PreprintPDF Available

Hybrid Time Theory: “Euler’s Formula” and the “Phi-Algorithm”

Preprints and early-stage research may not have been peer reviewed yet.

Abstract and Figures

Here a proposed time-equation conforms to a spherical wavefront of propagation in space in deriving the value of π. This will be achieved by first addressing how a time-equation should be most precisely and efficiently used to explain the notion of space and time in detailing a just as efficient and precise use of numbers describing the process of linking a 0 reference in space to an infinite reference. Then, that description will uphold the findings of papers 1-14 [1-14] in this series of papers, most importantly the final premise reached in paper 14 regarding natural radioactive decay. There it shall be explained exists an associated equation for time, not explicitly the proposed phi-algorithm for time, yet an associated algorithm of its own explained in Euler’s formula.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Page 1 of 12
Hybrid Time Theory: “Euler’s Formula” and the “Phi-Algorithm
Stephen H. Jarvis. (ORCiD)
Abstract: Here a proposed time-equation conforms to a spherical wavefront of propagation in space in deriving the
value of π. This will be achieved by first addressing how a time-equation should be most precisely and efficiently
used to explain the notion of space and time in detailing a just as efficient and precise use of numbers describing the
process of linking a 0 reference in space to an infinite reference. Then, that description will uphold the findings of
papers 1-14 [1-14] in this series of papers, most importantly the final premise reached in paper 14 regarding natural
radioactive decay. There it shall be explained exists an associated equation for time, not explicitly the proposed phi-
algorithm for time, yet an associated algorithm of its own explained in Euler’s formula.
Keywords: time; space; golden ratio; pi; phi; Euler’s formula; phi-algorithm
1. Introduction
In this series of papers on the φ-algorithm for time [1-14], the concept of time as the φ-algorithm
has been the core focus of topic. Through the development of the papers, the idea of the φ-algorithm for
time seeking to define has resulted in the development of a vast field of ideas covering what is perceived
and measured of the natural physical world, containing equations that fit all of the thus-far tackled
phenomenal data regarding the field forces for light, mass, and energy and associated constants thereof.
These results took shape from the initial premise of defining space as a “0” 3-d construct associated to
time, “time” as a concept that is tagged to a basic logical construct of consciousness, namely the features
Page 2 of 12
of time-before, time-now, and time-after, and how that process of time from time-before to time-after can
fit with the basic feature of 3-d 0-space in time-now.
It was initially proposed that time would propagate from any point in 0-space as a spherical
wavefront at a fixed rate. Now, in this paper, that assumption will be fully addressed, namely the
assumption of time seeking to conform to a spherical wavefront and thus to the notion of the value of .
This will be done by first addressing how words should be most precisely and efficiently be used to explain
the notion of space and time in detailing a just as efficient and precise use of numbers describing the
process of linking a zero (0) reference in space to an infinite (ꝏ) reference. Then that description will
uphold the findings of papers 1-14 [1-14], most importantly the final premise reached in paper 14 [14]
regarding the feature of    and associated process of natural radioactive decay as per Euler’s
formula [15]. There, it shall be explained exists an associated equation for time, not explicitly the φ-
algorithm for time, yet an associated algorithm of its own explained in Euler’s formula.
This paper will be structured as follows:
1. Introduction.
2. Explaining space and time with mathematics.
3. How time is currently measured.
4. Hybrid time-theory.
5. Conclusion.
The conclusion reached suggests that Euler’s formula as an equation for time implies a “naught”
future, as a natural process of radioactive decay, whereas the φ-algorithm presents a more worthwhile
steady-state process to time and space, yet a compromise can be reached between those two
determinations for time.
2. Explaining space and time with mathematics
In this chapter the assumption of 0-scalar space and associated time-algorithm seeking “, the
φ-algorithm, as presented in paper 1 [1] shall be addressed. Here, the basic idea of mathematics shall be
explained, why mathematics represents a type of “logic” for our tendency to “adapt” to reality, and what would
represent a most basic wording for the concepts of space and time. It should be noted that mathematics is a tool that
brings measurement as mathematics to gaze upon physical phenomena.
Science has evolved using mathematics in a fashion that standardises certain features of physical
phenomena, key features, as equations with associated constants. One need not be concerned about the
idea of space and time representing certain measurements as an a-priori. Indeed, space and time are
both unfathomable “until defined” with a mathematical tool of measurement, and thus for the "purpose" of
science, mathematics is employed to discuss their relationship, the relationship between space and time,
ideally as follows.
Page 3 of 12
2.1 Mathematics
Mathematics represents a broad field of interests, interests such as numerical quantity
as number theory, mathematical structure as algebra, space as geometry, and change as
mathematical analysis, employing with those ingredients certain mathematical models to
formulate conjectures, axioms of choice, through abstraction and logic that are proven true or
false through mathematical proof.
Successful proofs are considered as good models for real phenomena. Through such a
process, the notions of counting, calculation, and measurement, have been applied to the
phenomena of physical objects. Mathematics may nonetheless be purely mathematical without
any design or purpose in mind, yet Mathematics has primarily held its purpose in explaining the
world. In a world that was initially thought of a generally flat, the idea of explaining reality using a
flat surface with drawn lines and angles seemed to be intuitive for the ancients.
From such beginnings, certain "functions" in mathematical congress to explain numbers
and their association to one another become apparent, basic functions-operators such as
addition and subtraction, and even then the concept of what those numbers represent, such as
lines in space or length in time, had to be to be explained "with words", otherwise mathematics
was nothing but a collection of symbols with no literary meaning other than numbers alone with
expressed functions.
2.2 Explaining the diversity of equations, formulas, and theories.
To explain how such diversity has evolved in mathematical equations, formulas, and
theories, it can be considered that such diversity has depended on three key things:
1. Our conscious ability to achieve such, our conscious pixilation of intelligence and
2. The process of applying our intelligence and drive to what appears to be a never-
ending vastly and unfathomable reality.
3. Our diversity as beings, having a different point of view to each other, and thus
a vast well of unknowns based on the difficulty in sharing a common concept.
Each of such things are primary, and each of such things do not represent a mathematical
process in their entirety. Subsequently, the application of mathematics to observed phenomena
has focused primarily on physical objects in space and their motions with each other, and how
mathematics as numbers with associated structures can be related to space as a type of
geometry with an associated feature of change some would interpret as a process of time’s flow.
How mathematics has been applied to reality has depended primarily on the wording, the actual
transcript of context, for the use of mathematics central to the nature of space, the nature of
objects in space, and the nature of the motion of those objects in space.
Page 4 of 12
2.3 Wording a mathematical axiom for space
It could be suggested that the concept of space is a fairly routine concept to measure as
a mathematical construct requiring only a few words, only a few literary axioms, yet the concept
of time not so. Two key mathematical features used for space and time that appear to be fairly
routine through scientific definition is that space can be measured with a straight line using three
axes as 3 dimensional space, and time can be measured as a single dimension in regard to that
3d space. A few of the basic tenets of this process include:
- Straight lines are generally used to measure 1d space.
- A circle is measured in relation to 2d space as the curved line drawn as an arc
equidistant from a nominated central point of any nominated line.
Given a circle is very different to a line, , the value for the circumference of a circle with
diameter “1”, is why we need words to primarily describe the mathematics of a circle in regard to
space, to explain the connection between the arc of a radius drawn as a circle in reference to a
line (such as its diameter), and how that is achieved; simply, any key irrational number such as
needs words to explain exactly what is happening there, how that irrational number comes
into being.
To define why “” could be an irrational number, a key one, in words, is a good way to
set a standard of use of words to then describe other features of space that could be related to
for instance the idea of time; in describing with words alone, why "is" an irrational number,
one need only ask oneself how and why "" is related to a "line". For instance, take a straight
line, real and rational, determined, say length of arbitrary unit “1”, and then go to the midpoint of
that line and draw an arc around that straight line from the midpoint of that line. The proposal is
that length of the circle around that line can never be the concept of a complete number as the
distance of that line could be. Why? If one suggested that the concept of the distance of that line
the circle arcs around can never be determined, then how can that circle be drawn on such an
undetermined length of line? Furthermore, to draw that circle is to use a geometry related to that
line (diameter) that has no actual relationship to the exactness of the number assigned to the
distance of that line other than a value that (as a number related to that line) is forever incomplete
as a description of a number value, as it can only be, in trying to link the beginning of that line
with the end of that line without being that line. In other words, that line could be at any angle in
reference to the circle. That’s intuitive; and so, if the line is known as a determined length, its
circle can never be properly defined, and thus must be irrational. Therefore, how indeed can a
straight line be in a perfect ratio with a circle if the angle of that line in space can never be
determined owing to the nature itself of the circle, no beginning, and no end? The question is how
such improbability of exact definition manifests itself in reality.
Page 5 of 12
How does this look therefore on paper in the form of a mathematical axiom for space,
with the notion of time being the variable seeking to perfect , as though time is a type of endless
algorithm forever trying to reach the perfect value of ? Consider a total “1” length of a line “A”
that could represent “any” part of an infinite region of 2-d space around a central “0” point, as
follows (figure 1):
Here the blue dotted line “B” is the value “. Yet what indeed is the value “”? Can it be
represented as a whole number, a fraction even? One thing that is certain is that the circle never
gets to “0”, never breaches the “0” point.
Therefore, as an arbitrary condition of definition here, let it be suggested that in regard
to space for the circle,
represents that “non-0 concept for the circle in that the circle as a type
of curved line in not skewing “0” would somehow constantly “approach” zero from a
reference, never meeting it though, as per equation 1.
 (1.)
In other words, the “reference” of the blue line “A” represents a unit vale per anywhere in
“as” what would trace a “circle” if “0” is not being used as the reference for that line. It is just a
statement that dispels the notion of “0” and replaces it with the idea of
for the idea of the circle.
Yet how can be defined to give substance to this reference for the circle?
Let it now be suggested that to define this circle one must use an increasing denominator
value from the reference of line A as a fraction central to “0”, in approaching “0” from a
value in order to define the “0” reference; more correctly, in approaching the “0” reference,
the length of the circle as an exact number would represent a number not expressed by a perfect
single fraction given can never be defined, yet a series of fractions that would employ the use
Figure 1: here, A is a straight line of length
“1” in any infinite region of 2d space effected
by the axes x and y around an arbitrarily
reference point “0” such that from that “0”
point the line extends a length of +½ and
½ from that “0” reference. “B” is the value
of as the arc around the central point “0”
radius ½.
Page 6 of 12
of a denominator of the fraction extending to through a process of subtraction and addition
around a “0” reference (as technically “0” is being approached, yet never reached, as what the
“circle” wold best represent relevant to this line “A”), as per equation 2:
   
 (2.)
The problem there though is that any fraction as a factor of
cannot be used, as
integral to the length of each axis for line A (relevant to “0”) of the line being used, and
therefore unique” numbers NOT integral to
thus must be used. Therefore, the process
would become as equation 3:
   
 (3.)
Why is subtraction and addition used in this manner? The point here is being central to
while approaching the “0” reference, and thus what must be a negative and positive scale around
the “0” reference, the first step clearly being a negative step from the basic “1” line reference
(diameter of the circle), the step following that a positive step, the step after that a negative step,
and so on and so forth. In short, the idea of “0” is best explained central to
by this definition for
the circle.
Thus, we start with 1 as the overall length of the line, and then seek to determine how to
define the circle as a concept that would “approach” a “0 reference therewith, to create a process
of balancing subtraction and addition central to this “0 reference of an overall “1” line, one
length to the
length meeting at a “0” point, from
. Once again note that any
factor of
from 1 to cannot be used in this sequence owing to
already representing the scale
of each axis in use for line A, as a unique scale is needed “from” that
scale all the way to
for the circle.
Yet the next question is, what value, what fraction, of is being calculated through
this process? Is “being calculated whole or a fraction of ? The value of being calculated
can only be a factor of the axes being used, and here this is as a progression based on one
positive axis of length
and one negative axis of length
, and thus a factor of
. Thus, equation
3 must become as equation 4:
   
 (4.)
Note also that is a concept that would exist by default as a very large number, and
thus for the most accurate value for
to be reached this series of fractions must extent to include
Page 7 of 12
a denominator approaching , in successfully demonstrating the reference for the circle of
is the value reached that joins the ends of each axis from “0” to a value of
as the radius
around “0”, as it only can be, as this is not a direct calculation of the ends of the axes together,
yet the value held in the context of . The next real question is, what is the implication of this
curve?”. Is it a feature of space or a feature of time? The thinking is that if space has already
been measured as the straight-line axes incorporating line “A”, space as the “0” construct
anywhere and everywhere, then the value of the curve () in the context of would be relevant
to that other fundamental feature of reality, “time”, which shall be discussed shortly.
Nonetheless, this equation is an actual confirmed equation for , as reached through
different axioms of definition as per the work of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz [16] and Madhava of
Sangamagrama [17]. Here though, has been reached by this equation in the context of defining
the hypothetical concepts of “0” and using straight lines and a circle for 2d space, which can
then be applied to a 3d grid of space. Note that this is not a process of rounding something off
using an infinite progression, this is quite the opposite, this is accepting the nature of what is
being defined and why it is being defined in such a manner. The question though is, “how can
this algorithm as space represent a function of time?”. Its fine to define this concept of space as
, yet what about defining using a function of time? That has been the quest in paper 1-14 [1-
14] using the φ-algorithm for time, and to demonstrate its worth by deriving known feature of time
and space.
In short, if space is associated to”0”, time is associated to the value of a circle, to , the
emphasis of the preceding papers [1-14]. This is why it was considered very intuitive to use this
idea for the wave-function of light in this series of papers [1-14], namely time as the wave-function
seeking to define ”. The implication here is that if 3d-0 space can be determined with lines
exactly, as an ideal scenario, then light cannot and should not be exactly determinable other than
seeking to define .
Here the idea of time is given the quality of not just our conscious ability (time-before,
time-now, and time-after) as described per paper 1 ([1]: p1-6) (the φ-algorithm for time), yet a
property of an axis associated to space, as an analogue of a sinusoidal wave in space along an
axis whose aim is to properly “define” , as per paper 2 ([2]: p4-12). The quest of that paper and
subsequent papers was to determine how that function for time, that wave-function, would
represent what would be “perceived” of reality. And so each paper built upon that basic wave-
function for time in space, driving the basic features of such an association of time with space,
time “as” the consciousness-related algorithm of time in space, as per what would be the most
logical thing to perceive of reality using that concept of time, that golden ratio signature of time,
based on the basic conscious notions we have for time, namely time-before, time-now, and time-
after. That theory then led to where we are now, using those 14 papers [1-14] to then take a
Page 8 of 12
general and complete look at what has been achieved and perhaps why the scientific community
has yet to cotton-on with such a theory.
The general criticism of contemporary physics in light of the φ-algorithm for time is
contemporary physics’ use of inertia as a concept of cause and effect as opposed to the natural
cause and effect flow of time of time-before to time-after via time-now, and how such a concept
has limited contemporary physics theory, preventing contemporary physics theory from properly
understanding the nature of light in “pure space” and why there is such a thing as the redshift of
light [13], and how a correct understanding of light in space through a correct understanding of
the axiom of time and space can solve the cosmological constant problem [14]. Yet inertia is not
the fundamental problem for contemporary physics. There is something more fundamental that
seems to be the over-arching problem for contemporary physics theory, and that is how
contemporary physics theory measures the concept of time. The only way to highlight this feature
of how time is measured using inertia theory, the basis of Newton and Einstein’s theories of mass
in space with time, and how ineffective it is, is to make the necessary comparison to the φ-
algorithm for time theory, that equation, with a few key highlights,
3. How time is currently measured
As indicated by the successful results of papers 1-14 [1-14], as summarized in paper 14 ([14]: p
29-30) by comparison to contemporary science, in not setting a suitable standard for the idea of “0” and
and as a notion of space, another process was used as per contemporary science, that being the
exponential grid equations introduced by Euler. The force behind Euler’s formula is equally interesting,
for we should ask ourselves how the idea of using in an algorithm became sought after in physics. For
Euler at the time, it was the mathematics of financial wealth, namely compound interest (superannuation),
for is the number linked to exponential growth, a key determinant in financial analysis. In mathematics,
Euler’s formula, or Euler's identity, named after its founder the Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler, is
as (equation 5):
   (5.)
where e is Euler's number [18], the base of natural logarithms, is the imaginary unit, which by definition
satisfies i2 = −1, and is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter.
Euler’s formula is considered to be a standard of mathematical beauty in demonstrating the
profound connection between the most fundamental numbers in mathematics in the way it does.
Nonetheless, Euler’s formula uses the idea of and as a limiting function with , whereas the concept
presented in this paper regarding time as the φ-algorithm uses the idea of 0-1- and as a primary
definition for space which is then annexed with ” as a time-algorithm. Nonetheless, for an equation such
as Euler’s to be presented so simply and fundamentally, it certainly must represent a key concept for
reality, for instance, space or time. It does, as a type of analogue for time. And such is indeed the case,
Page 9 of 12
as the idea of time is measured objectively using Euler’s formula regarding the concept of the time-
constant [19]. Here, Euler’s formula is used to explain the radioactive decay of particles, and does this
with the radioactive decay of the Caesium atom [20] central to the idea of a “half-life” [21]. Yet, one may
ask if time is in fact completely a process of radioactive decay? What are the general applications
therefore of Euler’s formula?
Half-life (t1⁄2) [21], the key application of Euler’s formula, is the time required for a nominated
quantity to reduce itself to half of its initial nominated quantity value. It has applications in two key fields
of study:
Ernest Rutherford applied the principle of Euler’s formula as the radioactive decay
of an element, as a half-life, to study the age of rocks through measuring the decay
period of radium to lead-206.
In nuclear physics half-life describes how quickly unstable atoms undergo
radioactive decay (or conversely how long they survive, depending on the choice of
view, half full or half empty); nuclear chain reactions as per a uranium nucleus
undergoing fission produce multiple neutrons that each can be absorbed by adjacent
uranium atoms, causing them also to undergo fission reactions, and thus a runaway
exponential explosion.
Avalanche breakdown is the term given for a dielectric material whereby a free
electron frees up additional electrons as it collides with atoms or molecules of the
dielectric media after becoming sufficiently accelerated by an externally applied
electrical field; the subsequent secondary electrons behave the same way as the
initial free electron. The resulting exponential growth of electrons and ions may
rapidly lead to complete dielectric breakdown of the material
Generally, half-life describes any type of exponential or non-exponential decay; the
biological half-life of drugs and other chemicals in the human body is based on
Euler’s formula.
Converse to the idea of half-life is the idea of doubling time”, used to describe
biological population growth.
Studies show that the population of microorganisms in a culture
increases exponentially until an essential nutrient is exhausted,
indicating a constant growth rate.
So too with the Human population; for instance, the population of the
United States of America is exponentially increasing at an average rate
of one and a half percent a year (1.5%), and thus the doubling time of
the American population is approximately 50 years [22].
Page 10 of 12
The initial utility of Euler’s formula was in compound interest, yet as is apparent it has been
applied to the idea of a “time-constant” [19] for radio-active decay as the value of the time it takes for
decay to reach
, which technically bases the value of time as a type of compound percentage value,
when in fact the concept of time can be something else entirely. How did this happen? It was considered
that the idea of half-life is a constant over the lifetime of an exponentially decaying quantity, that radio-
active decay is constant as an accumulative measure of any such quantity.
Such is the contemporary understanding for time as an objective measurement of such processes
that can be relied upon as a standard (as per the radioactive decay of the Caesium atom [20]), time that
uses that process of “decay”, decay of a quantity of an atom no longer being a part of the process of time.
Time though when locked in with space according to the φ-algorithm has a different function as highlighted
in papers 1-14 [1-14]; the issue with exponential growth and exponential decay is one of an atom that is
undergoing a process of exponential growth or decay, radiation, that is no longer a part of the stabilized
form of space and time, yet instead a part of the unhinged and unbound process of time and space, as
highlighted in paper 14 ([14]: p26). Such processes would occur as a manner of disintegration, even
exponential growth, as exponential growth incurs a resource-incursion that takes away from an otherwise
time-correct steady state situation; exponential decay or growth are two sides of the one coin, as even in
a situation of the growth of cellular material, there would be an accountable exponential loss of resources.
In short, as per paper 14 [14], it seems that in the process of times flow as the φ-algorithm, there
is an allowance for radioactive decay (as radioactive decay), and thus a distinct allowance for the idea of
Euler’s formula for time and the φ-algorithm for time as one ([14]: p26), held in the one general overall
equation for time of the φ-algorithm. How can such be possible? The answer lies in the code itself, the
presented function, of Euler’s formula according to the φ-algorithm and their relationship to the phi-
quantum wave-function spatial template.
Euler’s formula on the surface is analogous to where   and   and
, as per equation 6:
    (6.)
The idea of   is essential to understanding this is a time-equation for particle decay, or quite
simply, a 0-future outcome of particles in regard to energy. The component of time as is simply
represented to a power of on a complex number plane, as in a complex number plane.
This is the proposed hybrid time feature, namely , and
   , and will be
demonstrated to be essential to a basic understanding of the energy processes for time and space as
timespace, to be proposed in a subsequent paper.
Page 11 of 12
4. Conclusion
The purpose of this paper has been to present a case for why the φ-algorithm for time seeks to
define “”, and how this happens, to address the assumption of 0-scalar 3d space in paper 1. Yet in doing
so, interesting new conclusions become apparent regarding the current contemporary scientific
measurement process of time, namely via an equation, Euler’s formula [15], that primarily represents a
process of “decay” (or growth, depending on the perspective of interest). In short, if space is associated
to”0”, time is associated to the value of a circle, to , and both are proposed to be to the basic human
perception ability which when reduced to three features of time as time-before to time-now to time-after
brings to bear the φ-algorithm for time, which then brings to bear the phi-quantum wave-function for light
seeking , which then as a process of time in space manifests the theory for time and space and all
associated processes such as electromagnetism, gravity, and mass, to make that work, as per papers 1-
14 [1-14], as summarised in paper 14 ([14]: p29-30). The task ahead is to add further resolution of
understanding to the energy components of these equations for time and space and thence a description
for associated phenomena.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest; this has been an entirely self-funded independent project.
1. Jarvis S. H. (2017), Gravity’s Emergence from Electrodynamics,'s_Emergence_from_Electrodynamics,
2. Jarvis S. H. (2017), Golden Ratio Axioms of Time and Space,,
3. Jarvis S. H. (2017), The Emergence of Consciousness from Chaos,,
4. Jarvis S. H. (2017), Phi-Quantum Wave function Crystal Dynamics,,
5. Jarvis S. H. (2017), Time as Energy,
6. Jarvis S. H. (2018), The Relativity of Time,
7. Jarvis S. H. (2019), Golden Ratio Entropic Gravity: Gravitational Singularity Field Testing,
Page 12 of 12
8. Jarvis S. H. (2019), The Golden Ratio Time Algorithm,,
9. Jarvis S. H. (2019), The Physics Chimera,,
10. Jarvis S. H. (2019), The Conception of Time,,
11. Jarvis S. H. (2019), Space, and the propagation of Light,
12. Jarvis S. H. (2019), Space, and the Nature of Gravity,,
13. Jarvis S. H. (2019), Space, and the Redshift Effect,,
14. Jarvis S. H. (2019), Solving The Cosmological Constant Problem,,
15. Moskowitz, Martin A. (2002). A Course in Complex Analysis in One Variable. World Scientific Publishing Co. p. 7.
ISBN 981-02-4780-X. Retrieved 13 January 2020.
16. Davis, Martin (28 February 2018). The Universal Computer : The Road from Leibniz to Turing, Third Edition. CRC
Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-1-138-50208-6. Retrieved 13 January 2020.
17. T. Hayashi, T. Kusuba and M. Yano. 'The correction of the Madhava series for the circumference of a circle', Centaurus
33 (pages 149174). 1990. Retrieved 13 January 2020.
18. Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed.: natural logarithm Retrieved 13 January 2020.
19. Bong Wie (1998). Space vehicle dynamics and control. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. p. 100.
ISBN 978-1-56347-261-9. Retrieved 13 January 2020.
20. L. Essen, J.V.L. Parry (1955). "An Atomic Standard of Frequency and Time Interval: A Caesium Resonator". Nature.
176 (4476): 280. Bibcode:1955Natur.176..280E. doi:10.1038/176280a0 Retrieved 13 January 2020.
21. Muller, Richard A. (April 12, 2010). Physics and Technology for Future Presidents. Princeton University Press. pp. 128
129. ISBN 9780691135045. Retrieved 13 January 2020.
22. 2010 Census Data, "U.S. Census Bureau", 20 Dec 2012, Internet Archive: Retrieved 13 January
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Full-text available
In taking up from the preliminary papers [1-11], the idea of gravity as a process of the nature of space shall be presented; the idea of space will be defined in a way that is able to support how Newton derived the equation for gravity using astronomical observations consistent with gravity being an "immediate" field force and not one travelling at "c", while accommodating for Einstein's "curvature of spacetime" theory for gravity. In using a definition of space that carries the notion of gravity being an immediate field force, a number of key features of quantum mechanics are able to be explained regarding the behaviour of light, this by defining "space" as "nothingness", and as a type of feature of "uncertainty" that a quantum reference would abide by, as though space has its own "program" as "nothing", putting everything within it as that which is defined as uncertain, not clearly definable, and thus must exist randomly, like a process of natural uncertainty. It is then highlighted how Einstein's special and general relativity is incorrect in its application of the idea of measuring inertial frames of reference using the speed of light in his assuming, through such a process, that gravity, and thus inertial frames of reference, operate at light speed, despite relativity theory being accurate with the idea of gravity as a curvature of spacetime. Finally, an update to the method of proof in paper 7 [7], "Golden Ratio Entropic Gravity: Gravitational Singularity Field Testing", is offered based on this new understanding of space and gravity, with associated confirmatory results posted.
Full-text available
In this paper, a follow-on from papers 1-9 [1-9], the idea of consciousness as a feature of the process itself of scientific inquiry shall come to attention; here, as per the previous papers and in alliance with contemporary notions of the idea of consciousness and time, the idea of "consciousness" shall be presented as the ideal "fixed" frame of reference with time, going a step beyond the concept both Descartes and Einstein assumed in their works as a requirement of scientific theory genesis for the ideas of time and space, and above all "our required ability to exercise certain conscious functions to fully utilise the associated theory of time and space". Ultimately, this proposed model of consciousness shall be demonstrated to not only abide with contemporary models of consciousness and thought, yet take those ideas a step ahead, as much as the new theory for time and space presented here as the golden ratio algorithm for time is being considered as a step ahead of contemporary ideas in physics. The aim here is not to change the impetus of our thinking, our philosophizing, or our world-view, yet to assess how a new theory of time and space aligns with a new ability, a new exercise of our conscious ability, to achieve that ability, to theorize time and space anew, as a step ahead of what has been previously thought possible in defining not just time, yet that tagged reference to time as consciousness.
Full-text available
This paper, a follow-on from seven previous papers [1]-[7], will discuss historical notions of time in science, time as a concept applied to scientific theory, and then discuss those problems that have been presented to science in using certain axiom definitions of time. The newly proposed axiom for time is re-presented as an algorithm that can knit together much of what is known of physical scientific data, including Einstein’s well-known equation. The quest of this paper is to demonstrate that it is possible to marry up many known scientific principles using a common mathematical “function” for time, as the golden ratio time-equation.
Full-text available
This paper presents the "testing" of the golden ratio algorithm for time as per the previously explained new theory for time in those featured papers, focussing on the idea of gravity "emerging" from EM on the atomic level. The thus-far "testing" is explained as per the experiments detailed in this paper, and analysed.
Full-text available
The idea of consciousness emerging from chaos is not a new idea. In fact, it is one of the oldest ideas of philosophy. What makes it an important idea to herald here in the context of a newly proposed time-equation for space incorporating the Golden Ratio is how the idea of consciousness as a time-equation is associated to “chaos theory”. This third paper shall briefly discuss the Schrodinger equation for light, and then present an improved equation as the time-equation Schrodinger analogue. From there, in using the time-equation, the idea of the emergence of a natural error from the temporal wave function shall be demonstrated to represent a well-known equation for chaos theory, the “logistic map equation”. From there shall be presented the idea of consciousness as a need for this system of time and space to resolve the disparity between light and particle location, together with the need to reach an exact value for “π”. A list of features of this proposal of consciousness as an emergent entity will be presented describing well-known features of conscious expression.
Full-text available
A new approach to understanding the fundamental particles and associated forces via a new a priori definition for space and time is forwarded, and is then linked to contemporary equations for Gravity and Electromagnetism; space as an infinitesimal universal “0”-scalar manifold, and “time” as the “feature” that divides and “qualifies” each 0-scalar spatial reference is discussed. Further, the idea of gravity as an emergent quality of electromagnetism (which here is given the spectra of “time” itself) is proposed by assuming 3-dimensional space as the “fine-structure 0-scalar manifold” while considering "time" as the “symmetry-breaking” principle of entropy “effecting” space, opening to a new mathematical method of applying the concept of time as the “Golden Ratio” equation to spatial transformations. By this process a link between gravity and electromagnetism is established, together with a proposal for the genesis of the four field forces via explaining atomic particle congress in the context of this time-equation, all of such granting electron shell modelling precisely according to the Rydberg description, setting a platform for further theoretic proposals and modelling.
Full-text available
This sequel to “Gravity’s Emergence from Electrodynamics” will more closely examine the golden ratio time-equation when applied to space. Here, we shall develop a wave-function equation for π, the fine structure constant, a determination for the speed of light, while also confirming through these independent equations the idea of the Uncertainty Principle and Quantum Entanglement. More specifically, a number of fundamental things to be demonstrated here using the golden ratio time-equation include deriving the dipole of magnetism, the electrical monopole field, and their relation to the Fine Structure Constant, charge of the electron, the speed of light, and elementary particle traits.