Dr. Brian Keating : Dr. Leonard Susskind

This is a fascinating interview. I made some comments on YouTube and pasted them below.

@27:45 : Dear Brian, it is time to clear up another misconception in science. We need to reinterpret the 2nd Law as an equality now. Entropy is conserved. The problem is that all this time scientists could not measure the entropy of the spacetime aether. When they thought entropy was increasing, they didn’t realize it but the entropy of the surrounding spacetime aether was decreasing. The point charges are conserved. In fact, better, they are immutable. We can start counting them in reactions. I am sure the PDB has lots of reactions that are missing some very low energy point charges that were consumed from or released to the aether. Oh, and as a reminder, a solid core of packed point charges (the ultimate matter-energy storage device) has only one microstate, and therefore zero entropy. So back to Leonard’s comment, there is no violation in this revised 2nd Law, and entropy is conserved. So, in some sense the universe is a perpetual motion machine. It seems destined to swirl and recycle via the SMBH or in any of zillions of reaction cycles and cycles of cycles. Best, Mark

@35:30 Dear Brian, We need to re-evaluate the black hole thought experiment scenarios. Near a black hole the spacetime aether is getting rather energetic and dense. The spacetime aether point charges are spinning or vibrating faster near dense matter-energy and of course that is causing dilation and contraction. But you have to think about what is happening to the standard matter constructs trying to exist in the spacetime aether. At some point they decay. Even photons and neutrinos may have some difficulty passing through the dense soup the closer you get to the center of the SMBH. Bottom line here is we can not assume that spacetime is a void and it is just some geometrical object that contracts. My answer right now is that it is pretty much smithereens for any object near the SMBH. Best, Mark

@40:00 Well, Mr. Popper and his falsifiability are probably going to have a big issue with point charges that have an Lp radius barrier. I don’t think your test equipment will be at 10^-35 for a while Brian, am I right? 😉 However this TOE will likely lead to many new discoveries because it is going to be relatively easy to simulate and there are new conservation constraints and who knows some new math or computational techniques may help with this constrained N-body problem. Also, I suspect that it is testable in many ways other than direct observation. Best, Mark

@49:00 Please note that my model, NPQG, provides eternal inflation and recycling that is right in front of our eyes in nearly every galaxy. It’s easy to explain. Immutable energetic point charges fall in to the SMBH in the form of structure (and maybe the spacetime aether is pulled in too – haven’t intuited that one yet) and those same point charges may come out some absolute time in the future via the jets in a very energetic form, including the tau neutrino which I mark as just a spinning pair of + and – point charges. I have no feel for the mean and stddev of the duration a point charge spends in the SMBH, but the jets erupt periodically, so chances are the ones that go in will come out eventually.

I had been thinking that information is destroyed in a Planck core in an SMBH since it is a single microstate with zero entropy. But this discussion got me thinking that if I am going to claim conservation, then whenever a point charge joins the Planck core, that any conserved quantities must be left behind with the teeming point charges waiting for that boost to Planck energy to join the core. So I am going to have to rethink this. Maybe Hawking was right.

@1:04:45 Is physics invented or discovered? I would say both. I feel like I have reverse engineered a minimal set of ingredients, parameters (2), and basic rules (classical mechanics, and Maxwell’s adjusted equations). Reverse engineering is a lot like invention, especially in this case. However, at the end of the reverse engineering was a discovery. That discovery is then applied to solve open problems which is another form of invention/discovery. The most difficult part of finding the TOE is not invention, but rather inventing what experiments will then discover and confirm.

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : December 14, 2020 : v1

By J Mark Morris

I am imagining and reverse engineering a model of nature and sharing my journey via social media. Join me! I would love to have collaborators in this open effort. To support this research please donate:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s