1

A Bio-Info-Digital Universe Model (BIDUM, version 1.0) inspired by a Teller’s large

number hypothesis overlooked by the great majority of physicists

(including Tipler, Barrow, Dirac and Einstein) but also Teller himself

*

(Open development interval: 2008 – 2015 - ?)

*

Andrei Lucian Drăgoi1,2,3

*

Motto: "[God]: universe is nothing but a big copying machine, reproducing your thoughts [pure information]

in physical form [energy/matter], that will be your experience” 4

(Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God, 3rd volume)

Abstract

„Edward Teller appears to have been the first who speculate that there may exist a logarithmic

relation between the fine structure constant (α) and the parameter G·mN2/h·c~10

-39 of the form

α~ln(G·mN2/h·c) (in fact α

-1=ln(3.17 x 10

60 and the formula is too insensitive to be of very much use in

predicting exact relations)“5.

I will try to demonstrate that Barrow and Tipler (but also the great majority of the physicists including

those mentioned in the title) overlooked the possibility that Teller’s hypothesis (called “speculation”) may be

much more inspired and profound than the Dirac’s large number hypothesis (DLNH), as it can offer an

elegant explanation both to the fine structure constant (FSC) and to DLNH (using FSC) and also can

predict a Planck-like gravitational constants series and a big G series (a G “imprint” for every type of

atom in any state) as a unified quantum-relativistic theory of quantum gravity that is experimentally

testable.

IDUM proposes an informational view on the universe in which all physical constants can be derived

(at least theoretically) from just one parameter: the total information of the universe (a quantum

fluctuation resulted from a huge informational input to a “nothing” 0D vacuum). In IDUM the mass-energy

conservation (thermodynamics) and equivalence (Einstein) laws become the consequence of an information

conservation law (which is fundamental in IDUM).

IDUM tries to demonstrate that the universe can be modeled as a multi-processor quantum

(gravity) computer in which all the fundamental forces are just the result of reading the same total

information in different dimensional frames.

1 Romanian pediatrician partially self-educated in theoretical physics and IT

2 Email: dr.dragoi@yahoo.com

3 Mailing Address: Str. Lucrețiu Pătrășcanu, nr.3, bl. Y1, sc. 1, ap. 144, Bucharest, Romania

4 www.nytimes.com/books/first/w/walsch-god3.html

5 Barrow, John D., and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986, p.230

and ref. no. 37 from p.29: E. Teller, Phys. Rev. 73, 801, (1948) (www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle-Oxford-

Paperbacks/dp/0192821474)

2

Part 1: A fine structure constant binary logarithm coincidence series

overlooked by the vast majority of physicists

In the abstract mN stands for (free) nucleon (proton / neutron) rest mass. All the physical constants used

in this article are based on CODATA 2012 recommendations and are all measured in SI units (see Table 1)

Table 1. The abbreviations used in this article

Mn / Mp / Me (free) neutron/ proton/ electron rest mass

tP / lP / mP Planck time / length / mass

Qe / Ke / ε0 /

c / Re

the elementary charge (so that not to be confused with Euler number e) / Coulomb constant / vacuum

permittivity / the speed of light in vacuum / classical electron radius

α the inverse of fine structure constant6 (abbreviation chosen for the simplicity and intelligibility of the equations):

αhr c⋅

Qe2

4 π⋅ ε0⋅

137.036

αG

αGr=αG/2π

the inverse of gravitational coupling constant7 (abbreviation chosen for the simplicity and intelligibility of the

equations):

αGhr c⋅

G Me2

⋅

MP

Me

2

5.709 1044×

G The DAH-based (for DAH see below) quantum variant of the Newtonian universal gravitational constant

(G / QG or Gq: „quantum big G”); the classical experimentally determined G will be named as

GCODATA2012

h / hr / hrr Planck constant / the reduced Planck constant (h/2π) / the „double” reduced Planck constant (h/4π) (4π is a

Moebius-like double-circle complete cycle on a 4D hypersphere: a possible trajectory of the

gravitons/pair of interchanged gravitons)

Eph(λ) the energy of a single photon: Eph λ( ) h

c

λ

NBE (average) nuclear binding energy (per each nucleon) (average nuclear mass defect per each nucleon)8

ln (x) the e-base (natural) logarithm of x>0

log2(x) the 2-base (binary) logarithm of x>0.

DLNH Dirac’s large number hypothesis

NL-TH natural logarithm (variant of) Teller’s9 hypothesis

BL-TH binary logarithm (variant of) Teller’s hypothesis

DAH Drăgoi’s alpha (constant) hypothesis (my hypothesis based on a binary logarithm subvariant of Teller’s

hypothesis)

(B)IDUM (Bio-)Info-Digital Universe Model (a model of the physical universe using DAH as main premise and

based on the analogy with a multi-processor quantum computer)

LMI location-and-moment information

LMIP location-and-moment information packs

ACP (The) Anthropic Cosmological Principle10

HUP Heisenberg Uncertainty principle

6 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_structure_constant

7 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_coupling_constant

8 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy

9 ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Teller

10 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe;

3

It is clearly that using natural logarithm in the Teller’s hypothesis is „too insensitive to be of very

much use in predicting exact relations” (see Table 2)

Table 2. The „insensitive” NL-TH variant

α 137.036= ln

h c⋅

G Mn2

⋅

89.86 65.574 % α⋅

eα

3.266 1059×=

h c⋅

G Mn2

⋅1.061 10

39×1

3.078 1022× %

eα

Even if Teller himself overlooked the possibility of using binary logarithm (not natural logarithm) in his

hypothesis mentioned in the abstract, it is quite strange that the vast majority of physicists also overlooked this

possibility from 1948 until present (I have emailed a couple of years ago Mr. Barrow and Mr. Tipler on this

BL-TH variant (see Tables 3 and 4) for their book next edition review, but never received any answer). This

overlooking is quite similar to the background radiation prediction that had escaped unnoticed by the majority

of physicists quite a few decades.

Table 3. The much more „sensitive” BL-TH variant

α 137.036=

log2h c⋅

G Mn2

⋅

129.641 94.603 % α⋅

2α

1.786 1041×=

h c⋅

G Mn2

⋅1.061 10

39× 0.594 % 2α⋅

Table 4. Other „striking sensitive” BL-TH subvariants

α 137.036=

log2h c⋅

G Me⋅ Mp⋅

140.487 102.518 % α⋅

log2h c⋅

G Me⋅ Mn⋅

140.485 102.517 % α⋅

log2hr c⋅

G Me⋅ Mp⋅

137.836 100.583 % α⋅

log2hr c⋅

G Me⋅ Mn⋅

137.834 100.582 % α⋅

2α

1.786 1041×=

hr c⋅

G Me⋅ Mp⋅3.109 10

41× 174.055 % 2α

hr c⋅

G Me⋅ Mn⋅3.105 10

41× 173.816 % 2α

hrr c⋅

G Me⋅ Mp⋅1.555 10

41× 87.028 % 2α

4

hrr c⋅

G Me⋅ Mn⋅1.552 10

41× 86.908 % 2α

The most striking “sensitive” BL-TH sub-variant (which I’ve called DAH in the abbreviation Table 1) (see Table 5) deserves a very special attention in my opinion as it may have great importance in

formulating a quantitative description/prediction of gravitons and quantum gravity theory. I consider it very

small the probability that this “too-elegant” numerical coincidence is “just” the result of pure chance. I don’t

have any information from the physics literature11

on a more sensitive theoretical numerical prediction of αg

and a quantum G (including the Einstein’s famous 8πG general relativity equation factor) using only α (as

an adimensional combination of almost all the physical constants fundamental to quantum mechanics theory).

In this article I shall try to argue that the power of predicting a gravitational Planck-like constants (mass

quanta) and a theoretical quantum G series (similar to the experimental G determinations and variations) makes DAH very probable to be a true non-coincidence due to a more profound undiscovered

law of nature which I’ll try to demonstrate in my IDUM (a possible scale-invariance12

law in a possible

fractal universe13

). DAH non-coincidence suggests that FSC has a dual electrogravitational significance

(with FSC being a both electromagnetic and gravitational constant). I also support Dirac’s famous quote

that “if the [physical] equations are not simple and elegant, they are probably wrong.”: Koide

coincidence is one (still debated) example that has successfully predicted the tauon mass within one

standard deviation from its observed value. Similarly, DAH could offer an elegant explanation to DLNH.

Table 5. The most striking „sensitive” BL-TH subvariant: DAH

α 137.036=

log2h c⋅

4 π⋅( ) α

3

2⋅ G Me

2⋅( )

137.0304 99.996 % α⋅

2α

1.786 1041×=

h c⋅

4 π⋅( ) α

3

2⋅ G Me

2⋅( )

1.779 1041× 99.613 % 2

α⋅

h c⋅

G Me2

⋅4 π⋅( )α

3

22

α⋅

8 π⋅ G⋅h c⋅

α

3

22

α 1−⋅

Me

2⋅

hr c⋅

G Me2

⋅2 α

3

2⋅ 2

α⋅ α

3

22

α 1+⋅ hrr c⋅

G Me2

⋅α

3

22

α⋅

11

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant 12

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_invariance; en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_spiral 13

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_cosmology

5

αGhr c⋅

G Me2

⋅2α

3

22

α⋅ α

3

22

α 1+⋅ αGrhrr c⋅

G Me2

⋅α

3

22

α⋅

Analogously to single λ-wavelength photon energy [Eph(λ)], the gravitational energy of a 2 rest

electron/positron vacuum system (G·Me2/λ) is the consequence of 2 “Ping-Pong” co-phase-graviton-packs

interchange (with the speed of light in vacuum and wavelength λ) between the 2 rest electrons/positrons at the

maximum frequency of emission for the electron/positron (1/ λ, with minimum λ close to the

electron/positron diameter): I shall name this pack of co-phase gravitons an electrograviton (eg). The energy

of an eg [Eeg(λ)] can be defined as a scalar analogous to the single photon energy using a

theoretical/hypothetical electrogravitonic Planck-like constant (heg) which is very plausible (as the

gravitational analogue of electromagnetic Planck constant) and can be predicted using DAH (see Table 6)

In IDUM heg (mass quanta) measures the granulation of the 4D-ST itself which may explain why

all the other physical quantities (from all the other forces/fields) seem also discrete quantum/quantized

when measured. Heg doesn’t measure the smallest granulation of the 4D-ST (as lP and tP are the

maximum measurable resolution of that granulation), but the electrogravitational granulation/pixilation

of 4D-ST. IDUM postulates an universal electrogravitational (non-maximum) granulation/pixilation of

all 4D-ST “scene” and all its particle-“actors” (see also the superposing between string theory and

quantum gravity theory14

)

Table 6. DAH predicts a plausible electrogravitonic Planck-Drăgoi constant (heg)

Eph λ( ) hc

λh ν⋅

Eeg λ( ) hegc

λheg ν⋅ G Me

2⋅

λ2 Eeg λ( )⋅ 2 heg

c

λ⋅

⋅

G Me2

⋅ 2 heg⋅ c⋅

h c⋅

G Me2

⋅

h c⋅

2 heg⋅ c⋅4 π⋅( )α

3

22

α⋅

h

2heg4 π⋅( )α

3

22

α⋅

hegh

8 π⋅( ) α

3

2⋅ 2

α⋅

heghr

4 α

3

2⋅ 2

α⋅

heghrr

2 α

3

2⋅ 2

α⋅

hrr

α

3

22

α 1+⋅

The factor that connects h and heg constants can be named ”electrogravitational constant” (KEG)

and offers a seductive scalar unification between electromagnetism and gravity. Although speculative,

there is a good possibility that KEG may represent the electrogravitonic “granulation” factor of the photon

(as the 4D-ST vacuum is granulated and the photon “borrows” that granulation as all quantum particles

are 4D-ST vacuum phenomena): the (integer) number of co-phase linear (λ -) egs in a single (λ -)photon

(NEgP). The possible “granular” structure of a photon (similar to a laser beam of co-phase linear (same)

λ-egs) may explain the wave-particle duality of the photon and offers an interesting explanation15

for the

double slit experiment and for the de Broglie hypothesis. Similar to the photon, the electron may be

14

Matthias Blau, Stefan Theisen. String theory as a theory of quantum gravity: a status report

(link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10714-008-0752-z)

15 Patrick J. Coles, Jedrzej Kaniewski, Stephanie Wehner. Equivalence of wave–particle duality to entropic uncertainty. Nature

Communications, 2014; 5: 5814 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms6814

6

interpreted as a conglomeration of permanently moving circular eggs (that can explain the rest mass of

electron as a moving energy of circular egs with a specific spin): expressing classical electron radius (Re)

as a function of heg constant shows that electron/positron mass (Me) can be interpreted as a multiple

(integer) of the energy of a single circular eg (the number of co-phase circular [λ –]egs in a single

“classical” resting but “spinning” electron/ positron [NEgRE], in principle, even if Re isn’t the same with

the real ray of a pinpoint electron/positron). However, it is also well-known that Re is not the real physical

ray of an electron. A much better approximation of an electron real ray (Rre) may be deduced from the proton

ray (Rp) by starting with the premise that electron and photon have similar densities of matter/energy per unit

of space volume: Rre~Rp/(Mp/Me)1/3

. IDUM suggests that the ray of the spinning electron (even at rest) may

vary between to 2 limits (as the subcomponent egs of the electron may vary their ray of rotation as function of

eg-input of that particle in a specific interval of time): Rre (inferior limit) and Re (superior limit). NEgRE

may be formulated as a general function of the ray (r) of subcomponent-egs rotation so that Me (at rest)

remains constant: NEgRE(r)=Me·c2/Eeg(2π·r).

IDUM interprets both electron and photon as 2 great conglomerations of egs in 2 different

possible states: circular (4D-torus16

-like) (in the electron) and/or linear(4D cylinder-like) (in the photon)

moving egs (super-string theory similarity) (photon-electron unified interpretation) (see Table 7-A).

Besides explaining the rest mass of the electron and the movement mass of the photon, IMUD also

conjectures that the circular egs composing a torus-like electron (at rest) can also explain the spin of the

electron (½) and the photon (1) and also the charge of these 2 type of particles by the direction and the

sense of the circular/linear EG movement in 4D: left-to-right or right-to-left on any 2D plane of the S-3D

and past-to-future (typical particles like electrons) future-to-past (anti-particles like positron). It is very

possible that the sub-particle egs to be organized in 3 groups compatible with the preon17

/rishon18

concepts (1/3eT rishons and neutral V rishons) (IMUD-preon/rishon model combination) (see the next

figures). IDUM has an essential advantage on the rishon model: it also explains the “resting” mass of any

particle as an informational mass flux generated by the circular movement of the subcomponent egs of

the electrons(leptons)/quarks (and quark based particles). IDUM also conjectures that the 4th

dimension

of ST is “hidden”/packed in the central hole of the torus like structure of any quantum particle (but also

in the central holes torus-like pixels of the ST, as explained later): it’s possible that the holes of this torus-

like entities to be populated with other types of particles (including gravitons, tachyons and other types

of candidates for the dark matter and dark energies particle constituents) that can travel with faster-

than-light speeds interconnecting at very long distances different particle (as quantum entanglement but

also as the Coulomb force that seem to propagate instantly, no matter the distance19

;in this way

synchronicity generated by the hidden phenomenon of the 4th

dimension can be masked by the apparent

causality of the 3.xD-ST phenomenon).

16

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torus 17

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preon 18

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rishon_model 19

Calcaterra, A.; de Sangro, R.; Finocchiaro, G.; Patteri, P.; Piccolo, M.; Pizzella, G. (2012). "Measuring Propagation Speed

of Coulomb Fields". arXiv:1211.2913 [gr-qc]; arxiv.org/abs/1211.2913; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb%27s_law

7

Based on the 4D circular movement of sub-particle egs/groups of egs, IMUD offers a possible unified

explanation for the 3 intrinsic proprieties of any quantum particle (including the electron and the photon):

rest/movement mass, spin and charge are 3 intrinsic proprieties of the electron. In IMUD, rest mass, charge and

spin are 3 “faces” of the same phenomenon. The “egic” closed-torus like structure of the electron (and the open

tubular/cylindrical structure of the photon) can offer a unified electrogravitational / electrogravity theory of the

electron/photon and their inner structures.

If the photon and the electron have an eg-granular structure, than we can hypothesize that

electromagnetism is just a masked form of quantum gravity (as egs may be “hidden” in the space-time frames

of the photons and electrons, but also in W and Z gauge bosons) (and this may be a way to unify the 2 forces

[the electroweak and the gravity] with so similar scalars as I shall try to demonstrate in the next part of this

article).

Table 7-A. Heg constant suggests a plausible photon-electron unified interpretation as

linear/circular electrogravitons conglomerates

NEgP 8 π⋅( )α

3

22

α⋅

(KEG)

hegh

NEgP

h NEgP heg⋅ Re

h

2 π⋅( )αc⋅

Me c2

⋅

Re

NEgP heg⋅

2 π⋅( )αc⋅

Me c2

⋅

Me

NEgP

αheg

c

2 π⋅ Re⋅⋅

c2

Me

NEgP

αEeg 2 π⋅ Re( )

c2

MeNEgREEeg 2 π⋅ Re( )

c2

8

NEgRE r( )Me c

2⋅

Eeg 2 π⋅ r⋅( )

NEgRE NEgRE Re( ) 5.255 1043×

NEgRE Re( ) 5.255 1043×=

NEgRE Rre( ) 1.336 1042×=

FSC (=1/α) can be interpreted as the ratio between NEgRE and NEgP and logically expresses the

probability(~1/137) of a resting electron to emit a photon as a function of the linear/circular sub-eggs

number ratio between the photon and the electron (at rest) (see Table 7-B). Quantum G constant can be

interpreted as a consequence of heg quantization of egs and can be express as a scalar function of the heg

constant: by speculative induction I may conjecture that all physical constants may emerge from the

quantization of 4D-ST and all its component gauge-bosons and non-gauge-bosons particles (as Ke is a

consequence-function of h and quantum G is a consequence-function of heg).

We can also observe that in contrast with NEP (which is constant, no matter the λ of the photon),

the number of egs in a moving elecron (NEgME) can be generalized as a function of speed of the electron

(which is the result of transfering X suplimentary egs to the resting electron, egs that bring kinetic energy

to that electron). So NEgME is the sum: number of egs in the resting electron (NEgRE) + number of egs

transfered to the resting electron (NEgTRE) as kinetic energy (Me·v2/Eeg(any υ)). α can so be generalized

as a function of NEgTRE (with a constant term NEgRE and a constant factor NEgP) (see Table 7-B)

The eg would be NOT just the „cell” of any photon/lepton/quark/gauge-boson, but also „the brick” of

4D-ST itself (the unity between the “scene and the actor” that Einstein quoted as “beyond he wildest

imagining”).

As all the 4D-ST vacuum is also granulated/pixilated (similar to a “sponge” made of egs / eg-based

quantum “foam”), it is possible that all the quantum subatomic particles-“actors” in the 4D-ST to ALSO

have an eg-based inner structure (that explains the rest mass of any non-gauge-boson particle): that

might imply that all the 4 fundamental forces (or 5 if we consider a 5th

force that stabilizes all the inner

structure of the quantum particles considered fundamental and irreducible as quarks and leptons) are

eg-based and are all 4 (or 5) different subtypes of gravity at various scale of space and energy.

Table 7-B. α as function of NEgP and NEgME(v,λ,r)

NEgP 8 π⋅( )α

3

22

α⋅ (KEG) NEgTRE v λ, ( )

Me v2

⋅

Eeg λ( )

NEgRE 8 π⋅( ) α

1

2⋅ 2

α⋅

NEgME v λ, ( ) NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+

NEgME v λ, r, ( ) NEgRE r( )NEgRE Re( )

NEgRE r( )⋅ NEgTRE v λ, ( )+:=

α v λ, ( ) α NEgME v λ, ( )( )NEgP

NEgME v λ, ( )

NEgP

NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+

αf v λ, r, ( ) αf NEgME v λ, r, ( )( )NEgP

NEgME v λ, r, ( )

NEgP

NEgRE r( )NEgRE Re( )

NEgRE r( )⋅ NEgTRE v λ, ( )+

9

α 0 λ, ( )NEgP

NEgRE137.036

αf 0 λ, r, ( )NEgP

NEgRE r( )NEgRE Re( )

NEgRE r( )⋅

NEgP

NEgRE Re( )

NEgP

NEgREα 0 λ, ( ) 137.036

IDUM conjectures that Rre is the smallest possible rotation ray (bending ray) of an eg (and that

the difference between the electrons(generally leptons) and neutrinos stands in the number of the

subcomponent egs, not on a great difference in rays; as the eg is defined as a pack of co-phase gravitons,

Rre is just an inferior limitation rotation ray of the eg, not of the graviton which is a much smaller

energy quanta that can have a much smaller bending ray than an eg, possible close to a Planck length):

based on this conjecture IDUM predicts that what is called “dark matter and energy” maybe the energy

of 3D-ST vacuum itself20

. IDUM also conjectures that the each “pixel” of the measured 3D-ST is

composed of torus-like single-circular-egs “bricks”/”pixels” that create that 3D-ST (as the eg is the

“pixel”/”cell” of ST vacuum). IDUM also conjectures that each single torus-like pixel is linked with all

adjacent pixels with other torus-like perpendicular pixels in a chain-like 3D web (but with probably

under 10% of their energy [perpendicular to our observable 3D-ST] measurable in our 3D-ST). IDUM

calculates the energy of the total universe (Etu) (3D-ST-energy/mass+”white” particles + ”white” energy)

as a function of the number of egs per ray of the observable universe (NEgRou=1.1·Rou/Rre) and of the

energy of a single circular eg with Rre as ray of rotation (Eeg(2·π·Rre)) (see the next table). IDUM

conjectures the 4th

ST dimension as “hidden” in each apparent “point” of the 3D-ST, as each apparent

point/pixel is in fact a circle/ellipse (a single circular eg): no matter the eg moves on the surface of a

sphere or a 4D hyper-sphere, the energy of this point(ST “pixel”)/circle remains the same -- Eeg(λ).

IDUM predicts in this way that the “white” energy of the universe (Ewu~3.8·1072

) is about 4.5% of the

energy of the total universe (Ewu+Edu), which is close to the 4.9% white matter and energy percent

approximation in the present. With this idea, IDUM explains why the speed of light in vacuum (c)

appears to be the maximum possible speed in the universe: c is in fact the fixed circular maximum speed

of single egs in the “pixels” of the universe and it appears logically that a heavier (than one universe

“pixel”) quantum particle cannot surpass that inner speed of a pixel, as the effect would be similar to a

“c-sonic bang” in which the quantum particle would be blocked in its movement by the single-eg-pixels

speed (similar to the sonic bang generated by supersonic planes). This single-eg-pixel inner speed may

also explain the tendency that a body gains mass exponentially when approaching the c-limit speed (as

the single-eg-pixels simply “condense” on that moving quantum particle and generates an enormous

moving mass that tends to infinity and opposes to higher-than-c speed movement). In IDUM, c is in fact

an indirect measure of the Rre-ST granulation: as the photons can move saltatory, from pixel-to-pixel

(somehow like the bioelectric current in a neuronal axon with Ranvier nodes), the larger the pixel, the

larger the speed (as the number of steps needed to reach for an initial point in ST to a final point in ST is

less). IDUM also considers c as an indirect measure of υc=c/Rre, which is the highest possible frequency

of a single-eg-pixel of ST: in fact υc is the frequency of the most rapid timer/clock of the universe (the

time in which a single eg completes a 2π rotation cycle with Rre as ray of rotation; that why c). As the

single-eg-pixels of ST have intensely high-frequency interconnections with each other ST appears

continuous: however the vacuum tends to generate (even for just short time intervals) only relatively

20

See also abstract no. 18 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2010abstracts.pdf

10

(un)stable (virtual) quantum particle-anti-particle pairs (the other highly unstable particle remaining

undetectable as they “die” almost in the same time they are “born”, similarly to the evolutionary-

intermediate organisms that are considered highly unstable by the evolutionism and that explains the

rarity of this type of organisms today)

Table 7-C. IDUM predicts the nature of the dark-energy and dark matter as the energy of ST

itself. IDUM also predicts the approximate percent of „white” matter and energy of the total

estimated energy of the universe (~5%)

Mp

Me

Rp

Rre

3

RreRp

Mp

Me

1

3

Rre

Re2.543 %=

Re

Rre39.324=

νcc

Rre4.184 10

24× Hz⋅

Rre

lP4.434 10

18×=

log2Rre

lP

α0.452=

NEgRou 1.1Rou

Rre:=

Eeg 2 π⋅ Rre( ) 6.126 1056− J⋅=

Edu4

3π⋅ NEgRou

3⋅ Eeg 2π Rre⋅( )⋅

Edu 7.953 1073× J= ( Ewu 3.769 10

72× J= )

Etu Edu Ewu+

Ewu

Etu4.525 %⋅=

Starting from the conjecture that ST is “pixilated” in single-eg-rotating-micro-spheres with Rre as

ray of rotation and that ST permits as eg-rotation-rays only multiple integers of this Rre, we can deduce

than there may be at least 40 types of electrons (with the same rest mass Me), as combinations of different

NEgRE(r) (from NEgRE(Rre)=1.336*1042

to NEgRE(Re)=5.255*1043

), r (with r multiple integer of Rre in

the interval [Rre, Re]). This electron diversity explains (at least partially) the need of the theory of probability

to predict an electron behavior (and also any other quantum particle behavior).

As the gravitational force acts on any physical mass directly proportional to that mass (no matter if that

mass is at rest or it is the result of additional inside movement kinetic energy like in the case of the hadrons like

proton/neutron in which almost 99% of the “resting” hadron mass is due to the kinetic energy of the gluons

interchanged between the internal quarks), it is reasonable to consider that quantum G is in fact a function of

energy (the total energy of the particle) not of a resting mass: and that energy squeezes/”presses”/”stresses”

the local ST like a sponge generating higher energy eg emissions (greater heg by modifying h and α, or

shorter eg wavelength, BUT at the same frequency of emission) from that particle (but also from the ST

matrix of that particle inner and surroundings) and also creating a pit trap for the egs emitted from

other sources towards that mass/energy squeeze location and its surroundings. By “stressing” vacuum,

11

gravity can also constantly cause (apparently) “spontaneous” generation of virtual particle-antiparticle

pairs (the Casimir effect). In this way, IDUM offers a unified view of general relativity and quantum

gravity (in which gravity is mediated both by ST squeezes and ALSO by egs emitted/received by that ST

local squeeze). Another possible interpretation is that ST vacuum may be a huge quantum deposit of

virtual egs with all the spectrum of wavelengths and energies that ST can heavily emit (as an instant

reaction) if it is excited with any non-zero energy of any particle in that ST (in the context of dark energy

and dark matter than can have an eg structure, this last interpretation is considered much more

plausible in IDUM as “white” quantum particles behave more like ships on a huge ocean, “ships” that

have a very small capacity to deform ST in which they lay and “ships” that also may be absorbed by

large strong ST vortexes like the black-holes).

IDUM considers both quantum and relativistic views are compatible to each other with a remark:

the 4D-ST is similar to a quantum “sponge” which, if it is deformed, it would also generate higher energy

egs. IDUM doesn’t exclude an universe with more than 4 dimensions, like a 5D-ST as the equation of G

suggests it: in this case IDUM conjectures that time is 2D membrane with a 2nd time vector

perpendicular to the physical time in which all the particle are interconnected instantly (resolving the

Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paradox and giving an elegant explanation to quantum entanglement). IDUM

treats time as a (“very persistent”[Einstein]) illusion created by the living bodies and their extensions

(measuring devices) (as any measurement of a system produces more entropy in the local universe

generating the sense of the physical time from a lower-entropy past to a higher-entropy future) (the

oriental religions/philosophies view): if man would build his science only using just experiments in the

“time” of dreams (in which mind is partially freed from the physical senses input), the “science” would

surely be very different.

G is a direct proportionality function of a single eg energy (similar/analogous to Ke being a

directly proportional function of a single photon energy). As c and Me (rest mass) are fixed constants,

IDUM supposes that heg is a function of α and may vary directly proportional to ST level of “squeezing”,

that’s why G is essentially a function of a variable heg, and G may vary directly proportional with heg

(using Kg=c/Me2 as a proportionality constant) (see Table 7-C). IDUM conjectures a G series based on a

heg series, both functions of (eg-based) ST level of “compression”.

In contrast with a resting electron which is composed from only circular egs, a moving electron could

contain a mixture of circular si linear egs (a photon-resting-electron hybrid/transition state) and that

may the explanation why it is more probable that a moving electron (which has more egs, some of which

may be „already” the linear egs needed for a photon to form) to emit a photon than a resting low-kinetic-

energy electron. There is a simplified quantum G sclar in the case of 2 electrons/positron at rest. We can

also deduce a generalization of the quantum G sclar in case of 2 electrons in 2 different kinetic-energy

states different from the resting state (as a superposition of 2 „ping-pong” egs) that may emit egs with

lower energies/heg (variable) constants than the egs emitted by a resting electron (heg1<heg and

heg2<heg, as the moving electron has a negative mass „defect”, in contrast to the nucleons from the

multiple nucleons nucleus [see also Part 2]). This quantum G sclar formula may predict the gravitational

force between to isolated electrons in any energetic state, at any distance/scale (including atomic scale: as

it is practically quasi-impossible21

to measure G at atomic scales, as G was tested in the lab only from

distances ranging from 1 cm to a couple of meters).

21

For a possible exception see also 2nd

prize abstract from

www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf

12

Table 7-D. Quantum G as a function of a-single-eg energy (essentially a function of heg at

constant frequency of eg emission)

G 2 heg⋅c

Me2

⋅ 6.648 1011−×

m3

kg s2

⋅99.613 % GCODATA_2012⋅

G 2 heg⋅c

Me2

⋅ 2 heg⋅c

5

Me c2

⋅( )2⋅ 2 heg⋅

c5

Et Me( )2

⋅

G Me 1 Me 2, ( ) heg c5

⋅1

Et Me 1( )2

1

Et Me2( )2

+

⋅

`

G2 λ⋅

Me2

hegc

λ⋅

⋅2 λ⋅

Me2

Eeg λ( )⋅

Keλ

Qe2

2 π⋅ α⋅( )⋅h

c

λ⋅

⋅λ

Qe2

2 π⋅ α⋅( )⋅Ef λ( )⋅

Kgc

Me2

G2

Me2

heg c⋅( )⋅2c

Me2

heg⋅ 2Kg heg⋅

G Kg heg1⋅ Kg heg2⋅+ Kg heg1 heg2+( )⋅

Photons and electrons may permanently emit (pulsated emission) egs with no sign of observable

“tiring” at standard time intervals we can measure, as the photon and electron have a potential energy

much larger than the maximum energy of a possible emitted eg. A photon can emit only egs at and with the

same or lower frequencies than their global frequency (phνmax=c/λmin, with λmin comparable to 2·Re). An

electron can emit only egs at and with the same or lower frequencies than their global frequency (which is the

inverse of the classical electric circumference of the electron: eνmax=c/(2π·Re)). Supposing that they would emit

ONLY one single eg at a time at their maximum frequencies22

(phνmax and eνmax) (in different directions

decided by the electron spin that sweeps the 4D-ST) the time needed to completely dissipate their total energy

into egs would be much more larger (with ~5, respectively ~3 orders of magnitude) that the age of the

observable universe (Aou) of about 13.7·109 years.

Table 7-E. Electrons and photons permanently emit egs (pulsated emission) with a superior

limit of frequency given in this table below. It may took more that 103 to 10

5Aou (age of the

present observed universe) for an electron or photon to completely „vanish” by this pulsated

emission of egs.

phνMax 5.319 1022×

1

s=

NEgP

Aou phνMax⋅3.11 10

5×=

eνMax 1.693 1022×

1

s=

NEgRE

Aou eνMax⋅( )7.129 10

3×=

Given all the anterior facts and to avoid tautology we can suppose that NOT α[=α(0,λ)], but

2α[=α(0,λ)]

(~1.8*1041

) is a „more” fundamental constant of the universe as it can be a natural integer

22

See also abstract no.12 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf

13

(because α, NEgP, NEgRE, heg, quantum G and Ke can be derived from 2α) . Another striking

coincidence is that 2α is very close to the square root of the (mass-deduced) total number of the hydrogen

atoms in the universe (total number of protons and neutrons, as the electrons have a small percentage

contribution to the total „white” mass/energy of the universe) (a rough estimation if all the mass of the

observable universe would be composed of only hydrigen atoms) (Eddington number): this would be an

unexpected „secret” link between TH (DAH) and „old” and apparently obsolete Eddington universe

model (with an obvious holographic/fractal accent in which the total number of particles in the universe

is strongly related to the individual characteristic of each particle by a somehow default undiscoverd

physicial law of the universe which I’ll try to demonstrate in IDUM). It would be more trustful to

consider that α constant (with its very high precision measurement) would be an indirect unexpectedly

IMPORTANT measure of the EXACT Eddington number and NOT viceversa: in the context that

„white” matter-energy in the universe is roughly a 2D „dust” (|”compressible” in a 2D disk of spaced

particles) in a 3D volume (and represents) (~5% of the estimated universe total mass). 2α may be

considered the number of hypothetic hydrogen atoms per any diameter of the 2D „white” matter 2D

compressed plane „disk” (NHAD). In the next table it is important to notice that NEgP and NegRE (and

all the derived constants) are a special kind of linearithmic form with an greater than 1 exponent of the

log(N).

As a checkpoint conclusion, it is very probable that the real number of hydrogen atoms in the

universe (RNHAU) (measured indirectly and intuitively using α) is the „most fundamental” constant of

all until this stage of discussion.

Table 8. The „inverse deduction” of the „classical” physical constants from h, Me and

RNHAU (hydrogen atoms hypothetically organized in a 2D disc with 2α atoms per any

diameter): checkpoint review

RNHAU π2

α

2

2

⋅ 2.506 1082×

NHAD 2RNHAU

π⋅ 2

α1.786 10

41×

α 0 λ, ( ) α log2 NHAD( ) 137.036

NEgP 8 π⋅( ) log2 NHAD( )

3

2⋅ NHAD⋅ 8 π⋅( ) α

3

2⋅ 2

α⋅ 7.202 1045×

NEgRE 8 π⋅( ) log2 NHAD( )

1

2⋅ NHAD⋅ 8 π⋅( ) α

1

2⋅ 2

α⋅ 5.255 1043×

hegh

NEgP

Eeg λ( ) hegc

λheg ν⋅

NEgTRE v λ, ( )Me v

2⋅

Eeg λ( )

NEgME v λ, ( ) NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+

α v λ, ( ) α NEgME v λ, ( )( )NEgP

NEgME v λ, ( )

NEgP

NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+

14

G 2hegc

Me2

⋅ Kgc

Me2

G2

Me2

heg c⋅( )⋅2c

Me2

heg⋅ 2Kg heg⋅

G Kg heg1⋅ Kg heg2⋅+ Kg heg1 heg2+( )⋅

Keh

2 π⋅( ) α⋅

c

Qe2

⋅hr

α

c

Qe2

⋅

DAH and all the BL-TH variants (but also the original NL-TH) have an obviously quite strong

similarity to the theory of information: as the binary logarithm is usually used to measure the quantity of

information in a system of N possible states as log2(N). The physical universe may be considered a very

large (but not infinitely large) 4D space-time (4D-ST) matrix computer in which all non-gauge-bosons-

quantum-particles are parallel processors (with intrinsic information organized as code lines that

implement all the laws of the universe generating reaction to any kind of action to that quantum particle)

that permanently (but pulsated, NOT continuous) interchange small packs of information (location and

momentum) (LMIPs=location-momentum information packs). Like any other kind of information, any

LMIP can be measured in (physical) bits. IDUM views particle movement/colliding as LMIP interchange

(similar to bytes transfer protocol between computers: TCP [transmission control protocol])23

.

To differentiate the physical bit from the binary bit, I shall abbreviate the physical bit (p-(b)it) as “pit”

(pit=kpit·bit) (with kpit being a real number for the number of bits that the universe needs to store location and

momentum information: LMIPs bits that mediate repulsive forces may be measured by negative kpit and

LMIPs bits that mediate attractive forces may be measured by positive kpit).

Each type of gauge-boson and its anti-particle may be considered small LMIPs that non-gauge-

bosons quantum particles can interchange with each other (4D-ST pulsated interchange). In this view,

energy and matter are NOT fundamental, but they are just the result of measuring the LMIPs interchange

between the observer and the physical system and between system components, interchange that is observed

and measured in a well definite time interval (∆t=t2-t1). LMIPs is truly fundamental in this model, and

energy becomes just a “measure unit” for the number of LMIPS interchanged between the particles of

an observed physical system per unit of time, and also between that physical system and the observer

(including his measuring tools). What we perceive physically as the “energy of an observed system” (and/or

through measuring tools which are body extensions) is the result of the capacity of the observed system to

transfer LMIPs to the observer or the capacity of the observed system’s subcomponent to interchange LMIPs

per unit of (subjective and/or objective) time.

LMI is intrinsically a function of time by definition: LMI is strictly related to the time interval

(∆t=t2-t1=multiple integer of Plank time/interval= N∆t ·tP, with N∆t as positive integer: N∆t= ∆t/tP).

In this informational view, Einstein’s equivalence principle E=m·c2 becomes a consequence of the

more general and profound information (LMI) conservation law (the “0 principle of thermodynamics” as

Susskind names it when explaining black-holes: ”bits are indestructible”) and must be formulated

strictly related to time by definition: E·∆t =(m· ∆t)·c2���� IE(∆t) =Im·c2(∆t)

The LMI contained in a single λ-eg can be measured as a function of Eeg(λ): IEg(λ,∆t)= Eeg(λ)·∆t

(where ∆t=t2-t1=N∆t ·tP is a specific time interval in which the eg is measured: for example the interval

23

See also: Alagoz, B. Baykant. Open Universe Modeling: Information Layer and Time Dilation

(arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1010/1010.2365.pdf); On gravitons as information carriers see also abstract no. 7 from

www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf;

15

between the emission of the eg from a non-gauge-boson quantum particle and the absorption of that eg

by another such quantum particle): IEg(λ,∆t)= Eeg(λ)· ∆t= Eeg(λ)· N∆t ·tP.

Table 9-A. IDUM: the physical information (LMI) definition.

∆t t2 t1− N tP tP⋅

E Joules( )I Physical_information pits( )( )

∆t time s( )( )

I pit( ) E joule( ) ∆t s( )⋅

I E ∆t, ( ) E ∆t⋅ E N tP⋅ tP⋅

Information Energy Time⋅ 1pit 1joule( ) 1s( )⋅

pit joule s⋅ kpit bit⋅

Total_I ∆t( ) intrinsec_I ∆t( ) received_I ∆t( )+ emitted_I ∆t( )−

Total_I ∆t( ) intrinsec_I ∆t( ) input_I ∆t( )+ output_I ∆t( )−

E ∆t⋅ m c2

⋅( ) ∆t⋅

I E ∆t, ( ) I m c2

⋅ ∆t, ( ) IE ∆t( ) I

m c2

⋅∆t( ) IE I

m c2

⋅

Ieg λ ∆t, ( ) Eeg λ( ) ∆t⋅ Eeg λ( ) N∆t⋅ tP⋅

h and heg constants are measurable in pits (as they are measured in joule·seconds) and have a

profound informational meaning in IDUM, as they can be interpreted as part of an apparently specific

quantized informational transfer protocol of the universe. As h and heg have very small numerical values

compared to 1 pit, it’s useful to imagine (similar to the complex imaginary number i) a binary

logarithmic subunit (apparently atypical and a physical “non-sense”, as i factor is for the complex

number):log2(pit)=lit(lpit) <=>pit=2lit

. The fact that when measured in lits, h and heg have numerical

values close to adimensional α is an indirect argument for the possible non-coincidental truth of DAH.

Based on the physical information definition above, we can estimate the total “white” information

of the (observable directly and indirectly) universe (Iwu) from the total white energy of the universe

(Ewu) (deducted from the total “white” mass of the universe [Mu(Mwu)] and the speed of light [c]) and

the estimated age of the observable universe [Aou] (considered in doubled-temporal-sense as all the

quantum charged anti-particles can be viewed as moving inversely, from the future to the past as

Richard Feynman did in his famous diagrams describing the behavior of subatomic particles, “stealing”

Wheeler’s idea from the one-electron universe hypothesis as he recognized it with humor and no

animosity from Wheeler’s part): Iwu=Ewu·(2·Aou)=(Mu·c2)·(2·Aou)=[RNHAU·(Mp+Me)·c

2]·(2·Aou) (see

both previous and next table).

The total information of the 4D-ST universe (Itu) is the sum between the “white” information

(Iwu) and “dark” information (the physical information stored in the measurable 3D-ST vacuum) (Idu=

Etu·(2·Aou)): Itu=Iwu+Idu.

What we measure/name as “the total [white] energy of the universe” can be just the consequence

of a large informational input (Itu) absorbed by the 0/1D vacuum (a possible “slice”/brane of an N-

dimensional universe as in M-theory) at the Big-Bang “moment”: all the universe can be seen as large

informational input fluctuation of that initial 0/1D vacuum.

16

Table 9-B. IDUM: h, heg and Iwu, Idu and Itu measurement using physical bits (pits)

h 6.62606957 1034−⋅ pit 2

110.217−2

lit⋅ 2110.217− lit+

110.217− lit

heg1

1.087 1079×

pit 2262.553−

2lit⋅ 262.553− lit 2 131.276−( )⋅ lit⋅

Iwu Eu 2 Aou⋅( )⋅ Mu c2

⋅( ) 2 Aou⋅( )⋅ RNHAU Mp Me+( )⋅ c2

⋅ 2 Aou⋅( )⋅

Iwu 3.282 1090× pit 300.688 lit 2.194 137.036( )⋅ lit⋅

Idu Edu 2 Aou⋅( )⋅

Idu 6.925 1091× pit 305.087 lit⋅ 2.226 α⋅ lit⋅

Itu Idu Iwu+

Itu 7.254 1091× pit⋅ 305.154 lit⋅

Idu

Itu95.475 %=

Iwu

Itu4.525 %=

As IDUM treats h/heg and other information quantities as central and fundamental (as a form of

theoretical unification), many physical quantities with no apparent meaning in SI (such as the square root of

mass/force/energy as in the gravity and Coulomb universal laws, Koide coincidence etc.) have a precise

meaning in IDUM measuring system.

In the table below, IDUM defines mass as an informational flow (number of LMIPs measured in a

specific time interval) per unit of area. In IDUM, the rest mass of any quantum particle isn’t explained just by

the subcomponent circular moving egs (that also generates spin), but IDUM predicts that all the subcomponent

egs of one particle come from the con-focal LMIP “radiation” of all the other quantum particles in the universe

in a no-time 3D-framed 4D-ST universe: that’s why IDUM considers as legitimate (and NOT obsolete as the

majority of mainstream physicist now consider) the Eddington’s intuition on a very strong relationship between

one specific quantum particle and all the other particles in the universe (which is a both fractal and holographic

principle: “the whole is present in all its parts and vice versa”).

17

Table 9-C. IDUM system of info-energy-mass measure units. LMIPs transfer has a specific direction

and sense in a specific moment in time that’s why (physical) information quantity and all its derived

physical quantities (including energy, force, mass) are considered essentially vectors in IDUM: the fact

that LMI is a vector explains why force is also a vector, but IDUM imposes that all the SI scalar-

considered physical quantities (such as energy and mass) are also vectors in essence (as LMIPs are

proprieties of the 4D-ST vacuum itself)

(Physical) Information (LMI)

quantity (I) (the spin of

elementary particles / the classical

angular momentum)

I E ∆t⋅ pit 2lit J s⋅( )

(the same measure unit as the spin of elementary particles / the

classical angular momentum)

Information flow (IF) IF I ∆t⋅ E ∆t2

⋅ pit s⋅ 2lit s⋅ J s

2⋅( )

Energy (LMI interchange/transfer

speed) E

I

∆t

pit

s

2lit

sJ

(Physical) Power (the variation of

LMI transfer-speed with time;

LMI transfer acceleration)

PE

∆t

I

∆t

∆t

I

∆t2

pit

s

s

pit

s2

2lit

s2

W

Force (the LMI transfer per unit

of distance [linear or circular

distance usually perpendicular on

the direction of LMI transfer] per

unit of time)

FE

distance d( )

I

∆t

d

I

d

∆t

I

d ∆t⋅

pit

s

m

pit

m

s

pit

m s⋅

2lit

m s⋅N

Square root of force (0.5D Cantor-

fractal sampled LMI [1 of the 2

LMIP pair of the force field]

distributed per 0.5D Cantor-

fractal sampled time and space)

(0.5D Cantor-fractal pulsated

force/LMI transfer)

FE

0.5

distance d( )0.5

I0.5

∆t0.5

d0.5

I0.5

d0.5

∆t0.5

I0.5

d0.5

∆t0.5

⋅

pit0.5

s0.5

m0.5

pit0.5

m0.5

s0.5

pit0.5

m0.5

s0.5

⋅

2

lit

2

m0.5

s0.5

⋅N

0.5

Mass (information flow [LMI

transfer flow] per unit of area [an

area usually perpendicular to the

direction of LMI transfer])

MF

acceleration a( )

E

distance d( )

distance d( )

∆t2

I

∆t

d2

∆t2

I ∆t⋅

d2

IF

d2

18

N

m

s2

pit

m s⋅

m

s2

pit s2

⋅

m2

s⋅

pit s⋅

m2

kg

The rest mass of the electron can be understood as the informational flow (measured by number of egs in a minimal full rotation

interval of time 2 π⋅ Re⋅

c1.096 10

21× tP⋅ ) per unit of circular section area (supposing that the electron is a 4D

torus/hyper-sphere in which all the co-phase sub-egs circulary move through a section area, and this informational flow movement

generates the rest mass, the spin and the charge of the electron).

Square root of mass (0.5D Cantor-

fractal sampled LMI flow [1 of the

2 LMIP pair of the mass field in a

0.5D Cantor-fractal sampled time

interval] distributed per unit of

distance/length [a linear/circular

distance usually perpendicular to

the direction of LMI transfer])

(0.5D Cantor-fractal pulsated LMI

flow)

MIF

d2

IF0.5

d

kgpit

0.5s

0.5⋅

m

Square of mass (informational 2D

“super”-flow per unit of 4D hyper

volume)

M2 IF

2

d4

pit2

s2

⋅

m4

pit s⋅( )2

m4

kg2

Momentum (classical)

(informational quantity

transferred per unit of

distance/length [a linear/circular

distance usually perpendicular to

the direction of LMI transfer])

p m v⋅IF

d2

d

∆t⋅

IF

d ∆t⋅

I

d

kgm

s⋅

pit s⋅

m2

m

s⋅

pit

m

IDUM proposes Iwu as the single real fundamental parameter (physical “constant”) of the white

universe with Mu (Mwu), c and Aou as 3 “faces”(inverse proportional to each other) of the same essential

informational entity (Iwu=[Mwu·c2]·Aou=Ewu·Aou) that can be measured (at least theoretically) in any

N-ST frame (with N being any positive real number of dimensions). Iwu has the potential of predict

Ewu·Aou binomial, Mwu(RNHAU)·c2 binomial, h, Me (the initial parameters considered in Table 8,

from which all other physical constants were deduced). h, heg, W/Z boson masses are LMIP constants that

may be deduced from Iwu in a quite unexpected way.

h can be deduced from another striking DAH-like (apparent) coincidence: log2(Iwu/h)/α~3���� h~

Iwu/NHAD3~Iwu/(2

α)3 (with a very low probability to exist just by pure hazard). From this “unexpected”

19

relationship (which is related with TH and DAH) we can conclude that it is very possible that h measurement is

in fact the result of the total Iwu measurement in a 3D-ST frame (the fractal principle that is a component of

many models of fractal universes: “the whole is in each of the parts”). Based on this striking coincidence, we

can calculate a h-corrected Iwu so that log2(Iwuc/h)/α=3���� Iwuc=h·NHAD3= h· (2

α)3. Based on Iuc, both

Ewu and/or Aou can be “corrected” in correlation with Iwuc. As Aou typically varies by definition (the

time scale of the universe), it may be more inspired to calculate a corrected Aou (Aouc) based on Iuc.

Aouc>Aou doesn’t necessary mean that Aou is inexact: Aouc may have a more profound meaning as it

may be interpreted as half duration of an universe expansion-contraction full cycle (as if the known

universe may have a negative accelerated expansion until the Aouc point and then enters in a contraction

half-cycle24

). IDUM predicts a periodic expansion-contraction(e-c) cycle of the physical universe

behavior, with 2*Aouc for a full e-c cycle. Based on Aouc, IDUM also estimates Iwuc and Iduc as the

corrected white and dark information of the universe.

Table 10-A. IDUM predicts Iuc, Aouc and h (as a function of Iuc).

log2Iwu

h

α2.999=

hIwu

NHAD3

Iwu

NHAD3

h86.912 %=

Iwuc h 23 α⋅⋅ 115.058 % Iwu⋅

Aouc

Iwuc

Ewu

215.885 10

9⋅ years 115.058 % Aou⋅

Iduc Edu 2 Aouc⋅( )⋅ 7.968 1091× pits⋅

Iwuc Ewu 2 Aouc⋅( )⋅ 3.777 1090× pits⋅

Ituc Iduc Iwuc+ Edu Ewu+( ) 2 Aouc⋅( )⋅ 8.346 1091× pits⋅

Iwuc

Ituc4.525 %=

When analyzing the quantity of information carried by a single W/Z boson (Ibwz=Mwz·c2·Tbwz)

as function of W/Z boson mass (Mwz) and W/Z boson mean half-life25

(Tbwz ~ 3·10-25

s ~ 5.565*1018·tP ~

2 α/2

·tP), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence log2[Iwu/(Mwz·c2·Tbwz)]/α~3 ���� Ibwz~ Iwu/NHAD

3

~ Iwu/(2α)3 which supports the (already proved) theory that the weak nuclear force and the electromagnetic

force are 2 “faces” of the electroweak force .

Table 10-B. IDUM (retroactively) predicts the unity between electromagnetic and weak

nuclear forces as part of the same ~3D-frame.

log2Iu

Mbz c2

⋅ Tbz⋅( )

α2.99=

log2Iu

Mbw c2

⋅ Tbw⋅( )

α2.992=

24

See also abstract no. 17 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf; See also abstract no. 24

from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2006abstracts.pdf; See also abstract no. 4 from

www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf; 25

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W_and_Z_bosons

20

log2Iuc

Mbw c2

⋅ Tbw⋅( )

α2.993=

log2Iuc

Mbz c2

⋅ Tbz⋅( )

α2.992=

In the case of the gauge bosons other than the photon and the (electro)graviton, there are 2 types

of information associated to those quantum particles: 1) the intrinsic information (Iin) that can be

calculated from the total energy of the particle (m·c2) and the medium time interval in which that gauge-

particle is stable if it is isolated (at least theoretically) from all other particle in the universe for a

sufficient time interval to observe decay (Tin) and 2) the extrinsic information (Iex) that can be

calculated from the total energy of the particle (m·c2) and the (average) time interval in which that

gauge-particle can be normally observed between 2-consecutive-emission-absorption cycle (Tex) by 2

non-gauge-bosons quantum particles. It can also be observed that in the case of eg, photon and W/Z

bosons, Iin~Iex (as Td~Tex).

When analyzing the extrinsic information of a single gluon26

(Iex-gl=Mgl·c2·Tbwz) as function of

gluon mass (Mgl~0,<0.0002MeV/c2) and gluon very short emission-absorption cycle similar to W/Z boson

half-life (Tgl~Tbwz), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence log2[Iwu/(Mgl·c2·Tbwz)]/α~3 ���� (Mgl·c

2)

·Tgl ~ Iwu/NHAD3 ~ [Iwu/(2

α)3]. This coincidence offers IDUM the potential of offering at least a formal

logical unification between the electroweak force and the strong nuclear force as they both share 3D-

framed LMIPs (similar to Grand Unified Theories27

).

Table 10-C. IDUM predicts the unity between electroweak and strong nuclear forces as

part of the same ~3D-frame.

log2Iu

Mgl c2

⋅ Tbw⋅( )

α3.2=

log2Iu

Mgl c2

⋅ Tbz⋅( )

α3.2=

log2Iuc

Mgl c2

⋅ Tbw⋅( )

α3.202=

log2Iuc

Mgl c2

⋅ Tbz⋅( )

α3.202=

When analyzing heg information quantity from the same perspective, we get another similar DAH-

like coincidence log2(Iwuc/heg)/α~4 ���� heg~Iwuc/NHAD4~Iwu/(2

α)4 from which we can conclude that it is

very possible that heg measurement (even though it is just a theoretical plausible-but-indirect measurement) is

in fact same Iwu(Iuc) measurement in a 4D-ST info-frame variant. This coincidence offers IDUM the

potential of offering at least a formal logical unification between the electromagnetic force and gravity, as

any 3D-framed LMIP can be decomposed in a quantum gravity 4D-info-frame. The hugeness of Iwuc,

the 2 orders of magnitude of (the exponential index) α above 1 and the Iwuc-4D-framing of

(electro)gravity (in contrast to the Iwu 3D-framing of the other 3 forces) also explains the huge

exponential difference (over 39 decimal magnitude orders) in strength between gravity and the other 3

forces.

26

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon 27

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory

21

Table 10-D. IDUM predicts the unity between gravity and the other 3 fundamental

forces (3D-framed) as gravity is the ~4D-framed variant of the same total universe

information (Iwu, Iuc).

log2Iu

heg

α4.11=

log2Iuc

heg

α4.112=

h

heg7.202 10

45×=

Checkpoint conclusion: IDUM offers an Iwu(3D/4D) unified info-frame for all the 4 known

fundamental forces of nature (measured by heg, h, Iin/ex of W/Z bosons and Iex of gluons) (“theories of

everything”28

similarity). However, I shall try to demonstrate that IDUM also offers a potential

explanation of leptons, photons, gluons and quarks inner forces and structures.

As IDUM defines the eg as a (large) group of co-phase gravitons (in the same quantum state)

(which all may act as a unity), we can inductively proceed in reading Iwuc in a 5D frame using the same

algorithm: IDUM conjectures that the 5D frame is that of gravitons, the (~)1D “bricks” that build all the

5D-ST vacuum and also build the eg-based quantum particles (string theory similarity; Kaluza-Klein

theory29

similarity). Reading Iwuc in a 5D-α frame generates another (possible last) gravitonic Planck-

like constant named hgr by IDUM. Hgr is defined as hgr=Iwuc/NHAD5~Iwu/(2

α)5 ����log2(Iwuc/hgr)/α=5.

Based on the heg/hgr ratio, IDUM estimated that a single (circular/linear) eg (a physical byte) may

contain a huge number of ~1036

gravitons (physical bits) with the same wavelength (the granulation

factor of an eg analogous to the granulation factor NEgP of a photon). Based on this informational

constant (hgr) IDUM also defines the scalar of a single graviton with λ-wavelength as: Egr(λ)=hgr·c/

λ=hgr·υ. As Rre is considered a minimum bend-ray for a single circular eg, IDUM conjectures that lP is

the minimum bend-ray of a single circular graviton so that a single 4D-ST single eg pixel may

circumscribe ~1018

single graviton inner subpixels (all the ~1.5D quantum particles including electrons

and quarks may have an inner structure composed of at least 1018

graviton-strings) (see the next table).

The ~2D holographic character of a single eg 4D-ST pixel information is conserved when compared to a

single graviton 5D-ST subpixel information (see the next table). As a single eg is a ~2D entity in a 5D-ST,

a single graviton is a ~1D entity when Iwuc is read in a 5D-α frame (string theory similarity; see the next

table). IDUM conjectures that gravity and electromagnetism have similar scalars because they both are

graviton-based forces: photon is a pack of ~1045

co-phase egs which is analogous to an eg being a pack of

~1036

co-phase gravitons. IDUM conjectures that light bending is a consequence of the eg-based

granulation of the photon that changes gravitons with the ST eg-based matrix.30

. The gluon (~0eV), the

electron neutrino (~2eV)31

, the gravitino32

(~1eV as defined in supersymmetric models) may be graviton

based with rest energy defined as multiple of Egr(lP)=hgr·lP/c.

28

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything

29 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaluza%E2%80%93Klein_theory; See also abstract no. 4 (Bondărescu, Mihai) from

www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2005abstracts.pdf 30

See also abstract no. 28 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2009abstracts.pdf 31

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

32 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightest_Supersymmetric_Particle

22

Table 10-E. IDUM predicts a gravitonic Planck-like constant (the informational

constant of the graviton; the [physical] bit of the universe) by reading the same Iwuc in a

5D-α frame.

hgrIwuc

2α( )5

log2Iwuc

hgr

α5

hgr1

4.815 10115×

pit⋅ heg

hgr4.431 10

36×=

h

hgrNHAD

23.191 10

82×

Egr λ( ) hgrc

λ⋅ hgr υ⋅

Eeg Rre( )

Egr lP( )9.992 10

17×= Rre

lP4.434 10

18×=

log2heg

hgr

log2Rre

lP

1.965=

log2Eeg Rre( )

Egr lP( )

log2Rre

lP

0.965=

When analyzing the intrinsic information of a single gluon33

(Iin-gl=Mgl·c2·Tgl) as function of

gluon mass (Mgl~0,<0.0002MeV/c2) and the very large (mean) half-life of the gluon (as the gluon is as stable

as the electron and the proton) (Tgl~Te, Tgl~Tp or Tgl~Aou, with Te=electron half-life and Tp=proton

half-life), we get another similar DAH-like coincidence: log2[Iwu/(Mgl·c2·Te,Tp)]/α~2.

The electron, the proton (and the intra-nuclear neutron), the up and down quarks (that form the

nucleons together with gluons) also have 1.5-2D Iwu-framing (there are not just informational

arguments, but also mass and dimension argumentative strong DAH-like coincidences related to

log2(Mu/Me) and log2(Mu/Mp), but also between the ray of the observable universe [Rou] and the

classical electron ray [Re] and the approximate proton ray [Rp]): Mu~Mp·NHAD2~Mp·(2

α)2~-

Me·NHAD2~Me·(2

α)2; log2(Rou/Re)~α����Rou~ Re·NHAD~ Re·2

α;

log2(Rou/Rp)~α����Rou~Rp·NHAD~Rp·2α.

IDUM predicts and supports the 2D holographic universe theory by the DAH-like coincidence that

Mu/Mp~(Rou/Rp)2~NHAD

2~(2

α)2. IDUM predicts and supports that quark based quantum particles and

leptons are essentially ~2D branes (strong similarity with M-theory and subquantum theories34

generally,

especially to Bohm's subquantum potential35

concept). From this point of view, IDUM invokes a 5th

force

(similar to some preon/rishons theories) that assures the inner structure and stability of the 1.5-2D

subatomic particles mentioned above. This 5th

force may be a type of very strong gravity (VSG) which

may be active only on very short distances (close to Planck length): VSG is a good candidate for

explaining the internal forces and the 2D inner structure of the black-holes. VSG may also explain

Koide-like coincidences in which high symmetry can be reached at (just) apparently low energies (in fact

33

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon 34

www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/qm4.htm 35

arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0311244; www.metafysica.nl/holism/implicate_order_20.html

23

the inner forces and energy of the electron/quark may be very high on very small scales and may explain

the striking symmetries in the rest masses of the leptons/quarks [as the one illustrated by Koide

coincidence])

Table 11. IDUM predicts that the subatomic particles supposed to be „point-like” are

actually ~1.5D to 2D-ST framed and may have a 1.5D to 2D inner structure stabilized by

forces even stronger than the strong nuclear force (a possible very strong gravity: VSG).

log2Iu

Mgl c2

⋅ Te⋅( )

α1.766=

log2Iu

Mgl c2

⋅ Tp⋅( )

α1.709=

log2Iu

Me c2

⋅ Te( )

α1.683=

log2Mu

Me

α2.077=

log2Rou

Re

α0.999=

log2Mu

Me

log2Rou

Re

2.079=

log2Iu

Mp c2

⋅ Tp( )

α1.548=

log2Mu

Mp

α1.997=

log2Rou

Rp

α1.011=

log2Mu

Mp

log2Rou

Rp

1.976=

log2Iu

Mqu_med c2

⋅ Tp⋅( )

α1.611=

log2Iu

Mqd_med c2

⋅ Tp⋅( )

α1.603=

log2Rou

lP

α1.489=

Mu

Mp

Rou

Re

21.024=

In conclusion, LMIPs (measured by h, heg, W/Z boson intrinsic information and gluon intrinsic

and extrinsic information) may be the consequence of the the same Iwu (Iuc) and its “granularity” and

spreading/escape in different (3D/4D)-ST frames of measurement.

IDUM offers a simple elegant interpretation to all forces/fields as derived from a single parameter (Iwu,

Iuc). IDUM is compatible with a potential universal law of force variation inverse proportional to the square of

the distance (as distribution of the emitted LMIPs on the surface of a sphere with a ray equal to the distance

between any 2 particles in the universe). IDUM can be simulated on any computer, using software specialized

in parallel multiple particle manipulation. IDUM may generate interesting predictions that can be tested

experimentally: the quantum G series prediction is a good example (see Part 2).

24

Part 2

A heg series and quantum G series prediction for any atom,

based on the nuclear binding energy (the nuclear mass „defect”)

as a measure of ST level of contraction/”compression” at high nuclear internal „pressures”.

The number of egs emitted by a specific subatomic quantum particle is directly proportional to

the particle relativistic mass (rest mass+velocity/dynamic mass+/-mass „defect” if it’s the case). The number

of egs emitted by an atom is directly proportional to the sum of all masses/energies of the subatomic

particles (proton, neutron and electron). The protons total mass in an atom can be aproximated as a function

of the number of protons (NP) and also considering the mass „defect”/NBE of the protons in the atom nucleus

(see PTM [protons total mass] function in the next table). The neutrons total mass in an atom can be

aproximated as a function of the number of neutrons (NN) and also considering the mass „defect”/NBE of the

neutrons in the atom nucleus (see NTM[neutrons total mass] function in the next table). The electrons total

mass in a neutral (intact) atom can be aproximated as a function of the number of electrons (NE=NP) and also

considering the dynamic mass of the electrons in the atom’s electronic shell as a function of an average speed

(as) (see ETM[electrons total mass] function in the next table). The atom’s total mass (ATM) is the sum of

the 3 functions described before (NTM, PTM and ETM).

For simplicity, IDUM considers a plausible simple grade I function to describe the relationship

between NBE and the energy of a single emitted eg (Eeg=function(hegn); hegsn as directly proportional to

ST level of contraction which is also relative to the initial free masses of the proton and neutron at rest, which

differ slightly from one another). NBE measures the level of the strong nuclear force exerted on a nucleon in a

specific nucleus, and the ST contraction/compression is directly proportional to that level of force

(measured by NBE). The level of the ST compression in a particle can be measured supra-unitary by the

(inverse) ratio between a particle rest mass and the compressed particle mass (the rest mass minus mass defect):

see PCR (proton compression ratio), NCR (neutron compression ration) and ECR (electron compression

ratio) functions in the next table (ECR is sub-unitary as the electrons have negative mass defects generated

by their high relativistic average speed[as] in the atom).

In any atom, heg (and the single eg energy: Eeg(λ)) has a specific distorsion for any type of

subatomic particle from that atom as function of PCR, NCR and ECR: hegP (intranuclear proton

specific heg), hegN (intranuclear neutron specific heg) and hegE (atom’s electrons specific heg, moving

with an average speed [as]) (see the next table).

In fact, what it is measured as heg (by measuring G in different experiments) is the mass weighted

average between these 3 separate specfic hegs: HegP, hegN and hegE. That’s why IDUM considers a heg

series (named hegs) for all types of atoms in which each element (hegsn) is a a mass weighted avarage of

all 3 specific heg of each subatomic particle in each type of atom (hegP, hegN and hegE).

The G series (Gs) is a function of heg series (hegs): see Gs(NBE, NP, NN, as) function in the next

table. IDUM considers that the experimental G is the result of measuring the interchange of 2 simultanously

combined flows of egs (each characterized by a hegP, hegN and hegE weighted average combination) between

2 masses (characterized by 2 specific Gs for each mass: Gs1 and Gs2): see the general form of Gs(NBE, NP,

NN, as) function in the next table.

As it can be seen in the next table graphs, the theoretical Gs graph aproximates all the G results in the

past over 100 years of big G determination experiments (Gexp [violet marks]: in a chronological order

aproximating the rising accuracy of the devices used to determine G; Gexp2[light blue marks with connectig

lines]: in an ascending order aproximating the NBE curve used to determine G), as a superior limit to the

experimental G values suite. However, all the G results obtained on Earth are „contaminated” by the (already)

curved ST of the Sun and the Earth in which the experiments take place. IDUM can aproximate Sun’s and

25

Earth’s specific G based on their chemical composition. Because of the Sun predominance and its

abundance in hydrogen (a chemical element with a specific Gs smaller than CODATA2012 G) (see the next

table), the Sun’s specific quantum G is 99.613%·G. The Earth’s specific G is larger that CODATA2012 G

(100.497%·G) and can be calculated based on the abundance of the chemical elements in the Earth composed

mostly of iron (32.1%), oxygen (30.1%), silicon (15.1%) and magnesium (13.9%). When experiments are

conducted into space, exprimental G will tend to be smaller (due to the influence of the hydrogen based

quantum G of the Sun). When the experiments are conducted deep in the Earth’s layers (as one experiment that

took place in 1km deep mines) they tnd to generate a larger experimental G. IDUM predicts that the G

determination will depend on the altitude at which the experiment takes place, but also on the chemical

composition of that specific Earth region in which the experiment takes place.

IDUM has a prediction that is verifiable both retrospectively (by analizing the negative/positive

altitude, the chemical composition of that region and of all the materials used in past 100 years G

determination experiments) and in the future by using the same experimental device at different altitudes

and in different regions and using metal spheres of different atoms or single atoms of at least 2 types and

analyze the systematic differences36

between the experimental G as function of all these chemical and

physical variables. IDUM recommends Stephen Merkowitz’s method37

and atom inferometry38

. IDUM

also predicts that any change in the relative position between the Sun and the Earth in the interval of the

experiment can slightly influence the results (see the 1400ppm varation invoked in one experiment cited

below). IDUM can also explain the Mikhail Gershteyn’s (MIT) discovery: his team has successfully

experimentally demonstrated that the well known force of gravity between 2 test bodies varies with their

orientation in space, relative to a system of distant stars. Their remarkable finding has been also been

issued on the journal 'Gravitation and Cosmology'. George Spagna, a chairman of the physics dept at

Randolph-Macon College, argued that Mikhail and his colleagues must provide theoretical justification

to be convincing. IDUM proposes a plausible explanation to the apparent paradox of the divergent

variation of experimental G values („despite” constant improvements of the measurement systems) as

these measurement systems can now better differentiate between different chemical structures combined

G imprints and Sun-Earth-star systems configurations (in 1999, CODATA decided to officially increase

the uncertainty of the accepted value for G from 128 ppm to 1500 ppm).

IDUM approximates the entire information that can be stored in a potential 3D-ST vacuum and

also the inner (intrinsic/extrinsic) information of the particles in their existence, NOT just the

information stored in the states of the particles (the main difference between IDUM and the other

informational models of the universe: see the References).

36

See also abstract no. 25 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2004abstracts.pdf 37

asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/Stephen.Merkowitz/G/Big_G.html 38

Schlamminger, Stephan (18 June 2014). "Fundamental constants: A cool way to measure big G". Nature.

adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014Natur.510..478S

26

Table 12-A. Hegs series (hegs) and quantum G series (Gs) for any atom

PTM NP NBE, ( ) NP MpNBE

c2

−

⋅ NTM NN NBE, ( ) NN MnNBE

c2

−

⋅

ETM NE as, ( ) NE MeMe as

2⋅

c2

+

⋅

ATM NP NN, NBE, as, ( ) PTM NP NBE, ( ) NTM NN NBE, ( )+ ETM NP as, ( )+

PCR NBE( )Mp

MpNBE

c2

−

:= NCR NBE( )Mn

MnNBE

c2

−

:= ECR as( )Me

MeMe as

2⋅

c2

+

:=

hegP heg PCR NBE( )⋅

hegN heg NCR NBE( )⋅

hegE heg ECR as( )⋅

hegs NP NN, NBE, as, ( ) hegPPTM NP NBE, ( )

ATM NP NN, NBE, as, ( )⋅ hegN

NTM NN NBE, ( )

ATM NP NN, NBE, as, ( )⋅+ hegE

ETM NP as, ( )

ATM NP NN, NBE, as, ( )⋅+

Kgc

Me2 ; Gs NP NN, NBE, as, ( ) 2Kg hegs NP NN, NBE, as, ( )⋅

Gs NBE NP, NN, as, ( ) Kg hegs1 NBE NP, NN, as, ( )⋅ Kg hegs2 NBE NP, NN, as, ( )⋅+

Gs NBE NP, NN, as, ( )Gs1 NBE NP, NN, as, ( ) Gs2 NBE NP, NN, as, ( )+

2

Figure 1. NBE variation with atomic mass

(upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Binding_energy_curve_-_common_isotopes.svg)

27

Figure 2. hegs as function of each atom’s specific NBE

0 20 40 60 800.998

1

1.002

1.004

1.006

1.008

1.01

The hegs/heg ratio variation for the main isotope of each chemical element

Z

hegs NP NN, NBE, as, ( )

heg

NP

Figure 3. Gs as function of hegs.

28

Table 12-B. G variation evidence from readings spanning over 200 years

(Source of the data and the comments: www.blazelabs.com/f-u-massvariation.asp)

Data Set

number Author Year G (x10

-11 m

3Kg

-1s

-2) Accuracy

% Deviation

from CODATA

1 Cavendish H. 1798 6.74 ±0.05 +0.986

2 Reich F. 1838 6.63 ±0.06 -0.662

3 Baily F. 1843 6.62 ±0.07 -0.812

4 Cornu A, Baille J. 1873 6.63 ±0.017 -0.662

5 Jolly Ph. 1878 6.46 ±0.11 -3.209

6 Wilsing J. 1889 6.594 ±0.015 -1.202

7 Poynting J.H. 1891 6.70 ±0.04 +0.387

8 Boys C.V. 1895 6.658 ±0.007 -0.243

9 Eotvos R. 1896 6.657 ±0.013 -0.258

10 Brayn C.A. 1897 6.658 ±0.007 -0.243

11 Richarz F. & Krigar-Menzel O. 1898 6.683 ±0.011 +0.132

12 Burgess G.K. 1902 6.64 ±0.04 -0.512

13 Heyl P.R. 1928 6.6721 ±0.0073 -0.031

14 Heyl P.R. 1930 6.670 ±0.005 -0.063

15 Zaradnicek J. 1933 6.66 ±0.04 -0.213

16 Heyl P.,Chrzanowski 1942 6.673 ±0.003 -0.018

17 Rose R.D. et al. 1969 6.674 ±0.004 -0.003

18 Facy L., Pontikis C. 1972 6.6714 ±0.0006 -0.042

19 Renner Ya. 1974 6.670 ±0.008 -0.063

20 Karagioz et al 1975 6.668 ±0.002 -0.093

21 Luther et al 1975 6.6699 ±0.0014 -0.064

22 Koldewyn W., Faller J. 1976 6.57 ±0.17 -1.561

23 Sagitov M.U. et al 1977 6.6745 ±0.0008 +0.004

24 Luther G., Towler W. 1982 6.6726 ±0.0005 -0.024

25 Karagioz et al 1985 6.6730 ±0.0005 -0.018

26 Dousse & Rheme 1986 6.6722 ±0.0051 -0.030

27 Boer H. et al 1987 6.667 ±0.0007 -0.108

29

28 Karagioz et al 1986 6.6730 ±0.0003 -0.018

29 Karagioz et al 1987 6.6730 ±0.0005 -0.018

30 Karagioz et al 1988 6.6728 ±0.0003 -0.021

31 Karagioz et al 1989 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019

32 Saulnier M.S., Frisch D. 1989 6.65 ±0.09 -0.363

33 Karagioz et al 1990 6.6730 ±0.00009 -0.018

34 Schurr et al 1991 6.6613 ±0.0093 -0.193

35 Hubler et al 1992 6.6737 ±0.0051 -0.008

36 Izmailov et al 1992 6.6771 ±0.0004 +0.043

37 Michaelis et al 1993 6.71540 ±0.00008 +0.617

38 Hubler et al 1993 6.6698 ±0.0013 -0.066

39 Karagioz et al 1993 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019

40 Walesch et al 1994 6.6719 ±0.0008 -0.035

41 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1994 6.6746 ±0.001 +0.006

42 Hubler et al 1994 6.6607 ±0.0032 -0.202

43 Hubler et al 1994 6.6779 ±0.0063 +0.055

44 Karagioz et al 1994 6.67285 ±0.00008 -0.020

45 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1995 6.6656 ±0.0009 -0.129

46 Karagioz et al 1995 6.6729 ±0.0002 -0.019

47 Walesch et al 1995 6.6685 ±0.0011 -0.085

48 Michaelis et al 1996 6.7154 ±0.0008 +0.617

49 Karagioz et al 1996 6.6729 ±0.0005 -0.019

50 Bagley & Luther 1997 6.6740 ±0.0007 -0.003

51 Schurr, Nolting et al 1997 6.6754 ±0.0014 +0.018

52 Luo et al 1997 6.6699 ±0.0007 -0.064

53 Schwarz W. et al 1998 6.6873 ±0.0094 +0.196

54 Kleinvoss et al 1998 6.6735 ±0.0004 -0.011

55 Richman et al 1998 6.683 ±0.011 +0.132

56 Luo et al 1999 6.6699 ±0.0007 -0.064

57 Fitzgerald & Armstrong 1999 6.6742 ±0.0007 ±0.01

30

58 Richman S.J. et al 1999 6.6830 ±0.0011 +0.132

59 Schurr, Noltting et al 1999 6.6754 ±0.0015 +0.018

60 Gundlach & Merkowitz 1999 6.67422 ±0.00009 +0.0003

61 Quinn et al 2000 6.67559 ±0.00027 +0.021

-- PRESENT CODATA VALUE 2004 6.6742 ±0.001 ±0.0150

“The official CODATA value for G in 1986 was given as G= (6,67259±0.00085) x 10-11

m3Kg

-1s

-2 and was based on the

Luther and Towler determination in 1982. However, the value of G has been recently called into question by new

measurements from respected research teams in Germany, New Zealand, and Russia in order to try to settle this issue. The

new values using the best laboratory equipment to-date disagreed wildly to the point that many are doubting about the

constancy of this parameter and some are even postulating entirely new forces to explain these gravitational anomalies.

For example, in 1996, a team from the German Institute of Standards led by W. Michaelis obtained a value for G that is 0.6%

higher than the accepted value; another group from the University of Wuppertal in Germany led by Hinrich Meyer found a

value that is 0.06% lower, and in 1995, Mark Fitzgerald and collaborators at Measurement Standards Laboratory of New

Zealand measured a value that is 0.13% lower. The Russian group found a curious space and time variation of G of up to

+0.7%. In the early 1980s, Frank Stacey and his colleagues measured G in deep mines and bore holes in Australia. Their

value was about 1% higher than currently accepted. In 1986 Ephrain Fischbach, at the University of Washington, Seattle,

claimed that laboratory tests also showed a slight deviation from Newton's law of gravity, consistent with the Australian

results. As it may be seen from the Cavendish conference data, the results of the major 7 groups may agree with each

other only on the level 0.1%. So, despite our great technology advancements in measuring equipment, we are still very

close to the precision of 1% obtained by Cavendish in the 17th century. This controversy has spurred several efforts to

make a more reliable measurement of G, but till now we only got further conflicting results.”

“One such effort was that by J.P. Schwartz and J.E. Faller, who devised an experiment that uses gravity field of a one half

metric ton source mass to perturb the trajectory of a free-falling mass. They used laser interferometry to track the falling

object. This experiment does not suspend the test mass from a support system, and it therefore rules out many of the

systematic errors associated with supports in Cavendish-like setups. Below are the results gathered over 3 years. This is a

plot of G results using the mentioned free fall technique. Error bars represent one formal standard deviation. The 1997 data was

processed daily, giving values of G from 6.66E-11 to 6.71E-11. One day's observation consisted of approximately 7200

drop measurements. Again, data consistently shows that G varies over time, with an uncertainty of over 1400ppm,

31

despite the fact that all sources of possible experimental errors associated with the classical Cavendish setup, have been

eliminated.[...]Just a couple of years ago, Mikhail Gershteyn, a visiting scientist at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Centre

and his colleagues have successfully experimentally demonstrated that the well-known force of gravity between 2 test

bodies varies with their orientation in space, relative to a system of distant stars. Their remarkable finding has been

also been issued on the journal 'Gravitation and Cosmology'. George Spagna, a chairman of the physics dept. at

Randolph-Macon College, argued that Mikhail and his colleagues must provide theoretical justification to be

convincing.”

“The collection of these new results suggests that the something is wrong or missing in our understanding of G. By the

end of 1999, the international committee CODATA, decided to officially increase the uncertainty of the accepted value

for the gravitational constant from 128 ppm to 1500 ppm. This remarkable step of increasing the uncertainty instead of

decreasing was made to reflect the discrepancies between the mentioned experiments.”

32

Part 3

(B)IDUM synthesis: principles, explanations, final additional arguments, extensions and predictions

1. IDUM conjectures that the universe is essentially a finite unitary (electro)graviton(string)-based

informational entity (homogenous on large scales and generally at high energies AND

assymetrical on local scales and generally at low energies) with a fractal holographic nature (self-

similarity from low microcosmic to large macrocosmic scales AND all-in-one and one-in-all

holographic principle). This unitary info-universe reaveals itself by specific intrinsic laws also

encoded in this informational entity.

a. IDUM proposes an „inverse” description of the universe (unity-to-parts) with accent on the

(subquantum) informational unity of the universe and its apparent (holographic)

„separations”/dichotomies as described in quantum mechanics and general relativity.

b. What is perceived and/or measured as „energy” and „matter” is in fact the result of a

double-sense flow of information between at least 3 elements of the whole informational

universe: the observer (with or without measurement systems extensions to his body) and

at least 2 subcomponents of the observed physical system. The channel of observation

(through which information is transfered bisense) is also the subject to the same laws of the

same whole universe.

c. „Physical” is in fact „informational” and IDUM sustains and includes Wheeler's "it from

bit" principle.39

(IDUM identifies the physical byte [as group of bits] with a single

electrograviton, and considers that the electrograviton is a compact co-phase group of

gravitons, with the graviton as a ultimate indivisible physical bit [sub-byte])

d. IDUM conjectures that ST is granular (no matter the number of possible euclidian/fractal

dimensions) and all the quantum particles appear quantized as a consequence of this ST

granulation. Moreover, IDUM conjectures that:

i. The observed 3D-ST vacuum is granulized in single circular electrogravitons (egs)

with the smallest possible ray of eg circular movement being approximative Rre.

The eg-pixels rotate in 4D and are intrincated and reciprocally perpendicular as in

the next image.

1. 2. In IDUM, the circular/linear gravitons are considered the physical bits of

reality (for both the 3D-ST „scene” and quantum wavicles „actors”).

3. All the quantum particles are eg-based and that’s how IDUM explains the

particle-wave double nature of quantum particles, as all the quantum

particles emit/receive egs (in pulses).

4. All the quantum particles are „born” from the ST vacuum (which may be

considered a sub-quantic40

level of unity of all [at least the observable]

universe)

5. ST and quantum particles interchange (physical) information in fractal

pulsed mode and relatively fixed packs (LMIPs) and all the physical

39

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics#Wheeler.27s_.22it_from_bit.22 40

link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00670409

33

(quasi)invariants of any law of physics are an indirect measurements of those

relatively fixed LMIPs.

ii. What we name and measure as the „dark energy/matter” is in fact the 3D-ST

vacuum total energy with a volume (at least) equal to the observable universe

volume.

1. IDUM predicts a percent (4.5%) close to the observed „white” energy/matter

percent (~5%), with the observation that IDUM’s prediction may be closer

to reality, as the ray of the observable universe and the capacity to measure

energy/mass both depend on the measurement systems that can become

more sensible and accurate in the future and measure greater

energies/masses (from larger distances than the present determined Ru).

iii. Physical information is in fact an energy/matter-space-time unity that reveals itself

in a triple dichotomy: the primary dichotomy 1) space-time (the „scene”: the

„dark” energy/matter) and quantum particles (the „actors”: the „white”

energy/matter); 2) the parallel splitting of the dark/”white” energy-matter into a

dark/”white” energy-matter binome; 3) the gauge-non-gauge functional relative

dichotomy of quantum particles.

1. The informational unity (energy/matter-space-time) concept reveals itsself

also in the scalars used by IDUM: Information=energy · time=mass · speed2 ·

time = mass · speed · distance =mass · distance2 / time=mass · 2D area / time.

IDUM defines physical information as the product between energy and time

and measures it using physical bits (p-bits/pits, 1 pit=1 joule*1 second). In

IDUM, the mass/energy equivalence principle is just a consequence (and an

approximation) of a more profound (physical) information conservation law.

a. I E ∆t⋅ pit 2lit J s⋅( )

b. I E ∆t, ( ) I m c2

⋅ ∆t, ( )

c. See Table 9-A and Table 9-C from Part 1.

2. The fact that the particle decay is a stochastic process in which it cannot be

predicted for sure (but just probabilistically) what is the next particle from a

multi-particle system that will decay (only the mean lifetime can be

calculated statistically) is and argument for the IDUM view that information

is a unity that reveals itself with a grade of impredictibility measured by the

HUP (Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle)41

.

e. The first-level arbitrary-parameters (finite by definition) in IDUM are Iduc (the total

[corrected] dark ST „scene” information), Iwuc (the total [corrected] white quantum

particles „actors” information) (as the 2 parts of a total [corrected] [dark and white]

information of the universe Ituc), the arbitrary rotation speed of a single-eg-ST-pixel (the

speed of light in vacuum, noted c) considered the superior speed limit of any quantum

particle in the 3D-ST (but NOT necessarily in 4D-ST), ±Qe (the elementary electrical

charge generated by the single eg rotation with the speed of light in the 4th dimension, in 2

possible senses: past-to-future and future-to-past) and NegRou (the number of single-eg-

ST-pixels per ray of the observable universe; these pixels are considered to be organized in

41

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

34

a 4D chain in which to adiacent pixel are perpendicular to each other creating a 4D-ST and

only a small fraction [ ~10%] of S2DT2D pixels can be measured indirectly as dark energy).

As a conclusion, the first-level arbitrary-parameters in IDUM are pixels (with all their

inner characteristics) and their distribution pattern and density (ST resolution).

i. Ituc 8.346 1091× pits⋅

1. Ituc Iduc Iwuc+

2. Iduc 6.925 1091pits⋅

a. Iduc

Ituc95.475 %

3. Iwuc 3.282 1090⋅ pits⋅

a. Iwuc

Ituc4.525 %

4. Qe 1.602176565 1019−

⋅ C

5. NEgRou 6.767 1042×= ( NEgRou 1.1

Rou

Rre:= )

a.

f. IDUM also conjectures that the total information of the universe (Itu) has the potential to

be the first level arbitrary parameter of any TOE reliable model: IDUM argues that all the

measurable physical parameters may be derived from this first level parameter. In other

words, the theory of everything is that „everything” is... one (creating the illusion of

diversity by different frames auto-reading, as life is a process in which the total

information of the whole universe auto-splits in different ierarhycal dichotomies and reads

itself simulaneously in different frames)

i. Ituc is a holographic fractal unity that can be measured in any frame of reference

(no matter how many dimensions) without losing its overall consistency/coeherence

and unity. Ituc is the mark of a complex unitary system in which the separation

between the RNHAU info-processing units is also an illusion (as a consequence of

the (perceptual) illusion of space-time separation)

ii. IDUM sustains Bohm subquantum holographic model in which the universe is an

informational unitary entity in which the separation of any 2 quantum particle is

essentially an illusion created by mind and its measurement tools.

iii. IDUM proposes the binary logarithm time-measuring technique using NOT

seconds, but the number of dedublation steps needed for an initial physical

quantity/state of a system to reach a target physical quantity/state of the same

mono-/poli-measured system: in this way time will be a necessary „illusion” only

locally/unilaterally (multiple local times and a global illusion of an „uniform

newtonian universal time flow”)

iv. The mass of the universe (the sum between the white mass and the dark mass:

Mwu+Mdu), the age of the universe and the speed of light (the speed of graviton/eg-

pixel) are 3 physical measures reciprocally complementary to Ituc.

35

1. Ituc Mdu Mwu+( ) c2

⋅ 2 Aouc⋅( )⋅

2. In IDUM, mass (M) is a vectorial measured informational flow per unit of

area (an area perpendicular to the flow vector) (area of a eg-based 2D

surface which is ALSO essentially informational as it is composed of single-

eg-pixels rotating with the speed c)

a. MF

acceleration a( )

E

distance d( )

distance d( )

∆t2

I

∆t

d2

∆t2

I ∆t⋅

d2

IF

d2

3. In consequence, IDUM considers that time (and Aouc value) are illusions

created by the fundamental binomial (Ituc, c, Qe, NEgRou). IDUM also

considers that space (and also Ru and Rre) is also an illusion created by the

same binomial (Ituc, c, Qe, NEgRou). IDUM considers that this binomial

creates the ST-illusion by the c factor (which is a time-space hybrid physical

measure) and the energy/mass reality by the Ituc factor.

v. The second-level arbitrary-parameters of IDUM are: Ewu and Edu (as 2 faces of

their sum Etu=Ewu+Edu).

1. Aouc can be derived from Iwuc (and/or Iduc) and c:

a. AoucIwuc

2 Ewu⋅

Iduc

2 Edu⋅

2. Edu can also be expressed as a function of NegRou and single-circular-eg-

energy (as an anticipiation of the next explanation for heg and Eeg)

a. Eeg 2 π⋅ Rre( ) 6.126 1056− J⋅=

b. Edu4

3π⋅ NEgRou

3⋅ Eeg 2π Rre⋅( )⋅

c. Edu 7.953 1073× J= ( Ewu 3.769 10

72× J= )

d. Etu Edu Ewu+ (

Ewu

Etu4.525 %⋅= )

3. Mwu and Mdu can also be derived from Ewu, Edu and c:

a. MwuEwu

c2

b. MduEdu

c2

vi. The third-level arbitrary-parameter of IDUM is RNHAU ([the approximate] real

number of hydrogen atoms [proton-electron pairs/neutrons] in the universe:

Eddington integer number equivalent, as the number of proton-electron pairs [the

third-level dichotomy of the white matter] as the neutron can also be considered a

compact confined proton-electron pair).

1. RNHAU 2.506 1082×=

36

a. The proton-electron / neutron (information) processor-unity mass

(Mpe~Mn) can be obtain from Mwu and RNHAU:

i. MpeMwu

RNHAU

ii. Mpe

Mn99.917 %=

b. As RNHAU can be organized as a 2D disk and

RNHAU π NHAR2

⋅ , NHAR ([approximate] number of hydrogen

atoms per ray [of the universe]) can be deduced from RNHAU:

i. NHARRNHAU

π

c. NHAD (number of hydrogen atoms per diameter [of the universe]) is

the double of NHAR

i. NHAD 2 NHAR⋅

d. IDUM defines the photon as a fixed LMIP containing NEgP linear

egs, with NegP defined as: the number of co-phase linear

electrogravitons per each photon (the electrogravitational granulation

factor of a single photon as a holographic projection of a 3/2

exponential information from all NHAD, as the photon is ~1.5D as

the electron is):

i. NEgP 8 π⋅( ) log2 NHAD( )

3

2⋅ NHAD⋅ 7.202 10

45⋅

e. IDUM defines the resting electron as a fixed LMIP containg NEgRE

egs, whith NEgRE defined as: the number of co-phase circular

electrogravitons per each resting electron (the electrogravitational

granulation factor of a single resting electron as a holographic

projection of a 1/2 exponential information from all NHAD, as the

resting electron is considered to have less degrees of [moving]

freedom than a photon has):

i. NEgRE 8 π⋅( ) log2 NHAD( )

1

2⋅ NHAD⋅ 5.255 10

43⋅

f. IDUM defines the inverse FSC for an electron at rest (α) as the ratio

between NegP and NegRE which is exactly the formal quantity of

white physical (extrinsic) information per diameter of white matter

(organized in NHAD proton-electron modules)

i. FSC1−

αNEgP

NEgRElog2 NHAD( ) 137.036

g. IDUM also defines the natural logarithm of NHAD (αe) as a FSC

derivative important in defining a scale invariance law in the ratio

37

between the ray of the visible universe (Ru) and the classical ray of

the electron (Re):

i. αe ln NHAD( ) α ln 2( )⋅ 94.986

ii. Re e

αe⋅

Ru114.177 %=

h. IDUM defines Planck constant (h) as an informational constant

obtained from reading Iwuc in a 3D-NHAD-frame:

i. hIwuc

NHAD3

Iwuc

2α( )3

ii. h 6.62606957 1034−⋅ pit 2

110.217−2

lit⋅

i. Ke is essentially a function of Planck constant (h), Qe (which is a first-

level free arbitrary parameter in IDUM), c (which is also a first-level

free arbitrary parameter in IDUM) and α:

i. Keh

2 π⋅( ) α⋅

c

Qe2

⋅hr

α

c

Qe2

⋅

j. IDUM argues that boson W/Z total physical information (particle

mass*mean half-life) can also be obtained from reading from the

same Iwuc (Iuc) in a ~3D-NHAD-frame:

i.

log2Iuc

Mbw c2

⋅ Tbw⋅( )

α2.993=

ii.

log2Iuc

Mbz c2

⋅ Tbz⋅( )

α2.992=

k. IDUM argues that gluon total physical information (particle

mass*mean half-life) can also be obtained from reading from the

same Iwuc (Iuc) in a ~3D-NHAD-frame:

i.

log2Iuc

Mgl c2

⋅ Tbw⋅( )

α3.202=

ii.

log2Iuc

Mgl c2

⋅ Tbz⋅( )

α3.202=

l. IDUM defines an electro-gravitational Planck-like constant (used in

the scalar definition of a single eg) for the photon as a group of a fixed

number (NEgP) of co-phase egs (heg) as the ratio between h and

38

NEgP (as the photon information is splitted in a NEgP information

quanta of each electrograviton in the photon):

i. hegh

NEgP

ii. heg1

1.087 1079×

pit 2262.553−

2lit⋅

m. Note that heg is very close to the informational quanta generated

when reading the same Iwuc in a 4D-NHAD-frame (the 2 orders of

magnitude of α above 1 and the ~3D-α /~4D-α frame difference

explains the major difference between gravity and the other 3

fundamental forces):

i.

log2Iwuc

heg

α4.112=

n. IDUM predicts that the gluon, the electron, the quark, the

proton/neutron (quark-based) have ~1.5D-α inner eg-based structures

(physical information) possibly stabilized by a 5th force, much

stronger that the strong nuclear forces, named very strong gravity

(VSG). IDUM conjectures that VSG is the main acting force in the

inner cores of the large black-holes were single circular egs pixels

(with Rre as ray of rotation) can be compressed to rays of rotation

close to Planck length. IDUM also conjectures that there is a profund

link between the ~1.5D dimension of an electron and the NegP scalar

as a function of NHAD1.5

.

i.

log2Iu

Mgl c2

⋅ Te⋅( )

α1.766=

ii.

log2Iu

Me c2

⋅ Te( )

α1.683=

iii.

log2Iu

Mqu_med c2

⋅ Tp⋅( )

α1.611=

iv.

log2Iu

Mqd_med c2

⋅ Tp⋅( )

α1.603=

v.

log2Iu

Mp c2

⋅ Tp( )

α1.548=

vi. log2

Rou

lP

α1.489=

39

vii. [1,2)D dimensions suggest string (quasi)disks (spherical string

„dust”) that do not cover a 2D (curved) plane/surface

completely with possible (quasi)fractal structure (as spherical

string „dust”)

o. Simillary to the information reading frame, the masses of quantum

particles (up/down quarks, proton/neutron, electron etc) are also the

result of reading the mass of the white universe (Mwu[Mu]) in a ~2D-

α frame:

i. log2

Mu

Me

α2.077=

ii.

log2Mu

Mp

α1.997=

p. Simillary to the information reading frame, the standard rays of

quantum particles (up/down quarks, proton/neutron, electron etc) are

also the result of reading the ray of observable universe (Ru, which is

also function of Iwuc and Mwuc/Ewuc) in a ~1D-α frame:

i.

log2Ru

Rre

α1.037=

ii.

log2Ru

Re

α0.999=

iii.

log2Ru

Rp

α1.011=

q. From analyzing the ratio between the dimensional frames of masses

(2D-α) and lengths (1D-α) IDUM argues that this is the fundamental

argument for which the energy-mass of the universe seems to have a

~2D holographic essence. The energy-mass of the universe and tof he

black-holes have a strong common holographic character because of

this ~2/1 dimensional ratio.

i.

log2Mu

Me

log2Ru

Rre

2.002=

ii.

log2Mu

Me

log2Ru

Re

2.079=

40

iii.

log2Mu

Mp

log2Ru

Rp

1.976=

iv. In fact IDUM predicts that the universe „scene” (all the ST eg-

based pixels and graviton-based subpixels) and the actors

(quantum particles and also conglomerates of quantum

particle including living entities) are black-hole-like entities

(1D-2D holograms) the constantly emit and absorb physical

information (2 anabolic/catabolic alternate phases, similar to

the biological entities).

r. In contrast with energy-mass (which is a 2D-α hologram), the total

information of the universe coded by the total number of egs in this

universe is a ~3D-α hologram:

i.

log2Ituc

Eeg Rre( ) Aouc⋅

α3.111=

ii.

log2Ituc

Eeg Rre( ) Aouc⋅

log2Ru

Rre

3=

s. As it can be observed from all the previous α-dimensional arguments,

the absolute values (in physical units) of different physical measures

(information, energy, mass, length and durations) aren’t essential in

IDUM: the single aspects essential in IDUM are the adimensional

ratios between maximum and the minimum (information, energy,

mass, length and durations). That’s why IDUM is essentially an info-

mathematical model of the universe than can be simulated using pure

adimensional real numbers/ratio constants). Aditionally, IDUM also

conjectures that the universe evolves step-by-step by ST self-

similarity with its previous past states (conserving the essential

definitory adimensional ratio constants from the Big-Bang until the

present day). IDUM conjectures (see the next arguments for BIDUM)

that is very possible that even the „living” observes to be present (like

being „precoded”/”preprinted” on film/genome) on a 2D surface of

the pre-Big Bang singularity (like an apparently „dead seed” pre-

created by a superior intelligent universe that contains its living

„embryos” which will/may become the future observers): even if the

universe continuously inflates, it remains essentially self-similar with

its previous singularity as if this singularity co-existes as a superposed

state with the present state of the universe (a possible explanation for

subquantum unity hypothesis and a possible explanation for

41

synchronicity/quantum entalgement through that singularity; a vision

simillar to Einstein’s eternal universe theory).

i. Time may be an ilussion, a visual construction of the observer

conscious mental part (with causality being just an apparent

„mask” of the subquantum synchronicity): there a high

probabilty that the universe may be a giant black-hole42

as

each of its subcomponents.

ii. The global dynamic inflation-deflation cycle (keeping self-

similarity by conserving the same ratios between maximum

and minimum physical measures of the universe) creates the

illusion of a global time (and global age of the universe) and

projects the 4th sub-Planck micro-dimension into this illusory

global (macro)time. The scene(ST)-actor(quantum particle)

dichotomy also may create the illusion of movement (which

may be indistinguishable from static if the universe were

viewed from outside, like a „leaf” that grows self-similarly)

t. As it can be observed, IDUM uncovers fractional α-dimension

numbers close to integers (~1D, ~2D, ~3D, ~4D etc) which suggests a

fractal nature of the universe.

u. IDUM uses a scalar definition of a single eg, a sclar law

similar/analogous to the scalar of a photon ( Ef λ( ) hc

λ⋅ ) (the

graviton is in fact the physical info-bit and the electro-graviton [eg] is

the physical info-byte defined as a group of co-phase gravitons)

i. Eeg λ( ) hegc

λheg ν⋅

v. Based on the Eeg(λ) scalar, IDUM estimates the number of Egs

transfered to an electron that moves from a resting state to a speed (v)

state as:

i. NEgTRE v λ, ( )Me v

2⋅

Eeg λ( )

w. Based on NEgTRE(v, λ) IDUM defines the total number of egs in a

moving electron (NEgME(v, λ)) as:

i. NEgME v λ, ( ) NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+

x. IDUM generalizes α (FSC-1

) for the moving electron as:

i. α v λ, ( ) α NEgME v λ, ( )( )NEgP

NEgME v λ, ( )

NEgP

NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+

42

See also: Nassim Haramein , Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass (resonance.is/wp-

content/uploads/2013/05/1367405491-Haramein342013PRRI3363.pdf)

42

ii. FSC alpha1

α

NEgRE NEgTRE v λ, ( )+

NEgP

iii. As it can be seen, BIDUM offers a plausible probabilistic

explanation for FSC: the probability that an electron will emit

a photon is the ratio between the number of egs (bytes of the

physical intrinsic information) of the moving electron

(NegRE+NEgTRE[v,λ]) and the fixed number of egs (bytes of

the physical intrinsic information) of the photon (NEgP).

y. IDUM interprets the electron rest mass as generated by the circular

movement of the number of circular egs in a resting electron

(NEgRE) with Re as rotating ray (generalized as a larger variable

NEgRE and variable rays smaller than Re)

i. MeNEgRE Eeg 2 π⋅ Re( )

c2

ii. Apparently Me has a tautologic definition (as Re is already a

function of Me). However, IDUM predicts Re from a global

arbitrary parameter (Ru) similarly to Mpe, using α

(log2[NHAD]), using another striking (non-)coincidence

related to DAH:

1. log2Ru

Re

136.845=

2.

log2Ru

Re

α99.86 %=

3. Using a (globally) corrected classical electron ray (Rec),

IDUM can predict Me with resonable accuracy (that

can be also raised by adjusting NegRE)

a. RecRu

2α

:=

b. Rec

Re87.584 %⋅=

c.

NEgRE Re( ) Eeg 2 π⋅ Rec⋅( )⋅

c2

Me114.177 %⋅=

d.

NEgRE Rec( ) Eeg 2 π⋅ Rec⋅( )⋅

c2

Me100 %⋅=

4. In fact, there are 2 other microcosmic lengths (Rre and

Rp) that are close to Re and subject to similar DAH-like

coincidences:

a.

log2Ru

Rre

α103.726 %⋅=

43

b.

log2Ru

Rp

α101.089 %=

5. The Ru-Re coincidence mentioned before suggests that

the visible universe may have grown in a self similar

way using the same exponential function of a specific

logarithmic spiral:

a. FRu Re θ, ( ) Re eαe θ⋅

⋅

b. FRu Re 1, ( )

Ru114.177 %⋅=

z. Proton beta constant (βp) emerges from Mpe (predicted from Mwu

and RNHAU) and Me as:

i. βpMpe Me−

Me1836.15

aa. IDUM also predicts the gravitational coupling constant (αG/ αGr) as

a function of log2(NHAD)(=α[Re,0]=α). This function (the DAH [non-

]coincidence) suggests that FSC has a dual electrogravitational

significance (FSC being a both electromagnetic and gravitational

constant by the 2α [NHAD] factor).

i. αGhr c⋅

G Me2

⋅2α

3

22

α⋅ α

3

22

α 1+⋅

ii. αGrhrr c⋅

G Me2

⋅α

3

22

α⋅

bb. As it can be observed until now, IDUM essentially focuses on

adimensional constants (ratios) as they are considered essentially

fundamental in IDUM but also in any plausible (informational)

TOE.43

cc. As IDUM considers c fundamental, as I have already shown how

IDUM predicts h, Me, heg from FSC, quantum G is considered a

function of heg and Kg(=c/Me2):

i. Kgc

Me2

ii. G 2hegc

Me2

⋅

43

See also abstract/article no. 10 from www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/abstracts/2010abstracts.pdf

44

iii. G2

Me2

heg c⋅( )⋅2c

Me2

heg⋅ 2Kg heg⋅

iv. As it can be observed, G is a function analogous to Ke

function, as c/(α·Qe2) is a constant (versus hr from the same

equation)

1. Keh

2 π⋅( ) α⋅

c

Qe2

⋅hr

α

c

Qe2

⋅

v. As the r2 factor comes from the area of the sphere (4πr

2) on

which a mass emits LMIPs perpendiculary to that sphere

surface (until the LMIPs are absorbed by another mass), a

gravitational permitivity(εG) can be defined analogously to ε0

(as Fg can be formulated analogously to the Coulomb force

Fe):

1. Fe KeQ1 Q2⋅

r2

⋅1

4 π⋅ ε0

Q1 Q2⋅

r2

⋅1

ε0

Q1 Q2⋅

4 π⋅ r2

⋅⋅

2. Fg GM1 M2⋅

r2

⋅ G 4 π⋅( )⋅[ ]M1 M2⋅

4 π⋅ r2

⋅⋅

1

εg

M1 M2⋅

4 π⋅ r2

⋅⋅

3. 1

εg4 π⋅( )G

4. DAH defines 4πG as:

a. 4 π⋅( ) G⋅h c⋅

α

3

22

α⋅

Me

2⋅

5. The gravitational permitivity (εg) can be expressed

using DAH as:

a. εg1

4 π⋅( ) G⋅

α

3

22

α⋅

Me

2⋅

h c⋅

dd. IDUM proposes a generalized quantum G as a combination of 2 types

of egs (with heg1 and heg2 scalars)

i. G Kg heg1⋅ Kg heg2⋅+ Kg heg1 heg2+( )⋅

ii. G1 2, Kg heg1 heg2+( )⋅

ee. IDUM proposes a simple grade I function that describes how heg

depends on NBE (nuclear binding energy as local stressor of ST).

IDUM postulates that what is measured as G is in fact a combination

of superposed eg flows with different specific hegs that are specific to

each atom/isotope as a function of NBE (see tables, figures and the

initial explanation from Part 2).

2. IDUM sustains a unitary informational holographic view of the universe with a single essential

principle: „the whole in each part and each part as a [morpho-functional] reflexion of the whole”

45

(equivalent to „each component is bisense-connected to all other components from which it

receives and to which it sends information” AND „each component is created by information

received by all the other components, with [theoretically] 0 intrinsic isolated [un-connected]

information”). In the next figure, each vertix of the regular poligon is a proton-electron processing

unit (with the white universe being graphically simulated as a regular polligon with

RNHAU/quark vertices). This model is similar to cyber scheme of the biological entities in which

each effector receives information from all receptors and each receptor can theoretically transmit

information to all the effectors („all for/from one AND one for/from all”)

a. b. All types leptons, all types quarks etc are considered in IDUM nodal points of the same

informational layer of the universe: the electron layer, the down -quark layer, the up-

quark layer, etc (Wheeler’s one-electron hypothesis44

partial similarity). The non-nodal

lines in the same level of informational interconnection hierarchy are the forces that

interconnect the indentical particles (nodal points) from the same level. In a way, quantum

particles can be interpreted as compact nodal points of this informational network and

forces can be interpreted as „loose” line-nodes that can extend to infinity. In other word,

IDUM conjectures that the universe is essentially a INFORMATIONAL CRYSTAL: A

QUANTUM MIND/INTELLIGENCE (COMPUTER). IDUM promotes the principle that

the universe is essentially a mind, an intelligence, a natural conciousness. A 5D info-

„crystal” universe can explain the quantum entalgement between some quantum particles

(as these seem to be connected by rigid force-lines). In IDUM, quantum particles and

fundamental forces are indissolubly related as the particles are the result of forces and the

forces are the result of quantum particles: in other words all particles (the „crystal faces”)

and all forces (the „crystal edges”) are different compementary subforms of the same

informational unitary (quasi)„crystal” that the universe is. Single gravitons and graviton

packs (the egs and the photons) are LMIPs that have a „cable” function in BIDUM (similar

to a computer RAM). As gravitons are the bits of ST vacuum itself but also the basic

strings constituents of all quantum particles (gauge and non-gauge), they also function as a

ROM memory (the hard-disk of the universe). The same gravitons have 2 different states:

a LMIP state (the gauge particles: RAM of the universe and informational flow „cables”)

and a condensed state (all the types of non-gauge quantum particles) (the ROM and the

parallel microprocessors of the universe). Even if the real universe may be much larger

44

io9.com/5876966/what-if-every-electron-in-the-universe-was-all-the-same-exact-particle; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-

electron_universe; www.quora.com/How-plausible-is-the-idea-of-Feynmans-one-electron-universe-What-do-theoretical-and-

experimental-quantum-physicists-think-about-that-idea; telescoper.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/the-theory/

46

and heavier than the observed universe, IDUM conjectures that the universe behaves as a

unity (in which the separation in observable subcomponents and dichotomies are

essentially illusions: „the unity/whole in parts <<more>> than the parts in unity/whole”)

and all the global invariants (which also may be the answer-illusions that the universe

creates when questioned/analyzed by the human mind in different frames of perceptions)

may be the expression of this unity, but also the „synapses” of articulation between this

(sub)universe and other parts of the REAL universe, or between this universe and other

parallel universes (possible ierarchically superior or inferior to ours).

c. In the previous figure, the diagonals of the polygon (that connect each vertix with all the

other vertices, no matter the spatial distance between those informational interconnected

vertices) represent the lines of the graviational field (no matter the number of euclidian

dimensions of the polygon/polyhedron). Electromagnetic force is represented in the

previous figure by all diagonals that interconnect all the charged quantum particles (a grid

of lines that superpose to a small percent of the gravitational lines if we consider the dark

universe that doesn’t normally couple with the charged particles). The edges that connect

any vertix with the other 2 adiacent neighbour-vertices may represent the strong nuclear

force that connects only some type of particles (quarks) located very close (close enough) to

each other.

d. IDUM considers α as the number of dimensional „electric” „octaves” of the universe, so

that the visible universe interstingly has ~137 dimensional „electric” octaves and a

maximum ~1.5α (~204) (Planck) gravitational „octaves”. In other words, the

electromagnetic force is the 137th „octave harmonic” of the gravitational force (as DAH

and Ru-Re [non-]coincidences suggest)

i. Ru Rec 2α⋅

ii. Ru lP 2

3

2α⋅

⋅

e. The Ru~Re·2α (Ru=Rec·2

α) coincidence is equivalent to:

i. Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( ) 2α⋅ Et Me( )

ii. Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( )

Et Me( )2

Ef 2 π⋅( ) Ru⋅[ ]

Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( )⋅ 1.142=

iii. From the previous relations it results that the rest total energy of one single electron

is the ~137th octave of the electromagnetic energy of 2 electrons at Ru distance from

each other. Interstingly, the total rest energy of an electron can be obtained by

summing all the electrostatic energies of any 2 charges of the same type (2 protons

or 2 electrons) at Ru distance to one another on a hypothetical 2D particled

diameter of a hypothetical universe (with NHAD particles per diameter): this

suggests that each single electron rest mass may be an „electrical” hologram of all

other electrons/protons on the same diameter (defined by NHAD proton-electron

units).

1. Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( ) NHAD⋅

Et Me( )114.176 %=

2. Ee Qe Qe, Ru, ( ) NHAD⋅ Et Me( )

47

3. By induction, IDUM can also estimate a scalar for the graviton (the universal bit), not only for the

electrograviton (eg).

a. IDUM also predicts a gravitonic Planck-like constant (the informational constant of the

graviton; the [physical] bit of the universe) by reading the same Iwuc in a 5D-α frame. Of

course that IDUM speculates this 5th dimension (by analogy with the 1D, 2D, 3D-α, 4D-α

„chain” of alpha coincidences) for the sake of mathematical beauty, simmetry, the

experience with Kaluza-Klein universes etc, as IDUM can arbitrary choose any (fractional)

value superior to 4 when calculating hgr.

i. hgrIwuc

2α( )5

ii.

log2Iwuc

hgr

α5

iii. hgr1

4.815 10115×

pit⋅

iv. heg

hgr4.431 10

36×=

v. h

hgrNHAD

23.191 10

82×

b. IDUM defines the graviton-energy scalar similarly to the photon and electrograviton

scalars:

i. Egr λ( ) hgrc

λ⋅ hgr υ⋅

c. IDUM considers that a single circular graviton can be bent to a rotation ray equal to a

Planck length (lP) so that a single circular eg ST pixel can be divided/transformed in other

circular single-graviton subpixels with rotation rays between Rre and lP.

i. Rre

lP4.434 10

18×=

ii. Eeg Rre( )

Egr lP( )9.992 10

17×=

d. IDUM considers the graviton ~1D-α string,

i.

log2Eeg Rre( )

Egr lP( )

log2Rre

lP

0.965=

e. The eg is ~2D-α when dimensionally compared to a single graviton dimension (~1D-α)

i.

log2heg

hgr

log2Rre

lP

1.965=

ii. In conclusion, the eg is a graviton-based ~2D-α hologram.

48

f. When the total physical information of the universe (Ituc) is compared to the extrinsic

information of a single graviton, the informational universe reveals itself as a 4D-α

hologram:

i.

log2Ituc

Egr Rre( ) Aouc⋅

α4=

ii.

log2Ituc

Egr Rre( ) Aouc⋅

log2Ru

Rre

3.856=

4. IDUM anthropical/biological principle:

a. As 4D(5D)-ST is a unity artificially splitted in 3D-S and 1D(2D)-T, IDUM considers that, if

there exists even a single living cell in the universe, the whole universe may be considered

(„by bioinformation contamination”) a living entity at least in the interval of time in which

that cell manages to survive (with all abiotic matter and energy serving as present and/or

potential „future” deposits for the future development of that living cell, being just „a

matter of time” until that cell would eventually spread its daughters throught the universe

and access those deposits)

i. The fact that life is proven to exist without interruption on Earth for the last 4·109

years (which is almost a 3rd of age of the universe [Aou[) is a strong argument for

the bio-informational view of (B)IDUM. Even if somewhere else in the universe life

would have existed in the past before the (13.7-4=9.4)·109 years moment (and now is

dissapeared), that life erase can pe interpreted as apoptosis/necrosis-like not a „full”

death given the fact that life on Earth still exists (restarted from abiotic deposit, or

somehow escaped but silenced from that previous form of life).

ii. In conclusion „informational” is „bio-informational” (as „physical” is

„informational”), the bit/byte is essentially a bio-bit/byte and IDUM is in fact a Bio-

info-digital universe model (BIDUM). In other words, BIDUM conjectures that the

universe is essentially a living very intelligent creature/being as BIDUM generally

defines „life” as a combination between intelligence (intelligent design) AND free

will. Quantum is essentially bio-quantum (as information is essentially bio-

information, at least in our observed universe).

iii. BIDUM is in fact a a combination between IDUM and some elements of the

Anthropic Cosmological Principle (ACP).

iv. BIDUM unifies evolutionism and scientific creationism in a mature integrated view,

as it pushes the „natural selection” to a natural necessary „preselection” of atoms

and molecules appropriate to life which profoundly depend on FSC and proton beta

constant (Mp/Me) which were (apparently) randomly „decided” in the first

moments (seconds?minutes?) after Big Bang (as they were demonstrated as

constant for at least the last [10-12]·109 years).

v. Additionally, BIDUM speculates that the apparently „point-like” quantum particles

(as the electron, gluon etc) are in fact ~1.5D-α quantum micro-computers

(processor) that have a possible fractal/strange-attractor like eg-based inner

structures and use egs/gravitons strings as ROM and RAM (having implemented

line codes with all the universal laws of the universe). If true, it is legitimate to

49

conjecture that all the quatum particles are in fact quantum computers (processors)

and the universe is in fact a quantum super-computer with a huge number (at least

1082

„white” quantum particles) of parallel processors.

1. An indirect argument for the plausible complex inner structure and self

organisation of quantum particles is the fact that any living cell can highly

self-organize as a bio-information computer using a minimal 1012

atoms as

separate parallel processors: a single electron can contain at least 1042

egs

(and a lot more string-gravitons) that can theoretically be used to process

input/output information received/emmited by any quantum particle.

2. Another indirect argument is that gravitons are spin-2 bosons that can

occupy the same quantum state: egs have the same propriety as they are

defined as co-phase gravitons packs. This assures the primary condition of a

quantum computer: the possibility of quantum coherence in the inner

structure of any quantum particle.

3. BIDUM sustains and shares (as an „inner” conjecture of BIDUM) the The

Strong Free Will Theorem (John H. Conway, Simon Kochen)45

and uses this

theorem as an indirect argument for the quantum-particle – quantum

computer hypotesis/conjecture. As conclusion, BIDUM conjectures that the

universe is a living (free will intelligence) entity (essentially informational)

that reveals itsself in 3 faces: dark/white energy(matter), space

(distance/surface) and time (interval/speed) AND that our universe is most

probably created by a superior intelligence (identified with the Divine by all

religions in the history of mankind).

vi. BIDUM proposes the swarm intelligence (SI) algorithms46

to shape the behaviours

of multiple quantum particle systems in which each atom is a powerful self-

organized quantum computer eg/info-connected to all the other particles of the

universe in a fractal holographic manner (all-in-each and each-in-all).

5. BIDUM conjectures that an intelligence/mind (as our universe is) cannot appear from „nothing”,

but it can only be created by another superior intelligence (such as a Creator intelligence, named

the Divine). In conclusion, BIDUM sustains creationism, such as: all the intelligent informational

„crystal” that the universe is (the universe as mind/intelligence) was created by a superior

informational entity (a [Divine] Creator mind: that is essentially another universe-

mind/intelligence ierachically superior to our universe). As our universe is considered a natural

(alive) intelligence (a bio-intelligence), BIDUM considers the Creator Mind ALSO alive and

superior as intelligence to our universe (a superior bio-intelligence, a super-intelligence intuitively

deduced and defined as „the Divine” in all known human cultures from all known spaces and

hystorical times)

6. BIDUM has at least 2 retroactive predictions in (informational) biology.

a. Applying the BIDUM’s general principle in which the total intrinsic physical information

of an entity is the product between the energy of that entity and its life (average) duration,

organisms can be viewed as essentially unitary (bio)informational entities (not just

information processors) which contain a relatively fixed quantity of information (as a

global measure for their entire individual lifetime) generally genetically predetermined.

45

www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf; www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/free_will_theorem.html;

arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0604079; arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0604079.pdf; 46

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarm_intelligence

50

b. As Bio(Physical)Information=energy*lifetime=(intrinsic energy + input energy) *

lifetime=(intrinsic mass+input mass)*c2*(maximum) lifetime(L), then BIDUM predicts

that caloric restriction will generally prolonge the life of the living organisms (no matter

the complexity of that bioorganisms) with the difference ∆L=L2-

L1=I/{(BodyMass+[smaller]CaloricInput2/c2)*c

2} - I/{(BodyMass+[larger] CaloricInput1 /

/c2)*c

2}.

c. BIDUM suggests that the biologicial information (tendence of) conservation law has a

strong link with the fact/observation that very young organisms are very fragile but very

regenerative versus older organisms which may have a much more robust anatomical and

physiological structures/processes but have a much lower regenerative capacity.

d. BIDUM will surely offer some other biological (retro)predictions/explanations in the next

version 1.1.

7. BIDUM is a digital physics model candidate for TOE and has strong similarities with other

informational models of the universe (see Refrences). BIDUM offers an integrated unitary

bioinformational interpretation to both quantum mechanics (including quantum gravity) and

general relativity.

8. BIDUM version 1.0 is still „under construction” and any email/comment feedback is welcome by

the author as BIDUM v.1.0 still needs furher deductions/ inductions/ developments/corrections

and also needs to generate more predictions to be more convincing in the future, at least in its

strong parts: the DAH coincidence, the quantum G series predictions, the heg (and analogous hgr)

series predictions.

51

Table 14. References (ordered by relevance for BIDUM, not alphabetically)

No. Author Year Title Link(s)

1 Drăgoi, Andrei-Lucian 2015

The Bio-Info-Digital Universe Model

version 1.0 (English variant of this

article) (self-reference)

andrei.dragoii.com/anexe/BIDUMv1.0.pdf

2 Lloyd , Seth 2001 Computational capacity of the universe

arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0110141v1.pdf

www.newscientist.com/blogs/culturelab/2010/03/the-

universe-is-a-quantum-computer.html

3 Gundlach, Jens H. and

Merkowitz, Stephen M. 2002

University of Washington: Big G

Measurement asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/Stephen.Merkowitz/G/Big_G.html

4 Becker, Kate 2014 Is Information Fundamental? www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/physics/2014/04/is-

information-fundamental/

5 Wikipedia article 2015 Digital physics en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics

6 Wikipedia article 2014 Classical unified field theories en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_unified_field_theories

7 Wikipedia article 2014 Digital philosophy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_philosophy

8 Wikipedia article 2015 Dirac large numbers hypothesis en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_large_numbers_hypothesis

9 Wikipedia article 2015 Zero-energy universe

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe

www.astrosociety.org/publications/a-universe-from-

nothing/

www.livescience.com/33129-total-energy-universe-

zero.html

10 Wikipedia article 2015 Vacuum genesis en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_genesis

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_nihilo#Modern_physics

11 Wikipedia article 2015 Dark matter en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

12 Wikipedia article 2015 Dark energy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy

13 Links collection (2015) The holographic universe hypothesis

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle

www.nature.com/news/simulations-back-up-theory-that-

universe-is-a-hologram-1.14328

www.newscientist.com/article/dn26114-experiment-tests-

whether-universe-is-a-hologram.html#.VOjbevl_uSp

www.rense.com/general69/holoff.htm

www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/myths-of-physics-

1-einste_b_5672842.html

14 Wikipedia article 2015 The Fined Tuned Universe en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_Universe

14 Wikipedia article/book 2015 The Anthropic Principle

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

www.bluffton.edu/~bergerd/essays/impert.html

www.amazon.com/Anthropic-Cosmological-Principle-

Oxford-Paperbacks/dp/0192821474

15 Wikipedia article 2015 Loop quantum gravity theory en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_quantum_gravity

16 Links collection (2015) The Strong Free Will

Theorem

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_theorem

www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf

jamesowenweatherall.com/SCPPRG/MenonTarun2009Man

_FreeWillThm.pdf

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-go_theorem

17 Links collection (2015)

De Broglie–Bohm theory / Subquantum

(fields) fluctuations / Hidden variables

theories and related themes

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theo

ry

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_wave

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable_theory

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_hidden_variable_theory

www.phys.tue.nl/ktn/Wim/qm4.htm

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0375960191901

16P

link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00670409#page-1

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kochen%E2%80%93Specker_theore

m