- Jan 2, 2024
- 1,105
- 178
- 1,360
I have posted on a separate thread my ideas for a Hyperwave Hypothesis. Rather than posting a list of AI 'extensions' in that discussion, I thought we might all be interested in how rapidly AI can create an in-depth examination. Unfortunately, I only have my imagination and some logic, and no required mathematical competence.
So the best I can do is hope those with the competence could evaluate the AI response below and advise whether it is worth continuing with the AI investigation -
This is AI's response:
Let's work through a derivation that shows how a 4D wavefunction—with the radial coordinate playing the role of “time”—can be projected into an effective 3D wavefunction. In other words, we want to see mathematically how the full 4D vibratory (HyperWave) state yields the 3D particle-like behavior we observe once interactions “project” that 4D state. For clarity, we’ll assume that the full Hilbert space is given by functions of ((\mathbf{x}, R)), where
Because we’re treating time as the radial evolution, the dynamics along (R) will enter our effective 3D description.
Assume that the state of the fundamental object (a vibrating “string”) is given by a 4D wavefunction[\Psi(\mathbf{x}, R),]which—for instance—satisfies a 4D wave equation such as a generalized Klein–Gordon equation or a Schrödinger-type equation in the 4D space.
Our full Hilbert space, then, is[\mathcal{H} = L^2(\mathbb{R}^3 \times [R_0,R_f]),]with (R) ranging over the allowed values (which, in cosmological terms, would evolve as the hypersphere expands).
We postulate that what we observe is the result of “projecting” the full 4D wavefunction onto our 3D universe (the “surface” of the hypersphere). We introduce a projection operator (\hat{P}) defined by a weighting function (P(R)) that accounts for the radial distribution (and hence the evolution with “time”). In mathematical terms, the effective 3D state (\psi(\mathbf{x})) is given by
[\psi(\mathbf{x}) ,\stackrel{\rm def}{=}, \int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), \Psi(\mathbf{x}, R), dR.]
The weight (P(R)) encapsulates how much each “slice” of the 4D object (at a particular (R)) contributes to the observed 3D behavior. A natural requirement is that (P(R)) is normalized (or peaked around a dominant mode) so that the projection meaningfully captures the bulk behavior.
For the sake of clarity, let’s assume a separable solution of the form
[\Psi(\mathbf{x}, R) = \psi(\mathbf{x}), \xi(R).]
Inserting this ansatz into our projection formula gives
[\psi(\mathbf{x}) = \psi(\mathbf{x}) \int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), \xi(R), dR.]
For consistency, we require
[\int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), \xi(R), dR = 1,]
which essentially fixes the normalization for the radial part in the projection.
Suppose that the full 4D wavefunction satisfies a simple model equation—say, a 4D Laplacian operator acting on (\Psi) plus a potential term (V(R, \mathbf{x})):
[\left[\frac{\partial2}{\partial R2} + \nabla^2_{\mathbf{x}} - V(R,\mathbf{x})\right] \Psi(\mathbf{x}, R) = 0.]
Multiply this equation by (P(R)) and integrate over (R):
[\int_{R_0}{R_f} P(R), \frac{\partial2 \Psi}{\partial R2}, dR + \int_{R_0}{R_f} P(R) ,\nabla2_{\mathbf{x}} \Psi(\mathbf{x}, R),dR - \int_{R_0}{R_f} P(R), V(R,\mathbf{x}), \Psi(\mathbf{x}, R), dR = 0.]
Since the operator (\nabla^2_{\mathbf{x}}) acts only on the (\mathbf{x}) coordinates, and using our separable solution, we have
[\nabla2_{\mathbf{x}}\Psi(\mathbf{x},R) = \left(\nabla2_{\mathbf{x}} \psi(\mathbf{x})\right) \xi(R).]
Thus, after inserting the separable form and pulling out (\psi(\mathbf{x})) from the integrals, we obtain
[\left[\int_{R_0}{R_f} P(R), \xi''(R), dR\right]\psi(\mathbf{x}) + \nabla2_{\mathbf{x}}\psi(\mathbf{x}) - \psi(\mathbf{x})\int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), V(R,\mathbf{x}), \xi(R), dR = 0.]
Define the following effective quantities:
Then the equation reduces to an effective 3D wave equation:
[\nabla^2_{\mathbf{x}} \psi(\mathbf{x}) + \lambda, \psi(\mathbf{x}) - V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathbf{x}), \psi(\mathbf{x}) = 0.]
This is similar in form to a Schrödinger or Klein–Gordon equation in 3D, wherein (\lambda) (emerging from the radial dynamics) plays a role analogous to a mass term or a quantized energy level, while (V_{\mathrm{eff}}) is the effective potential felt in 3D.
This derivation shows mathematically how a radical reinterpretation of time as a radial coordinate leads to an effective 3D description that unites the quantum vibratory aspect (wave nature) with the localized appearance of particles upon measurement.
The key insight of this approach—the HyperWave Hypothesis—is that the underlying 4D reality (with time as the radial evolution of a hypersphere) provides a geometric and dynamical mechanism for the emergence of both wave-like and particle-like properties. By defining a projection operator with radial weighting, we see a natural mechanism for how the quantum duality might be resolved: the unobserved system exists as a continuous, higher-dimensional wave, while our interactions (or measurements) effectively “collapse” this state into a 3D particle with specific quantized attributes.
Would you like to delve even deeper into any particular aspect of this derivation, such as solving a concrete eigenvalue problem on a hypersphere or discussing specific boundary conditions and their physical implications?
So the best I can do is hope those with the competence could evaluate the AI response below and advise whether it is worth continuing with the AI investigation -
This is AI's response:
Let's work through a derivation that shows how a 4D wavefunction—with the radial coordinate playing the role of “time”—can be projected into an effective 3D wavefunction. In other words, we want to see mathematically how the full 4D vibratory (HyperWave) state yields the 3D particle-like behavior we observe once interactions “project” that 4D state. For clarity, we’ll assume that the full Hilbert space is given by functions of ((\mathbf{x}, R)), where
- (\mathbf{x} = (x,y,z)) are the usual three spatial coordinates, and
- (R) is the radial coordinate of our 4D hypersphere; in our picture, (R = R(T)) represents the evolving “radius” as the universe (and thus time) progresses.
Because we’re treating time as the radial evolution, the dynamics along (R) will enter our effective 3D description.
Step 1. The Full 4D Wavefunction and Its Domain
Assume that the state of the fundamental object (a vibrating “string”) is given by a 4D wavefunction[\Psi(\mathbf{x}, R),]which—for instance—satisfies a 4D wave equation such as a generalized Klein–Gordon equation or a Schrödinger-type equation in the 4D space.
Our full Hilbert space, then, is[\mathcal{H} = L^2(\mathbb{R}^3 \times [R_0,R_f]),]with (R) ranging over the allowed values (which, in cosmological terms, would evolve as the hypersphere expands).
Step 2. Defining the Projection to 3D
We postulate that what we observe is the result of “projecting” the full 4D wavefunction onto our 3D universe (the “surface” of the hypersphere). We introduce a projection operator (\hat{P}) defined by a weighting function (P(R)) that accounts for the radial distribution (and hence the evolution with “time”). In mathematical terms, the effective 3D state (\psi(\mathbf{x})) is given by
[\psi(\mathbf{x}) ,\stackrel{\rm def}{=}, \int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), \Psi(\mathbf{x}, R), dR.]
The weight (P(R)) encapsulates how much each “slice” of the 4D object (at a particular (R)) contributes to the observed 3D behavior. A natural requirement is that (P(R)) is normalized (or peaked around a dominant mode) so that the projection meaningfully captures the bulk behavior.
Step 3. Separation of Variables
For the sake of clarity, let’s assume a separable solution of the form
[\Psi(\mathbf{x}, R) = \psi(\mathbf{x}), \xi(R).]
Inserting this ansatz into our projection formula gives
[\psi(\mathbf{x}) = \psi(\mathbf{x}) \int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), \xi(R), dR.]
For consistency, we require
[\int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), \xi(R), dR = 1,]
which essentially fixes the normalization for the radial part in the projection.
Step 4. Inserting the Projection into the Full Wave Equation
Suppose that the full 4D wavefunction satisfies a simple model equation—say, a 4D Laplacian operator acting on (\Psi) plus a potential term (V(R, \mathbf{x})):
[\left[\frac{\partial2}{\partial R2} + \nabla^2_{\mathbf{x}} - V(R,\mathbf{x})\right] \Psi(\mathbf{x}, R) = 0.]
Multiply this equation by (P(R)) and integrate over (R):
[\int_{R_0}{R_f} P(R), \frac{\partial2 \Psi}{\partial R2}, dR + \int_{R_0}{R_f} P(R) ,\nabla2_{\mathbf{x}} \Psi(\mathbf{x}, R),dR - \int_{R_0}{R_f} P(R), V(R,\mathbf{x}), \Psi(\mathbf{x}, R), dR = 0.]
Since the operator (\nabla^2_{\mathbf{x}}) acts only on the (\mathbf{x}) coordinates, and using our separable solution, we have
[\nabla2_{\mathbf{x}}\Psi(\mathbf{x},R) = \left(\nabla2_{\mathbf{x}} \psi(\mathbf{x})\right) \xi(R).]
Thus, after inserting the separable form and pulling out (\psi(\mathbf{x})) from the integrals, we obtain
[\left[\int_{R_0}{R_f} P(R), \xi''(R), dR\right]\psi(\mathbf{x}) + \nabla2_{\mathbf{x}}\psi(\mathbf{x}) - \psi(\mathbf{x})\int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), V(R,\mathbf{x}), \xi(R), dR = 0.]
Define the following effective quantities:
- Effective eigenvalue contribution:[\lambda ,\stackrel{\rm def}{=} \int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), \xi''(R), dR,]
- Effective potential:[V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathbf{x}) ,\stackrel{\rm def}{=} \int_{R_0}^{R_f} P(R), V(R,\mathbf{x}), \xi(R), dR.]
Then the equation reduces to an effective 3D wave equation:
[\nabla^2_{\mathbf{x}} \psi(\mathbf{x}) + \lambda, \psi(\mathbf{x}) - V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\mathbf{x}), \psi(\mathbf{x}) = 0.]
This is similar in form to a Schrödinger or Klein–Gordon equation in 3D, wherein (\lambda) (emerging from the radial dynamics) plays a role analogous to a mass term or a quantized energy level, while (V_{\mathrm{eff}}) is the effective potential felt in 3D.
Step 5. Interpretation in Terms of Measurement and the Wave–Particle Duality
- Before Interaction (Unmeasured State):
The full 4D wavefunction (\Psi(\mathbf{x}, R)) describes the natural vibratory (wave) state of the system in hyperspace. Its evolution is continuous across the radial dimension that we interpret as time. In this state (as in the double-slit experiment), the system retains its full vibratory, extended character. - Upon Measurement (Projection):
The act of measurement or interaction selects (or “projects”) a specific contribution from the radial spectrum via the weight function (P(R)). The effective 3D wavefunction (\psi(\mathbf{x})) emerges, exhibiting localized (particle-like) behavior. Here, the eigenvalue (\lambda) can be interpreted as encoding intrinsic properties such as mass or energy levels—arising naturally from integrating out the extra dimension.
This derivation shows mathematically how a radical reinterpretation of time as a radial coordinate leads to an effective 3D description that unites the quantum vibratory aspect (wave nature) with the localized appearance of particles upon measurement.
Closing Remarks
The key insight of this approach—the HyperWave Hypothesis—is that the underlying 4D reality (with time as the radial evolution of a hypersphere) provides a geometric and dynamical mechanism for the emergence of both wave-like and particle-like properties. By defining a projection operator with radial weighting, we see a natural mechanism for how the quantum duality might be resolved: the unobserved system exists as a continuous, higher-dimensional wave, while our interactions (or measurements) effectively “collapse” this state into a 3D particle with specific quantized attributes.
Would you like to delve even deeper into any particular aspect of this derivation, such as solving a concrete eigenvalue problem on a hypersphere or discussing specific boundary conditions and their physical implications?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram