About the problem of two Hubble constants

I received a link to a popular article relating to the two values of Hubble constant (see \this). The popular article states that the expansion is 9 per cent faster than expected. This problem is old and earlier and has been seen discrepancy: measurement suggest two different values of Hubble constant. The article suggests that the bigger value is now accepted as the correct value. Hype warning is in order. The refusal to accept the possibility of two different values might mean only the continuation of the long lasting fruitless debate. It is better two try to explain why two different values are obtained.

I have considered the problem of two value of cosmological constant already earlier in the framework provided by many-sheeted space-time. In the sequel the puzzle of two Hubble constants is discussed applying the recent view about cosmological constant. What is new that twistor lift of TGD predicts that cosmological constant is length scale dependent and that cosmological expansion consists of jerkes involving accelerated periods followed by a phase transition changing reducing cosmological constant by a negative power of two and and inducing the transformation of the magnetic energy of monopole flux tubes to ordinary matter.

Monopole flux tubes have become a central element of TGD inspired cosmomology and astrophysics and the natural question is whether length scale dependent cosmological constant could solve the Hubble discrepancy? It seems that the higher value of cosmological constant corresponds to a smaller scale for observations: this could explain the discrepancy. The model requires a more detailed consideration of what it it is to be a standard candle. In many-sheeted space-time of TGD also the environment of the standard candle identified as monopole flux tube matters.

For distant standard candles the environment defined by the flux tube is younger than for nearby ones. The thickening associated with the ageing of the flux tubes involving the decay of magnetic energy to ordinary matter. The reduction of magnetic energy density in turn increases the value of the metric component g_aaa)^1/2 in the natural space-time coordinates provided by the Robertson-Walker coordinates of the light-cone (a corresponds to the proper time coordinate of the light-cone). This can give rise to the increase of the Hubble constant H= 1/(g_aaa)^1/2 explaining why the nearby flux tubes correspond to a larger value Hubble constant. Therefore monopole magnetic flux tubes could explain also the Hubble constant discrepancy.

See the article About the problem of two Hubble constants or the chapter More TGD inspired cosmology.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

The puzzle of two different values of Hubble constant

Thanks to Sebastian Cornelis Brink for an interesting link relating to the two values of Hubble constant. The popular article states that the expansion is 9 per cent faster than expected. This problem is old and earlier this problem was seen as the measurement of two different values of Hubble constant. The article suggests that the bigger value is now accepted as the correct value. Hype warning is in order. The refusal to accept the possibility of two different values means only the continuation of the long lasting fruitless debate.

I can think of two TGD explanations for two different Hubble constants - this is how I see the problem - and it should be time to think this through again.

1. The first TGD explanation coming into mind is based on many-sheeted space-time that I proposed decades ago. The Hubble constant depends on space-time sheet, in particular it depends on the p-adic scale assignable to the space-time sheet. Could the measured values of Hubble constant which differ by 9 per cent could correspond to different space-time sheets having slightly different Hubble constants. p-Adic length scales come as half octaves and different p-adic lengths scales would suggest a larger difference.
   
   
2. Could length scale dependent of cosmological constant predicted by TGD (see solve the problem? Could it lead to length scale dependent Hubble constant H explaining the 9 per cent discrepancy as reflecting different values of H at long and short distances or equivalently at different values of cosmological time?
   
   

Consider now the second option which actually can be seen as a more precise formulation of the first one.

1. TGD predicts length scale dependent cosmological constant and phase transitions inducing accelerated expansion (due to accelerated thickening of monopole flux tubes) as their magnetic energy transforms to ordinary matter (see this). Eventually the increase of volume energy stops his accelerated expansion. This fastens the expansion rate temporarily. Inflation and the recent accelerated expansion would be examples of this kind jerks replacing smooth cosmological expansion in TGD Universe. These jerks occur in all scale: even in scale of Earth (see this).
   
   
2. The square H² of Hubble constant (see Friedmann equation ).
   
   is sum of 3 contributions.
   
   
   1. The first term is proportional to mass density ρ_m and given by
      

      8π G ρ_m/3,
      

      where ρ_m is the density of matter.
      
      

   2. Second "kinematic" contribution
      

      -k/a²
      

      depending on the parameter k=-1,0,1 characterizing the 3-curvature of 3-space. For hyperbolic cosmology expanding forever one has k=-1. Curvature radius a corresponds in TGD to the light-cone proper time coordinate.
      
      

   3. The third term given by
      

      Λ/3
      

      corresponds to cosmological constant. It is positive since the expansion is accelerated. This observation was fatal for superstring theory.
      
      

3. What is new that in TGD Λ is (p-adic) length scale dependent and expected to come as negative powers of 2. Dark energy density is estimated to be 68 per cent of the total so that this term is the largest and the reduction of this term in the formula for H² by factor of say 1/4 is expected to have much larger effect on H² than 9 per cent. The value of Λ must be same for the measurements giving different value of H as already noticed.
   
   
4. Λ corresponds the sum of magnetic and volume energy densities defining the dark matter density having also interpretation as galactic dark matter. It is assignable to monopole flux tubes. Λ decreases during the accelerated period of expansion since magnetic energy decays to ordinary matter and increases the contribution of ρ_m . These changes do not however cancel each other. The dark energy is transformed to matter during the acceleration period but the visible matter participates the expansion and its density is reduced during expansion. Hence the value of H² should decrease.
   
   
5. Could this give rise to a net effect so that the value of H² would change during the acceleraion period? Since the time of emission for the radiation depends on the distance of the object, the redshift of the radiation giving information about H at different stages of accelerated expansion. For long distances the net decrease of H should be larger and the measurements of H from large distances should give a smaller value of H.
   

   This argument is rough but the key idea should be clear. The question is whether length scale dependent cosmological constant could solve the discrepancy? It turns out that the actual model requires a more detailed consideration of what it it is to be a standard candle. In many-sheeted space-time of TGD also the environment of the standard candle identified as monopole flux tube matters. For distant standard candles this environment is younger than for nearby ones and the ageing of the flux tubes involving the decay of magnetic energy to ordinary matter would explain why the nearby flux tubes correspond to a larger value Hubble constant.
   
   

See the article About the problem of two Hubble constants or the chapter More TGD inspired cosmology.

About the notion of length scale dependent cosmological constant

TGD predicts that cosmological constant Λ characterizing space-time sheets is length scale dependent and depends on p-adic length scale. Furthermore, expansion would be fractal and occur in jerks. This is the picture that twistor lift of TGD leads to (this).

Quite generally, cosmological constant defines itself a length scale R=1/Λ^1/2. r= (8π)^1/4(Rl_P)^1/2 - essentially the geometric mean of cosmological and Planck length - defines second much shorter length scale r. The density of dark energy assignable to flux tubes in TGD framework is given as ρ=1/r⁴.

In TGD framework these scales corresponds two p-adic length scales coming as half octaves. This predicts a discrete spectrum for the length scale dependent cosmological constant Λ . For instance, one can assign to ..., galaxies, stars, planets, etc... a value of cosmological constant. This makes sense in many-sheeted space-time but not in standard cosmology.

Cosmic expansion is replaced with a sequence of fast jerks reducing the value of cosmological constant by some power of 2 so that the size of the system increases correspondingly. The jerk involves a phase transition reducing Λ by some negative power of 2 inducing an accelerating period during which flux tube thickness increases and magnetic energy transforms to ordinary matter. Thickening however increases volume energy so that the expansion eventually halts. Also the opposite process could occur and could correspond to a "big" state function reduction (BSFR) in which the arrow of time changes.

An interesting question is whether the formation of neutron stars and super-novas could involve BSFR so that these collapse phenomena would be kind of local Big Bangs but in opposite time direction. One can also ask whether blackhole evaporation could have as TGD analog BSFR meaning return to original time direction by a local Big Bang. TGD analogs of blackholes are discussed here.

Consider now some representative examples to see whether this picture can be connected to empirical reality.

1. Cosmological constant in the length scale of recent cosmology corresponds to R∼ 10²⁶ m (see this). The corresponding shorter scale r= (8π)^1/4(Rl_P)^1/2 is identified essentially as the geometric mean of R and Planck length l_P and equals to r∼ 4× 10^-4 m: the size scale of large neuron. This is very probably not an accident: this scale would correspond to the thickness of monopole flux tubes.
   
   
2. If the large scale R is solar radius about 7× 10⁸ m, the short scale r∼ 10¹² m is about electron Compton length, which corresponds to p-adic length scale L(127) assignable to Mersenne prime M₁₂₇=2¹²⁷-1. This is also the size of dark proton explaining dark fusion deduced from Holmlid's findings (see this): this requires h_eff∼ 2¹²!
   

   Remark: Dark proton sequences could be neutralized by a sequence of ordinary electrons locally. This could give rise to analogs of atoms with electrons being very densely packed along the flux tube.
   

   The prediction of the TGD based model explaining the 10 year old puzzle related to the fact that nuclear abundances in solar interior are larger than outside (see this) assumes that nuclear reactions in Sun occur through intermediate states which are dark nuclei. Hot fusion in the Sun would thus involve the same mechanism as "cold fusion". The view about cosmological constant and TGD view about nuclear fusion lead to the same prediction.
   
   

3. If the short scale is p-adic length L(113) assignable to Gaussian Mersenne M_G,113=(1+i)¹¹³-1 defining nuclear size scale of r∼ 10^-14 m, one has R∼ 10 km, the radius of a typical neutron star (see this) having a typical mass of 1.4 solar masses.
   

   A possible interpretation is as a minimum length of a flux tube containing sequence of nucleons or nuclei and giving rise to a tangle. Neutron would take volume of about nuclear size - size of the magnetic body of neutron? Could supernova explosions be regarded as phase transitions scaling the stellar Λ by a power of 2 by making it larger and reducing dramatically the radius of the star?
   
   

4. Short scale r ∼ 10^-15 m corresponding to proton Compton length gives R about 100 m. Could this scale correspond to quark star (see this)? The known candidates for quark stars are smaller than neutron stars but have considerably larger radius measured in few kilometers. Weak length scale would give large radius of about 1 cm. The thickness of flux tube would be electroweak length scale.
   
   

See the article Comparing Electric Universe hypothesis and TGD or the chapter with the same title.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

Some comments about number theoretic discretisation

We had an interesting FB discussion with Stephen King and others about discrete and continuum. As it usually occurs, people tended to talk about different things and misunderstand each other. Therefore I decided to write down my thoughts and emphasize those points that I see as important.

1. Is discretization fundamental or not?

The conversation inspired the question whether discreteness is something fundamental or not. If it is assumed to be fundamental, one encounters problems. The discrete structures are not unique. One has deep problem with the known space-time symmetries. Symmetries are reduced to discrete subgroup or totally lost. A further problem is the fact that in order to do physics, one must bring in topology and length measurements.

In discrete situation topology, in particular space-time dimension, must be put in via homology effectively already meaning use of imbedding to Euclidian space. Length measurement remains completely ad hoc. One feeds in information, which was not there by using hand weaving arguments like infrared limit. It is possible to approximate continuum by discretization but discrete to continuum won't go.

In hype physics these hand weaving arguments are general. For instance, the emergence of 3-space from discrete Hilbert space is one attempt to get continuum. One puts in what is factually a discretization of 3-space and then gets 3-space back at IR limit and shouts "Eureka!". It is regrettable that funding goes to the production of this kind of pseudophysics and pseudomathematics.

2. Can one make discretizations unique?

Then discussion went to numerics. Numerics is for mathematicians same as eating to poets. One cannot avoid it but luckily you can find people doing the necessary programming if you are a professor. Finite discretization is necessary in numerics as is highly unique.

I do not have anything personal against discretization as a numerical tool. On the contrary, I see finite discretization as absolutely essential element of physics when it includes also correlates of cognition. Cognition is discrete and finite: this is the basic clue.

1. Cognitive representations are discretizations of for instance space-time and one should be able to do this in unique manner if one is talking about fundamental physics. In TGD p-adic physics as physics of cognition led to powerful calculational recipes. In p-adic thermodynamics the predictions come in power series of p-adic prime p and for the values of p assignable to elementary particles the two lowest terms give practically exact result. Corrections are of order 10^(-76) for electron characterized by Mersenne prime M_127= 2^127-1.
   
   
2. Adelic physics provides the formulation of p-adic physics: it is assumed that cognition is universal. Adele is a book like structure having as pages reals and extensions of various p-adic number fields induced by given extension of rationals. Each extension of rationals defines its own extension of the rational adele by inducing extensions of p-adic number fields. Common points between pages consist of points in extension of rationals. The books associated with the adeles give rise to infinite library.
   

   At space-time level the points with coordinates in extension define what I call cognitive representation. In the generic case it is discrete and has finite number of points. The loss of general coordinate invariance is the obvious objection. In TGD however the symmetries of imbedding space fix the coordinates used highly uniquely. M^8-H duality and octonionic interpretation implies that M^8 octonionic linear coordinates are highly unique. Note that M^8 must be complexified.
   
   

3. Discretization by cognitive representation is unique for given extension defining the measurement resolution. At the limit of algebraic numbers algebraic points form a dense set of real space-time surface and p-adic space-time surfaces so that the measurement resolution is ideal.
   

   Given polynomial defining space-time surfaces in M^8 defines via its roots extension of rationals. The hierarchy of extensions defines an evolutionary hierarchy. The dimension n of extension defines kind of IQ measuring algebraic complexity and n corresponds also to effective Planck constant labelling phases of dark matter in TGD sense so that a direct connection with physics emerges.
   

   Imbedding space assigns to a discretization a natural metric. Distances between points of metric are geodesic distances computed at the level of imbedding space.
   
   

3. Can discretization be performed without lattices?

1. One might think that discretization for partial differential equations involving derivatives forces to introduce lattice like structures. This is not needed in TGD. At the level of M^8 ordinary polynomials give rise to octonionic polynomials and space-time surfaces are algebraic surfaces for which imaginary or real part of octonionic polynomial in quaternionic sense vanishes. The equations are purely algebraic. This is essential!
   

   For surfaces defined by polynomials the roots of polynomial are enough to fix the space-time surface: discretization is not an approximation but gives an exact result! This could be called number theoretical holography.
   

   What about the field equations at the level of H=M^4xCP_2? M^8-H duality maps these surfaces to preferred extremals as 4-surfaces in H: they are minimal surfaces with singularities and determined in terms of polynomials too.
   
   

2. The simplest assumption is that the polynomials have rational coefficients. One can consider also algebraic coefficients. In both cases also WCW is discretized and given point -space-time surface in QCD has coordinates given by the points of the number theoretically universal cognitive representation of the space-time surface. Even real coefficients are possible and this seems to be needed to obtain WCW as a continuum.
   
   

4. Simple extensions of rationals as codons of space-time genetic code

1. The extensions of rationals define and infinite hierarchy. In particular, sequences of extensions of extensions of... define analog for the inclusions of hyper-finite actors my belief is that these two hierarchies are closely related. Galois group for a extension of extension contains Galois group of extension as normal subgroup and is therefore *not simple*. Extension hierarchies correspond to inclusion hierarchies for normal subgroups. Simple Galois groups are in very special position and associated with simple extensions, which are fundamental building bricks of inclusion hierarchies. They are like elementary particles and define fundamental space-time regions.
   
   
2. One can therefore talk about elementary space-time surfaces in M^8 and their compositions by function composition of octonionic polynomials. Simple groups would label elementary space-time regions. They have been classified: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_finite_simple_groups .
   
   
3. There is also an analogy with genes. Extensions with simple Galois groups could be seen as codons and sequences of extension obtained by functional composition as analogs of genes. I have even conjectured that the space-time surfaces associated with genes could quite concretely correspond to extensions of extensions of ...
   
   

5. Are octonionic polynomials enough or are also analytic functions needed?

1. What about analytic functions as limits of polynomials? Also their imaginary and real part can vanish in quaternionic sense and could define space-time surfaces - analogs of transcendentals as space-time surfaces. It is not clear whether these could be allowed or not.
   
   
2. Could one have a universal polynomial like function giving algebraic numbers as the extension of rationals defined by its algebraic roots. Could Riemann zeta could code algebraic numbers as an extension via its roots. I have conjectured that roots are algebraic numbers: could they span all algebraic numbers? It is known that the real or imaginary part of Riemann zeta along s=1/2 critical line can approximate any function to arbitrary accuracy: also this would fit with universality. Could one think that the space-time surface defined as root of octonionic continuation of zeta could be universal entity analogous to a fixed point of iteration in the construction of fractals?
   
   
3. Riemann zeta has counterpart in all extensions of rationals known as Dedekind zeta. Therefore that it seems that Riemann zeta is not unique. One can ask whether Dedekind zetas associated with simple Galois groups are special and whether Dedekind zetas associated with extensions of extensions of .... can be constructed by using the simple building brick zetas. One can also construct iterates of Riemann zeta having at least the same roots as zeta by the rule f(s)-->zeta(f(s))+zeta(0), zeta(0)=-1/2. zeta is not a fixed point of this iteration but one could ask whether the fixed point is obtained at the limit of infinite number of iterations.
   
   

See the article Are fundamental entities discrete or continous and what discretization at fundamental level could mean?.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

Comparing Electric Universe hypothesis and TGD

I have encountered the notion of Electric Universe (EU) several times during the years. Rational Wiki (see this) describes EU as pseudoscience claiming that the formation and evolution can be better explaining by electricity and magnetism than by gravity alone as the standard belief goes. Aether is also reported to be part of the theory and have elements from mythology.

One must be however very cautious with these kind of highly negatively emotional articles pretending to represent balanced and objective scientific statements. The words crank and crackpot appeared quite too often in them, and when the entire article is collection of emotionally negative associations about people behind EU than the contents of EU itself, one knows that this is not science.

I have become during last 42 years very familiar with people calling themselves "skeptics" and therefore I decided to to take a more analytic approach and concentrate on "than in terms of gravitation alone". This tells the reductionistic motivations of the author. Author has decided cosmology and astrophysics can be described in terms of gravitation only: the proposal that electromagnetism could be involved, is pseudoscience. The article is only part of battle between different world vires. It is already now clear that one day "gravitation alone" hypothesis will be regarded comparable to the aether hypothesis.

Could we learn something from EU and the work of SAFIRE team?

What EU (see this) really claims? There is of course no unique EU but collection of models. Rather, it claims that electromagnetism, in particular plasmas, are central for the understanding of galaxies and astrophysical objects, in particular nuclear fusion. The Electric Sun model (see this) assumes that astrophysical objects derive their main sources of their power electrically. That gravitation would not be needed at all is only an extremist claim. To me the claim that nuclear physics is not needed, looks unrealistic.

The lucky instance, is that the experimental work of SAFIRE team (see Youtube video) to be discussed in the sequel concentrates only on question whether nuclear fusion can be achieve in plasma system and the conclusion is that nuclear transmutations occur. This does not mean that nuclear physics is not needed. What it however implies that the recent view about nuclear physics is wrong also also the phenomenon dubbed as "cold fusion" or "low energy nuclear reactions" (LENR) has demonstrated. Nuclear physics of solar core has been also plagued by a very serious anomaly for 10 years now.

Could we take a less emotional approach and look whether we could learn something - open-mindedness if not anything else - from the people labelled with "EU"? I had luck: I received two extremely interesting links from Wes Johnson to videos describing purely empirical and experimental physics. Nothing about mythology, aether, or anything like that but two highly inspiring videos allowing to see what science as a process of discovery is. This is something totally different from what I have seen SUSY and superstring theoreticians doing last four decades. It is about what is there in the real world, concrete numbers and correlations, discovery of physical anomalies. Something different from infertile games with braney worlds, multiverses, blackholes, etc. and endless production of hype.

It was clear from beginning that these videos provide further applications for the TGD view about cosmology and formation of galaxies and smaller stellar objects.

TGD view about classical fields

TGD does not assume aether but neither does it assume that gravitation alone is enough for understanding cosmology and astrophysics. In TGD both gravitation and long range electromagnetic fields are in crucial role. Nuclear physics is part of TGD but TGD view from it differs in some crucial aspects.

TGD leads to a new view about classical fields differing from the views of standard model and General Relativity (GRT).

1. The notion of field is generalized by induction procedure. All classical fields are expressible in terms of 8 coordinates of 8-D imbedding space H=M⁴× CP₂ and their gradients. General coordinate invariance reduces their number to 4 effectively. This means enormous reduction in local field like degrees of freedom. The extreme complexity of many-sheeted space-time compensates for this reduction and space-time is topologically complex in all scales.
   

   This does not reduce gravitation to electromagnetism as EU claims: rather both gravitation, electromagnetism and actually electroweak and color interactions are reduced to the geometry of space-time surface via the notion of the induced gauge field and metric. The induction of spinor structure does the same for spinor fields.
   
   

2. Standard model and GRT emerge at QFT limit when space-time sheets are replaced with single region of M⁴ made slightly curved. The replacement of many-sheeted space-time with Einsteinian space-time however means enormous loss of information. In particular, the information about magnetic flux tubes is completely lost. This loss of information makes description of systems like living matter extremely difficult.
   
   
3. In primordial cosmology Einsteinian picture does not work even as approximation. At this limit space-time surfaces can be idealized by what I call cosmic strings having 2-D M⁴ projection and behaving like strings for most practical purposes. Ironically, string like objects are present in all scales in TGD, not only something in Planck length scale. The tragedy of superstring models is easy to see: people had so enormous hurry to guarantee the call from Stocholm that they did not have time to realize that strings must be generalized to 3-D objects having interpretation as both particles and 3-space - depending on the scale.
   
   

Cosmic strings thickening to flux tubes as basic element of TGD based cosmology and astrophysics

Cosmic strings carrying monopole fluxes bring a lot of new elements to cosmology and astrophysics and solve the numerous problems of "gravitation only" approach.

1. These cosmic strings, in particular those carrying monopole flux possible due to the non-trivial topology of CP₂ thicken gradually to flux tubes, which are central element of TGD view about formation of various structures, in particular galaxies, stars, planets, and even smaller objects.
   

   They are present in all scales: also in quantum biology, biochemistry, chemistry, molecular physics, atomic physics, nuclear physics, hadron physics. In all scales new phenomena are predicted and it has been fascinating to realize that the experimental physics is producing anomalies in all these branches of physics and really stunning to realize that theoretical physicists could not be less interested.
   

   Also in cosmology and astrophysics they are crucial and without them one cannot understand cosmological constant, the notion of dark matter and energy, the formations mechanisms of galaxies, stellar object, stars, and even smaller objects. "Gravitation alone" is not enough.
   
   

2. The twistor lift of TGD predicts that cosmological constant depends on p-adic length scale and become extremely small in cosmological scales but very large in short scales. This solves the basic problem of cosmology due to the gigantic value of cosmological constant also due its wrong sign which eventually killed string models.
   

   During cosmological evolution phase transitions reducing the value of cosmological constant occur leading to an accelerated expansion since volume energy is reduced. This sequences of jerks replaces smooth cosmological expansion of standard cosmology and solves the mystery due to the fact that astrophysical objects co-expand but do not seem to expand themselves. Smooth cosmic expansion is replaced with a sequence of jerks involving accelerating and slowing down periods.
   

   The reason is that magnetic contribution to string tension is reduced in thickening but volume energy increases so that one has acceleration followed by slowing down leading to a stationary situation. This expansion transforms the energy of flux tube identifiable as dark energy/dark matter to ordinary matter and is counterpart for inflation but occurring in all scales.
   
   

3. The model for galaxies as tangles along long cosmic strings predicts that the thickening of flux tube in the tangle generates ordinary matter. This explains the flat velocity spectrum of stars around galaxies as being due to the gravitational field of long string, and also the galaxies apparently without dark matter as galaxies formed around short circular cosmic strings. The model allows to solve the accumulating anomalies of halo model based on dark matter identified as some exotic particles.
   
   
4. The local jerks have counterpart even at the level of Earth and the TGD inspired Expanding Earth model predicting that in Cambrian Explosion the radius of Earth increased very rapidly by a factor of 2 can be regarded as this kind of jerk. This leads also to an explanation of Cambrian Explosion and a model for the evolution of prebiotic life as occurring in underground oceans shielded from cosmic rays and meteoric bombardment and preventing the oxygen from leaking to outer space. The splitting of core of Earth to inner core and rotating outer core generated ordinary magnetic field making possible atmosphere.
   
   
5. TGD suggests also that dark matter identifiable as h_eff=n× h₀ phases and dark energy identifiable as magnetic and volume energy of flux tubes are by quantum classical correspondence (QCC) one and same thing basically. More formally, QCC implies that the eigenvalues for fermionic representations of Cartan algebra generators as Noether charges - observables - are same as the values for classical Noether charges. In particular, energy, momentum and angular momentum.
   
   

From this picture it is clear that in TGD Universe both gravitation and electromagnetism - or more generally the physics of induced electroweak and color fields is crucial for understand the formation of astrophysical objects.

TGD view about craters of Moon and findings of SAFIRE team

This article is a commentary of the mentioned two videos from TGD point of view.

1. The first video told about craters of Moon and I learned that existing theories, about which I found representations in Wikipedia too, are full of anomalies. I could not find anything obviously pseudoscientific in the representations apart. Since I have a habit to concentrate on content than social clues, I realized only later that the killer label EU assigned with these both videos.
   

   It was immediately clear that TGD based model for "cold fusion", another branch of evolving science labelled as pseudoscience but already now led to a developing technology, can be scaled up to describe the formation of craters.
   
   

2. Second video was about experiments done by SAFIRE team. They forget theoretical prejudices and just try to look whether Sun can be created in laboratory. Sun would be spherical electrode with positive charge surrounded by similar electrode with opposite charge and there would be strong electric field between them. The video told about the discoveries made also by "cold fusion" people: transmutations producing elements with higher isotope number are found to occur. Do transmutations occur everywhere and is nuclear fusion in solar core only one part of the story? This is the question that also TGD raises.
   
   

It must be emphasized, that these videos represent only two examples of the continual stream of anomalies having immediate explanation in TGD framework. Some time ago I had learned that even the cherished nuclear physics has had a very serious anomaly for a decade: the model of cold fusion based on TGD view about dark matter and the notion of monopole magnetic flux tube generalizes to a model of nuclear reactions and of Sun itself explaining this anomaly too. Only few weeks ago I had learned that the magnetic field of Mars behaves very weirdly: popular article used the word "magnetic madness". Some days ago I learned about evidence that Earth's surface 600 million years was without details such as rivers and lakes: this fits with the Expanding Earth hypothesis. I learned also fascinating and strange facts about earthquakes and volcanic eruptions providing an applications for zero energy ontology based view about state function reduction in macroscopic length scales.

See the article Comparing Electric Universe hypothesis and TGD or the chapter with the same title.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

The findings of SAFIRE team as support for dark nucleosynthesis

I got from West Johnson a highly interesting link to a video providing a representation about the experimental work done in SAFIRE project (see this) . The motivation is so called Electric Universe model, which I see as unrealistic but the work itself was purely experimental. The mainstream claim, which can be found in Wikipedia is that these scientists are crackpots. To my best understanding this claim is simply an intentional lie. This conclusion is not difficult to make on basis of what I have been experienced during these four decades of TGD. The world view is changing: the old memes defending themselves against new memes desperately and the end justifies the means.

One must of course be extremely cautious. Nuclear transmutations are in air, so to say. It is difficult to believe that TGD would be totally unknown in physics community although there is politically motivated total silence about TGD leading to even comic manifestations. When it begins to look plausible that certain theory might provide a breakthrough at the level of entire world view, it might lead to over-reactions. However, Electric Universe seems to be the theoretical background of SAFIRE project and it is very different vision as compared to TGD.

What SAFIRE group is doing?

1. SAFIRE team is studying plasma. They are not doing it in garage, a big laboratory is in question, and the researchers have academic credentials.
   
   
2. One has two electrodes - positively charge inner spherical electrode and outer negatively charged spherical anode. This gives rise to a strong electric field. Various gases are in the atmosphere, in particular hydrogen: (see this). Electric discharge is created and electric currents run in the voltage. The situation is like in electrolysis. The temperatures is rather low: around 100 degrees Celsius.
   

   Note that in cold fusion experiments one has a situation in which hydrogen atoms are absorbed in the cathode. Plasma is created in this kind of situation and one looks what happens by measuring all kinds of observables. One can study what happens at the surface of the anode, one can study the plasma atmosphere say by measuring the voltage and doing optic spectroscopy.
   
   

For me the most interesting topic of the talk were nuclear transmutations. "Cold fusion" model based on magnetic flux tubes containing dark matter as h_eff=n/times h₀ phases predicts just what has been observed. It was really amazing to see direct experimental verification of the most radical predictions of TGD: things are going really fast now.

1. One of the basic predictions of TGD are nuclear transmutations. They observe nuclear transmutations at low temperatures than believed and production of energy. Essentially this is observed also by "cold fusion" experimentalists (see this) and this) .
   
   
2. Energy production was claimed. The ratio of the output power to input power seemed to me incredible. Dark nuclear fusion predicts in optimal situation very large COP but in the "cold fusion" experiments the COP is of order 2-3 typically. If I understood correctly, it was now something like 10 or even more. Maybe I misunderstood.
   
   
3. The experimentalists do not know the mechanism involved and there is no such mechanism in standard model Universe. In TGD Universe it would be the formation of dark proton sequences - dark nuclei - transforming to ordinary nuclei and liberating essentially nuclear binding energy. In fact, also ordinary nuclear reactions would also proceed by the formation of dark nuclei as intermediate states: this replaces tunnelling phenomenon as mechanism in TGD Universe (see this).
   
   
4. It was also claimed that SAFIRE produces by transmutations just those non-organic atoms that are observed in interstellar space. This supports the TGD based proposal that part of elements is formed in interstellar space besides solar cores. If both are involved, the abundances from both should be very similar. If nuclear transmutations involve only the production of dark proton sequences transforming to ordinary nuclei whereas ordinary nucleosynthesis in Sun would involve also the fusions of ordinary nuclei by generating dark nuclei as intermediate states, it is is not clear whether this is the case.
   
   
5. The flux tubes carry also electric fields parallel to them in average sense and charges along them can accelerate to high energies. Second point is that dissipation is very slow due to the large value of h_eff: this brings a completely new element into the picture. The dark protons and ions at flux tubes can accelerate to very high energies. This would explain for instance the production of very high energy electrons in lightnings: would they accelerate to unexpectedly high energies in the electric field of Earth prevailing also inside flux tubes. By the way, I am still not sure whether gravitational flux tubes can be regarded as monopole flux tubes.
   
   

Some further impressions about what was observed at the surface of the anode and at in atmosphere.

1. Highly interesting were the pictures about the microscopic structures involved. Brought in mind the craters on the surface of Moon (see this). The mechanism would be the same - TGD Universe is fractal. The balls formed by elements were one very interesting detail that should be understood. Why the atoms of given element gathered together in this manner?
   

   Was the transformation to ordinary nuclei quantum coherent process as I have proposed on basis of large h_eff and occurred for a bundle of flux tubes simultaneously? - these bundles are actually part of the h_eff hypothesis. The motivation was the observation of Holmlid that even kaons with masses in 500 MeV range were produced! The production of so large energy quanta is not possible without large scale quantum coherence since nuclear bining energies are in MeV range. h_eff is proportional the number of flux tubes in bundle (see this) .
   
   

2. The formation of layered structures in the atmosphere around anode formed from double layers was also reported. These bring in mind cell membranes.
   
   
3. So called dark mode was mentioned and the behaviour of electric voltage as function of distance for dark mode and glow mode with visible atmosphere were compared. If I understood correctly, the plasma becomes invisible in dark mode. What could this mean in TGD Universe? Could a phase transition transforming ordinary photons to dark photons be in question? Or is the rate for the transformation of dark photons to ordinary photons for some reason much slower in the dark mode? Could this rate be proportional to h_eff and could dark mode have larger h_eff.
   
   

In the second part of a talk a proposal for how stars and planets are formed was discussed.

1. It was essentially TGD view except that they did not talk about monopole flux tubes and tangles along them: the natural possibility is that tangles have structure analogous to that of flux lines of dipole magnetic field.
   
   
2. One of the basic conjectures of TGD is that solar interior was not the only place, where elements are produced. They would be produced by cold fusion everywhere. In planets an the dark currents going along flux tubes to the interior of planets and smaller objects coming from Sun along flux tube network would be in crucial role and give rise to dark nuclear fusion.
   
   
3. Personally I do not see electric universe as a realistic option. Electromagnetic fields in long length scales are essential for the formation of the planets and their chemistry. Gravitational fields are however also central and the the role of gravitational Planck constant assignable to gravitational flux tubes having huge values is in key role in TGD. What makes electromagnetic fields equally important is the existence of monopole magnetic flux tubes and hierarchy of Planck constants. In TGD of course, all fields are expressible in terms of imbedding space-time coordinates as functions of space-time coordinates. Field theorist would say that by general coordinate invariance one has only 4 primary field like variables. In TGD however the notion of classical field is geometrized: space-time geometry determines everything.
   
   

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.



What created the craters of Moon and other celestial bodies?

I received from Wes Johnson a link to to a Youtube video of Space News: Electric Universe titled
Our Lightning-Scarred Moon-The Evidence Grows . Very briefly: the basic message is that in case of Moon the basic theories for the formation of craters assuming impacts and volcanism as mechanisms are challenged by a large number of anomalies. It is also claimed that the theory assuming electric discharges - lightnings- as a cause is consistent with the data.

The video was highly interesting and I listened it through several times and the following is my attempt to summarize what I learned and how the the model based on electric lightnings can be formulated in TGD framework. Actually a generalization of a model formulated for what happens in "cold fusion" as dark nuclei transform to ordinary ones, is in question. The formation of craters could involve "cold fusion" and a kind of nuclear explosion.

Consider first what mainstream science says about the formation of craters. Impacts and volcanism would be the basic mechanisms. Most of craters would be however due to impacts.

1. According to Wikipedia article, the cratering records of very old surfaces, such as Mercury, the Moon, and the southern highlands of Mars, record a period of intense early bombardment in the inner Solar System around 3.9 billion years ago. This is actually hypothesis known as late bombardment hypothesis.
   
   
2. The Wikipedia article about craters in Moon states that most craters in Moon are impact craters. The number of craters in Moon and Mars is many orders of magnitude larger than that of impact craters in Earth. A natural explanation is that geological processes have destroyed the craters and very few from time before 500 million years are known (happens to be the time of Cambrian explosion about which I have talked a lot).
   
   

The video argues that the properties of craters of Moon are not consistent with either hypothesis.

1. The sizes of craters can be enormous. Moon has a gigantic crater which has radius of 25000 km and is 390 km deep. It is one of the largest craters in solar system. Impact theory predicts that there should be material bursted from the mantle to the surface. The material is shocked and melded and there is no material from mantle as volcanic hypothesis would require (data are from Apollo mission).
   
   
2. Why Moon should be so heavily cratered? The hypothesis that so called late heavy bombardment period 4.5-3.8 Gy ago lasting for 20 -200 million years gave rise to the impacts producing the craters. Asteroids have been assumed to have caused the impacts. The video mentions an article claiming that asteroids are not probable cause. The modified hypothesis is that remnants from the formation of planetary system caused the impacts.
   
   
3. The craters are highly circular and can form sequences. There are also smaller craters at the rims of the craters bringing in mind fractal structure: vortices containing vortices containing....
   
   
4. Also very long rilles very different from lava tubes at Earth are found and often start from the circular craters. Rilles have sequences of craters within them. The rilles can be very long, much longer than at Earth: the longest rille is 185 km long. Just the opposite should be the case, since the heat loss in very thin atmosphere should be faster than at Earth with insulating atmopshere so that the rilles should be shorter. There is no rubble at the bottom of rilles as at Earth. The rilles can be directed uphill rather than downhill as in hydrodynamic and lava flows. Rilles also disappear instantaneously. The rilles dwindle suddenly, which does not support the idea that lava flow caused their formation by "eating" the surface material. Rather this, suggest a sheet like structure entering the surface as giving rise to the rille. In the case of the highly circular craters a tube like structure meeting the surface orthogonally suggests itself.
   
   
5. Also glass spheres and chondrules and minerals formed at very high temperatures are found in craters.
   Amusingly, crop circles (see this and this) involve also glass spheres and the model that propose for their formation decades ago would be the same as the model to be discussed for the formation of craters.
   
   
6. The near side of Moon less cratered than far side. There are even hexagonal craters. At Mars there is hemisphere dichotomy with southern hemisphere containing more craters.
   
   

Consider the model based on electric discharges argued to be consistent with all data.

1. Immanuel Velikovsky proposed that cosmic lightnings between planets and Moons created the craters of Moon Mainstream has labelled Velikovski as pseudoscientist. Carl Sagan has written a rather civilized critic of Velikovski's ideas concentrating on content rather than direct personal insults. On basis of his vision Velikovski predicted remanent magnetism in lunar rocks. Nowadays the magnetic field is very weak. This remanent magnetism has been observed.
   
   
2. The crucial discovery by Brian J. Ford was that the electric discharges in lab applied also in industrial processes produce structures very similar to those observed in Moon. The ratio of sizes of largest to smallest craters is the same in Moon and in Mars. In particular, the craters produced in electric discharges are extremely circular. The document claims the electric discharge hypothesis is consistent with all findings about craters in Moon.
   
   
3. R. Juergens studied the rilles appearing in many scales and starting typically from the craters. They were originally called cracks and proposed to be formed by a flow of water or lava across surfaces or beneath the ground. Juergens found however that high energy electric discharge is favoured as a model. Lava and water cannot explain the features of rilless already listed like craters along rilles whereas electric discharges reproduce these features.
   
   

If the arguments of the document are true, the proposal must be taken very seriously. It seems incredible that mainstream could neglect so serious anomalies but I have seen this to happen in particle physics for decades. So: suppose that one take the claims seriously. What could be TGD explanation?

1. Monopole magnetic flux tubes carrying dark matter - perhaps dark nuclei as dark proton sequences is of course what comes first in mind. The flux tubes carrying the dark nuclei as dark cosmic rays could be associated with solar wind and are proposed to form a part of a bigger network allowing cosmic rays to propagate between galacies, stars and smaller astrophysical objects. This would be a cosmic analog of blood circulation (see this and this).
   

   Flux tubes have flux tubes within flux tubes that mathematical connection between incompressible liquid flow and magnetic field would allow to understanding the various structures as analogos of hydrodynamic trubueles having vortices within vortices fractal structure.
   
   

2. In the collision with ground the dark nucleus formed by dark nucleon sequence nucleons would transform to ordinar nucleons and liberate practically all nuclear binding energy (see this and this) . The event would be like a nuclear explosion and this could explain why the effect is so large. This would be "cold fusion" event in macro scale. "Cold fusion" is known to involve formation of craters in micro scale and it would interesting to see whether the situation are scaled versions of each other.
   
   Also flux sheets are possible and the long rilles could correspond to these. Flux tubes inside flux tubes and inside flux sheets are possible and could give rise to fractal craters. This explanation would mean that also electric discharges in laboratory give rise to nuclear transmutations producing heavier elements as happens also in "cold fusion". This predictions could be tested in lab.
   
   
3. From Wikipedia article one learns that ores often accompany craters and an interesting question is whether the craters formed in this manner give rise to ores.
   
   
4. What one can say about these monopole flux tubes carrying the dark nuclei to Moon. Most naturally they would be dark flux tubes associated with solar wind bringing cosmic rays. Earth does not have this kind of craters and the number of impact craters is small. The simplest explanation is that geological and atmospheric processes have caused the erosion of these structures. This is proposed as an explanation for the very small number of impact craters in Earh (190), whereas their number in Moon, some planets and their moons is much larger due to the absence of atmosphere.
   

   It is also possible that reconnections of solar flux tubes with the flux tubes of dark magnetic field associated with the Moon (planet or its moon) is involved and leads to the event! Also the flux tubes of dark magnetic fields of planets and
   Moon (moons of planets) could take place.
   
   

One can test the hypothesis is consistent with the TGD inspired version of Expanding Earth model (see this).

1. The model assumes that Earth had radius, which is half of the recent value before Cambrian explosion and same as the recent radius of Mars. Then came geologically fast expansion (jerk in sequence of fast expansions reducing the value of length scale dependent cosmological constant replacing smooth cosmic expansion in TGD Universe) and the life that had evolved in underground oceans below Earth's surface bursted to the surface and oceans were formed.
   
   
2. The assumption that the situation at Earth was the same as in Mars before the expansion (see this), would explain the finding that the surface of Earth seems to have lost various details like rivers and lakes about 600 million years ago preceding Cambrian explosion about 512 million years ago.
   

   If the surface of Earth was like the surface of Mars now it would have been full of craters formed by electrical discharges due to the solar wind. This does not kill the model. The presence of erosion due to the emergence of atmosphere and biosphere would explain the absence of these craters at the surface of recent Earth. At the bottom of oceans formed in the expansions they would be automatically absent. Inside tectonic plates signatures of their presence might be found.
   
   

3. The recent Earth is shielded by van Allen belts. If the van Allen belts consisted of dark flux tubes, they should have been present also before expansion and shielded Earth from cosmic rays and solar wind by guiding it to the Earth's interior. This would have brought ions and dark photons into the underground oceansand made possible the evolution of multicelluar life capable of photosynthesis.
   
   

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

How consciousness does webs its path into the life?

This post is kind of guest post by Savyasanchi Ghose inspired by our discussion relating to life and consciousness. I transformed his doc file to html file and added some after-comments. I strongly encourate to look the video.

About: The following commentary is inspired by a video I saw on Youtube. This video shows an artificial egg hatching experiment, in which a researcher tries to hatch an egg outside the egg, he periodically puts some chemicals into it and then at last life came to it. These are the questions in which I tried to know what is the life and consciousness in this case, what is the ‘notion’ of life here, these questions were posted by me on Facebook and answers were provided by a great Finnish theoretical physicist Matti Pitkänen.

1. How the life did came to the ‘chicken’?
   

   The basic question is about what "consciousness" is. If consciousness is indeed a property as materialistic science teaches, the question is about how this property emerged. In TGD framework consciousness is not a property but in the quantum jumps re-creating the sub-universe of self. "Consciousness" is re-creation, not a property: carve this to my tombstone ;-). Therefore one must ask how the first moment of recreation emerged.
   

   In zero energy ontology (ZEO) self has two parts: the un-exchanging part - core selfness - corresponds to untangled subsystem located at passive boundary of causal diamond (CD) not changed in "small" state function reductions. Changing part of selfness, "Maya" corresponds to the changing part of state at the active boundary of CD changing in each "small" state function reduction having also interpretation as time measurement. Active boundary of CD also drifts farther away from the passive one giving rise to the experience about flow of time and experienced time-clock-time correspondence.
   

   "Big" state function changes the roles of active and passive boundaries of self and means re-incarnation: self reincarnates with opposite arrow of time. This is the moment of birth. Subsequent "small" state function reductions mean generalized Zeno effect for permanself but the changing part of self in active boundary of CD gives rise to sensory experience, cognition, etc...
   

   What this re-incarnates self-corresponds is an interesting question: I think the construction of model for solar cycle (what it has to do with consciousness ;-)?) led to a considerable progress here (see this).
   

   Biological life involves also many other aspects. For instance, information is essential aspect and here adelic physics predicts evolutionary hierarchy in one-one correspondence with extensions of rationales. The dimension of extension which corresponds to effective Planck constants is the measure for the evolutionary level and determines the maximal conscious information content.
   

   One could require that system replicates. As a matter fact, replication of 3-surface analogous to 3-vertex is Feynman diagrammatic occurs already for elementary particles which are 3-surfaces rather than points in TGD. On could require that the system has some minimum repertoire of quantum programs - standardized mental images- representable as superposition of space-time surfaces that I call preferred extremes. In ZEO quantum states are analogous to these
   quantum programs.
   
   

2. I understand consciousness as a parameter which differentiates between a dead and a living being, not as a capability of an individual to make decisions or to sense, How did it come to the new born chick?
   

   Here I disagree. Any system can have conscious experiences: it must correspond in ZEO a system, which is de-entangled from the rest of the world at passive boundary of CD. Every living being has conscious experiences. It is a matter of definition whether one regards electron as living. One could define that the extension of rationales involved must be non-trivial or that it has some minimal complexity.
   
   

3. Morphogenetic fields are the fields that guide the developing embryo, how did they arise here? What is the nature of these fields here? And how they differ from the fields present when egg hatch naturally.
   

   In TGD framework magnetic body (MB) is the intentional agent controlling biological body (egg) and receiving sensory input from it by analogs of EEG in various frequency scales and realized as dark photons with h_eff=n*h_0. MB would be the counterpart of morphogenetic fields. MB has hierarchical structure having parts in in various size scales. Scales include size of Earth and even larger scales. The larger the part the larger h_eff=nh_0 and the higher its "IQ" and the higher the level in control hierarchy. Biological body, the egg, would be near the bottom. Elementary particles are the ultimate bottom.
   
   

4. What happened exactly at t=0 when any movement started inside the gelatin, how this conscious force originated inside there? Are chemicals creating some kind of consciousness? Well if this is so, then why do we deny that consciousness is generated by brain?
   

   Gelatin is born or rather, reincarnates, in "big" state function reduction. Re-creation without breaking the laws of deterministic physics occurring in every "small" state function reduction is the counterpart of conscious force.
   

   Conscious experience is in the moment of re-creation, and not a property of some existing entity. One cannot say that consciousness is generated: there is no consciousness. Chemicals are not conscious, nothing is conscious. The re-creation of the quantum states of chemicals gives rise to conscious experience at this particular level of hierarchy.
   
   

This was the little article sent by Ghose. Here are some after-comments of mine.

1. The egg must have been fertilized so that it would have developed to a chicken in any case so that life was already there. Actually everything can be said to be living in TGD Universe, only the level of conscious intelligence varies. The experimenter perhaps made the process of evolution of the embryo faster.
   

   It is a pity that the text was not in english: I would like to know what the added chemicals were. Also it remained open what the real time scale for the process was.
   
   

2. What I did not emphasize enough is the evolutionary process involved. In TGD picture it corresponds to the gradual emergence of algebraic complexity as extensions of rationals assignable to subsystems of this developing egg emerge. Increasingly larger values of effective Planck constant pop up. The system or develops magnetic body getting more and more complex and it begins gradually to control the developing embryo. This miraculous but quantum jump is literally a miracle: a recreation of the quantum Universe.
   
   
3. What is needed is metabolic energy since to increase h_eff and to keep its values same requires energy output: h_eff tends to decrease spontaneously by liberating energy. Egg itself can provide part of metabolic energy. Mother hen provides also metabolic energy by hatching the egg. Perhaps the purpose of added chemicals was to provide more metabolic energy to fasten the process. Is addition of proteins serving as source of metabolic energy enough? One might ask whether also the magnetic body of moghet hen is involved.
   
   

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

What smoothed out Earth's surface for 600 million years ago - or was it already smooth?

I learned about new fascinating finding (see this) related to the geological history of Earth. During a geologically very brief period Earth's surfaces would have somehow lost its surface details such as rivers and lakes. This would have happened for 600 million years ago. Before this there would have been period of snowball Earth.

TGD provides different view about the renovation of the surface of Earth by loss of details and about the period before this change: snowball Earth hypothesis seems un-necessary. There were no oceans. The situation would have been the same as in Mars now. Water was in underground oceans as has been observed recently in Mars. One could deduce the story of Earth from what we know about Mars on basis of latest discoveries.

Cambrian explosion, in which complex multicellulars suddenly and mysteriously emerged took place about 512 million years whereas the loss of details is claimed to have happened about 600 million years ago. TGD based theory of expanding Earth assumes that Cambrian explosion happened because of geologically very fast expansion of Earth so that the radius of Earth increased by a factor 2. Amusingly, the radius of Earth would have been before the expansion same as that of Mars now!

Expansion would correspond to one fast jerk in the sequence of jerks, which replaces smooth cosmic expansion in TGD Universe: it is indeed known that astrophysical objects co-move in expansion but do not expand themselves (except by jerks). These jerks would be induced by reduction of length scale dependent cosmological constant by factor 1/4, or more generally, negative power of 2. The findings suggest that the expansion started about 600 million years ago and happened geologically very fast. Note that length scale dependent cosmological constant solves the basic problem of standard cosmology, which has killed many theories, also superstring theory.

Before this life would have evolved in underground oceans - the womb of Mother Gaia - shielded from cosmic rays and meteors. Oxygen and other important molecules could not leak out so that oxygen based life could evolve. In the expansion the core of Earth split into two parts (Mars has same radius as Earth and only single core) and the rotation of the outer core created ordinary magnetic field preventing oxygen and other important molecules to leak out. Otherwise the life at surface would not have survived. The surface of Earth split into pieces giving rise to continents and underground oceans gave rise to the oceans.

Consider now the mystery of lost details.

1. The surface of Earth before expansion should have looked very much the same as that of Mars now. Since there was very little water, rivers, lakes and this kind of features would have been practically absent. I do not know whether this is enough to explain the findings.
   
   
2. If the surface of Earth was stretched in the sudden expansion, the details of Earth's surface would have tended to disappear since gradients are reduced in the stretching. Whether the stretching really occured is however not clear: one could argue that the surface split into pieces like clay soil as it dries and formed continents.
   
   
3. The bottoms of oceans consisted of the magma from the interior of Earth and they should have been rather smooth. Also this might help to understand the findings.
   
   

See the articles Expanding Earth Model and Pre-Cambrian Evolution of Continents, Climate, and Life and Could Mars have intra-planetary life?

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

Dark matter nightmare is not due to wrong equations but wrong philosophy

Sabine Hossenfelder wrote an article "Dark matter nightmare: What if we are just using the wrong equations?" (see this) suggesting that we are using wrong equations in general relativity. The point is that the field equations of general relativity are nonlinear and the averaging is not consistent with the non-linearity. Average metric does not obey Einstein's equations.

This is true but to my view cannot solve the problem. Far from source region the relative error made in averaging distance in range [r,r+Deltar] with the mean value of r and r+Deltar is of order Deltar/r and far from sources very small. One can write perturbation series in powers Delta r/r and higher contributions go rapidly to zero. One can also argue that Einstein's equations emerge at long length scale limit of the theory so that the argument would not work. One must replace Einstein equations with something more deeper.

I am convinced that the problem is not at the level of numerics but much deeper and much more general. It is about the basic philosophy behind recent day theoretical physics dominated by reductionism and physicalism. During years I have learned that also other fields of physics and also chemistry, biology, neuroscience, and consciousness are full of deep problems.

What I call naive length scale reductionism is the mother of all problems that we are not able to solve.

1. Superstring models were hoped to be the last jewel in the crown of reductionism. With one huge step we would have jumped directly to Planck scale. It did not happen. Superstring models led to landscape problem. Then it turned out that landscape hoped to explain the small value of cosmological constant and its sign very probably does not exist. One must accept that superstring theory predicts huge cosmological constant with wrong sign. I other worlds: superstrings are dead since single wrong prediction is enough to kill the theory.
   
   
2. The wrong path was however chosen much earlier. GUTs providing extremely naive generalization of standard model were the fatal step preceding superstrings. The fact that GUTs could not make any testable prediction except proton decay which did not happen, should have put bells ringing. But already standard model view about quark color is very probably wrong: for instance, axion difficulty and the failure to describe hadrons suggests strongly this. Why standard model gauge group is not at all understood.
   
   
3. In spirit of reductionism nuclear physics have been pretended to be a mature branch of physics although it is just a collection of models each explaining some aspect of nuclear physics. 10 years ago emerged a very serious problem with the fact that nuclear abundances deduce from the physics of solar interior are different from those defined for solar spectrum and meteorites. "Cold fusion" and nuclear transmutations have been known for about century and have been labelled as pseudoscience but the situation has changed and even new technologies are under development. The transition from nucleons to nuclei is not understood: we do not even know what nuclei are!
   
   
4. Atomic physics works rather nicely but also here there are some anomalies. The transitions from atomic to molecular physics to chemistry to organic chemistry to biochemistry are not really understood. Biochemistry fails to explain the coherence of bio-systems and cannot say anything about extreme effectiveness of bio-catalysis and the magic ability of reacting bio-molecules to find each other in molecular soup. Reductionism seems to be therefore an illusion.
   
   
5. The tragic implication of the length scale reductionism is that scientists began to believe that they can solve deep problems of their own field without any knowledge about problems in other fields of physics. Particle physics know only about particle physics, nuclear physics only about nuclear physics, there is a camp of general relativists, there is a camp of superstringers,... The new information technology makes it possible to produce huge amounts of highly interesting data but specialists close their eyers for most of it. Here is the real reason for the stagnation of theoretical physics lasted now for more than four decades. And what is worst is that although the existing models are known to be wrong the work with them continues: the funding must go on.
   
   

In this kind of situation we should challenge the old dogmas. We must challenge even quantum theory and General Relativity, the great achievements of the previous century.

1. Quantum measurement theory is plagued by a paradox forcing to give up ontology altogether in Copenhagen interpretation and to regard quantum theory as a mere collection of calculational recipes. In TGD framework one is forced to construct quantum measurement theory on basis of zero energy ontology. One implication is that classical theory is exact part of quantum theory and one can understand why quantum world manages to look classical. One deep implication is that ordinary state function reduction changes the arrow of time. For this there is now direct evidence from the experiments of Minev et al. The outcome not only solves the basic paradox of quantum measurement theory but extends physics to a theory of conscious experience and also makes radical and testable predictions. This of course means leaving the narrow confines of physicalism.
   
   
2. General relativity is plagued by the conceptual problems due to the loss of Poincare symmetries so that the notions of energy and momentum are not defined in principle. This has led to endless variety of ad hoc proposals. Since the existence of conserved energy implies the existence of S-matrix, this could explain the failure to quantized GRT. String models were very promising attempt and the identification of string world sheets as 2-surfaces allowed to identify 4-momentum as Noether charges.
   

   What about replacement of 4-geometry with 4-surfaces in suitably chosen higher-D imbedding space with Poincare symmetries acting as isometries? When this question is made, it is easy to end up with TGD. Standard model symmetries emerge from this framework as prediction emerging from both number theoretical vision and twistor lift of TGD. Quark color differs from QCD color and in the simplest scenario this difference makes it possible to regard leptons as local composite of 3-quarks analogous to super partners of quarks. SUSY in TGD sense is essential element of second quantization of fermions.
   

   The study of classical TGD leads to identification of stringlike entities - cosmic strings -as basic 4-D surfaces. During cosmic expansion they thicken to magnetic flux tubes which serve as building bricks of galaxies. Twistor lift leads to length scale dependent cosmological constant and predicts that cosmic expansion takes place in jerks involving reduction of cosmological constant implyin acceleration period followed by slowing down.
   

   One outcome is an explanation of galactic dark matter predicting automatically the flat velocity spectrum of stars. No exotic particles are needed and there is no halo, whose existence has been challenged by data. There are also galaxies which apparently lack dark matter: also this can be understood. Galactic dark matter could be actually dark energy consiting of magnetic and volume energy of monopole flux tubes formed from cosmic strings. Quantum classical correspondence suggests that dark energy and dark matter can be identified. ‎
   

   The phases of ordinary particles with non-standard value of effective Planck constant h_eff= nh₀ behave in many aspects like dark matter. The existence of these phases follows from number theoretic vision following from the question: what could be the correlates of cognition. Also this question goes outside the confines of physicalism. The outcome is what I call adelic physics, and the integer n corresponds to the dimension of extension of rationals defining the adele. This leads to a dramatic breakthrough in quantum biology according to TGD. The implications are seen in all scales since quantum coherence is possible in all scales and I have been busily deducing the implications.
   
   

If some colleague would bother to learn about TGD and asked what is the secret of the success of TGD I would give a simple answer. Challenge the old dogmas! This has led to a new view about space-time giving at QFT limit Einsteinian space-time and Einstein's equations in long length scales. The equations at fundamental level are very different from Einstein's equations and extremely simple and number theory becomes part of physics. TGD forces to give up physicalism and reductionism is replaced by fractality. To me this shows that tinkering with old equations leads nowhere: one must start from much deeper level.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

Some comments related to Zero Energy Ontology (ZEO)

Zero energy ontology (ZEO) lies behind TGD based quantum measurement theory in turn giving rise to a theory of consciousness by making observed part of system as a conscious entity - self . ZEO solves the basic paradox of quantum measurement theory forcing to give up ontology altogether in the Copenhagen interpretation. ZEO has become a key aspect of the entire TGD based physics.

The basic prediction of ZEO is that ordinary ("big"}) state function reductions (BSFRs) involve change of the arrow of time. There is a lot of support for this prediction. The recent highly counterintuitive findings of Minev et all provided support for the time reversal in atomic systems. Fantappie proposed decades ago time reversal in living systems and introduced syntropy as time reversed entropy. In living matter the generation of more complex molecules from their building bricks can be seen as decay in time reversed direction. Phase conjugate laser beams are known to obey time reversed second law.

Also Libet's findings related to the active aspects of conscious experience find a nice explanation in terms of the time reversal. The latest application is to the understanding of the mysterious looking findings about earthquakes and volcanic eruptions suggesting that macroscopic quantum jumps involving time reversal are in question. This suggest that experimental verification of the time reversal and occurrence of macroscopic quantum jumps is possible by studying causal anomalies. For these reasons is important to try to develop the details of the view about ZEO as precise as possible.

In the article "Some comments related to Zero Energy Ontology (ZEO)" I will consider more precise mathematical formulation and physical interpretation of ZEO. ZEO forms also the cornerstone of TGD inspired theory of consciousness and quantum biology and I will consider also some related aspects of ZEO such as the notions of free will and intentionality, the notions of memory and precognition as its time reversal, intuitive in contrast to formal reasoning, and remote metabolism as a universal thermodynamical mechanism of metabolism in ZEO based thermodynamics.

See the article Some comments related to Zero Energy Ontology (ZEO) or the chapter Zero Energy Ontology and Matrices of "Towards M-matrix".

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

Cosmic strings and magnetic flux tubes as basic building bricks of TGD Universe

This posting consists of an answer to Wes Johnson's question inspired by the findings supporting the existence of Martian life. I will explain first the relationship between cosmic strings and flux tubes and the general role of cosmic strings and flux tubes in cosmology, astrophysics, and physics in TGD Universe. I will add this post also to my blog.

A. What cosmic strigs and magnetic flux tubes are?

A.1. Cosmic strings and monopole flux tubes

There are two kinds of cosmic string and flux tubes. Those carrying monopole flux and those carrying non-monopole flux. The first are not possible in Maxwellian world whereas the latter are.

1. Monopole flux tubes originate from cosmic string extremals, which are space-time surfaces which have 2-D minimal surface as projection to 4-D MInkowski space M^4 and 2-D minimal surface projection to CP_2. For all practical purposes above CP_2 scale which is about 10^4 Planck lengths these 4-D surfaces look like 2-D string world sheets.
   
   
   1. They are monopole flux tubes since the magnetic flux over cross section of tube, which is closed 2-surface rather than disk as for ordinary flux tubes, is non-vanishing and quantized. Essentially the homology charge of the CP_2 projection. The projection is sphere S^2 in the simplest case.
      
      
   2. Monopole flux tubes are necessarily closed since magnetic field lines parallel to them must be closed. In particular, one can have flux tubes which look somewhat like rectangles with very short and very long side. These give rise to U-shaped tentacles crucial in biology.
      

      The long sides of U-shaped tentacles can also form DNA-like helical structure. This kind of dark structure would be behind ordinary DNA: dark DNA would carry dark proton sequence neutralizing the negative charges of nucleotides and making DNA stable. Codon would correspond to 3-proton unit: codon would correspond to 3-proton unit and vertebrate DNA code is predicted correctly.
      
      

   3. Monopole flux tubes can be also 2-sheeted. Flux tube can connected wormhole throats at sheet A and continue along wormhole contact with Euclidian signature of induced metric and representable as small deformation of CP_2 type extremal - essentially elementary particle- to parallel space-time sheet B. Flux would return back along B and return back to A along the first wormholecontant.
      
      
2. TGD predicts also non-monopole flux tubes with closed cross section for which flux over cross section vanishes. Also they can exists as a version for which one say disk instead of sphere and glues it to background space-time sheet. Now one however requires current at the boundary of the disk. The thckenings of these would represent flux tubes of *ordinary* magnetic field.
   
   

B. (Monopole) cosmic strings, cosmology, and cosmological constant

1. Cosmic strings dominate in very early cosmology during which space-time with 4-D M^4 projection had not emerged.
   
   
2. During TGD counterpart of inflationary phase their 2-D M^4 projection starts to thicken and becomes 4-D: ordinary Einsteinian space-time emerges.
   
   
3. Their dark energy consisting of Kahler magnetic energy and volume energy decreases and transforms to ordinary matter: this corresponds to the decay of inflaton field. The thickening of flux tubes slows down by the increase of the volume energy competing with the decrease of magnetic energy and one obtains radiation dominated phase.
   
   
4. These first accelerating and then slowing down periods of thickening repeat being associated with the decrease of length scale dependent cosmological constant by a factor, which is negative power of 2. The rapid expansion of Earth's radius by factor 2 in Cambrian explosion is example of this kind of rapid jerk. This jerkwise cosmic expansion replaces smooth expansion (see this).
   

   Quite generally, highly developed multicellulars would evolve in underground oceans of planets acting as wombs. Various ions from stellar wind and dark photons would arrive along dark flux tubes to the interior. Earth could be predecessor in the sense that the life from underground ocean would have emerged to the surface during Cambrian explosion as the radius of Earth increase by factor 2.
   
   

5. This could solve Fermi paradox. Life would be everywhere but inside the planets in planetary wombs. We might be pioneers. An alternative solution is that we are already in telepathic contact with higher life forms at dark magnetic bodies but do not realize it. We ourselves could have magnetic bodies with Earth sized and perhaps even galaxy sized layers.
   

   This is not the only possible TGD inspired solution of Fermi paradox. Our own magnetic body would have layers with size of Earth scale and perhaps even galactic scale. We could be in continual contact with the magnetic bodies of members of other civilizations without knowing it - say during dream states. We could have even neural machinery activating these flux tube contacts. DMT is the only psychelic produced by body itself, and is assigned with pineal gland, which Descartes identified as the seat seat of soul. In zero energy ontology light velocity would not be a problem for communications with distant civlization since signals could propagate in both directions and time reflection would make communications forth and back in time possible (see this).
   
   

6. This gives a solution to the problem of cosmic constant plaguing competing theories and which gave the final death blow to superstring models. The cosmological constant is indeed very large in short scales but in recent cosmic scale extremely small. Cosmological constant in given scale involves two length scales: horizon sizes and the typical thickness of flux tube. For recent cosmology flux tube thickness has the size scale of large neutron and Compton length of neutrino so that a connection with biology and neutrino physics emerges.
   
   
7. Monopole flux tubes and probably also their non-monopole variants possibly defining the flux tubes along which gravitational interactions propagate (monopole or non-monopole: this is not yet clear) form a fractal network and appear in all scales
   
   

C. (Monopole) osmic strings, flux tubes and physics and biology

1. All branches of physics starting from the formation of galaxies, stars, and planets down to biology, molecular physics, atomic physics, nuclear physics, hadron physics,... involve monopole flux tubes as basic entities. Ironically the intuition of string model builders was right but they were too hasty to ask how to obtain 4-D space-time and lost 35 years. The best manner to be really slow is to be very hasty.
   
   
2. Monopole flux which is direct reflection of surface property of space-time means a very essential deviation from Maxwell's theory. These magnetic fields require no current as source so that that they can exists in very early cosmology where there are no coherent currents in long scales.
   
   
3. This explains the observed magnetic fields in cosmic scales.
   
   
4. Also the maintenance problem of magnetic field of Earth finds solution. Monopole part requires no current which requires energy feed to avoid dissipation. The ordinary part decays but the change of the orientations of the monopole part - magnetic body of Earth- generates currents regenerating the ordinary part. One can visualize Earth's magnetic body as a magnetic animal turning its body to regenerate ordinary magnetic field! van Allen belts would be associated with monopole part of MB and also auroras (see this).
   
   
5. Also the recently discovered magnetic field of Mars with same strength as Eart's magnetic field would consists of monopole flux tubes. This also explains Martian auroras (see this).
   
   
6. The reconnections of monopole flux tubes give rise to topological dynamics associated with the formation of auroras. When otherwise unseen monopole flux tubes carrying dark matter as h_eff=n×h₀ phases reconnect part of dark matter transforms to ordinary matter and also currents (Birkeland currents) giving rise to ordinary magnetic fields are generated. This topological dynamics is behind biochemistry and biocatalysis. Molecules find each other by U-shaped flux tube tentacles which reconnected to pair of flux tubes. Then the pair shortens by reducing h_eff. This liberates energy making possible for reactants to jump over the potential wall making the reaction very slow (see this) .
   
   

D. Further questions about flux tubes

Wes Johson asked also following questions related to magnetic flux tubes.

• Monopole flux tubes require no current but do they EMF a current or then what system does drive the energy of these tubes so universal?
  
  
• And, why would a beginning of a Universe need to be chaotic, (no regular coherent magnetic fields yet in the early phase?)
  
  
• I think the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us it must begin in maximal order.
  
  
• And... are your dark tubes called that because they what, can't be observed? But they drive the patterns we do observe so why are they dark? Out of our phase?
  
  

My answers.

1. They have magnetic energy and volume energy, which they cannot dissipate. This is prevented by monopole character of flux. It is conserved. This makes them stable and they replace the unstable wormoles in ER-EPR. Actually the TGD counterpart of ER-EPR emerged much before ER-EPR but for some reason the colleagues had not noticed TGD proposal.
   

   The deformations of monopole flux tubes generate to its magnetic field rotational part which has current as source. This is expected to dissipate and lead to dissipation of corresponding part of magnetic field. Remember that we are considering space-time surfaces and fields are completely geometrized and determined by geometry from CP_2.
   
   

2. If the beginning was cosmic string dominated, it need not be chaotic.
   

   There are excellent reasons to believe that TGD Universe at the level of zero energy states corresponds to a completely integrable system, which is extremely highly ordered allowing infinite number of conservation laws. If the cosmic strings dominated in the beginning, the low entropy initial state looks plausible.
   

   Here one must however remember that there is entropy related to the purely geometric degrees of freedom and the fermionic degrees of freedom inside them.
   
   

3. Second law must be generalized in TGD framework since the arrow of time is not fixed. Small state function reductions a counterparts of weak measurements generate entanglement and therefore entanglement entropy. In TGD Universe however both arrows of time are possible: the arrow actually changes in ordinary state function reduction.
   

   In biology the change of arrow would occur routinely. Basic biomolecular reactions involve ordinary state function reductions changing the arrow of time. Magnetic flux tubes again. Also macroscopic quantum jumps changing the arrow of time are possible and the very strange findings about volcanic eruptions and earthquakes can be understood if they correspond to quantum jumps chabging the arrow of time. Monopole flux tubes are in a key role also here.
   
   

4. Darkness means in TGD following. The working hypothesis is that only particles with same value of h_eff=n*h_0 can appear in the same vertex. In this sense particles with different value of h_eff would be relatively dark. The change of h_eff for single particle states is however possible. It would preserve energy.
   

   In case of photons transition would change frequency by conservation of E= h_eff×f. For instance, dark ELF photons could produce ordinary photons identified as biophotons and having energies in visible and UV. This would make possible for long range degrees of freedom to control short length scales (say biomolecular transitions by magnetic body).
   

   Dark flux tubes are observable both indirectly and directly. The measure magnetic fields in many-sheeted space-time are sums of ordinary and dark contributions since test particle as extremely small CP₂ size object touches all space-time sheets extremely near to each other and experience the sum of fields from various sheets defining the gauge field at QFT limit of TGD replaced many-sheeted space-time with piece of M⁴, which becomes slightly curved.
   

   For instance, the reconnections of cosmic strings induce transformation of dark matter at them to ordinary matter, which is observed in auroras also in Mars which was though to have no appreciable magnetic field but has according to the latest measurements - as strong as Earth's field at same distance!
   

   Quite generally, dark matter makes itself observable via its transformation to ordinary matter and vice versa. One must accept either the violation of basic conservation laws or existence of dark matter in TGD sense. The situation is same as for neutrinos. Biophotons is one example. Emdrive effect discovered in NASA is second example. Also in atomic physics there is effect in which valence electrons mysteriously disappear. The list is already now long.
   
   

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

Hot nuclear fusion is again almost here

Nature told that UK hatches plan to build world's first fusion power plant. Best wishes for the project. Hot nuclear fusion have been realized next year for half century. Maybe it is time to ask why we still do not have it?

Could the problem be that we still do not have a proper theory of nuclear interactions? QCD as a theory of nuclear interactions did not help to understand nuclear physics. Nuclear physics degenerates to a jungle of potential models and of their quantum field theory versions each of them explaining some aspect of experimenal findings but nothing more. There is even a "complementarity" principle saying that this Babel of models is quite OK!

Despite the situation the reductionistic dogma requires pretending that nuclear physics is a closed chapter in physics.

Particle physics was decided to be the next big step in the reductionistic march towards Planck scale and we started to pretend that M-theory was the last giant step in the march. Now it has become clear that we have ended up to a dead end and should return to where we started. Not only to standard model and sixties, not even fourties when nuclear physics emerged, but even back to the beginning of previous century and ask what went wrong at the level of basic philosophy.

Challenging of reductionism is necessary in order to make progress. For instance, nuclear physics has large number of anomalies. One such anomaly is 10 years old. From solar seismology the abundances of isotopes inside Sun are different from those outside Sun deduced from solar spectroscopy and meteorites. "Cold fusion" is second such anomaly and experimentalists are developing new technology while theoreticians refuse to know anything about LENR (low energy nuclear reactions).

I have myself continued for more than four decades lonely work with TGD forcing also a new view about nuclear physics. Ironically, nuclei would consist of string like objects, nuclear strings in TGD Universe (see this). To deepen the irony, string like entities - actually 4-D objects, appear in all lengh scales. The predicted hierarchy of phases of ordinary matter with non-standard value of Planck constant leads to a prediction of dark variants of nuclei with much smaller binding energies than ordinary nuclei and decaying to ordinary nuclei and liberating ordinart nuclear binding energy in the process.

TGD explains "cold fusion" as outcome of the fusion of protons to dark nuclei decayig to ordinary nuclei (see this). This mechanism is also the mechanism of ordinary nuclear fusion. The tunnellig phenomenon essential in the standard model of nuclear fusion is replaced with the formation of dark nuclei as intermediate states. The higher abundances of isotopes in solar core would be due to the presence of dark variants of nuclei (see this).

I dare to guess that a real understanding of theoretical nuclear physics could lead to a real progress in fusion research. But this depends on colleagues in the academic hegenomy: they decide. When they are finally mature to admit that TGD might be it and stop the censorship? This will be painful but there is no other manner to proceed.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.