Wolfram Physics II: Emergent Hypergraph Geometry and General Relativity

Find more information about the summer school here: education.wolfram.com/summer/...
Stay up-to-date on this project by visiting our website: wolfr.am/physics
Check out the announcement post: wolfr.am/physics-announcement
Find the tools to build a universe: wolfr.am/physics-tools
Find the technical documents: wolfr.am/physics-documents
Follow us on our official social media channels.
Twitter: / wolframresearch
Facebook: / wolframresearch
Instagram: / wolframresearch
LinkedIn: / wolfram-research
Stephen Wolfram's Twitter: / stephen_wolfram
Contribute to the official Wolfram Community: community.wolfram.com
Stay up-to-date on the latest interest at Wolfram Research through our blog: blog.wolfram.com
Follow Stephen Wolfram's life, interests, and what makes him tick on his blog: writings.stephenwolfram.com

[@pedromoya9127]

superb! clear math concepts, great insights and thinking

[@tarkajedi3331]

Watching this again I finally followed the maths and ideas!!!! IT was worth the work !!!

[@dragolov]

Deep respect!

[@tarkajedi3331]

I don't know why my brain kept misunderstanding this now that I actually follow it!!! It is actually very logial and clever. I think my brain was stuck like a broken VCR!!!! I can't wait to see this go further now that I get it !!!

[@MathPhilosophyLab]

We need some HyperGraph Animations

[@123amsterdan456]

This is it.

[@vjfperez]

Looks like your model could handle problems such as ad hoc inflation field assumptions with ab initio derivations - are you guys looking at this?

[@tarkajedi3331]

Just finished 1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@geekoutnerd7882]

Your comments are wonderfully encouraging.

[@uzulim9234]

What's the definition of topological obstruction in baryonic matter?

[@glitchp]

DNA

[@realist4859]

I might be way off... but if i move an apple with my hand... the apple is a errr 'collection of topological distortions' that i errr 'force to propagate'... 'they' move... and the new apple is made from the re-ordered space of the new-location. The thing that is 'the apple' is the information... the information is moved and the 'stuff' that is 'mass/matter'.... that's made up from the distorted spacetime created by the info that is my apple... (the old spacetime that formed those part of my apple at its old location return to their 'un--distorted' state as the apple moves on) This made me want to try a simple experiment which turned out to amuse me.. I have a computer mouse (but its an apple) First... i assume the mouse will move in a direction from the now moment... (if it doesn't stay still)... i wibble my mouse a bit, it seems my assumption is correct... What if i want to move my mouse in a direction it's not going to go? I try very hard.... can't do it... its very very hard to do... feels a bit like a physical barrier... Anyone else get that with everything they think and do? its annoying. :p

[@DavidBrown-om8cv]

At 2:12 in video, "As long as your hypergraph limits to something like a Riemannian manifold,, it's guaranteed to be compatible with general relativity ..." According to Kroupa, the Lambda-CDM model is ruled out by empirical evidence. Google "kroupa milgrom". Are there 3 problems with Einstein's field equations, namely, (1) lack of a simple explanation for the empirical successes of MOND, (2) lack of an upper limit for wavelengths, and (3) lack of a positive lower limit for wavelengths? Does the Big Bang need to be replaced by Wolfram's Reset? Sanejouand, Yves-Henri. "A framework for the next generation of stationary cosmological models." arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.07931 (2020). arxiv.org/abs/2005.07931 My guess is the preceding article is a work of genius, but the section “How are photons lost?” is wrong - photons are not lost, instead they display the effects of loss of gravitational energy - such loss confirms the existence of the timing mechanism of Wolfram’s cosmological automaton, I say that MOND is the key to understanding string theory with the finite nature hypothesis, i.e. Wolfram’s cosmological automaton. MOND idea: Force = Newtonian-acceleration + excess-acceleration-based-on-a0 Alternate idea (string theory with the finite nature hypothesis): Force = (A0 + G)mM/r^2 = Newtonian-force + excess-gravitational-force Claim: The MOND idea and the alternate idea are approximately mathematically equivalent. What might be going on? The radius of our universe is a constant - our universe is not expanding. Astrophysicists mistakenly believe that our universe is expanding because they mistakenly believe that gravitational energy is conserved. Instead of our universe expanding, the observers and their associated reference frames are shrinking. During each Planck time interval, precisely one unit of Fredkin-Wolfram gravitational energy is transferred from the boundary of the multiverse into the interior of the multiverse. Gravitons do not have spin 2 - instead they have spin 2 on average and there is a new uncertainty principle for graviton spin. The graviton spin uncertainty principle allows some gravitons to escape from the boundary of the multiverse into the interior of the multiverse. The escape process causes 3 phenomena: (1) For people who believe that gravitational energy is conserved, our universe seems to be expanding with a nonzero cosmological constant, i.e. dark energy; instead of a weird negative pressure there is a steady, real loss of gravitational energy. (2) MOND has many empirical successes, i.e. MOND replaces the so-called dark matter - the escape of gravitons causes a back reaction against gravitational lines of force, thus resulting in dark-matter-compensation-constant = (3.9±.5) * 10^-5 . (3) The escape of gravitons causes an excess flattening of spacetime - thus causing a deflaton field which replaces the inflaton field. Is the preceding scenario nonsense?

[@theuniques1199]

David Brown You forgot to include variable with constant and constants with variables, expansion is based on contraction and vice versa, expanding, contracting, expanded, contracted so contracted, expanded, contracting, expanding. Could you explain parallel with or without perpendicular and diagonal, yes you could and no you couldn't. Newtonian third law states neutrality, neutrality states Newtonian third law because even motion is based on non motion and vice versa. Replication is isn't infinite, infinite isn't is replication, infinite is isn't replication, replication isn't is infinite.

[@ConnorMcCormick]

@@theuniques1199 your response is isn't is isn't is isn't isn't isn't sensical

[@theuniques1199]

You only have two shapes and/or forms based on one form or/and shape, or/and one form and/or shape based on two shapes and/or forms, which are pi and/or square or/and cube and/or sphere. All shape/s_ form/s are based, not based on pi, sphere, cube, square so square, cube, sphere, pi are not based, are based on all form/s_ shape/s. Vortex is based on segment, vector, ray so ray, vector, segment are based on vortex. Extrapolation is based on interpolation, interpolation is based on extrapolation, all squares(cubes) are based on square(or cube), square(cube) is based on all squares(or cubes), circumference is based on radius, radius is based on circumference, mass is based on density, density is based on mass, rectangle is based on perfect cube(perfect square), perfect square(perfect cube) is based on rectangle, infinite time_ infinite space are based on finite space_ finite time so finite time_ finite space are based on infinite space_ infinite time, pi(sphere) is both based and/or both not based on pi(sphere) and/or cube(square) so square(cube) is both not based or/and both based on cube(square) or/and sphere(pi), all color/s are based on dark_ light so light_ dark are based on all color/s, all color/s are based on all form/s_ shape/s, all shape/s_ form/s are based on all color/s, plural is based on single, single is based on plural, macro relativity, macro quantom are based on micro quantom, micro relativity so micro quantom, micro relativity are based on macro quantom, macro relativity, locality/s are based on non locality/s, non locality/s are based on locality/s, common is based on proper, proper is based on common, entanglement is based on non entanglement, non entanglement is based on entanglement, repetitive is based on repeat, repeat is based on repetitive, progress is based on regress so regress is based on progress, evolving is based on evolved so evolved is based on evolving, devolving is based on devolved, devolved is based on devolving, becoming is based on being so being is based on becoming, knowing, unknowing, known, unknown is not based or/and based on unknown, known, unknowing, knowing, creating, destroying, created, destroyed are based and/or not based on destroyed, created, destroying, creating, becoming a beginning, becoming an end so being an end, being a beginning and/or or/and being an end, being a beginning so becoming a beginning, becoming an end. Replication is replication, replication is not replication, infinity is infinity, infinity is not infinity, replication is not infinity, infinity is not replication, infinity is replication, replication is infinity; eternal recurrence(neutral). Memory is based, not based on remembering, forgetting, remembered, forgotten so forgotten, remembered, forgetting, remembering are not based, are based on memory. The word based is just like or/and not like the word stereotype which is neutral, based means and/or doesn't mean difference and/or sameness(based or/and and/or not based) just not like or/and like stereotype doesn't mean or/and does mean lie and/or truth(stereotype or/and and/or non stereotype). A closed universe is based on an open universe, an open universe is based on a closed universe, border is based on non border, non border is based on border, movement is based on non movement, non movement is based on movement, change is based on non change, not changing is based on changing, a clock is always changing but never changes, a clock never changes but is always changing, a seesaw is always moving but never moves, a seesaw never moves but is always moving, other self isn't is based on self other, self other is isn't based on other self, illogical is isn't logical so logical isn't is illogical, rational isn't is irrational so irrational is isn't rational, trough is based on crest, crest is based on trough, parallel, perpendicular, diagonal is based or/and and/or not based on diagonal, perpendicular, parallel. Infinite finite replication, Infinite replication finite, finite Infinite replication, finite replication Infinite, replication Infinite finite, replication finite Infinite. Nature(becoming, being ) is isn't based on artificial_ natural so natural_ artificial isn't is based on nature(being, becoming). Eternal recurrence, neutral, neutral, recurrence eternal. Replication infinite, Infinite replication. Being the block universe(square, cube) is isn't being the moving electron universe(sphere, pi), becoming the moving electron universe(pi, sphere) isn't is becoming the block universe(cube, square) so becoming the block universe isn't is becoming the moving electron universe, being the moving electron universe is isn't being the block universe.

[@TechyBen]

As amazing as this is. I fear for the results that appear from people playing with this knowledge. It's closing in on 100 years since Einstein's discovery gave power and destruction...

[@geekoutnerd7882]

Does anyone believe in God?

[@geekoutnerd7882]

@jawad mansoor Neat, figured I’d never see a reply. 😂

[@ethanellis465]

nope