Why Hyper Space and the Two Frame System

8/14/2019 Why Hyper Space and the Two Frame System

1/4

Why Hyperspace and a Two Reference Frame System?

A compact extra dimension has a completely different effect on the Newtonianforce law. In a D-dimensional space with one dimension compactified on circle ofradius R with an angular coordinatea that is periodic with period 2p, the line

element becomes

The force law derived from the potential that solves the Laplace equationbecomes

So if we added an extra compact space dimension to our three existingnoncompact space dimensions, then D=4, but D-2=2, so the force law is still aninverse square law. The Newtonian force law only cares about the number ofnoncompact dimensions. At distances much larger than R, An extra compact

dimension can't be detected gravitationally by an altered force law.

But you might be asking how does this extra space manage to act like its horizonis set at the horizon of our universe? Part of the answer lies in its own localvelocity of light. If that velocity crosses its own universe in 1 second then inessence as you shrink that universe in volume size one still has a lightconeextending far further than our own. When you try to compare both these frameseven though C is a constant in any one frame the velocity of C remains differentfrom each other. The result is any information carried from our space-timethrough it seems to transfer non-local due to differences in our measuring rod,while information transferred from hyperspace to here is forced to remain local so

that we only get a fraction of the total information.

This is where the difference between quantum derived expectation values for theZPF and observed values comes into play. Quantum Theory deals with thePlanck scale. By nature it measures value from this external frame of referenceand derives answers that do not equal those based upon observation. If oneknows the actual velocity of C within hyperspace one can reduce those answersback to our observed ones simply by division of those answers by that value forC there. That leads one to assume that the local velocity of C is some 120powers higher in hyperspace than here (see author notes 2). Such a largevelocity as far as localized lab experiments go would seem infinite. But if wecould perform quantum information transfer via entanglement over a very largedistance then one could detect that actual local value for C in hyperspace.

Dirac waves transfer through hyperspace the same as they do here using themodel I have proposed. The difference is in the wavelength spread due to themuch faster local velocity of C. The energy spectrum is simply spread out to thepoint that we can only measure a small fraction of its total energy per Planck unithere. Thats why we observe an energy for the vacuum some 120 powers


2/4

smaller than theory predicts. Its actual energy is the higher value. But we onlysee part of the picture due to the wave function spread. The only thing requiredto solve this quantum problem is the acceptance of a two reference frame systeminstead of one.

The effect of adding an extra compact dimension is more subtle than that. Itcauses the effective gravitational constant to change by a factor of the volume2pR of the compact dimension. If R is very small, then gravity is going to bestronger in the lower dimensional compactified theory than in the full higher-dimensional theory.

So if this were our Universe, then Newton's constant that we measure in ournoncompact 3 space dimensions would have a strength equal to the fullNewton's constant of the total 4-dimensional space, divided by the volume of thecompact dimension. The actual volume internal for hyperspace is set by itslightcone horizon. In hyperspace all four forces (strong, weak, EM, and Gravity)

are equal. But their transfer into our noncompact 3 space dimensions altersthese forces to all look different.

This leads then to the issue that quantum information is different from normalinformation, yet, it in its own frame it is the same. In theory, normal informationcould be sent through hyperspace. But to get the correct picture of thatinformation so as to restore it correctly wed have to measure the return over afar longer time period. What wed get is just bits of the information that wedhave to add together to get the whole message. In essence every EM signalever sent out has traveled through hyperspace. But we only get the results backin a limited fashion here because of the frame difference. In essence thosesignals traveled ahead in time all the way to their course end in a fraction of asecond there. But we only arrive at that point here in a much slower time rate.

Consider a 5-dimensional space-time with space coordinates x1,x2,x3,x4 and timecoordinate x0, where the x4 coordinate is rolled up into a circle of radius R so thatx4 is the same as x4+2pR

Suppose the metric components are all independent of x4. The space-time metriccan be decomposed into components with indices in the three noncompactdirections (signified by a,b below) or with indices in the x4 direction:

The four ga4 components of the metric look like the components of a space-timevector in four space-time dimensions that could be identified with the vectorpotential of electromagnetism with the usual field strength Fab


3/4

The field strength is invariant under a a reparametrization of the compact x4dimension via

which acts like a U(1) gauge transformation, as it should if this is to act likeelectromagnetism. This field obeys the expected equations of motion for anelectromagnetic vector potential in four space-time dimensions. The g44component of the metric acts like a scalar field and also has the appropriateequations of motion.

In this model (see author notes 1, 3), a theory with a gravitational force in fivespace-time dimensions becomes a theory in four space-time dimensions withthree forces: gravitational, electromagnetic, and scalar. But the idea that Diracwaves can carry through in hyperspace also brings up in itself that there is more

than 1 extra dimension at play here.

So the answer to the question about why hyperspace is simply that everythingwe know from quantum theory at the current time requires that a compact extraset of dimensions is in existence. Once one accepts those extra dimensions asreal then the idea of a two frame system begins to make a whole lot of sensewhen you examine certain quantum effects like entanglement, tunneling, etc.

Authors notes

1.) This model I am using has similar properties to the one used under Double

Special Relativity (see: Jerzy Kowalski-Glikman, Sebastian Nowak, Non-commutative space-time of Doubly Special Relativity theories, Int.J.Mod.Phys.D12 (2003) 299-316). But the two frames system here is different from the oneemployed there owning to the PV nature of this model The actual modelemployed and its implications can be found at: Hyperspace a Vanishing act,http://doc.cern.ch//archive/electronic/other/ext/ext-2004-109.pdf, Implications ofthe Dutch Equation Modified PV Model,http://doc.cern.ch//archive/electronic/other/ext/ext-2004-115.pdf, and WhyQuantum Theory does not fit observational data,http://doc.cern.ch//archive/electronic/other/ext/ext-2004-116.pdf

2.) The strongest basis for assuming that C stays constant in hyperspace is fromobservations of the CMB itself. However, it is possible that C may also vary inhyperspace. The implications of such have not been worked out in this model todate. Also to be noted the K=0 in the original paper assumes that value forhyperspace itself before inflation took place. The best fit currently with ourspace-time is that K would equal 1. The usage of K=0 was to simplify themodeling. In reality I suspect that K=1 for both space-time frames.


4/4

3.) In many respects hyperspace under such a model is a static space-timesince all events here we witness in broken fashion have already transpired withinhyperspace in an instant of its time. But it is also dynamic in that under thismodel its volume in relation to our space-time changes.

.

Documents

Why Hyper Space and the Two Frame System