[time 447] Re: [time 446] Some New Mathematics

Stephen P. King (stephenk1@home.com)
Sat, 17 Jul 1999 11:24:22 -0400

Dear Bill,

        I have read over your interesting paper before and after thinking about
what I have read in Ben's papers on division algebras, I am wondering if
the two could be related? My own notion is that each observer (LS) has
its own space-time framing of events and thus would have its own set of
observable states which is finite. The interactions among them should be
definable in terms of their mutual entropy. The total number of states
and events is, of course, infinite, given the definition of the Universe
as the totality of existence.
        How your infinite products relate to Ben's division algebras is an open
question. I am just wondering. :-)
        I would like to understand how you would define a relationship between
"states" and "events" when the latter are the particular physical
observations and the former seem to be defined in terms of information
content. I have been trying to advance Vaughan Pratt's notions that
demonstrate a Stone-Birkhoff duality relation between the two.

Kindest regards,


WDEshleman@aol.com wrote:
> Time Group,
> Some of you math whizzes out there may like to see a formalism I have
> developed concerning a proposed structure for the universe. A proof of the
> mathematical object starts on page 4 of the website:
> http://members.tripod.com/~EshlemanW/
> For a direct link press -> <A
> HREF="http://members.tripod.com/~EshlemanW/">Bill's Many-Worlds Page
> </A>
> I am a bit of a whiz on developing infinite product identities for constants
> and functions, but am a youngster concerning physical interpretation... so
> you may wish to skip the words and look only at the math, contrary to the way
> most of us read papers containing math we don't immediately understand. Any
> form of feedback will be gratefully accepted. I have included the ABSTRACT
> of the site below.
> This report shows that an equivalence of infinite mathematical sequences
> exists between the Lorentz factor, 1/(1 - v^2/c^2) and a proposed
> gravitational factor, 1/(1 - GM/R/c^2). The equivalent sequences are derived
> from infinite product forms of the above relationships. And, just as it is
> assumed that v^2/c^2 can only approach unity, so too it is assumed that
> GM/R/c^2 can only approach unity. This leads to a black hole with finite
> radius, entropy, and event horizon as well as the same for the universe.
> Conventional wisdom indicates that such a flat universe would be neither open
> nor closed. But the conclusion drawn here is that what the mathematics
> represents is a "confined" universe that exists within its event horizon,
> confined by a multitude of parallel universes that exist outside the event
> horizon of each of many-worlds. Together, these many-worlds comprise the
> multiverse.
> Sincerely,
> Bill Eshleman

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Oct 17 1999 - 22:36:56 JST