- 6/20/2025
Discussing Quinta Essentia: Simulation Algorithms: 5.1-5.4 (2019-2022). This is an [AI] generated Audio-Overview; it isn't perfect, but it's pretty close; please access the book via the links below:
(1) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335173066_Quinta_Essentia_Part_51_A_Practical_Guide_to_Space-Time_Engineering_Solution_Algorithm
(2) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345236498_Quinta_Essentia_Part_52_History_of_The_Cosmos_Solution_Algorithm
(3) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362412581_Quinta_Essentia_Part_53_Fate_of_The_Cosmos_Solution_Algorithm
(4) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358496903_Quinta_Essentia_Part_54_Milky_Way_Mass_Solution_Algorithm
(1) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335173066_Quinta_Essentia_Part_51_A_Practical_Guide_to_Space-Time_Engineering_Solution_Algorithm
(2) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345236498_Quinta_Essentia_Part_52_History_of_The_Cosmos_Solution_Algorithm
(3) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362412581_Quinta_Essentia_Part_53_Fate_of_The_Cosmos_Solution_Algorithm
(4) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358496903_Quinta_Essentia_Part_54_Milky_Way_Mass_Solution_Algorithm
Category
📚
LearningTranscript
00:00Okay, let's dive deep.
00:01We've got this incredible stack of source material here today,
00:04all about a really fascinating theoretical framework.
00:08It's called the Electro-Gravimagnetics Construct, or just EGM for short.
00:13Right.
00:14Think of this as your shortcut, really,
00:16to understanding a potentially radical new way of looking at physics.
00:20Yeah, that's a good way to put it.
00:22Our mission, based on these sources anyway, is to unpack this,
00:26this pretty complex theory.
00:27We want to get the core ideas right,
00:29see how it pushes back against established physics,
00:32like the standard model of cosmology, SMOC, they call it,
00:36and explore some of its really surprising predictions,
00:38stuff about particles, gravity, the universe itself.
00:42Because it makes some really bold claims, doesn't it, right from the start?
00:45Things that go against ideas we've, well, held for a long time.
00:48Oh, absolutely.
00:49Things that definitely make you stop and think.
00:50Yeah.
00:51Like the idea that photons might not actually be massless.
00:54Whoa, right.
00:55Or that dark energy isn't what S.M.O.P. says it is at all.
00:58It really forces you to kind of re-evaluate some fundamental physics concepts.
01:03So let's start at the beginning then.
01:04Where does EGM build its foundation?
01:06What's the big idea?
01:08Well, EGM sets out with this incredibly ambitious goal, right,
01:11to create one single unified picture for all the fundamental forces.
01:16The dream, basically.
01:18Exactly.
01:18And describe the universe across all scales.
01:21I mean, from the tiny quantum level,
01:23way up to the biggest cosmic structures.
01:25Wow.
01:26Okay, unifying everything.
01:27What's the single principle, they say, makes it all work?
01:31The sources keep pointing to this one core concept,
01:34something called the Fourier spectrum quantization of gravitational acceleration,
01:38or just G.
01:39Quant as G.
01:40Yeah.
01:40And EGM posits this isn't just an idea.
01:42It's the fundamental source from which literally every single result in their framework comes.
01:47Whether it's particle sizes or how the cosmos evolves, it's the engine.
01:51Okay, so gravity isn't just like ESMA or curving spacetime.
01:55It has this deeper frequency-based structure.
01:59How does that manage to link quantum mechanics and relativity?
02:02They seem so different.
02:03Well, it integrates them using specific parameters that supposedly arise from this G quantization.
02:08So quantum mechanics get pulled in via something they call NPV,
02:13which is like a harmonic multiple derived from G.
02:16Newtonian mechanics is there through the familiar GMR2 gravity term.
02:21And then general relativity is incorporated using KPV.
02:25They call that the refractive index of spacetime.
02:28Refractive index of spacetime.
02:30Huh.
02:30It's their way of trying to weave these traditionally separate fields together.
02:34And speaking of things that sound different, EGM apparently has some core beliefs about the
02:40universe that feel pretty counterintuitive compared to standard physics, right?
02:44They certainly do.
02:44The sources highlight three big ones.
02:46First, and maybe the most startling, is the claim that photons are not massless.
02:50Wait, photons have mass.
02:52But isn't the whole point in the standard model that they're pure energy, zero rest mass,
02:56travel at sea?
02:57Exactly.
02:58That's the massive point of the part.
02:59Pardon the pun.
03:00And EGM just fundamentally disagrees with that core assumption.
03:04Their second tenet is about gravitons, you know, the hypothetical gravity particle.
03:09EGM defines a graviton as an entangled pair of, get this, conjugate wave function photons.
03:16So gravity particles are made of light particles.
03:19In their model, yes, entangled pairs.
03:21And the third big idea is that all matter exists in this energetic equilibrium with the
03:26space-time manifold around it, like particles are constantly balanced with the fabric of
03:30space-time.
03:30Wow.
03:31Okay, those three, photons have mass, gravitons are photon pairs, matter in equilibrium.
03:37That's the bedrock.
03:38That's what the sources present as the bedrock, yeah.
03:41So how does this whole EGM thing connect with other, maybe less mainstream models out there?
03:47Like, I've heard of the polarizable vacuum model, or zero-point field theory.
03:51Good question.
03:52The sources describe EGM as sort of an interface.
03:54So the polarizable vacuum, or PV model, that's presented as this alternative way to think
03:59about gravity, more like how light behaves in a medium.
04:03Sometimes it's mathematically equivalent to GR, actually.
04:05So EGM then acts as a kind of quantized mathematical bridge between that PV model and zero-point
04:12field theory, or ZPF.
04:15And ZPF is that branch of quantum field theory dealing with the vacuum energy, the energy
04:20of supposedly empty space.
04:22So it's like layers.
04:23Kind of, yeah.
04:24They even visualize it as a solution pyramid.
04:27You've got GR at the base, the PV model in the middle layer, and then the more quantum
04:31ZPF theory at the top.
04:33But EGM sits right in that middle layer, connecting the sort of classical view of GR and PV up
04:38to the quantum ZPF.
04:39And if this whole EGM structure actually holds up, what's the ultimate payoff?
04:43Oh, the potential payoff is enormous.
04:44If EGM gets validated, it claims to finally solve that huge, long-standing problem in physics.
04:50I can say, well, in quantum mechanics and general relativity.
04:52Oh, holy grail.
04:53Pretty much.
04:54Getting one consistent description for everything.
04:56That's what physicists have been chasing for, what, a century?
04:58Okay, that sets the stage really well.
05:00We've got the big picture of the foundations.
05:02Now, let's use this EGM lens, like you said, and zoom right in on the smallest things we
05:06know, elementary particles.
05:08Yeah.
05:08How does EGM describe them?
05:10Right.
05:10So EGM comes at particle physics using these harmonic representations.
05:14It's almost like particles are specific frequencies or resonances within that whole G quantization
05:21structure we talked about.
05:22Like musical notes.
05:23Sort of, yeah.
05:24It's interesting, though.
05:25They do note that the neutron is a bit of an outlier, an exception to this general harmonic
05:30rule in their system.
05:31And they actually calculate sizes for these particles, right, and compare them to the standard
05:35values we measure.
05:36Exactly.
05:37So how do EGM's numbers stack up?
05:39Are they totally different?
05:40Well, EGM's derived harmonic radii are remarkably close, actually.
05:44And they also have this conjecture that quarks are incredibly tiny, like maybe 0.5 AM.
05:49They really stress that their specific method for getting these hadronic measurements has
05:54gotten some empirical backing from experiments like CELEX and also from independent work by
06:00researchers like Kopecky and Ries.
06:02One thing the source material really seems to hammer home is the internal consistency within
06:07EGM's particle calculations.
06:09Yes, absolutely.
06:11They present this as a major strength.
06:13EGM apparently shows an internal consistency of something like 99.99% across the different
06:19ways they calculate these radii, whether it's based on mass or Compton wavelength or their
06:25specific harmonic unification approach.
06:27That's pretty high consistency.
06:28It is.
06:29And they cite that high level of agreement as, you know, strong evidence that the framework
06:33is internally sound.
06:34And that refractive index of space-time KPV, that pops up here again, too.
06:38It absolutely does.
06:39EGM puts forward what they call a refractive index form for particles, which explicitly
06:44shows how QM, Newtonian mechanics, and GR principles are all woven together, and it's
06:48mediated by this KPV.
06:50So it's like the glue holding it together.
06:51Kind of, yeah.
06:52The fact that KPV shows up consistently everywhere, describing the vacuum, influencing particle
06:58characteristics, it really points to EGM's view of the vacuum, not as just empty
07:03space, right?
07:03Right.
07:04But as an active structured medium.
07:06And its properties, summed up by KPV, fundamentally shape how particles behave and interact.
07:11Okay, let's circle back to that really radical claim, massive photons.
07:15How does EGM actually put a number on that?
07:17Because that's such a departure.
07:19It really is a core point where they diverge from the standard view.
07:23EGM explicitly states photons are massive.
07:25Now, it's worth mentioning, right, that while the standard model assumes zero mass, the official
07:30particle data group, the PDG, they actually leave the door open for a
07:33potential tiny photon mass.
07:35It just hasn't been measured.
07:37Right.
07:37There's an experimental upper limit, but it's tiny.
07:39Exactly.
07:40But EGM provides specific derived quantitative values for this mass.
07:44Okay, so what kind of mass are we talking?
07:46Is it measurable?
07:47Extremely small.
07:48According to the source material, EGM calculates the photon mass energy at about 3.195 times
07:5310 to the minus 45 electron volts.
07:55Minus 45.
07:56Wow.
07:57Tiny.
07:57And the graviton mass energy, feeding their entangled photon pair idea, is exactly double
08:03that, around 6.390 times 10 to the minus 45 eV.
08:08Okay.
08:08And these incredibly tiny values, along with predicted tiny diameters, were apparently
08:14predicted within the EGM framework by Sturdy way back in 2005.
08:182005.
08:19Before a lot of the precision cosmology data we have now.
08:21Years before, yeah.
08:23Yeah.
08:23And here's a kicker, they note that even this almost impossibly small photon mass has
08:27a noticeable significant impact on their calculated value for the Hubble constant.
08:31That's wild, something that small affecting the whole expansion rate of the universe.
08:36Any other cool particle details from EGM?
08:38Well, there's this specific analysis they do of the neutron's internal structure.
08:42Apparently, the EGM framework reveals this interesting connection between the proton's
08:46radius and a subtle feature inside the neutron, specifically.
08:49It coincides with a turning point and the third derivative of the neutron's charge density
08:54distribution.
08:55The third derivative.
08:56That's deep in the weeds.
08:57It suggests some really deep interconnected structure within nucleons, you know.
09:02Okay.
09:02And they even apply this whole framework down to something like the Casimir effect.
09:06The force between plates in a vacuum.
09:08Yeah.
09:08They use it as an example to show EGM can reach down to the nanoscale.
09:12They show how their model can calculate Casimir pressure, and even how it would change in
09:16different environments, like on Mars or in orbit relative to Earth.
09:20So demonstrating its reach, basically.
09:22All right.
09:22So we've gone deep on the very small with EGM.
09:25Now let's pull way back and look at the really big picture, the cosmos itself.
09:30How does EGM describe the universe on its grandest scale?
09:33And how does that picture differ from the standard model of cosmology, SMO?
09:37Okay.
09:38Yeah.
09:38Cosmology.
09:39A huge difference right away is how EGM deals with what S. Monsey calls dark energy.
09:44The mysterious stuff making the universe expand faster.
09:47That's the one.
09:48The EGM sources state very clearly that the effects we attribute to dark energy are organically
09:54derived from EGM's basic principles.
09:56It's not some extra mysterious ingredient they had to add later to make the observations fit.
10:00So no separate dark energy concept?
10:03Not as a distinct thing.
10:04No.
10:04Okay.
10:04So where do the dark energy effects come from then?
10:07They arise from the zero point field, the ZPF.
10:10EGM proposes that the ZPF provides the actual cosmological expansive force.
10:15It acts as the necessary counterforce to gravity on cosmic scales.
10:19It's basically like applying Newton's third law action reaction to the entire universe.
10:24So the vacuum energy itself is pushing the universe apart?
10:27That's the idea in EGM.
10:28What about the cosmological constant, lambda?
10:30That's so central to Zmolomach's dark energy explanation.
10:33Right.
10:34It's a function that changes over time.
10:36A time-dependent cosmological constant.
10:39How does that change the story of the universe?
10:41It significantly changes the interpretation of cosmic history.
10:45EGM actually passes through zero at a certain point, around 7.3 billion years after the Big Bang.
10:50EGM claims that SMC misinterprets this as the moment accelerated expansion began.
10:55But EGM says it's not.
10:56Right.
10:57EGM's calculations show EGM then reached a maximum value more recently, around 10.9 billion years, and they claim SMC often mistakes that maximum value for the constant present day value.
11:08EGM gives a specific lower value at the present epoch, around 7.9 by 10.53 per square meter.
11:14Now, one of the most, well, eye-catching parts of the source material is this claim EGM makes about predicting the Hubble constant, H0.
11:21Yes, this is definitely presented as a major success story for the framework.
11:25Apparently, Storty, using just the EGM construct, predicted the value of H0 would be 67.0843 kilometers per second per megaparsec.
11:35And he did this back in 2008.
11:362008.
11:37And why is that date so significant?
11:39Because it was years before the key satellite data, especially from the Planck satellite, came in.
11:43And that Planck data, released around 2013, confirmed a value remarkably close to Storty's prediction the PDG Planck value was 67.3.
11:50Wow.
11:51So EGM allegedly predicted it from theory before the confirming observations, without needing the satellite data.
11:56That's the claim.
11:57Derived purely from their theoretical principles.
11:59Predicting a fundamental constant like that years in advance.
12:03Yeah, that's powerful validation for any model, if true.
12:06And have they refined that prediction since?
12:08They have.
12:09Using Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation CMBR data as constraints within their framework, EGM now derives a present-epoch Hubble constant, they call it, of 67.118 kilometers MPC.
12:21And they give a very tight error margin, 0.0269.
12:27Very precise.
12:27Yeah, they highlight this as showing, one, unprecedented resolution, and two, excellent agreement or synergy with the latest official PDG 2022 value,
12:35which is 67.4.
12:37What about the age of the universe?
12:38Does EGM calculate that with similar precision?
12:41It seems so.
12:42EGM calculates the cosmological age, they call it the Hubble age, to be 14.5685 billion years.
12:48And again, with a remarkably small uncertainty, plus or minus just 5.8 million years.
12:5214.57 billion years.
12:53That's older than the standard SMSC age, isn't it?
12:56It is.
12:56SMSC's age is around 13.8 billion years.
12:59EGM points out that their older age actually shows better synergy with the estimated age of the oldest known star,
13:06HD214802A3, which is around 14.46 billion years old, though with a large uncertainty.
13:13Ah, the Methuselah star.
13:15Right.
13:15So EGM suggests their framework might help resolve that potential tension, that crisis in cosmology,
13:21where the universe might seem younger than its oldest stars.
13:23They also claim their age aligns better with observed CMBR temperatures than the SMOC age does.
13:29Interesting.
13:30The sources also dig into the vacuum energy spectrum.
13:32Something about Lorentz forces structuring the vacuum.
13:35What's the takeaway there?
13:36Yeah.
13:36There's a detailed derivation mentioned.
13:38The gist is that EGM finds that the presence of electric charge actually imparts structure to their polarized vacuum model.
13:44In this structured vacuum, particles emerge as resonances, like specific harmonic modes within the ZPF spectrum.
13:50And crucially, they find that the energy density of this structured ZPF is finite.
13:55It avoids the infinity problems that can pop up in other QFT calculations of vacuum energy.
14:00They conclude that a theoretical bare vacuum, totally empty and unstructured, is simply undefined in their framework.
14:08So the vacuum isn't empty.
14:09It's this dynamic structured sea and particles are like waves on it.
14:13That's the picture EGM paints.
14:15Yeah.
14:16And it feeds into their whole view of deep interconnectedness.
14:19They emphasize this consistent mathematical thread linking the fundamental constants of nature, you know, C, G, H, the electron charge and mass,
14:27directly to the big cosmological parameters like the Hubble constant cosmic density, age, radius.
14:33And that KPV thing is the link.
14:34Exactly.
14:36Mediated by KPV, that space-time refractive index.
14:39It suggests potentially a deterministic universe where the physics of the very small is inherently tied to the physics of the very large.
14:45Okay, so EGM has laid out its foundations, its view of particles, its cosmology.
14:49Now, how does this framework claim to actually solve some of the biggest outstanding puzzles that the standard model of cosmology is currently grappling with?
14:56Right.
14:56This is where the rubber meets the road, so to speak.
14:59Let's tackle the Hubble tension first.
15:01That big disagreement between the Hubble constant measured locally versus from the early universe.
15:06Yeah, that's a huge headache for cosmologists right now.
15:09Two really precise measurements, but they just don't line up.
15:12EGM's position on this is, well, pretty bold.
15:15They state the Hubble tension does not exist within their framework.
15:19This doesn't exist.
15:20How?
15:20They argue the tension only appears to exist because the Hubble constant isn't truly constant across all space and time, the way esmophoria often treats it.
15:29In EGM, the value you measure inherently varies, spatially and temporally.
15:34Depending on the local mass distribution, the gravity wells around where you're making the measurement.
15:39So the CMBR measurement reflects the average early universe condition, and local measurements reflect, well, local conditions, and there should be different.
15:47That's precisely EGM's argument.
15:49They claim they use a single equation that can derive values consistent with both sets of measurements, depending on the input conditions.
15:56They suggest that if you could average local measurements over a huge representative population of galaxies, the apparent tension would simply vanish.
16:04They even point to specific galaxies, like M82, as places where measurements might test this idea.
16:10Okay.
16:11What about the whole dark matter, dark energy issue?
16:14SMC basically had to invent these things to explain observations like galaxy rotation and accelerated expansion.
16:21EGM offers a pretty sharp critique here.
16:23They argue that general relativity itself is incomplete, precisely because it didn't naturally predict accelerated expansion or the effects attributed to dark matter and dark energy.
16:33EGM proposes what they call a more rational explanation for cosmic acceleration compared to some way's miraculous interpretation.
16:40And how does that work in EGM?
16:42It ties back to their dynamic cosmological constant.
16:44Around 7.3 billion years ago, EGM says the actual transition to accelerated expansion,
16:49where Q becomes negative happens later, around 9.63 billion years ago,
16:55they claim the standard model community, PDG, mistakenly identifies the earlier zero point as the start of acceleration.
17:02They also argue their later Q0 timing validates an earlier prediction by Freeman and colleagues,
17:07seeing that as more support for their model.
17:09Okay.
17:10And what about the flatness problem?
17:12The fact that the universe looks incredibly geometrically flat,
17:15which seems like a huge coincidence requiring fine-tuning in SMOF.
17:19EGM tackles this head-on.
17:21Their fundamental starting point is just, the cosmos is flat.
17:24They argue it's maintained flat through some kind of oscillatory creation process.
17:29They state directly that the flatness problem is an artifact of SMOF-A making an unfounded assumption that cosmological curvature is constant.
17:36Ah.
17:37So just like lambda and H, curvature also changes over time in EGM.
17:40Exactly.
17:41EGM shows that cosmological metrics, including curvature, are not constant.
17:45They evolve.
17:46How does it evolve?
17:47According to their model, the universe was barely open right near the Big Bang.
17:51Then it briefly became maximally closed.
17:53And now in the present epoch, it's apparently flat.
17:56And in the far future, it'll become asymptotically open.
17:59So the flatness problem just dissolves if curvature isn't constant.
18:03That's the EGM argument, yeah.
18:04Then there's that other huge puzzle.
18:06The massive difference in strength between electromagnetism and gravity.
18:09The many orders of magnitude problem.
18:12How does EGM handle that gigantic ratio?
18:14Right, that mind-boggling ratio, something like 4.16 times 10 to the 42 for electrons.
18:19It's enormous.
18:21EGM's proposed solution connects this difference in force strengths directly to cosmological expansion.
18:26Expansion affects force strengths.
18:27How?
18:28EGM proposes something really radical.
18:30That the electron's fundamental charge, Q, was actually zero at the very instant of the Big Bang.
18:35Zero charge.
18:35Zero charge, while its mass was already its present value.
18:40Then, as the universe expanded, the charge evolved from zero up to the value we measure today.
18:45This makes the ratio of the electric force to the gravitational force inherently time-dependent.
18:50So the ratio wasn't always 1042.
18:52No, it grew from basically zero.
18:54The change is incredibly slow now, like five parts per billion per year, they estimate.
18:59But this evolution explains that vast initial difference.
19:02They also mentioned a related idea about a 90-degree phase difference in the quantum vacuum spectra
19:07between the electric and gravitational forces,
19:09which helps magnify the observed ratio while keeping the forces distinct.
19:13Okay, let's swing back to dark energy again.
19:16EGM seems to challenge the very basic idea that the present moment, our now,
19:21corresponds to a redshift of zero, right?
19:23That's correct.
19:23EGM calls Esmosi's assumption of zero for the present epoch a fundamental flaw.
19:28So what does EGM use instead?
19:30Their framework, drawing from that polarizable vacuum model,
19:33uses the relation 1 plus z equals 1 kpv, where kpv is that refractive index.
19:40From this, EGM derives a specific dark energy refractive index,
19:44in a case which, at the present time, is actually greater than 1.
19:47And if CLABDA is greater than 1?
19:49Then the formula gives you a negative dark energy redshift.
19:52A negative redshift?
19:53What on earth does a negative redshift signify in this context?
19:56In the EGM framework, a negative redshift is the direct mathematical signature
20:01of accelerated cosmological expansion.
20:03Ah.
20:04They propose that the dark energy field is fundamentally a massive photonic field,
20:08and its effect is what causes this accelerated expansion,
20:12acting, as they put it, to stretch time.
20:14They also show that the z isn't constant either.
20:17It changes sign over cosmic history,
20:19aligning with the different phases of expansion.
20:21So let's get this straight then.
20:22How does EGM fundamentally redefine what dark matter and dark energy are?
20:26EGM's bottom line is,
20:28no requirement for dark matter, dark energy,
20:30as distinct, unknown substances needing exotic new particles.
20:34Okay.
20:35So what are they?
20:36Instead, in EGM,
20:37dark energy is identified simply as the energy of photons,
20:40their mass of photons,
20:42contributing a fixed 50% of the total energy mass budget.
20:46Dark matter is identified as the energy of gravitons,
20:49their mass of gravitons,
20:50making up a variable amount,
20:52currently calculated over 26.3%.
20:54Wait, only 26% for dark matter?
20:57Espancy needs much more than that.
20:58Yeah.
20:59But here's the crucial claim.
21:00EGM asserts that a significant proportion of dark matter
21:03has been misidentified by Espancy as being dark energy.
21:07But EGM says that 17.73% isn't curvature energy,
21:11it's actually graviton energy, dark matter,
21:13that Espancy made labeled as dark energy.
21:15So if you add that back?
21:16If you add that 17.73% to the directly calculated 26.3%,
21:21which they say is also dark matter gravitons,
21:23you get EGM's total dark matter contribution.
21:26Their proposed breakdown for the present epoch is
21:28dark energy, photons, at 50%,
21:30dark matter gravitons at 44.02%,
21:33that's 26.3% plus 17.73% roughly,
21:36and baryonic matter, the normal stuff we see,
21:38at 5.98%.
21:40So 50% photons, 44% gravitons, 6% baryons.
21:43That adds up to 100%.
21:45And no need for WIMPs or axions or anything exotic.
21:48That's EGM's claim.
21:49It simplifies the cosmic inventory dramatically
21:52by explaining the dark components using particles
21:54already inherent to their framework,
21:56photons and gravitons, just giving them mass.
21:59It really does seem like the core theme
22:00running through all of EGM's explanations
22:02is that things we thought were fixed
22:03are actually changing over cosmic time.
22:05Absolutely.
22:06That's a fundamental challenge EGM throws down
22:08to the standard model.
22:09They explicitly state that the majority
22:12of significant cosmological metrics,
22:14if not all, vary with time.
22:16This includes lambda,
22:18the omega density parameters,
22:19the deceleration parameter Q,
22:21the Hubble parameter H.
22:22This dynamic time-varying nature
22:24is absolutely central to how EGM
22:27explains cosmic evolution
22:28and claims to resolve those SOMC puzzles.
22:31This dynamic picture then leads naturally
22:33into EGM's own story of the universe's entire history,
22:37its evolution, and maybe even its ultimate fate.
22:40What's that grand narrative, according to EGM?
22:42Yeah, EGM describes this whole cosmic process
22:44as a dynamic cycle.
22:46It's based on the interplay
22:47between what they call kinematic mass energy,
22:50it's energy locked up in the cosmos,
22:51photons, gravitons, baryonic matter,
22:53and potential mass energy, EZPF,
22:56which is the energy residing in the zero-point field.
22:58Okay, so energy shifts between the cosmos and the ZPF.
23:00How does the cycle actually play out?
23:02Well, conceptually, it starts at time zero,
23:04where presumably all energy is in the ZPF.
23:07So 100% ZPF, 0% cosmos.
23:10Then there's a creation phase
23:11between zero and their Big Bang time tie,
23:13where ZPF energy gets converted
23:15into the kinematic energy of the cosmos.
23:17Photons, gravitons, eventually matter form.
23:20So the Big Bang isn't the absolute beginning.
23:22In EGM, the Big Bang event tie
23:24is more like the completion
23:26of this primary energy conversion phase.
23:28At tie, you have maximum cosmos energy,
23:30100% cosmos, 0% ZPF.
23:32Then, after the Big Bang tie,
23:34the whole process reverses.
23:35The energy goes back from the cosmos
23:36back into the ZPF.
23:38How?
23:38Yeah, it returns through various physical processes
23:40described in quantum field theory and their model.
23:43Photons go back via annihilation.
23:45Gravitons decay into those entangled photon pairs,
23:48which then also return to the ZPF.
23:50Even baryonic mass participates
23:52by curving spacetime.
23:53It radiates gravitons.
23:54And those gravitons eventually decay,
23:56returning their energy to the ZPF.
23:58So over truly immense timescales,
24:00everything dissolves back into the vacuum energy.
24:03That's the idea.
24:03Yeah.
24:04In the very distant future,
24:05all the kinematic energy of the cosmos
24:07returns to the ZPF.
24:08You end up back in a state of 0% cosmos,
24:11100% ZPF.
24:13And then does it start all over again?
24:15That is EGM's conjecture, yes.
24:17It implies a truly cyclic universe.
24:20They have this oscillatory cosmological model,
24:22or OCM,
24:23which even gives specific timelines
24:25for these different phases,
24:26like when baryonic matter evaporates,
24:28when gravitons decay,
24:29when photons fully return to the ZPF,
24:31and when the cycle might reset.
24:33They use a theoretical time unit called TL for this.
24:36Cosmic reset button?
24:38Kind of.
24:38They do note that their OCM idea
24:40has some philosophical parallels
24:41with Roger Penrose's conformal cyclic cosmology, C3,
24:45although the underlying physics might be different.
24:47This whole picture of a dynamic, expanding,
24:50maybe cycling universe,
24:52does it have implications for the speed of light too?
24:54Does EGM suggest C isn't constant?
24:56Ah, yes, the variable speed of light, VSL question.
25:00This is a point that the sources say
25:01needs careful handling within EGM.
25:04Their framework does imply a VSL,
25:06but only over cosmological time.
25:08And this variation is tied to the history
25:10of that space-time refractive index, KPV.
25:13But the key is who is doing the observing.
25:16Okay, that sounds crucial.
25:18Who would actually see the speed of light changing?
25:20According to EGM,
25:22only a hypothetical distant observer
25:24residing at infinity would measure VSL.
25:27Someone completely outside the gravity well of our universe,
25:30imagine an observer in an alternate universe,
25:33watching ours expand.
25:34That observer would see the speed of light
25:36in our universe change over time.
25:38But what about us, observers inside our universe?
25:40For any observer within our universe, like us,
25:42the speed of light C will always be measured as constant
25:45in any local inertial reference frame,
25:47just like Einstein said.
25:48Why the difference?
25:49Because in the EGM model,
25:51our fundamental tools for measurement,
25:53our ruler plus clock,
25:54how we define meters and seconds,
25:56are themselves tied to and scale perfectly
25:58with that cosmological refractive index, KPV,
26:01and the overall expansion of space-time.
26:02So C appears constant to us
26:04because our measuring tools are stretching
26:06or shrinking right along
26:07with the changing space-time properties.
26:09Exactly.
26:10It's a subtle but crucial distinction.
26:13EGM suggests that while we always measure C
26:15as constant locally,
26:17hints of its cosmological variation
26:18might, perhaps, be detectable
26:21in very subtle anomalous fluctuations
26:23in the cosmic microwave background.
26:26They even predict a time frame
26:27that the speed of light,
26:29as seen by that hypothetical distant observer,
26:31started decreasing in our current epoch
26:33sometime between 3.4 and 4.6 billion years ago.
26:36Wow.
26:37Okay, if C varies for a distant observer,
26:39does that mean other fundamental constants change too,
26:42like the fine structure constant alpha?
26:43That's usually thought to be absolutely constant.
26:45That's another important point
26:47of clarification in the sources.
26:48Despite the dynamic vacuum
26:49and the potential VSL for distant observers,
26:52EGM predicts the fine structure constant alpha
26:55does not change over cosmological time.
26:57It remains invariant.
26:58Why not?
26:59If C changes for some observers,
27:00and alpha depends on C.
27:02Because alpha depends on the elementary charge,
27:04Q, Planck's constant H,
27:06and the speed of light related to zero and A.
27:09In EGM, Q, H, and the zero ratio,
27:12which defines C in the vacuum,
27:14all transform or scale in exactly the same way
27:16as the properties of the polarizable vacuum
27:18change over time.
27:20So their ratios, which define alpha,
27:22remain perfectly constant.
27:24Okay.
27:24That's a neat way to preserve that invariance.
27:26True.
27:27Okay.
27:27We've covered a lot of ground.
27:29Pulling all this together,
27:30what's the elevator pitch for this EGM construct?
27:34Well, it's presented as this really compelling,
27:37highly integrated theoretical framework, isn't it?
27:39It tries to derive literally everything
27:41from one single starting point,
27:43that quantization of gravity.
27:44And in doing so,
27:45it directly challenges some really core ideas
27:47in the standard model.
27:49Like massive photons.
27:50Massive photons, massive gravitons,
27:51and crucially,
27:52the idea that key cosmological parameters
27:54aren't constant,
27:55but actually evolve with the universe.
27:57And its big claim is that this new perspective
27:59offers solutions to some of the major roadblocks
28:01in physics and cosmology right now.
28:03Exactly.
28:04It claims to resolve things like the Hubble tension,
28:07the flatness problem,
28:08that huge force ratio puzzle.
28:09And it reframes dark energy and dark matter completely.
28:13Not as weird, unknown stuff,
28:15but as the inherent mass energy of photons and gravitons
28:18within their structured vacuum.
28:20All leading to this picture of a dynamic, evolving,
28:24maybe even cyclic universe.
28:26What do the sources really emphasize
28:27as EGM's biggest strength,
28:29the points they want you to take away?
28:31They really hammer home
28:32its claimed predictive accuracy,
28:34that Hubble concept prediction from 2008
28:36being the prime example.
28:37They stress that it's supposedly derived
28:38from first principles with,
28:40and I quote loosely here,
28:41no reverse engineering or ad hoc fixes
28:44just to match data.
28:45And they constantly point to
28:46its high degree of internal mathematical consistency
28:49across different areas
28:50as evidence that the framework is solid.
28:52So for you, the listener,
28:54hearing about all this,
28:55what does it mean to engage
28:56with a framework like EGM?
28:58It sounds complex,
28:59maybe even improbable in parts.
29:01Yeah, and that's okay.
29:02I think it's a really powerful reminder
29:04that our understanding of the universe
29:06is absolutely still a work in progress, right?
29:10Engaging with theories like EGM,
29:12even if they seem out there
29:14or challenge deeply held beliefs,
29:16is valuable.
29:17It pushes the boundaries of how we think.
29:19Gets you question assumptions.
29:20Exactly.
29:21It forces us to question those assumptions
29:23we might take for granted
29:24and to consider how seemingly separate bits of physics,
29:27like, you know,
29:27the mass of one tiny particle
29:29and the expansion history of the entire cosmos,
29:31might actually be profoundly
29:32and fundamentally connected.
29:33It just shows that the quest
29:35for that unified picture of everything
29:37is still very much alive
29:38and full of potential surprises.
29:40That really does make you think.
29:42Maybe let's leave you, the listener,
29:43with this thought to ponder.
29:45If photons,
29:46these particles of light
29:47we've always pictured
29:48as pure massless energy,
29:50actually do carry some tiny amount of mass,
29:52no matter how incredibly small,
29:54what does that fundamentally change?
29:55How does that shift
29:56our understanding of light itself,
29:58of energy,
29:58maybe even the very nature of space-time?
30:00Could that infinitesimal mass
30:02be a hidden key,
30:03something we've overlooked
30:04that might unlock
30:05some of the universe's deepest secrets?
Recommended
16:34
|
Up next
20:28
19:43
15:14
16:04
17:14
30:45
8:36
7:06
10:15
8:42
11:25
9:25
13:36
27:38
17:41