ Edu Ewu+( ) 2 Aouc⋅( )⋅ 8.346 1091× pits⋅
Iwuc
Ituc4.525 %=
When analyzing the quantity of information carried by a single W/Z boson (Ibwz=Mwz·c2·Tbwz)
as function of W/Z boson mass (Mwz) and W/Z boson mean half-life25
(Tbwz ~ 3·10-25
s ~ 5.565*1018·tP ~
2 α/2
·tP), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence log2[Iwu/(Mwz·c2·Tbwz)]/α~3 ���� Ibwz~ Iwu/NHAD
3
~ Iwu/(2α)3 which supports the (already proved) theory that the weak nuclear force and the electromagnetic
force are 2 “faces” of the electroweak force .
Table 10-B. IDUM (retroactively) predicts the unity between electromagnetic and weak
nuclear forces as part of the same ~3D-frame.
log2Iu
Mbz c2
⋅ Tbz⋅( )
α2.99=
log2Iu
Mbw c2
⋅ Tbw⋅( )
α2.992=
24
See also abstract no. 17 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf; See also abstract no. 24
from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2006abstracts.pdf; See also abstract no. 4 from
www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf; 25
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W_and_Z_bosons
20
log2Iuc
Mbw c2
⋅ Tbw⋅( )
α2.993=
log2Iuc
Mbz c2
⋅ Tbz⋅( )
α2.992=
In the case of the gauge bosons other than the photon and the (electro)graviton, there are 2 types
of information associated to those quantum particles: 1) the intrinsic information (Iin) that can be
calculated from the total energy of the particle (m·c2) and the medium time interval in which that gauge-
particle is stable if it is isolated (at least theoretically) from all other particle in the universe for a
sufficient time interval to observe decay (Tin) and 2) the extrinsic information (Iex) that can be
calculated from the total energy of the particle (m·c2) and the (average) time interval in which that
gauge-particle can be normally observed between 2-consecutive-emission-absorption cycle (Tex) by 2
non-gauge-bosons quantum particles. It can also be observed that in the case of eg, photon and W/Z
bosons, Iin~Iex (as Td~Tex).
When analyzing the extrinsic information of a single gluon26
(Iex-gl=Mgl·c2·Tbwz) as function of
gluon mass (Mgl~0,<0.0002MeV/c2) and gluon very short emission-absorption cycle similar to W/Z boson
half-life (Tgl~Tbwz), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence log2[Iwu/(Mgl·c2·Tbwz)]/α~3 ���� (Mgl·c
2)
·Tgl ~ Iwu/NHAD3 ~ [Iwu/(2
α)3]. This coincidence offers IDUM the potential of offering at least a formal
logical unification between the electroweak force and the strong nuclear force as they both share 3D-
framed LMIPs (similar to Grand Unified Theories27
).
Table 10-C. IDUM predicts the unity between electroweak and strong nuclear forces as
part of the same ~3D-frame.
log2Iu
Mgl c2
⋅ Tbw⋅( )
α3.2=
log2Iu
Mgl c2
⋅ Tbz⋅( )
α3.2=
log2Iuc
Mgl c2
⋅ Tbw⋅( )
α3.202=
log2Iuc
Mgl c2
⋅ Tbz⋅( )
α3.202=
When analyzing heg information quantity from the same perspective, we get another similar DAH-
like coincidence log2(Iwuc/heg)/α~4 ���� heg~Iwuc/NHAD4~Iwu/(2
α)4 from which we can conclude that it is
very possible that heg measurement (even though it is just a theoretical plausible-but-indirect measurement) is
in fact same Iwu(Iuc) measurement in a 4D-ST info-frame variant. This coincidence offers IDUM the
potential of offering at least a formal logical unification between the electromagnetic force and gravity, as
any 3D-framed LMIP can be decomposed in a quantum gravity 4D-info-frame. The hugeness of Iwuc,
the 2 orders of magnitude of (the exponential index) α above 1 and the Iwuc-4D-framing of
(electro)gravity (in contrast to the Iwu 3D-framing of the other 3 forces) also explains the huge
exponential difference (over 39 decimal magnitude orders) in strength between gravity and the other 3
forces.
26
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon 27
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory
21
Table 10-D. IDUM predicts the unity between gravity and the other 3 fundamental
forces (3D-framed) as gravity is the ~4D-framed variant of the same total universe
information (Iwu, Iuc).
log2Iu
heg
α4.11=
log2Iuc
heg
α4.112=
h
heg7.202 10
45×=
Checkpoint conclusion: IDUM offers an Iwu(3D/4D) unified info-frame for all the 4 known
fundamental forces of nature (measured by heg, h, Iin/ex of W/Z bosons and Iex of gluons) (“theories of
everything”28
similarity). However, I shall try to demonstrate that IDUM also offers a potential
explanation of leptons, photons, gluons and quarks inner forces and structures.
As IDUM defines the eg as a (large) group of co-phase gravitons (in the same quantum state)
(which all may act as a unity), we can inductively proceed in reading Iwuc in a 5D frame using the same
algorithm: IDUM conjectures that the 5D frame is that of gravitons, the (~)1D “bricks” that build all the
5D-ST vacuum and also build the eg-based quantum particles (string theory similarity; Kaluza-Klein
theory29
similarity). Reading Iwuc in a 5D-α frame generates another (possible last) gravitonic Planck-
like constant named hgr by IDUM. Hgr is defined as hgr=Iwuc/NHAD5~Iwu/(2
α)5 ����log2(Iwuc/hgr)/α=5.
Based on the heg/hgr ratio, IDUM estimated that a single (circular/linear) eg (a physical byte) may
contain a huge number of ~1036
gravitons (physical bits) with the same wavelength (the granulation
factor of an eg analogous to the granulation factor NEgP of a photon). Based on this informational
constant (hgr) IDUM also defines the scalar of a single graviton with λ-wavelength as: Egr(λ)=hgr·c/
λ=hgr·υ. As Rre is considered a minimum bend-ray for a single circular eg, IDUM conjectures that lP is
the minimum bend-ray of a single circular graviton so that a single 4D-ST single eg pixel may
circumscribe ~1018
single graviton inner subpixels (all the ~1.5D quantum particles including electrons
and quarks may have an inner structure composed of at least 1018
graviton-strings) (see the next table).
The ~2D holographic character of a single eg 4D-ST pixel information is conserved when compared to a
single graviton 5D-ST subpixel information (see the next table). As a single eg is a ~2D entity in a 5D-ST,
a single graviton is a ~1D entity when Iwuc is read in a 5D-α frame (string theory similarity; see the next
table). IDUM conjectures that gravity and electromagnetism have similar scalars because they both are
graviton-based forces: photon is a pack of ~1045
co-phase egs which is analogous to an eg being a pack of
~1036
co-phase gravitons. IDUM conjectures that light bending is a consequence of the eg-based
granulation of the photon that changes gravitons with the ST eg-based matrix.30
. The gluon (~0eV), the
electron neutrino (~2eV)31
, the gravitino32
(~1eV as defined in supersymmetric models) may be graviton
based with rest energy defined as multiple of Egr(lP)=hgr·lP/c.
28
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything
29 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaluza%E2%80%93Klein_theory; See also abstract no. 4 (Bondărescu, Mihai) from
www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2005abstracts.pdf 30
See also abstract no. 28 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf 31
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino
32 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightest_Supersymmetric_Particle
22
Table 10-E. IDUM predicts a gravitonic Planck-like constant (the informational
constant of the graviton; the [physical] bit of the universe) by reading the same Iwuc in a
5D-α frame.
hgrIwuc
2α( )5
log2Iwuc
hgr
α5
hgr1
4.815 10115×
pit⋅ heg
hgr4.431 10
36×=
h
hgrNHAD
23.191 10
82×
Egr λ( ) hgrc
λ⋅ hgr υ⋅
Eeg Rre( )
Egr lP( )9.992 10
17×= Rre
lP4.434 10
18×=
log2heg
hgr
log2Rre
lP
1.965=
log2Eeg Rre( )
Egr lP( )
log2Rre
lP
0.965=
When analyzing the intrinsic information of a single gluon33
(Iin-gl=Mgl·c2·Tgl) as function of
gluon mass (Mgl~0,<0.0002MeV/c2) and the very large (mean) half-life of the gluon (as the gluon is as stable
as the electron and the proton) (Tgl~Te, Tgl~Tp or Tgl~Aou, with Te=electron half-life and Tp=proton
half-life), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence: log2[Iwu/(Mgl·c2·Te,Tp)]/α~2.
The electron, the proton (and the intra-nuclear neutron), the up and down quarks (that form the
nucleons together with gluons) also have 1.5-2D Iwu-framing (there are not just informational
arguments, but also mass and dimension argumentative strong DAH-like coincidences related to
log2(Mu/Me) and log2(Mu/Mp), but also between the ray of the observable universe [Rou] and the
classical electron ray [Re] and the approximate proton ray [Rp]): Mu~Mp·NHAD2~Mp·(2
α)2~-
Me·NHAD2~Me·(2
α)2; log2(Rou/Re)~α����Rou~ Re·NHAD~ Re·2
α;
log2(Rou/Rp)~α����Rou~Rp·NHAD~Rp·2α.
IDUM predicts and supports the 2D holographic universe theory by the DAH-like coincidence that
Mu/Mp~(Rou/Rp)2~NHAD
2~(2
α)2. IDUM predicts and supports that quark based quantum particles and
leptons are essentially ~2D branes (strong similarity with M-theory and subquantum theories34
generally,
especially to Bohm's subquantum potential35
concept). From this point of view, IDUM invokes a 5th
force
(similar to some preon/rishons theories) that assures the inner structure and stability of the 1.5-2D
subatomic particles mentioned above. This 5th
force may be a type of very strong gravity (VSG) which
may be active only on very short distances (close to Planck length): VSG is a good candidate for
explaining the internal forces and the 2D inner structure of the black-holes. VSG may also explain
Koide-like coincidences in which high symmetry can be reached at (just) apparently low energies (in fact
33
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon 34
www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/qm4.htm 35
arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0311244; www.metafysica.nl/holism/implicate_order_20.html
23
the inner forces and energy of the electron/quark may be very high on very small scales and may explain
the striking symmetries in the rest masses of the leptons/quarks [as the one illustrated by Koide
coincidence])
Table 11. IDUM predicts that the subatomic particles supposed to be „point-like” are
actually ~1.5D to 2D-ST framed and may have a 1.5D to 2D inner structure stabilized by
forces even stronger than the strong nuclear force (a possible very strong gravity: VSG).
log2Iu
Mgl c2
⋅ Te⋅( )
α1.766=
log2Iu
Mgl c2
⋅ Tp⋅( )
α1.709=
log2Iu
Me c2
⋅ Te( )
α1.683=
log2Mu
Me
α2.077=
log2Rou
Re
α0.999=
log2Mu
Me
log2Rou
Re
2.079=
log2Iu
Mp c2
⋅ Tp( )
α1.548=
log2Mu
Mp
α1.997=
log2Rou
Rp
α1.011=
log2Mu
Mp
log2Rou
Rp
1.976=
log2Iu
Mqu_med c2
⋅ Tp⋅( )
α1.611=
log2Iu
Mqd_med c2
⋅ Tp⋅( )
α1.603=
log2Rou
lP
α1.489=
Mu
Mp
Rou
Re
21.024=
In conclusion, LMIPs (measured by h, heg, W/Z boson intrinsic information and gluon intrinsic
and extrinsic information) may be the consequence of the the same Iwu (Iuc) and its “granularity” and
spreading/escape in different (3D/4D)-ST frames of measurement.
IDUM offers a simple elegant interpretation to all forces/fields as derived from a single parameter (Iwu,
Iuc). IDUM is compatible with a potential universal law of force variation inverse proportional to the square of
the distance (as distribution of the emitted LMIPs on the surface of a sphere with a ray equal to the distance
between any 2 particles in the universe). IDUM can be simulated on any computer, using software specialized
in parallel multiple particle manipulation. IDUM may generate interesting predictions that can be tested
experimentally: the quantum G series prediction is a good example (see Part 2).
24
Part 2
A heg series and quantum G series prediction for any atom,
based on the nuclear binding energy (the nuclear mass „defect”)
as a measure of ST level of contraction/”compression” at high nuclear internal „pressures”.
The number of egs emitted by a specific subatomic quantum particle is directly proportional to
the particle relativistic mass (rest mass+velocity/dynamic mass+/-mass „defect” if it’s the case). The number
of egs emitted by an atom is directly proportional to the sum of all masses/energies of the subatomic
particles (proton, neutron and electron). The protons total mass in an atom can be aproximated as a function
of the number of protons (NP) and also considering the mass „defect”/NBE of the protons in the atom nucleus
(see PTM [protons total mass] function in the next table). The neutrons total mass in an atom can be
aproximated as a function of the number of neutrons (NN) and also considering the mass „defect”/NBE of the
neutrons in the atom nucleus (see NTM[neutrons total mass] function in the next table). The electrons total
mass in a neutral (intact) atom can be aproximated as a function of the number of electrons (NE=NP) and also
considering the dynamic mass of the electrons in the atom’s electronic shell as a function of an average speed
(as) (see ETM[electrons total mass] function in the next table). The atom’s total mass (ATM) is the sum of
the 3 functions described before (NTM, PTM and ETM).
For simplicity, IDUM considers a plausible simple grade I function to describe the relationship
between NBE and the energy of a single emitted eg (Eeg=function(hegn); hegsn as directly proportional to
ST level of contraction which is also relative to the initial free masses of the proton and neutron at rest, which
differ slightly from one another). NBE measures the level of the strong nuclear force exerted on a nucleon in a
specific nucleus, and the ST contraction/compression is directly proportional to that level of force
(measured by NBE). The level of the ST compression in a particle can be measured supra-unitary by the
(inverse) ratio between a particle rest mass and the compressed particle mass (the rest mass minus mass defect):
see PCR (proton compression ratio), NCR (neutron compression ration) and ECR (electron compression
ratio) functions in the next table (ECR is sub-unitary as the electrons have negative mass defects generated
by their high relativistic average speed[as] in the atom).
In any atom, heg (and the single eg energy: Eeg(λ)) has a specific distorsion for any type of
subatomic particle from that atom as function of PCR, NCR and ECR: hegP (intranuclear proton
specific heg), hegN (intranuclear neutron specific heg) and hegE (atom’s electrons specific heg, moving
with an average speed [as]) (see the next table).
In fact, what it is measured as heg (by measuring G in different experiments) is the mass weighted
average between these 3 separate specfic hegs: HegP, hegN and hegE. That’s why IDUM considers a heg
series (named hegs) for all types of atoms in which each element (hegsn) is a a mass weighted avarage of
all 3 specific heg of each subatomic particle in each type of atom (hegP, hegN and hegE).
The G series (Gs) is a function of heg series (hegs): see Gs(NBE, NP, NN, as) function in the next
table. IDUM considers that the experimental G is the result of measuring the interchange of 2 simultanously
combined flows of egs (each characterized by a hegP, hegN and hegE weighted average combination) between
2 masses (characterized by 2 specific Gs for each mass: Gs1 and Gs2): see the general form of Gs(NBE, NP,
NN, as) function in the next table.
As it can be seen in the next table graphs, the theoretical Gs graph aproximates all the G results in the
past over 100 years of big G determination experiments (Gexp [violet marks]: in a chronological order
aproximating the rising accuracy of the devices used to determine G; Gexp2[light blue marks with connectig
lines]: in an ascending order aproximating the NBE curve used to determine G), as a superior limit to the
experimental G values suite. However, all the G results obtained on Earth are „contaminated” by the (already)
curved ST of the Sun and the Earth in which the experiments take place. IDUM can aproximate Sun’s and
25
Earth’s specific G based on their chemical composition. Because of the Sun predominance and its
abundance in hydrogen (a chemical element with a specific Gs smaller than CODATA2012 G) (see the next
table), the Sun’s specific quantum G is 99.613%·G. The Earth’s specific G is larger that CODATA2012 G
(100.497%·G) and can be calculated based on the abundance of the chemical elements in the Earth composed
mostly of iron (32.1%), oxygen (30.1%), silicon (15.1%) and magnesium (13.9%). When experiments are
conducted into space, exprimental G will tend to be smaller (due to the influence of the hydrogen based
quantum G of the Sun). When the experiments are conducted deep in the Earth’s layers (as one experiment that
took place in 1km deep mines) they tnd to generate a larger experimental G. IDUM predicts that the G
determination will depend on the altitude at which the experiment takes place, but also on the chemical
composition of that specific Earth region in which the experiment takes place.
IDUM has a prediction that is verifiable both retrospectively (by analizing the negative/positive
altitude, the chemical composition of that region and of all the materials used in past 100 years G
determination experiments) and in the future by using the same experimental device at different altitudes
and in different regions and using metal spheres of different atoms or single atoms of at least 2 types and
analyze the systematic differences36
between the experimental G as function of all these chemical and
physical variables. IDUM recommends Stephen Merkowitz’s method37
and atom inferometry38
. IDUM
also predicts that any change in the relative position between the Sun and the Earth in the interval of the
experiment can slightly influence the results (see the 1400ppm varation invoked in one experiment cited
below). IDUM can also explain the Mikhail Gershteyn’s (MIT) discovery: his team has successfully
experimentally demonstrated that the well known force of gravity between 2 test bodies varies with their
orientation in space, relative to a system of distant stars. Their remarkable finding has been also been
issued on the journal 'Gravitation and Cosmology'. George Spagna, a chairman of the physics dept at
Randolph-Macon College, argued that Mikhail and his colleagues must provide theoretical justification
to be convincing. IDUM proposes a plausible explanation to the apparent paradox of the divergent
variation of experimental G values („despite” constant improvements of the measurement systems) as
these measurement systems can now better differentiate between different chemical structures combined
G imprints and Sun-Earth-star systems configurations (in 1999, CODATA decided to officially increase
the uncertainty of the accepted value for G from 128 ppm to 1500 ppm).
IDUM approximates the entire information that can be stored in a potential 3D-ST vacuum and
also the inner (intrinsic/extrinsic) information of the particles in their existence, NOT just the
information stored in the states of the particles (the main difference between IDUM and the other
informational models of the universe: see the References).
36
See also abstract no. 25 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf 37
asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/Stephen.Merkowitz/G/Big_G.html 38
Schlamminger, Stephan (18 June 2014). "Fundamental constants: A cool way to measure big G". Nature.
adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014Natur.510..478S
26
Table 12-A. Hegs series (hegs) and quantum G series (Gs) for any atom
PTM NP NBE, ( ) NP MpNBE
c2
−
⋅ NTM NN NBE, ( ) NN MnNBE
c2
−
⋅
ETM NE as, ( ) NE MeMe as
2⋅
c2
+
⋅
ATM NP NN, NBE, as, ( ) PTM NP NBE, ( ) NTM NN NBE, ( )+ ETM NP as, ( )+
PCR NBE( )Mp
MpNBE
c2
−
:= NCR NBE( )Mn
MnNBE
c2
−
:= ECR as( )Me
MeMe as
2⋅
c2
+
:=
hegP heg PCR NBE( )⋅
hegN heg NCR NBE( )⋅
hegE heg ECR as( )⋅
hegs NP NN, NBE, as, ( ) hegPPTM NP NBE, ( )
ATM NP NN, NBE, as, ( )⋅ hegN
NTM NN NBE, ( )
ATM NP NN, NBE, as, ( )⋅+ hegE
ETM NP as, ( )
ATM NP NN, NBE, as, ( )⋅+
Kgc
Me2 ; Gs NP NN, NBE, as, ( ) 2Kg hegs NP NN, NBE, as, ( )⋅
Gs NBE NP, NN, as, ( ) Kg hegs1 NBE NP, NN, as, ( )⋅ Kg hegs2 NBE NP, NN, as, ( )⋅+
Gs NBE NP, NN, as, ( )Gs1 NBE NP, NN, as, ( ) Gs2 NBE NP, NN, as, ( )+
2
Figure 1. NBE variation with atomic mass
(upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Binding_energy_curve_-_common_isotopes.svg)
27
Figure 2. hegs as function of each atom’s specific NBE
0 20 40 60 800.998
1
1.002
1.004
1.006
1.008
1.01
The hegs/heg ratio variation for the main isotope of each chemical element
Z
hegs NP NN, NBE, as, ( )
heg
NP
Figure 3. Gs as function of hegs.
28
Table 12-B. G variation evidence from readings spanning over 200 years
(Source of the data and the comments: www.blazelabs.com/f-u-massvariation.asp)
Data Set
number Author Year G (x10
-11 m
3Kg
-1s
-2) Accuracy
% Deviation
from CODATA
1 Cavendish H. 1798 6.74 ±0.05 +0.986
2 Reich F. 1838 6.63 ±0.06 -0.662
3 Baily F. 1843 6.62 ±0.07 -0.812
4 Cornu A, Baille J. 1873 6.63 ±0.017 -0.662
5 Jolly Ph. 1878 6.46 ±0.11 -3.209
6 Wilsing J. 1889 6.594 ±0.015 -1.202
7 Poynting J.H. 1891 6.70 ±0.04 +0.387
8 Boys C.V. 1895 6.658 ±0.007 -0.243
9 Eotvos R. 1896 6.657 ±0.013 -0.258
10 Brayn C.A. 1897 6.658 ±0.007 -0.243
11 Richarz F. & Krigar-Menzel O. 1898 6.683 ±0.011 +0.132
12 Burgess G.K. 1902 6.64 ±0.04 -0.512
13 Heyl P.R. 1928 6.6721 ±0.0073 -0.031
14 Heyl P.R. 1930 6.670 ±0.005 -0.063
15 Zaradnicek J. 1933 6.66 ±0.04 -0.213
16 Heyl P.,Chrzanowski 1942 6.673 ±0.003 -0.018
17 Rose R.D. et al. 1969 6.674 ±0.004 -0.003
18 Facy L., Pontikis C. 1972 6.6714 ±0.0006 -0.042
19 Renner Ya. 1974 6.670 ±0.008 -0.063
20 Karagioz et al 1975 6.668 ±0.002 -0.093
21 Luther et al 1975 6.6699 ±0.0014 -0.064
22 Koldewyn W., Faller J. 1976 6.57 ±0.17 -1.561
23 Sagitov M.U. et al 1977 6.6745 ±0.0008 +0.004
24 Luther G., Towler W. 1982 6.6726 ±0.0005 -0.024
25 Karagioz et al 1985 6.6730 ±0.0005 -0.018
26 Dousse & Rheme 1986 6.6722 ±0.0051 -0.030
27 Boer H. et al 1987 6.667 ±0.0007 -0.108
29
28 Karagioz et al 1986 6.6730 ±0.0003 -0.018
29 Karagioz et al 1987 6.6730 ±0.0005 -0.018
30 Karagioz et al 1988 6.6728 ±0.0003 -0.021
31 Karagioz et al 1989 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019
32 Saulnier M.S., Frisch D. 1989 6.65 ±0.09 -0.363
33 Karagioz et al 1990 6.6730 ±0.00009 -0.018
34 Schurr et al 1991 6.6613 ±0.0093 -0.193
35 Hubler et al 1992 6.6737 ±0.0051 -0.008
36 Izmailov et al 1992 6.6771 ±0.0004 +0.043
37 Michaelis et al 1993 6.71540 ±0.00008 +0.617
38 Hubler et al 1993 6.6698 ±0.0013 -0.066
39 Karagioz et al 1993 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019
40 Walesch et al 1994 6.6719 ±0.0008 -0.035
41 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1994 6.6746 ±0.001 +0.006
42 Hubler et al 1994 6.6607 ±0.0032 -0.202
43 Hubler et al 1994 6.6779 ±0.0063 +0.055
44 Karagioz et al 1994 6.67285 ±0.00008 -0.020
45 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1995 6.6656 ±0.0009 -0.129
46 Karagioz et al 1995 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019
47 Walesch et al 1995 6.6685 ±0.0011 -0.085
48 Michaelis et al 1996 6.7154 ±0.0008 +0.617
49 Karagioz et al 1996 6.6729 ±0.0005 -0.019
50 Bagley & Luther 1997 6.6740 ±0.0007 -0.003
51 Schurr, Nolting et al 1997 6.6754 ±0.0014 +0.018
52 Luo et al 1997 6.6699 ±0.0007 -0.064
53 Schwarz W. et al 1998 6.6873 ±0.0094 +0.196
54 Kleinvoss et al 1998 6.6735 ±0.0004 -0.011
55 Richman et al 1998 6.683 ±0.011 +0.132
56 Luo et al 1999 6.6699 ±0.0007 -0.064
57 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1999 6.6742 ±0.0007 ±0.01
30
58 Richman S.J. et al 1999 6.6830 ±0.0011 +0.132
59 Schurr, Noltting et al 1999 6.6754 ±0.0015 +0.018
60 Gundlach & Merkowitz 1999 6.67422 ±0.00009 +0.0003
61 Quinn et al 2000 6.67559 ±0.00027 +0.021
-- PRESENT CODATA VALUE 2004 6.6742 ±0.001 ±0.0150
“The official CODATA value for G in 1986 was given as G= (6,67259±0.00085) x 10-11
m3Kg
-1s
-2 and was based on the
Luther and Towler determination in 1982. However, the value of G has been recently called into question by new
measurements from respected research teams in Germany, New Zealand, and Russia in order to try to settle this issue. The
new values using the best laboratory equipment to-date disagreed wildly to the point that many are doubting about the
constancy of this parameter and some are even postulating entirely new forces to explain these gravitational anomalies.
For example, in 1996, a team from the German Institute of Standards led by W. Michaelis obtained a value for G that is 0.6%
higher than the accepted value; another group from the University of Wuppertal in Germany led by Hinrich Meyer found a
value that is 0.06% lower, and in 1995, Mark Fitzgerald and collaborators at Measurement Standards Laboratory of New
Zealand measured a value that is 0.13% lower. The Russian group found a curious space and time variation of G of up to
+0.7%. In the early 1980s, Frank Stacey and his colleagues measured G in deep mines and bore holes in Australia. Their
value was about 1% higher than currently accepted. In 1986 Ephrain Fischbach, at the University of Washington, Seattle,
claimed that laboratory tests also showed a slight deviation from Newton's law of gravity, consistent with the Australian
results. As it may be seen from the Cavendish conference data, the results of the major 7 groups may agree with each
other only on the level 0.1%. So, despite our great technology advancements in measuring equipment, we are still very
close to the precision of 1% obtained by Cavendish in the 17th century. This controversy has spurred several efforts to
make a more reliable measurement of G, but till now we only got further conflicting results.”
“One such effort was that by J.P. Schwartz and J.E. Faller, who devised an experiment that uses gravity field of a one half
metric ton source mass to perturb the trajectory of a free-falling mass. They used laser interferometry to track the falling
object. This experiment does not suspend the test mass from a support system, and it therefore rules out many of the
systematic errors associated with supports in Cavendish-like setups. Below are the results gathered over 3 years. This is a
plot of G results using the mentioned free fall technique. Error bars represent one formal standard deviation. The 1997 data was
processed daily, giving values of G from 6.66E-11 to 6.71E-11. One day's observation consisted of approximately 7200
drop measurements. Again, data consistently shows that G varies over time, with an uncertainty of over 1400ppm,
31
despite the fact that all sources of possible experimental errors associated with the classical Cavendish setup, have been
eliminated.[...]Just a couple of years ago, Mikhail Gershteyn, a visiting scientist at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Centre
and his colleagues have successfully experimentally demonstrated that the well-known force of gravity between 2 test
bodies varies with their orientation in space, relative to a system of distant stars. Their remarkable finding has been
also been issued on the journal 'Gravitation and Cosmology'. George Spagna, a chairman of the physics dept. at
Randolph-Macon College, argued that Mikhail and his colleagues must provide theoretical justification to be
convincing.”
“The collection of these new results suggests that the something is wrong or missing in our understanding of G. By the
end of 1999, the international committee CODATA, decided to officially increase the uncertainty of the accepted value
for the gravitational constant from 128 ppm to 1500 ppm. This remarkable step of increasing the uncertainty instead of
decreasing was made to reflect the discrepancies between the mentioned experiments.”
32
Part 3
(B)IDUM synthesis: principles, explanations, final additional arguments, extensions and predictions
1. IDUM conjectures that the universe is essentially a finite unitary (electro)graviton(string)-based
informational entity (homogenous on large scales and generally at high energies AND
assymetrical on local scales and generally at low energies) with a fractal holographic nature (self-
similarity from low microcosmic to large macrocosmic scales AND all-in-one and one-in-all
holographic principle). This unitary info-universe reaveals itself by specific intrinsic laws also
encoded in this informational entity.
a. IDUM proposes an „inverse” description of the universe (unity-to-parts) with accent on the
(subquantum) informational unity of the universe and its apparent (holographic)
„separations”/dichotomies as described in quantum mechanics and general relativity.
b. What is perceived and/or measured as „energy” and „matter” is in fact the result of a
double-sense flow of information between at least 3 elements of the whole informational
universe: the observer (with or without measurement systems extensions to his body) and
at least 2 subcomponents of the observed physical system. The channel of observation
(through which information is transfered bisense) is also the subject to the same laws of the
same whole universe.
c. „Physical” is in fact „informational” and IDUM sustains and includes Wheeler's "it from
bit" principle.39
(IDUM identifies the physical byte [as group of bits] with a single
electrograviton, and considers that the electrograviton is a compact co-phase group of
gravitons, with the graviton as a ultimate indivisible physical bit [sub-byte])
d. IDUM conjectures that ST is granular (no matter the number of possible euclidian/fractal
dimensions) and all the quantum particles appear quantized as a consequence of this ST
granulation. Moreover, IDUM conjectures that:
i. The observed 3D-ST vacuum is granulized in single circular electrogravitons (egs)
with the smallest possible ray of eg circular movement being approximative Rre.
The eg-pixels rotate in 4D and are intrincated and reciprocally perpendicular as in
the next image.
1. 2. In IDUM, the circular/linear gravitons are considered the physical bits of
reality (for both the 3D-ST „scene” and quantum wavicles „actors”).
3. All the quantum particles are eg-based and that’s how IDUM explains the
particle-wave double nature of quantum particles, as all the quantum
particles emit/receive egs (in pulses).
4. All the quantum particles are „born” from the ST vacuum (which may be
considered a sub-quantic40
level of unity of all [at least the observable]
universe)
5. ST and quantum particles interchange (physical) information in fractal
pulsed mode and relatively fixed packs (LMIPs) and all the physical
39
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics#Wheeler.27s_.22it_from_bit.22 40
link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00670409
33
(quasi)invariants of any law of physics are an indirect measurements of those
relatively fixed LMIPs.
ii. What we name and measure as the „dark energy/matter” is in fact the 3D-ST
vacuum total energy with a volume (at least) equal to the observable universe
volume.
1. IDUM predicts a percent (4.5%) close to the observed „white” energy/matter
percent (~5%), with the observation that IDUM’s prediction may be closer
to reality, as the ray of the observable universe and the capacity to measure
energy/mass both depend on the measurement systems that can become
more sensible and accurate in the future and measure greater
energies/masses (from larger distances than the present determined Ru).
iii. Physical information is in fact an energy/matter-space-time unity that reveals itself
in a triple dichotomy: the primary dichotomy 1) space-time (the „scene”: the
„dark” energy/matter) and quantum particles (the „actors”: the „white”
energy/matter); 2) the parallel splitting of the dark/”white” energy-matter into a
dark/”white” energy-matter binome; 3) the gauge-non-gauge functional relative
dichotomy of quantum particles.
1. The informational unity (energy/matter-space-time) concept reveals itsself
also in the scalars used by IDUM: Information=energy · time=mass · speed2 ·
time = mass · speed · distance =mass · distance2 / time=mass · 2D area / time.
IDUM defines physical information as the product between energy and time
and measures it using physical bits (p-bits/pits, 1 pit=1 joule*1 second). In
IDUM, the mass/energy equivalence principle is just a consequence (and an
approximation) of a more profound (physical) information conservation law.
a. I E ∆t⋅ pit 2lit J s⋅( )
b. I E ∆t, ( ) I m c2
⋅ ∆t, ( )
c. See Table 9-A and Table 9-C from Part 1.
2. The fact that the particle decay is a stochastic process in which it cannot be
predicted for sure (but just probabilistically) what is the next particle from a
multi-particle system that will decay (only the mean lifetime can be
calculated statistically) is and argument for the IDUM view that information
is a unity that reveals itself with a grade of impredictibility measured by the
HUP (Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle)41
.
e. The first-level arbitrary-parameters (finite by definition) in IDUM are Iduc (the total
[corrected] dark ST „scene” information), Iwuc (the total [corrected] white quantum
particles „actors” information) (as the 2 parts of a total [corrected] [dark and white]
information of the universe Ituc), the arbitrary rotation speed of a single-eg-ST-pixel (the
speed of light in vacuum, noted c) considered the superior speed limit of any quantum
particle in the 3D-ST (but NOT necessarily in 4D-ST), ±Qe (the elementary electrical
charge generated by the single eg rotation with the speed of light in the 4th dimension, in 2
possible senses: past-to-future and future-to-past) and NegRou (the number of single-eg-
ST-pixels per ray of the observable universe; these pixels are considered to be organized in
41
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
34
a 4D chain in which to adiacent pixel are perpendicular to each other creating a 4D-ST and
only a small fraction [ ~10%] of S2DT2D pixels can be measured indirectly as dark energy).
As a conclusion, the first-level arbitrary-parameters in IDUM are pixels (with all their
inner characteristics) and their distribution pattern and density (ST resolution).
i. Ituc 8.346 1091× pits⋅
1. Ituc Iduc Iwuc+
2. Iduc 6.925 1091pits⋅
a. Iduc
Ituc95.475 %
3. Iwuc 3.282 1090⋅ pits⋅
a. Iwuc
Ituc4.525 %
4. Qe 1.602176565 1019−
⋅ C
5. NEgRou 6.767 1042×= ( NEgRou 1.1
Rou
Rre:= )
a.
f. IDUM also conjectures that the total information of the universe (Itu) has the potential to
be the first level arbitrary parameter of any TOE reliable model: IDUM argues that all the
measurable physical parameters may be derived from this first level parameter. In other
words, the theory of everything is that „everything” is... one (creating the illusion of
diversity by different frames auto-reading, as life is a process in which the total
information of the whole universe auto-splits in different ierarhycal dichotomies and reads
itself simulaneously in different frames)
i. Ituc is a holographic fractal unity that can be measured in any frame of reference
(no matter how many dimensions) without losing its overall consistency/coeherence
and unity. Ituc is the mark of a complex unitary system in which the separation
between the RNHAU info-processing units is also an illusion (as a consequence of
the (perceptual) illusion of space-time separation)
ii. IDUM sustains Bohm subquantum holographic model in which the universe is an
informational unitary entity in which the separation of any 2 quantum particle is
essentially an illusion created by mind and its measurement tools.
iii. IDUM proposes the binary logarithm time-measuring technique using NOT
seconds, but the number of dedublation steps needed for an initial physical
quantity/state of a system to reach a target physical quantity/state of the same
mono-/poli-measured system: in this way time will be a necessary „illusion” only
locally/unilaterally (multiple local times and a global illusion of an „uniform
newtonian universal time flow”)
iv. The mass of the universe (the sum between the white mass and the dark mass:
Mwu+Mdu), the age of the universe and the speed of light (the speed of graviton/eg-
pixel) are 3 physical measures reciprocally complementary to Ituc.
35
1. Ituc Mdu Mwu+( ) c2
⋅ 2 Aouc⋅( )⋅
2. In IDUM, mass (M) is a vectorial measured informational flow per unit of
area (an area perpendicular to the flow vector) (area of a eg-based 2D
surface which is ALSO essentially informational as it is composed of single-
eg-pixels rotating with the speed c)
a. MF
acceleration a( )
E
distance d( )
distance d( )
∆t2
I
∆t
d2
∆t2
I ∆t⋅
d2
IF
d2
3. In consequence, IDUM considers that time (and Aouc value) are illusions
created by the fundamental binomial (Ituc, c, Qe, NEgRou). IDUM also
considers that space (and also Ru and Rre) is also an illusion created by the
same binomial (Ituc, c, Qe, NEgRou). IDUM considers that this binomial
creates the ST-illusion by the c factor (which is a time-space hybrid physical
measure) and the energy/mass reality by the Ituc factor.
v. The second-level arbitrary-parameters of IDUM are: Ewu and Edu (as 2 faces of
their sum Etu=Ewu+Edu).
1. Aouc can be derived from Iwuc (and/or Iduc) and c:
a. AoucIwuc
2 Ewu⋅
Iduc
2 Edu⋅
2. Edu can also be expressed as a function of NegRou and single-circular-eg-
energy (as an anticipiation of the next explanation for heg and Eeg)
a. Eeg 2 π⋅ Rre( ) 6.126 1056− J⋅=
b. Edu4
3π⋅ NEgRou
3⋅ Eeg 2π Rre⋅( )⋅
c. Edu 7.953 1073× J= ( Ewu 3.769 10
72× J= )
d. Etu Edu Ewu+ (
Ewu
Etu4.525 %⋅= )
3. Mwu and Mdu can also be derived from Ewu, Edu and c:
a. MwuEwu
c2
b. MduEdu
c2
vi. The third-level arbitrary-parameter of IDUM is RNHAU ([the approximate] real
number of hydrogen atoms [proton-electron pairs/neutrons] in the universe:
Eddington integer number equivalent, as the number of proton-electron pairs [the
third-level dichotomy of the white matter] as the neutron can also be considered a
compact confined proton-electron pair).
1. RNHAU 2.506 1082×=
36
a. The proton-electron / neutron (information) processor-unity mass
(Mpe~Mn) can be obtain from Mwu and RNHAU:
i. MpeMwu
RNHAU
ii. Mpe
Mn99.917 %=
b. As RNHAU can be organized as a 2D disk and
RNHAU π NHAR2
⋅ , NHAR ([approximate] number of hydrogen
atoms per ray [of the universe]) can be deduced from RNHAU:
i. NHARRNHAU
π
c. NHAD (number of hydrogen atoms per diameter [of the universe]) is
the double of NHAR
i. NHAD 2 NHAR⋅
d. IDUM defines the photon as a fixed LMIP containing NEgP linear
egs, with NegP defined as: the number of co-phase linear
electrogravitons per each photon (the electrogravitational granulation
factor of a single photon as a holographic projection of a 3/2
exponential information from all NHAD, as the photon is ~1.5D as
the electron is):
i. NEgP 8 π⋅( ) log2 NHAD( )
3
2⋅ NHAD⋅ 7.202 10
45⋅
e. IDUM defines the resting electron as a fixed LMIP containg NEgRE
egs, whith NEgRE defined as: the number of co-phase circular
electrogravitons per each resting electron (the electrogravitational
granulation factor of a single resting electron as a holographic
projection of a 1/2 exponential information from all NHAD, as the
resting electron is considered to have less degrees of [moving]
freedom than a photon has):
i. NEgRE 8 π⋅( ) log2 NHAD( )
1
2⋅ NHAD⋅ 5.255 10
43⋅
f. IDUM defines the inverse FSC for an electron at rest (α) as the ratio
between NegP and NegRE which is exactly the formal quantity of
white physical (extrinsic) information per diameter of white matter
(organized in NHAD proton-electron modules)
i. FSC1−
αNEgP
NEgRElog2 NHAD( ) 137.036
g. IDUM also defines the natural logarithm of NHAD (αe) as a FSC
derivative important in defining a scale invariance law in the ratio
37
between the ray of the visible universe (Ru) and the classical ray of
the electron (Re):
i. αe ln NHAD( ) α ln 2( )⋅ 94.986
ii. Re e
αe⋅
Ru114.177 %=
h. IDUM defines Planck constant (h) as an informational constant
obtained from reading Iwuc in a 3D-NHAD-frame:
i. hIwuc
NHAD3
Iwuc
2α( )3
ii. h 6.62606957 1034−⋅ pit 2
110.217−2
lit⋅
i. Ke is essentially a function of Planck constant (h), Qe (which is a first-
level free arbitrary parameter in IDUM), c (which is also a first-level
free arbitrary parameter in IDUM) and α:
i. Keh
2 π⋅( ) α⋅
c
Qe2
⋅hr
α
c
Qe2
⋅
j. IDUM argues that boson W/Z total physical information (particle
mass*mean half-life) can also be obtained from reading from the
same Iwuc (Iuc) in a ~3D-NHAD-frame:
i.
log2Iuc
Mbw c2
⋅ Tbw⋅( )
α2.993=
ii.
log2Iuc
Mbz c2
⋅ Tbz⋅( )
α2.992=
k. IDUM argues that gluon total physical information (particle
mass*mean half-life) can also be obtained from reading from the
same Iwuc (Iuc) in a ~3D-NHAD-frame:
i.
log2Iuc
Mgl c2
⋅ Tbw⋅( )
α3.202=
ii.
log2Iuc
Mgl c2
⋅ Tbz⋅( )
α3.202=
l. IDUM defines an electro-gravitational Planck-like constant (used in
the scalar definition of a single eg) for the photon as a group of a fixed
number (NEgP) of co-phase egs (heg) as the ratio between h and
38
NEgP (as the photon information is splitted in a NEgP information
quanta of each electrograviton in the photon):
i. hegh
NEgP
ii. heg1
1.087 1079×
pit 2262.553−
2lit⋅
m. Note that heg is very close to the informational quanta generated
when reading the same Iwuc in a 4D-NHAD-frame (the 2 orders of
magnitude of α above 1 and the ~3D-α /~4D-α frame difference
explains the major difference between gravity and the other 3
fundamental forces):
i.
log2Iwuc
heg
α4.112=
n. IDUM predicts that the gluon, the electron, the quark, the
proton/neutron (quark-based) have ~1.5D-α inner eg-based structures
(physical information) possibly stabilized by a 5th force, much
stronger that the strong nuclear forces, named very strong gravity
(VSG). IDUM conjectures that VSG is the main acting force in the
inner cores of the large black-holes were single circular egs pixels
(with Rre as ray of rotation) can be compressed to rays of rotation
close to Planck length. IDUM also conjectures that there is a profund
link between the ~1.5D dimension of an electron and the NegP scalar
as a function of NHAD1.5
.
i.
log2Iu
Mgl c2
⋅ Te⋅( )
α1.766=
ii.
log2Iu
Me c2
⋅ Te( )
α1.683=
iii.
log2Iu
Mqu_med c2
⋅ Tp⋅( )
α1.611=
iv.
log2Iu
Mqd_med c2
⋅ Tp⋅( )
α1.603=
v.
log2Iu
Mp c2
⋅ Tp( )
α1.548=
vi. log2
Rou
lP
α1.489=
39
vii. [1,2)D dimensions suggest string (quasi)disks (spherical string
„dust”) that do not cover a 2D (curved) plane/surface
completely with possible (quasi)fractal structure (as spherical
string „dust”)
o. Simillary to the information reading frame, the masses of quantum
particles (up/down quarks, proton/neutron, electron etc) are also the
result of reading the mass of the white universe (Mwu[Mu]) in a ~2D-
α frame:
i. log2
Mu
Me
α2.077=
ii.
log2Mu
Mp
α1.997=
p. Simillary to the information reading frame, the standard rays of
quantum particles (up/down quarks, proton/neutron, electron etc) are
also the result of reading the ray of observable universe (Ru, which is
also function of Iwuc and Mwuc/Ewuc) in a ~1D-α frame:
i.
log2Ru
Rre
α1.037=
ii.
log2Ru
Re
α0.999=
iii.
log2Ru
Rp
α1.011=
q. From analyzing the ratio between the dimensional frames of masses
(2D-α) and lengths (1D-α) IDUM argues that this is the fundamental
argument for which the energy-mass of the universe seems to have a
~2D holographic essence. The energy-mass of the universe and tof he
black-holes have a strong common holographic character because of
this ~2/1 dimensional ratio.
i.
log2Mu
Me
log2Ru
Rre
2.002=
ii.
log2Mu
Me
log2Ru
Re
2.079=
40
iii.
log2Mu
Mp
log2Ru
Rp
1.976=
iv. In fact IDUM predicts that the universe „scene” (all the ST eg-
based pixels and graviton-based subpixels) and the actors
(quantum particles and also conglomerates of quantum
particle including living entities) are black-hole-like entities
(1D-2D holograms) the constantly emit and absorb physical
information (2 anabolic/catabolic alternate phases, similar to
the biological entities).
r. In contrast with energy-mass (which is a 2D-α hologram), the total
information of the universe coded by the total number of egs in this
universe is a ~3D-α hologram:
i.
log2Ituc
Eeg Rre( ) Aouc⋅
α3.111=
ii.
log2Ituc
Eeg Rre( ) Aouc⋅
log2Ru
Rre
3=
s. As it can be observed from all the previous α-dimensional arguments,
the absolute values (in physical units) of different physical measures
(information, energy, mass, length and durations) aren’t essential in
IDUM: the single aspects essential in IDUM are the adimensional
ratios between maximum and the minimum (information, energy,
mass, length and durations). That’s why IDUM is essentially an info-
mathematical model of the universe than can be simulated using pure
adimensional real numbers/ratio constants). Aditionally, IDUM also
conjectures that the universe evolves step-by-step by ST self-
similarity with its previous past states (conserving the essential
definitory adimensional ratio constants from the Big-Bang until the
present day). IDUM conjectures (see the next arguments for BIDUM)
that is very possible that even the „living” observes to be present (like
being „precoded”/”preprinted” on film/genome) on a 2D surface of
the pre-Big Bang singularity (like an apparently „dead seed” pre-
created by a superior intelligent universe that contains its living
„embryos” which will/may become the future observers): even if the
universe continuously inflates, it remains essentially self-similar with
its previous singularity as if this singularity co-existes as a superposed
state with the present state of the universe (a possible explanation for
subquantum unity hypothesis and a possible explanation for
41
synchronicity/quantum entalgement through that singularity; a vision
simillar to Einstein’s eternal universe theory).
i. Time may be an ilussion, a visual construction of the observer
conscious mental part (with causality being just an apparent
„mask” of the subquantum synchronicity): there a high
probabilty that the universe may be a giant black-hole42
as
each of its subcomponents.
ii. The global dynamic inflation-deflation cycle (keeping self-
similarity by conserving the same ratios between maximum
and minimum physical measures of the universe) creates the
illusion of a global time (and global age of the universe) and
projects the 4th sub-Planck micro-dimension into this illusory
global (macro)time. The scene(ST)-actor(quantum particle)
dichotomy also may create the illusion of movement (which
may be indistinguishable from static if the universe were
viewed from outside, like a „leaf” that grows self-similarly)
t. As it can be observed, IDUM uncovers fractional α-dimension
numbers close to integers (~1D, ~2D, ~3D, ~4D etc) which suggests a
fractal nature of the universe.
u. IDUM uses a scalar definition of a single eg, a sclar law
similar/analogous to the scalar of a photon ( Ef λ( ) hc
λ⋅ ) (the
graviton is in fact the physical info-bit and the electro-graviton [eg] is
the physical info-byte defined as a group of co-phase gravitons)
i. Eeg λ( ) hegc
λheg ν⋅
v. Based on the Eeg(λ) scalar, IDUM estimates the number of Egs
transfered to an electron that moves from a resting state to a speed (v)
state as:
i. NEgTRE v λ, ( )Me v
2⋅
Eeg λ( )
w. Based on NEgTRE(v, λ) IDUM defines the total number of egs in a
moving electron (NEgME(v, λ)) as:
i. NEgME v λ, ( ) NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+
x. IDUM generalizes α (FSC-1
) for the moving electron as:
i. α v λ, ( ) α NEgME v λ, ( )( )NEgP
NEgME v λ, ( )
NEgP
NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+
42
See also: Nassim Haramein , Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass (resonance.is/wp-
content/uploads/2013/05/1367405491-Haramein342013PRRI3363.pdf)
42
ii. FSC alpha1
α
NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+
NEgP
iii. As it can be seen, BIDUM offers a plausible probabilistic
explanation for FSC: the probability that an electron will emit
a photon is the ratio between the number of egs (bytes of the
physical intrinsic information) of the moving electron
(NegRE+NEgTRE[v,λ]) and the fixed number of egs (bytes of
the physical intrinsic information) of the photon (NEgP).
y. IDUM interprets the electron rest mass as generated by the circular
movement of the number of circular egs in a resting electron
(NEgRE) with Re as rotating ray (generalized as a larger variable
NEgRE and variable rays smaller than Re)
i. MeNEgRE Eeg 2 π⋅ Re( )
c2
ii. Apparently Me has a tautologic definition (as Re is already a
function of Me). However, IDUM predicts Re from a global
arbitrary parameter (Ru) similarly to Mpe, using α
(log2[NHAD]), using another striking (non-)coincidence
related to DAH:
1. log2Ru
Re
136.845=
2.
log2Ru
Re
α99.86 %=
3. Using a (globally) corrected classical electron ray (Rec),
IDUM can predict Me with resonable accuracy (that
can be also raised by adjusting NegRE)
a. RecRu
2α
:=
b. Rec
Re87.584 %⋅=
c.
NEgRE Re( ) Eeg 2 π⋅ Rec⋅( )⋅
c2
Me114.177 %⋅=
d.
NEgRE Rec( ) Eeg 2 π⋅ Rec⋅( )⋅
c2
Me100 %⋅=
4. In fact, there are 2 other microcosmic lengths (Rre and
Rp) that are close to Re and subject to similar DAH-like
coincidences:
a.
log2Ru
Rre
α103.726 %⋅=
43
b.
log2Ru
Rp
α101.089 %=
5. The Ru-Re coincidence mentioned before suggests that
the visible universe may have grown in a self similar
way using the same exponential function of a specific
logarithmic spiral:
a. FRu Re θ, ( ) Re eαe θ⋅
⋅
b. FRu Re 1, ( )
Ru114.177 %⋅=
z. Proton beta constant (βp) emerges from Mpe (predicted from Mwu
and RNHAU) and Me as:
i. βpMpe Me−
Me1836.15
aa. IDUM also predicts the gravitational coupling constant (αG/ αGr) as
a function of log2(NHAD)(=α[Re,0]=α). This function (the DAH [non-
]coincidence) suggests that FSC has a dual electrogravitational
significance (FSC being a both electromagnetic and gravitational
constant by the 2α [NHAD] factor).
i. αGhr c⋅
G Me2
⋅2α
3
22
α⋅ α
3
22
α 1+⋅
ii. αGrhrr c⋅
G Me2
⋅α
3
22
α⋅
bb. As it can be observed until now, IDUM essentially focuses on
adimensional constants (ratios) as they are considered essentially
fundamental in IDUM but also in any plausible (informational)
TOE.43
cc. As IDUM considers c fundamental, as I have already shown how
IDUM predicts h, Me, heg from FSC, quantum G is considered a
function of heg and Kg(=c/Me2):
i. Kgc
Me2
ii. G 2hegc
Me2
⋅
43
See also abstract/article no. 10 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2010abstracts.pdf
44
iii. G2
Me2
heg c⋅( )⋅2c
Me2
heg⋅ 2Kg heg⋅
iv. As it can be observed, G is a function analogous to Ke
function, as c/(α·Qe2) is a constant (versus hr from the same
equation)
1. Keh
2 π⋅( ) α⋅
c
Qe2
⋅hr
α
c
Qe2
⋅
v. As the r2 factor comes from the area of the sphere (4πr
2) on
which a mass emits LMIPs perpendiculary to that sphere
surface (until the LMIPs are absorbed by another mass), a
gravitational permitivity(εG) can be defined analogously to ε0
(as Fg can be formulated analogously to the Coulomb force
Fe):
1. Fe KeQ1 Q2⋅
r2
⋅1
4 π⋅ ε0
Q1 Q2⋅
r2
⋅1
ε0
Q1 Q2⋅
4 π⋅ r2
⋅⋅
2. Fg GM1 M2⋅
r2
⋅ G 4 π⋅( )⋅[ ]M1 M2⋅
4 π⋅ r2
⋅⋅
1
εg
M1 M2⋅
4 π⋅ r2
⋅⋅
3. 1
εg4 π⋅( )G
4. DAH defines 4πG as:
a. 4 π⋅( ) G⋅h c⋅
α
3
22
α⋅
Me
2⋅
5. The gravitational permitivity (εg) can be expressed
using DAH as:
a. εg1
4 π⋅( ) G⋅
α
3
22
α⋅
Me
2⋅
h c⋅
dd. IDUM proposes a generalized quantum G as a combination of 2 types
of egs (with heg1 and heg2 scalars)
i. G Kg heg1⋅ Kg heg2⋅+ Kg heg1 heg2+( )⋅
ii. G1 2, Kg heg1 heg2+( )⋅
ee. IDUM proposes a simple grade I function that describes how heg
depends on NBE (nuclear binding energy as local stressor of ST).
IDUM postulates that what is measured as G is in fact a combination
of superposed eg flows with different specific hegs that are specific to
each atom/isotope as a function of NBE (see tables, figures and the
initial explanation from Part 2).
2. IDUM sustains a unitary informational holographic view of the universe with a single essential
principle: „the whole in each part and each part as a [morpho-functional] reflexion of the whole”
45
(equivalent to „each component is bisense-connected to all other components from which it
receives and to which it sends information” AND „each component is created by information
received by all the other components, with [theoretically] 0 intrinsic isolated [un-connected]
information”). In the next figure, each vertix of the regular poligon is a proton-electron processing
unit (with the white universe being graphically simulated as a regular polligon with
RNHAU/quark vertices). This model is similar to cyber scheme of the biological entities in which
each effector receives information from all receptors and each receptor can theoretically transmit
information to all the effectors („all for/from one AND one for/from all”)
a. b. All types leptons, all types quarks etc are considered in IDUM nodal points of the same
informational layer of the universe: the electron layer, the down -quark layer, the up-
quark layer, etc (Wheeler’s one-electron hypothesis44
partial similarity). The non-nodal
lines in the same level of informational interconnection hierarchy are the forces that
interconnect the indentical particles (nodal points) from the same level. In a way, quantum
particles can be interpreted as compact nodal points of this informational network and
forces can be interpreted as „loose” line-nodes that can extend to infinity. In other word,
IDUM conjectures that the universe is essentially a INFORMATIONAL CRYSTAL: A
QUANTUM MIND/INTELLIGENCE (COMPUTER). IDUM promotes the principle that
the universe is essentially a mind, an intelligence, a natural conciousness. A 5D info-
„crystal” universe can explain the quantum entalgement between some quantum particles
(as these seem to be connected by rigid force-lines). In IDUM, quantum particles and
fundamental forces are indissolubly related as the particles are the result of forces and the
forces are the result of quantum particles: in other words all particles (the „crystal faces”)
and all forces (the „crystal edges”) are different compementary subforms of the same
informational unitary (quasi)„crystal” that the universe is. Single gravitons and graviton
packs (the egs and the photons) are LMIPs that have a „cable” function in BIDUM (similar
to a computer RAM). As gravitons are the bits of ST vacuum itself but also the basic
strings constituents of all quantum particles (gauge and non-gauge), they also function as a
ROM memory (the hard-disk of the universe). The same gravitons have 2 different states:
a LMIP state (the gauge particles: RAM of the universe and informational flow „cables”)
and a condensed state (all the types of non-gauge quantum particles) (the ROM and the
parallel microprocessors of the universe). Even if the real universe may be much larger
44
io9.com/5876966/what-if-every-electron-in-the-universe-was-all-the-same-exact-particle; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-
electron_universe; www.quora.com/How-plausible-is-the-idea-of-Feynmans-one-electron-universe-What-do-theoretical-and-
experimental-quantum-physicists-think-about-that-idea; telescoper.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/the-theory/
46
and heavier than the observed universe, IDUM conjectures that the universe behaves as a
unity (in which the separation in observable subcomponents and dichotomies are
essentially illusions: „the unity/whole in parts <<more>> than the parts in unity/whole”)
and all the global invariants (which also may be the answer-illusions that the universe
creates when questioned/analyzed by the human mind in different frames of perceptions)
may be the expression of this unity, but also the „synapses” of articulation between this
(sub)universe and other parts of the REAL universe, or between this universe and other
parallel universes (possible ierarchically superior or inferior to ours).
c. In the previous figure, the diagonals of the polygon (that connect each vertix with all the
other vertices, no matter the spatial distance between those informational interconnected
vertices) represent the lines of the graviational field (no matter the number of euclidian
dimensions of the polygon/polyhedron). Electromagnetic force is represented in the
previous figure by all diagonals that interconnect all the charged quantum particles (a grid
of lines that superpose to a small percent of the gravitational lines if we consider the dark
universe that doesn’t normally couple with the charged particles). The edges that connect
any vertix with the other 2 adiacent neighbour-vertices may represent the strong nuclear
force that connects only some type of particles (quarks) located very close (close enough) to
each other.
d. IDUM considers α as the number of dimensional „electric” „octaves” of the universe, so
that the visible universe interstingly has ~137 dimensional „electric” octaves and a
maximum ~1.5α (~204) (Planck) gravitational „octaves”. In other words, the
electromagnetic force is the 137th „octave harmonic” of the gravitational force (as DAH
and Ru-Re [non-]coincidences suggest)
i. Ru Rec 2α⋅
ii. Ru lP 2
3
2α⋅
⋅
e. The Ru~Re·2α (Ru=Rec·2
α) coincidence is equivalent to:
i. Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( ) 2α⋅ Et Me( )
ii. Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( )
Et Me( )2
Ef 2 π⋅( ) Ru⋅[ ]
Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( )⋅ 1.142=
iii. From the previous relations it results that the rest total energy of one single electron
is the ~137th octave of the electromagnetic energy of 2 electrons at Ru distance from
each other. Interstingly, the total rest energy of an electron can be obtained by
summing all the electrostatic energies of any 2 charges of the same type (2 protons
or 2 electrons) at Ru distance to one another on a hypothetical 2D particled
diameter of a hypothetical universe (with NHAD particles per diameter): this
suggests that each single electron rest mass may be an „electrical” hologram of all
other electrons/protons on the same diameter (defined by NHAD proton-electron
units).
1. Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( ) NHAD⋅
Et Me( )114.176 %=
2. Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( ) NHAD⋅ Et Me( )
47
3. By induction, IDUM can also estimate a scalar for the graviton (the universal bit), not only for the
electrograviton (eg).
a. IDUM also predicts a gravitonic Planck-like constant (the informational constant of the
graviton; the [physical] bit of the universe) by reading the same Iwuc in a 5D-α frame. Of
course that IDUM speculates this 5th dimension (by analogy with the 1D, 2D, 3D-α, 4D-α
„chain” of alpha coincidences) for the sake of mathematical beauty, simmetry, the
experience with Kaluza-Klein universes etc, as IDUM can arbitrary choose any (fractional)
value superior to 4 when calculating hgr.
i. hgrIwuc
2α( )5
ii.
log2Iwuc
hgr
α5
iii. hgr1
4.815 10115×
pit⋅
iv. heg
hgr4.431 10
36×=
v. h
hgrNHAD
23.191 10
82×
b. IDUM defines the graviton-energy scalar similarly to the photon and electrograviton
scalars:
i. Egr λ( ) hgrc
λ⋅ hgr υ⋅
c. IDUM considers that a single circular graviton can be bent to a rotation ray equal to a
Planck length (lP) so that a single circular eg ST pixel can be divided/transformed in other
circular single-graviton subpixels with rotation rays between Rre and lP.
i. Rre
lP4.434 10
18×=
ii. Eeg Rre( )
Egr lP( )9.992 10
17×=
d. IDUM considers the graviton ~1D-α string,
i.
log2Eeg Rre( )
Egr lP( )
log2Rre
lP
0.965=
e. The eg is ~2D-α when dimensionally compared to a single graviton dimension (~1D-α)
i.
log2heg
hgr
log2Rre
lP
1.965=
ii. In conclusion, the eg is a graviton-based ~2D-α hologram.
48
f. When the total physical information of the universe (Ituc) is compared to the extrinsic
information of a single graviton, the informational universe reveals itself as a 4D-α
hologram:
i.
log2Ituc
Egr Rre( ) Aouc⋅
α4=
ii.
log2Ituc
Egr Rre( ) Aouc⋅
log2Ru
Rre
3.856=
4. IDUM anthropical/biological principle:
a. As 4D(5D)-ST is a unity artificially splitted in 3D-S and 1D(2D)-T, IDUM considers that, if
there exists even a single living cell in the universe, the whole universe may be considered
(„by bioinformation contamination”) a living entity at least in the interval of time in which
that cell manages to survive (with all abiotic matter and energy serving as present and/or
potential „future” deposits for the future development of that living cell, being just „a
matter of time” until that cell would eventually spread its daughters throught the universe
and access those deposits)
i. The fact that life is proven to exist without interruption on Earth for the last 4·109
years (which is almost a 3rd of age of the universe [Aou[) is a strong argument for
the bio-informational view of (B)IDUM. Even if somewhere else in the universe life
would have existed in the past before the (13.7-4=9.4)·109 years moment (and now is
dissapeared), that life erase can pe interpreted as apoptosis/necrosis-like not a „full”
death given the fact that life on Earth still exists (restarted from abiotic deposit, or
somehow escaped but silenced from that previous form of life).
ii. In conclusion „informational” is „bio-informational” (as „physical” is
„informational”), the bit/byte is essentially a bio-bit/byte and IDUM is in fact a Bio-
info-digital universe model (BIDUM). In other words, BIDUM conjectures that the
universe is essentially a living very intelligent creature/being as BIDUM generally
defines „life” as a combination between intelligence (intelligent design) AND free
will. Quantum is essentially bio-quantum (as information is essentially bio-
information, at least in our observed universe).
iii. BIDUM is in fact a a combination between IDUM and some elements of the
Anthropic Cosmological Principle (ACP).
iv. BIDUM unifies evolutionism and scientific creationism in a mature integrated view,
as it pushes the „natural selection” to a natural necessary „preselection” of atoms
and molecules appropriate to life which profoundly depend on FSC and proton beta
constant (Mp/Me) which were (apparently) randomly „decided” in the first
moments (seconds?minutes?) after Big Bang (as they were demonstrated as
constant for at least the last [10-12]·109 years).
v. Additionally, BIDUM speculates that the apparently „point-like” quantum particles
(as the electron, gluon etc) are in fact ~1.5D-α quantum micro-computers
(processor) that have a possible fractal/strange-attractor like eg-based inner
structures and use egs/gravitons strings as ROM and RAM (having implemented
line codes with all the universal laws of the universe). If true, it is legitimate to
49
conjecture that all the quatum particles are in fact quantum computers (processors)
and the universe is in fact a quantum super-computer with a huge number (at least
1082
„white” quantum particles) of parallel processors.
1. An indirect argument for the plausible complex inner structure and self
organisation of quantum particles is the fact that any living cell can highly
self-organize as a bio-information computer using a minimal 1012
atoms as
separate parallel processors: a single electron can contain at least 1042
egs
(and a lot more string-gravitons) that can theoretically be used to process
input/output information received/emmited by any quantum particle.
2. Another indirect argument is that gravitons are spin-2 bosons that can
occupy the same quantum state: egs have the same propriety as they are
defined as co-phase gravitons packs. This assures the primary condition of a
quantum computer: the possibility of quantum coherence in the inner
structure of any quantum particle.
3. BIDUM sustains and shares (as an „inner” conjecture of BIDUM) the The
Strong Free Will Theorem (John H. Conway, Simon Kochen)45
and uses this
theorem as an indirect argument for the quantum-particle – quantum
computer hypotesis/conjecture. As conclusion, BIDUM conjectures that the
universe is a living (free will intelligence) entity (essentially informational)
that reveals itsself in 3 faces: dark/white energy(matter), space
(distance/surface) and time (interval/speed) AND that our universe is most
probably created by a superior intelligence (identified with the Divine by all
religions in the history of mankind).
vi. BIDUM proposes the swarm intelligence (SI) algorithms46
to shape the behaviours
of multiple quantum particle systems in which each atom is a powerful self-
organized quantum computer eg/info-connected to all the other particles of the
universe in a fractal holographic manner (all-in-each and each-in-all).
5. BIDUM conjectures that an intelligence/mind (as our universe is) cannot appear from „nothing”,
but it can only be created by another superior intelligence (such as a Creator intelligence, named
the Divine). In conclusion, BIDUM sustains creationism, such as: all the intelligent informational
„crystal” that the universe is (the universe as mind/intelligence) was created by a superior
informational entity (a [Divine] Creator mind: that is essentially another universe-
mind/intelligence ierachically superior to our universe). As our universe is considered a natural
(alive) intelligence (a bio-intelligence), BIDUM considers the Creator Mind ALSO alive and
superior as intelligence to our universe (a superior bio-intelligence, a super-intelligence intuitively
deduced and defined as „the Divine” in all known human cultures from all known spaces and
hystorical times)
6. BIDUM has at least 2 retroactive predictions in (informational) biology.
a. Applying the BIDUM’s general principle in which the total intrinsic physical information
of an entity is the product between the energy of that entity and its life (average) duration,
organisms can be viewed as essentially unitary (bio)informational entities (not just
information processors) which contain a relatively fixed quantity of information (as a
global measure for their entire individual lifetime) generally genetically predetermined.
45
www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf; www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/free_will_theorem.html;
arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0604079; arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0604079.pdf; 46
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarm_intelligence
50
b. As Bio(Physical)Information=energy*lifetime=(intrinsic energy + input energy) *
lifetime=(intrinsic mass+input mass)*c2*(maximum) lifetime(L), then BIDUM predicts
that caloric restriction will generally prolonge the life of the living organisms (no matter
the complexity of that bioorganisms) with the difference ∆L=L2-
L1=I/{(BodyMass+[smaller]CaloricInput2/c2)*c
2} - I/{(BodyMass+[larger] CaloricInput1 /
/c2)*c
2}.
c. BIDUM suggests that the biologicial information (tendence of) conservation law has a
strong link with the fact/observation that very young organisms are very fragile but very
regenerative versus older organisms which may have a much more robust anatomical and
physiological structures/processes but have a much lower regenerative capacity.
d. BIDUM will surely offer some other biological (retro)predictions/explanations in the next
version 1.1.
7. BIDUM is a digital physics model candidate for TOE and has strong similarities with other
informational models of the universe (see Refrences). BIDUM offers an integrated unitary
bioinformational interpretation to both quantum mechanics (including quantum gravity) and
general relativity.
8. BIDUM version 1.0 is still „under construction” and any email/comment feedback is welcome by
the author as BIDUM v.1.0 still needs furher deductions/ inductions/ developments/corrections
and also needs to generate more predictions to be more convincing in the future, at least in its
strong parts: the DAH coincidence, the quantum G series predictions, the heg (and analogous hgr)
series predictions.
51
Table 14. References (ordered by relevance for BIDUM, not alphabetically)
No. Author Year Title Link(s)
1 Drăgoi, Andrei-Lucian 2015
The Bio-Info-Digital Universe Model
version 1.0 (English variant of this
article) (self-reference)
andrei.dragoii.com/anexe/BIDUMv1.0.pdf
2 Lloyd , Seth 2001 Computational capacity of the universe
arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0110141v1.pdf
www.newscientist.com/blogs/culturelab/2010/03/the-
universe-is-a-quantum-computer.html
3 Gundlach, Jens H. and
Merkowitz, Stephen M. 2002
University of Washington: Big G
Measurement asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/Stephen.Merkowitz/G/Big_G.html
4 Becker, Kate 2014 Is Information Fundamental? www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/physics/2014/04/is-
information-fundamental/
5 Wikipedia article 2015 Digital physics en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics
6 Wikipedia article 2014 Classical unified field theories en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_unified_field_theories
7 Wikipedia article 2014 Digital philosophy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_philosophy
8 Wikipedia article 2015 Dirac large numbers hypothesis en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_large_numbers_hypothesis
9 Wikipedia article 2015 Zero-energy universe
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe
www.astrosociety.org/publications/a-universe-from-
nothing/
www.livescience.com/33129-total-energy-universe-
zero.html
10 Wikipedia article 2015 Vacuum genesis en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_genesis
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_nihilo#Modern_physics
11 Wikipedia article 2015 Dark matter en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
12 Wikipedia article 2015 Dark energy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
13 Links collection (2015) The holographic universe hypothesis
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle
www.nature.com/news/simulations-back-up-theory-that-
universe-is-a-hologram-1.14328
www.newscientist.com/article/dn26114-experiment-tests-
whether-universe-is-a-hologram.html#.VOjbevl_uSp
www.rense.com/general69/holoff.htm
www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/myths-of-physics-
1-einste_b_5672842.html
14 Wikipedia article 2015 The Fined Tuned Universe en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe
14 Wikipedia article/book 2015 The Anthropic Principle
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
www.bluffton.edu/~bergerd/essays/impert.html
www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle-
Oxford-Paperbacks/dp/0192821474
15 Wikipedia article 2015 Loop quantum gravity theory en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_quantum_gravity
16 Links collection (2015) The Strong Free Will
Theorem
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_theorem
www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf
jamesowenweatherall.com/SCPPRG/MenonTarun2009Man
_FreeWillThm.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-go_theorem
17 Links collection (2015)
De Broglie–Bohm theory / Subquantum
(fields) fluctuations / Hidden variables
theories and related themes
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theo
ry
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_wave
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable_theory
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_hidden_variable_theory
www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/qm4.htm
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0375960191901
16P
link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00670409#page-1
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kochen%E2%80%93Specker_theore
m
Recommended