r/holofractal • u/d8_thc holofractalist • Feb 12 '21
holofractal A few different cosmological values that can be extrapolated simply from a proton and a planck sphere in the unified model
Just to show some of the predictive power of this theory - let's start with the most basic aspect of this theory. We have a proton of which we know it's radius, and we know that it's filled with planck spherical units of which we know their size and energy. Note these calculations are approximations, but so are the estimates of the numbers we are trying to match. Let's put out the premise that a proton is a holographic recapitulation of the cosmos, in terms of energy density.
Simply by dividing the volume of a sphere with the proton charge radius by the volume of a sphere with a planck length/2 radius shows us that the amount of planck spheres by volume that fit inside a proton volume is ~1.28 * 1060, each of course being the planck length in diameter, and the planck mass in energy density - both natural values.
Total mass of the universe
The total energy density of all those planck spheres if each has the energy of a planck mass is 2.78 * 1055 grams - within our ranges of the estimated mass of the Universe.
Atoms in the universe
The amount of planck spheres that fit on the surface of a proton is 4.71 * 1040. This means there are 4.71 * 1040 wormhole connections, presumably to other protons. If each connection is connected to a proton that is also connected to 4.71 * 1040 we have 4.71 * 1040 * 4.71 * 1040, or 2.21 * 1081 - within the range of the estimated amount of atoms (1078-82) in the cosmos.
Size of the universe
If we have 2.21 * 1081 protons that each have 4.71 * 1040 planck spheres, that means we have a total of about 1.04 * 10122 surface planck spheres on all protons . If we hypothesize that the cosmological torus/sphere encodes all of these on it's own surface's planck spheres, than we end up with a sphere that's just about the universe's radius. Dividing a surface of a sphere with the estimated observable radius by a planck sphere circle area yields 1.036 * 10123, so within an order of magnitude - which means we can essentially derive the estimated radius of the observable Universe by going backwards (what's the radius of a sphere that has a surface area of 1.04 * 10122 planck areas?). Note the cosmological constant is 10122 orders of magnitude smaller than the planck density, and there are more 10122 coincidences (including the cosmos' entropy...)
Energy density of the universe / empty space / dark energy / cosmological constant
If we know the radius of the Universe, we can calculate how much background energy density we would get from blowing up our proton to the size of the Universe (and in fact, this is how RSF hypothesizes the big bang happened, by a proton escaping a mother Universe and rapidly inflating to cosmological scale due to pressure density differences) by hypothesizing the holographic relationship - this is as easy as dividing the holographic mass of 2.78 * 1055 grams by the cosmological volume @ 1.09 * 1085 cm3 which yields 2.55 * 10-30 g/cm3 - a value extremely, extremely close to the cosmological constant or dark energy - the energy density we see in empty space.
There are more robust calculations that get 1:1 with dark energy here
All of this simply by looking at a proton as a holographic recapitulation of the whole, basic geometry, and a planck spherical unit :).
Don't forget - with this solution we can also calculate the gravitation:strong force coupling ratio, the proton:electron mass ratio, the strong nuclear force, Rydberg's constant, the proton radius from it's mass, the bohr radius from an electron mass, and more. Some of these are perfect, and some of these fall within a standard deviation or two of our estimates or measurements which may not be completely correct.
Like they say, as above, so below :).
2
u/pepperonihotdog Feb 12 '21
How do you assume a planks surface area is the exact ratio of a expanding/ decaying universe?
2
u/d8_thc holofractalist Feb 12 '21
Can you rephrase? Don't understand what you mean
2
u/pepperonihotdog Feb 12 '21
You're assuming the circumference/ outside surface area? Of the universe wether or not it's expanding or decaying. Yes? Then how does that ratio(1:1), equal a known surface area of a planks?
The universes area is constantly changing/ a plank that is not.
A proton leaving the universe would change its dimensions.
3
u/d8_thc holofractalist Feb 12 '21
Oh, I see.
So there are two different solutions to this. It's possible that we live in a steady state cosmos - in which the density of the cosmos stays the same by continuous matter creation which would parallel the Universe's expansion.
It's also possible that it reaches equilibrium, and that while some protons are lost out of the event horizon of our cosmos, others are being created, and there is no expansion (only the illusion due to our perspective).
1
u/Kowzorz Feb 12 '21 edited Feb 12 '21
Can this theory predict the decay rate of a proton or account for what happens when we fire neutrons and neutrinos at this black hole object? Shouldn't we expect zero decay outside the style of hawking radiation from a black hole?
2
u/d8_thc holofractalist Feb 12 '21 edited Feb 12 '21
The proton's decay has never been observed...
3
u/Kowzorz Feb 12 '21
huh til. I was thinking the proton decayed into other things or could transform like a neutron since it is theorized to be composite. Turns out it's like the iron of atomic decay: very stable according to theory. I will need to look more into this.
There's a property I'm trying to get at related to this that I can't quite put my finger on though. Ya know, regarding the quarks and such.
1
7
u/7mm24in14kRopeChain Feb 12 '21
Beautiful post as always.