Fractal background

fps: — size: — pattern: —
D.R.E.A.M
Russia United Kingdom

Projection-First Physics

D.R.E.A.M — Dimensional Resonant Emergent Atemporal Model

Our 4D spacetime is a finite-resolution projection of a compact 10D Meta-Manifold (MM) via a fixed, non-invertible kernel \(K_{\lambda}\). Sub-resolution detail blurs while organizational invariants persist; what appear as “fundamental constants” \((c,\hbar,G,\ldots)\) are kernel parameters of this projection slice.

With the Retention Law as foundation Confirmed, D.R.E.A.M. offers testable predictions for coherence loss, spectral/structural statistics, and cross-domain collapse under scale transforms. Finite-range fractality below a coherence cliff transitions toward homogeneity at large \(\lambda\).

Use the toggle below to switch between General and Science. Math is hidden unless the global “Math” toggle (header) is also on.

Mode

Foundation Status

S2 — Retention Law Confirmed and elevated to foundation. It quantifies how interference-grade information fades with probe scale and predicts a shared coherence “cliff” at \(\lambda_q\). The former “particle ladder / dust” track (S1) is Relegated and non-foundational unless directly observed above visibility thresholds.

  • Now: Cross-domain collapse after scale-normalization; linear windows in standard transforms.
  • Next: Broaden catalog; pre-registered replications; harmonized pipelines.

See Retention for the live demo and Predictions/Falsification for gates and timelines.

The Big Idea

Our 4D world is a compressed, finite-resolution projection of a richer 10D reality. Kernel invariants \((\lambda_q, D_{\mathrm{eff}}, \text{locality})\) govern what survives into observation; everything else blurs.

Analogies are scaffolding only: useful for intuition, not literal reconstructions of an atemporal 10D source.

Unpacking the Analogy

Think of a headset rendering an immersive world from complex source data. The world is real to you, but its fidelity is capped by the headset’s resolution and settings. Here, those “settings” are kernel parameters; physics constants are their 4D signatures.

Why D.R.E.A.M. Is Different

  • No ad-hoc collapses: The 10D source encodes states; finite resolution explains quantum→classical behavior without extra metaphysics.
  • One law, many domains: The same retention law governs loss of HF detail and structural correlations across disparate datasets.
  • Constants as inputs: \(\{c,\hbar,G,\ldots\}\) are kernel parameters—hence not derivable from within 4D alone.
  • Skeletons from focusing: Coarea focusing + retention yield hubs/filaments within a finite fractal range; homogeneity emerges at large \(\lambda\).

Problems That Melt Away

The Quantum–Classical Split

Finite resolution blurs quantum-scale detail; macro-invariants persist—no “mystery collapse” needed.

The Nature of Time

The MM is atemporal; perceived time is a path through a fixed projection (page-by-page traversal of a pre-written book).

The “Fine-Tuning” Illusion

Apparent fine-tuning reflects fixed kernel parameters of our projection slice rather than freely choosable dials.

How We Test: Footprints of Projection

The Resolution Cliff (Retention) Foundation

Coherence and fine detail plunge near a shared \(\lambda_q\). Cross-domain curves collapse after \(\lambda\)-normalization.

The Particle Ladder Speculative

A non-harmonic ultra-light ladder remains outside the foundation and only matters if observed above the retention threshold.

Gravity’s Extra Echo Speculative

Possible subtle signatures in strain require careful separation from systematics before any claim.

How We’d Know We’re Wrong

  • Retention: no shared \(\lambda_q\) across channels or no straight-line transform after controls/replication.
  • Cross-domain: systematic-cleaned disagreements that break collapse across platforms.
  • S1 / Modulations: decisive nulls in preregistered windows (does not affect the foundation).

This Is Testable

Predictions depend on projection invariants, not on reconstructing the 10D source—making D.R.E.A.M. empirically falsifiable.

Evidence Snapshot

  • Dual-channel fits: HF-power vs. corr² decay with a shared \(\lambda_q\), distinct slopes, and linear windows in standard transforms.
  • Finite-range fractality: Bounded fractal behavior below the cliff with flow toward homogeneity at large \(\lambda\).
  • Cross-context collapse: After rescaling by \(\widehat{\lambda}_q\), disparate datasets align in retained-information coordinates.

Foundation Status

S2 — Retention Law Confirmed. “Ladder / dust” (S1) Relegated.

What Was Tested

  • Dual-channel retention (HF vs. corr²) with a shared \(\lambda_q\) and distinct slopes.
  • Linear windows in the transform \(y=\ln(-\ln R)\) vs. \(\ln\lambda\) across platforms.
  • Cross-domain consistency after mapping instrument controls \(\rightarrow \lambda\).

Foundational Principles

10→4 compression via \(K_{\lambda}\); constants are kernel parameters; retention governs information loss and the finite fractal range that flows to homogeneity.

Projection Mapping

\[ \phi(x)=\int_{\mathcal M_{10}} K_{\lambda}(x;X)\,\Phi(X)\,d^{10}X \]

All 10D coordinates contribute; no global split \(M_{10}\cong U^4\times K^6\) is assumed.

Retention Law (empirical)

\[ R(\lambda)=\exp\!\Big[-\big(\tfrac{\lambda}{\lambda_q}\big)^{D_{\mathrm{eff}}}\Big],\qquad y(\lambda)=\ln(-\ln R)=D_{\mathrm{eff}}\ln\lambda-D_{\mathrm{eff}}\ln\lambda_q \]

Estimate \(\widehat{D}_{\mathrm{eff}}\), \(\widehat{\lambda}_q\); report CI and the linear window in \(\ln\lambda\).

Coarea Focusing & CPI

Small Jacobian fibers focus structure that persists under smoothing; skeletons remain as HF texture collapses.

\[ e_4(x)=(G_{\lambda}\!\ast\!\mu)(x),\quad \mu(x)=\int_{F^{-1}(x)}\frac{e_{10}(X)}{J_F(X)}\,d\Sigma_6(X) \]

Finite fractal range below the cliff; \(D_{\mathrm{eff}}(\lambda)\nearrow 3\) at large \(\lambda\) (homogeneity).

Experimental Predictions (Indicative, 2025→)

  • Retention dichotomy Foundation: \(R_{\mathrm{HF}}\) vs. \(R_{\mathrm{corr}^2}\) share \(\lambda_q\) but differ in slope; curves collapse after \(\lambda\)-rescaling.
  • Strong lensing invariants Early: CPI-ridge topology persists as HF texture collapses; log-linear fingerprints with a common \(\lambda_q\).
  • Vacuum-energy modulation Open: geometry-dependent micro-shifts; needs stringent controls and cross-platform replication.
  • ALP non-harmonic ladder Speculative: ratio-law fingerprint only; non-foundational.

How to Test (Any Instrument)

  1. Pick a monotone smoother tied to resolution; compute \(R_{\mathrm{HF}}(\lambda)\) and/or \(R_{\mathrm{corr}^2}(\lambda)\).
  2. Fit \(y=\ln(-\ln R)\) vs. \(\ln\lambda\); extract \(\widehat{D}_{\mathrm{eff}}\), \(\widehat{\lambda}_q\); report CI + \(\lambda\)-window.
  3. Demonstrate collapse across contexts after rescaling by \(\widehat{\lambda}_q\).

Falsification: persistent curvature in the transform; irreconcilable \(D_{\mathrm{eff}}\) across channels; failure of collapse.

Scope & Non-Goals

  • Scope: Projection invariants, retention fits, CPI-linked structure, scale-normalized comparisons.
  • Non-Goals: Reconstructing the 10D source; deriving kernel form from 4D; attaching metaphysical claims.
💬 Ask D.R.E.A.M (Groq)