The existence of tachyons explains the nature of gravity.

Can tachyon be the same as graviton? Tachyon is a hypothetical faster-than-light particle.  That particle cannot exist in the 3rd dimension because nothing can travel faster than light. The graviton is a hypothetical. Transporter boson of gravity. If we think of a possibility. That we could find tachyon in our universe. That point is near black holes. There are models that we cannot observe tachyons. Because. When they interact with 3D particles or space and time. Tachyons release their energy immediately. That means a photon can form when a tachyon releases its kinetic energy. And the ring shape of the photon supports that model. 

The idea is this. When a black hole binds energy, or quantum fields from around it. And turns those fields into kinetic energy. That energy turns some particles into tachyons. If tachyon exists. It can escape from a black hole. So, that means tachyons can be a source of so-called Hawking radiation. If a tachyon travels in the universe, it can leave a similar energy cone behind it. 

As an aircraft leaves. When it travels faster than sound. If a tachyon can form a quantum version of a sonic boom, that means the quantum low pressure follows that hypothetical particle. That thing makes. Quantum fields fall into those cones. And that explains why gravity can only pull things. The tachyon can also make the Hawking radiation possible. 

"A tachyon or tachyonic particle is a hypothetical particle that always travels faster than light. Physicists posit that faster-than-light particles cannot exist because they are inconsistent with the known laws of physics. If such particles did exist they perhaps could be used to send signals faster than light and into the past. "(Wikipedia, Tachyon)

"According to the theory of relativity this would violate causality, leading to logical paradoxes such as the grandfather paradox. Tachyons would exhibit the unusual property of increasing in speed as their energy decreases, and would require infinite energy to slow to the speed of light. No verifiable experimental evidence for the existence of such particles has been found." (Wikipedia, Tachyon)

"The term "tachyon" derives from a 1967 paper by Gerald Feinberg about excitations of a quantum field with imaginary mass. Subsequent work has shown the excitations are not faster than light particles but particle physicists still discuss "tachyons", e.g. in tachyon condensation, when they are referring to tachyonic fields." (Wikipedia, Tachyon)

"A new theory, that explains how light and matter interact at the quantum level has enabled researchers to define for the first time the precise shape of a single photon. Credit: Dr. Benjamin Yuen" (ScitechDaily, Quantum Leap: Scientists Reveal the Shape of a Single Photon for the First Time)

When tachyon arrives. Into the 3rd dimension, it would release its extra energy as a ring-shaped energy wave. So the photon, or at least some of the photons, are the remnants of the tachyons that slow their speed immediately when they arrive in the 3rd dimension. Here, they slow their speed and leave the sockwave behind them. That means a photon could be a similar shockwave to what an aircraft causes. When it crosses the speed of sound. And maybe those shockwaves are photons. 

But near black holes, the massive gravity pulls quantum fields into the black hole. There, the hypothetical tachyon can travel against the quantum fields. That travels into the black hole, the tachyon that can escape from the black hole can exist because the quantum field that travels against the tachyon allows it to cross the speed of light virtually. When a quantum field travels to a particle. And impacts it, the impact speed can be faster than the speed of light. If a particle travels 60% of the speed of light, and a quantum field travels against it with 70 % of the speed of light. 

The impact speed is 130% of the speed of light. That thing is called border crossing. The neutrino telescope benefits from a similar effect. When a neutrino travels into Earth's atmosphere and water, it travels faster than the speed of light in a medium. The neutrino must slow its speed, and during that process, it sends a blue light shockwave. That shockwave is like a quantum version of a sonic boom. 

When we think of a possibility. That a hypothetical graviton is the same thing as a tachyon. When a hypothetical tachyon travels out from the black hole. It can leave a similar cone behind it. As an aircraft leaves. When it travels faster than sound. That cone is called a sonic boom. If a tachyon leaves that kind of cone after it. If there is. Some kind of lower energy area. Energy around it starts to fill that area immediately. If a black hole sends those hypothetical tachyons, they could form the lower-energy area around it. If those hypothetical tachyons. Come out of a black hole. As pulses. That explains black hole quakes. And that explains why gravity has only one way effect. The cone that tachyon forms after it pulls particles into it. 

https://scitechdaily.com/quantum-leap-scientists-reveal-the-shape-of-a-single-photon-for-the-first-time/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

The universe will end its existence in the Big Crunch.

"A Cornell physicist proposes that the universe is only halfway through its 33-billion-year lifespan, and will one day reverse course. Based on new dark-energy data, Henry Tye’s model suggests the cosmos will stop expanding in about 11 billion years and ultimately collapse into a “big crunch,” ending in a single point. Credit: Shutterstock" (ScitechDaily, 

The new model suggests that the universe. Ends its existence. In the Big Crunch. The Big Crunch means that gravitation wins and all particles fall into the center of the universe. Then that ultimate black hole detonates and forms a new universe. The reason for that is. The distances between particles and other objects will increase. That makes gravitational interactions weaker. In the same way. The other three fundamental interactions turn weaker. 

And another thing is that. The universe leaks. The wave movement or energy travels faster than most particles. And that means wave movement travels before particles. That means the universe loses its energy all the time. Dark energy that rips the universe into pieces will turn weaker because the normal scattering effect doesn’t disturb that wave movement in the same way as other types of wave movement. 

“The local geometry of the universe is determined by whether the density parameter Ω is greater than, less than, or equal to 1. From top to bottom: a spherical universe with Ω > 1, a hyperbolic universe with Ω < 1, and a flat universe with Ω = 1. These depictions of two-dimensional surfaces are merely easily visualizable analogs to the 3-dimensional structure of (local) space.” 

If Ω = 1, the universe is flat.

If Ω > 1, there is positive curvature.

If Ω < 1, there is negative curvature.

If the density parameter is higher than one, Ω > 1, the universe will collapse. The problem is that the universe should be round anyway. Without depending on the main  shape. So the universe is not square. It's like some CD or round disk.

This means dark energy travels out from the universe. The third interesting thing is that the geometrical shape of the universe could be anything, but its farthest edge is a round or parabolic shape. The geometrical shape of the universe can be any one of those three possible forms, but those forms should be made of a round shape. So if the universe is flat, the shape of the universe is like a CD rather than a square. 

This means gravitation should win, and the universe will fall. Into one point. This means that things like a phoenix-universe could be possible. There is evidence in the Black Hole radiation. could involve information about the past universes that existed before our universe. So if the model. The spherical universe forms and falls again. And again turns real. The universe before the last is larger than the next universe. The reason for that is that not all energy will return to the point where the universe formed. This is one version of the cosmological mystery. And the thing that we should know is this. 

The universe has a beginning and an end. The end is the mystery. But if the end of the universe is the Big Crunch, that means matter forms a giant black hole, which will vaporize or detonate. Because matter cannot just vanish, that means the phoenix universe model is possible. 

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2025/10/physicist-after-33-billon-years-universe-will-end-big-crunch

https://scitechdaily.com/the-universe-will-end-in-a-big-crunch-physicists-warns/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe

Reductionism can restore information.

Reductionism is seen in cases like puzzles. We can break puzzles into pieces and then remake the entirety. So if we have all the pieces of the puzzle, we can remake the puzzle even if we take some of those pieces to another side of the Earth. If we can transport those pieces back, that allows us to remake the puzzle. But that is possible only if those pieces are not destroyed. 

Reductionism can explain the whole universe. The idea in this thing is this: all systems have a limited number of particles, or some other actors. That means if we turn the system into turbulence or entropy, we might not recognize the system the same as it was before the process started. But the particles that create the system are the same. So theoretically, we can remake and reorder those particles into the same form and order that they were before the process started, without depending on the size of the system.

The requirement is that the system is stable. If we think of a situation, a tornado takes our puzzle with it, and we cannot remake it when it moves. We cannot remake or restore a system that we cannot touch. It’s impossible to restore the image or system. Even if it's small, if the system is full of turbulence and dirt. Also, we must know what the original image, or the system, looked like. And we must know what the pieces of the system look like. 

That means we can return the universe to the form that it was just after the Big Bang. Or maybe, if the universe is formed of the black hole that formed from the past universe’s remnants, if that universe that existed before our universe faced the Big Crunch. Theoretically. It is possible. To calculate information that remains in the superstrings that form all particles. The key element in the quantum theories, and especially quantum information theory, is that information cannot vanish. It can change its form. But it's possible to restore that information into its form. 

Above the light cone. 

In the light cone model, the giant black hole pressed and teleported information from another universe. The black hole focused information. And then acted like a camera obscura, the pinhole camera. This means if that model is true, the theoretical universe that existed before our universe was opposite to our universe. In the case that this hypothetical universe could transport information through the black hole. Acted as a pinhole camera. That information is stored in the superstrings. The information is in the wave form, but restoring it requires complete knowledge of the universe. And that thing can be the most fascinating thing in science. 

Reductionism makes it possible to transport at least data through the quantum wormholes. The data can be sent to the receiver through the quantum wormhole. And then the receiver will reorder those data bits into the original form. That allows the system to transport even humans. through the teleport, that is one name for the wormhole that tunnels data through it. The teleportation can happen without the need to transport the body physically. The system can send genetic information. And the human brain waves through the quantum channels. The receiver can create artificial DNA by using that data. And then create cell groups that the bioprinter uses to create a copy of the person. Or the system can transport a human atom by atom, and then reorder those atoms into the original form. That requires a very advanced technology. But maybe that thing is possible someday. 

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/universe-reductionist/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionism

How to simulate the entire universe using a laptop?

“A new tool, Effort.jl, is revolutionizing cosmology by letting scientists analyze enormous datasets quickly and accurately on a simple laptop. (Artist’s concept). Credit: SciTechDaily.com” (ScitechDaily, Researchers Have Discovered a Way To Simulate the Universe – on a Laptop)

How to simulate the entire universe using a laptop? The answer lies in the accuracy the system employs. When we want to conduct. In a comprehensive analysis or simulation of the entire system, we must first select the scale at which we want to simulate it. If we want to make a simulation of the entire universe, we must begin with its smallest parts. In this case, we must only remember that the system's entirety is the sum of multiple subsystems. An atom, as an example, is the sum of electron shells and the nucleus. 

The nucleus of an atom is the sum of the protons and neutrons. And protons and neutrons are sums of quarks and gluons. We can make the simulation step by step. First, we can make a simulation of interactions. Between quarks and gluons. Then we can connect these simulations. Together with the proton and neutron interaction. 

And then we can make simulations. Of how electrons behave with each other and then how electron orbits interact with the atomic core. In this case, the system handles the entirety as modules. Each module handles each participant. The proton module involves the up and down quarks. Interaction with each other. This means that the system creates a mosaic where each participant of the structure is handled. Like an element. The system forms a bigger structure by connecting the smaller mosaic plates. The system makes a puzzle. Where each piece is a smaller-sized system. And together. Those smaller systems form a bigger entirety. 

If we want to calculate chemistry calculations. And to make simulations. Between molecules, we must not know quark interactions. We can choose the scale as atoms or atomic groups. To make simulations of their behaviors. In molecular-scale interactions. Those interactions happen in the farthest electron orbital. So we must not care. About the internal interactions of atoms. Removing. Unnecessary parts from the simulations. We can remove too high accuracy. 

That means we remove unnecessary parts of the system. If we want to drive from point A to point B. We want to know what route we choose. We don’t want to know what kind of houses or what kind of trees. Are in certain areas. We don’t need to know when every single person comes home. We must not know there is a free parking lot if we are on a transit journey. We need to know only which streets we select. This means the system must remove unnecessary information to make our work easier. So, the system gives only information. That we need. 

When we talk about accuracy. We can think that the system must control small points in the simulations. If we want to make a complete simulation of the universe and start from the quark-gluon levels, there are too many points that the system must handle.  We should begin those simulations from a much higher level. Like in the level of local galactic clusters. That means . We must make a model. Where the details in the entirety are lost. That allows us to handle things like galaxies as one point or entirety. 

If we want to simulate the interactions between galaxies. We must realize that there are billions of galaxies in the universe. That makes this type of simulation hard to make. There are billions of stars in each galaxy. And all giant spiral galaxies are following large groups of star clusters and dwarf galaxies. 

But it's possible to handle those systems as a whole. In that model. The system makes ball-shaped structures. There, it removes details. So the galaxies are like balls that interact with each other. But then there are still too many objects. That means we can make another crop. We can select certain galaxies whose interactions we can analyze. If we want to make a simulation. 

To determine how the Andromeda galaxy and the Milky Way will collide, we must calculate the route that those galaxies follow. There, we need to see the effect. The Magellanic Clouds affect that route. Calculating that three-body problem is possible, if we do not follow the highest accuracy. There is a possibility that Andromeda travels past the Milky Way. And then those galaxies start to orbit each other. Closing together. Then in the last stage, the supermassive black holes collide in the middle of the new galaxy. 

But if we want to make universe-scale simulations. We must use a different scale of accuracy. We must not calculate all electrons and each electron's trajectories. If we want to calculate things like how stars or interstellar nebulae behave. We must change the scale of accuracy. To make a large-scale simulation. We must understand that we can cut off atomic-scale objects. If we simulate large entireties. 

In universe-scale simulations, it's important. To determine the thing. What we want to simulate. If we want to simulate interactions between two galactic superclusters, we must not calculate the interactions of each single galaxy. We can think. That those galaxies and even local clusters are the entirety at the level of cosmic superclusters. We can think that. The superclusters are like balls. The giant entities where the local clusters form the mass centers. Or we can simply think. That they are like giant balls. That makes the simulation of the galactic superclusters' interactions easy. 

https://scitechdaily.com/researchers-have-discovered-a-way-to-simulate-the-universe-on-a-laptop/

Does the AI turn us passive?

The answer to that question is simple. The way we use AI determines whether it will make us more effective, smarter, or dumber. The thing that can turn an AI into a tool that destroys our ability to search for information. Write our essays, and make things. Is the way. To use AI. The AI can be like a mother, who always gives answers when the kid asks something. That thing can be effective. The problem is that the mother will not always stand next to the kids. And give answers to their questions. 

But the thing. That teaches a critical way to think and search for information is to give the encyclopedia to the kid, and then order them to search for the answer by themselves. 

The best way to destroy our productivity, thinking, and other things. It is to use the AI as a mother. In that case, we use AI like a child uses their parents. We can ask everything from the AI, and that makes us lazy. If we just ask things. From the AI. like “Write an essay for me, and mention things X,Y,and Z.” 

That thing can make this way of working effective. But it doesn’t make the essay-writing thing. That advances our way of thinking. In this case, we can compile the AI into a mother who writes essays to their kids. Those things might be impressive. If a 40-year-old person writes an essay. That a 10-year-old kid introduces as their own product. That essay can collect many prizes in a 10-year series, but that doesn’t advance the 10-year-old kid’s thinking. 

The thing that can destroy our ability to search for information is the need for effectiveness. When we write our essays, like this kind of text, we make them for ourselves. And of course, they are made for the audience. But those things require time. Time is money. And of course, we must write our essays in our free time. Companies pay for work. They pay for effectiveness. And that means we can turn the AI into a mother, who we can ask to make things like write essays and reports for our boss. 

We can use the AI as a mother who always gives answers to us. If we ask something. Or we can turn that tool into the melody mother, who always pleases the user, and tells things that the user wants to hear. We can give the AI the ability to think. But should we follow the instructions that the AI gives? Or should we just push the red button when the AI says that: “Press the red button”?

We say that we can use the AI as a mother. We can ask everything. From the AI. And that makes us effective. But that kind of mother. Kills our ability to search for information. Or, is it the AI’s fault if our boss gives an order to use the AI assistant in every situation? When we use the AI as some kind of mother. Who always gives answers all the time. When we ask something, we make a decision. We are people who use AI. We give orders to the algorithm. 

The algorithm is the system that searches, sorts, and outputs information. The decision on how to use AI is made by humans. If we give AI the authority to give orders to us, and we follow those orders, that decision is made by a human. We decide if we want to take orders from the AI. And if we don’t even check who owns some newspapers or TV channels, the decision is ours. 

But same way. Humans own the AI companies. They also make decisions about what the AI should tell and what it should not tell. Those people decide what they allow people to get, and what they are not allowed to get. 

The biggest failure that the user can make with the AI is not to use AI as some kind of mother, who tells everything that we want. We can turn the AI into a melody mother, who tells us what we want to hear. The problem with commercial AI is that it must be user-friendly. In some cases, the user-friendly can mean that the AI’s purpose is to please the user. That thing can tell. What the user wants to hear.  But, in this case. The people who make products. Have responsibility for their product. The AI tells only things. That it’s allowed to tell. The person who makes the algorithms determines those rules. 

About the segregation law of integers.

About the segregation law of integers. 

Can there be prime numbers in the group of integers? 

The segregation law means that all numbers can be divided into subsets. And this means that there cannot be a so-called prime number in the group of integers. The prime number is divisible only by one and itself. And that means an integer can be a prime number only if its divider is another integer. This means that, for example, 1, 2, and 3 are so-called virtual prime numbers. The reason for that is that we can divide those numbers into parts using decimal numbers. 

This means

1=0,5*2

1=0,25*4

1=0,05*20

but

1=0,0625*16 (0,25/4=0,0625) and (0,0625*16)

Let’s play with number 2

2=0,5*4

2=0,25*8

2=0,05*40

and

2=0,0625*32

And with 3

3=0,5*6

3=0,25*12

and

3=0,0625*48

So are 1,2, and 3 integers? The fact is that all numbers include one. And that means there are no real prime numbers in the group of integers. So, if we think like that, prime numbers are hiding on in the groups of decimal numbers. 

How to simulate the entire universe using a laptop?

 How to simulate the entire universe using a laptop? 

How to simulate the entire universe using a laptop? And can psychohistory be possible? 

The idea is this. If we want to simulate a large entirety, we must not have high accuracy. If we want to make a simulation about. How a river flows, we can use the entire river as a model. We must not care. About how a single water molecule or subatomic particle behaves. We must only know where the river flows. To make a prediction about how the river will flow, we must only know where the softest rock is to predict the channel that the river will choose. In meteorology, supercomputers can make very good predictions. If they know the forces that affect the air. In those cases, the system. Look at the entirety. It doesn’t try to make a precise and highly accurate model of how a single water droplet interacts. The system observes the large entireties. Like cloud groups to make a model, how the air mass will behave. 

Weather satellites and computers are good tools. To predict how large hurricanes behave. But those systems are helpless. When they must try to predict how tornadoes will form. Tornadoes are smaller but more destructive than large tropical storms. Tornadoes are too small for weather satellites.

Maybe. The same programs can make predictions of tornadoes. If the system uses so-called atmospheric satellites that observe smaller areas but with higher accuracy. Those systems will get information from smaller areas. But they can use similar computer systems. Researchers used to make a large-scale weather forecast. In this case, it's easy to make a planet-scale weather forecast. But those forecasts are inaccurate. 

In the same way, it's easy to make predictions about how large gas mass behaves. The system removes unnecessary accuracy and handles things like galaxies as solid forms. Those are like pins in the large system. Or maybe we should say that galaxies are like wheels. Those wheels move wave movement, fields, and large material masses over the universe. 

That means if we make inaccurate, “about” predictions. About how large gas masses are. Like galactic superclusters behave, we can make that prediction using laptop computers. In an inaccurate model, we can think that galactic superclusters are the wheels, and the universe is like a ball around those wheels. When the system starts to simulate how the galaxies behave in a local cluster. The system uses the local cluster as a scale, and galaxies are wheels. When the system makes a model of how a galactic supercluster behaves, the local clusters are the wheels. And the last version is the universal scale. The galactic superclusters are the wheels. In the large-scale simulations. The system doesn’t notice or filter out too small actors that have no visible effect on the system. 

This system is called. A variable scale model. The idea is similar to the U.S map. If we want to look at the overview of the weather over the USA. We can use the USA as a whole. But if we want to see what the weather is over in Montana. We can take a Zoom image of the state of Montana. We can use the same computer algorithms in that area. As in larger-scale images. But the higher accuracy means that we lose the entirety. 

Ludwig Boltzmann (1844-1906), Austrian physicist

Can the psychohistory turn true? 

There is a possibility that the same models. Those used for simulating the universe can be used to predict how humans behave. That is called psychohistory. In the SciFi series: “The Foundation”. The idea is that the system predicts the behavior of large human groups. The system uses large human groups. And things like their states’ influence as variables that can predict how people behave. The system makes models. Using billions of people. But if that thing is possible. The system can use the same algorithms for smaller groups. 

In psychohistory, the system looks at things. That happened in the past. Then the system searches for what those things caused. And then. The system searches for details of similar events from its environment. Because people with similar personalities should behave in similar ways in similar situations. So, the system must know. How many certain types of personalities live in an area that faces certain changes? We can think. Human groups have a certain social or psychological mass, and if a certain number of people start behaving in certain ways. That psychological mass can start to pull other people with it, only if it's large enough.

The thing that causes panic is that a certain number of people in a group start to panic. When we think that four people start to panic, that might not seem like a very big thing. But if there are 10 people in one room. And there is one square meter of space. For each person. Then four people will get the larger effect. And one of those reasons is that. There is no outside effect that can suppress the panic effect. And that makes it stronger. If the head of state goes into panic, that can escalate into a very large group. If one single person goes into panic, that has no such effect. 

And then to psychohistory: can we predict how people or nations behave? Every person. With a certain personality. Behaves in certain ways. The thing that makes predictions hard. Is that. We should know. What a person’s personality is. And that’s impossible if the researchers don’t know the entire personal history of the person. 

We can take the scale of millions or billions of people. When we think about psychology and economics. There are inaccuracies. The reason for those inaccuracies is that we don’t know every person’s background. People’s experiences model our behavior. Psychological models are almost right. And they work with most people. But those models are not working with people. Whose nature is not known. We don’t know what type of humans they are if we don’t know that person’s complete history. The personality is unknown, if there is something hidden in history. 

But there should be a certain number of  non-predicted cases. Or a certain type of standard deviation  of cases that behave in a non-predictable way. This means that large, scalable surprises are not very common cases. in large-scale models. Cases like the Kennedy assassination are very rare. They are like black swans, possible but extremely rare things. There must be an acceptable  error level in all models. Some of those black swans can be predicted. We can calculate the possibilities of asteroid hits, but there is a possibility. That some asteroids can come through the defense. Sometimes asteroids are seen. Only when they pass Earth and those things cause problems. 

https://scitechdaily.com/scientists-just-found-a-way-to-simulate-the-universe-on-a-laptop/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_constant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Boltzmann

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_temperature_and_pressure