/sci/ - Science & Math

It also means "you" don't exist
"You" represent a likelihood of possible ways for particles to behave
You can not know how probable you are, ie, in what % of multiverses "you" were born.
It also means it is possible that you are inevitable in every universe
Because the laws of physics dictate how universes unfold, some events have to happen identically in every universe.
It also means that you may have offspring to different people in other realities, that you will never meet in this life.

The multiverse proposes a model of reality in which timelines are formed according to probability
The more probable certain events are, the more dense is the amount of timelines formed according to it and the more likely the events in it are similar to other timelines

what is it about quantum that makes it the number one most popular popsci topic of discussion amongst the brainlet soience fangoys?
is it the comic bookish aspects of the spectacular, unrealistic and completely non disprovable conjectures which go along with the topic that makes quantum so popular amongst the scientist posers and wannabes?

By behaving more and more erratically you open up more universes in which your behavior is gradually more predictable in every timeline
This means that taking risks spreads your chances across the multiverse for alternate versions of yourself to experience success
But they have to be calculated risks, not reckless. Recklessness implies you open up universes in which you have to deal with gradual variations of challenging conditions.

Your higher self is the accumulation of "you" in other realities, including genetically other yous
Your intuition is basically thoughts shared between alternate yous in moments of timeline densities

Your soul is multidimensional and spread across innumerable bodies
You may think that you are your brain, your body is a tool and this reality is your sandbox
In fact this body is just a cell of your true self moving through the multiverse, possibly as a fundamental element of reality itself

>>15684603
>waahh someone is inspired by the lack of fundamental consensus about physics!
>how dare they hypothesize the implications of scientific discoveries!
>this stuff is not peer reviewed at all!!

>>15684532
Scizo science

>>15684640
Yes

>>15684641
>>15684645
>>15684648

>>15684641
>>15684645
>>15684648
>>15684650


Sixty-Six Theses: Next Steps and the Way Forward in the Modified Cosmological Model
>https://vixra.org/abs/2206.0152
>http://gg762.net/d0cs/papers/Sixty-Six_Theses__v4-20230726.pdf
The purpose is to review and lay out a plan for future inquiry pertaining to the modified cosmological model (MCM) and its overarching research program. The material is modularized as a catalog of open questions that seem likely to support productive research work. The main focus is quantum theory but the material spans a breadth of physics and mathematics. Cosmology is heavily weighted and some Millennium Prize problems are included. A comprehensive introduction contains a survey of falsifiable MCM predictions and associated experimental results. Listed problems include original ideas deserving further study as well as investigations of others' work when it may be germane. A longstanding and important conceptual hurdle in the approach to MCM quantum gravity is resolved. A new elliptic curve application is presented. With several exceptions, the presentation is high-level and qualitative. Formal analyses are mostly relegated to the future work which is the topic of this book. Sufficient technical context is given that third parties might independently undertake the suggested work units.

Fractional Distance: The Topology of the Real Number Line with Applications to the Riemann Hypothesis
>https://vixra.org/abs/2111.0072
>http://gg762.net/d0cs/papers/Fractional_Distance_v8-20230808.pdf
Recent analysis has uncovered a broad swath of rarely considered real numbers called real numbers in the neighborhood of infinity. Here we extend the catalog of the rudimentary analytical properties of all real numbers by defining a set of fractional distance functions on the real number line and studying their behavior. The main results of are (1) to prove with modest axioms that some real numbers are greater than any natural number, (2) to develop a technique for taking a limit at infinity via the ordinary Cauchy definition reliant on the classical epsilon-delta formalism, and (3) to demonstrate an infinite number of non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function in the neighborhood of infinity. We define numbers in the neighborhood of infinity as Cartesian products of Cauchy equivalence classes of rationals. We axiomatize the arithmetic of such numbers, prove all the operations are well-defined, and then make comparisons to the similar axioms of a complete ordered field. After developing the many underlying foundations, we present a basis for a topology.

>>15684532
>possible different behavior
how can he know what's possible? that's pure arrogance. nature decides what's possible, we don't.

>>15684532
>it is not infinite.
Why not? if there are an infinite number of degrees in a circle, and a particle could should off in any direction, then there are an infinite number of universes.

someone ask him on twitter if this is what he believes

look, physics is dead. physics students are mostly morons who don't know much besides QFT. For those drones, if there is something incomplete from a theory, then it means there is a new particle somewhere. Those idiots have made up hundreds of particles so far and they are still looking for more. That's the entirety of their intellectual framework. LOL. And btw, the job is shit. HEP is really just computing feynman diagrams to some retarded orders in terms of h_bar. It's just computer stuff and 0% physics.
Since the LHC is the biggest DUD in the history of physics, those morons fear they got exposed. So what did they do? they said they wanted 100 billions this time to build a bigger LHC, and to achieve what? discovering new particles LOL.
It is just putting ones head in the sand at this point

even on a global scope, theoretical physics is pretty much dead. Zero innovation since the discovery of the CMB.
All the atheists crave for a new scientific revival with biology, AI, and biohacking but it wil be an even bigger dud. And even worse, they are even less a science, because the side effects are even more complicated to predict in general, and with respect to the particularities of such and such genetic population.
And people will scream about ethical stuff since testing on living beings will be even more mandatory sooner or later...
Even on the level of the daily life, you can see the scientific decay with videogames. video games coming out today basically look like the games they were releasing on 360 and PS3 ca. 2005-2007 when I was in middle school. Compare a pixelated N64 game from the late 90s with a 1080p HD Xbox 360 game from the mid 2000s and the difference is astonishing. Compare a 360 game like CoD4 from the mid 2000s with the latest version of the same game 15 years later, and you will find very few differences. If 3D graphics were progressing at the same rate as in the late 90s and early 00s, then we would have photorealistic videogames by now.

>>15684943
Anyway, all of that is meaningless, because videogames graphics are largely irrelevant to science and only have relevance for mindless loq IQ normie conSOOOMers. All I need to do is look at actual math and science research. Math is doing better than physics or chemistry, for example, but the only new areas of math that are highly active are the Langlands Program, and Complex Systems/Chaos/Complex Networks, and even that is kind of loosing steam at this point. It was super trendy in the 70-90s and helped pave the way for stuff like data science, but even progress in those fields is slowing. The most active areas of science today really seem to be biotech, cognitive science, and systems biology. Physics, chemistry, math, etc. are largely stagnant, and are becoming increasingly insular and isolated from one another, and more so for institutional and bureaucratic reasons, and not because this is more scientifically productive or something like that.

>This poses the problem that if the totality of everything that can possibly exist, always exists, it means that nothing really exists
I don't understand this

Someone explain this to me I don't want to have to try to read it

>>15685535
How can something be really something if that something is infinitely eternally everything. It's an unending singularity.
You know what's infinitely eternal? Nothing. Zero.
If there is only nothingness forever, its the same as absolutely everything always.
It's the same.
The total absence of anything gives birth to absolutely everything which is nothing.
Nothing remains nothing. That's why all this stuff we call reality is happening for no apparent reason and makes no sense to anyone. It's eternal nothingness manifested. This shit isn't real, never was and never will be. You're already dead and forgotten, in fact you never existed.

According to theory.

>>15684943
>we would have photorealistic videogames by now
We do
https://youtu.be/otu_iFTivQw