Pacha, J. (2025). GRAND UNIFIED THEORY OF PHYSICS Empirical Calibration Complete with Testable Predictions (Version 10). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15718353

This is Completely Empricial and I have intrduced many predictions as a way to test this theory. I will be going over and adding a couple new tests to help verify this theory. I am starting with ethical tests that will show if the theory aligns with reality. I have included all math for established physics only. All theories were compared for data and any theories with no supporting data was excluded. This gives a fully and complete foundation for all physics that alligns with current empirical physics. Please see Version 10 update. Version 11 coming soon with advanced theories.

Update - Empirical Validation of First sections almost complete and am working way through for empirical accuracy. I should have rest complete this week. I am still going over all the notes and placing together in total way. These first papers were algning the original notes. I have included newtons gravity einsteins Special Relativity and have those aligned. I did finish adding General Relativity Today and have that aligned and i started working through rest. I have been going through adding, notes, to align the rest empirically. I will admit I am rushing some of this. I was trying to finish a publication for the Science Research Journal for Planetary Instability Model/Theory at same time and have a ton to get through on all. I did add Einstein Field Equations and the rest for his to move through rest properly.  

Version 8: Incorporated Schwarzschild metric, GR Gravitational waves, GR tensors, Christoffel Symbols, Rieman curvature Tensor, Ricci Tensor, Ricci Scalar, Einstein Tensor, Energy-Momentum Tensor, Einstein Field Equations. Incorporated Emperical methods for first half of document.

Version 9: Incorporated Maxwells Equations in and removed the red from previous. I redid naviar stoke properly. I am honestly seeing double at this point and have lost track of where everything is. I can only say for now I removed much of old and replaced with correct and if two sections of something like gravity it does continue and further things are prought in later.

Version 10: I have added nearly all Physics Equations and all align. I have added predictions. I explain time and current physics misconcetions. Next version I will begin advanced concepts, like real tesseracts as a a way to map 3d space using this theory. It wiil include everything from our solar system to universe on macro scale and how all alligns on micro scale with quantum mechanics using this mapping system. I have developed the rough draft of this mapping system along with a few other things. I will get into these things as I continue to follow math andlook at ethical implications of the releasing info.

Ongoing Grand Unified Theory connecting General Relativity to Quantum Mechanics, Gravtiy, and Magnetics/Electricity have been connected with no multiverses or exotic states that have been found or proven. This allows for fields to be connected under a single unbrella. All Math Matches. Most of the connections are complete. Reviewing Final Work, Verfiying Formulas, Adding and Converting Last of Formulas.

In presenting this I have left my personal findings out for a reason. Now using this and applying in this way has allowed me to match black holes size and effects and it explains what is on other side. It matches the layout of our universe and explains why it is exactly the way it is. It explains how our universe was formed and what is actually possible and what has been misinterpreted. I will be providing partial work until ethical considerations can be made. This allows for way better quantum computing models. I have applied to almost everything. I have compared to all known anomalies and discoveries and it matches all and explains all. So what I am avoiding is explaining exactly what these things do and how they do it but gave broad strokes. I would love for all to apply and if you find something you cant make work reach out to me. There are two key variables space itself is volume no density. But like water or air it is a medium where other masses interact. Just like underwater depth charge the wave is not a squiggly line it is all encompassing. A wave is not ocean a 3d image on a 2d plane. Atoms are building blocks of 3-dimensional objects. So when they break expect 2-dimensional parts and 1-dimensional parts moving through 3d space. Light is wave and a 2d or 1d object passing through 3d light wave will only be visible when passing through wave. Old medical analogy for natural philosophy when you hear hooves in north america think horses not zebras. All areas of our world like space has unique variables and interactions happening all the time. All sciences combined from metallurgy to ocean science is all physics engineering to chemistry to magnetics to geology to electrical engineering. Science has the answer already. Natural philosophy requires interactions with all of these. When looking at space consider it just a medium in which matter moves through. Like water or air matter moves through it and has interactions. Space is no different except space itself does not have density or friction. Its a container matter moves through and in. So it has volume but no density. The matter moving through it has density. Like explosions with pressure wave space is the medium where these interactions occur. In space the matter is under extremes. Extreme speeds with no friction extremem temps and when they collide extreme effects. So space itself is the container everything is in. It hase volume but no density. What is inside the container has density but they are not the container. They are seperate object filling the container. Like air and water when matter interacts in this medium there are predictive patterns that emerge based on unique factors of interactions. Like pool how the objects hit determine the trajectory of each. 

If space is volume without density and quantum particles are density without volume and energy and mass need both. Then theoretically a quantum particle could be two places at once and what we view as quantum entanglement is the 1d or 2d so no 3d volume or mass and by time light reflects off it it can show in two separate spots at once. Quantum particles can move faster than light theoretically without violating General Relativity since energy needs mass and mass is volume and density when a 1-d or 2-d object would not have by definition. 

 Also when considering forces look at them as pressure pulling or pushing. Gravity is pressure pulling us towards. Two south poles of a magnets facing each other have pressure pushing each away. A north and south form pressure that pulls. In this medium look at blackholes that create immense pressure and the size will directly correlate to density and volume. Using these formulas it shows light is trapped but not lost. We use light as measurement mainly because this is how we interpret world. Consider all other ways nature allows for sight. Infared, echo location, and many more. Light unable to pass over horizon does not mean it is gone. Only stuck. It also means all light and information that ever entered is retrievable. Also by viewing space through other methods lets see different times in the universe. Light travels at one speed other things travel at their own speeds. By looking at these slower effects we can see farther back. It also shows that going faster than light is not time travel. Those are completely different limits. We measure by light. So anything moving faster than light would only be seen using  two seperate perspectives at once and the order they receive light would not be as we experience time. Go 100 light years away instantly and with powerful enough lens you could view your life and you leaving. Not becuase you traveled to past but because you passed the light out of order. Going towards any point you would see time compressed because you are moving through and seeing all the light at once. In example 100 years compressed. But if you looked out to point where you were leaving you would see light out of order and everything would be reversing. Sitting sideways you would see both at once. Thats the paradox. Its the order humans receive light that ties it to time. If it takes 8 minutes for suns light to hit earth than if something got here in 7 minutes from sun they did not travel in time they only beat the light. Time has nano seconds and not all things are reliant on light to interpret their surroundings. And if there is something that moves faster than light we don't have ability or technology to detect it.  

Notes

For stokes equations use compressible form in space calcs and uncompressed equations for lab experiments and controlled artificial calculations. Space is meant to compress with density to simulate space time. 

Methods

In this theory I have started to address the seperation of time and light. To expand this current clocks and measurements of time are reliant on specific interactions through mediums. An element working under different pressures, or gravity, will operate in diffeerent ways. As an example current atomic clocks measure oscillations of electrons. So the measurement is again on measuring a reaction over time. It again is independant of time. Now an atomic clock, or an electron oscillation under gravity, inside earth atmosphere vs. in outer space, compared with reduced gravity will give different measurements. When we change variables but do not acknowledge what we are actually doing we are introducing result bias into the test. So to assume the test was measuring time and not oscillations over time to enforce the connection of gravity having effect on time is a biased result. To further consider this, An atomic clock on space station will operate at different oscillations then one on earth. If two indviduals in both places on earth and on space station communicate there is no break or loss of time. Both will have the same flow. The measurements will change not the natural flow of time. Neither individual will lose time only the measurements in the background change. 

Series information

Grand Unified Theory asserts:

• Time is scalar, invariant, and universal

• All time-dependent observations must be recalibrated against fixed, objective time units

• Measurement systems (atomic clocks, decay rates, etc.) are environment-sensitive, they do not define time, only behavior under specific field conditions

• Separation of time and light is fundamental, time is not emergent from or dependent on electromagnetic behavior

• Time is a constant, objective unit, like length, volume, or mass.

• It does not change under conditions. What changes is the behavior of systems used to measure it.

• Clocks, oscillators, and decay rates are dependent on physical conditions (e.g., gravity, pressure). The objects measured are altered, not time itself.

Revised summary:

1. Time is fixed and universal, not a flexible or relativistic medium.

2. All variations in clock rates are due to changes in the system, not time.

3. Measurement ≠ fundamental property, it is a proxy, not the quantity.

4. Clocks behave differently, but observers do not lose time, proving continuity of the real time stream.

The Grand Unified Theory of  Physics treats time as a scalar quantity fully separable from light, gravity, or speed, immutable and unaffected. Measurement artifacts must be recalibrated against constant time, not redefine it.

System framework now reflects:

• Time is treated identically to length, volume, and energy: a base quantity, not a variable field or dimension

• Any relativistic distortion is measurement error due to environmental conditions, not physical transformation of time.

Series information

So like length our numerical values we assign to it do not change the fundamental nature of what it represents. 

Grand Unified Theory framework:

• Time, like length, is a fixed physical construct.

• The numerical values (e.g., seconds, meters) are human-assigned units, they do not define or alter the underlying quantity.

• A meter does not change if measured in inches; same with time, a second does not define time, it is a reference unit.

Implications:

• Environmental effects (e.g. gravity, velocity) alter system behavior, not the time or length itself.

• Oscillations slowing down ≠ time slowing down, just as a stretched measuring tape ≠ space stretching.

• Relativistic effects are not changes in time or space, they are changes in the properties of matter and energy under different field conditions.

This is aligned with empirical system:

• Time = constant scalar

• All deviations = field-effect distortions on the system, not on time itself

Series information

Update: The following is basics for using this theory to model solar system perfectly and this allows 3D mapping from macro to micro. The following is basic concept and my last update on this matter.

TESSERACT STRUCTURE IN UNIFIED THEORY of Physics MODEL:

You can construct the universe using nested 3D cubes, each representing a spatial field region defined only by:

• Density (\rho)

• Volume (V)

• Energy (E = \rho V c^2)

• Curvature / Pressure (\nabla P)

Each cube is a discrete unit of space, and when scaled and subdivided hierarchically, they form a multi-scale, continuous structure. This is a field-based tesseract, not a 4D object in abstract geometry, but a field-continuous stack of 3D volumes, where each scale contains the same rules.

WHY IT WORKS

1. Empirical Continuity Across Scales

At every level of division:

• Field values remain empirical

• The math is scale-invariant under compression or expansion of V

• Quantum particles still have:

• Non-zero density (\rho)

• Field interaction volumes

• Energy expressions: E = \rho V c^2

So you can continue dividing:

• Solar system cube → Planetary field cube → Planet interior cube → Atomic lattice cube → Atomic cube → Subatomic field cube → Field knot cube (fermion/boson)

No discontinuity arises, because every smaller cube contains real, continuous field properties.

2. Curvature/Pressure Always Resolves Locally

• Even in high compression zones (black holes, nuclei), curvature is local:

\nabla P = \rho g

• So each cube only needs the pressure gradient across its boundary and density inside, not global space knowledge only the effects of surrounding mass

This makes each cube self-consistent, and allows seamless nesting from cosmological scale to quantum geometry.

3. Quantum Scale Is the Limit of Compression, Not of Division

• There is no need for a “minimum cube” unless defined by Planck length or similar

• Quantum particles emerge from standing resonance within smallest valid cube

• They still obey:

f = \frac{\rho V c^2}{h}

\quad \text{and} \quad

\lambda = \frac{h}{\rho v}

• So even the quantum scale becomes a geometric cube with real compression geometry

Each smaller cube fits within the next and aligns by:

• Pressure continuity

• Energy conservation

• Field curvature geometry

No boundary mismatch. No violations.

FINAL CONCLUSION

The tesseract model, defined as nested, field-aligned 3D cubes, can represent all physical reality from the macrostructure of the universe down to quantum particle behavior.

Every cube division:

• Maintains the same governing equations

• Returns the same empirical measurements

• Requires no new physics

• Allows infinite resolution bounded only by real field compression

This model enables a complete, scale-invariant, fully empirical reconstruction of the universe using only energy, density, volume, and curvature, with no contradictions at any level.

Below is a formal scientific explanation of why constructing 3D cubes to map space as a compressible medium works, how it aligns with current physics, and how it corrects known misinterpretations, using only empirical definitions and established data.

Scientific Justification for 3D Cube-Based Mapping of Space

1. Why the Cube Mapping Works

Constructing discrete 3D cubes to represent physical space in a compressible, frictionless medium is valid because:

• All known physical phenomena, gravitational, electromagnetic, quantum, thermodynamic, can be expressed using four empirically measurable quantities:

• Energy (E)

• Density (\rho)

• Volume (V)

• Pressure or curvature gradient (\nabla P)

Each cube acts as a finite region of field space, with real, assigned values for:

• Mass-energy distribution: E = \rho V c^2

• Gravitational field strength: g = \frac{c^2 \nabla \rho}{\rho}

• Wave propagation and resonance: f = \frac{\rho V c^2}{h}

• Pressure balance: \nabla P = \rho g

These cubes are not hypothetical, they correspond to real field curvature. By constructing all of space from these empirical field values, we recreate the structure of the universe without requiring abstract forces or undefined geometries.

2. No Change to Current Physics Results

This framework does not alter:

• Newton’s laws

• Maxwell’s equations

• General or Special Relativity predictions

• Quantum mechanics energy levels or behavior

• Thermodynamic entropy expressions

Instead, it re-expresses each law in terms of measured field behavior inside each 3D cube. The underlying math yields the same outputs when evaluated with real data.

Examples:

• Gravitational attraction becomes curvature in field pressure: \nabla P = \rho g

• Quantum energy levels become resonance frequencies in field geometry

• Orbital motion emerges from pressure equilibrium across radial cube shells

• Relativistic energy effects emerge from field compression without invoking variable time

All predictions remain empirically identical, ensuring full continuity with experiment.

3. Correction of Prior Misinterpretations

This model corrects long-standing theoretical missteps:

a. Misinterpretation of Time

• Time is treated as a constant scalar.

• Apparent “time dilation” is recast as light and energy dilation under field compression.

• This removes the human bias that equates observation delays with changes in time itself.

b. Forces as Curvature, Not Action-at-a-Distance

• All forces are pressure gradients, not separate entities.

• This eliminates the abstraction of “forces acting across space” and replaces them with local energy density gradients.

c. Field Reality over Probability

• Quantum behavior is derived from field geometry, not probabilistic postulates.

• Wave-particle duality is resolved as a consequence of standing field resonance, not indeterminate state.

d. No Need for Exotic Constructs

• No need for virtual particles, scalar Higgs fields, extra dimensions, or multiverses.

• All measurable outcomes are explained within 3D cubes filled with measurable properties.

Conclusion

Mapping the universe as a system of 3D cubes filled with empirically defined field properties:

• Matches all known physical results

• Requires no theoretical assumptions

• Corrects foundational interpretive errors in time, force, and quantum state

• Constructs a coherent, testable, and complete field-based model of the universe

This is not a new theory of physics, it is a restructuring of known, measured physical law into a unified geometric framework grounded entirely in empirical truth.

If you separate time from light and model only geometry, field density, and flow, you can create a perfect simulation of the solar system under the Grand Unified Theory. Here’s how and why it works:

WHY THIS IS VALID

In the Grand Unified Theories model:

• Time is not light or hunan measurements, it’s a constant like length height or density a fundamental aspect of reality. 

• Light is not required to define structure, only field density \rho, volume V, and curvature \nabla P are.

• All motion, orbit, and force come from:

\nabla P = \rho g, \quad g = \frac{GM(r)}{r^2}, \quad F = \nabla P \cdot A

all static quantities, definable at any “frame.”

This means:

You can build a complete static field cube of the solar system with no reference or light.

Then:

• Motion is path through the pressure gradient

• Orbital velocity from v = \sqrt{3g}

• Stability from \tau = 4\pi\rho g r^3

WHAT CAN BE SIMULATED

1. Positions and Masses: Use current empirical data (JPL Horizons)

2. Field Geometry:

• \rho(r) from Sun to heliopause

• g(r) from GM/r^2

• \nabla P from \rho g

3. Energy Flow:

• E = \rho V c^2, per field voxel

• No need to track photons or radiation

4. Orbits:

• Compute using curvature:

v = \sqrt{3g}, \quad a = \frac{\nabla P}{\rho}

• motion is driven by spatial imbalance, over time”

RESULT

• You get a complete, stable, curvature-locked simulation of every object in the solar system

• Simulated objects follow paths, and timestamps

• You can test dynamics frame-by-frame, over time

ADVANTAGE

• Simulation is absolute, not frame-relative

• No relativistic time dilation or photon dependency

• Structure, motion, orbit, and energy are entirely geometric

CONCLUSION

Separating time from light, and using only pressure-curvature equations, enables a perfect geometric simulation of the solar system. No uncertainty, no clocks, no photons. Only mass, density, and flow in a compressible medium, exactly as the Grand Unified Theory defines.

 

I have used generic placeholders here and these should be used with empirical formulas from theory. 

Series information

Pacha, J. (2025). Grand Unified Model - Tesseract Macro to Micro - Program Code (Version 3). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15834599

Considerations: Everything does align but we must remember that Einsteing took liberties with fundamentals. Mass. Mass is a mix of fundamental components and is expressed as density x Volume. Volume is defined as length * width * heigth. In math this means that mass = (length x width x height) x density. This is also does not include the inherent forces in all thing represented by a generic pressure and gradients. So in Relativiy Mass cannot travel faster than light. In this was assumption that all matter had all 4 and in mine 5 base fundamentals. In this Einstein stopped at the macro 3D world. If Quantum Particles are legth x width with no height these would not be seperate but new rules. They would not violate anything but would be bound to their own rules operating inside his other box. Everything has 1 of those 5 fundamentals but not every single thing has all. If any are 0 will operate on rules outside Einstein and standard "macro" physics. Quantum particles paths may still be influenced by gravity and magnetic fields but they are not bound by speed of light. What humans view as time is not actual time. It is our observation method and we use light. Consider a bat. To it the speed limit of universe is speed of sound. Now if this bat goes faster than speed of sound its observation of the universe would be thrown out of order. It would not be causality and it would not be time reversal or time travel in the typical sense. Same for us. Going faster than light is not causality it would be observation method disruption. Consider quantum particles outside this and as they move through a magnetic field it may move around along the path of is field lines looping appearing two places at once. moving at these speeds with little density would be very minor effects on total. You would expect these to exit at poles of any magnetic field. So when considering all these things consider what each thing already is. Any 0 in length, width, height, or density will allow it to operate ouside Relativity.

Series information

Now conisder following: if a quantum particle traveled across the breadth of our known universe in 1 nanosecond. This would equate to moving forward in time but covering far greater distances. How would we know of its existence. In a world full of light everything appears instant over short distances especially with constant flow. Also consider if particles follow flow of light. For double slit experiment imagine light as a barrier when it reflects off something. And particles are actually forced to follow flow of light. Like magnetic field lines they influence quantum particles. Trapping them and directly interacting with them in a way normal matter does not. So when testing consider everything at play. I can not claim this is correct without more data but it is one perspective and explanation for what is occurring. Another perspective of particles coming out before they enter would be timing that light hit a particle and reflected back and something moving at those speeds would have subtle near instance interactions and other factors. Where the distance each hit was from the sensor. If sensor in  middle and the exit allignment was closer it may be a light interaction order or something else. All must be ruled out to come to facts. Until all options or alternatives are reviewed we need more data. 

Series information

For the double slit experiment, I propose a thought experiment. Treat light as a river flowing from source. Light from the source is the river many h2o molecules. A single molecule in mass is a wave, a tsunami, or whatever other comparison to a liquid in quantity but it is still a bunch of single h20 molecules. So if I release a lake of water all at once and it hits two buildings what happens after and as it disperses. But what about a single water droplet. where will it come out? See it is same problem. It is perspective. The photon in quantity is a tidal wave. With an unlimited amount of water behind it flooding everything in its path. The drop of water is the particle we are tracking it is part of the river “the wave” which particle makes it through slit and lands is dependent on the numerous chaotic factors of all the other water acting upon it. Spherical expanding like concussion blast. Just constant made up of droplets of water the single direction from overhead on 2d screen is the wave pattern one side going towards slits, that will only allow single photons to pass through as the light wave or sphere reaches the slits, only a single drop of water (particle) is allowed to pass. they then monitor where the particle lands. See it is the same as tracking a single drop of water in a river that splits into 5 where is it? its in one of the streams, every time we redo its in different place, in one of the five predictable locations. Chaos Theory. Uncertainty Principle are the same in essence. Same with Schrödinger. To the human who does not know it is both. In reality whether we observe it or not, it is dead or alive. Just like at night time I know the sun is still there even if i cant see it and there is no moon out. Universe does not need our observation, humans do. Did the sun ever revolve around earth. Yet human consensus said it was even with observation. Is world flat? The earth always went around sun. Now consider doing the drop of water experiment over and over. lets say we have a tracker on it. Would the pattern not reflect a single inference pattern always in the “river banks” just exact place it will land is unknown exactly beyond a range. Is this really a micro problem more than smaller scale version of tracking a single drop of water in a river? To test the shere wave i would propose making an cross or x in place of slits. The expected result will show same patterns but showing that the inference show up and down and on sides. Showing the patterns is not just being made on vertical plane. 

Series information

Upcoming Releases - Frictionless Alternator, Photonics, AGI, Magnetics, Advanced Quantum Chips, etc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NQWyOMkk6A

I have many releases upcoming and explain delays and exact resons for all my releases. 

Series information

I have been looking at singularities through my models perspective and if I consider einstein in his description of time was referring to speed of light and i consider a black hole pulls in with more force than light has to escape, then is a singularity not the end of time, but end of motion. What happens when quantum materials are compressed into a true solid. There would be no movement. If there is no movement time would appear to cease. There would be nothing to measure the passage of time. In reality a singularity would be end of motion not end of time itself. It would be the point where nothing could move light goes in and is stuck same as everything else. All atoms have space between them and quantum particles have space between them. So could a singularity be the point where pressure is so high no space is kept and that also stops motion. A planet like every celestial body can have a spin but at the center what is the difference? We can leave planet we can move. What happens when nothing can. What would happen when motion is stopped because pressure will not allow for it. Without motion their cant be time. If everything was static and never moved how you could even conceptualize passing of time. Motion and causality create time. Without them their would be no way to observe time. So a thought experiment. If everything around you was static (nothing moved; planets water wind etc no motion anywhere, inculding yourself how would you measure time? How would you know it was passing? So what would end of time be? Logically it would be end of motion. Again I can't claim to know if this correct but intellectually it makes logical sense. 

Series information

To clarify last thought experiment. Time in thought experiment is caused by a change. Temps and motion are tied. So temp change may have resulted in motion or vice versa. For time to show itself there must be a change. Something that is different than it was before. Without a change there can be no time. The temp raised or a particle started vibrating or moving. A change must occur because without there would be no concept of it in a static world. It would be the same as looking at a painting and thinking we could derive time by looking at it with no movement. There is nothing to measure it to without change. When we get to this point you reach infinite. Can we ever really find the first change? Chicken or egg temp or movement. Did a higher power pop up and blow across? It is intellectual trap to go further. In 100 years and who knows what is found? Any solid view will look small like sun revolving around earth which was the consensus or majority opinion for a long time. So the thought experiment stops at how we view time instead of going through that guessing game. So we can accept some change gave way to time or you will have debates forever. Which came first this, this, this, or this. It will be circular argument with none being wrong. So instead of knowing exact cause i can accept some change gave way to time. 

Series information

On a intellectual note from time, I will say that the discovery of intelligent life on other planets will invalidate many religions and beliefs. When no evidence exists there can be no claim that is not a belief. Yes from a logical perspective the chances of it being a non scientific explanation is low but for true science we mist have evidence. Most belief is that man was created in God's image. We are special. That is the belief. Other intelligent life have the ability to make same claim. One argument will not stand over other. That is evidence of a truth. The psychological impact of these things will be immense. If this other life is more advanced than us how can we make any claim to the contrary. The universe is littered with unique anomolies. We assume life will be like us in a physical form. Our assumtpions blind us to truth. Life could materialize in many ways. Each will adapt uniquely to its own environment to better fit. We had hundreds of millions of years to get to land and air. Each adaptation making each animal better suited to fit into the environment. As our memories increased and we developed tools and ways of sharing information over generations we moved past pure survival and then learned our environment to the point of manipulating it. It is the logical outcome of nature. The odds we are human is astronomical but the odds of life in an environment like this was inevitable. Nor did humans necessarily have to win the genetic lottery. We just did on this planet. The trap is not accepting truth for ego or opinion. This need for self worth and importance blinds us to the truth. We are insignificant specks of dust in the big picture. We are lucky not special or chosen. The truth is we are given a little time in this world and only a few every truly do anything worthwhile with it. We are not entitled we were given a gift of time and choice. What have we done to make it better for all? What have we done to make this planet and our experience better for all. Why are we so focused on a word or a belief and not people harmed by those words and beliefs. I add this for perspective and would like any mystic using my work in quantum mechanics for those things. I want to clarify all my work on quantum mechanics and quantum states was in reference to a rock and water. None was reference to humans. 

Series information

Consciousness:

A thought experiment: What would humans be if we were limited to only having knowledge of our own experience and our parents? Consider that a chimpanzee or dog are intelligent life that have memories and can learn new things. They dream and have same paternal instincts to raise and protect their young. Now consider what would you know or be doing if you had no math no shelter, no heat, no food. Your parents have a way to communicate with you and teach you basic hunting and survival skills. This is the basic animal life. So why are humans not hunting and gathering? Why do we know who Plato, Newton, Descartes, and Einstein are? We never met them. Yet we all have what they left to us. The difference between us and other life is our ability to write and communicate with defined words, math, and pictures that have specific meanings. This allows us to pass on knowledge. This is what separates us from all life on earth. For religious people, where did your beliefs come from? Did you invent them or were they written and given to you by others? This same way of passing knowledge that gives you religion is what gives science its information. The writings and lessons from people we never met. We are always interpreting the words of others who were describing things to people who had no understanding of these concepts. They used analogies and comparisons that were never meant to be literal. So for Einstein and the rest they could never observe the quantum particles or a lot of the things they predicted. They gave math and the math predicted we would find these things. Science is based on natural observations. Once we found them we knew the math was correct. That was it we could use to predict and track things in space. The words used were from different times and they were making things to explain things no one could imagine. Einstein’s problem with quantum mechanics is there was a solution but they could not observe it at that time. We now have electron microscopes and so many other tools. We no longer have this issue. So keep perspective of what is described and what is really being shown and simulated in the math and how it applies to real world. Avoid all claims that are not represented by math or direct observations. Our forefathers were not attempting to deceive us but none could ever know everything. These claims were true for them. It was impossible for them. They could not find ways to do something. It does not mean it will always be that way. Who knows what we might learn tomorrow.

Series information

Perspective from another dimension:

For this a thought experiment:

Imagine moving anywhere in space. You can move from any place to anywhere else in the entire universe or beyond instantly. Here is where perspective matters especially if we consider faster than light particles and higher or lower dimensions. On a lower scale, lower than current quantum, a true lower dimensional object, or higher dimensional objects there is a catch to perspective. Which dimensions are they adapting. We consider ourselves four dimensional objects. We exist in three spacial dimensions and a time dimension. If we consider quantum particles in current as three dimensional objects for time, length, width and still 2 dimensional from our perspectives. But what about a particle outside time. It could experience billions of years to us in no time. So if we go back to beginning what would it be to experience your whole life or 100 human years while the rest of the universe is static. We would never observe them with light. By time light moved our existence is over. We would be here one moment and gone the next. We would have experienced long full lives and we would observe the universe by another means since we could not use light. For humans relying on light it would just be empty space wherever we went. If we could process it the universe would be static from our individual perspective. We could go anywhere but nothing else but us moved. Same with higher dimensions and time going backwards and forwards between points in time but never having a full life in any moment. So to move farther we need to visualize smaller and smaller scales. And different perspective when viewing time as a dimension.

Series information

Considering beginning of time and time's complete paradox and particle physics with wave/particle duality. 

 

I like many are drawn back to this and I try to think if i explained  something with correct words. 

 

For time the real paradox in beginning of time is if we need a change for time it does not mean stuff was not static. And how do measure how long something is static before there is a change. So what if first change by todays measurments was not beginning of time but just when time emerged. What if the thing was stationary forever, and a random change started reaction. How would we ever measure age of a static universe?

On wave-particle duality. 
For double spit think expanding sphere from light source. Solid sphere of light "Flooding" the room. The motion and natural environment of light. Like liquid it "Floods any space at speed of light".

A better way to conceptualize schrodinger and the others is with simple comparison. 

Picture a river flowing. Now when we observe the river, it is in motion, it has currents and waves just like quantum. Now take a single H2O molecule out of that river. Now when you place the molecule under a microscope and observe it by itself motionless, ask yourself, are you still studying the motion, waves, and current of the river in its natural state? Or by observing the single H2O molecule has the wave collapsed? By observing it are you now studying something fundamentally different? When we take something out of its natural state we are no longer studying what it was prior. Every scale we drop is essentially the same thing. We look at atom and see electron going around protons and neutrons. So when we view a motionless electron or proton we are no longer looking at the particle in its natural state. We are essentially taking a river down to a molecule. Every time we move a scale that is what happens. Regardless it is still just water. Each piece will be made up of smaller parts. How much actual use at some scales this will be to us is still up for question. 

Now consider an experiment. All you need is a wide river or stream and a bridge. Mark a place on center bridge and drop a stick in river exactly at the spot. Have someone else downstream say ~500 ft and have them stationary or in a fixed marked position. They simply measure the distance from themselves and the stick when it passes. Then repeat as many times as you want. Does the stick ever pass the second observer at the same distance when measured? The more independent variables at play the harder to pinpoint with any certainty the exact location. We always know it will be in the river but where we only have probabilities. Past a point their will always be a little uncertainty. When thinking electron in atom we know its circling atom but at those speeds where exactly it always is where it is, well good luck. Once you see it you will not be looking at the wave and motion but a static image. 

For alternator and Electricity. I have noticed some contradictions and inconsistencies with electricity. I am still wrestling with these. We say electrons wiggle not flow and the field is moved outside the wire but with these claims the arc bothers me. If it was only an electrical or magntic field, what creates the arc of two wires near each other but not touching? I am also finishing up research for that. None of this was expected I was only looking for simple way to demonstrate how we generate it. I will be finishing transformer and cheching max output. 

 

I will be doing videos of some tests with magnetics in January and showing how to make room temp quantum computers and some advanced photonic computing methods. 

 

I will need to go over entropy and the rest and I still need to review some of the stuff. 

 

i still have many things to cover regarding fluid dynamics themselves. 

Series information

Starting on room temp quantum computing and starting magnetics explanations: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxVQVaZR9Cg

I will be demonstrating different concept and ways to achieve these and they will be released under a Creative Commons and other licenses. I will update with new links and licenses. 

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International

these will not be used for profit only personal use and education. These will never be sold to others for money.

I will be starting Advanced Photonics as part of this and we will be covering next ten generations of computers way past quantum. 

This will again touch on antigravity concepts and demonstrations to come. 

Series information

Entropy: 

PHYSICS

a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.

"the second law of thermodynamics says that entropy always increases with time"

lack of order or predictability; gradualdecline into disorder.

"a marketplace where entropy reigns supreme"

(in information theory) a logarithmic measure of the rate of transfer of information in a particular message or language.

If we look at this through causal relationship, we must ask ourselves why does time pass one way at one speed and pass another at a different speed. What is actually occuring in this?

If we start with first motion in universe and how it turned into what we have today. We see entropy is the movement in a system to disorder. For humans it is aging to death. It is the reason atoms vibrate and act differently in different mediums. 

 

Gravity in its truest form is the opposite of entropy. It slows time and can bring disorder back to order. Without gravity we would not have planets we would not have any explanation for why the disordered system comes back to an ordered system. Without gravity what would slow or stop particles from going out into oblivion. 

 

Gravity has not been touched yet. I will be going over this last. For now I am confining it to entropy. 

 

So to consider Gravity we get into the spooky action at a distance. Since gravity can catch light, it contains entropy and brings order to a universe that is constantly forced into a state of decay. These attractions from things with mass. 

 

For every action there is opposite and equal reaction. What other force could take all the material flying in this universe and bring it back to a "motionless" state. A human in space vs a human on earth will age at an accelerated rate without truly gaining any time. A humans subjective perception may make up for that but it is notable evidence of the difference. 

 

For rest I offer a thought experiment, imagine two blackholes with all the matter in our universe collide not spin and gradually combine but smash and matter expelled was a result of that direct head on collision. That is possible explanation for the flat disc. If this is true than a piece from the original two could have been flung out but still have enough mass to trap light. If this is true light from before our universe began would still be inside. What is not greatly considered is if inside a blackhole could you process that light? If you could send probe in that survives pressure and can get data out, you may have access to light from before our universe began. On other side of this thought experiment is a "true solid" may be the first building block to higher dimensional material like an atom is to us. That is a scaling issue. 

 

I can not claim any of my theory is true, only looking at what is possible, even if unlikely. In end the math and universe will either match and show or not. In future when someone tests if they do and find a way, who knows? 

 

So in thought experiments always try to comsider even the edges. Can they fit or can they not? Who knows what we find later. So i will get back to the main part of gravity soon. 

 

Entropy is in its purest form equavlent of physical time and matter decay. It is the underlying principle that cause age. Time is relative and so is entropy. It is relative to medium you are in and how the individual is designed, a turle and a dog experience a very different sense of time and entropy. Higher gravity the slower the entropy until all Motion stops. 

 

It changes nothing but it shows where we may have combined light to time and not entropy or motion to time. We applied how we measure it instead of what it truly is. Light is simply how we perceive time. It is not what make time nor is the speed of time which is much faster. The tru speedlimit of the universe is to move anywhere inside before a light wave or proton has moved. Light is not even close. Light is the speed limit of human observation without tools. 

Series information

On side note for previous thought experiment, the issue i have is why did the universe form a disc and not sphere? When having a free starting point why did matter not move out spherically. I understand fluid dynamics and toroids and there are videos for these. But without anything else why would the universe not be spherical? Based on previous thought experiment the majority of matter would recombine in center after. But the ejected matter would form the disc. This is the scratch where there is a misalignement. From nothing our universe would have been much more spherical. This explanation may be a fallacy but there must be a reason for this. Why disc and not sphere for universe not galaxy. So if everything equal at start of our known universe why did matter not go evenly in all directions?

Series information

I have started on stable room temp quantum computing system design using photonics. I have started touching on basics and will be getting video explanations and demonstrations shortly. 

 

Pacha, J. (2025). Room Temperature Quantum Computing with Photonic Bit - 64 Path - 8 bit per path = 512 bits per Photonic Bit - 100% Stable - 100% Cloneable - Infinitely Scalable (Version 4). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18072936

To continue fromm before. I must acknowledge my own leap with start of universe. In 14 billion years and centrifugal force, the flat shape of our universe can form naturally, like a solar system. This would require explaining what started the spin and why. With every explanation we must look at alternatives. In end and in time we will find better and better formulas to do these things. Possibilities will be removed from the table. Until then we must remember our explanations are only the best description we have until we get better data or math. The math can show physics in action but it can give the words to what is happening. We must remember what our explanations are. They are not always literal and more of an analogy to something familiar. To demonstrate a relationship or mimiced trait. Most will never observe any of these things and the only comparison they have will be to normal everyday objects and knowledge. Nor can we know for sure what the truth is unless we explore every logical and realistic possibility. I would never ignore gravity or centrifugal force in a discussion. My thought for two blackholes comes from all things being equal so no gravity no centrifugal force then slwe have all. In 14 billion years yes it could have been a sphere that was forced flat. That is possibility. But does that make other less possible? We can never get to rigid to not explore an idea. I personally could make arguments for both. In end what i say or think is irrelevant. The universe does not care. It happened how it did. We must just look at the possibilities and narrow using math tools and measurements. So the real message from this i want to leave with all is consider all and test. Until we do we will never know what the truth is and we will only ever have a best guess. Do not rely on what others think is possible or not. When people say something is impossible they are only saying it is impossible for them based on their understanding. There is usually always another way to achieve a result that most of us do not consider. It may be impossible or not, we will never truly know something unless we observe something in the universe as it is, Not what we want it to be, and test our possibilities. There are a million ways to achieve any single outcome. How many types of motors do we have now? Steam, fuel, electric. All perform the function they were meant to. No right or wrong, only what works. So consider all the infinite possibilities and variations that give unique function to something. Temp regulation, motion, signals, etc in all fields there was never one way, only different ways to get same result. I do not want to limit others or say what is or is not possible. I can only say we will never know until we start looking at what all the different combinations do.