User talk:Rjowsey

Let's be honest now...

Did you or not create User:Siddhant Singhji‎ as a sock to appear "confused" with general relativity because of its apparently "extraordinarily complicated" maths, so that you could respond and include your complex spacetime framework as a possible answer? M∧Ŝc²ħε И_τlk 23:48, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No. Rjowsey (talk) 23:51, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I get it now, and will leave it here. Thanks for being honest as requested and good luck with your mathematical framework and eventual physical theory. M∧Ŝc²ħε И_τlk 23:53, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I don't have any fucking theory! I have some very useful math. And I study science history, for fun. Rjowsey (talk) 23:55, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maxwell is one of my favourite dudes, in the history of science. I started messing with electronics and radio when I was 12 years old, the youngest guy in NZ to get a ham radio license, age 16. Built all the gear, from scratch. Employed by the University of Auckland as a research assistant, age 19. Helped with gravitational wave research in 1972, then studied physics with Prof Roy Kerr (the spinning black holes guy) at University of Canterbury. So I've had a life-long fascination with black holes and gravity, but by nature, I'm a generalist, not a specialist. I was reading a biography on Maxwell, and realised that his math used a complex manifold, with 3 extra imaginary dimensions. The great divide between GR and QM is that QM has complexity, GR doesn't. So I had a go at putting SR into a couple complex planes, one for position & momentum, the other for time & energy. And it fucking worked. Beautifully. Spits out exactly the same numbers as the classical Lorentz transform. So I went back to Maxwell, and found the clues he'd left in his Treatise, deliberately, because he loved puzzles. So I plugged his M = L³/T² into the Planck Units, and out fell 5 spatial dimensions. Gotta have 2 extra dimensions of space. They must be imaginary, because MATH. So I built a simulator to generalise the solution for special relativity, over the entire imaginary plane. The 2 Dirac spinors fell out, plus a whole heap of elegant, simple, beautiful MATH which solves GR and quantum spin. I tutor some gifted kids in physics, so I showed them this math, and they fucking loved it. So did their science teacher, because these kids knew more about relativity than they did. Kids badgered me to write a WP article, so I tried. End of story. Rjowsey (talk) 02:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, Maxwell's frame was: (x, y, z, iλ₁, jλ₂, kλ₃) where ijk = i² = j² = k² ≡ −1 [quaternion metric]. It's the golden key. A unified framework fell out of that, which actually should've been found 100 years ago, it's so bloody obvious (once you've seen it). Rjowsey (talk) 02:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

...provides the coordinate basis for a 6D Quaternion-Kähler manifold, which is the perfect geometry for special and general relativity. And for massless bosons and fermions, per the Dirac equation (with π/4 phase offsets). High-school math. Simple, beautiful, elegant. Rjowsey (talk) 02:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]