Multidimensional character of emergent perspective

This post is just a copy of few silly comments to ongoing discussion about concept of minimal length in quantum gravity and Lorentz symmetry violation. AWT enables to separate the subtleties of particular quantum field theories from general problem consisting in subconscious mixing of insintric and exsintric perspectives.

In AWT Lorentz symmetry(LS) is direct consequence of observational perspective. When we are observing low dimensional space (like 2D+1T water surface) from strictly 2D+1T perspective, LS is indeed maintained. When we are observing the same situation from higher dimensional perspective, LS can be violated and nothing very special is about it. AWT stance is, every space-time is completely homogeneous from its own perspective by definition and its LS cannot be violated. At the moment, when we are discussing some homogeneities in it, we are applying higher dimensional perspective, which enables LS to become violated. "An Outside View" is always of higher dimensionality, then insider's view, so its LS can be violated by definition. If it wouldn't, we couldn't distinguish it from inside view, after all.



In AWT concept of minimal length doesn't exist from global perspective, because even the tiniest density fluctuations can be formed by some more smaller ones without apparent constrains. But there exist limit in observability of smallest density fluctuations from perspective of larger density fluctuations (like humans) or instrumentation, which was used for their detection. Aether fluctuation at particular dimensional scale cannot interact with fluctuations at all remaining dimensional scales directly in accordance to principle "Simillia simillibus observatur". If we would use more sensitive/large apparatus, the limit of fluctuations on both sides of dimensional scale will increase accordingly and we would observe our Universe larger and quantum fluctuations smaller - but some general limit still persists here.

The philosophical question is, if such dimensional scale is real for people, because it's always interpreted by apparatus. Science answered such question positively already from the time of Galilei and van Leeuwenhoek. The main gnoseologic problem is, outside perspective remains undetectable from insiders, so we are always talking about somehow abstract phenomena, which can be proven by higher dimensional emergent approach only, i.e. by coincidence of two or more indirect evidences - but not by direct observation. Whole evidence of emergent Aether concept is about it, after all.

It should be pointed out, the existence of space-time at sub-Planck scale (i.e. existence of "subminimal length") lies outside of observational perspective scope of insiders too, so we are relating existence of one unprovable phenomena (Lorentz symmetry violation) by existence of another one (sub-Planck length).

Proclamativelly rigorous people, who are working with insintric perspective preferably can say easily, both ideas are BS - whereas other people, who knows, that more is different and really is different and how emergent phenomena are working, can expect, combination of two or more undetectable phenomena (assumption) could still lead to new observable (i.e. testable) predictions, thus fulfilling utilitarian perspective of further evolution. After all, renormalization procedure is quite similar approach based on emergence, because its extrapolating singular function by pair of their derivations from both sides of divergence. In this way, modern physicists just replaced wide-scale philosophical extrapolations by these less-visible formalized ones.

Higgs boson and Uroboros model of Universe

Uroboros is an ancient archetypal model of Universe related to implicit surfaces of topology, the Mobius strip and Klein bottle topology of holographic model of Universe in particular, which manifests at many levels of observable reality. In AWT it follows from geometry of causal energy spreading in transversal waves through nested Aether foam, where the same energy mediates both bulk volume properties, both surface properties of the same object. For example, if we get close to black hole, during passing its event horizon we would see, how previous universe generation has collapsed into many black hole horizon behind our spin and interior of black hole now appears like observable generation of universe with many black holes inside, the direct observation of black holes can therefore serve as an observational evidence of Uroboros geometry at cosmological scale.

The same geometry we can met with many dualities in human society, for example in mutual convergence of extreme leftwind and rigtwind ideas, as practiced by NDSAP party in Nazi Germany or bolshevist party in former Soviet Union, where employees got the same social status like their employers, at least proclamativelly. At Planck level scale the Uroboros model manifests in various supersymmetry phenomena, which follows from AdS/CFT correspondence (Mobius strip structure of electron and other spin 1/2 particles in particular) and in E8xE8 heterosis of Platonic solids, which can serve as 3D geometric models of causal dynamic triangulation of Aether foam (Lorentz/Wick rotation leads to isomorphism of root vector system of E8 Lie group in 3D, as Lisi Garret demonstrated).

Interesting consequence of T-duality in Uroboros model is isomorphism of most heavy/lightweight fermions and their supersymmetric bosons, the top quarks and Higgs boson in particular. From Standard model follows, the product of Higgs boson Yukawa coupling to the left- and right-handed top quarks have same rest mass (173.1±1.3 GeV/c²) and dilepton channel of decay and they're virtually indistinguishable each other. While top quark was observed in 1995 by the CDF and DØ experiments at Fermilab, it has no meaning to search for Higgs anymore at the moment, when bare top quark decay was identified (if something looks like a Higgs, walks like a Higgs, and quacks like a Higgs, it's just a product of top quark dilepton decay). In this point last bet of prof. Hawking that LHC won't find Higgs boson is dual to my conclusion, Higgs was observed already.

The more detailed interpretation of Higgs boson in AWT is difficult, because Higgs mechanism isn't primarily responsible for rest mass of particles in AWT. Higgs mechanism for giving mass to particles was actually first proposed in the context of solid state physics to explain how particle-like structures in metals can act as if they had an effective mass and it explains temperature dependence of conductivity in transition metals and semiconductors.

In particle physics, though, Higgs argument is designed to introduce the masses of the gauge bosons by a spontaneous breaking of the gauge symmetry of an additional field, the Higgs field. Of course this mechanism is a conceptually different from the way, in which condensate droplets of every particle environment are obtaining mass. And it has nothing to do with superconductivity also, as it takes place at room temperature, too. If Anderson–Higgs mechanism is related to background field in superconductivity such effect shouldn't be called a Higgs mechanism anymore - or we simply get two different kinds of Higgs bosons. Even worse, the technical derivation of the Higgs mechanism, consists in a mere reshuffling of degrees of freedom by transforming the Higgs Lagrangian in a gauge-invariant manner. This already raises serious doubts about the adequacy of the entire manoeuvre, since gauge transformations possess no real instantiations and no straightforward interpretation of the Higgs mechanism is tenable. IMO physicists are just mixing various concepts and mechanisms mutually at each level of physical model from phenomenological to formal one. Furthemore, a well known "hiearchy problem" implies, that quantum corrections can make the mass of the Higgs particle arbitrarily large, since virtual particles with arbitrarily large energies are allowed in quantum mechanics.

The case, when scientists are looking for phenomena, which is known for years already - just from opposite side - isn't new at all in context of AWT. For example the search for gravitational waves (CMB radiation), supersymmetry (observation of tetraneutron, pentaquark, dimuon event and other phenomena) Lorentz symmetry violation (gravitational lensing, GZK limit and other phenomena) or evidence of hidden dimensions (Casimir force and related phenomena) is the situation of the same category. For scientists is quite normal to search for violation of relativity by quantum mechanics and vice versa, while they're know already, these theories are inconsistent mutually up to level, their predictions differs in two hundred orders of magnitude.

Such situation just reflects the level of conceptual confusion, which penetrates whole contemporary physics. But we should realize, scientists as such have no strong motivation to solve contemporary situation, on the contrary - confusion enables them to keep their information monopoly, to broaden their RE-search and to ask money for another grants from taxes - only layman society is who is paying here. I suppose, such situation would appear unbelievable for our descendants - but this is exactly the situation, we are experiencing by now. Scientists are shamans of modern era and they're eating their own tails by such ignorant approach.

Art and curvature of space-time

Being general theory, AWT explains many aspects of symmetry and periodicity in art and beauty theory. For example in Aether theory a fuzzy boundary exists between insintric and exsintric observational perspective, which affects the perceiving of space-time curvature bellow and above human distance scale. Insintric perspective corresponds the deterministic, curvature geometry based view of relativity, where space-time is considered deformed, while path of light remains straight due Lorentz invariance. Exsintric perspective corresponds the perspective of quantum mechanics, which considers undeformed Hilbert space, while path of light is deformed heavily, thus forming fuzzy reality composed of overlapped particles, where Lorentz invariance remains violated heavily. Bellow human distance scale the meaning of both these perspectives becomes reversed.

In this context an interesting question may arise, whether some objective, curvature based boundary between impressionism and expressionism in visual art exist? In general, impressionism is earlier movement, related to rather optimistic illustrations of real exteriors oriented to future - whereas the expressionism is more recent movement, connected more to internal, abstract and tragical feeling of the past. Abstract or psychical impressionism is based on intuitive preference of overlapping spots (tachism), where positive curvatures and altitude prevails, while expressionism is more rational art, based on curves and lines with zero or negative curvature and pessimistic connotations (informel). Note that expressionistic art is often generated mechanically or by algoritmic digital techniques. The distance scale between positive curvature of blobs and negative curvature of areas and lines still remains around 1.7 cm, i.e. at range of CMB wavelength scale.

Psychic impressionism of Jeff Lewis, 2001:

Jackson Pollock, Autumn rhythm, 1950:

Karin Kuhlmann: Inflammable matter, 2005:

Such perspective would explain the subliminal value (and objective price) of J. Pollock's abstract oil drip "paintings", which are of fractal nature (albeit their fractal dimension is rather low) and where the spot and lines feature of 2D curvature remains rather balanced in it - so they appear most transformable/transformative from our subconscious view, because they illustrate dual character of Aether foam in its critical Lifshitz point most exactly.

Can dimensionful quantities change?

This post is a reaction to recent deduction of Lubos Motl "Changes of dimensionful quantities are unphysical", presented on his blog. As Lubos belongs between conservative proponents of formal approach to theoretical physics, string theory in particular, his stance can be understood easily in this context. String theories are rather large group of quantum field theories, which are based on combination of quantum mechanics and special relativity postulates - between many others, which are specified less or more vaguely by math formalism used. Because Lorentz invariance belongs special relativity postulates, it's evident, string theory cannot derive violation its own assumptions, i.e. Lorentz invariance violation in rigorous way with compare to quantum gravity theory, which is general relativity based, so it uses a different postulate set. Therefore we can understand negativistic stance to all theories dual to Lorentz invariance, which are considering the changes in fundamental quantities, the "varying light speed" theories in particular.

In AWT Lorentz invariance is completely matter of observational perspective. The gravitational lensing can be interpreted both like manifestation of variable light speed in vacuum near massive object (an exsintric perspective of quantum mechanics), both like manifestation of constant light speed in curved space-time (an insintric general relativity perspective). The observer, which is deformed together with space-time inside of gravitational lens would have an tendency to consider light speed invariant and space-time deformed, unfortunately its rather abstract and local stance, as real observer usually cannot stay at the center of gravity lens (for example at the center of Sun or large galaxy).

The crucial point is the definition of fundamental SI units here, the meter and seconds units in particular. Until 1975 light speed was defined by using of iridium meter prototype since the second can be defined more precisely than the metre, in 1983 the metre was re-defined to be the distance light travels in a vacuum in ¹⁄_299,792,458 of a second, making the speed of light in vacuum a defined constant, c = 299,792,458 m/s. By AWT the omnidirectional space-time expansion can be interpreted as a fall of observable matter into black hole, the surface gradient of which is forming space-time. During this process vacuum becomes more dense gradually, so that transversal waves of light spreads more slowly through it, which the observer inside of it can interpret as an expansion of space-time. Whereas the observer which is using exsintric perspective would see the collapse of vacuum foam instead - from this reasons the cosmological constants differs so much in relativity and quantum mechanics. In SI system of units meter unit cannot change with density of vacuum and the second unit can change only if mass of cesium atoms will change with respect to kilogram unit, which may occur only, if cesium atoms will change their mass in dense vacuum in different way, then the iridium alloy. After then even gravity constant and fine structure constant may change (compare the Expanding Earth theory). The decrease of gravity constant would increase the frequency of supernovae used as a standard candles for measurement of distance and change our understanding of acceleration of Universe expansion observed. Recent measurements of a possible variation of the gravitational constant showed an upper limit for a relative change of 5•10^-12, while Expanding Earth theory needs a variation ten times higher than that measured. Changes in dimensionless fine structure constant observed in distant quasars and Oclo reactor are still unconfirmed.

From insintric perspective the massive bodies would expand together with space-time, but because space-time is preexpanded already, massive objects smaller then human/CMB distance scale (1,7 cm) would collapse slowly then the vacuum and they would shrink effectively, whereas larger object would expand faster in the form of radiation (i.e. they would evaporate in vacuum into bosons), until they fill the volume of the whole universe like gummi bears inserted into hot watter. It's evident, if we would measure the distance by wavelength of light, this distance wouldn't change, but the large massive objects would expand gradually and they would evaporate losing their mass. This prediction of AWT was confirmed recently, because iridium meter prototypes are still used for fitting of interferometers results.

The changes in kilogram prototype seem to be consistent with this finding, although the "Shrinking Kilogram Mystery" can be the consequence of abrasion due the primitive and somewhat drastic "cleaning methods", especially the usage of hot vapor, followed by mechanical wiping (note that the poor etalon is even manipulated without gloves). Iridium-platinum alloy is soften, then the chrome plated steel - so I'm a bit surprised personally, the changes in kilogram prototype mass aren't just a much bigger.

When rigid body meter prototype is used, the light speed could slow down gradually, because of increasing vacuum density with compare to matter density. From historical observations follows, such possibility cannot still be excluded with certainty.

From implicate topology follows, every system of physical quantities will remain always inconsistent by definition - if it would be fully consistent, we could replace all quantities by single one. It means, the change in one constant will affect the others in unpredictable way from less or more distant perspective. Analogous situation exists in theories based on at least two mutually inconsistent postulates: if these postulates will be consistent, we could replace them by single one, thus obtaining a tautology. This means, no theory can remain universally valid, or it couldn't be falsified (compare the AWT approach to Goedel's theorems). Therefore the finding of universally invariant quantity corresponds the finding of generally valid TOE. By AWT such quantity in gradient driven reality could serve the quantity of change as defined by polyomino algebra.

AWT and one-to-many duality

In AWT the existence of dualities is inherent an it follows from concept of gradient driven reality, which the AWT is based on. As the most general example of duality we can consider one-to-many duality (1:N relation). It's a permutation group, which surjectivelly maps every local object (i.e. number of particular configurations of many conformal states possible inside of object) to its probability distribution at the rest of space (probability of the occurance of these states outside of object). Because Universe is composed of nested density fluctuations from human perspective, people are naturally one of these fluctuations and the scope of their interactions (so called "human scale") is placed near the center of dimensional/energy density scale of observable Universe. We can say, the people are living at the middle of space-time brane, i.e. near inflexion point of density gradient, forming observable Universe, because it's the place of maximal complexity (i.e. space-time events enabling mutations during mankind evolution).



One of observable consequences of this insight is, habitable zone is placed in the middle of Milky Way galaxy boundary and the habitable zone is placed in the middle of solar system. From the very same reason we can expect, life has evolved at the gas-fluid-solid phase interface as well.



One to many duality manifests by many other ways. One observation may be, the most distant objects at the Planck boundary of observable Universe scale (i.e. the future boundary with respect to omnidirectional space-time expansion) are one-to-many dual to objects, living at the opposite boundary, i.e. the cosmological one (i.e. the past boundary). The semicontinuos counterpart of one-to-many duality is the famous AdS/CFT duality. It means, common black holes are dual to elementary particles - especially if we consider quantum gravity models of black holes, not just these relativistic ones.



By AWT elementary particles are formed by clusters of many smaller particles (virtual quarks) as well. The overlapping interactions (distance forces) of individual particles collapsed is what makes the composite interactions in many dimensions for us. If we imagine black holes as a dense stars full of particles, the conceptual similarity becomes quite apparent here.



If we consider common black holes as a gravitons or gravitational waves stars (gravastars or gravitational geons), then the counterpart of leptons are neutrino stars and the counterpart of mesons are unstable quark stars, which are composed of many quarks. The counterparts of baryons, neutrons in particular are the stable neutron stars. The common atom nuclei are 1:N related to collapsed stars, so-called white dwars and the common stars are dual to common atoms. Planets are dual to molecules, being formed by them. Well, and humans are 1:N dual to human civilization, living at the middle of their own scale.

We can deduce many fundamental aspects of reality (like the symmetry breaking) from the 1:N duality, i.e. from the fact, we are forming part of observable Universe - but not vice-versa. One consequence is, the curvature of all observable objects "inside" of our Universe is inherently positive and we can perceive them as a particles of matter, whereas the negative curvature objects are forming invisible holes, "voids" or particles of energy for us. Such conclusion may appear trivial for someone - but without AWT concept we probably never could explain it in logical way.

Please note that the implicate logic and formal math theorems are 1:N dual as well, because every formal theorem is based on many implications used in its derivation. Which can explain, why AWT appears so different with respect to mainstream physics, based on formal math.

AWT and the quest for hidden dimensions

When Neil Armstrong made his first descent to the Moon's surface during Apollo 11 mission in 1969, he spoke his famous line "That's one small step for (a) man, one giant leap for mankind..". Aether Wave Theory can become such a dual step in mankind awareness, too: in many areas of physics, which are covered by formal theories already its contribution may remain infinitesimal, whereas in more fundamental areas it suggests a virtually a deep revolution in thinking. Such revolution may become the understanding of role/scope of hidden dimensions and Lorentz symmetry concepts.

As we have demonstrated already by model of water surface, the problem of hidden dimensions is tightly connected to violation of Lorentz symmetry up to level, every violation of Lorentz symmetry can be considered as a direct manifestation of hidden dimensions. Because Lorentz symmetry for light spreading in vacuum is violated at presence of every dispersion or refraction phenomena, it would mean, the hidden dimensions are very common in Nature. For example, the hydrogen bonds or repulsive forces between atoms are manifestation of short distance forces operating in very high number of dimensions.



How the heck is all this possible? A quite easily - due the symmetry, in AWT energy spreads through every environment under conservation of integral number of dimensions in two dual ways only: via transversal and longitudinal waves. The forces mediated by these waves follows an inverse power law due the shielding LeSage/Casimir/Feynman mechanism represented by supergravity, where the power is always lower by one from the number of environment dimensions. In this way, for 3D space the only force fulfilling the inverse 2nd power law (ISL) should be a Coulomb force mediated by photons and gravity force mediated by gravitons or gravity waves at infinite scope, i.e. of zero rest mass. Every other force is simply manifestation of interaction in hidden dimensions and Lorentz symmetry violation. Note that Casimir force mechanism mediated by gravity waves corresponds Fatio-LeSage mechanism for gravitons and transaction absorber theory for virtual photons promoted by Feynman and Wheeler for QED in 50's of the last century. Easy and trivial, isn't it?



But mainstream physics still persists a deep inconsistency in thinking. While the world is full of short distance interactions - from weak nuclear force and dual Casimir force spreading if five dimensions, strong nuclear force mediated by gluons and so called gravitomagnetism ("fifth force") mediated by gravitophotons in four dimensions and many refraction and dispersive phenomena inside of atom orbital - mainstream physicists still considers these nonlinear forces as a "special forces", "nonlinearities" and/or "2nd order effects" rather then manifestation of hidden dimensions and ISL violation - despite the fact, under inconsistent thinking they can never get consistent conclusion.



As the result, these scientists are spending a lotta money from our taxes in various less or more sagacious searches of "hidden dimensions". Because they know, violation of Lorentz symmetry would manifest by inverse square law and non zero rest mass of photons, one way of experimental evidence is based on thourough tests of ISL for gravity and Coulomb forces (which are unsuccessful so far, especially because theorists are ignoring Casimir force in this extent). The deep inconsistency in mainstream science thinking manifests by the fact, some of these tests are even interpreted like tests of string theory as well - albeit string theory is based on Lorentz symmetry from its very beginning. Next time we will discuss some techniques, by which we can interpret and/or visualize interactions in hidden dimensions by AWT.

AWT and Zeta function

From formal math perspective, Riemann Zeta function describes the probability density of prime number distribution in complex plane, i.e. when expressed by Ulam's spiral.



From AWT perspective Riemann Zeta function is significant from two dual reasons. It first, Ulam's spiral is closely related to Fibonacci spiral, which corresponds the patterns of closest packing of colliding particles and Golden mean ratio. Plant leaves and septum of snail/sea shells are minimizing the volume/surface ratio by the same way, like growing sphere formed by mutually coliding particles in diffusive (random walk) process.

Because numbers in vector space can be considered as a formal representation of colliding countable particles in N-dimensional space, we can see, how closely the number theory is related to particle physics and vice-versa.

Zeta function is therefore important in description of supergravity (SUGRA), which is general interaction between density gradients, formed by their shielding effect in N-dimensional space in analogy to Fatio de Duillier - Le Sage theory of gravity. The common gravity and Casimir force are projections of supergravity into 3D space from this perspective. The contributions of supergravity in higher dimensions converge to zero in accordance to surface/volume ratio dependence of N-dimensional hypersphere (i.e. hypersurface area) and the high dimensional residuals are promoting the complexity of observable reality.


The consequence is, inside of dense particle field the nested density fluctuations (clusters) are formed, but the number of cluster generations is strictly limited by geometry of their mutual interactions. After some three generations a less ore more chaotic particle superfluid is restored, as can be demonstrated by computer simulations. This behavior is related to many natural phenomena, from hydraulic sterilization over shaped warhead theory and viscoelastic properties of complex polymers (tixotropy of ketchup or Thinking Putty plasticine) and certain alloys (bismuth) under pressure to boson condensate and HT superconductivity theory. AWT explains the existence of three particle generations and the presence of superfluid condensate forming the vacuum inside of black holes by this way.

AWT and plicate topology

By AWT every causal (logical) theory becomes part of physical reality by the same way, like physical artifact itself, which are dual to it. We tend to consider only reproducible repeating events/artifact as real, thus fulfilling the theories and their causal implication. The random fluctuation of Aether density isn't real for us, until we recognize it like electron, photon, etc., i.e. until we assign it into some conceptual group. Only the fact, consciousness is forming environment for these waves, we tend to consider ideas a non-material artifacts by the same way like the Aether, which is dual approach to consciousness from this perspective.

By this way, the observable reality is forming a brane manifold between our ideas and observations (perceptions) mediated by wits and it has both objective, both subjective character of belief. The symmetry of this duality is broken toward multiplicity of casual approach and intersubjective opinon due the emergence paradigm (more is really more).

The physical theories are ideas formalized by group of nested logical implications, which are connected mutually by correspondence principle. Each implication is defined by its causal time arrow, defining the causality. The time arrow is defined by root system of higher order tensors describing the gradient of space-time compactification, which can be furthermore interpreted by a rotation by Lorentz/Poincaré group in causal space. Implication tensor defines a time arrow of causal space-time curvature and subsequent compactification of it. Therefore antecedent /consequent components of every implication are defining time arrow of theory, thus forming a manifolds of causal space and conceptual basis of every theory.

At less abstract level, ideas/concepts are low energy nested density gradients ("strings" or "membranes") of compacted space-time formed by gradients of electrochemical activity inside of human brain. By holographic theory we can consider them as a supersymmetric low energy density projection of the observable reality into our consciousness. Every idea is represented by dense cluster of standing waves of electrochemical activity inside of our brain, which can become shared and entangled between brains of many members of human society. The process of understanding/sharing of such ideas corresponds the collapse of their wave functions: as the result, these ideas aren't chaotic and invariant for us anymore, they become a component of more general order, characterized by higher level of ideas.

This concept was presented first by Bohm in form of it's implicate/explicate order and it was extrapolated later by "Holographic Brain Theory" of Karl Pribram and by theory of Quantum consciousness of David Chalmers and Sir Roger Penrose. These concepts have all robust physical meaning in context of Heim's theory and AWT.

AWT and definition of observable reality

When comparing contemporary physical theories, a natural question can emerge immediately: if AWT is proclamativelly more general, then for example various quantum field or quantum gravity theories, shouldn't it lead to even more solutions, then these theories can supply? And if the vagueness is the main objection against these theories, why we should take care about AWT, after then?

The true is, AWT can lead into virtually infinite number of solutions, because even in quite limited particle system the number of possible states increases by extremely fast way. But AWT introduces a gradient driven reality concept, which is probability driven. Many results of particle-particle collisions aren't simply probable, because they're too rare. Therefore we can see only density gradients inside of dense particles system, not a particles or intermediate states as such. The concept of gradient driven reality is apparently anthropocentric, but it can be derived from AWT concept independently, because only artifacts, which were created by long term evolution of high number of mutations, i.e. by causal time events can interact with reality by gradient driven way.

The probability based approach based on particle statistics brings a rather strict restriction into number of possible solutions of every fuzzy theory. String theorists are aware of this opportunity, so they're trying to apply a statistical approach onto landscape of string theory predictions as well. But because the number of predictions of string theory (~10E+500) roughly corresponds the number of particles states inside of observable portion of Universe, then such approach is phenomenologically identical to AWT, if we simply omit whole intermediate step related to tedious string theory formalism (which is serving like random number generator only) - and if we apply Boltzmann statistics to these states directly.

By such way, the AWT wins over formal theories in simplicity (i.e. by Occam's razor criterion), just because it introduces a gradient driven definition of observable reality into physics, thus reducing the number of possible observable states in it: every object can be observed only and if only it contains some space-time gradient from sufficiently general perspective. For example, the (movement of) density gradients inside of condensing supercritical vapor can be observed, while the molecules (motion) itself not. The single Aether concept i.e. material conditional (antecedent) is sufficient for such decision, if we apply an observability criterion (consequent), thus introducing basic implication vector, which the AWT is based on: if Universe is formed by chaotic/particle environment, then every fluctuation evolved/emerged in it via (number of) causal events would see only the (same number of) causal gradients of it. (... and we can predict an appearance of this observable reality by unique way). By such way, we can always see exactly the part of Universe, which has served for our evolution (space-time emergence) and the observable scope of reality expands gradually. This is the way, how Bohm's implicate/explicate order may be undertood in context of AWT, because implication vector defines a time arrow of causual space-time curvature and subsequent compactification of it here.

The testability of AWT insintric perspective is provided by nonscalar implication vector, which is based on nonsingular (zero or infinite) order of axiomatic tensor.  Outside of this perspective AWT remains tautology inherently, whis is given by fact, no assumption can consider itself, or less generally, that no object of observation can serve both like mean, both like subject of the same observation in the same time and space point. Aether concept itself remains a tautology, as it cannot be proven by observation and causual logic without violation of this logic in less or more distant perspective by the same way, like God concept.

It can be demonstrated easily, many conceptual problems of contemporary science simply follows from the fact, the scientists have no clue, what is observable and what not, because of lack of relevant definition of observable reality. By such way, many possible combinations would simply disappear from testable predictions, if we apply the gradient driven statistics or Lagrange/Hamilton mechanics, which is based on it. In particular, the misinterpretation of results of M-M experiment just follows from the fact, scientists didn't realize, the motion of environment isn't observable by waves of this environment. The refusal of deBroglie /Bohmian mechanics is misunderstanding of the same category: scientists didn't realize, deBroglie wave cannot be observable by light wave (so easily), being a wave of the same environment, so that the lack of experimental evidence of deBroglie wave cannot serve as an evidence against Bohmian mechanics.

AWT and human scale

By AWT the Universe appears like being formed by infinitely nested field of density fluctuations of Aether. The human brain is one of such fluctuation, due its large time scale it can interact/observe a huge portion of space-time both into past of Universe expansion (the cosmic scale), both into future of it (the Planck scale). Because of symmetry of mutual interaction, human scale appears exactly at the middle of observable space-time scale. The human scale is defined by the average size of neurons inside of human brain (lowest entropy observable inside of our Universe generation) or by wavelength of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) (about 1.7 cm), which is apparently chaotic (highest entropy density observable). Under furthersome conditions, the violation of Lorentz symmetry can be observed by naked eye as a Brownian motion at Planck scale or like gravity lensing at cosmic scale - due CPT symmetry violation the Planck scale appears more close to human scale, then the cosmic one.

The wavelength 1.7 cm is invariant with respect to AdS-CFT duality, because it corresponds the wavelength, when the character of energy spreading changes from longitudinal waves to transversal one. From AWT perspective the CMB corresponds the capillary waves at water surface, which are spreading along it by the lowest speed at wavelength of 1.73 cm from exsintric perspective, enabling to interact with as large space-time, as possible and allowing the most advanced evolution of matter inside it. Classical quantum mechanics cannot handle gravity (phenomena) at all and quantum noise blurs in CMB noise above human scale by the same way, like relativity is limited by CMB noise (GZK limit, CMB Doppler anisotropy, etc.) in its predictions.

From cosmological perspective, the wavelength of CMB (1,7 cm) corresponds the outer diameter of Universe or the wavelength of Hawking radiation of tiny black hole, whose lifespan corresponds the age of our Universe generation (13.7 GYrs) - so we can say, the CMB is Hawking radiation of the black hole, which we are living in, i.e. red-shifted radiation of most distant quasars. The foamy character of energy spreading enables to see the event horizons of our Universe both from inside, both from outside via CMB radiation (i.e. the event horizons of most distant quasars observable). The larger (gravitational waves) or shorter waves (gamma radiation) are of limited scope with compare to CMB due the dispersion (GZK limit) in analogy to capillary waves spreading at water surface (compare the celerity curve bellow). The energy density of 3D space-time (roughly given by third power of Planck constant, i.e. 1oE+96 J/m3) corresponds the mass density of black hole, which is forming it.



From AWT follows, every Aether fluctuation of diameter bellow 1.7 cm will dissolve into photons and neutrinos, while the larger objects will collapse into heavier objects and evaporate by the same way. The black holes of diameter bellow 1.7 cm can evaporate via Hawking radiation during observable Universe lifespan, while these larger ones will evaporate by accretion radiation - so we can say, such objects are the most stable objects inside of observable Universe generation and accretion radiation is AdS-CFT dual to Hawking's one (massive objects bellow 1.7 scale falling into event horizon would appear like tiny quantum fluctuations from distant perspective outside of black hole due the immense space-time compactification around it). The density of largest black holes existing inside of observable Universe (with 10+9 times the mass of the sun, which has a radius of event horizon about 109 km) should be comparable with human scale (1 kg per dm3).

Curvature instability is scale invariant. During Big Bang event, all particles were formed by supersymmetric gravitons, the average size of which corresponded the wavelength of CMB photons. During universe evolution the larger gravitons condensed into particles and objects of observable matter, while the smaller fluctuations have evaporated into antiparticles of matter, which were dispersed by its repulsive gravity into clouds of dark matter, surrounding the objects of normal matter. The same criterion can be applied for planet and planetoids formation or even for predators-prey relationship of biosphere. Only pieces larger then some 1.7 cm can serve as a nuclei for accretion and subsequent gravitational growth, or they would become dispersed by radiation pressure of CMB photons. The smaller pieces of matter tends to condense as a whole in large clusters, instead (large means > 1.7 cm).



From AWT follows, the size of photons is given by interference of light wave with graviton background of Planck length scale, forming the quantum foam background of universe. From interference condition follows, the size of wave packet is equal to their wavelength size exactly at the 1.7 cm scale, which effectivelly means, microwave photons are serving both like particles, both like waves, i.e. by the same way, like gravitons in previous generation of Universe, expanded during inflation or like graviton waves in future generation of Universe before its gravitational collapse. The photons of larger wavelength cannot exist, because they tend to condense spontaneously with these smaller ones into solitons of negative rest mass (axions, or so called tachyon condensate).

Even tiny droplets and bubbles in mixtures tends to shrink and evaporate bellow 1.7 cm scale, while larger droplets and bubbles expands and fragments. The least stable droplets of 1,7 cm diameter (liposomes) could started the evolution of life at shallow places of ancient oceans (i.e. inside of multiphase environment of the largest possible complexity). The repeated breakdown by surf waves enabled them to compete for collection and/or (later) production of surfactants, which enabled them to remain as stable, as possible. Whole evolutionary process lasted whole Universe age, because AWT makes no conceptual difference between evolution of inorganic matter and organic life. Therefore it's nothing very strange, the quantum nature and size of neural standing waves corresponds the size of Universe scope, perceivable just by these waves (i.e. quantum gravity standing wave, forming the observable Universe generation). The increasing density of Universe resulting from vacuum foam collapse corresponds the expansion of the scope of human consiusness, capable to comprehend an increasing space-time portion of Aether chaos complexity during time.

The anthropocentric question, whether 1.7 cm distance scale is adjusted by evolution or it just enables the best visibility of Universe remains a tautology by Aether theory, because from AWT follows, every object which is product of less or more long term evolution has tendency to remain adapted to its environment and vice-versa. The scope of observable Universe always depends on entropy density of observer (i.e. number of time events/mutations involved) - the primitive organisms can see their Universe smaller, the more intelligent larger accordingly.

Lord Byron: "Truth is always strange — stranger than fiction."

Aether and emergence paradigm.

Emergence concept is one of four postmodern paradigms, by which contemporary physics converges to Aether based models of reality. The another ones are unparticle physics of Howard Georgi, Process physics of R.T.Cahill (Wikipedia article deleted by trolls already) and Constructal theory of A. Bejan. Aether concept covers all these particular theories into single one. Until now, emergence concept helped to cover the Aether concept for mainstream physics before publicity. Surprisingly (but quite logically from platonic perspective of mainstream science), while the causal basis of emergence concept is the least understood, it remains accepted in best- if not trendy - by mainstream, as the fast growing number of arXiv HEP articles indicates.

Being quite ancient, emergence concept has no single author, but the most significant proponent of this approach is Standford physicist R. Laughlin, particularly due his personal experience with emergent high pressure phenomena during nuclear research in Livermore. In his popular book "A Different Universe: Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down" (2005) he argues for emergence as a replacement for reductionism in accordance to 1972 article by Phil W. Anderson More is different, extended later by preprint of Mile Gu et all More really is different.

Prof. Laughing's stance can be understood by the way, it has no meaning to try to extrapolate the theories too far, until we don't understand their postulates well. It's not a reductionists stance, rather sort of logical optimization of approach. For example, when we start to develop a formal theory from two or more sets of mutually inconsistent postulates, we'll always finish in singular landscape of many possible solutions, because of poorly conditioned condition at the very beginning. Under such circumstances has no meaning to develop some extrapolations based on consecutive logic too deeply - we should rather develop the super-symmetric part of theory, based on parallelized approach, i.e. the intuition.

The conceptual basis of emergence in AWT is trivial and based on the fact, every entity of causal reality (a "particle") should be of positive curvature to remain observable, and the effects of surface curvature are cumulative, so that in every system of high number of such particles the total curvature leads to symmetry breaking and formation of new entities in less or more distant space-time perspective (1, 2). This remains valid for every set of entities of causal reality, based on consecutive logic, i.e. reality driven by single time arrow. From this point of view we can call the Aether model a theory of emergence and vice-versa, albeit I'm in doubt, whether the emergence paradigm can be understood without particle concept at all (and by Ed Witten the same could be said about the rest of string theorists, with honour exception of L. Motl and a few others).

The practical consequence of emergence in physics is every process involving so called spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB), which is not understood by the same way, like the emergence itself by mainstream physics. As a practical example of SSB can serve every phase transform, the condensation in particular. The nested condensation of supercritical fluid can serve as an iconic example of emergence phenomena, on which whole the AWT is based.

We can met with emergence phenomena in many places in psychology, sociology and biology. A classical example of emergent process is so called imagination - i.e. the creative process of "new" ideas involving phase transforms of waves of electrochemical activity inside of human brain. Because we understand the Universe by mean of ideas, it's nothing strange, we can understood it by mean of emergence as well. The theory of prime number, Fibonacci serii and modular forms are the main areas of emergence theory in math, Penrose tiles in geometry.

In art the manifestation of emergence is manifested by so called serigraphy, i.e. the artistic approach based on repetition of elements based on stencil technique of katazome Japanese art. Albeit the most advantage examples of emergent aspects we can met in quasicrystalline structures used in Islamic art and architecture in particular, which are used in metamaterial and terrahertz technologies. The most famous promoter of serigraphy in modern art is Andy Warhol. The emergence principle is contained in fact, the repetetive application of elements brings new quality into artistic testimonial. In this sense, the violation of symmetry in serigraphy has a particular impact due its apparent evolutionary aspect: people usually prefers the patterns, which are enabling further evolution of ideas and perception, so they can become a part of transformation process.

Aether and structure of observable reality

By AWT the observable reality appears as being formed by nested density fluctuations of hypothetical inhomogeneous environment of infinite mass/energy density, i.e. the Aether. By such a way, AWT doesn't explain, what the reality is, it just extrapolates the criterions of observability well known from everyday reality. Inside of dense particle environment, everything, what we can observe are density fluctuations, i.e. the gradients - from this the concept of gradient driven reality follows. In addition, just these density fluctuations can serve for causal energy spreading in transversal waves, the longitudinal waves follows Huygens principle, so they cannot serve as a causal base of information (for longitudinal waves every event has an infinite number of parallel consequences).



Fortunately, it's rather easy to imagine the behavior of infinitely dense particle system, because it can be modeled by dense gas system or cold plasma crystals, both modeled by using of computers and nested foam structure of neural network is adapted to parallel processing (an intuition), being an Aeter simulator. The fundamental system here is ideal gas, following Boltzmann-Maxwell distribution in infinite number of dimensions. The extrapolation of density fluctuations to infinite density leads to concept of Boltzmann brain, proposed by assistant of Ludwig Boltzmann reportedly. By this idea whole universe appears a single giant fluctuation of Aether. Surprisingly, this model is very well defined and conditioned, because here's the only way, by which such dense gas can condense into more complex structures. Therefore we can expect, with increasing gas density the solution would converge by well defined way, the only problem is, we can model such system with limited precision by real systems or computers by using of contemporary technology. In this post we can just emphasize some common aspects of very dense particle system behavior.

The most fundamental aspect of observable reality is hidden in question, how we can see at least something from infinitely dense chaos? The reason is somewhat anthropic: we are highly causal phase of Aether borrowed from long term causal evolution, so we can see just a causal portion of chaos (this one mediated by transversal waves) and such portion is infinitely tiny with compare to rest of chaos: the infinitely small portion of infinitely huge and dense environment is just the observable part of reality. Inside of such small portion of reality the information can propagate by the limited speed (the speed of light in particular), so we can see just a limited number of different states of chaos in each moment. The limited number of chaos is always stochastic by the same way, like dense field of limited number of points consisting of limited number of colors: a scale invariant density fluctuations appears here:



As the result, the particle concept in it's true singular nature of zero dimensional objects colliding in infinitely dimensional space is limited just to very fundamental level of Aether, which remains unreachable for causal observation by definition. All other parts of reality will be composed by less or more dense particle fluctuations, which are having a character of scale invariant nested density fluctuations (unparticles), similar to fractal clouds and/or Perlin noise, composed of octals (Perlin noise is fundamental fractal here):



The observation through thick layer of Aether would lead into gradual dispersion of transversal waves and the formation of density gradients and/or even singularities, which will manifests itself like phase transform with respect to time dimension. With increasing gradient density the blobby character of density fluctuations will change into dense nested foam of 1D/2D strings and membranes, because only sharpest gradients can be distinguished from noise here. This transform is illustrated by above picture. The density of foam will increase and at the certain moment it will form a continuum, inside which new generation of density fluctuations will emerge. We can observe this structure inside of dark matter streaks, which are demonstrating, how the vacuum should appear at the Planck scale level as well.



This is because of another important aspect of Aether foam: every reality can be perceived by local observer from at least two points of view: "inner" (insintric) and "outer" (exsintric) one (every truth has two sides, here). In more general perspective these points of view will become fragmented into plural ones in analogy to structure of Aether foam itself. The existence of multiple perspectives is trivial consequence of character of information spreading, which can be modeled by energy spreading in transversal waves through dense soap foam. When we place a light source inside of bucket into foam, we can observe, the light will penetrate whole volume, so that the inner surface of bucket will remain illuminated by the same way, like this outer one - the light spreading will become omnipresent here:



Practical consequence of this aspect of Aether behavior is, every density fluctuation will interact with the neighboring fluctuations by at least two ways: like as it would being part of them (insintric perspective), both like it would be outside of them (exsintric perspective). These two ways of interactions will always interfere in stable given ratio, thus forming of causal base of so called quantization. This is an important aspect of chaos driven reality: we should explain, not only why everything differs each other, but the existence of analogies and classes as well: i.e. the fact, why certain fundamental parts of reality appears so similar each other (atoms, elementary particles, living species, large black holes and galaxies). i.e. quantization of matter and energy.



Testable consequence of dual nature of reality is supersymmetry and self-similarity of Universe at Planck and cosmological scales: the Universe appears as being formed by itself from long-term distance perspective, the structure of quantum foam is similar in many aspects to streaks of dark matter, the Universe appears like interior of black hole being observed from outside at the same time, the mass/energy density of vacuum corresponds the mass/energy density of black holes, the cosmic microwave background corresponds the Hawking radiation of black hole, whose lifespan corresponds the Universe age, and so on. Later we can discuss some practical consequences of supersymmetry duality on the examples/analogies of evolutionary biology and sociology.

Is Earth at the heart of a giant cosmic void?

This post is a reaction to the NewScientist article of the same name. By AWT the Universe is behaving like interior of very dense star, where the energy spreads along surfaces of foamy density fluctuations, similar to those, which we can observe during condensation of every dense particle system. Now we can start to think:

"If such environment would be completely homogeneous, could we see something from it?"

Of course not - our ability to see some matter or phenomena is given by the fact, the randomness of system is violated in certain space and/or time. For example, we can see a laser ray in atmosphere just because such atmosphere is a bit inhomogeneous. The laser ray on the picture bellow is FASOR used at the Starfire Optical Range for LIDAR and laser guide star experiments is tuned to the sodium D2a line and used to excite sodium atoms in the upper atmosphere. In vacuum we could never see some ray from outside.



But the very same reason, which enables us to see the stars, red shift or expansion of Universe means, it's related to some dispersion and divergence in less or more distant perspective. It's tic for tat: if you want to see at least something predictable and regular, such regularity and symmetry would be always broken in less or more distant perspective (compare the geometry of density blog interactions, as described herein). It means, when we can see a light of distant stars, it's just because the vacuum contains some inhomogeneities, which can serve for causal energy spreading in transversal waves. But just these inhomogeneities are the very reason, why such causality is violated in less or more distant perspective, because you cannot separate causal fluctuations of vacuum from these random ones.


Therefore the light of distant stars appears reddish, and the speed of this redness is accelerated with distance (and the speed of its speed as well). This is because the same reason, which serves for light spreading is the reason of its dispersion, which we can perceive as a red shift and expansion of space-time. We can observe it as a omni-directional Universe expansion. And this expansion even proceeds the faster, the farther is the distance, from which we are observing it. We are calling it a dark energy. By AWT our ability to see at least something is always connected with nonlinearity of this observation in less or more global perspective. Of course, this cannot serve as an evidence of geocentric model, because it's merely an observational illusion, which is relative to each observer in Universe. We can compare to keeping of lantern inside of dense fog: after then our Universe would appear like spherical zone of iluminated fog symmetric to our location, no matter when we are staying right now.

In fact, we should observe the very same effects even at the water surface, when we would use the surface water waves as the only source of information about our neigbourhood, because water surface is never quite homogeneous, as it always contains a Brownian noise fluctuations. But these density fluctuations cannot be seen from surface wave perspective directly, they would appear like quantum chaos instead by deforming the images of other objects at proximity.