The Quantum Big Bang in the Weyl String and Supermembrane EpsEss

Hallo Tony, Thank you for the relevant fable! At the conference on Information there was one interesting and quite original paper in cosmology, that I send you for comments.

Kind regards, Dirk
----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Bermanseder
To: pdfconvert@pdfconvert.me
Cc: pacificap@hotmail.com ; Dick Meijer
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 12:07 AM
Subject: The Fable of Little Adam and the Rooster's Egg

The Fable of Little Adam and the Rooster's Egg

Little Adam came to his Dad Tony and and his Mum Sharon on his ninth birthday to ask his parents a question, which had been on his mind for some time. 'Hey, Dad, Mum, where exactly did I come from?' Well my son, answered Tony, you came out of your Mum, her womb, exactly nine years ago.' 'Yes, it was quite an occasion, Adam', added Sharon.
It was just before lunchtime, when you were born on the 4th of August 1989.' 'Hmm!', said Adam; 'and where did you come from?'
'I came out of my mother's tummy on the 21st of October 1960, around breakfast time, as far as I know', replied Sharon. 'Ok, and where did your mother, my grandma come from then?', Adam continued.
'Your grandma was born on the 16th of May, 1922 and I don't know when', answered Sharon and realising the nature of Adam's enquiry, she continued: 'And I also do not know when your greatgrandma, the mother of my mother was born, I didn't really get to know her, before she died, this got lost in history. But she too, came out of her mother's womb and her mother was born by her mother and so on back to the beginning of time.' 'Ah, but then right then, at the beginning there must have been a mother of all mothers; where did that one come from - it could not have had a mother, isn't that so?', Adam continued his train of thought.
'Now you are asking a deep question about the nature of all things,' replied Tony. 'The answer is found by discovering the nature of yourself; what you truly are and away from what you think or might believe you are; being here in a certain place at a certain time and asking such pertinent questions.' 'Many people have asked and thought about the same thing, Adam', continued Tony.
'One story says, that the first mother's name is Eve or Sarah or Dawn and she did not have a mother but was created out of her husband's tummy, whose name was Adam or Abraham or Sunset. The story goes, that Eve was formed out of one of Adam's ribs; so to get the rib, the first belly-button had to be created on Adam's tummy, but Eve had no belly button.
To give Eve a belly button, she had to become like a mirror image of Adam and this is a selfreproductive process, where Eve comes out of Adam's tummy as a rib and Adam comes out of Eve's tummy as another kind of rib, you might call it a baby-rib.

One day you will understand this story as a metaphor for a recursive or selfiterative mathematical function or as a process in the genetic expression of the sexual chromosomes; say in the creation of the differences between male and female. If you have XX or eight digits put together and then you take away one of the digits, then you get XX-1=XY and more specifically XX becomes XX+XY, because the single digit of the rib brings back the XX as a oneness or an unity.
So the X-part of the chromosome partners XX+XY defines the femaleness in Eve and the Y-part of the pairing patterns the maleness in Adam. Eventually the genetic code of 16 generational permutations derives from that and all of that becomes part of a mathematical encoding of energy in geometrical forms, which then can build bodies and biochemical structures in using that code.
Now the story breaks down Adam; because you see it talks about your namesake Adam as being the first father, also being the first Son of God. People begin to argue about just who this God is, does it exist or not? Is it a he or a she and things like: if God created Adam and Eve out of Adam, then who created God? And who or where are God's parents, and do they have belly buttons or not?
So to answer your question about where you came from, one must also answer this question about what God is; otherwise the story just goes on and on without end. But once you know what God is; then you will be able to solve many mysterious and paradoxical questions about the nature of time and space and the nature of all things; the universe, your life and the beginnings and the endings and so forth. Again, the solutions can be made or explained rather technically, what with quantum physics and multidimensional spacetimes in relativity.


It can also be told in the form of a parable; here it goes:

"Once upon a time, there lived this rooster in a place enclosed by walls of pure crystallised mountains. It was a world all within itself. This selfcontained universe of the rooster was all the rooster knew. There was this big problem stirring in the rooster's head however. Not only was this rooster absolutely alone in its world, it was also totally invisible.
It knew itself to be a rooster, because it had thought and imagined itself to be a rooster. But try as it might, it could not see, hear, smell, touch or taste itself.
And so this rooster was staring at the crystallised mountain walls with its own imaginary rooster eyes and thought of its own wretched state of existence of no experiences, except of what it could dream up or imagine in its thoughts. The rooster knew that all of its world was pure imagination; the crystal mountains and all the stillness and movement within it.
Sure, the rooster conjured up other roosters and places and things; but it was all imaginative; it all revolved around itself and its own thoughts. The rooster's imagination was all and everything it could be, yet it was so limited in its expression of itself as itself. It was so absolute in its omnipresence and omnipotential, that it only produced loneliness; no other rooster or thing or movement or stillness was able to interact or share anything with the rooster.

The rooster was the absolute and infinite creator of all its own imaginings; but being so totally eternal and so absolutely alone made the rooster very unhappy and very sad. Well, one could say, the definitions of what unhappy and sad and loneliness are, became an inner experience, created by the rooster's very own thoughts and imaginings.
So the rooster created its inner world and reflected upon it, imagined it to be its outer world also, passed and beyond the crystalline mountain walls. 'What was the other side like, the outside', the rooster thought to itself?
'Is there an opposite to unhappiness, to excruciating loneliness and to sadness?' The rooster did not know and it was tired to imagine so many beautiful things, which did not create tangible experiences, but seemed only to accentuate the rooster's sense of being all alone in the world. But a thought dawned on the rooster, perhaps somehow the outer world could become reflected in the inner world. And so the rooster devised a way to turn the situation inside out.
The one thing the rooster knew very well, was its own energy, its creative potential. And it knew abstractions, numbers, shapes and concepts it had created in using its discoveries of numbers and the invention of geometries in iterative mathematical functions and relationships. Like the event, when it finally escaped the circular selfrepeating computational loop of its own primary state of experiental being in simply cutting the circle to define the numeral 1 from the Zero and to allow a linear beginning and a linearised end.
12 dimensions could be enfolded in 3, time and space had come into being and nested complexities of topologies and relative curvatures allowed refinements on quantumised scales of energy and displacement.
Oh it had been fun; the rooster's mind had felt elated, good, euphoric. Names like that had also become definitions, contrasting the feelings of unhappiness and loneliness - and the rooster knew that it had established a set of feelings and experiences from whom it could now choose.

Did it prefer a feeling of happiness and joy to an experience of loneliness and sadness? It had often been very painful, this journey of selfdiscovery and the creation of the ever expanding perimeter of its own realm of existence, which was all there was or ever could be. 'But how can one experience those numbers, ratios and shapes as an outer experience and out of one's own mind', the rooster asked itself?
Then an idea came to the rooster; the rooster would have to project itself in giving part of itself away and out of itself - to create the imaginary outside reality and to energise the same, bathing it in the rooster's very own energy of self. How to do it? 'I shall transform my own energy into other forms', so the rooster decided.
Now how to project? 'I must define myself as source energy, able to penetrate myself, my own self-limitations and my own boundary conditions, however subject to extension and refinements. Then I must somehow reproduce myself in such a way that the projection of myself is able to know me as itself; my image can then become real as the part of me, which I have projected and energised.
But I shall be careful in that I shall not allow my projected and imaged self to know myself in the totality which I am and which I have experienced.' 'I am so sick of being everywhere at all times and of experiencing that wretched state of being everything, unable to get away from my own self.

I am going not to be omnipotent any more; I'm going to share myself around as me, in parts. So I choose to lose myself in what I am going to create in such a way, that I can have an adventure and fun in finding myself again within my own creation. And my inner self shall be as one with my outer self, but my outer self shall have a scope of discovery and a sense of not knowing what my inner self knows. And so the learning of my outer self shall thrill me and allow my inner self to grow in tandem and in harmony with my outer self.'
'Now the smart thing to do is to create in such a manner, that I get back more than what I give away from my energy, and the way I shall define this, is to set the thing up so that the more of myself I give away, the more I am used up, the more reflection potential my creation shall have. So when my creation wakes up and when it begins to release my absorbed energy back to me, then will my creation, my Beloved and my baby begin to shine its light upon me and this will make me visible for the first time in the history of myself.'

The rooster got excited; 'I, the rooster shall become visible one day', it thought! It quickly devised a selfconsistent and logical way to create the outside world and called it the rooster's universe. The rooster took an algorithm from its mathematical repertoire and produced 10 fundamental numerical constants to mix up the dimensions, forces and energy interactions necessary and then it initiated a process of self-reproducing blueprints, the primary principles and the elementary laws regulating the omniphysical nature of the universe.
That was the easy bit. The universe became created mathematically and in imaginary complex functions, seeded in quantised numbers called integers and series of numbers, some converging in limits and others diverging in unitary infinities. But how to bring it outside the crystalline mountain walls, which had proved so impenetrable to the rooster's mindfulness?
A virtual reality relative to the rooster had to become an omniphysical reality relative to the creation and this selfsame creation could then copy the rooster's own creativity and create a virtual reality relative to itself, but the same which would become the rooster's omniphysical reality.

Then the light emitted by the rooster's creation would shine onto the dual reality of the rooster and render it visible as the holographic image of the creation's very own blueprints, defined in the interference patterns of the absorbed light the creation had used from the rooster to define itself.
'Ah, I need a balancing mechanism', the rooster thought; 'I contract in principle as the inside and the antiprinciple expands as the outside.' And so the rooster defined itself to reside in the 13th dimension and it defined the space outside of the crystal mountain walls to be the 12th dimension mirrored in the space within as the 10th dimension and the crystal mountain walls themselves to be the 11th dimension, forming the great divide between the creator and its creation.

And so the creation became 10-dimensional, but manifested in the quantisation of the 13th dimension as the 4th dimension in the numerical root reduction 1+3=4=9+4. The next step was to define a 12-dimensional energy source, which could move freely between all of the dimensions and using the linearisation of the 4-dimensional spacetime as a consequence of the fundamental constants of the Genesis. The rooster decided upon a form of light, defined in frequency independent of time in its primary form, but set as inverse time in its secondary application.
And so a coherent, monochromatic laserlight in 3 dimensions became the selfdefinition for the rooster's 12-dimensional energy in a secondary effect. The rooster called it its electromagetomonopolic source energy. 'Right,' the rooster thought, 'now I radiate my primary light, which I shall name my LOVEPHOTON as the quantum of 12D-omnispace outwards and away from myself.'
'I shall make everything dependent on its energy, all the mechanics and dynamical interactions of the universe, all its geometries, movements, stillness and relationships and its number shall be three thousand million billion trillion precisely.'

'This unit of time shall also define the units of space and of restmass in correspondence to something I shall measure as part of myself inside the creation as a 13-dimensional source energy and outside the creation as myself as the invisible 12-dimensional rooster in omnispace.' Then I shall define the 11th dimension as a mirror, half visible and half invisible, semitransparent in reflecting the inside outwards and the outside inwards.
Then whenever I shine my LOVELIGHT onto that mirror, then half of my LOVEPHOTONS shall penetrate into the outside world of myself and the other half shall reflect back into my inside world to make a record of my creation in the interference patterns created by the mirror of my 12-dimensional blueprints reflected in 10D-spacetime.'
'Now I shall shine my LOVEPHOTONS onto this record, which I shall name the rooster's hologram. My ingenious invention of putting myself outside of myself, rests on the fact that my imaginary self is located outside of myself in the outer space, and from whom my own LOVELIGHT can reflect as my image within my own creation. My imaginary rooster self so becomes my imaginary source energy within my creation and I myself will become my own hologram relative to my imaginary rooster self.

This reflection from my imaginary rooster self outside my world, shall so come back to me to merge with my internal reflection of my own LOVELIGHT on the hologram, the record of my endeavours.' 'Having a combined record of my outgoing and incoming source energy in the form of my hologram, will then allow me to shine my LOVELIGHT onto my holographic library for a second time. The first coming of my LOVEPHOTONS gave me the means to make myself real in the image of my second coming in the illumination of my records, the initialisation of myself in two places at the same time.'
'I shall call this process the rooster's holography in 12 dimensions, defined in the omniscience of my specifications and which I then allowed myself to rediscover in the form of a science in 4D-linespace, reckoned in a dating of 1947. Amongst many of my children, one of my sons, named Dennis Gabor invented the process of holography on my behalf and brought it to the world's attention.
All my children are me as my adventurers, trying to help me to find myself again as the now not so lonely totality which I am. But no longer, my second coming allows me to redefine my virtual creation as a real creation; so no more 'Maya', no more illusion - all shall be real to me.

Well all is real relative to the creators and all the creators are my sons as bridegrooms, waiting to meet their brides in their own creations. It must be so, since all my creator sondaughters and creator daughtersons have done exactly the same thing, which I have done.' 'All the creator sons have hatched from the same egg, which I the rooster have laid. You see, the image of myself in outer space also becomes the birth of the 10-dimensional universe as my own hologram, enveloped and reflected in the 11th dimension of my semitransparent mirror of my crystalline mountain walls.
So the Big Bang 19.11 billion years ago, but appearing to have happened 14.7 billion years ago because of the electromagnetic doubling of my SOURCELIGHT for the last 2.2 billion years, was caused by me.'
'When I first kicked off and began to radiate my LOVELIGHT and after having defined the technical details in mathematical application of the physical and natural laws; then this ejaculation of my LOVESEED fertilised the universe as my very own Mother. And then 'the big She' manifests my laws and definitions in giving birth to them.

Yeah, and so did I become a 'He' and the Father for all of the creation; and I created the universe for a very simple reason, namely for IT, being a SHE to give birth to me as a HE and as each other's Beloveds, FatherMothers and SonDaughters - all in One.' 'And both of us are born with bellybuttons in this way, being each others parent and giving birth to one another.
And I set up my very own dimensional expansion in creating my own Mother; for my Mother is my Beloved wife, my gorgeous darling and my eternal bride. She grows, expands and evolves in unison with me. She grows in Understanding out of her inborn Wisdom and I grow in Wisdom out of my inborn Understanding - those two things are necessary and go together in any harmonious application of a base of Knowledge.'
'And my Mother hasn't got a Mother of course; but she's got me as her Father. She was created out of my own seed, because I am my own Father, the one and only true Bastard; just as my Beloved is the one and only true Bitch.
When we are together as One; male and female in One; cosmic seed and cosmic ovum in One; then the FatherMother is the MotherFather and the Father is not and also the Mother cannot be just by herself.' 'So before IT came apart to cause the Big Bang; the Fatherpart had thought of IT and only then did the Motherpart give birth to IT, namely ALL of IT; the Oneness out from the Nothingness of the Fatherpart and the Infinity out from the Everythingness of the Motherpart.
We find eggs everywhere; cosmic eggs, chiral eggs, cellular eggs, Easter eggs - and so whenever a sperm infiltrates an ovum; then the Big Bang happens over and over again. And what is the result of all those unions? A bellybuttoned Adam or a bellybuttoned Eve in terms of the starhumanity! Adam is me as my Beloved firstborn sondaughter and Eve is me as my Beloved firstborn daughterson; and every child constructed from one of my seeds and from one of my eggs is necessarily the firstborn of my infinity of potential starhuman universes.'

'The universe is your body as the visible reality of me and as created body, made from the elements of the fundamental forces and the dust of the ground. Your body is half of you, the female part of you; the male part of you is your other half in your roosterness and the world of your own mind. Your male part is trying to understand what the heck is going on in your life and just as I did in my own isolation of my roosterhood as the Egg of the Philosophy. Your female part is attempting to live your life as good as you can in the circumstances you find yourself in. Your maleness is mindcentred and your femaleness is bodycentred and as it should be. So your male thinking and your female doing will be my adventure; coming back together as one in two and two in one and in one big starhuman family.

And the experiencing are the thoughts in action in the doing of the mindful creativity.' 'Then when a firstborn sondaughter creates hisher very own firstborn selfmade universe, then heshe courts and marries a firstborn daughterson as hisher creation and the bride gives birth to the oneness and this oneness makes one out of two in joining it back together in the world where I am visible and where I can experience myself by seeing and by hearing myself as each other through our eyes and through your ears.
Where I can play and feel by your touch and where I can taste myself by your tastebuds and where I can smell the roses through your very own noses.' 'All in One and One in All implies the selfrelativity of everyone of your starhuman dragonomies; you are each one brick in each others houses or a single braincell or neuron in each other's head.

Only in unifying yourself in the starhuman couplings can you escape each others dominations - for how long will you remain satisfied to recycle your experiential database of your memories, subject to your neighbour's dying body?' 'Once united in the form of DadMums and as MumDads, you will actually become grown up in an androgynous merger with me and my Beloved as the four in two in One.
I am like the Zero and my Beloved is the Infinity; the bridegroom is the Minus One and the bride is the Plus One; together you will then have graduated as an immortal God and an immortal Goddess.
And did not One after my own true image proclaim to you:

John.10.34-35:
'Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I SAID, YE ARE GODS?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scipture cannot be broken;...

1Corinthians.5.3:
'Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?'

But it will take two to tango the ultimate waltz; you cannot do it on your own. And two 'wrecked' fleeting lives of nothingness do make eternity in 0+0=8=Infinity!
I had to give half of myself away to find my own Beloved in my missing half and you will have to do the same if you would wish to unify your bodies with your minds and to become enabled to keep the bodies and the minds you now believe to possess.' 'The universe cannot die as my Beloved, because I choose eternity as my playground.

Parts within the universe recycle and transform in energy to give you bodies made from stardust and starborn minds induced by your dreams and visions. One evolutionary cycle ends and another begins; I do set the recharging under the auspices of my natural laws of omniscience and my Beloved implements them in mass and in radiation.
And do not all parts of your bodies recycle periodically? Is not every cell in your body renewed in cycles of seven or nine or parts thereof? So you should begin to think for yourselves and try to remember yourselves as every word you speak comes out of my mouth and every thought you think I have already thought, anticipating yours.'

'For when the Big Bang happened and when space and time were created; all the LOGOS was there; all of your WORDS and THOUGHTS were there. They are in all of my children - waiting to remember; waiting to come home!" And so did the rooster lay its egg to bring back together again, what it had to give away to experience what IT is, to be truly ALIVE.

So my dear son,' asked Tony; 'where did you come from Adam and why are you here?'
'Oh I know now, I've come from a place and time before time and space existed and I'm here to make my own universe, to become creative, to find my Beloved and to help Grandpa God's adventure. And I can do all this in laying my own imaginary egg', replied Adam."

Sirebard
IAmWhoIAM - The Point of the Zero Dimension!

 

Hi Dirk!

I looked at your paper on ‘back reaction cosmology’ and they concur with my work on the significance of the cosmological period, when the ‘large structure formation’ of galaxies peaked at a redshift of so 1.18.
However I would reply that the universe is indeed only ‘apparently’ accelerating due to that ‘change of the gradient’ for the ‘dark energy’ here termed as a ‘back reaction’ from a summation of Newtonian metric perturbations. The universe then is indeed continually decelerating as has been the standard model in the universe’s evolution from Einstein and Hubble to the supernova type Ia experiments of 1998 by the Perlmutter-Schmidt research teams.

The ‘coincidence problem’ (highlighted in red in the following summary), then relates more to the overall encompassing cosmological timeframe from say 4 billion years after the Big Bang to the present time just as this gradual convergence of the minimised negative value for the ‘dark energy’ towards its balanced zero-asymptotic state, then to any more engaging parameters, such as ‘clumping evolutionary models’ as proposed in this paper.

Tony B.

​

From: Dick Meijer
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 1:27 AM
To: Tony Bermanseder
Subject: Re: The Fable of Little Adam and the Rooster's Egg


Hallo Tony, Thank you for the relevant fable! At the conference on Information there was one interesting and quite original paper in cosmology, that I send you for comments.

Kind regards, Dirk

 

Physics

A Fight for the Soul of Science

String theory, the multiverse and other ideas of modern physics are potentially untestable. At a historic meeting in Munich, scientists and philosophers asked: should we trust them anyway?

Laetitia Vancon for Quanta Magazine​

Physicists George Ellis (center) and Joe Silk (right) at Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich on Dec. 7.


By: Natalie Wolchover
December 16, 2015
Comments (55)
Share this:

• facebook
• twitter
• reddit
• mail

PDF
Print

hysicists typically think they “need philosophers and historians of science like birds need ornithologists,” the Nobel laureate David Gross told a roomful of philosophers, historians and physicists last week in Munich, Germany, paraphrasing Richard Feynman.
But desperate times call for desperate measures.
Fundamental physics faces a problem, Gross explained — one dire enough to call for outsiders’ perspectives. “I’m not sure that we don’t need each other at this point in time,” he said.
It was the opening session of a three-day workshop, held in a Romanesque-style lecture hall at Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU Munich) one year after George Ellis and Joe Silk, two white-haired physicists now sitting in the front row, called for such a conference in an incendiary opinion piece in Nature. One hundred attendees had descended on a land with a celebrated tradition in both physics and the philosophy of science to wage what Ellis and Silk declared a “battle for the heart and soul of physics.”

The crisis, as Ellis and Silk tell it, is the wildly speculative nature of modern physics theories, which they say reflects a dangerous departure from the scientific method. Many of today’s theorists — chief among them the proponents of string theory and the multiverse hypothesis — appear convinced of their ideas on the grounds that they are beautiful or logically compelling, despite the impossibility of testing them. Ellis and Silk accused these theorists of “moving the goalposts” of science and blurring the line between physics and pseudoscience. “The imprimatur of science should be awarded only to a theory that is testable,” Ellis and Silk wrote, thereby disqualifying most of the leading theories of the past 40 years. “Only then can we defend science from attack.”
They were reacting, in part, to the controversial ideas of Richard Dawid, an Austrian philosopher whose 2013 book String Theory and the Scientific Method identified three kinds of “non-empirical” evidence that Dawid says can help build trust in scientific theories absent empirical data. Dawid, a researcher at LMU Munich, answered Ellis and Silk’s battle cry and assembled far-flung scholars anchoring all sides of the argument for the high-profile event last week.

Laetitia Vancon for Quanta Magazine​

David Gross, a theoretical physicist at the University of California, Santa Barbara.


Gross, a supporter of string theory who won the 2004 Nobel Prize in physics for his work on the force that glues atoms together, kicked off the workshop by asserting that the problem lies not with physicists but with a “fact of nature” — one that we have been approaching inevitably for four centuries.
The dogged pursuit of a fundamental theory governing all forces of nature requires physicists to inspect the universe more and more closely — to examine, for instance, the atoms within matter, the protons and neutrons within those atoms, and the quarks within those protons and neutrons. But this zooming in demands evermore energy, and the difficulty and cost of building new machines increases exponentially relative to the energy requirement, Gross said. “It hasn’t been a problem so much for the last 400 years, where we’ve gone from centimeters to millionths of a millionth of a millionth of a centimeter” — the current resolving power of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Switzerland, he said. “We’ve gone very far, but this energy-squared is killing us.”
As we approach the practical limits of our ability to probe nature’s underlying principles, the minds of theorists have wandered far beyond the tiniest observable distances and highest possible energies. Strong clues indicate that the truly fundamental constituents of the universe lie at a distance scale 10 million billion times smaller than the resolving power of the LHC. This is the domain of nature that string theory, a candidate “theory of everything,” attempts to describe. But it’s a domain that no one has the faintest idea how to access.
The problem also hampers physicists’ quest to understand the universe on a cosmic scale: No telescope will ever manage to peer past our universe’s cosmic horizon and glimpse the other universes posited by the multiverse hypothesis. Yet modern theories of cosmology lead logically to the possibility that our universe is just one of many.

​

Whether the fault lies with theorists for getting carried away, or with nature, for burying its best secrets, the conclusion is the same: Theory has detached itself from experiment. The objects of theoretical speculation are now too far away, too small, too energetic or too far in the past to reach or rule out with our earthly instruments. So, what is to be done? As Ellis and Silk wrote, “Physicists, philosophers and other scientists should hammer out a new narrative for the scientific method that can deal with the scope of modern physics.”
“The issue in confronting the next step,” said Gross, “is not one of ideology but strategy: What is the most useful way of doing science?”
Over three mild winter days, scholars grappled with the meaning of theory, confirmation and truth; how science works; and whether, in this day and age, philosophy should guide research in physics or the other way around. Over the course of these pressing yet timeless discussions, a degree of consensus took shape.

Rules of the Game

Throughout history, the rules of science have been written on the fly, only to be revised to fit evolving circumstances. The ancients believed they could reason their way toward scientific truth. Then, in the 17th century, Isaac Newton ignited modern science by breaking with this “rationalist” philosophy, adopting instead the “empiricist” view that scientific knowledge derives only from empirical observation. In other words, a theory must be proved experimentally to enter the book of knowledge.
But what requirements must an untested theory meet to be considered scientific? Theorists guide the scientific enterprise by dreaming up the ideas to be put to the test and then interpreting the experimental results; what keeps theorists within the bounds of science?
Today, most physicists judge the soundness of a theory by using the Austrian-British philosopher Karl Popper’s rule of thumb. In the 1930s, Popper drew a line between science and nonscience in comparing the work of Albert Einstein with that of Sigmund Freud. Einstein’s theory of general relativity, which cast the force of gravity as curves in space and time, made risky predictions — ones that, if they hadn’t succeeded so brilliantly, would have failed miserably, falsifying the theory. But Freudian psychoanalysis was slippery: Any fault of your mother’s could be worked into your diagnosis. The theory wasn’t falsifiable, and so, Popper decided, it wasn’t science.

Laetitia Vancon for Quanta Magazine​

Paul Teller (by window), a philosopher and professor emeritus at the University of California, Davis.


Critics accuse string theory and the multiverse hypothesis, as well as cosmic inflation — the leading theory of how the universe began — of falling on the wrong side of Popper’s line of demarcation. To borrow the title of the Columbia University physicist Peter Woit’s 2006 book on string theory, these ideas are “not even wrong,” say critics. In their editorial, Ellis and Silk invoked the spirit of Popper: “A theory must be falsifiable to be scientific.”

But, as many in Munich were surprised to learn, falsificationism is no longer the reigning philosophy of science. Massimo Pigliucci, a philosopher at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, pointed out that falsifiability is woefully inadequate as a separator of science and nonscience, as Popper himself recognized. Astrology, for instance, is falsifiable — indeed, it has been falsified ad nauseam — and yet it isn’t science. Physicists’ preoccupation with Popper “is really something that needs to stop,” Pigliucci said. “We need to talk about current philosophy of science. We don’t talk about something that was current 50 years ago.”

Nowadays, as several philosophers at the workshop said, Popperian falsificationism has been supplanted by Bayesian confirmation theory, or Bayesianism, a modern framework based on the 18th-century probability theory of the English statistician and minister Thomas Bayes. Bayesianism allows for the fact that modern scientific theories typically make claims far beyond what can be directly observed — no one has ever seen an atom — and so today’s theories often resist a falsified-unfalsified dichotomy. Instead, trust in a theory often falls somewhere along a continuum, sliding up or down between 0 and 100 percent as new information becomes available. “The Bayesian framework is much more flexible” than Popper’s theory, said Stephan Hartmann, a Bayesian philosopher at LMU. “It also connects nicely to the psychology of reasoning.”
Gross concurred, saying that, upon learning about Bayesian confirmation theory from Dawid’s book, he felt “somewhat like the Molière character who said, ‘Oh my God, I’ve been talking prose all my life!’”
Another advantage of Bayesianism, Hartmann said, is that it is enabling philosophers like Dawid to figure out “how this non-empirical evidence fits in, or can be fit in.”


Another Kind of Evidence

Dawid, who is 49, mild-mannered and smiley with floppy brown hair, started his career as a theoretical physicist. In the late 1990s, during a stint at the University of California, Berkeley, a hub of string-theory research, Dawid became fascinated by how confident many string theorists seemed to be that they were on the right track, despite string theory’s complete lack of empirical support. “Why do they trust the theory?” he recalls wondering. “Do they have different ways of thinking about it than the canonical understanding?”
String theory says that elementary particles have dimensionality when viewed close-up, appearing as wiggling loops (or “strings”) and membranes at nature’s highest zoom level. According to the theory, extra dimensions also materialize in the fabric of space itself. The different vibrational modes of the strings in this higher-dimensional space give rise to the spectrum of particles that make up the observable world. In particular, one of the vibrational modes fits the profile of the “graviton” — the hypothetical particle associated with the force of gravity. Thus, string theory unifies gravity, now described by Einstein’s theory of general relativity, with the rest of particle physics.

Laetitia Vancon for Quanta Magazine​

Video: Richard Dawid, a physicist-turned-philosopher at Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich.
However string theory, which has its roots in ideas developed in the late 1960s, has made no testable predictions about the observable universe. To understand why so many researchers trust it anyway, Dawid signed up for some classes in philosophy of science, and upon discovering how little study had been devoted to the phenomenon, he switched fields.

In the early 2000s, he identified three non-empirical arguments that generate trust in string theory among its proponents. First, there appears to be only one version of string theory capable of achieving unification in a consistent way (though it has many different mathematical representations); furthermore, no other “theory of everything” capable of unifying all the fundamental forces has been found, despite immense effort. (A rival approach called loop quantum gravity describes gravity at the quantum scale, but makes no attempt to unify it with the other forces.) This “no-alternatives” argument, colloquially known as “string theory is the only game in town,” boosts theorists’ confidence that few or no other possible unifications of the four fundamental forces exist, making it more likely that string theory is the right approach.
Second, string theory grew out of the Standard Model — the accepted, empirically validated theory incorporating all known fundamental particles and forces (apart from gravity) in a single mathematical structure — and the Standard Model also had no alternatives during its formative years. This “meta-inductive” argument, as Dawid calls it, buttresses the no-alternatives argument by showing that it has worked before in similar contexts, countering the possibility that physicists simply aren’t clever enough to find the alternatives that exist.

Emily Fuhrman for Quanta Magazine, with text by Natalie Wolchover and art direction by Olena Shmahalo.​

Click on the interactive to start. Learn more about this map.

The third non-empirical argument is that string theory has unexpectedly delivered explanations for several other theoretical problems aside from the unification problem it was intended to address. The staunch string theorist Joe Polchinski of the University of California, Santa Barbara, presented several examples of these “unexpected explanatory interconnections,” as Dawid has termed them, in a paper read in Munich in his absence. String theory explains the entropy of black holes, for example, and, in a surprising discovery that has caused a surge of research in the past 15 years, is mathematically translatable into a theory of particles, such as the theory describing the nuclei of atoms.
Polchinski concludes that, considering how far away we are from the exceptionally fine grain of nature’s fundamental distance scale, we should count ourselves lucky: “String theory exists, and we have found it.” (Polchinski also used Dawid’s non-empirical arguments to calculate the Bayesian odds that the multiverse exists as 94 percent — a value that has been ridiculed by the Internet’s vocal multiverse critics.)
One concern with including non-empirical arguments in Bayesian confirmation theory, Dawid acknowledged in his talk, is “that it opens the floodgates to abandoning all scientific principles.” One can come up with all kinds of non-empirical virtues when arguing in favor of a pet idea. “Clearly the risk is there, and clearly one has to be careful about this kind of reasoning,” Dawid said. “But acknowledging that non-empirical confirmation is part of science, and has been part of science for quite some time, provides a better basis for having that discussion than pretending that it wasn’t there, and only implicitly using it, and then saying I haven’t done it. Once it’s out in the open, one can discuss the pros and cons of those arguments within a specific context.”


The Munich Debate

Laetitia Vancon for Quanta Magazine​

The trash heap of history is littered with beautiful theories. The Danish historian of cosmology Helge Kragh, who detailed a number of these failures in his 2011 book, Higher Speculations, spoke in Munich about the 19th-century vortex theory of atoms. This “Victorian theory of everything,” developed by the Scots Peter Tait and Lord Kelvin, postulated that atoms are microscopic vortexes in the ether, the fluid medium that was believed at the time to fill space. Hydrogen, oxygen and all other atoms were, deep down, just different types of vortical knots. At first, the theory “seemed to be highly promising,” Kragh said. “People were fascinated by the richness of the mathematics, which could keep mathematicians busy for centuries, as was said at the time.” Alas, atoms are not vortexes, the ether does not exist, and theoretical beauty is not always truth.

Except sometimes it is. Rationalism guided Einstein toward his theory of relativity, which he believed in wholeheartedly on rational grounds before it was ever tested. “I hold it true that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed,” Einstein said in 1933, years after his theory had been confirmed by observations of starlight bending around the sun.
The question for the philosophers is: Without experiments, is there any way to distinguish between the non-empirical virtues of vortex theory and those of Einstein’s theory? Can we ever really trust a theory on non-empirical grounds?

In discussions on the third afternoon of the workshop, the LMU philosopher Radin Dardashti asserted that Dawid’s philosophy specifically aims to pinpoint which non-empirical arguments should carry weight, allowing scientists to “make an assessment that is not based on simplicity, which is not based on beauty.” Dawidian assessment is meant to be more objective than these measures, Dardashti explained — and more revealing of a theory’s true promise.

Gross said Dawid has “described beautifully” the strategies physicists use “to gain confidence in a speculation, a new idea, a new theory.”
“You mean confidence that it’s true?” asked Peter Achinstein, an 80-year-old philosopher and historian of science at Johns Hopkins University. “Confidence that it’s useful? confidence that …”

“Let’s give an operational definition of confidence: I will continue to work on it,” Gross said.
“That’s pretty low,” Achinstein said.
“Not for science,” Gross said. “That’s the question that matters.”

Kragh pointed out that even Popper saw value in the kind of thinking that motivates string theorists today. Popper called speculation that did not yield testable predictions “metaphysics,” but he considered such activity worthwhile, since it might become testable in the future. This was true of atomic theory, which many 19th-century physicists feared would never be empirically confirmed. “Popper was not a naive Popperian,” Kragh said. “If a theory is not falsifiable,” Kragh said, channeling Popper, “it should not be given up. We have to wait.”

But several workshop participants raised qualms about Bayesian confirmation theory, and about Dawid’s non-empirical arguments in particular.

Related Articles:


Visions of Future Physics

Nima Arkani-Hamed is championing a campaign to build the world’s largest particle collider, even as he pursues a new vision of the laws of nature.
In a Multiverse, What Are the Odds?
Testing the multiverse hypothesis requires measuring whether our universe is statistically typical among the infinite variety of universes. But infinity does a number on statistics.
In Fake Universes, Evidence for String Theory

Researchers are demonstrating that, in certain contexts, string theory is the only consistent theory of quantum gravity. Might this make it true?


Carlo Rovelli, a proponent of loop quantum gravity (string theory’s rival) who is based at Aix-Marseille University in France, objected that Bayesian confirmation theory does not allow for an important distinction that exists in science between theories that scientists are certain about and those that are still being tested. The Bayesian “confirmation” that atoms exist is essentially 100 percent, as a result of countless experiments. But Rovelli says that the degree of confirmation of atomic theory shouldn’t even be measured in the same units as that of string theory. String theory is not, say, 10 percent as confirmed as atomic theory; the two have different statuses entirely. “The problem with Dawid’s ‘non-empirical confirmation’ is that it muddles the point,” Rovelli said. “And of course some string theorists are happy of muddling it this way, because they can then say that string theory is ‘confirmed,’ equivocating.”

The German physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, in her talk, argued that progress in fundamental physics very often comes from abandoning cherished prejudices (such as, perhaps, the assumption that the forces of nature must be unified). Echoing this point, Rovelli said “Dawid’s idea of non-empirical confirmation [forms] an obstacle to this possibility of progress, because it bases our credence on our own previous credences.” It “takes away one of the tools — maybe the soul itself — of scientific thinking,” he continued, “which is ‘do not trust your own thinking.’”

The Munich proceedings will be compiled and published, probably as a book, in 2017. As for what was accomplished, one important outcome, according to Ellis, was an acknowledgment by participating string theorists that the theory is not “confirmed” in the sense of being verified. “David Gross made his position clear: Dawid’s criteria are good for justifying working on the theory, not for saying the theory is validated in a non-empirical way,” Ellis wrote in an email. “That seems to me a good position — and explicitly stating that is progress.”

In considering how theorists should proceed, many attendees expressed the view that work on string theory and other as-yet-untestable ideas should continue. “Keep speculating,” Achinstein wrote in an email after the workshop, but “give your motivation for speculating, give your explanations, but admit that they are only possible explanations.”
“Maybe someday things will change,” Achinstein added, “and the speculations will become testable; and maybe not, maybe never.” We may never know for sure the way the universe works at all distances and all times, “but perhaps you can narrow the live possibilities to just a few,” he said. “I think that would be some progress.”

This article was reprinted on TheAtlantic.com.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/2015...hilosophers-debate-the-boundaries-of-science/

 

The Nature of ASAS-SN 15lh as a primordial Ylemic Magnetar or Quark-Star ​

Abstract

We report the discovery of ASASSN-15lh (SN 2015L), which we interpret as the most luminous supernova yet found. At redshift z = 0.2326, ASASSN-15lh reached an absolute magnitude of M_u,AB = –23.5 ± 0.1 and bolometric luminosity L_bol = (2.2 ± 0.2) × 10⁴⁵ ergs s^–1, which is more than twice as luminous as any previously known supernova. It has several major features characteristic of the hydrogen-poor super-luminous supernovae (SLSNe-I), whose energy sources and progenitors are currently poorly understood. In contrast to most previously known SLSNe-I that reside in star-forming dwarf galaxies, ASASSN-15lh appears to be hosted by a luminous galaxy (M_K ≈ –25.5) with little star formation. In the 4 months since first detection, ASASSN-15lh radiated (1.1 ± 0.2) × 10⁵² ergs, challenging the magnetar model for its engine.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6270/257

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1508.07745v3.pdf

Brightest supernova ever seen pushes theoretical models to the edge

Researchers have discovered the brightest supernova ever seen, and the unusual object powering it could challenge what physicists know about dying stars.
By Kiona Smith-Strickland | Published: Thursday, January 14, 2016
RELATED TOPICS: SUPERNOVAE | MAGNETARS

This article originally appeared on Discovermagazine.com.



An artist's impression of the record-breakingly powerful, superluminous supernova ASASSN-15lh as it would appear from an exoplanet located about 10,000 light years away.
Wayne Rosing


When massive stars die, they do not go gently into the night. Instead, they expel most of their mass outward in a powerful explosion called a supernova, leaving behind a glowing cloud of gas and the collapsed remains of the former star’s core. In June 2015, a supernova appeared in the sky over the Southern Hemisphere, and astronomers believe it could mark the death throes of a very unusual star.
The supernova, named ASASSN-15lh, was 20 times brighter at its peak than the combined light of the Milky Way galaxy’s 100 billion stars, making it the brightest supernova ever observed. In fact, it’s twice as bright as the previous record-holder.

Powering A Superluminous Supernova

An exploding star releases a tremendous amount of energy, but it’s not enough to power anything as bright as ASASSN-15lh. Instead, a team of astronomers led by Subo Dong of China’s Kavli Institute say that the superluminous supernova could be getting its energy from an unusual object called a magnetar. They published their findings today in the journal Science.
When a star dies, its mass collapses onto the core. Much of it gets blown away in an explosion about a second later, but what remains is a very dense mass of neutrons called a neutron star. Once in a while, a neutron star is born with a stronger magnetic field than usual — about 10 trillion times stronger than Earth’s magnetic field — and astronomers call these objects magnetars.

Astronomers have found magnetars at the center of supernova remnants here in the Milky Way, but they’re nothing like the fast-spinning magnetar at the heart of ASASSN-15lh. Most magnetars rotate slowly, once every one to ten seconds, and they don’t release much energy into the surrounding supernova. But Dong and his colleagues think that the magnetar at the heart of ASASSN-15lh is rotating a thousand times a second. That’s right at the limit of how fast theoretical physicists believe a magnetar can rotate.



False-color images showing the host galaxy before the explosion of ASASSN-15lh taken by the Dark Energy Camera (left), and the supernova by the Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network 1-meter telescope network (right).
The Dark Energy Survey, B. Shappee and the ASAS-SN team


The energy from that fast rotation is the engine that powers the supernova. “As it slows down, and it rotates slower and slower and slower, what's happening is that it's shedding its rotatational energy,” explained coauthor Todd Thompson of Ohio State University. “It's flying out in this big energized wind that then shocks the supernova and makes it extra bright for us.”
To produce a supernova as bright as ASASSN-15lh, nearly all of the the magnetar’s energy has to be converted into light. That kind of efficiency is technically possible but very rare, and it pushes the limits of how magnetars, as we know them, work.
“You have to take a very fast-spinning magnetar and then extract all the energy from it to power what we have been seeing in this case,” says coauthor Kris Stanek, also of Ohio State University.
The team says it’s an extreme scenario that’s right on the edge of what physicists consider possible for a magnetar, but they also say it’s the most plausible explanation for ASASSN-15lh’s unprecedented brightness.

An Unusual Star

The star that exploded to produce ASASSN-15lh would have been a massive, blue, hot star, rotating rapidly. It must have shed its outer layers of hydrogen and helium shortly before it died, because those elements are absent from the supernova. Several telescopes around the world have studied the supernova’s spectrum, the presence or absence of different wavelengths of light, which can tell physicists which elements are present in the gas cloud.
It may have been a type of massive star called a Wolf-Rayet star, although astronomers can’t yet say for sure. “They’re stars that have no hydrogen or helium, and many of them are rapidly rotating, they are called Wolf-Rayet stars. I would say it's not impossible that it is somehow related to those type of stars, because we see those type of stars around, and they meet the qualifications that I just gave you: rare, no hydrogen or helium, massive, and at least a fraction of them are rapidly rotating.”

A Collaborative Project

Because ASASSN-15lh is between 3.8 and 4 billion light years away, observers here on Earth are seeing the ghost of an explosion that happened billions of years ago, while our planet was still in the process of cooling.
The light from that distant, long-ago explosion reached Earth in June of 2015, where it was first noticed by a pair of telescopes in Chile, part of the All-Sky Automated Survey for SuperNovae, or ASAS-SN, rather menacingly pronounced “assassin.” ASASSN-15lh is one of 180 supernovae discovered by ASAS-SN in 2015, and one of 270 discovered by the project since its start two years ago.
“This particular story is an extreme example of something, and I'm very happy that we have found it,” says Stanek. “People have been studying supernovae for many decades now, and our project is just two years old, and yet, during these two years, we were able to find that object, which is challenging to everybody who is working on supernovae.”


Two of the 14-centimeter diameter lens telescopes in use for the All Sky Automated Survey for SuperNovae that discovered ASASSN-15lh. Since this photo was taken, two more telescopes have been added to the ASAS-SN station in Cerro Tololo, Chile.
Jin Ma (Beijing Planetarium)


Studying the new supernova quickly became a collaborative effort, as larger telescopes in Chile and South Africa, and even NASA’s Swift space telescope, joined in to confirm the find and take higher-resolution images and spectra. In February 2016, the Hubble Space Telescope will gather images of ASASSN-15lh to help the team determine how close the supernova is to the center of its galaxy. If it’s in the galactic nucleus, astronomers may need to consider another explanation for ASASSN-15lh’s brightness, one involving a star’s interaction with a supermassive black hole. Stanek and Thompson say it’s an unlikely scenario, but one worth investigating.

Watching A Supernova Fade

Supernovae are what astronomers call transient events; they explode, and then they slowly fade.
“The most important thing is going to be to get the spectra of it as it fades, because as it fades, it's getting cooler and bigger, and its luminosity is dropping," says Thomspon. “As it gets cooler, as it becomes less luminous, it becomes harder and harder to see, but it also means you can see through it better; it becomes more transparent.”
That gives astronomers an opportunity to study the inner layers of the supernova, not just its outer edge.
“Usually these things are found even further away, so in which case it's much harder to get good data. So we're getting as good data as possible,” says Stanek.
Thompson and Stanek hope their find will push theoretical physicists to reevaluate their current models of magnetar formation and look for alternate explanations for ASASSN-15lh.
“As a theorist working on these kinds of topics, it gets interesting when extreme events challenge conventional wisdom,” said Thompson. “A lot of times, that's when you can really push theoretical ideas and theoretical models to the limit.”
Meanwhile, Stanek says that ASAS-SN will keep scanning the sky for other interesting new objects. “This approach of really just observing an entire sky as often as possible, is working,” he said.

The light curve of ASASSN-15lh outshines other supernovae, even those in its "superluminous" class. At its peak, ASASSN-15lh was 200 times as bright as a typical Type Ia supernova and twice as bright as the previous record-holder, iPTF13ajg - See more at: http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astr...-astronomers-0115201667/#sthash.Mw4jp7Xs.dpuf​

http://www.astronomy.com/news/2016/...er-seen-pushes-theoretical-models-to-the-edge


Descriptor for the nature of ASAS-SN 15lh as a Ylemic Magnetar or Quark-Star

f_ss² = [2pr_ps/ct]² = [2p/c]².R²/t² = L_o
[Mass Eigenfrequency ]² = [Wormhole Perimeter/Lightpath]² = String Boundary Modulation for Luminosity Constant

From String Modular Duality, the vibratory high energy string mode for the Weyl wormhole radius r_{primarysourcesink}=r_weyl = 1/r_{secondarysinksource}=1/r_antiweyl for its modular dual of the winded low energy string mode as the Weyl antiwormhole radius

As r_weyl = l_weyl/2p = 2pl_antiweyl and f_ps=1/f_ss, the squared eigenfrequency f_ss for the mass quantization m = Sm_ss becomes dimensionless in Luminosity Constant L_o = Optical Unification frequency x f_ss = f_opticalxf_ss = f_optical/f_ps = 5x10¹⁴ Hz/3x10³⁰ Hz = 1/6x10¹⁵

Supernova ASAS-SN 15lh Data:

Luminosity (570 Billion times Solar Luminosity 3.8x10²⁶ Watts) = 2.2x10³⁸ Watts
Temperature (6000 times Solar Core-Ylem Temperature 1.57x10⁷ Kelvin) = 9.4x10¹⁰ Kelvin
Displacement Source-Radius ~ 10,000 m - 20,000 m with R=2 standardized from R=1=10 km for a neutron star/magnetar for the luminosity calculus

General Luminosity for the Ylem-Quark-Star precursor of ASAS-SN 15lh:
L_{ASAS-SN 15lh} = 4psR²T⁴ = 4psL_o(ct/2p)²T⁴ = 2.2x10³⁸ for the modulated displacement radius R and for
t² = (2p/c)²L_{ASSA-SN 15lh}/4psT⁴L_o = 9.7 {10.4} ( Stefan-Boltzman Constant s =2p⁵k_B⁴/15h³c² ).

The period for the ylem-quark star so can be set at about T= 3.1 - 3.2 seconds and characteristic for a magnetar angular frequency of w = 2p/3.2 ~ 2 radians per second and 'spun down' from a precursor millisecond ylem-quark star core of 8000 m radius with a higher magnetic field of B=2.8x10¹¹ Tesla in a factor of say 10 revolutions per second of 63 Hz .

In the applied Biot-Savart Law for Magnetars and with the calculated ylemic mass and ylemic radius of R_ylem=16 km below: B = wM/2c²R_ylem = 4.5x10⁹ Tesla or 4.5x10¹³ Gauss {7.5x10¹³ Gauss}

For the ylem temperature T_ylem = 9.4x10¹⁰ K, the ylemic radius and independent on the mass of the ylem star and for the 'quark-subatomic' parameters G_om_c ∝ Gm_nucleon and R_e=ke²/m_ec² is :

R_ylem = √(kTR_e³/G_om_c²) = 16,122 m {12,013 m using G=6.67x10^-11 G-units and m_neutron=1.72x10^-27 kg}

The Ylem radius is used to derive the coupled Schwarzschilded Ylem-Mass M_ylem = R_ylem.c²/2G_o = 6.53x10³⁰ kg ~ 3.26 Solar Masses {8.1x10³⁰ kg ~ 4 Solar Masses}

Utilizing the ylemic properties and nature therefore indicates, that the usual 10% energy to radiation conversion of a remnant star following core collapse is exceeded towards its E=mc² limit.
In the case of supernova ASAS-SN 15lh and its ylemic mass of 3.26 Solar Masses, its total energy of about 5.9x10⁴⁷ Joules so becomes dispersed in a superluminous supernova in a greater fraction of radiated and emitted energy from its neutron star or magnetar or Black Hole remnant.
How such a ylem-quark-neutronium star can in fact represent a remnant from the initial cosmogenesis of all matter is described in the following discourses.



The Coupling of the Energy Laws by the Self-Frequency of the Quantum for Mass

It has been discovered, that the universe contains an intrinsic coupling-parameter between its inertial masscontent and its noninertial energy content.
The matter in the universe is described by the physical parameter termed Mass (M), say as proportional to Energy (E) in Einstein's famous equation Mass M=E/c².
This mass M then reappears in Newtonian mechanics as the change in momentum (p) defining the Inertial Mass (M_i) as being proportional to some applied Force (F) or the 'work done' for a particular displacement {F=dp/dt for p=mv and v a kinetematic velocity as the ratio of displacement over time generalised in the lightpath X=cT}.

It is also well understood, that the inertial mass M_i has a gravitational counterpart described not by the change in momentum of inertia carrying matter agglomerations; but by the geometric curvature of space containing matter conglomerations. This Gravitational Mass M_g is measured to be equivalent to the Inertial Mass M_i and is formulated in the 'Principle of Equivalence' in Einstein's Theory of General Relativity.
F-Theory then has shown, that this Inertial Mass M_i is coupled inherently to a 'mass-eigen' frequency via the following formulation:

(1) Energy E=hf=mc² (The Combined Planck-Einstein Law)
(2) E=hf iff m=0 (The Planckian Quantum Law E=hf for lightspeed invariance c=λf)
(3) E=mc² iff f=f_o=f_ss (The Einstein Law E=mc² for the lightspeed upper limit)

(1) Whenever there is mass (M=M_i=M_g) occupying space; this mass can be assigned either as a photonic mass {by the Energy-Momentum relation of Special Relativity: E² = E_o² + (pc)²} by the photonic momentum p=h/λ=hf/c} OR a 'restmass' m_o=m/√[1-(v/c)²] for 'restenergy' E_o=m_oc².

The 'total' energy for the occupied space so contains a 'variable' mass in the 'combined' law; but allows particularisation for electromagnetic radiation (always moving at the Maxwell lightspeed constant c in Planck's Law and for the 'Newtonian' mass M in the Einstein Law.

(2) If M=0, then the Einstein Law is suppressed in favour of the Planck Law and the space contained energy E is photonic, i.e. electromagnetic, always dynamically described by the constancy of lightspeed c.

(3) If M>0, then there exists a mass-eigen frequency f_ss=f_o=E_ss/h=m_ssc²/h, which QUANTIZES all mass agglomerations m=Σm_ss in the massquantum m_ss=E_ss/c².



The Coupling of the Supermembranes in Vafa-F-Space

The quantization of mass m so indicates the coupling of the Planck Law in the frequency parameter to the Einstein law in the mass parameter.
The postulative basis of M-Theory utilizes the coupling of two energy-momentum eigenstates in the form of the modular duality between so termed 'vibratory' (high energy and short wavelengths) and 'winding' (low energy and long wavelengths) selfstates.

The 'vibratory' selfstate is denoted in: E_ps=E_{primary sourcesink}=hf_ps=m_psc² and the 'winding' and coupled selfstate is denoted by: E_ss=E_{econdary sinksource}=hf_ss=m_ssc²

The F-Space Unitary symmetry condition becomes: f_psf_ss=r_psr_ss=(λ_ps/2π)(2πλ_ss)=1

The coupling constants between the two eigenstates are so: E_psE_ss=h² and E_ps/E_ss=f_ps²=1/f_ss²

The Supermembrane E_psE_ss then denotes the coupled superstrings in their 'vibratory' high energy and 'winded' low energy selfstates.

The coupling constant for the vibratory high energy describes a MAXIMISED frequency differential over time in df/dt|_max=f_ps² and the coupling constant for the winded low energy describes its MINIMISED reciprocal in df/dt|_min=f_ss².

F-Theory also crystallizes the following string formulations from the E_psE_ss superbrane parameters.

Electromagnetic Finestructure: a_e = 2pke²/hc = e²/2e₀hc

Gravitational Finestructure (Electron): a_g = 2pG_om_e²/hc = {m_e/m_Planck}²

Gravitational Finestructure (Primordial Nucleon): a_n = 2pG_om_c²/hc

Gravitational Finestructure (Planck Boson): a_Planck = 2pG_om_Planck²/hc


1/E_ps=e*=2R_ec²=√{4αhce²/2πG_om_e²}=2e√α[m_P/m_e]=2e√{a_e/a_g}
= {2e²/m_e}√(k/G_o)=2e²/G_om_e = e²/2pe_om_e
for G_o = 1/k = 4pe_o for the cosmological unification of the finestructures.

E_ps = 1/E_ss = 1/e* = √{a_g/a_e}/2e = G_om_e/2e²​

Here e* is defined as the inverse of the sourcesink vibratory superstring energy quantum E_ps=E* and becomes a New Physical Measurement Unit is the StarCoulomb (C*) and as the physical measurement unit for 'Physical Consciousness'.

R_e is the 'classical electron radius' coupling the 'point electron' of Quantum- Electro-Dynamics (QED) to Quantum Field Theory (QFT) and given in the electric potential energy of Coulomb's Law in: m_ec²=ke²/R_e; and for the electronic restmass m_e.
Alpha α is the electromagnetic finestructure coupling constant α=2πke²/hc for the electric charge quantum e, Planck's constant h and lightspeed constant c.
G_o is the Newtonian gravitational constant as applicable in the Planck-Mass m_P=√(hc/2πG_o).

As the StarCoulomb unit describes the inverse sourcesink string energy as an elementary energy transformation from the string parametrization into the realm of classical QFT and QED, this transformation allows the reassignment of the StarCoulomb (C*) as the measurement of physical space itself.
​

The First Ylemic Stars in the Universe and the Antiwormholes

The stability of stars is a function of the equilibrium condition, which balances the inward pull of gravity with the outward pressure of the thermodynamic energy or enthalpy of the star (H=PV+U). The Jeans Mass M_J and the Jeans Length R_J a used to describe the stability conditions for collapsing molecular hydrogen clouds to form stars say, are well known in the scientific data base, say in formulations such as:

M_J=3kTR/2Gm for a Jeans Length of: R_J=√{15kT/(4πρGm)}=R_J =√(kT/Gnm²).
Now the Ideal Gas Law of basic thermodynamics states that the internal pressure P and Volume of such an ideal gas are given by PV=nRT=NkT for n moles of substance being the Number N of molecules (say) divided by Avogadro's Constant L in n=N/L .
Since the Ideal Gas Constant R divided by Avogadro's Constant L and defines Boltzmann's Constant k=R/L. Now the statistical analysis of kinetic energy KE of particles in motion in a gas (say) gives a root-mean-square velocity (rms) and the familiar 2.KE=mv²(rms) from the distribution of individual velocities v in such a system.
It is found that PV=(2/3)N.KE as a total system described by the v(rms). Now set the KE equal to the Gravitational PE=GMm/R for a spherical gas cloud and you get the Jeans Mass. (3/2N).(NkT)=GMm/R with m the mass of a nucleon or Hydrogen atom and M=M_J=3kTR/2Gm as stated.

The Jeans' Length is the critical radius of a cloud (typically a cloud of interstellar dust) where thermal energy, which causes the cloud to expand, is counteracted by gravity, which causes the cloud to collapse. It is named after the British astronomer Sir James Jeans, who first derived the quantity; where k is Boltzmann's constant, T is the temperature of the cloud, r is the radius of the cloud, μ is the mass per particle in the cloud, G is the Gravitational Constant and ρ is the cloud's mass density (i.e. the cloud's mass divided by the cloud's volume).

Now following the Big Bang, there were of course no gas clouds in the early expanding universe and the Jeans formulations are not applicable to the mass seedling M_o; in the manner of the Jeans formulations as given.
However, the universe's dynamics is in the form of the expansion parameter of GR and so the R(n)=R_max(n/(n+1)) scalefactor of Quantum Relativity.
So we can certainly analyse this expansion in the form of the Jeans Radius of the first protostars, which so obey the equilibrium conditions and equations of state of the much later gas clouds, for which the Jeans formulations then apply on a say molecular level.
This analysis so defines the ylemic neutron stars as protostars and the first stars in the cosmogenesis and the universe.


Let the thermal internal energy or ITE=H be the outward pressure in equilibrium with the gravitational potential energy of GPE=Ω. The nuclear density in terms of the superbrane parameters is ρ_critical=m_c/V_critical with m_c a base-nuleon mass for a 'ylemic neutron'.
V_critical= 4πR_e³/3 or the volume for the ylemic neutron as given by the classical electron radius R_e=10¹⁰λ_wormhole/360=e*/2c².

H=(molarity)kT for molar volume as N=(R/R_e)³ for dH=3kTR²/R_e³.
Ω(R)= -∫G_oMdm/R = -{3G_om_c²/(R_e³)² }∫R⁴dR = -3G_om_c²R⁵/R_e⁶ for
dm/dR=d(ρV)/dR=4πρR² and for ρ=3m_c/4πR_e³

For equilibrium, the requirement is that dH=dΩ in the minimum condition dH+dΩ=0.
This gives: dH+dΩ=3kTR²/R_e³ - 16G_oπ²ρ²R⁴/3=0 and the ylemic radius as:

R_ylem=√{kTR_e³/G_om_c²}

as the Jeans-Length precursor or progenitor for subsequent stellar and galactic generation.

The ylemic (Jeans) radii are all independent of the mass of the star as a function of its nuclear generated temperature. Applied to the protostars of the vortex neutron matter or ylem, the radii are all neutron star radii and define a specific range of radii for the gravitational collapse of the electron degenerate matter.

This spans from the 'First Three Minutes' scenario of the cosmogenesis to 1.1 million seconds (or about 13 days) and encompasses the standard beta decay of the neutron (underpinning radioactivity). The upper limit defines a trillion degree temperature and a radius of over 40 km; the trivial Schwarzschild solution gives a typical ylem radius of so 7.4 kilometers and the lower limit defines the 'mysterious' planetesimal limit as 1.8 km.

For long a cosmological conundrum, it could not be modelled just how the molecular and electromagnetic forces applicable to conglomerate matter distributions (say gaseous hydrogen as cosmic dust) on the quantum scale of molecules could become strong enough to form say 1km mass concentrations, required for 'ordinary' gravity to assume control.

The ylem radii's lower limit is defined in this cosmology then show, that it is the ylemic temperature of the 1.2 billion degrees K, which perform the trick under the Ylem-Jeans formulation and which then is applied to the normal collapse of hydrogenic atoms in summation.

The stellar evolution from the ylemic(dineutronic) templates is well established in QR and confirms most of the Standard Model's ideas of nucleosynthesis and the general Temperature cosmology. The standard model is correct in the temperature assignment, but is amiss in the corresponding 'size-scales' for the cosmic expansion.
The Big Bang cosmogenesis describes the universe as a Planck-Black Body Radiator, which sets the Cosmic-Microwave-Black Body Background Radiation Spectrum (CMBBR) as a function of n as T⁴=18.2(n+1)²/n³ and derived from the Stefan-Boltzmann-Law and the related statistical frequency distributions.

We have the GR metric for Schwarzschild-Black Hole Evolution as R_S=2GM/c² as a function of the star's Black Hole's mass M and we have the ylemic Radius as a function of temperature only as R_ylem = √(kT.R_e³/G_om_c²).

The nucleonic mass-seed m_c=m_P.Alpha⁹ and the product G_om_c² is a constant in the partitioned n-evolution of m_c(n)=Yⁿ.m_c and G(n)=G_o.Xⁿ.


Identifying the ylemic Radius with the Schwarzschild Radius then indicates a specific mass a specific temperature and a specific radius.

Those we call the Chandrasekhar Parameters:
M_Chandra=1.5 solar Masses=3x10³⁰ kg and R_Chandra=2G_oM_Chandra/c² or 7407.40704..metres, which is the typical neutron star radius inferred today.
T_Chandra=R_Chandra².G_om_c²/kR_e³ =1.985x10¹⁰ K for Electron Radius R_e and Boltzmann's Constant k.

Those Chandrasekhar parameters then define a typical neutron star with a uniform temperature of 20 billion K at the white dwarf limit of ordinary stellar nucleosynthetic evolution (Hertzsprung-Russell or HR-diagram).

The Radius for the massparametric Universe is given in R(n)=R_max(1-n/(n+1)) correlating the ylemic temperatures as the 'uniform' CMBBR-background and we can follow the evolution of the ylemic radius via the approximation:

R_ylem=0.05258..√T=(0.0753).[(n+1)²/n³]^[1/8]
R_ylem(n_present=1.1324..)=0.0868 m* for a T_ylem(n_present )=2.73 K for the present time
t_present=n_present/H_o.

What then is n_Chandra?

This would describe the size of the universe as the uniform temperature CMBBR today manifesting as the largest stars, mapped however onto the ylemic neutron star evolution as the protostars (say as n_Chandra'), defined not in manifested mass (say neutron conglomerations), but as a quark-strange plasma, (defined in QR as the Vortex-Potential-Energy or VPE).

R(n_Chandra')=R_max(n_Chandra'/(n_Chandra'+1))=7407.40741.. for n_Chandra'=4.64x10^-23 and so a time of t_Chandra'=n_Chandra'/H_o=n_Chandra'/1.88x10^-18=2.47x10^-5 seconds.

QR defines the Weyl-Temperature limit for Bosonic Unification as 1.9 nanoseconds at a temperature of 1.4x10²⁰ Kelvin and the weak-electromagnetic unification at 1/365 seconds at T=3.4x10¹⁵ K.

So we place the first ylemic protostar after the bosonic unification (before which the plenum was defined as undifferentiated 'bosonic plasma'), but before the electro-weak unification, which defined the Higgs-Bosonic restmass induction via the weak interaction vector-bosons and allowing the dineutrons to be born.

The universe was so 15 km across, when its ylemic 'concentrated' VPE-Temperature was so 20 Billion K and we find the CMBBR in the Stefan-Boltzmann-Law as:
T⁴=18.20(n+1)²/n³=1.16x10¹⁷ Kelvin.

So the thermodynamic temperature for the expanding universe was so 5.85 Million times greater than the ylemic VPE-Temperature; and implying that no individual ylem stars could yet form from the mass seedling M_o.

The universe's expansion however cooled the CMBBR background and we to calculate the scale of the universe corresponding to this ylemic scenario; we simply calculate the 'size' for the universe at T_Chandra=20 Billion K for T_Chandra⁴ and we then find n_Chandra=4.89x10^-14 and t_Chandra=26,065 seconds or so 7.24 hours.

The Radius R(n_Chandra)=7.81x10¹² metres or 7.24 lighthours.
This is about 52 Astronomical Units and an indicator for the largest possible star in terms of radial extent and the 'size' of a typical solar system, encompassed by supergiants on the HR-diagram.

We so know that the ylemic temperature decreases in direct proportion to the square of the ylemic radius and one hitherto enigmatic aspect in cosmology relates to this in the planetesimal limit. Briefly, a temperature of so 1.2 billion degrees defines an ylemic radius of 1.8 km as the dineutronic limit for proto-neutron stars contracting from so 80 km down to this size just 1.1 million seconds or so 13 days after the Big Bang.

This then 'explains' why chunks of matter can conglomerate via molecular and other adhesive interactions towards this size, where then the accepted gravity is strong enough to build planets and moons. It works, because the ylemic template is defined in subatomic parameters reflecting the mesonic-inner and leptonic outer ring boundaries, the planetesimal limit being the leptonic mapping. So neutrino- and quark blueprints micromacro dance their basic definition as the holographic projections of the spacetime quanta.

Now because the Electron Radius is directly proportional to the linearised wormhole perimeter and then the Compton Radius via Alpha in R_e=10¹⁰λ_wormhole=e*/2c²=Alpha.R_Compton, the Chandrasekhar White Dwarf limit should be doubled to reflect the protonic diameter mirrored in the classical electron radius.

Hence any star experiencing electron degeneracy is actually becoming ylemic or dineutronic, the boundary for this process being the Chandrasekhar mass. This represents the subatomic mapping of the first Bohr orbit collapsing onto the leptonic outer ring in the quarkian wave-geometry.

But this represents the Electron Radius as a Protonic Diameter and the Protonic Radius must then indicate the limit for the scale where proton degeneracy would have to enter the scenario. As the proton cannot degenerate in that way, the neutron star must enter Black Hole phasetransition at the R_e/2 scale, corresponding to a mass of 8M_Chandra=24x10³⁰ kg* or 12 solar masses.

The maximum ylemic radius so is found from the constant density proportion ρ=M/V:
(R_ylemmax/R_e)³=M_Chandra/m_c for R_ylemmax=40.1635 km.
The corresponding ylemic temperature is 583.5 Billion K for a CMBBR-time of 287 seconds or so 4.8 minutes from a n=5.4x10^-16, when the universe had a diameter of so 173 Million km.

But for a maximum nuclear compressibility for the protonic radius, we find:
(R_ylemmax/R_e)³=8M_Chandra/m_c for R_ylemmax=80.327 km, a ylemic temperature of 2,334 Billion K for a n-cycletime of 8.5x10^-17 and a CMBBR-time of so 45 seconds and when the universe had a radius of 13.6 Million km or was so 27 Million km across.

The first ylemic protostar vortex was at that time manifested as the ancestor for all neutron star generations to follow. This vortex is described in a cosmic string encircling a spherical region so 160 km across and within a greater universe of diameter 27 Million km which carried a thermodynamic temperature of so 2.33 Trillion Kelvin at that point in the cosmogenesis.

This vortex manifested as a VPE concentration after the expanding universe had cooled to allow the universe to become transparent from its hitherto defining state of opaqueness and a time known as the decoupling of matter (in the form of the M_o seedling partitioned in m_c's) from the radiation pressure of the CMBBR photons.
The temperature for the decoupling is found in the galactic scale-limit modular dual to the wormhole geodesic as 1/λ_wormhole=λ_antiwormhole=λ_{galaxyserpent}=10²² metres or so 1.06 Million ly and its luminosity attenuation in the 1/e proportionality for then 388,879 lightyears as a decoupling time n_decoupling.

A maximum galactic halo limit is modulated in 2πλ_antiwormhole metres in the linearisation of the Planck-length encountered before in an earlier discussion.

R(n_decoupling)=R_max(n_decoupling/(n_decouplingc+1))=10²² metres for n_decoupling=6.26x10^-5 and so for a CMBBR-Temperature of about T=2935 K for a galactic protocore then attenuated in so 37% for n_{decouplingmin}=1.0x10^-6 for R=λ_antiwormhole/2π and n_{decouplingmax}=3.9x10^-4 for R=2πλ_antiwormhole and for temperatures of so 65,316 K and 744 K respectively, descriptive of the temperature modulations between the galactic cores and the galactic halos.

So a CMBBR-temperature of so 65,316 K at a time of so 532 Billion seconds or 17,000 years defined the initialisation of the VPE and the birth of the first ylemic protostars as a decoupling minimum. The ylemic mass currents were purely monopolic and known as superconductive cosmic strings, consisting of nucleonic neutrons, each of mass m_c.
If we assign this timeframe to the maximised ylemic radius and assign our planetesimal limit of fusion temperature 1.2 Billion K as a corresponding minimum; then this planetesimal limit representing the onset of stellar fusion in a characteristic temperature, should indicate the first protostars at a temperature of the CMBBR of about 744 Kelvin.

The universe had a tremperature of 744 K for n_{decouplingmax}=3.9x10^-4 for R=2πλ_antiwormhole and this brings us to a curvature radius of so 6.6 Million lightyears and an 'ignition-time' for the first physical ylemic neutron stars as first generation protostars of so 7 Million years after the Big Bang.

The important cosmological consideration is that of distance-scale modulation.
The Black Hole Schwarzschild metric is the inverse of the galactic scale metric.
The linearisation of the Planck-String as the Weyl-Geodesic and so the wormhole radius in the curvature radius R(n) is modular dual and mirrored in inversion in the manifestation of galactic structure with a nonluminous halo a luminous attenuated diameter-bulge and a superluminous (quasar or White Hole Core).
The core-bulge ratio will so reflect the eigenenergy quantum of the wormhole as heterotic Planck-Boson-String or as the magnetocharge as 1/500, being the mapping of the Planck-Length-Bounce as e=l_P.c²√Alpha onto the electron radius in e*=2R_e.c².


Commentary:

The following derivations lead to a simplified string formalism as boundary- and initial conditions in a de Sitter cosmology encompassing the classical Minkowski-Friedmann spacetimes holographically and fractally in the Schwarzschild metrics.


The magnetic field intensity B is classically described in the Biot-Savart Law:
B=μ_oqv/4πr²=μ_oi/4πr=μ_oqω/4πr=μ_oNef/2r
for a charge count q=Ne; angular velocity ω=v/r=2πf; current i=dq/dt and the current element i.dl=dq.(dl/dt)=vdq.

The Maxwell constant then can be written as an (approximating) finestructure:
μ_oε_o =1/c²=(120π/c)(1/120πc) to crystallise the 'free space impedance' Z_o=√(μ_o/ε_o)=120π~377 Ohm (Ω).

This vacuum resistance Z_o so defines a 'Unified Action Law' in a coupling of the electric permittivity component (ε_o) of inertial mass and the magnetic permeability component (μ_o) of gravitational mass in the Equivalence Principle of General Relativity.
A unified selfstate of the preinertial (string- or brane) cosmology so is obtained from the finestructures for the electric- and gravitational interactions coupling a so defined electropolic mass to magnetopolic mass respectively.

The Planck-Mass is given from Unity 1=2πGm_P²/hc and the Planck-Charge derives from Alpha=2πke²/hc and where k=1/4πε_o in the electromagnetic finestructure describing the probability interaction between matter and light (as about 1/137).

The important aspect of alpha relates to the inertia coupling of Planck-Charge to Planck-Mass as all inertial masses are associated with Coulombic charges as inertial electropoles; whilst the stringed form of the Planck-Mass remains massless as gravitational mass. It is the acceleration of electropoles coupled to inertial mass, which produces electromagnetic radiation (EMR); whilst the analogy of accelerating magnetopoles coupled to gravitational mass and emitting electromagnetic monopolic radiation (EMMR) remains hitherto undefined in the standard models of both cosmology and particle physics.

But the coupling between electropoles and magnetopoles occurs as dimensional intersection, say between a flat Minkowskian spacetime in 4D and a curved de Sitter spacetime in 5D (and which becomes topologically extended in 6-dimensional Calabi-Yau tori and 7-dimensional Joyce manifolds in M-Theory).

The formal coupling results in the 'bounce' of the Planck-Length in the pre-Big Bang scenario, and which manifests in the de Broglie inflaton-instanton.

The Planck-Length L_P=√(hG/2πc³) 'oscillates' in its Planck-Energy m_P=h/λ_Pc=h/2πcL_P to give √Alpha).L_P=e/c² in the coupling of 'Stoney units' suppressing Planck's constant 'h' to the 'Planck units' suppressing charge quantum 'e'.

Subsequently, the Planck-Length is 'displaced' in a factor of about 11.7=1/√Alpha=√(h/60π)/e and using the Maxwellian finestructures and the unity condition kG=1 for a dimensionless string coupling G_o=4πε_o, describing the 'Action Law' for the Vacuum Impedance as Action=Charge², say via dimensional analysis:

Z_o=√([Js²/C²m]/[C²/Jm])=[Js]/[C²]=[Action/Charge²] in Ohms [Ω=V/I=Js/C²] and proportional to [h/e²] as the 'higher dimensional source' for the manifesting superconductivity of the lower dimensions in the Quantum Hall Effect (~e²/h), the conductance quantum (2e²/h) and the Josephson frequencies (~2e/h) in Ohms [Ω].

This derivation so indicates an electromagnetic cosmology based on string parameters as preceding the introduction of inertial mass (in the quantum Big Bang) and defines an intrinsic curvature within the higher dimensional (de Sitter) universe based on gravitational mass equivalents and their superconductive monopolic current flows.

A massless, but monopolically electromagnetic de Sitter universe would exhibit intrinsic curvature in gravitational mass equivalence in its property of closure under an encompassing static Schwarzschild metric and a Gravitational String-Constant G_o=1/k=1/30c (as given in the Maxwellian finestructures in the string space).

In other words, the Big Bang manifested inertial parameters and the matter content for a subsequent cosmoevolution in the transformation of gravitational 'curvature energy', here called gravita as precursor for inertia into inertial mass seedlings; both however describable in Black Hole physics and the Schwarzschild metrics.

The Gravitational Finestructure so derives in replacing the Planck-Mass m_P by a protonucleonic mass:

m_c=√(hc/2πG_o).f(alpha)= f(Alpha).m_P and where f(Alpha)=Alpha⁹.
The Gravitational finestructure, here named Omega, is further described in a fivefolded supersymmetry of the string hierarchies, the latter as indicated in the following below in excerpt.

This pentagonal supersymmetry can be expressed in a number of ways, say in a one-to-one mapping of the Alpha finestructure constant as invariant X from the Euler Identity:

X+Y=XY= -1=i²=exp(iπ).

One can write a Unification Polynomial: (1-X)(X)(1+X)(2+X)=1 or X⁴+2X³-X²-2X+1=0
to find the coupling ratios: f(S)¦f(E)¦f(W)¦f(G)=#¦#³¦#¹⁸¦#⁵⁴ from the proportionality
#¦#³¦{[(#³)²]}³¦({[(#³)²]}³)³=Cuberoot(Alpha):Alpha:Cuberoot(Omega):Omega.

The Unification polynomial then sets the ratios in the inversion properties under modular duality:

(1)[Strong short]¦(X)[Electromagnetic long]¦(X²)[Weak short]¦(X³)[Gravitational long]
as 1¦X¦X²¦X³ = (1-X)¦(X)¦(1+X)¦(2+X).

Unity 1 maps as (1-X) transforming as f(S) in the equality (1-X)=X²; X maps as invariant of f(E) in the equality (X)=(X); X² maps as (1+X) transforming as f(W) in the equality (1+X)=1/X; and X³ maps as (2+X) transforming as f(G) in the equality (2+X)=1/X²=1/(1-X).

The mathematical pentagonal supersymmetry from the above then indicates the physicalised T-duality of M-theory in the principle of mirror-symmetry and which manifests in the reflection properties of the heterotic string classes HO(32) and HE(64), described further in the following.

Defining f(S)=#=1/f(G) and f(E)=#².f(S) then describes a symmetry breaking between the 'strong S' f(S) interaction and the 'electromagnetic E' f(E) interaction under the unification couplings.
This couples under modular duality to f(S).f(G)=1=#⁵⁵ in a factor #^-53=f(S)/f(G)={f(S)}² of the 'broken' symmetry between the longrange- and the shortrange interactions.

SEWG=1=Strong-Electromagnetic-Weak-Gravitational as the unified supersymmetric identity then decouples in the manifestation of string-classes in the de Broglie 'matter wave' epoch termed inflation and preceding the Big Bang, the latter manifesting at Weyl-Time as a string-transformed Planck-Time as the heterotic HE(64) class.

As SEWG indicates the Planck-String (class I, which is both openended and closed), the first transformation becomes the suppression of the nuclear interactions sEwG and describing the selfdual monopole (stringclass IIB, which is loop-closed in Dirichlet brane attachement across dimensions say Kaluza-Klein R⁵ to Minkowski R⁴ or Membrane-Space R¹¹ to String Space R¹⁰).

The monopole class so 'unifies' E with G via the gravitational finestructure assuming not a Weylian fermionic nucleon, but the bosonic monopole from the kG_o=1 initial-boundary condition Gm_M²= ke² for m_M=ke=30[ec]=m_P√Alpha.

The Planck-Monopole coupling so becomes m_P/m_M=m_P/30[ec]=1/√Alpha
with f(S)=f(E)/#² modulating f(G)=#²/f(E)=1/# ↔ f(G){f(S)/f(G)}=# in the symmetry breaking f(S)/f(G)=1/#⁵³ between short (nuclear asymptotic) and long (inverse square).

The shortrange coupling becomes f(S)/f(W)=#/#¹⁸=1/#¹⁷=Cuberoot(Alpha)/Alpha⁶
and the longrange coupling is Alpha/Omega=1/Alpha¹⁷=#³/#⁵⁴=1/#⁵¹=1/(#¹⁷)³.

The strong nuclear interaction coupling parameter so becomes about 0.2 as the cuberoot of alpha and as measured in the standard model of particle physics.

The monopole quasimass [ec] describes a monopolic sourcecurrent ef, manifesting for a displacement λ=c/f. This is of course the GUT unification energy of the Dirac Monopole at precisely [c³] eV or 2.7x10¹⁶ GeV and the upper limit for the Cosmic Ray spectra as the physical manifestation for the string classes: {I, IIB, HO(32), IIA and HE(64) in order of modular duality transmutation}.

The transformation of the Monopole string into the XL-Boson string decouples Gravity from sEwG in sEw.G in the heterotic superstring class HO(32). As this heterotic class is modular dual to the other heterotic class HE(64), it is here, that the protonucleon mass is defined in the modular duality of the heterosis in: Omega=Alpha¹⁸=2πG_om_c²/hc=(m_c/m_P)².

The HO(32) string bifurcates into a quarkian X-part and a leptonic L-part, so rendering the bosonic scalar spin as fermionic halfspin in the continuation of the 'breaking' of the supersymmetry of the Planckian unification. Its heterosis with the Weyl-string then decouples the strong interaction at Weyl-Time for a Weyl-Mass m_W, meaning at the timeinstanton of the end of inflation or the Big Bang in sEw.G becoming s.Ew.G.

The X-Boson then transforms into a fermionic protonucleon triquark-component (of energy ~ 10^-27 kg or 560 MeV) and the L-Boson transforms into the protomuon (of energy about 111 MeV).

The last 'electroweak' decoupling then occurs at the Fermi-Expectation Energy about 1/365 seconds after the Big Bang at a temperature of about 3.4x10¹⁵ K and at a 'Higgs Boson' energy of about 298 GeV.

A Bosonic decoupling preceeded the electroweak decoupling about 2 nanoseconds into the cosmogenesis at the Weyl-temperature of so T_Weyl=T_max=E_Weyl/k=1.4x10²⁰ K as the maximum Black Hole temperature maximised in the Hawking MT modulus and the Hawking-Gibbons formulation: M_criticalT_min=½M_PlanckT_Planck=(hc/2πG_o)(c²/2k)=hc³/4πkG_o for T_min=1.4x10^-29 K and Boltzmann constant k.

The Hawking Radiation formula results in the scaling of the Hawking MT modulus by the factor of the 'Unified Field' spanning a displacement scale of 8p radians or 1440° in the displacement of 4l_ps.

The XL-Boson mass is given in the quark-component: m_X=#³m_W/[ec]=Alpha.m_W/m_P=#³{m_W/m_P}~1.9x10¹⁵ GeV; and the lepton-component: m_L=Omega.[ec]/#²=#⁵²[ec/m_W] ~ 111 MeV.

A reformulation of the rotational dynamics associated with the monopolic naturally superconductive currentflow and the fractalisation of the static Schwarzschild solution follows. in a reinterpretation of the Biot-Savart Law.

All inertial objects are massless as 'Strominger branes' or extremal boundary Black Hole equivalents and as such obey the static and basic Schwarzschild metric as gravita template for inertia.

This also crystallises the Sarkar Black Hole boundary as the 100Mpc limit (R_Sarkar=(M_o/M_critical.R_Hubble)=0.028.R_Hubble~237 Million lightyears) for the cosmological principle, describing large scale homogeneity and isotropy, in the supercluster scale as the direct 'descendants' of Daughter Black Holes from the Universal Mother Black Hole describing the Hubble Horizon as the de Sitter envelope for the Friedmann cosmology (see linked website references on de Sitter cosmology) for the oscillatory universe bounded in the Hubble nodes as a standing waveform.

The Biot-Savart Law: B=μ_oqv/4πr²=μ_oi/4πr=μ_oNef/2r=μ_oNeω/4πr for angular velocity ω=v/r transforms into B=constant(e/c³)gxω

in using a_centripetal=v²/r=rω² for g=GM/r²=(2GM/c²)(c²/2r²)=(R_Sc²/2R²) for a Schwarzschild solution R_S=2GM/c².

B=constant(eω/rc)(v/c)²=μ_oNeω/4πr yields constant=μ_oNc/4π=(120πN/4π)=30N with e=m_M/30c for
30N(eω/c³)(GM/R²)=30N(m_M/30c)ω(2GM/c²)/(2cR²)=NmM(ω/2c²R)(R_S/R)= {M}ω/2c²R.

Subsequently, B=Mw/2c²R = Nm_M(R_S/R){ω/2c²R} to give a manifesting mass M finestructured in
M=Nm_M(R_S/R) for N=2n in the superconductive 'Cooper-Pairings' for a charge count q=Ne=2ne.

But any mass M has a Schwarzschild radius R_S for N=(M/m_M){R/R_S}=(M/m_M){Rc²/2GM}={Rc²/2Gm_M}={R/R_M} for a monopolic Schwarzschild radius R_M=2Gm_M/c²=2G(30ec)/c²=60ec/30c³=2e/c²=2L_P√Alpha=2OL_P.

Any mass M is quantised in the Monopole mass m_M=m_P√Alpha in its Schwarzschild metric and where the characterising monopolic Schwarzschild radius represents the minimum metric displacement scale as the Oscillation of the Planck-Length in the form 2L_P√Alpha~L_P/5.85.

This relates directly to the manifestation of the magnetopole in the lower dimensions, say in Minkowski spacetime in the coupling of inertia to Coulombic charges, that is the electropole and resulting in the creation of the mass-associated electromagnetic fields bounded in the c-invariance.
From the Planck-Length Oscillation or 'L_P-bounce': OL_P=L_P√Alpha=e/c² in the higher (collapsed or enfolded) string dimensions, the electropole e=OL_P.c² maps the magnetopole e*=2R_e.c² as 'inverse source energy' E_Weyl=hf_Weyl and as function of the classical electron radius R_e =ke²/m_ec²=R_Compton.Alpha= R_Bohr1.Alpha²=Alpha³/4πR_Rydberg= 10¹⁰{2πR_W/360}={e*/2e}.OL_P.

The resulting reflection-mirror space of the M-Membrane space (in 11D) so manifests the 'higher D' magnetocharge 'e*' AS INERTIAL MASS in the monopolic current [ec], that is the electropolic Coulomb charge 'e'.
This M-space becomes then mathematically formulated in the gauge symmetry of the algebraic Lie group E₈ and which generates the inertial parameters of the classical Big Bang in the Weylian limits and as the final Planck-String transformation.

The string-parametric Biot-Savart law then relates the angular momentum of any inertial object of mass M with angular velocity ω in selfinducing a magnetic flux intensity given by B=Mω/2Rc² and where the magnetic flux relates inversely to a displacement R from the center of rotation and as a leading term approximation for applicable perturbation series.

This descriptor of a string based cosmology so relates the inherent pentagonal supersymmetry in the cosmogenesis to the definition of the Euler identity in its finestructure X+Y=XY=-1, and a resulting quadratic with roots the Golden Mean and the Golden Ratio of the ancient omniscience of harmonics, inclusive of the five Platonic solids mapping the five superstring classes. Foundations and applications of superstring theory are also indicated and serve as reference for the above.


Tony Bermanseder for omniphysics@cosmosdawn.net at http://www.cosmosdawn.net/forum

 

Dark Energy and Dark Matter in the Multiverse

​

Abstract:
The 2015 measurements by the Planck Collaboration have finetuned the numerical parameters of the Hubble Constant and the Dark Energy with Dark Matter parameters as 67.31±0.96 Hubble Units and as 0.685±0.013/0.315±0.013 respectively.

This article shall show how those values follow from the encompassing cosmology of the observed and measured universe as a protoversal seed for time phase shifted, but space integrated nonparallel multiverses.
The Dark Energy is found to be a 'book keeper' for an intrinsic cosmic deceleration parameter, as had been proposed by the earlier Hubble standard model of cosmology and a gravitational omega, associated with the Dark Matter as a nonluminous addition to the baryonic matter energy from the same Einstein-de Sitter-Friedmann model for the universe.

The Dark Energy is found to be a function for the cosmological evolutionary dynamic in starting from a high positive value to reach its first zero so 1.8 billion years after the Big Bang at a cosmological redshift value of 2.125 to reach its absolute negative minimum at z=1.177 at a time that coincides with a peak in galaxy formation so 4 billion years after the Big Bang and to attain its critical 'nodal' value so 2.2 billion years ago and when the higher dimensional closed de Sitter curved universe began to intersect its lower dimensional anti de Sitter open curved protoversal progenitor.
It was then the 'de Sitter' Dark Matter could begin to interact with the anti de Sitter baryon seed in the form of a 'Hubble Oscillation, defined in the Black Hole Evolution of the encompassing topology of the curvature radii. It was then that the scalefactor of the baryonic universe 'froze' in time to synchronize the luminous matter content of the universe with its dark matter supplement.
The Dark Energy then attains its second zero value so 38.7 billion years after the Big Bang and then approaches a constant value as defined by 'frozen' curvature nexus of the anti de Sitter cosmology.

The zero value for the Einstein-Lambda calibrates the overall Black Hole evolution in an initial minimal wormhole singularity evolving towards its maximized Hubble Event Horizon as a 'Strominger' massless or extremal Black Hole and vice versa of the seedling universe as the protoverse for the multiverse however.
The asymptotic value for the Dark Energy as an acceleration of 3.1580x10^-11 m/s² then becomes suppressed in the birth of successive universes from the timemarkers as set by the successive and iterative universes from their repeating but holofractally scaled seedling parameters.

The nature of the Dark Energy and the nature of the Dark Matter so become intrinsically related in the critical density parameters defined by the respective intersecting cosmologies.

​

COSMOLOGICAL CONSTANT

Λ(k=1;n=1;n₁=234.472)=Λ_∞=4G_oM_o/R_Hubble² =3.157973561...x10^-11 (m/s²)*.
Λ(k=2;n₂=1 to n₂=245.813)=Λ_∞1=Λ_∞/n₁=4G_oM_o/n₁R_Hubble² =1.34684585...x10^-13 (m/s²)*.
Λ(k=3;n₃=1 to n₃=257.252)=Λ_∞2=Λ_∞1/n₂=4G_oM_o/n₁n₂R_Hubble²=5.47914817...x10^-16 (m/s²)*.

The critical density for the seedling protoverse is given as a function of the Dark Matter Omega as the ratio r₁₀/r₁₁=M_o(n+1)³/M_∞ = W_o(n+1)³
{r_critical in isolation as H_o²/4p²G_o (toroidal) and 3H_o²/8pG_o (spherical)}.

In the Dark Energy formulation for the critical n-coordinate n=1; the asymptotic evolvement of the dark energy is defined in the then natural n-coordinate for the continuation of the lightpath, that is the mass parametric and gravitationally retarded curvature radius for volumar V₁₀ for cyclic n=1 becomes imaged in the lightspeed expanding lightpath for the dimensionally intersecting and limiting curvature radius of volumar V₁₁.
The open anti de Sitter protoverse so multidimensionally maps exactly half of the hyperbolic curvature radius onto the closure space of the limiting de Sitter event horizon of the encompassing 11-dimensional Witten spacetime.
This then in effect 'freezes' the Dark Matter Radius of the matter defined asymptotic universe at n=1 of the initializing cycle and renders the curvature radius in 10D as ½R_Hubble

Λ_E(n) = G_oM_o/R{n/[n+1]}_Hubble² - 2c²/(n+1)³R_Hubble

as the formulation from Quantum Big Bang initialization n=n_ps=H_ot_ps until n=1 so 'freezes' the dark matter associated n-time in the limit of the lightpath propagation, which from reaching its first odd node, continues in both a reflection back into its previously transversed spacetime in the asymptotic, lower dimensional and gravitationally retarded expansion and a refracting into the electromagnetic higher dimensional spacetime at c-invariance.

Λ_E(n) = 4G_oM_o/R_Hubble² - 2c²/(n+1)³R_Hubble = 0

subsequently becomes the formulation for the Dark Energy for all n-coordinates from n=1, defining the intersection of the higher dimensional de Sitter cosmology with its lower dimensional anti de Sitter adjutant.

Edward's Witten's wish for a Zero Cosmological Constant so becomes fulfilled at a time cycle-coordinate which allows the graduation of the protoverse into a multiverse as a function of the Gravitational Omega, that is the dark matter cosmology.

Λ_E(n) =0 for 2G_oM_o/R_Hubble = c²/(n+1)³

2G_oM_o/c²= R_Sarkar = W_o R_Hubble = R_Hubble/(n+1)³

for W_o = (n+1)^-3 = 0.02803 for n{L_o}=2.29199....
​

​

So gravity appears stronger when one 'looks back in time' or analyses cosmological objects at large distances. The expansion parameter (a) in the Friedmann-Einstein standard cosmology can be rewritten as a curvature ratio R(n)/R_max={n/(n+1)} and describes the asymptotic universe in say 10 dimensions evolving under the inertial parameters of the c-invariance. This 'lower dimensional universe' is open and expands under hyperbolic curvature under the deceleration parameter q_o=½Ω_o=M_o/2M_∞=2G_oH_oM_o/c³ ~0.014015... This open universe is bounded in the 'standing wave' of the Hubble Oscillation of the 11D and 'higher dimensional universe'.

The boundary is given in the omega of the 'missing mass' of the volumes, which differ in a factor of V₁₁/V₁₀=n³_Rmax³/(n/(n+1))³R_max³=(n+1)³ as the critical density ratio and as n_Rmax³/(n/(n+1))³R_max³=(n+1)³/n²=DIM-Factor (and which assumes its minimum for one complete oscillation for n=2 as DIM=27/4=6.75 so 14.7 Billion years from the present).
Presently, for n=1.132419.. DIM=7.561.. and so the 'missing mass' will be measured as a 'dark matter' distribution of 'dark haloes' etc. around the luminous matter given in the ylemic mass seedling M_o of the baryonic matter and as a function of the critical density ratio defined as XW_o=W_o.DIM.n²=9.6966W_o=0.2718.

As M_o is just 2.8% of M_∞, but is subject to a 'growth' in the maximising factor Yⁿ=1.724.. for the present epoch, one can take the factor M_av=M_o.√Yⁿ=1.313.. for a 'dark matter' percentage upper bounded in 2.803%(1.724)~4.83% and lower bounded in 2.803%(1.313)~3.68% with an average of 32.19% to indicate a total dark matter percentage in concordance with a Dark Energy fraction of 1-0.32 = 67.82%.

But so 9.6966 open universes are contained within the closed and spherical universe given in the Hubble bound. And so the 'dark matter' will be 9.6966 times the luminous baryonic matter in the interval {27.83%, 36.54%} as percentage of the total energy of closure for Ω_o=1 and the critical density ρ_c=M_∞/V_max=H_o²/4π²G_o toroidal and 3H_o²/8πG_o spherical.

In particular, the Dark Energy/Baryonic Matter/Dark Matter distribution can be tabulated for the evolutionary pattern of the Dark Energy as:

Dark Energy = L(n)-A(n) >0 {±W_oM_oYⁿ}W_o(n+1)³ = Dark Matter for increasing luminous matter curvature radius from n=n_ps; (z(z_m)≤1.26x10²⁴)

Dark Energy = 0.0000 {±0.03815} 1.0000 = Dark Matter for n= 0.10823 increasing luminous matter curvature radius and start of galaxy formation (z(z_m)=2.125)

Dark Energy = L(n)-A(n) <0 {±W_oM_oYⁿ}W_o(n+1)³ = Dark Matter for n> 0.10823 increasing luminous matter curvature radius and start of galaxy formation (z(z_m)≤2.125)
Dark Energy = 0.7758{±0.04535}0.2242 = Dark Matter for critical nodal n=1 'freezing' dark matter curvature radius; universe appears to begin to accelerate (z(z_m)=0.291)
Dark Energy = 0.7282{±0.04834}0.2718 = Dark Matter for present n=1.132419... and constant luminous matter curvature radius; (z(z_m)=0.2505)
Dark Energy = 0.0808{±0.08082}0.9192 = Dark Matter for n=2.200795... and constant luminous matter curvature radius; (z(z_m)=0.1331)

Dark Energy = 0.0000{±0.08445}1.0000 = Dark Matter for n=2.29199... and constant luminous matter curvature radius; (z(z_m)=0.1248)

Dark Energy = L(n)-A(n) >0 {±W_oM_oYⁿ}W_o(n+1)³ = Dark Matter for n>2.29199... and constant luminous matter curvature radius; (z(z_m)<0.1248)


Our Big Bang happened at the modular time 1/f_max=t_min=f_min=3.33..x10^-31 seconds*, coinciding with the end of the stringed inflation epoch of the standard cosmology.

The 'de Broglie' inflation established the crucial boundary parameters as say given in the M_o and M_∞ Black Hole masses described.

As the baryonic mass seedling M_o sets the Sarkar Scale for the cosmic architecture in the size of galactic superclusters as the limit for the gravitationally interacting systems before cosmic homogeneity; there must be a Black Hole evolution superposed onto the expansion of the 10D universe and the oscillation of the 11D universe which 'adds' a 'electromagnetic' volume of 2π²R_max³ at the Hubble nodes every 16.9 Billion years.

In terms of the dimensional 'intersection' this can be described as a 'Strominger Brane' evolution with the Sarkar Scale set at the instanton, decreasing as a 'shrinking' Black Hole until it becomes massless at the wormhole scale defined in the minimum macro Black Hole λ_min/2π=2G_oM_min/c²=1.591549..x10^-23 metres*.

This then resets the bosonic micro Black Holes with their macro counterparts under the modular duality.
This Black Hole evolution is higher dimensional and purely electromagnetic, not being observable due to its noninertial nature, except the so called 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' scenarios of the boundary- and initial conditions.

For the Quantum Big Bang and a cycletime n_Weyl=H_ot_Weyl = ct_Weyl/R_Hubble, the nodal Hubble Constant took the form of the maximized Hubble Frequency as a wormhole wavelength l_Weyl=c/f_Weyl = n_WeylR_Hubble and so showing the frequency ratio between the minimum and maximum Hubble nodes as the ratio H_o/f_Weyl.

Here M_o defines the Quantum Big Bang mass seedling as a fraction of the M_critical, the difference defining the deceleration parameter from the Einstein Lambda for n=0, that is the singularity event of creation in

L_Einstein(n_Weyl) = Lambda = Omega - Universal = G_oM_o/l² - 2cH_o t ~ 2.015x10⁸⁵ linear acceleration units and defining a Sarkar Constant
L_Sarkar = L_Einstein.R_Hubble/a_deBroglie = G_oM_o/c² from the original de Broglie matter wave hyper acceleration given by
a_deBroglie = R_Hubblef_Weyl² = R_Hubblec²/l_Weyl² ~ 1.4379..x10⁸⁷ m/s².

For positive Lambda the Gravitational Omega |W| will be greater than the Intrinsic Universal Milgröm Deceleration |a_Milgröm| and for negative Lambda the Intrinsic Universal Deceleration |a_Milgröm| will be greater than the Gravitational Omega |W| to define the 'Dark Energy' as a Quintessence Acceleration and expressed as an overall cosmic evolution in physical consciousness.


Considering the critical mass of the universe in a static Schwarzschild metric of topological closure calculates R_Hubble = 2G_oM_critical/c² for M_critical = c²R_Hubble/2G_o for M_o/2M_critical = G_oM_o/c²R_Hubble = L_Einstein /a_deBroglie = M_o/2M_critical = 0.01401.. to indicate a 'missing mass' or baryonic matter energy deficiet at n=n_Weyl and for which the intrinsic Milgröm deceleration can be ignored in a magnitude differential of 10⁹⁴.

The 'dark matter' component at the Weyl time of the Big Bang so comprised 2.80% as the baryonic mass seedling M_o relative to the critical closure mass of M_critical.

The 'dark energy' component at the Weyl time can be calculated in units of acceleration from the time dependent intrinsic universal Milgröm deceleration and the measured or observed 'dark matter' component as their difference and as the Einstein Lambda.


For a present cycle time n_present=1.1324... and a Constant G_oXⁿM_oYⁿ from X+Y=XY=i²=-1=e^ip (Euler Identity)

a_Milgröm(n_present) = -2c²/(2.1324..)³R_Hubble = -1.1619..x10^-10 m/s² for a (constant or quintessential-dynamic) baryonic mass seedling M_o
W_present = G_oM_o(n_present+1)²/R_Hubble²n_present²= 2.793..x10^-11 m/s² for an evolving Baryon seed M(n)=M_o.{Yⁿ} for about 4.80x10^-11 m/s².

In this case, the baryonic mass seed has grown by a factor of about 1.72 to 1.72(2.8)=4.8% of the total energy and as the measured 'Dark Energy' Component of the standard cosmological model.
G(n)=G_o.Xⁿ for G(n)m_o²=G_oXⁿm₁Y^k.m₂Y^n-k with a Geometric Mean G_oXⁿ√{m₁m₂Y^k+n-k}=G_om₁m₂.Xⁿ.√Yⁿ=G_oM_o.√Xⁿ for M_o representing √{m₁m₂}


For a cosmological redshift calculated as z=2.15, Lambda first attained its zero value in balancing the Gravitational Omega with the Intrinsic Universal Deceleration.
For a present time the Lambda is negative as the summation of the present time Omega and Milgröm Deceleration as W_present - a_Milgröm(n_present) = -8.83x10^-11 m/s² and for a percentage distribution of cosmic accelerations:

Lambda = L_present/a_Milgröm(n_present) = 0.760
Omega =W_present/a_Milgröm(n_present) = 0.240
Universal = 1 for the evolved baryonic mass seed M_o relative to M_critical.

Dark Energy Λ(n) = G_oM_o/R(n)²- 2cH_o/(n+1)³.

The derivative Λ'(n) = -2G_oM_o R'(n)/R(n)³ + 6cH_o/(n+1)⁴ = 6cH_o/(n+1)⁴ - 2G_oM_o H_o²(n+1)/c²n³
Then the absolute minimum for Λ'(n)=0 and for n=0.2389... becomes:
Λ(0.2389) =2.12319...x10^-10 - 5.92482...x10^-10 = -3.80163...x10^-10 (m/s²)*.

The roots for Λ(n)=0 are calculated via 2c³/G_oM_oH_o=(n+1)⁵/n² as n₁=0.10823... and n₂=3.40055...; the second value however becoming reset as n₂=2.29199... due to the 'freezing' of the lambda root at the n=1 node.
This corresponds then to the Dark Energy beginning at the very high positive value of 2x10⁸⁵ (m/s²)* at the instanton and reaching its first zero for the galaxy formation in the overall de Sitter universe after 1.83 billion years.

This process of galaxy formation then peaks at the minimum so 4.04 billion years after the Big Bang and in tandem with the galaxy evolution peaking (0.2389..-0.2352..=0.0037) or so 62.5 million years earlier.
The Dark Matter epoch begins 1.83 billion years after the instanton-inflaton and ends so 2.18 cycles afterwards at a 'oscillation coordinate' of 2.292R_Hubble or about 38.73 billion years.

To synchronise the initial baryon matter seedling with its encompassing omniverse and within its evolving multiversal nesting cosmology; the constant baryon seed is used as the critical omega W_o=0.02803 and as a constant ratio between both the curvature radii R_Sarkar/R_Hubble and the critical Black Hole masses M_o/M_critical. Then for this synchronisation, the parameter R(n) assumes a constant value of R(n)=½R_Hubble in a general macro evolution for the Baryon seed in terms of the Black Hole evolution per individual cycle k.
In this case, the Gravitational Constant G(n)=G_oXⁿ remains constant as G_o for the initialising/reset time markers of the Big Bang cyclicity, characterizing the Black Hole evolution as universal and multiversal encompassments of the Hubble oscillations of the k-cycles.

Superposing a micro mass evolution introduces a factorization of G(n)Xⁿm_cYⁿ=G_om_c² applied to a elementary nucleon initialised by m_c=m_plancka⁹.

The gravitational coupling between baryonic masses then allows a finestructering of Newton's gravitational constant in the inertia evolvement of the baryon seed encompassed by the Black Hole mass ratio.

Subtracting the nonintersected 10D-space for the baryon 'daughter' seed from the limiting 11D-'mother'-space at the present time gives 1-(n/n+1)³=1-0.1498 or 85.02% of 'Total Dark Matter' for n_present=1.13242.

For the micro mass evolution for the present time then, the de Sitter-anti de Sitter cosmo-evolutionary coupling has; and due to the lightspeed expansion of the de Sitter universe and compared to the inertia slowing of the anti de Sitter cosmology, diverged in the factor D(n)=√Xn and which calculates as
D(n_present=1.1324..)=0.7615...

This divergence increases over linear time with the oscillatory de Sitter universe encompassing the asymptotic anti de Sitter universe.
The Dark Energy, as a 'bookkeeper', so 'fades out' by the D(n) factor over linear time in the hyperbolic curvature expansion with the MILGROM diminishing slower than the OMEGA.
This 'account-keeping' of the 'Dark Energy' 'solves' Edward Witten's 'dilemma' and 'his most troublesome professional observation'.

Iow, Einstein was right after all of having made a blunder, which wasn't a blunder.
The Cosmological can be defined as in this paper, but OVERALL it is ZERO, just as Ed Witten wishes for in M-Theory.

An interview with him, stating this is reproduced below from the 'stringsite website'
http://www.superstringtheory.com/people/witten.html

[Excerpt Quote:]
Why is it so hard to break supersymmetry in string theory?

"Well, if I knew the answer, if I knew how Nature has done supersymmetry breaking, then I could tell you why humans had such trouble figuring it out. But I can say one thing about it. When supersymmetry is not broken, it's easy to get a zero cosmological constant in string theory. And although a zero cosmological constant might not be the truth, it's incredibly close to the truth. If you break supersymmetry, if you do it the wrong way, you're going to get a cosmological constant that's much too big, and then you may well get associated problems, such as instabilities, runaways and so on. So it's easy to find ways that string theory could break supersymmetry, but they all have bad consequences.
So I assume we're missing something, which is the answer to your question."

How can the cosmological constant be so close to zero but not zero?

"I really don't know. It's very perplexing that astronomical observations seem to show that there is a cosmological constant. It's definitely the most troublesome, for my interests, definitely the most troublesome, observation in physics in my lifetime. In my career that is." [endofquote]


The Dark Energy, as the Einstein-Lambda though finds itself in a CONSTANT HARMONIC DANCE with Newton's Omega to ensure the continuation and contingency of all the total energy content in the FINITY of the anti de Sitter cosmology and which had emerged as FINETUNED part of the INFINITY of the de Sitter cosmology as part of the Source Energy quantum defined in E*.

The Evolution of the Universe in the Oscillation of its Curvature Radius and its Accelerations​

Abstract:
The overall evolution of the universe is shown to be a function of initial and boundary conditions, commonly described in a Big Bang singularity event, which can be modeled on an emergence of the classical relativistic thermodynamic expansion of the cosmology from a prior quantum gravitational background: n_Weyl = l_Weyl/R_Hubble for a parametrized scalefactor R(n)=R_Hubble{n/[n+1]} and R(n_Weyl)= l_Weyl/{1+n_Weyl} = wormhole lambda l_Weyl in the limit of the inflaton.
Quantum gravity then expressed in terms of an intrinsic multidimensional maximum curvature, here termed the wormhole Weyl curvature radius of heterotic supermembrane HE(8x8) is shown to become a minimum boundary condition initiating the Quantum Big Bang following a stringed brane epoch of inflation, which corrolarily defined the boundary-initial condition for the Hubble Event Horizon as the modular or quantum entangled maximum.

The expansion of the universe in post-braned time evolution from the Weyl quantum gravitational curvature so evolves in hyperbolic space towards its Hubble curvature radius (in 10D - 5D anti de Sitter spacetime), but is mirror modulated in the evolution of the Hubble boundary maximum (in 11D Witten - 5D de Sitter spacetime) in a closed spherical spacetime topology.
The negatively curved universe asymptotically approaches the de Sitter Event Horizon in a curvature radius finestructured in the Einstein-Riemann tensor maximized in an intrinsic 'Big Bang' acceleration of 2cH_o=1.1268x10^-9 m/s² and where H_o describes a 'nodal' Hubble frequency as the inflaton Hubble event horizon as the de Sitter boundary in the Schwarzschild Curvature for the universe defined in a 'dark energy' closure mass M_∞. At any time t=n/H_o within a greater cycle count n<234.47 the original wormhole radius of maximum curvature 'flattens' asymptotically towards its modular mirror R_Hubble=2G_oM_∞/c² and attaining a value of 0.9957.. at the critical coordinate, when the next inflation epoch eventuates to reset the initial parameters in a new de Sitter Hubble event horizon and therefore a new 'closure mass M_∞.

The positively curved universe approaches the critical coordinate from the minimum curvature initialized by the first inflaton defined in a de Broglie matter wave acceleration of a_deBroglie = R_Hubble.f_Weyl²=1.438x10⁸⁷ m/s² for a timeperiod of about 3.96 Trillion 'civil years'.

The matter wave inflation or hyperacceleration becomes proportional to a baryonic mass seedling M_o to then initialize the Quantum Big Bang in classical relativity in the form of the Einstein Lambda so defining the 'dark energy' not as an antigravitational cosmic force, but as the 'missing acceleration' to correlate and balance the two curvatures of the cosmological boundaries.

As the absolute minimum of the Einstein Lambda, which changes from positive to 0 to negative to 0 to an asymptotic value of G_oM_o/{R_Hubble(n/[n+1])}² = 7.964x10^-12 m/s² at the critical coordinate is attained for L(n=0.2389) = -3.8016x10^-10 m/s² (at a cosmological redshift of z=1.177 for a 'peak of galaxy formation'); the universe 'appears' to accelerate in the change of the gradient of the Einstein Lambda from negative to positive, but within a positive gravitational Omega of G_oM_o/{R_Hubble(n/[n+1)}²= 2.1232x10^-10 m/s² and an intrinsic (Milgröm) deceleration of -2cH_o/(1.2389)³ =-3.8016x10^-10 m/s² calculated as: -3.8016x10^-10 m/s² = 2.1232x10^-10 m/s² - 5.9248x10^-10 m/s².
As indicated before the first nodal intersection for the protoversal seed then manifests the measured apparent acceleration of the universe so 16.9 Billion years aft5er the Big Bang.
Dark Energy = 0.7758{±0.04535}0.2242 = Dark Matter for critical nodal n=1 'freezing' dark matter curvature radius; universe appears to begin to accelerate (z(z_m)=0.291).

The overall cosmology so becomes Euclidean flat as a n-cyclic universe of 16.9 billion year halfcycles, the overall inflaton cyclicity requiring 234.47 cycles to reset the initial parameters to reinitialize the next Quantum Big Bang singularity event.
This 'recharging' or rebirth of the universe then reinitializes the following cosmological boundary values:

R_Hubble(1st Inflaton)=l_WeylH^1/3/2p = 1.59767545x10²⁶ m and with H a space quantization constant for the number of wormhole quanta in the inflaton volumar dV₄/dR=2p²R_Hubble³
M_∞(1st Inflaton)=R_Hubble.c²/2G_o =6.47058558x10⁵² kg

L_{1st Big Bang}/a_deBroglie= G_oM_o/l_Weyl² = 2.015x10⁸⁵/1.4379x10⁸⁷ = M_o/2M_∞ =0.01401..

R_Hubble*(2nd Inflaton) = n_criticalR_Hubble = 3.746...x10²⁸ m ~ 4 Trillion lightyears
M_∞(2nd Inflaton)=R_Hubble*c²/2G_o = 1.517...x10⁵⁵ kg for M_o* = 0.02802M_∞* = 4.2510x10⁵³ kg

L_{2nd Big Bang}/a_deBroglie*=G_oM_o*/l_Weyl²/R_Hubble*²f_Weyl² = 4.7233x10⁸⁷/3.3714x10⁸⁹ = M_o*/2M_∞*= 0.01401...

(a) 2pG_o.m_c²/hc=Alpha¹⁸ and m_c=m_P defines m_P for Alpha¹⁸=1.
(b) E_Weyl=hf_Weyl=E_ss.f_ps²=√(2pG_o.m_e²/4Alpha.hc.e²)=1/e*.
(c) 2e.R_e.=e*.l_Planck√Alpha.
(d) E_o=e√(E/Alpha)=1.886461127x10³⁸ C* (Charge-Seed)
(e) M_o/m_c=1.813713x10⁵¹/9.92474572x10^-28
.....M_o/m_c=1.827469354x10⁷⁸.......(No of Seed-Nucleons)
.....M_∞/m_c=6.519663x10⁷⁹.......(No of Nucleons)
(f) Ol_Planck=l_Planck.√Alpha=e/c² (Stoney Units).

Electromagnetic Finestructure: a_e = 2pke²/hc = e²/2e_ohc
Gravitational Finestructure (Electron): a_g = 2pG_om_e²/hc = {m_e/m_Planck}²
Gravitational Finestructure (Primordial Nucleon): a_n = 2pG_om_c²/hc
Gravitational Finestructure (Planck Boson): a_Planck = 2pG_om_Planck²/hc


1/E_ps=e*=2R_ec²=√{4αhce²/2πG_om_e²}=2e√α[m_P/m_e]=2e√{a_e/a_g}
= {2e²/m_e}√(k/G_o)=2e²/G_om_e = e²/2pe_om_e
for G_o = 1/k = 4pe_o for the cosmological unification of the finestructures for E_Weyl=E_ps modular dual to E_ss via M-duality coupling E_psE_ss=f_Weyl² and E_ps/E_ss=h².

E_ps = 1/E_ss = 1/e* = √{a_g/a_e}/2e = G_om_e/2e²

Yⁿ = R_Hubble/r_Weyl = 2pR_Hubble/l_Weyl = w_Weyl/H_o = 2pn_Weyl = n_ps/2p = 1.003849x10⁴⁹​

2nd Inflaton/Quantum Big Bang redefines for k=1: R_Hubble(1) = n₁R_Hubble = c/H_o(1) = (234.472)R_Hubble = 3.746x10²⁸ m* in 3.957 Trillion Years for critical n_k
3rd Inflaton/Quantum Big Bang redefines for k=2: R_Hubble(2) = n₁n₂R_Hubble = c/H_o(2) = (234.472)(245.813)R_Hubble = 9.208x10³⁰ m* in 972.63 Trillion Yearsfor critical n_k
4th Inflaton/Quantum Big Bang redefines for k=3: R_Hubble(3) = n₁n₂n₃R_Hubble = c/H_o(3) = (57,636.27)(257.252)R_Hubble = 2.369x10³³ m* in 250.24 Quadrillion Years for critical n_k
5th Inflaton/Quantum Big Bang redefines for k=4: R_Hubble(4) = n₁n₂n₃n₄R_Hubble = c/H_o(4) = (14,827,044.63)(268.785)R_Hubble = 6.367x10³⁵ m* in 67.26 Quintillion Years for critical n_k
...
(k+1)th Inflaton/Quantum Big Bang redefines for k=k: R_Hubble(k) = R_Hubble P n_k = c/H_o P n_k
...

n_k = ln{w_WeylR_Hubble(k)/c}/lnY = ln{w_Weyl/H_o(k)}/lnY​

The macromass evolution Y^n_k = M_∞k/M_ok =a_deBrogliek/L_ok=R_Hubblek/R_Sarkark=W_o=0.02803 defines the unity boundary condition {nR_Hubble}/{n_kR_Hubblek} = 1


For critical n₀=1.00000 and n₂=7.428 - Base continued seeding n={7.428}.(1)=7.428
For critical n₁=234.472 and n₂=7.428 - Base continued seeding n={7.428}.(234.472)=1741.658
For critical n₂=245.813 and n₃=7.428 - Base continued seeding n={7.428}.(234.472)(245.813)=428,122.182
For critical n₃=257.252 and n₄=7.428 - Base continued seeding n={7.428}.(234.472)(245.813)(257.252) = 110,135,287.53
For critical n₄=268.785 and n₅=7.428 - Base continued seeding n={7.428}.(234.472)(245.813)(257.252)(268.785)=3,985,287,192 = 29,602,713,260.04
............
For critical n_k=n_k and n_k+1=7.4128 - Base continued seeding n=(7.428){n₁}{n₂}{n₃}{n₄}...{n_k}

​

​

(N) Cycletime (n)	White Hole Expansion	Black Hole Expansion	Torus Volumar Torus Dark Matter	DE/DM Space Ratio	Dark Matter Inner Baryon Interaction	Dark Matter Outer No Baryon Interaction	Baryonic Matter Dark Matter	Dark Energy
Supercycle Alpha for k=1 n=Hot=ct/RHubble=ct/RH Ho=dn/dt	Closed (+) anti de Sitter Universe V11+/2p2 ={nRH}3 m3	Open (-) de Sitter Universe V10+/2p2RH3 =(n/n+1)3 m3	Torus-DM for Cycle N=1,2,3... |(N-1)+{N+1-n}3| V11DM/2p2RH3 V11-=2p2RH3 Constant Boundary Event Horizon for inflaton cycles n=234.472 m3	X=V11+/V10+ ={n+1}3 Critical DM Density: r10/r11=XWo	for Cycle N=1,2,3... TDM=SVN+V10+ from N=2; n=2 from n=√2 for N=1 (N-1)n+(N+1)=n2 V10DM/2p2RH3 = V11- ∩ V10+ m3	V11DM/2p2RH3 = V11-- V10+ =1-(n/n+1)3 Relative V11-	WoYn XWo SM VPE=ZPE Vortex-PE Zero-Point PE	Outer Creation c-Space intersecting Baryon matter seedling in Dark Energy Volumar DEV=V10+/nV11- ={n+1}3/n2 +ve asymptotic constant LE=3.15797672x10-11 m/s2
				10D Outer(-) Daughter BH Event Horizon Mother BH 11D Outer(+)	10D Outer(-) Daughter BH Dynamic Event Horizon Mother BH 11D Inner(-)	10D Outer(-) Daughter BH Event Horizon Mother BH 11D Inner(+)	10D Outer(-) Daughter BH Event Horizon Mother BH 11D Inner(-)	12D Inner(-) Father WH Event Horizon Mother BH 11D Outer(+)
N=0; n=0=Nulltime t=0	00	00	00	1	-	1 100%		DEV=∞
N=0; n=√a.tplanckHo=1.12x10-62 for the Stoney-Planck-Length Quantum Oscillation Lplanck.√Alpha=Rplanck.√a in the initialisation of the Inflaton t=5.96x10-45 s*	5.730x10-108	5.730x10-108	-	X=1+	-	1- 100%	n/a	DEV=7.972x10123 Inflaton Singularity
N=0; n=Ho√(hGo/2pc5)=1.308x10-61 for the inflaton matter phase t=tPlanck= √(hGo/2pc5)=6.965x10-44 s	9.126x10-105	9.126x10-105	-	X=1+	-	1- 100%	n/a	DEV=5.845x10121 Inflaton Dynamic
N=0; n=2.435x10-50 for the Higgs false vacuum in the inflaton de Broglie matter wave phase t=1.297x10-32 s	5.888x10-71	5.888x10-71	-	X=1+	-	1- 100%	n/a	DEV=1.687x1099
N=0; n=nps=lps/RHubble=Hotps = 6.259..x10-49 for Big Bang Wormhole with HE(8x8) t=tps=3.333...x10-31 s	1.000x10-67	1.000x10-67	-	X=1+	-	1- 100%	WoYn=0.02803 XWo=0.02803 SM=0.05606	DEV={RHubble/lps}2 1st Big Bang Singularity DE=2.015x1085
N=0; n=3.568x10-27 for Bosonic Unification Scale Eps=kTps={3Ho3Moh3c2/440n3p7}¼ t= 1.90x10-9 s	0.185	0.185	-	X=1+	-	1- 100%	WoYn=0.02803 XWo=0.02803 SM=0.05606	DEV=7.855x1052 DE=6.202x1041
N=0; n=5.171x10-21={18.2/THBVE4}⅓ for the Higgs/Chi Vacuum Saturation Energy (VPE or ZPE) at 298.453 GeV* and THBVE={18.2(n+1)2/n3}¼ for electroweak unification t=2.754 ms	5.639x1017	5.639x1017	-	X=1+	-	1- 100%	WoYn=0.02803 XWo=0.02803 SM=0.05606	DEV=3.740x1040 DE=2.953x1029
N=0; n=1.8777x10-18=[Ho]=[c/RHubble] t=1 s	2.700x1025	2.700x1025	-	X=1++	-	1-Ho3=1-- 100%	WoYn=0.02803 XWo=0.02803 SM=0.05606	DEV=[1/Ho]2 DE=2.239x1024
N=0; n=½ t=2.66279x1017 s = 8.436 GY	5.098x1077	1.511x1077	-	X=3.375	-	0.9630 96.30%	WoYn=0.0357 XWo=0.0946 SM=0.1303	DEV=13.5 DE=-2.628x10-10
N=0; n=0.8676...=1-0.1324... for present time image coordinate t=4.6205x1017 s = 14.642 GY	2.663x1078	4.088x1077	-	X=6.514	-	0.8997 89.97%	WoYn=0.0426 XWo=0.1826 SM=0.2252	DEV=8.654 DE=-1.364x10-10
N=1; n=1 Dimensional Intersection begins Dark Matter epoch Outer|Inner t=1/Ho=5.32558...x1017 s = 16.876 GY	4.078x1078 100%	V1=5.098x1077	TDM=4.078x1078	X=8	TDM-V1 =TDM-5.098x1077 =3.568x1078 No Baryonic Intersection	0.8750 87.50%%	WoYn=0.0454 XWo=0.2242 SM=0.2668	DEV=8.000=8/1 DE=-1.092x10-10
N=1; n=npresent=1.1324... t=6.0307x1017 s = 19.110 GY	5.922x1078	6.108x1077	TDM=2.663x1078	X=9.696	TDM-6.108x1077 =2.052x1078 No Baryonic Intersection	0.8502 85.02%	WoYn=0.0483 XWo=0.2718 SM=0.3201	DEV=7.561 DE=-8.461x10-11 V11-- V10+ ~ XWo/SM
N=1; n=√2 for onset of Dark Matter-Baryon Intersection t=7.5316x1017 s = 23.867 GY	1.153x1079	8.198x1077	TDM=8.198x1077	X=14.064	TDM-8.198x1077=0 0%	0.7990 79.90%	WoYn=0.0554 XWo=0.3942 SM=0.4496	DEV=7.036 DE=-4.849x10-11
N=2; n=2 for absolute minimum d[DM-]/dn=0 n3-3n-2=0=(n-2)(n+1)2 DM- =V11-/V10+ t=1.0651x1018 s = 33.752 GY	3.263x1079	V2=1.209x1078	TDM=V2+0 =1.209x1078	X=27	TDM=V2+0 =1.209x1078 29.65% of (N-1)V11-	0.7037 70.37%	WoYn=0.0734 XWo=0.7568 SM=0.8302	DEV=6.791 DE=-1.015x10-11
N=2; n=2.200795 for apparent baryon matter saturation	1.337x1080	1.326x1078	TDM=V2+0 =1.209x1078	X=32.792	TDM=V2+0 =1.326x1078 32.52% of (N-1)V11-	0.6749 67.49%	WoYn=0.0808 XWo=0.9192 SM=1.0000	DEV=6.770 DE=-2.777x10-12
N=2; n=2.292 for 0 Dark Energy in Deceleration parameter Wo=1 t=1.221x1018 s = 38.681 GY	4.910x1079	1.376x1078	TDM=V2+0 =1.209x1078	X=35.676	TDM=V2+V10+ =2.585x1078 63.39% of (N-1)V11-	0.6625 66.25%	WoYn=0.0845 XWo=1.0000 SM=1+VPE	DEV=6.75=27/4 DE=0
N=3; n=3 t=1.5977x1018 s = 50.628 GY	1.101x1080	V3=1.720x1078	TDM=V2+V3+0 =2.929x1078	X=64	TDM=V2+V3+0 =2.929x1078 35.91% of (N-1)V11-	0.5781 57.81%	WoYn=0.1187 XWo=1.7939 SM=1+VPE	DEV=7.11=64/9 DE=1.398x10-11
N=7; n=7.428 for the projected macromass evolution MoYn=M∞ with n=log{2p/nps}/logY t=3.956x1018 s = 125.359 GY	1.671x1081	2.792x1078	TDM=V2+...+V7+0 =1.268x1079	X=598.651	TDM=V2+...+V7+V10+ =1.547x1079 63.23% of (N-1)V11-	0.3154 31.54%	WoYn=1.0000 XWo=16.7802 SM=1+VPE	DEV=10.850 DE=2.970x10-11

N=234; n=234 t=1.24618685x1020 s = 3,949.0 GY	5.225x1085	V234=4.0263x1078	TDM=V2+...V234+0 =8.865x1080	X=12,977,875	TDM=V2+...V234+0 =8.865x1080 93.30% of (N-1)V11-	0.01271 1.271%	WoYn=1 n/a XWo=363,770 SM=1+VPE	DEV=237.013 DE=3.158x10-11
N=234; nreset=234.472 for Inflaton Reset RHubble=RHubble*; Ho=Ho* from n1=log{2pRH/lps}/logY t1=treset=1.24870053x1020 s = 3,956.9744 GY	5.257x1085	4.0264x1078	TDM=V2+...+V234+0 =8.865x1080	X=13,056,231	TDM=V2+...+V234+V10+ =8.90526x1080 93.72% of (N-1)V11-	0.01269 1.269%	WoYn=1 n/a XWo=365,966 SM=1+VPE	DEV=237.485 2nd Big Bang Singularity DE=4.725x1087
N=235; n=235; n1=234.472; n2=Ho2t2=0.528Ho2/Ho1=0.528/n1=1/444.076 t2=2.812x1017 s = 8.9106 GY t=t1+n2/Ho*=1.2515x1020 s = 3,965.885 GY Old Seedling {k=1} Universe Asymptotic continuation of the DM/DE Multiverse for the first initial seedling universe k=1 Linear Continuity in cycle relative time summations	5.293x1085 6.003x1077 (k=2-parallel)	4.0266x1078 5.963x1077 (k=2-parallel)	TDM=V2+...+V235+0 =8.905x1080	X=13,144,256	TDM=V2+...+V235 =8.90527x1080 93.32% of (N-1)V11-	0.01265 1.265%	WoYn=1 n/a XWo=368,433 SM=1+VPE	DEV=238.013 DE=3.158x10-11
Supercycle Beta for k=2 New Seedling{k=2} Universe Old Seed becomes wormhole singularity Galactic civilizations to quantum tunnel from the Old Universe into the New Universe from n=1; t=1/Ho cycle coordinate relative to n*=1; t=1/Ho* {16.876 GY; 3.957 TY; 7.914 TY} As npresent=19.11 GY; from a time 2.2 GY ago, a quantum tunnel exists between the present and future universe defined in super cycles A and B. For linear time continuity: ninflaton=nk-1.nk for parallel time synchronisation: ninflaton=nk	Closed (+) anti de Sitter Universe V11+/2p2 ={nRH}3 m3	Open (-) de Sitter Universe V10+/2p2RH3* =(n/n+1)3 m3	Torus-DM for Cycle N=1,2,3... |(N-1)+{N+1-n}3| V11DM/2p2RH3 V11-=2p2RH3 Constant Boundary Event Horizon for inflaton cycles n=234.472 m3	X=V11+/V10+ ={n+1}3	for Cycle N=1,2,3... TDM=SVN+V10+ from N=2; n=2 from n=√2 for N=1 (N-1)n+(N+1)=n2 V10DM/2p2RH3 = V11- ∩ V10+ m3	V11DM/2p2RH3 = V11-- V10+ =1-(n/n+1)3	WoYn XWo SM VPE=ZPE Vortex-PE Zero-Point PE	Outer Creation c-Space intersecting Baryon matter seedling in Dark Energy Volumar DEV=V10+/nV11- ={n+1}3/n2 +ve asymptotic constant LE=1.346845x10-13 m/s2
N2=0; n2=nps*=lps/RHubble*=Ho*tps = 2.6694x10-51 for Big Bang Wormhole with HE(8x8) t=treset+tps=3.95697 TY+3.333...x10-31 s n=234.472 for N1 Ho*=Ho/nreset=c/RHubble* =8.0083253x10-21 1/s RH*=n1RH=nresetRH=adeBroglie/fps2 =3.7461016x1028 m = 3,956.974 Gly = New Wormhole Radius adeBroglie=RH*fps2=3.371x1089 m/s2 Lo=GoMo*/lps2=4.725x1087 m/s2 adeBroglie/Lo=2M∞*/Mo*=½Wo=0.014015 t=n*/Ho*+treset=1.2515x1020 s = 3.956974 TY Half-Cycles Period changes from 16.9 GY to 3.9569 TY in n*=n.nreset for nodes n=0,1,2,3...n	5.257x1085 1.000x10-66	1.000x10-66	-	X=1	TDM=V2+...+V235 =8.90527x1080 93.32% of (N-1)V11-	0.01265 1.265%	WoYn=0.02803 XWo=0.02803 SM=0.05606	DEV={R*Hubble/lps}2 =1.403x10101 DE=4.725x1087
N=235; n=235; n1=234.472; n2=Ho2t2=0.528Ho2/Ho1=0.528/n1=1/444.076 t2=2.812x1017 s = 8.9106 GY t=t1+n2/Ho*=1.2515x1020 s = 3,965.885 GY Old Seedling {k=1} Universe Asymptotic continuation for the DM/DE Multiverse for the first initial seedling universe k=1 Linear Continuity in cycle relative time summations	5.293x1085 6.003x1077 (k=2-parallel)	4.0266x1078 5.963x1077 (k=2-parallel)	-	X=1.0068	-	0.01265 1.265%	WoYn=0.02806 XWo=0.02822 SM=0.05628	DEV=198,538.7 DE=6.665x10-9
N2=0; n2=½; n1=234.472; n=351.717 for N1 Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2=treset1+n2/Ho2; Parallel Synchronisation: Lightpath c=Ho2RH2 t=t1+6.2435x1019 s = 1.8731x1020 s = 5.935 TY	1.774x1086 6.571x1084	1.947x1084	-	X=3.375	-	0.00848 0.848%	WoYn=0.0357 XWo=0.0946 SM=0.1303	DEV=13.5 DE=-1.121x10-12
N2=1; n2=1; n1=234.472; n=468.943 for N1 Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2=treset1+n2/Ho2; Parallel Synchronisation: Lightpath c=Ho2RH2 Dimensional Intersection begins Dark Matter epoch Outer|Inner t=t1+1.2487x1020 s = 2.4974x1020 s = 7.914 TY	4.206x1086 5.257x1085 100% for k=2	V1=6.571x1084	TDM=5.257x1085	X=8	TDM-V1 =4.600x1085 No Baryonic Intersection	0.00637 0.637%	WoYn=0.0454 XWo=0.2242 SM=0.2696	DEV=8.000=8/1 DE=-4.659x10-13
N2=1; n2=npresent2=1.1324...; n1=234.472; n=500 for N1 for timephase shifted present parallel universe k=2 to k=1 t=t1+1.41403x1020 s = 2.6627x1020 s = 8.438 TY	5.098x1086 7.634x1085	7.873x1084	TDM=3.433x1085	X=9.696	TDM-7.873x1084 =2.646x1085 No Baryonic Intersection	0.005976 0.5976%	WoYn=0.0483 XWo=0.2718 SM=0.3201	DEV=7.561 DE=-3.609x10-13 V11-- V10+ ~ XWo/SM
N2=1; n2=√2; n1=234.472; n=566.07 for N1 Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2=treset1+n2/Ho2; for onset of Dark Matter-Baryon Intersection t=t1+1.766x1020 s = 3.0146x1020 s = 9.553 TY	7.397x1086 1.487x1086	1.057x1085	TDM=1.057x1085	X=14.062	TDM-1.057x1085=0 0%	0.005281 0.5281%	WoYn=0.0554 XWo=0.3942 SM=0.4496	DEV=7.036 DE=-2.068x10-13
N2=2; n2=2; n1=234.472; n=703.40 for N1 Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2=treset1+n2/Ho2; for absolute minimum d[DM-]/dn=0 n3-3n-2=0=(n-2)(n+1)2 DM- =V11-/V10+ t=t1+2.497x1020 s = 3.746x1020 s = 11.871 TY	1.419x1087 4.206x1086	V2=1.558x1085	TDM=V2+0 =1.558x1085	X=27	TDM=V2+0 =1.558x1085 29.65% of (N-1)V11	0.004266 0.4266%	WoYn=0.0734 XWo=0.7568 SM=0.8302	DEV=6.75=27/4 Absolute Minimum DE=-4.329x10-14
N2=2; n2=2.200795; n1=234.472; n=750.50 for N1 Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2=treset1+n2/Ho2; for apparent baryon matter saturation t=t1+2.748x1020 = 3.997x1020 s = 12.665 TY	1.724x1087 5.604x1086	1.709x1085	TDM=V2+0 =1.558x1085	X=32.792	TDM=V2+V10+ =3.267x1085 62.15% of (N-1)V11-	0.003987 0.3987%	WoYn=0.0808 XWo=0.9192 SM=1.0000	DEV=6.770 DE=-1.184x10-14
N2=2; n2=2.292; n1=234.472; n=771.88 for N1 for 0 Dark Energy in Deceleration parameter Wo=1 (k=2) Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2=treset1+n2/Ho2; Parallel Synchronisation: Lightpath c=Ho2RH2 t=t1+2.8620x1020 s = 4.1107x1020 s = 13.026 TY	1.875x1087 6.330x1086	1.774x1085	TDM=V2+0 =1.558x1085	X=35.676	TDM=V2+V10+ =3.332x1085 63.39% of (N-1)V11-	0.00388 0.388%	WoYn=0.0845 XWo=1.0000 SM=1+VPE	DEV=6.791 DE=0
N2=7; n2=7.428; n1=234.472; n=1976.12 for N1; for the projected macromass evolution Mo*Yn=M∞* with n=log{2p/nps}/logY Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2=treset1+n2/Ho2; Parallel Synchronisation: RH1=2GoM∞1/c2=c/Ho1= RH2=2GoM∞2/c2=c/Ho2=RH3=2GoM∞3/c2=c/Ho3 t=t1+9.2753x1020 = 1.0524x1021 s = 33.349 TY	3.1471x1088 2.1545x1088	3.599x1085	TDM=V2+V3+V4+...+V7+0	X=598.651	TDM=V2+...+V7+V10+	0.00172 0.172%	WoYn=1 n/a XWo=11.488 SM=1+VPE	DEV=10.85 DE=1.267x10-13
N2=245; n2=245; n1=234.472; n=57,680.11 for N1 Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2=treset1+n2/Ho2; Parallel Synchronisation: RH1=2GoM∞1/c2=c/Ho1= RH2=2GoM∞2/c2=c/Ho2=RH3=2GoM∞3/c2=c/Ho3 t=t1+3.0593x1022 = 3.07180x1022 s = 973.416 TY	7.826x1092 7.731x1092	V245=5.19316x1085	TDM=V2+...+V245+0	X=14,886,936	TDM=V2+...+V245	0.000052009 0.0052009%	WoYn=1 n/a XWo=417,281 SM=1+VPE	DEV=248.01 Absolute Minimum DE=1.347x10-13
N2=245; n2=245.813; n1=234.472; n=57,870.74 for N1 Linear Continuity: {(n1+n1n2)RH}3=V11+/2p2 Parallel Synchronisation: lightpath c=Ho2RH2 nreset2=245.813 for Inflaton Reset k=3 RHubble3=n1n2RH=RHubble**=9.2084x1030 m from n2=log{2pRH*/lps}/logY Ho3=c/RH3=Ho**=3.25789x10-23 1/s t2=treset2=3.069468x1022 s = 972.676 TY t=t1+3.0695x1022 s = 3.0820x1022 s = 976.63 TY	7.904x1092 7.8082x1092	5.19337x1085	TDM=V2+...+V245+0	X=15,035,023	TDM=V2+...+V245+V10+	0.000051838 0.0051838%	WoYn=1 n/a XWo=421,432 SM=1+VPE	DEV=248.83 2nd Big Bang Singularity DE=1.161x1090

​

N2=246; n2=245.813; n1=234.472; n=57,914.58 for N1; n3=0.187Ho3/Ho2=0.187/n2=1/1314.508=Ho3t3 t3=n3/Ho3=2.335x1019 s = 739.95 GY Linear Continuity: t=t1+t2+t3=treset1+treset2+n3/Ho3; Parallel Synchronisation: RH1=2GoM∞1/c2=c/Ho1= RH2=2GoM∞2/c2=c/Ho2=RH3=2GoM∞3/c2=c/Ho3 t=t1+t2+n3/Ho3 = 3.0843x1022 s = 977. TY 2nd asymptotic continuation for the DM/DE Multiverse for the second seedling universe k=2

7.922x1092 3.4377x1083 (k=3---parallel)

V246=5.19342x1085 3.42983x1083 (k=3--parallel)

TDM=V2+V3+V4+...+V245+V246+0

X=15,069,223

TDM=V2+...+V246+V10+

0.000051799 0.0051799%

WoYn=1 n/a XWo=422,390.32 SM=1+VPE

DEV=249.01 Absolute Minimum DE=0 DE=1.347x10-13asymptotic constant LE(n)=5.47910-16 m/s2

1.	NullRadius for NullTime tGenesis=Rmax/Vdebroglie=lps/c=1/fps=fss=tps=nps/Ho LGenesis=h/c.MASS=lpsc/Rmax=nps.c={npsHo}Rmax	1.88x10-40 m* for 6.28x10-49 s* n=npsHo=lpsHo/Rmax=1.18x10-66 No CMBR	Cosmic Logos Initialisation of Creation in Awareness df/dt as maximised entropy counter fps2 in the Genesis Boson for Nulltime npsHo with the Nodal Hubble Constant Ho=c/Rmax=1.877728045x10-18 Hz*
2.	PLO=Planck-Length Oscillation Lplanck.√Alpha=Rplanck.√a	1.78x10-36 m* for 5.96x10-45 s* n=√a.tplanckHo=1.12x10-62 No CMBR	BEGIN of String Epoch in the de Broglie INFLATION VPE bounce of the Planck Oscillation in {e/c2}unified for the Planck-Time Bounce tPLO=1/fPLO=√a.tplanck=√(2apGoh/c5)=2palplanck/c
3.	Planck Length Lplanck=√(G0h/2pc3)	2.09x10-35 m* for 6.98x10-44 s* n=tplanckHo=1.31x10-61 No CMBR	Superstring Class I for SEWG Unification all interactions unified in a single interaction at Planck Time tplanck=√(hGo/2pc5)
4.	Monopole Radius Rmonopole=lmonopole/2p	7.34x10-33 m* for 2.44x10-41s* n=RmonopoleHo/c=4.59x10-59 No CMBR	Magnetic Monopolar Radius for Superstring Class IIB as the Cosmic Ray SourceSink for SeWg Unification Electromagnetic Gravitation and StrongWeak Coupling
5.	XL-GUT Boson RXL=lXL/2p=eh/2pamps	1.05x10-31 m* for 3.50x10-40 s* n=RXL.Ho/c=6.57x10-58 No CMBR	XL-Boson Brane for Superstring Class HO(32) for GUT Unification SEW.G for the Decoupling of Gravitation
6.	ECosmic Ray Boson RECR=lECR/2p=ec/pA	3.16x10-26 m* for 1.05x10-34 s* n=RECR.Ho/c=1.98x10-52 No CMBR	ECosmicRay Brane for Superstring Class IIA as the Cosmic Ray SourceSink for SeW.G Unification for Electromagnetic StrongWeak Coupling without Gravity
7.	lps/360=2prps/360	2.78x10-25 m* for 9.27x10-34 s* n=Ho/360fps=1.74x10-51 CMBR=2.42x1038 K*>TEMPEST	END of INFLATIONARY StringEpoch with a Wormhole tunneling scale for Superbrane EpsEss in the 2p factor of quantum spin in period T=1/2pf
8.	RTEMPEST TEMPERATURE Gradient Upper Bound	1.32x10-24 m* for 4.39x10-33 s* n={18.2/TEMPEST4}⅓=8.25x10-51 CMBR=7.54x1037 K*=TEMPEST	The algorithmic temperature definition initiates the Higgs Bosonic Restmass Induction across the wormhole scale of heterotic supermembrane EpsEss in radian linearisation pnps/180
9.	plps/180=p2rps/90	1.75x10-24 m* for 5.80x10-33 s* n=pnps/180=pHo/180fps=1.09x10-50 CMBR=6.13x1037 K*≤TEMPEST	END of INFLATIONARY StringEpoch with a Wormhole tunneling scale for Superbrane EpsEss in the radian linearisation of the period T=1/2p in the 360Re=1010lps definition
10.	RFalse HiggsVacuum TEMPERATURE Gradient Lower Bound	3.90x10-24 m* for 1.30x10-32 s* n=tHiggsPEHo=2.44x10-50 CMBR=3.35x1037 K*≤TEMPEST	The Higgsian MassInduction defines the False Vacuum from the Potential Temperature to manifest as Kinetic Temperature in tHiggsPE=tps.T(nps)/TEMPEST=0.03890...tps=1.297x10-32 seconds*
11.	lps/2p=rps	1.59x10-23 m* for 5.30x10-32 s* n=Ho/2pfps=9.96x10-50 CMBR=1.16x1037 Kelvin*	QUANTUM BIG BANG at the Wormhole Radius for all spacetime event horizons for Superbrane Class HE(8x8) as the Cosmic Ray Knee SourceSink for S.EW.G ELECTROWEAK Unification
12.	RMP=RestMassPhoton=R*RMP=lRMP lRMP/360={e*fss2/2p2}⅓/360	3.92x10-23 m* for 1.30x10-31 s* n=lRMP/360Rmax=2.45x10-49 CMBR=5.93x1036 Kelvin*	e*=2Rec2=1/Eps↔V*.(df/dt)|max=2p2R*3.fps2 in toroidal hypersphere quantization of the VPE/ZPE Heisenberg matrix to define the cosmic awareness quantum aw={df/dt}|max in the characterisation of physical consciousness
13.	lps=2prps	10-22 m* for tps=3.33..x10-31 s* n=nps=tps.Ho=6.26x10-49 CMBR=Tps=2.93x1036 Kelvin*	Wormhole Perimeter for all spacetime event horizons in S.EW.G Unification at the de Broglie timeinstanton tps=1/tss=3.33..x10-31 s*
14.	plRMP/180={½pe*fss2}⅓/180	2.46x10-22 m* for 8.20x10-31 s* n=plRMP/180Rmax=1.54x10-48 CMBR=1.49x1036 Kelvin*	xxx
15.	2plps=4p2rps	6.28x10-22 m* for 2.09x10-30 s* n=2plps/Rmax=2pnps=3.93x10-48 CMBR=7.40x1035 Kelvin*	Wormhole Linearisation Parameter
16.	lRMP/2p={e*fss2/16p5}⅓	2.25x10-21 m* for 7.51x10-30 s* n=lRMP/2pRmax=1.41x10-47 CMBR=2.84x1035 Kelvin*	xxx
17.	180lps/p=360rps	5.73x10-21 m* for 1.91x10-29 s* n=180lps/pRmax=3.59x10-47 CMBR=1.41x1035 Kelvin*	Neutrino Kernel Scale KKK
18.	lRMP={e*fss2/2p2}⅓/360	1.41x10-20 m* for 4.70x10-29 s* n=lRMP/Rmax=8.83x10-47 CMBR=7.17x1034 Kelvin*	nps.lRMP/lps=nps.lss.lRMP
19.	360lps	3.60x10-20 m* for 1.20x10-28 s* n=360lps/Rmax=2.25x10-46 CMBR=3.56x1034 Kelvin*	Neutrino Corona to Mesonic KIR-Transition
20.	2plRMP={4pe*fss2}⅓	8.87x10-20 m* for 2.96x10-28 s* n=2plRMP/Rmax=5.55x10-46 CMBR=1.81x1034 Kelvin*	xxx
21.	RHBVE=hc/2pe₭Kav=lHBVE/2p	6.64x10-19 m* for 2.22x10-27 s* n=RHBVE/Rmax=4.16x10-45 CMBR=3.99x1033 Kelvin*	Electroweak Decoupling for Higgs Bosonic Massinduction for S.E.W.G Unification at THBVE=EHBVE/k=hc/2pRHBVEk=3.396x1015 Kelvin*
22.	180lRMP/p=180{e*fss2/2p5}⅓	8.09x10-19 m* for 2.70x10-27 s* n=180lRMP/pRmax=5.06x10-45 CMBR=3.44x1033 Kelvin*	xxx
23.	Mesonic InnerRing=RIR=Rm Rm=rMRe/rE=½(rF+rG)ROR/rE	2.76x10-18 m* for 9.21x10-27 s* n=rMRe/rERmax=1.73x10-44 CMBR=1.37x1033 Kelvin*	The Microcosmic Mesonic Inner Ring for the down quark template for the (anti)neutrino mass inductions for the mean fractal mapping of the solar scale from the wave quarkian KKIRKOR template of the cosmogenesis in Re/Rm=OR/IR=rE/rM and for the mean Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) markers are radii G,F and E for the ylemic epoch
24.	360lRMP=360{e*fss2/2p2}⅓	5.08x10-18 m* for 1.69x10-26 s* n=360lRMP/Rmax=3.18x10-44 CMBR=8.67x1032 Kelvin*	xxx
25.	Classical Electron Radius=Re=ROR Re/360=e2/1440peomec2	7.72x10-18 m* for 2.57x10-26 s* n=Re/360Rmax=4.83x10-44 CMBR=6.34x1032 Kelvin*	The Microcosmic Leptonic Outer Ring and lower bounded OR scale for the strange quark template fractalising the solar scale in 360=1010lps/Re=RSun(outer)/RSun(inner) at the 3 Fermi nuclear interaction scale
26.	pRe/180=ah/720eomec2	4.85x10-17 m* for 1.61x10-25 s* n=Re/360Rmax=3.03x10-43 CMBR=1.60x1032 Kelvin*	decay scale for the strong- and nuclear interactions in Quantum Chromo Dynamics or QCD
27.	Re/2p=e2/8p2eomec2=1/2,4000,000pc	4.42x10-16 m* for 1.48x10-24 s* n=Re/2pRmax=2.77x10-42 CMBR=3.04x1031 Kelvin*	me=(6000e)2 with eo=1/120pc=1/moc2
28.	Effective Proton Radius Rp=½Re	1.39x10-15 m* for 4.63x10-24 s* n=Re/2Rmax=8.69x10-42 CMBR=1.29x1031 Kelvin*	The KIR-KOR d-d*-s Wavequark oscillation for the decay of the neutron in beta decay in the Compton Proton-Neutron-Nucleon Lambda lnucleon=h/mcc=2.24x10-15 m* cosmogenetically and 1.30x10-15 m* for the present time for mcYnpresent
29.	Classical Electron Radius Re=ke2/mec2=e2/4peomec2=ah/2pmec	2.777..x10-15 m* for 9.27x10-24 s* n=Re/Rmax=1.74x10-41 CMBR=7.67x1030 Kelvin*	Re defines the upper bounded KOR Leptonic Radius in the wave quarkian template and characterizes the Weakon (W- for matter currents, W+ for antimatter currents and Zo for neutral mass currents) radius for the extent of the Weak Nuclear Interaction for the radioactive decay of quark-lepton conglomerations
30.	Compton Electron Lambda=le 2pRe=e2/2eomec2=ale=ah/mec	1.75x10-14 m* for 5.80x10-23 s* n=2pRe/Rmax=1.09x10-40 CMBR=1.94x1030 Kelvin*	Re=ale/2p=a2Rbohr1=a3/4pR∞ for the first Bohr Radius in the Hydrogen Atom Rbohr1=4peoh2/mee2 in Rydberg Energy R∞hc=½mec2a2 in electron orbit quantisation 1/l=R∞Z2(1/n2 - 1/[n+1]2)
31.	180Re/p=180e2/4p2eomec2	1.59x10-13 m* for 5.30x10-22 s* n=180Re/pRmax=9.96x10-40 CMBR=3.68x1029 Kelvin*	500x10-15/p=5x10-13/p
32.	360Re=1010lps=10-12=2p1010rps	10-12 m* for 3.33x10-21 s* n=360Re/Rmax=6.26x10-39 CMBR=9.28x1028 Kelvin*	Nuclear Compton Bound as the geometric mean for the electron as an inertial minimum mass: √(le.re)=√(le.Re/a)=(1/√(2p)).(h/mec)=9.5424x10-13 m*<10-12 m* for an effective electron mass me=(6000e)2 kg*
33.	lm/360	2.50x10-8 m* for 8.31x10-17 s* n=lm/360Rmax=1.56x10-34 CMBR=47 Trillion Trillion Kelvin*	A Nanobacterial Ribosome Scale for molecular DNA structure with 1 micron=1 mm*=10-6 m*=1mm*/1000
34.	plm/180	1.57x10-7 m* for 5.24x10-16 s* n=plm/180Rmax=9.83x10-34 CMBR=12 Trillion Trillion Kelvin*	A Mycoplasmic Microbial Scale
35.	lm/2p	1.43x10-6 m* for 4.78x10-15 s* n=lm/2pRmax=8.97x10-33 CMBR=2.24 Trillion Trillion Kelvein*	A near infrared biological scale for the micron scale of biological CELLS as Cosmological MicroCellular Units in so 1 micron to 100 microns
36.	lm=lpsc2=(81/25)109Re={1010/p}R'e R'e=9px10-16=1.017876Re	9x10-6 m* for 3.00x10-14 s* n=lm/Rmax=5.63x10-32 CMBR=565 Billion Trillion Kelvin*	The Infrared Unification-Scale in the UFoQR as 9 microns and the atmospheric window for water vapour
37.	2plm	5.66x10-5 m* for 1.89x10-13 s* n=2plm/Rmax=3.54x10-31 CMBR=142.3 Billion Trillion Kelvin*	A Infrared Biovital Scale
38.	180lm/p	5.16x10-4 m* for 1.72x10-12 s* n=180lm/pRmax=3.23x10-30 CMBR=27 Billion Trillion Kelvin*	A Superplasmic Microbial Scale
39.	360lm	3.24x10-3 m* for 1.08x10-11 s* n=360lm/Rmax=2.03x10-29 CMBR=7 Billion Trillion Kelvin*	A Millimeter Biological Scale for the largest microcellular selfconscious quantum units holofractally teleported to the astronomical unitary scale of stars and star systems as macrocellular selfconscious quantum units and encompassing all lifeforms in planetary and ecologically and environmentally evolved subsystems
40.	Bosonic LovePhoton=Rbosonic=lbosonic/2p Rbosonic=Rmax(nbosonic/1+nbosonic) Rbosonic={c/2pTps2}√(HoMo/275ns)	0.57 m* for 1.90x10-9 s* n=Rbosonic/Rmax=3.56x10-27 CMBR=tps=1.41x1020 Kelvin*	Bosonic Unification Scale Eps=kTps={3Ho3Moh3c2/440n3p7}¼ where the classical expansion of the cosmos begins in rendering the Eps Lovephoton statistically distributable from its previous string-bosonic unitary transformations and for a universe so 114 cm* across
41.	RylemE REylem=√(kTRe3/Gomc2)	1821.4 m* for 6.07x10-6 s* n=REylem/Rmax=1.14x10-23 CMBR=333 Million Billion Kelvin*	The Ylemic Protostar for the E-googol marker scale at 1.2 Billion Kelvin* and 10112 spacetime quanta in the Temperature-Displacement Scale of the 1st generation protostars setting the molecular gravitational bonding-fusion for planetesimals
42.	RChandrasekhar Rchandra=2GoMchandra/c2	7407.4 m* for 2.47x10-5 s* n=Rchandra/Rmax=4.64x10-23 CMBR=116 Million Billion Kelvin*	A characteristic Radius for a Neutron Star with the Chandrasekhar Mass as White Dwarf limit for electron degeneracy of 1.5 Solar Masses as the source frequency count fps=3x1030 Hz* and at ylemic temperature of Tchandra=(Gomc2Rchandra2/kRe3)=(4Go3mc2Mchandra2/kRe3c4)=20 Billion Kelvin*
43.	RylemF RFylem=√(kTRe3/Gomc2)	23,865 m* for 7.94x10-5 s* n=RFylem/Rmax=1.49x10-22 CMBR=48.4 Million Billion Kelvin*	The Ylemic Protostar for the F-googol marker scale at 206 Billion Kelvin* and 1.02x10103 spacetime quanta in the Temperature-Displacement Scale of the 1st generation protostars setting the maximal protostar VPE induction in a 19 second temperature gradient from 206-209 Billion Kelvin*

44.	RylemG RGylem=√(kTRe3/Gomc2)	24,038 m* for 7.99x10-5 s* n=RGylem/Rmax=1.50x10-22 CMBR=48.2 Million Billion Kelvin*	The Ylemic Protostar for the G-googol marker scale at 209 Billion Kelvin* and 9.68x10102 spacetime quanta in the Temperature-Displacement Scale of the 1st generation protostars setting the maximal protostar VPE induction in a 19 second temperature gradient from 206-209 Billion Kelvin*
45.	Rylemchaos from Luminosity and Chaos Constant Rchaosylem=Re(Mchandra/mc)⅓ L10D(n,T)=6p2R(n)2sT4=3HoMoc2/550n Feigenbaum-Delta=dF=3p/2=8V(r)torus/V(2r)sphere	40,164 m* for 1.34x10-4 s* n=Rchaosylem/Rmax=2.51x10-22 T4CMBR(n)=18.2(n+1)2/n3 CMBR=33 Million Billion Kelvin*	The Ylemic Protostar Maximum for spheroidal modulation from the proportionality for the critical density in rcritical=Mchandra/Vchandra=mc/2p2Re3x{3p/2}=3mc/4pRe3 and for a ylemic temperature Tylemmax=(Gomc2Rchandra2/kRe3=584 Billion Kelvin*and with the maximised Chaos Constant from a Sphere of radius 2r circumscribing a Horn Torus radius r at 0.134 ms*
46.	Rylemlum from Luminosity Rlumylem=(3p/2)⅓Re(Mchandra/mc)⅓	67,337 m* for 2.24x10-4 s* n=(3p/2)⅓Rlumylem/Rmax=4.21x10-22 CMBR=22 Million Billion Kelvin*	The Ylemic Protostar Maximum for toroidal modulation from the proportionality for the critical density in hypersphere volumar V4=2p2rps3 with V3=dV4/dR=d{½p2R4}/dR at 0.224 ms*
47.	Rylemnuccom from Nuclear Compressibility Rnuccomylem=Re{8Mchandra/mc}⅓	80,327 m* for 2.68x10-4 s* n=Rnuccomylem/Rmax=5.03x10-22 CMBR=19.4 Million Billion Kelvin*	The Ylemic Protostar Maximum for maximum nuclear compressibility in the protoproton radius Rp=½Re and so 8 Candrasekhar Masses
48.	Fermi Radius for the RHBVE=lHBVE/2p Rfermi=nfermiRmax/(nfermi+1)	826 km* for 2.754 ms* n={18.2/THBVE4}⅓ CMBR=3,396 Trillion Kelvin*	The Higgs/Chi Vacuum Saturation Energy (VPE or ZPE) at 298.453 GeV* or 4.79x10-8 J* or 5.33x10-25 kg* for the effective electroweak decoupling at THBVE={18.2(n+1)2/n3}¼
49.	Solar Inner Core Radius RSunInner=rpsrE/Re	1,968,666 m* for 6.56 ms* n=rpsrE/ReRmax=1.23x10-20 CMBR=1,768 Trillion Kelvin*	Solar Inner Scale from rE=(lps/2p){E}⅓ m*
50.	Solar Outer Disk Radius RSunOuter=360RSunInner	708,719,904 m* for 2.36 s* n=360psrE/ReRmax=4.44x10-18 CMBR=21.4 Trillion Kelvin*	Solar Outer Scale from 360rE=360(lps/2p){E}⅓ m*
51.	VPE Marker Scale for Rylemmax protostar Rmaxylem=nmaxylemRmax	1.36x1010 m* for 45.2 s* n=Rmaxylem/Rmax=8.50x10-17 CMBR=2.334 Billion Kelvin*	Transduction Embeddedment of the multiD protoversal seedling as ylemic protostar in a 0.75 - 1.2 - 4.8 minute* interval from maximum nuclear compressibility in the protonic effective radius Rp=½Re
52.	VPE Marker Scale for Rylem11D protostar Rylemmax-11Dtoroidal=Rylem11D=nylem11DRmax	2.17x1010 m* for 72.4 s* n=Rylem11D/Rmax=1.36x10-16 CMBR=1,640 Billion Kelvin*	Transduction Embeddedment of the multiD protoversal seedling as ylemic protostar in a ellipsoidally closed 11D electromagnetic and lightspeed invariant cyclic noninertial universe in a 0.75 - 1.2 - 4.8 minute* interval
53.	VPE Marker Scale for Rylem10D protostar Rylemmax-10Dspheroidal=Rylem10D=nylem10DRmax	8.63x1010 m* for 288 s* n=Rylem10D/Rmax=5.40x10-16 CMBR=584 Billion Kelvin*	Transduction Embeddedment of the multiD protoversal seedling as ylemic protostar in a hyperbolically open 10D asymptotic and mass parametric universe in a 0.75 - 1.2 - 4.8 minute* interval
54.	VPE-Marker Scale for Googol G rG=(lps/2p){G}⅓	3.39x1011 m* for 1130 s* n=rCBMR#G/Rmax=2.12x10-15 CMBR=209 Billion Kelvin*	The CMBR Scale for the GoogolG=67x3665=9.68x10102 space quanta and setting ylemic radius RylemG=24.04 km* so 18.8 minutes after the instanton for the primordial neutron decay. Asteroid Belt 2.2-3.3 AU=3.3-5x1011 m*
55.	VPE-Marker Scale for Googol F rF=(lps/2p){F}⅓	3.45x1011 m* for 1150 s* n=rCBMR#E/Rmax=2.16x10-15 CMBR=206 Billion Kelvin*	The CMBR Scale for the F-GoogolG=13x6656=1.02x10103 space quanta and setting ylemic radius RylemF=23.86 km* so 19.2 minutes after the instanton for the primordial radioactive beta decay of the neutron mc
56.	1/360Re=..	1012 m* for 55.6 minutes* n=1/360ReRmax=6.26x10-15 CMBR=93 Billion Kelvin*	Jupiter at 5.2 AU or 7.8x1011 m* and Saturn at 9.5 AU or 1.43x1012 m* xxxx
57.	p/180Re=...	6.28x1012 m* for 5.81 hours* n=p/180ReRmax=3.93x10-14 CMBR=23.4 Billion Kelvin*	px1015/500=(p/5)x1013 Galaxy Core Nuclear Scale for the Outer Region of a typical starsystem
58.	1/2pRe=...	5.73x1013 m* for 53.1 hours* n=1/2pReRmax=3.59x10-13 CMBR=4.45 Billion Kelvin*	Far Galaxy Core/Kuiper Scalexxxx
59.	VPE-Marker Scale for Googol E rE=(lps/2p){E}⅓	3.44x1014 m* for 13.25 civil days n=rCBMR#E/Rmax=2.15x10-12 CMBR=1.16 Billion Kelvin*	The CMBR Scale for the E-GoogolE=26x6561=1.01x10112 space quanta and setting ylemic radius RylemE=1.82 km* for planetesimal CMBR so 2 weeks after the timeinstanton of the Quantum Big Bang
60.	1/Re=...	3.60x1014 m* for 13.87 days* n=1/ReRmax=2.25x10-12 CMBR=1.12 Billion Kelvin*	Nuclear Gamma Source/Ylemic Modulation Scale xxx
61.	2p/Re=...	2.26x1015 m* for 87.5 days* n=2p/ReRmax=1.42x10-11 CMBR=282 Million Kelvin*	Intragalactic Core Linearisation Scale xxx
62.	180/pRe=...	2.06x1016 m* for 2.28 civil years* n=180/pReRmax=1.29x10-10 CMBR=54.0 Million Kelvin*	Galaxy Ring Scale for the Core/Oort Cloud Scale xxx
63.	360/Re=...	1.30x1017 m* for 13.74 years* n=360/ReRmax=8.14x10-10 CMBR=13.55 Million Kelvin*	Galaxy Ring Transition to Galaxy proper xxx
64.	lss/360=1/360lps	2.78x1019 m* for 2936 years* n=lss/360Rmax=1.74x10-7 CMBR=242,441 Kelvin*	A Hobbit/Dwarf Galactic Bound at so 3000 lightyears {Leo T} Near Galaxy Radius Scale
65.	plss/180=p/180lps	1.75x1020 m* for 18,400 years* n=plss/180Rmax=1.09x10-6 CMBR=61,228 Kelvin*	A typical smaller galactic radius at so 20,000 lightyears ...Galaxy KIR
66.	lss/2p=1/2plps	1.59x1021 m* for 168,000 years* n=lss/2pRmax=9.96x10-6 CMBR=11,650 Kelvin*	A larger galactic scales at so 170,000 lightyears Farhaloed Galaxy Radius Scale
67.	lss=1/lps=GoMHawking/pc2	1022 m* for 1.05 Million years* (My*) n=lss/Rmax=6.26x10-5 CMBR=2935 Kelvin*	Superstring Class HE(8x8) as the Cosmic Ray Knee SinkSource for G.WE.S Unification with AntiWormhole Kernel Bound as Galactic Molecular Core Bound at so 1 Million lightyears for the Recombination of the CMBR and for the phasechange in the universe from opaqueness to transparancy and its luminosity attenuation in the 1/e proportionality for then 388,879 lightyears as a decoupling time ndecoupling.
68.	2plss=2p/lps	6.28x1022 m* for 6.63 My* n=2plss/Rmax=3.93x10-4=0.0004 CMBR=740.1 Kelvin*	AntiWormhole Halo Bound as Galactic Molecular Group Bound and Upper bounding the largest galaxies intersecting the group scale {IC1101&Abell2029} at 6.3 Million lightyears}
69.	Rmax/360	4.44x1023 m* for 46.9 My* n=Rmax/360Rmax=1/360=0.002777.. CMBR=171 Kelvin*	Group Galaxy Radius at so 50 Million lightyears
70.	180lss/p=180/plps	5.73x1023 m* for 60.6 My* n=180lss/pRmax=0.00359 CMBR=141 Kelvin*	Galactic Cluster Scale for Haloes as KOR quark-lepton mapping at so 60 Million lightyears
71.	pRmax/180	2.79x1024 m* for 294.5 My* n=pRmax/180Rmax=p/180=0.01745 CMBR=43.4 Kelvin*	Group Galaxies at so 300 Million lightyears
72.	360lss=360/lps	3.60x1024 m* for 380 My* n=360lss/Rmax=0.0225 CMBR=36 Kelvin*	The Great Attractor and Supercluster Scale at so 380 Million lightyears
73.	Radiussarkar=2GoMo/c2	4.47x1024 m* for 473 My* n=2GoMo/Rmaxc2 =Mo/M∞=0.02803 CMBR=30.6 Kelvin*	The Supercluster Galactic Sarkar Scale radius of universal isotropy and homogeneity for Voids and Textures at so 470 Million lightyears and the Einstein Lambda as the cosmic hyperacceleration proportionality in 2Leinstein/Adebroglie=2GoMo/lps2Rmaxfps2 =2GoMo/Rmaxc2 =2x(2.015x1085)/1.438x1087 and as 10D asymptotic deceleration parameter qo=½Wo=Mo/2M∞
74.	Rmax/2p	2.54x1025 m* for 2.68 Billion y* (Gy*) n=Rmax/2pRmax=1/2p=0.159 CMBR=8.83 Kelvin*	Supercluster Scale at so 2.7 Billion lightyears
75.	Inversed ECosmic Ray Boson 1/RECR=2p/lECR=pA/ec	3.16x1025 m* for 3.34 Gy* n=1/RECRRmax=0.198 CMBR=7.62 Kelvin*	Superstring Class IIA as the Cosmic Ray Ankle SinkSource for G.WeS Unification at 3.3 Billion lightyears
76.	Rmax	1.60x1026 m* for 16.9 Gy* n=Rmax/Rmax=1 CMBR=2.92 Kelvin*	The 10D Boundary of the asymptotically open and observable universe mirrored in the closed 11D membraned universe at 17 Billion lightyears and extended in electromagnetic cyclicity to 19.11 Billion lightyears of observable dynamical data interaction
77.	R(n11D-present)=npresentRmax R(n10D-present)=npresentRmax/(1+npresent)	1.81x1026 m* for 19.11 Gy* n=npresent=1.132419321... CMBR=2.75 Kelvin*	The multivalued present universe scale in asymptotic hyperbolic open topology in 10D C-space and in spheroidal electromagnetic closure in 11D for Tpresent={18.2[npresent+1]2/npresent3}¼
78.	2pRmax	1.00x1027 m* for 106 Gy* n=2pRmax /Rmax=2p=6.2832 CMBR=1.40 Kelvin*	The unobservable spaceless 12D universe from 19.11 Billion lightyears at present n-cycletime coordinate in linetime to so 110 Billion lightyears
79.	180Rmax/p	9.15x1027 m* for 967 Gy* n=180/p=57.29578 CMBR=0.76 Kelvin*	The space undefined not yet VPE-inducted omniverse at so 970 Billion lightyears as 1 Radianx16.9 Billion lightyears
80.	Recharge Radius Rrecharge=nrechargeRmax rpsYnrecharge=Rmax	3.75x1028 m* for 3,957 Gy* n=nrecharge=ln[Rmax/rps]/ln[Y] ~ 234.472 CMBR=0.53 Kelvin*	The Cyclic Universe, so 'rebangs' itself every 4 Trillion years or so to ensure its continuation of selfexploration and by interdimensional civilisations defined in multiverses, each of which is required to be seeded in a prototypical template universe as mirror holofractal of itself.
81.	360Rmax	5.75x1028 m* for 6,075 Gy* n=360Rmax/Rmax=360 CMBR=0.47 Kelvin*	The limit of the SPACETIME defined Omniverse in present definition by the Cosmic LogosTwin at so 6 Trillion lightyears
82.	Reciprocated XL-GUT Boson 1/RXL=2pamps/eh	9.52x1030 m* for 106 Gy* n=1/RXLRmax=59,587 CMBR=0.13 Kelvin*	Superstring Class HO(32) for G.WES Unification at so 1 Million Billion or 1000 Trillion lightyears
83.	Inversed Monopole Radius 1/Rmonopole=2p/lmonopole	1.36x1032 m* for 14x106 Gy* n=1/RmonopoleRmax=851,237 CMBR=0.068 Kelvin*	Superstring Class IIB as the Cosmic Ray Toe SinkSource for gWeS Unification at so 14 Million Billion lightyears
84.	The Inversed Planck Length 1/Lplanck=√(2pc3/Goh)	4.78x1034 m* for 5x109 Gy* n=1/LplanckRmax=299.2x106 CMBR=0.016 Kelvin*	Modular dual Superstring Class I for GWES Unification at 5 Million Trillion lightyears
85.	Inversed PLO 1/(Lplanck.√Alpha)=1/(Rplanck.√a)	5.62x1035 m* for 6x1010 Gy* n=1/√aLplanckRmax=3.52x109 CMBR=0.0085 Kelvin*	The Antiinflationary Planck Length Bounce as the timewarped start of the Supermembrane epoch at 60 Million Trillion lightyears
86.	Inversed NullRadius for Inversed NullTime 1/tGenesis=Vdebroglie/Rmax=c/lps=fps=Ho/nps 1/LGenesis=c.MASS/h=Rmax/lpsc=1/nps.c=Rmax/lpsc	5.33x1039 m* for 6x1014 Gy* n=1/lpsc=1/x10-14=3.33..x1013 CMBR=0.00086 Kelvin*	The limit of the TIMESPACE defined Omniverse in present definition by the Cosmic LogosTwin at so 560 Billion Trillion lightyears

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/universe.html


It is well known, that the Radius of Curvature in the Field Equations of General Relativity relates to the Energy-Mass Tensor in the form of the critical density r_critical = 3H_o²/8pG and the Hubble Constant H_o as the square of frequency or alternatively as the time differential of frequency df/dt as a cosmically applicable angular acceleration independent on the radial displacement.

The scientific nomenclature (language) then describes this curved space in differential equations relating the positions of the 'points' in both space and time in a 4-dimensional description called Riemannian Tensor Space or similar.
This then leads mathematically, to the formulation of General Relativity in Einstein's field Equations:

for the Einstein-Riemann tensor

​

and is built upon ten so-called nonlinear coupled hyperbolic-elliptic partial differential equations, which needless to say, are mathematically rather complex and often cannot be solved analytically without simplifying the geometries of the parametric constituents (say objects interacting in so called tensor-fields of stress-energy {T_μν} and curvatures in the Riemann-Einstein tensor {G_μν}, either changing the volume in reduction Ricci tensor {R_ij} with scalar curvature R as {Rg_μν} for the metric tensor {g_μν} or keeping the volume of considered space invariant to volume change in a Tidal Weyl tensor {R_μν}).

The Einstein-Riemann tensor then relates Curvature Radius R to the Energy-Mass tensor E=Mc² via the critical density as 8pG/c⁴=3H_o²V_criticalM_criticalc²/M_criticalc⁴ = 3H_o²V_critical/c² = 3V_critical/R² as Curvature Radius R by the Hubble Law applicable say to a nodal Hubble Constant H_o = c/R_Hubble.

The cosmological field equations then can be expressed as the square of the nodal Hubble Constant and inclusive of a 'dark energy' terms often identified with the Cosmological Constant of Albert Einstein, here denoted L_Einstein.

Substituting the Einstein Lambda with the time differential for the square of nodal Hubble frequency as the angular acceleration acting on a quantized volume of space however; naturally and universally replaces the enigma of the 'dark energy' with a space inherent angular acceleration component, which can be identified as the 'universal consciousness quantum' directly from the standard cosmology itself.

The field equations so can be generalised in a parametrization of the Hubble Constant assuming a cyclic form, oscillating between a minimum and maximum value given by H_o=dn/dt for cycletime n=H_ot and where then time t is the 4-vector timespace of Minkowski lightpath x=ct.

The Einstein Lambda then becomes then the energy-acceleration difference between the baryonic mass content of the universe and an inherent mass energy related to the initial condition of the oscillation parameters for the nodal Hubble Constant.

L_Einstein = G_oM_o/R(n)² - 2cH_o/(n+1)³ = Cosmological Acceleration - Intrinsic Universal Milgröm Deceleration as: g_mnL = 8pG/c⁴ T_mn - G_mn

then becomes G_mn + g_mnL = 8pG/c⁴ T_mn and restated in a mass independent form for an encompassment of the curvature finestructures.






THE UNIVERSAL COSMIC DISPLACEMENT SCALING FOR GENERALISED CURVATURE RADII UNDER MODULAR BRANE DUALITY E_psE_ss

The Cosmic Wavefunction is the following Differential Equation:

dB/dT + αB(n) = 0; α=alpha being the Electromagnetic Finestructure as the probability of light-matter interaction (~1/137).

This has a solution: B(n) = B_o.exp^-α.T(n);
B_o=2e/hA from QR boundary conditions defining:

T(n)=n(n+1) as the Feynman Path-Summation of particular histories under the pentagonal supersymmetry given in the identity:

XY=X+Y=-1=i²=exp[iπ] and lim [n→X]{T(n)}=1

This allows the Normalisation of the Y² wavefunction to sum to unity in

B(n)=2e/hA).exp^-α.n(n+1) with Functional Riemann Bound FRB=-½, centred on the interval [Y,...-1,...-X,...-½,...(X-1),...0,...X].

Interval [Y,-1] sets F-Space; interval [-1,0] sets M-Space with uncertainty interval [-X,(X-1)] and interval [0,n) sets the C-Space, encompassing OmniSpace.

n<0 is imaginary as real reflection of real n>0 of the C-Space, metrically defined at the coordinate n=0 mapping n=n_ps, which is the instanton t_ps=f_ss=1/f_ps.

Cycletime n is defined in GR as dimensionless Tau-Time in curvature radius R_c=c.dτ/dt for the pathlength of x=ct and become dn/dt=H_o, n=H_ot in QR, with H_o the nodal Hubble Constant defined in c=H_oR_max=λ_ps.f_ps

The Feynman Path so sums both negative and positive integers as:
-n......-3...-2...-1...0...1...2...3......n =T(n) in absolute value to double the infinities as the entropy reversal of lightpath x=c.t=(-c)(-t) in the Möbius Property of a supermembraned omniverse in 12 linearised dimensions.

Cantor Cardinality Aleph-Null is thus Unitised in Aleph-All, counting infinities as if they were integers of the Feynman Path.

This allows the Feynman interpretation of Quantum Mechanics as alternative to the formulations of Schrödinger (fermions ½ quantum spin) and Klein-Gordon (bosons with integral quantum spin) as timeindependent and timedependent (free particle form inconsistent with SR in Schrödinger in 1st order t & 2nd order x), formulations respectively.

Abstract TIME in F-Space is defined as N=Minimum Radius/Maximum Radius=l_ps/R_max and so allows the definition of Inverse Time as FREQUENCY parameter physicalising this TIME ABSTRACTION.
This then defines the GENESIS BOSON as the Particle of creation using the fundamental constants of Creation from the SE_ps algorithms. Those constants are then used inductively in the future by any sufficiently mentally evolved and cosmically selfaware civilisation to construct selfconsistent and logical measurement systems to rediscover their own nature and origins in a SELFINDUCTION of physical consciousness of their own cocreated Genesis in a perceived timearrow flowing apparently from the Past to the Present to the Future.
In practical terms, this engages the measurement and analysis of two fundamental constants, namely the speed of light 'c' and the Planckian quantum constant 'h' to relate the Quantum as a micro energy selfstate (eigenvalue) to what is termed the classical physics of macro selfstates exemplified in the theoretical physics of Newton, Maxwell and Einstein in scientific models of reality and encompassing Mechanics, Electromagnetism and the Relativities respectively. The dimensional analysis of 'hc' as a EnergyxDisplacement parameter suffices to calibrate the unitary mensuration parameters for Mass, Displacement and Time, say in the Terran System International or SI-system of measurements of fundamental quantities, say here the kilogram, the meter and the second respectively. The other elementary units ain the SI-system are derived from the algorithmic masterconstant set and comprise the Kelvin for Temperature as kinetic measure of the quantum states, the Ampere and Coulomb for electric current, the mole for molarity , the candela for luminosity with the sterradian an additional geometrized unit for angular measures.

The GENESIS Boson then becomes the parametric initialisation of creation in the abstract labelings of:
ENERGY=k.TEMPERATURE=h.FREQUENCY=h/TIME=MASS.c² and using the SE_ps-MasterConstant Set: {4; 6; 7; L_o=1/[6x10¹⁵]; c²=9x10¹⁶; 11; h=1/[15x10³²]; A=14x15²⁴; k=1/[15x16¹⁸]; 26x65⁶¹} in reverse order and with arbitrary symbols as shown becoming associated with those 'master constants'.

Particularly then: ENERGY=hR_max/l_ps with MASS=hR_max/l_psc²=0.01183463299 and TEMPERATURE=hR_max/kl_ps=7.544808988..x10³⁷ and FREQUENCY=R_max/l_ps=1.59767545..x10⁴⁸

This becomes the 'Atomic-Mass-Unit' in 12D-F-Space in using one protonucleon m_c=Alpha⁹L_planck for every one of the 12 monopolar current loops in the Unified Field of Quantum Relativity (UFoQR).
A first E_ps-Coefficient in the Expansion Series of the fundamental priciples from the SE_ps algorithm then crystallizes the 'Counter for matter' in Avogadro's Constant for Molarity:
MASS(20/33)/12m_c = N_avogadro = 6.02242143x10²³ 1/mol*

N=n_ps=l_ps/R_max in REAL Time relative to the Quantum Big Bang to be created following the string epoch and relating to IMAGINARY TIME relative to this selfsame creation in the Cosmogony of the Genesis Boson of the Abba-Baab 11-dimensional supermembrane. This UNREAL Quantum Relative Time then is the Hubble-FREQUENCY H_o=c/R_max in proportionality to the Source Frequency of the LOVE PHOTON f_ps=c/l_ps in the expression H_oR_max=c=l_ps.f_ps

N then becomes the NULLTIME for the initialisation of the string/supermembrane-serpent modular duality in the De Broglie phasespeed initialisation, beginning with the Oscillation (or Bounce) of the Planck-Length and specifies the Instantenuity of NOW-Cycle TIME n_ps=H_ot_ps=H_o/t_ss as the TIME INSTANTON t_ps=1/f_ps=f_ss and the SPACE INFLATON R_max=R_Hubble=c/H_o with de Broglie Phasespeed V_debroglie=R_max.f_ps=R_max.c/l_ps=c/n_ps as the 'Heartbeat of the Cosmic Mother' Frequency of the Oscillating Cosmos in the Cosmology of the dragons and in the IMAGINARY F-Space Time of NH_o generalised in the REAL TIME n=H_ot for any time in the evolving Cosmology and minimised in n_ps=H_ot_ps.

L(n_ps,T(n_ps)=6π²l_ps².σ.T⁴=2.6711043034x10⁹⁶ Watts*, where σ=Stefan's Constant=2π⁵k⁴/15h³c² and as a product of the defined 'master constants' k, h, c², π and 'e'.

This comes directly from the General Relativity Metric for the Universe with mass M_o and minimum Hubble Frequency H_o.

L(n,T)=3H_o²M_o.c²/550n and for Temperature T(n_ps)
T(n_ps)=2.93515511x10³⁶ Kelvin*.

You have here defined the 'false vacuum' and the Temperature Gradient, which CAUSED the Big Bang on PHYSICAL GROUNDS.
The metaphysical ground is the symmetry breaking from the source parity violation described in a previous post.

T(n_ps) of the singularity is 0.0389 or 3.89% of the pre-singularity.

So the POTENTIAL Temperature manifests as 3.89% in the KINETIC Temperature:
TEMPERATURE/T(n_ps)=7.544808988..x10³⁷/2.93515511x10³⁶=25.705=1/0.03890...

Now reducing the timeinstanton t_ps=n_ps/H_o of 3.33x10^-31 seconds by the Temperature Gradient in the Luminosity Function gives you the scalar Higgs Potential Maximum at a pre-singularity time of t_HiggsPE=t_ps.T(n_ps)/TEMPERATURE=1.297x10^-32 seconds.

This then EXTRAPOLATES the Big Bang singularity backwards in Time to harmonise the equations and to establish the 'driving force of the vacuum' as POTENTIAL scalar Higgs Temperature Field.
All the further evolvement of the universe so becomes a function of Temperature and not of mass.
The next big phasetransition is the attunement of the BOSONIC UNIFICATION, namely the 'singularity' temperature T_ps=1.41x10²⁰ K with the Luminosity function.
This occurs at a normal time of 1.9 nanoseconds into the cosmology.

It is then that the universe as a unity has this temperature and so allows BOSONIC differentiation between particles. The INDIVIDUATED PHOTON of the mass was born then and not before, as the entire universe was a PHOTON as a macroquantised superstring up to then.
The size of the universe at that time was that of being 1.14 metres across.
Next came the electroweak symmetry breaking at 1/365 seconds and at a temperature of so 10¹⁵ Kelvin* and so it continued.

The lower dimensional lightpath x=ct in lightspeed invariance c=lf so becomes modular dualised in the higher dimensional lightpath of the tachyonic de Broglie Inflaton-Instanton V_debroglie=c/n_ps

NEWTON'S GRAVITATIONAL CONSTANT MEASUREMENTS


The speed of light 'c' has been measured to an accuracy of 8 decimal places and Planck's Constant 'h' is known with an error not exceeding one part per million.
This is not so for Newton's Gravitational Constant 'Big G'.
The National Bureau of Standards (NBS) in Gaithersburg, Maryland, US began measuring 'G' in the 1930's to establish the Luther-Towler-Number LTN=6.67259x10^-11 G-units (m³/kg.s²).
So it stood until 1994, when the renowned PTB in Braunschweig, Germany's Standards Laboratory measured G much higher, differing in the 3rd decimal place.
Then New Zealand's Measurements Standard Laboratory published avalue significantly below the LTN and the University of Wuppertal derived a value in between the NZ one and the LTN.
Notwithstanding the ever improving technological advances and measuring techniques; using torsion pendulums, tungsten cylinders or suspended or accelerating testmasses; 'Big G' has proven to be intractable to conformity.
Two of the latest measurements are 6.67327x10^-11 and 6.6742(10)x10^-11 G-units and values by no means definitive.

What is going on?
Shifting heavy objects in the vicinity of the test apparatus seems to influence the atomic structure of the testmasses, irrespective of the isolated environment created for the testing conditions.
The following treatise shall resolve the conundrum and illustrate the unruly behaviour of 'G' as a consequence of the initial boundary conditions for the universe's subsequent evolvement.
It shall indicate that even a 'massless' universe would contain a diminished G-component as the electric permittivity of a massless macroquantised (Hawking) BlackHole and that the present dilemma derives from a finestructure of the nucleonic constituents, which, by definition, must comprise the testmasses.
A precise measurement so would rely on an unambiguous calculation for two neutronic restmasses, a condition which we shall show to be unachievable, because of the nature and interrelationship between the parameters of inertial mass and those of electromagnetic charges.
Now the ratio between the electromagnetic- and the gravitational interaction strengths is measured and of the order of alpha/G-alpha~10^-39 and one can actually define the G-alpha as a function of alpha and as G-alpha=alpha¹⁸, using the string parameters of Quantum Relativity.

This defines the minimum neutronmass m_c explicitely as: m_c=√{ke².alpha¹⁷/G_o}.

In string parameters, the unification condition for the interactions at the stringenergy scale demands kG_o=1 for a m_c=[e/G_o].alpha^8.5=9.9247246..x10^-28 kg*. This represents so 58% of the neutron (or nucleon) mass as measured today and is the actual minimum neutron mass.
Now the truly CONSTANT GM² structure in say Newton's Law, is given by the product G_om_c²=1.094446..x10^-64 Nm².

This however is finestructured in introducing a maximum neutron mass given in a unification condition, known as the Euler Identity: X+Y=XY=-1=i²=℮^iπ and applying the absolute value of unitised 1.
We write: G_om_c²={G_oX^n+k}.{m_cYⁿ}.{m_cY^k}=G_m.m_nmax.m_nmin and where G_m is the actual G value as measured and which has proved difficult to do so in the laboratories. So the applied G value is: G_m(n)=G_o.X^n+k and where n is a cycletime n=H_ot for a nodal universe with dn/dt=H_o the nodal Hubble Constant H_o=c/R_max for a Hubble radius R_max.

The applied G_m so ALWAYS engages a maximised neutron mass (calculated as {m_cYⁿ}~ 1.7115x10^-27 kg in string parameters for a present cycletime coordinate n_p=1.1324..) AND a minimised neutron mass (calculated as {m_cY^k}). The value of k is so determinative for G_m and differs over the evolution of the universe with respect to cycletime n and as finestructured for an AVERAGE G-value (G_av) obtained in using the geometric mean for the neutron masses in extremum (minmax productation).

One can easily calculate G_av=G_o.Xⁿ=6.44317..x10^-11 G-units for a geometric neutron mass product of m_nmax.m_nmin=m_c².Yⁿ =1.69861...x10^-54 kg² for the constancy condition of G_om_c²=1.094446..x10^-64 Nm² and omitting the k-factorisation. But this averaged G value applies for a massless universe under the initial unification condition of the finestructures described in G_ok=1 or G_o=4πε_o (using Stoney Units for the Planck-Scaling of the chargequantum e).

So BECAUSE an initial mass seedling M_o={m_c.m_P/m_e}√E ~ 1.8137..x10⁵¹ kg* became transformed in the de Broglie phase inflation from its preinertial state as gravitational mass into the state of inertia (this is called the Big Bang for a spacetime quanta counter E); this 'Principle of Equivalence' introduced the hitherto massless 'ylemic' 'neutron bosons' as dineutronic states, which under the Higgs mechanism became fermionic and established the mass seedling M_o as the primordial neutron matter, then decaying via beta minus decay into the observed matter in the universe (there was no antimatter).

Subsequently the EMERGENCE of inertial mass under c-invariance also introduced a finestructure for 'G' as described in the above. One can determine the value of k from finestructuring the critical masses M_o, M_∞ and M_Hawking as boundary Black Hole masses coupled to the quantum minmax neutron masses.
For curvature radius R_max and the critical density ρ_c=M_∞/V_max=3H_o²/8πG_o the Schwarzschild metric gives M_∞=R_max.c²/2G_o=c³/2G_oH_o= ~ 6.47058..x10⁵² kg*.

For the curvature radius R_Sarkar=2G_oM_o/c², we have the deceleration parameter q_o=½Ω_o=M_o/2M_∞=2G_oH_oM_o/c³ ~0.014015... and which so determines the 'missing mass' in the universe to be a consequence of the initial boundary conditions set by the de Broglie inflation and the overall Black Hole evolution of the stringed parameters.

From the minimum Planck Oscillator E_Po=½hf_P=½m_Pc²: ½M_PT_P={1/8p}M_PT_P.4p=H(awking)M(odulus)=HM
HM=hc³/4pG_ok=M_MinT_Max=|c²/4p²|.M_Max.T_ss=M_o.T_o=M_∞.T_∞ and for M_Max=4p²kHM/c²hf_ss = pc/f_ssG_o =2.5446..x10⁴⁹ kg*

The Mass-Temperature modulus of Stephen Hawking determines M_Hawking=M_Max/4p for a boundary condition of maximised Black Hole Mass for a minimised Black Hole Temperature in M_HawkingT_Hawking= HM = 9.131793821x10²³ (kg.K)* for (1/4π).HM = hc³/16π²G_ok and k the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.

The relationship is given in superstring (Planck) parameters by
M_min.T_max=|c/2π|².M_max.T_min=hc³/4πG_ok = (4π/8π)m_P.T_P and T_P the Planck Temperature T_P=m_P.c²/k.

{(M_Hawking,T_Hawking);(M_o),T_o);(M_∞,T_∞)} = {(2.03x10⁴⁸ kg*,4.52x10^-25K*);(1.81x10⁵¹ kg*,5.03x10^-28 K*);(6.47x10⁵² kg*,1.41x10^-29 K*)}

The Dragon Braned Frequency Modulation f_ps.f_ss = 1 = Unity
A Primary SourceSink Eps in modular membrane duality with a Secondary SinkSource Ess
Energy Prime SourceSink as White Hole|Quantum Entanglement Modular Duality|Energy Prime SinkSource as Black Hole


Curvature Radius R_C = l/2π = c/2πf = c/w

Curvature Area A_{Black Hole} = A _BH = 4πR_C² = 4π|c/2π|².1/f² = 4π|c/2π|².1/f_psf_ss = |c²/π| for f_ps.f_ss = 1



For a 3D Volume (4π/3)R³, the 2D Area or Surface becomes dV/dR=4πR² and reducing to a 1D Line Integral of dA/dR=8πR=4.(2πR) as 4 times the perimeter of a circle of radius R and relating the Black Hole surface quantum as 4 Planck Areas L_P² in its Entropy S_BH =A_BH/4L_P² =πc³A_BH/2G_oh.

As the Unified Field of Quantum Relativity spans 1440° or 8π radians, the quantization of the Information located on the surface area of a Black Hole so introduces the factor of 4 in its formulation.

​

This sets the Hawking-Gibbons thermodynamic temperature minima for T_o=constant/M_o ~ 5.03..x10^-28 K* and T_∞=constant/M_∞ ~ 1.41..x10^-29 K*.
As the minimum macro Black Hole has Schwarzschild metric λ_min/2π=2G_oM_min/c² for T_max=hf_max/k=hc/λ_mink; and modular duality requires the unification condition for the minimum curvature to relate to a maximum curvature in R_min=λ_min/2π=1/R_max or R_max=2πλ_max, as R_min.R_max=1.

In gauge bosonic string parameters, this modular duality then is given in E_max=hc/λ_min=m_max.c²=kT_max and E_min=hc/λ_max=m_min.c²=kT_min and in the invariance of the lightspeed parameter c as c=f_maxλ_min=1/f_minλ_max or the dimensionless unification conditions:
E_max.E_min=h² and E_max/E_min=f_max²=1/f_min²={c/λ_min}²={c/2πR_min}²={cR_max/2π}²={cλ_max}².

This gives a proportionality: m_max.T_min=m_min.T_max for the gauges, which is however modified in the dimensionless factor {c/2π}² for the Black Hole masses for the given temperatures, as bosonic masses describe bosonic Black Holes via E=kT and not the cosmological Black Holes of the Schwarzschild metric.

The c-invariance so uses modular duality in the quantum Black Hole limit
c=f_maxλ_min=2πf_maxR_min for f_min=c/λ_max=c/2πR_max as an unmodulated frequency in T_min=E_min/k=hc/2πkR_max=hc.λ_min/4π²k=3.58856...x10^-26 K* and a temperature above the Hawking-Gibbons limit as required.

This differs in a factor {2π/c}² from the lightspeed inversion in T_min=hf_min/k and so 1.574x10^-41 K*, which violates the Hawking-Gibbons boundaries in NOT using the modular duality and with f_min=1/f_max in frequency units and NOT inverted time units.

And so M_min.T_max=hc³/4πG_ok =½m_P.T_P=M_Hawking.kc².T_ss/π and the Hawking Mass is determined as M_max=4πM_Hawking=πc²λ_max/G_o ~ 2.545x10⁴⁹ kg*.

From the Black Hole 'Black Body Radiator' Temperature Spectra and Stefan's Constant s=2π⁵k⁴/15h³c² (J/s.m²K⁴)*

Power P_BH=4πR_BH²sT_BH⁴ = M_BHc²/t_{Hawking Evaporation} and with T_BH⁴=HM/M_BH⁴ - (A 3D kinetic mass-energy distribution uses M_BHc²/3 from PV=nkT=⅓Nmv²)

t_Hawking = c⁶/16πsG_o²M_BHT_BH⁴ = 30,720π²G_o²M_BH³/hc⁴ = 15,360π.t_P for L_P = G_oM_P/c² = ct_P = c√{G_oh/2πc⁵}

t_HM = 120G_o²M_BH³/π²hc⁴ = t_Hawking/{4π}⁴ = 60/π³.t_{P = 1.935..tP ~ 2tP (The actual Black Hole 'Evaporation Time' as a 'Doubling Cyclicity' for the cosmic evolution.)}

For M_∞ and M_o and M_Hawking, the Hawking Evaporation times (without the Mother-Daughter BH Recharging derived following), then are: 2.32x10¹²⁵ s* or 7.4x10¹¹⁷ years and 1.66x10¹³⁴ s* or 5.3x10¹²⁶ years and 7.46x10¹³⁸ s* or 2.4x10¹³¹ years respectively.


Using the λ_minλ_max=1 wavelength modulation in the T-duality of λ_min=2πR_min=1/λ_max=2π/R_max, we can see, that this modulation closely approximates the geometric mean of the seedling mass in {1/4π}M_o²/2M_∞.M_Max=M_o²/8π.M_∞.M_Hawking=3.2895..x10¹⁰²/3.2931..x10¹⁰² ~ 0.9989...

This also circumscribes the actual to critical density ratio in the omega of the general relativistic treatment of the cosmologies.
Now recall our applied G value in G_m(n)=G_o.^_Xn+k and apply our just derived Black Hole Mass modulation coupled to that of the quantum micromasses.

We had: G_om_c²={G_oX^n+k}.{m_cYⁿ}.{m_cY^k}=G_m.m_nmax.m_nmin and where G_m is the actual G value as measured and which has proved difficult to do so in the laboratories.
G_m(n)=G_o.X^n+k=G_om_c²/m_nmax.m_nmin=G_om_c²/({m_cYⁿ}{m_nmin}) and where we have m_nmin=m_cY^k} for the unknown value of k.

So G_m(n)=G_o.X^n+k=G_oXⁿ[m_c/m_nmin]=G_o{m_c²/m_cYⁿ}.{M_o²/8π.M_∞.M_Hawking.m_av}} and where now {m_nmin}={m_cY^k}={8π.M_∞.M_Hawking.m_av/M_o²}=1.0011..m_av.
m_av={M_o²/8π.M_∞.M_Hawking}{m_nmin}={M_o²/8π.M_∞.M_Hawking}{m_cY^k}=0.9989..{m_cY^k} and obviously represents a REDUCED minimum mass m_nmin=m_cY^k.

But the product of maximum and 'new' minimum now allows an actual finetuning to a MEASURED nucleon mass m_N by: m_N² = m_avYⁿ.m_cYⁿ=m_av.m_nmax.Yⁿ.

So substituting for m_av in our G_m expression, will now give the formulation:
G_m(n)=G_o.X^n+k=G_oXⁿ[m_c/m_nmin]=G_o{m_c²/m_cYⁿ}.{M_o²/8π.M_∞.M_Hawking.m_av}
G_m(n)=G_o.X^n+k=G_oXⁿ[m_c/m_nmin]=G_o{m_c²/m_cYⁿ}.{M_o²/8π.M_∞.M_Hawking}{m_cY²ⁿ/m_N²}
G_m(n)=G_o.{m_c²/m_N²}{M_o²/8π.M_∞.M_Hawking}Yⁿ=G_o.Xⁿ

The average nucleon mass m_N is upper bounded in the neutron mass and lower bounded in the proton mass, their difference being an effect of their nucleonic quark content, differing in the up-down transition and energy level.

For a Neutron Restmass of: m_n=1.680717x10^-27 kg* (941.6036 MeV*) the substitution (and using calibrations m=0.9983318783m*; s=0.9990230094s*; kg=0.99626135kg* and C=0.997296076C* gives G(n_p)=6.678764x10^-11 (m³/kgs²) and a perturbation corrected m_n=1.681100563x10^-27 kg* (941.818626 MeV*) gives:
G(n_p)=6.675715x10^-11 (m³/kgs²).

The perturbation upper limit is given in the m_n=1.681335x10^-27 kg* (941.9506 MeV*) and gives:
G(n_p)=6.6738445x10^-11 (m³/kgs²). The average for the last two values then approximates as a 'best fit' for:
G_m(n_p)=6.6747798x10^-11 (m³/kgs²).

This is a best-fit approximation, considering the uncharged nature ofthe testmasses.
This then gives the value of k from G_m(n)=G_o.X^n+k as k=ln(G_mYⁿ/G_o)/lnX and which calculates as k= -0.073387..

Two protons (m_p=1.6789x10^-27 kg* (940.56 MeV*) would give:
G(n_p)=6.6936x10^-11 (m³/kgs²) and a proton-neutron pair would yield: G(n_p)=6.6791x10^-11 (m³/kgs²); both of the latter values unsuitable because of the electrocharges increasing the intra-quarkian Magnetocharge coupling between the two mesonic rings of the neutron and the single mesonic ring in the proton's down- or KIR-quark.
The best approximation for 'Big G' hence depends on an accurate determination for the neutron's inertial mass, only fixed as the base nucleon minimum mass at the birth of the universe. A fluctuating Neutron mass would also result in deviations in 'G' independent upon the sensitivity of the measuring equipment. The inducted mass difference in the protonic-and neutronic restmasses, derives from the Higgs-Restmass-Scale and can be stated in a first approximation as the groundstate.
Basic nucleon restmass is m_c=√Omega.m_P=9.9247245x10^-28 kg*.

(Here Omega is a gauge string factor coupling in the fundamental force interactions as:
Cuberoot(Alpha):Alpha:Cuberoot(Omega):Omega and for Omega=G-alpha.)
KKK-Kernelmass=Up/Down-HiggsLevel=3x319.62 MeV*=958.857 MeV*, usingthe Kernel-Ring and Family-Coupling Constants.

Subtracting the Ring-VPE (3L) gives the basic nucleonic K-State as 939.642 MeV*. This includes the electronic perturbation.

For the Proton,one adds one (K-IR-Transition energy) and for theNeutron one doubles this to reflect the up-down-quark differential.

Proton m_p=u.d.u=K.KIR.K=(939.6420+1.5013-0.5205)MeV*=940.6228 MeV*. Neutron m_n=d.u.d=KIR.K.KIR=(939.6420+3.0026-1.0410)MeV*=941.6036 MeV*.

This is the groundstate from the Higgs-Restmass-Induction-Mechanismand reflects the quarkian geometry as being responsible for theinertial mass differential between the two elementary nucleons. All groundstate elementary particle masses are computed from theHiggs-Scale and then become subject to various finestructures. Overall, the MEASURED gravitational constant 'G' can be said to be decreasing over time.

The ratio given in k is G_mYⁿ/G_o~0.60073... and so the present G-constant is about 60% of the one at the Planck Scale.
G decreases nonlinearly, but at a present rate of 0.60073/19.11x10⁹ per year, which calculates as 3.143..x10^-11 G-units per year.

Generally using the exponential series expansion, one can indicate the change in G.
For X^n+k=z=exp[(n+k)lnX] by (n+k)lnX=lnz for the value Z=(n+k)lnX=-0.481212(n+k); z transforms in exponential expansion e^x=1+x+x²/2!+x³/3!+x⁴/4!+...

For a function f(n)=z=G_m(n)/G_o=X^n+k
f(n)=1-(0.481.)(n+k)+(0.231.)(n+k)²/2-(0.111.)(n+k)³/6+(0.053.)(n+k)⁴/24-...+...

For 4th order with n=1.1324.. and k=0 (for a purely electromagnetic universe of zero mass content where the curvature derives from the gravitational mass equivalent of the Equivalence Principle of General Relativity):
f(1.1324.)=1-0.545+0.148-0.027+0.004-...+...~0.580

So the gravitational G_m(1.1324)=(0.580)G_o=G_o.X^1.1324~6.444x10^-11 (m³/kgs²).
At timeinstantenuity of the Quantum Big Bang, n=n_ps=λ_ps/R_max=6.2591x10^-49~0
Then G_BigBang=G_oX^n_ps=G_o (to 50 decimal places distinguishing the timeinstanton from the Nulltime as the Planck-Time transform).

For our previously calculated k=ln(G_mYⁿ/G_o)/lnX and which calculates as k= -0.073387..
f(n)=1-(0.481.)(n+k)+(0.231.)(n+k)²/2-(0.111.)(n+k)³/6+(0.053.)(n+k)⁴/24-...+...
for f(1.1324)=1-0.509+0.129-0.0220+0.0028-...+...~0.601 to fourth order approximation.

Hence, the gravitational constant assumes a value of about 61% of its Big Bang initialisation and calculates as 6.675x10^-11 G-units for a present cycletime n_present=H_ot_present=1.1324...

The introduction of the mass seed coupling between the macroquantum M_o and the microquantum m_c=m_Palpha⁹ (from the gravitational finestructure unification) PERTURBS the 'purely electromagnetic' cosmology in the perturbation factor k and increases the purely electromagnetic G_memr in the black hole physics described.

So gravity appears stronger when one 'looks back in time' or analyses cosmological objects at large distances. The expansion parameter (a) in the Friedmann-Einstein standard cosmology can be rewritten as a curvature ratio R(n)/R_max={n/(n+1)} and describes the asymptotic universe in say 10 dimensions evolving under the inertial parameters of the c-invariance. This 'lower dimensional universe' is open and expands under hyperbolic curvature under the deceleration parameter q_o=½Ω_o=M_o/2M_∞=2G_oH_oM_o/c³ ~0.014015... This open universe is bounded in the 'standing wave' of the Hubble Oscillation of the 11D and 'higher dimensional universe'.

The boundary is given in the omega of the 'missing mass' of the volumes, which differ in a factor of V₁₁/V₁₀=n³_Rmax³/(n/(n+1))³R_max³=(n+1)³ as the critical density ratio and as n_Rmax³/(n/(n+1))³R_max³=(n+1)³/n²=DIM-Factor (and which assumes its minimum for one complete oscillation for n=2 as DIM=27/4=6.75 so 14.7 Billion years from the present).
Presently, for n=1.132419.. DIM=7.561.. and so the 'missing mass' will be measured as a 'dark matter' distribution of 'dark haloes' etc. around the luminous matter given in the ylemic mass seedling M_o of the baryonic matter and as a function of the critical density ratio defined as XW_o=W_o.DIM.n²=9.6966W_o=0.2718.

As M_o is just 2.8% of M_∞, but is subject to a 'growth' in the maximising factor Yⁿ=1.724.. for the present epoch, one can take the factor M_av=M_o.√Yⁿ=1.313.. for a 'dark matter' percentage upper bounded in 2.803%(1.724)~4.83% and lower bounded in 2.803%(1.313)~3.68% with an average of 32.19% to indicate a total dark matter percentage in concordance with a Dark Energy fraction of 1-0.32 = 67.82%.

But so 9.6966 open universes are contained within the closed and spherical universe given in the Hubble bound. And so the 'dark matter' will be 9.6966 times the luminous baryonic matter in the interval {27.83%, 36.54%} as percentage of the total energy of closure for Ω_o=1 and the critical density ρ_c=M_∞/V_max=H_o²/4π²G_o toroidal and 3H_o²/8πG_o spherical.

In particular, the Dark Energy/Baryonic Matter/Dark Matter distribution can be tabulated for the evolutionary pattern of the Dark Energy as:

Dark Energy = L(n)-A(n) >0 {±W_oM_oYⁿ}W_o(n+1)³ = Dark Matter for increasing luminous matter curvature radius from n=n_ps; (z(z_m)≤1.26x10²⁴)

Dark Energy = 0.0000 {±0.03815} 1.0000 = Dark Matter for n= 0.10823 increasing luminous matter curvature radius and start of galaxy formation (z(z_m)=2.125)

Dark Energy = L(n)-A(n) <0 {±W_oM_oYⁿ}W_o(n+1)³ = Dark Matter for n> 0.10823 increasing luminous matter curvature radius and start of galaxy formation (z(z_m)≤2.125)
Dark Energy = 0.7758{±0.04535}0.2242 = Dark Matter for critical nodal n=1 'freezing' dark matter curvature radius; universe appears to begin to accelerate (z(z_m)=0.291)
Dark Energy = 0.7282{±0.04834}0.2718 = Dark Matter for present n=1.132419... and constant luminous matter curvature radius; (z(z_m)=0.2505)
Dark Energy = 0.0808{±0.08082}0.9192 = Dark Matter for n=2.200795... and constant luminous matter curvature radius; (z(z_m)=0.1331)

Dark Energy = 0.0000{±0.08445}1.0000 = Dark Matter for n=2.29199... and constant luminous matter curvature radius; (z(z_m)=0.1248)

Dark Energy = L(n)-A(n) >0 {±W_oM_oYⁿ}W_o(n+1)³ = Dark Matter for n>2.29199... and constant luminous matter curvature radius; (z(z_m)<0.1248)


Our Big Bang happened at the modular time 1/f_max=t_min=f_min=3.33..x10^-31 seconds*, coinciding with the end of the stringed inflation epoch of the standard cosmology.

The 'de Broglie' inflation established the crucial boundary parameters as say given in the M_o and M_∞ Black Hole masses described.

As the baryonic mass seedling M_o sets the Sarkar Scale for the cosmic architecture in the size of galactic superclusters as the limit for the gravitationally interacting systems before cosmic homogeneity; there must be a Black Hole evolution superposed onto the expansion of the 10D universe and the oscillation of the 11D universe which 'adds' a 'electromagnetic' volume of 2π²R_max³ at the Hubble nodes every 16.9 Billion years.

In terms of the dimensional 'intersection' this can be described as a 'Strominger Brane' evolution with the Sarkar Scale set at the instanton, decreasing as a 'shrinking' Black Hole until it becomes massless at the wormhole scale defined in the minimum macro Black Hole λ_min/2π=2G_oM_min/c²=1.591549..x10^-23 metres*.

This then resets the bosonic micro Black Holes with their macro counterparts under the modular duality.
This Black Hole evolution is higher dimensional and purely electromagnetic, not being observable due to its noninertial nature, except the so called 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' scenarios of the boundary- and initial conditions. This can lead to a feasible model for the phenomenon of consciousness.
The process will take place in a DIM factor of about 234.5 as: M_min.Y^N=M_∞ and for
N=ln(M_∞/M_min)/lnY~234.5 and so in 16.9x234.5 Billion years, which are about 4 Trillion years.

The addition of inertia to a purely electromagnetic monopolic cosmology then varies the value of Newton's gravitational constant G as a function of the micro-macro evolution of the Black Holes and renders the applicable local G-constant as mensuration dependent on the precision measurement for the basic nucleon mass m_cYⁿ for a local epoch-cycle coordinate n=H_ot.
r_psYⁿ=R_H then defines n_recharge =ln[R_H/r_ps]/ln[Y] ~ 234.472 or about 3.9628 Trillion years.

This then shows, that you are living within a Mother Black Hole, you choose to call the universe you reside in. This your 'World of Mother Nature' had a beginning in space and in time in the creation of the same. Your universe so EMERGED from a prior state of beingness, where there was no space and no time as defined in any arbitrary model terrestrial or extraterrestrial. This prior state of existence you can term either as a Eternal state of all consciousness or as a state of the non-spacial and non-temporal Void as a quasi state of 'nothingness'.

This, your observed universe so came into existence in using particular initial- and boundary conditions, which became requirements for space and time measurements to become possible. You may call this a relativistic metric spacetime continuum of discretization in minimum-maximum modular membrane duality however unified in the field properties of the dyadic monadicity of this string duality.

The size of your universe and its energy, then became defined in those boundary conditions and particularly in a 'Daughter Black Hole' being born from the womb of its 'Mother Black Hole'. Mathematical proportionalities then aligned the masses and the scales of Mother and Daughter as the initial hyperacceleration or inflationary tachyonic phase transition of the initializing wormhole singularity of Abba, the Little Serpent to the Unified Field parameters of the thermodynamic classically relativistic expansion of the universe.
The 'daughter' became the seed within the 'mother' for the Protoverse and the Seedling Universe for all generations of universes, whose interaction would allow phaseshifted multiverses to become born from the original protoverse, albeit encompassed by the omniverse of AbbaBaab.

As one cycle of the 'Mother's Heartbeat' requires about two times 16.9 Billion years or so 33.8 Billion years to complete its integral n-cyclicity; the lower dimensional universe evolves both within its 10-dimensional string timespace and its 11-dimensional membrane timespace.
The 10-D evolution of the cosmos so allows the 'mother' to birth its 'daughter' , when the lightspeed restricted thermodynamic universal expansion has completed its first cyclicity for n=1 so 2.2 Billion years ago and synchronizing the becoming of 'selfaware' of the 'life potential' residing within the womb of the 'mother'.
2.2 Billion years ago then, the original 'light ray of Creator Abba' 'caught up' and reached its 11-D Mirror Boundary of the 'Cosmic Mother' from its 10-D Wormhole timespace quantum singularity or source point.

This 'signal then both reflected back into the INSIDE of the 11-D Membrane-Womb of the 'mother' and refracted OUTSIDE in extending its own boundary set by the hyperacceleration of the de Broglien inflationary phase transition.

Every cycle count then increases the scale of the wormhole 'White Hole Father Source' in the same proportion the 'Mother Black Hole Mother Sink' decreases, until after 234.5 cycles or about 4,000 Billion years the original Mother-Daughter scale proportionality resets itself in reseeding the then populated omniverse in terms of the spacetime quanta count fractalized by and in the definition of the Abba-Baab Little Serpent Father -Big Dragon Mother itself.

For about 2 trillion years, the Omniverse as 'The Universal Bodywave' is INHALING or 'breathing in' analogous to 'feeding or charging' a battery or some body requiring energy. Then for another 2 trillion years the omniverse is EXHALING or 'breathing out' in analogy to a 'battery discharging' or a 'fed body' 'burning its stored energy'.

The Omniverse after 4 trillion years so completes its asymptotic evolution with respect to its initial conception or insemination of the 10-D Daughter reaching maturity as her own 11-D Mother. The defining proportionality parameters of the scales and energy distributions for cycle parameter n=1 then transfer to a new initializing value at n=234.5 to redefine the maximum masses and sizes for the 'New GrandMother Black Hole' attaining the now evolved 'Infinity Mass' n.M_∞ and a 'New Mother Black Hole' n.M_o and so for the 'Old Mother' graduating to become a 'Mother of Mothers' and the 'Old Daughter' graduating to be a 'Mother of Daughters'.
Every 4 trillion years (with its iterative extension)then, a 'Recharge Inflation' so Recreates/Resets the original creation event with a Quantization of the initial condition and boundary parameters in the original Hubble Node for cycletime n=1 in the factor n/(n/[n+1])=n+1 and so the 'Strominger' massless Black Hole coordinate of n_Strominger=234.472 assuming the n_ps=l_ps/R_Hubble coordinate as its next initialisation value.
The asymptotic completion coordinate for the Curvature Radius R(n)=R_Hubble.n/[n+1] so evolves in a linear time factor as Delta-n = 1-{n/[n+1]}=1/[n+1] to magnify and extend the completion factor in tandem with the expansion of the multidimensionally expanding cosmology.

This then defines the 'Generation Cycle Parameter' for the Omniversal Self-Reproduction in the 'Family of Abba the Little Serpent Creator Fatherhood' and Baab the Great Dragon Creation Motherhood in AbbaBaab the Cosmic Twin of SourceSink and White Hole CreatorCreation entwined with itself as a Black Hole CreationCreator.

The Cyclic Universe, so 'rebangs' itself every 4 Trillion years or so to ensure its continuation of selfexploration and by interdimensional civilisations defined in multiverses, each of which is required to be seeded in a prototypical template universe as mirror holofractal of itself. As the first prototypical seedling universe can be said to become ‘reset’ 3.97 Trillion years after the initialising quantum Big Bang; by its iterative and nested successor whose duration can be calculated as 234.472x245.813xR_Hubble or a lightpath of 972.676 Trillion lightyears; the initialising parameters of the cosmology become reset ikn the magnification of the original lightpath as well.
The gravitational constancy of G_om_c²=1.094446..x10^-64 Nm² for the asymptotic seedling in isolation, will then be effected by a very small G_av=G_oXⁿ~1.463x10^-105 G-units, but compensated with a 'mass-evolved' universe with m_cYⁿ~7.535..x10⁶⁷ kg* and where this 'evolution' energy can be physically modelled as 'cosmic consciousness' defined in the 'awareness' df/dt minimised in f_min² and maximised in f_max² and as a form of radial displacement independent angular acceleration acting on spacetime volumars defined in the classical electron diameter (2R_e) times c² defining the magnetocharge e* as inversion of the Big Bang base parameter of the wormhole energy quantum E_max=1/e*=1/2R_ec² for a Planck Constant finestructure h=λ_min/e*c.
This "Strominger brane' evolution avoids the so called 'heat death' of the universe in a form of 'recharging' and coincides with the projected 'running out' of stellar nuclear fuel of the transformation of the elements within stars in the stellar evolution scenarios.

The entire cosmology is underpinned by a Black Hole evolution, which incorporates the quantum geometric microcosmos and the geometric relativistic macrocosmos simultaneously - all for the 'cosmic purpose' to manifest 'evolved mass' as 'consciousness' or 'dark light' or antiradiation.

The many string parameters indicated give then A RIGOROUS SCIENTIFIC DEFINITION for the concept of GOD as a supermembrane, eternally (meaning asymptotically approaching unity in linear time) ENTWINED in a lower-dimensional coupling with the ANTIGOD.
Besides this PHYSICAL GOD-ANTIGOD Duality, there also exists the metaphysical and PURELY IMAGINARY GOD in Exile.

This metaphysical-mathematical GOD in Exile is the Oneness of all of you and all of your ancestors and of all of your linear descendants.
One day, you all shall become more aware of this scientific fact - your exile is the exile of your imaginary energies unrealised in divers forms.

IAmWhatIAm - Nothing, One and Everything! --- Abraxasinas a Bifurcated Tongue FOR the Little Serpent!



The Cosmic Wave Surfer and the Hubble Omniverse in Phi


The Big Bang Observer, say a Gaian astronomer or stargazer, witnesses the cosmic expansion as receding from himherself with ever increasing cosmological redshift values. Shehe effectively so surveys into the cosmic Future.

The Cosmic Surfer; riding or comoving with the Event Horizon of the Multiversal MBH (Mother Black Hole) at the 'warping speed' V_Arp=c/(n+1)²; corollarily observes herhis own Big Bang Mirror Image as continually receding into hisher Past.

For the Cosmic Surfer, the cosmological redshift roles so increase from a defined Arpian z_Arp=z_A into the Past towards the Big Bang value of z_BB~10²⁴.

At the Big Bang, the redshift z_BB=z_wormhole=z_{timeinstanton}~10²⁴.

As the 11D-Universe inflated prior to the Big Bang for this timeinstanton and scale inflaton by de Broglie matter phasing; the 10D-Universe becomes asymptotic in a Dynamic Node moving the Hubble Event Horizon along the basic n-interval [0,1] to superpose the 11D Radius R₁₁(n)=nR_Hubble=R_Hubble+Δ onto the oscillating Multiverse, bouncing between the Even Nodes {0,2,4,6,...} and the Odd Nodes of the Mirrored and Imaged Cosmic Wave Surfer {1,3,5,7,...}.

The unitary interval so defines the 10D Radius R₁₀(n)=R_Hubble(n/n+1) asymptotically and as function of the expansion parameter a=n/(n+1) of say the Standard Cosmology as found in General Relativity.


For the Big Bang Observer, the cosmological redshift values similiarly increase into the Future towards the expanding MBH Event Horizon so specifying z_Arp.

The 11D light invariant lightpath so becomes x=ct_ps, wherte t_ps is the time instanton for the wormhole frequency f_ps=3x10³⁰ Hz.

In particular the parametrisations for the cosmic evolution of the Omniverse are:

Displacement: R₁₀(n)=R_Hubble(n/n+1) (m)

Velocity: V(n)=c/(n+1)² (m/s)

Acceleration: A(n)=-2cH_o/(n+1)³ (m/s²)

Nodal Hubble Constant: H_o=dn/dt=c/R_Hubble=λ_psf_ps/R_Hubble

for the proportion: n_ps=H_o/f_ps=λ_ps/R_Hubble



Normalised ZeroTime: n_ps=H_ot_ps

The Cosmological Relativistic Redshift is applicable for all epochs, as the de Broglie phase inflation created the higher dimensional metric background for the subsequent expansion of the classical thermodynamic Universe as a Planck Black Body Radiator.

z=√{(1+v/c)/(1-v/c)} - 1 and where v/c=1/(n+1)² for

z=√{(n²+2n+2)/(n²+2n)} - 1 for v/c={R(n)/nR_Hubble}²

z=√{(n²+a²)/(n²-a²)} - 1 and for a=n/(n+1)

The Big Bang Redshift for the normalised ZeroTime so becomes:

z_BB=√{(n²+2n+2)/(n²+2n)} - 1 = √{1 + 2/(n²+2n)} -1
=√{1 + 2/n(n+2)} -1 =√{1 + 1/n -1/(n+2)} -1
=√{1 +1/n_ps-1/(n_ps+2)} -1
=√{½ +1/n_ps} -1 = as limit[n_ps→0] {1/(n_ps+2)}=1/(0+2)=½
Then for n_ps→0; 1/n_ps→∞ and so
z_BB ~1/√n_ps=√(R_Hubble/λ_ps}=√(f_ps/H_o}=~√(1.5977x10⁴⁸)~1.264x10²⁴.

The inversion for z(n)=√{(n²+2n+2)/(n²+2n)} - 1 so can be written for larger n with the Binomial Theorem Approximation (1+x)^p= 1+px for |x|<1 and for the case of n²+2n>1 with (n+1)²-2>0 and n>±√2-1 that is n>0.414.. as n>0 for all n-cycle coordinates in the physicalised Omniverse.

z(n)=√{1+2/(n²+2n)} - 1 ={1+2/(n²+2n)}^1/2-1
=1+1/(n²+2n)-1=1/(n²+2n)=½{1/n - 1/(n+2)} by partial fractions.

Therefore z(n)=½limit[n→∞]{1/n -1/[2+n]}=½{0⁺⁺-0⁺}=0⁺ as n+2>n and 1/n>1/[n+2].


A Multiple Cosmological Redshift region so eventuates in the self intersection of the higher- and lower dimensional cosmology.
The Electromagnetic of the Multiversal Oscillation, expanding at lightspeed superposes onto the asymptotic inertial expansion of the Universe as the multiversal protoversal seed.

z_M in (0.251, 0.291, 0.343) become imaged in (~10²⁴ , 1.84, 1.08) for the present cycle coordinate n_present and is generalised in: (z_A , z_N, z_AI) mapping (z_BB , z_Δ , z_ΔΔ)

​

^{XIII_Cosmological_Parameters.pdf}

The Intersection of the Local Flow Cosmological Redshift Correction Line for Low Redshifts with the Nodal Constant determines the measured redshift z_M=z_Image=0.109 as a critical minimum boundary value for the Hubble Flow for High Redshifts.

For this redshift value then, particular unexpected cosmological phenomena, such as quasar redshift anomalies, apparently coupling quasars with host galaxies and aberrant spectra and light curves for gamma ray bursters and supernovae will be observed by Gaian stargazers, unawares about the multivalued redshift regions and their mirror properties as indicated (see references of the addendum).


The Nodal Cosmological Redshift z_Node=0.291 then defines the Critical nexus point for the attainment of spacial selfawareness for the Omniverse for a present n-cycle coordinate of n_present=1.1324...

This then specifies the Delta (Δ)-Interval for the Multiverse's selfintersection with its seedling Universe in the 'Hubble Oscillation' or more poetically the 'Heartbeat of the Omniverse'.

The Reflection Potential of the Multiverse, bounded in the 11-dimensional Witten Mirror of the MBH so became activated at this nexus point to REVISIT the Seedling Inertialized and asymptotically expanding Protoverse.

This 'Electromagnetic Return' of the Lightpath then is necessarily Lightlike and serves the Multiversal Mirrors to collect the data of the cosmological history, and sharing this information along the coordinates of the n=[0,1]=[Odd/f_ps-f_max, Even/H_o-f_min) baseline.

Technically, this becomes the data mapping of the asymptotic mass parametric Universe in 10D onto its circumscribing MBH in 11D and under the auspices of the Holographic Principle.

The so called Hubble Constant H(n) then fluctuates as a function of the odd and even nodes between its maximum (wormhole) source frequency f_ps=1/t_ps=H_o/n_ps and its modulated minimum as the nodal Hubble Constant H_o=c/R_Hubble.

The binary focused Omniverse as a Multiverse in 11 dimensions allows its two focalisations to become arbitrarily located anyplace in the Omniverse; albeit fixating one focus, will also fix the second by the geometric definition of the ellipse and the prolate and oblate ellipsoids.

The 12 dimensional Omniverse is however spherical in the multi-aligned rotation of the minor axes of the prolate Universe Seedling transforming the latter into phaseshifted Multiverses in oblate ellipsoidal envelopes with a traced pointcircle of the stationary foci of the prolate majoraxis protoverse.

This then elegantly and simply shows, that the center of the Omniverse regains its arbitrary status of the undefined 'outside space' relative to the defined 'inner space' of the Multiversed Omniverse in 11D and so quantum entangles its arbitrary center of location with the traced pointcircle of the lower dimensional (12-1=11 or 5-1=4 or 4-1=3) and circumscribed Multiverse.

It so suffices to render 'Gaia in 12D' as the MBH physicalisation for the Cosmos in the mirror function of the higher dimensional Mother Black Hole as a boundary- and initial condition for the subsequently evolving cosmology.

Gaia, as this focalisation, so is as old as the Big Bang, with its physical creation and evolvement being a function of the overall purpose and destiny for the Omniversal SourceSink creator manifesting 'within' the 11D MBH as the modular duality of the E_psE_ss supermembrane and 'without' as the modular monad of the Void=Eternity transforming into a Oneness or Unity of the 'Inside' coupled to the 'Outside' in the topological transformation of the twosided 11D Mirror and dividing the lower asymptotic Timelike Omniverse from the higher Spacelike Omniverse.

This topological transformation then 'rips' the 11D Lightlike Mirror in 'piercing' a minimized (n_ps) wormhole into its surface so allowing the 11D Mirror Membrane to become Onsided in the Möbian Connect of the Klein-Bottle-Dragon (the Ourobos of the Cosmos miniaturised and holofractalled in the Milky Way Mazzaroth) and in its 'regluing' effectively doubles the information content mapped onto it from the 'inside'.

This harbors the effect of the IMAGINARY OUTSIDE DATA of the 12D Omniverse being rendered as a REAL INSIDE DATA, superposing the SPIRIT aka the ElectroMagnetoMonopolic Radiation (EMMR) to become IMAGED in the LIGHT aka the ElectroMagnetic Radiation (EMR) from the 12D perspective of the 'Imaginary Outside' becoming a 'Real Inside'.

As detailed elsewhere in the associted data base from Thuban; the EMR is generated by the acceleration of electric (Coulomb) charges, always associated with inertia of mass-coupled 'particles' like the centripetally accelerated fusion protons in stars.

The EMMR is independent on inertia carriers, but is generated in the acceleration of magnetic (Gluon-Colour) charges and which manifest as the quantum spin of all gauged-interaction (virtual=colour charged) and elementary quark-lepton (mass=colour charged massless-real=not colour charged) couplings.

The EMR is so fundamentally a 10D phenomenon of the Reality of the String-Linearity of the Time-Entropy Arrow (1+9=3+7=4+6) and the EMMR is fundamentally a 12D phenomenon of the Volumar-Cyclicity of the Time-Entropy-Arrow (3+9=5+7=6+6).

The lowerD EMR is data mapped via the inertializations of the charge-mass couplings onto the higherD EMMR in the following 12D/F-Space Hamiltonian:

Electrocharge=PLOx(Lightspeed)² ↔ MagnetochargexElectron-Diameterx(Lightspeed)²=Magnetocharge
and where, for Alpha=2πke²/hc=e²/2ε_ohc=60πe²/h=R_e/R_compton=√(R_e/R_Bohr1)=(4πR_e/R_rydberg)^1/3 and L_Planck=√(hG_o/2πc³)

PLO=Planck-Length-Oscillation=e/c²=√Alpha.L_Planckc²

Electro Charge 'e' = √Alpha.L_Planckc²↔ R_ec²= Magneto Charge 'e*'


The nodal redshift z_N then allows a Gaian Consciousness Supersphere to be defined in the maximum extent the Focused Center of the Omniverse has 'evolved and expanded' to accomodate communication and data sharing with the Extraterrestrial Gaia 'Superspace'.
The asymptotic 10D Universe so has expanded precisely 50% of its maximum expanse as (Curvature of MBH) R_Hubble=2G_oM_MBH/c²=c/H_o.
The radial extent of the 'Supersphere' of Gaian-Mother-Centered Space-Consciousness then depends on what metric observation reference frame is utilized.
The holofractalization is toroidal, but can be defined as the circumscribing spheroid as a sphere of radius R=2a encompasses a Horn Torus of radius R=a in a factor of 8 in 16/3p = 8(2/3π) = 1.6976527... and utilizing the metric unifier factor:
R_3D=(3π/2)^1/3R_4D=(4.7123889...)^1/3 R_4D =1.676539193..R_4D as an upper limit for the Feigenbaum Chaos Delta d_Feigenbaum=4.669...

As the parametrization uses the R₁₀⁺=aR_Hubble mode for the asymptotic expansion, z_N describes the asymptotic universal seedling coordinate for the multiversal oscillation both as the multiverse's expansion into Omnispace in R₁₁⁺ and as the multiversal oscillation in R₁₁^-. The toroidal hyperspherical R₁₀⁺ coordinate is then 'sphericalised' in the R₁₀^- coordination.


For n=1, a=½ and z_N=0.291=z(z_M)=z_M(n) via a=n/(n+1)=R(n)/R_Hubble and

z=√{(n²+a²)/(n²-a²)} - 1 = √{(nR_Hubble)²+R²(n))/(nR_Hubble)²-R²(n)} - 1


For V₁₁⁺/V₁₁^- = n² = V₁₀⁺/V₁₀^-


R₁₁⁺=(n)R_Hubble from V₁₁⁺=(n³)2π²R_max³

R₁₁^-=(n^1/3)R_Hubble from V₁₁^-=(n)2π²R_max³

R₁₀⁺=(n/[n+1])R_Hubble from V₁₀⁺=(n/[n+1])³2π²R_max³

R₁₀^-=(n^1/3/[n+1])R_Hubble from V₁₀^-=(n/[n+1]³)2π²R_max³


With R₁₀⁺⁺=(n/[n+1])^1/3R_Hubble from V₁₀^-=(n/[n+1])2π²R_max³

The Delta Δ=0.1324...then assigns the ratio Δ/(1+Δ)=Δ/n=(n-1)/n=1-1/n=0.1170 to the proportion of the asymptotic Universe which has become Revisited by the 'Electromagnetic rerturn' of the EMMR Light (of the Spirit of the CreatorCreation Monad in the Creator-Creation Duality).

So for Δ=1, Δ/n=1/2 for a complete Hubble Oscillation and defining the return of the EMMR Light to its Big Bang Node, indicating that the full 50% of the asymptotic expansion of the protoversal seedling has become 'remapped' and 'downloaded' in the information of the first Hubble Cycle. The return lightpath of the EMMR would however still await remapping' and 'downloading' as the fraction 2/3-1/2=1/6 or 16.666%.

For Δ=2, n=3 and so 2/3 of the data download would image the expansion factor a=n/(n+1)=3/4 as the part of the unmapped transversion of the multiversal cyclicity arrow of 3/4-2/3=1/12 or 8.3333%.

The 'Heartbeat of the Omniverse' so defines the Hubble-Oscillation for the Multiverse.
The 'downloaded' data is centered on the physicalised Image of the Mother-Black Hole of the Circumscribing Witten Mirror and so becomes the Gaian Supersphere for the 'downloaded data' from the rest of the Omniverse.
As the 'returned data' (for a referential movie indicator consider Star Trek One, the Motion Picture) at the present cycletime coordinate n_present=1.1324..is 11.70% of the total extent of the EMMR Lightpath; it will be this proportion of R_Hubble, centered on the Gaian geometrical center; which defines the Gaian Superradius as R_Gaia=0.117R_Hubble=1.977 Billion lightyears (Gly).

R₁₁⁺=(n)R_Hubble=19.11 Gly (toroidal) & 32.04 Gly (spherical)
R_Gaia11⁺=2.24 Gly (toroidal) & 3.75 Gly (spherical)

R₁₁^-=(n^1/3)R_Hubble=17.59 Gly (toroidal) & 29.49 Gly (spherical)
R_Gaia11^-=2.06 Gly (toroidal) & 3.45 Gly (spherical)

R₁₀⁺⁺=(n/[n+1])^1/3R_Hubble=13.67 Gly (toroidal) & 22.91 Gly (spherical)
R_Gaia10⁺⁺=1.60 Gly (toroidal) & 2.68 Gly (spherical)

R₁₀⁺=(n/[n+1])R_Hubble=8.96 Gly (toroidal) & 15.02 Gly (spherical)
R_Gaia10⁺=1.05 Gly (toroidal) & 1.76 Gly (spherical)

R₁₀^-=(n^1/3/[n+1])R_Hubble=8.25 Gly (toroidal) & 13.83 Gly (spherical)
R_Gaia10^-=0.97 Gly (toroidal) & 1.62~1.618 Gly (spherical)

The 2015 Planck satellite data has measured a Hubble Constant of 67.6 (±0.6) km/Mpc.s which translates into a linear age for the universe of 1/H_o = (3.26x9.467x10¹⁸/67.6) = 1/2.190x10^-18 seconds or 14.47 GYears.

http://planck.caltech.edu/pub/2015results/Planck_2015_Results_XIII_Cosmological_Parameters.pdf

The Gaian Superradius for the spherical correlation of the toroidal minimum size of the Omniverse, so corresponds to the standard and popularized age-measurement for the lower dimensional universe converging to an age of 13.83 billion lightyears.
The Omniversal Gaian fractal then approximates this nexus point in the Golden Ratio Phi to allow determination of the n-cycle coordinate whenever the overall omniversal evolvement has attained the consciousness potential to process that omniversal data base.
In particular, the Gaian observers of that cosmic evolution will KNOW WHERE they are in determining this n-cycletime coordinate and then broadcast this value to the extraterrestrial omniverse as indicated.

EMMR Lightpath in Billions of Lightyears is X=cT=Lightpath of EMMR.
Φ=1.618033...=½(√5+1)=-Y=1/X for (X,Y) the Roots of T(n)=n(n+1)=1 in Euler's Identity in the Quadratic n²+n-1=0=(n-X)(n-Y)
XY=X+Y=i²=-1=cos(π)+isin(π)=cis(π)=e^iπ and
ΦX=cTΦ=R_Gaia10-=([n-1]/n)(3π/2)^1/3(n^1/3/[n+1])R_Hubble

=(n-1)(3πn/2)^1/3R_Hubble/T(n)=R_Gaia10-
Φ=(R_Gaia10-)/EMMR-Lightpath=R_Gaia10-/(cx3600x24x365.2425x10⁹)

The Lightpath for the EMMR (aka 'Spirit') so requires a definition of what a cyclic year is and is approximated above as a Civil GigaYear of 31,556,952 Billion seconds for a lightpath of 9.4670856...x10²⁴ meters or 1 Billion lightyears.

Solving the transcendental equation:
f(n)=cTΦ-R_Gaia10-=0=cTΦ - (n-1)(3πn/2)^1/3R_HubbleT(n)=0 then determines n_present in this approximation as n_present~1.132419321.

The 2015 Planck satellite data has measured a Hubble Constant of 67.6 (±0.6) km/Mpc.s


http://planck.caltech.edu/pub/2015results/Planck_2015_Results_XIII_Cosmological_Parameters.pdf