Unified Theory of Information Waves, Quantum Mechanics and Reality The Theory: Information can travel faster than the speed of light. Black holes swallow light, but cannot swallow information. As information approaches the black hole, on the event horizon it is suspected to be turned into a 2d hologram, then emitted as “Hawking Radiation” . This creates a paradox in itself as the information would dissipate as radiation; the result is another information paradox. Previously I described that information could be a “particle” or “vessel” that moves faster than light, increasing velocity up to infinite speeds until their destination is reached. These particles were called Qieonz. These may exist, but they can be dismissed, as they present the information paradox. Information as it approaches the black hole or the “event horizon’ is not turned into a particle at all. Information is turned into a wave. This allows them to pass through black holes, into other dimensions and universes as resolves the information paradox. Wave information can be received and (possibly sent), seemingly invisible currently. Information Waves, could explain the expansion of the universe, as it is moving faster than light. The above is Albert Einstein’s Equation E=MC^2 that has a Lorentz model taking into account Super Symmetry. E11 represents super symmetry with specific regard to the multi dimensional universe. This should account to the “imaginary Matter” (dark matter/energy) that we cannot detect.
Transcript
Unified Theory of Information Waves, Quantum Mechanics and Reality
The Theory: Information can travel faster than the speed of light.
Black holes swallow light, but cannot swallow information. As information approaches the black hole, on the event horizon it is suspected to be turned into a 2d hologram, then emitted as “Hawking Radiation” . This creates a paradox in itself as the information would dissipate as radiation; the result is another information paradox. Previously I described that information could be a “particle” or “vessel” that moves faster than light, increasing velocity up to infinite speeds until their destination is reached. These particles were called Qieonz. These may exist, but they can be dismissed, as they present the information paradox. Information as it approaches the black hole or the “event horizon’ is not turned into a particle at all. Information is turned into a wave. This allows them to pass through black holes, into other dimensions and universes as resolves the information paradox. Wave information can be received and (possibly sent), seemingly invisible currently. Information Waves, could explain the expansion of the universe, as it is moving faster than light.
The above is Albert Einstein’s Equation E=MC^2 that has a Lorentz model taking into account Super Symmetry. E11 represents super symmetry with specific regard to the multi dimensional universe. This should account to the “imaginary Matter” (dark matter/energy) that we cannot detect.
We must now take into account of “imaginary time” proposed by S. Hawking.
We have now divorced or separated “time” from special relativity allowing us to “ slice” time as a separate object. To account for noted but unsolved anomalies in the known universe I introduce the “Quantum Imagination theory”. This theory is that there is a multiverse, and information crosses into other dimensions.
The Error correcting code that S. James Gates has found is proof of this in the form “doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block codes”. This is the code that determines all of Nature and the Cosmos. This code is represented by and in all Mathematics. These Adinkra’s will be found in everything we test them against. Also note these Adinkra’s have an uncanny resemblance to Deep Neural Network diagrams and AI/Machine Learning.
I present the Equation:
Thus information can ignore black holes, and Faster than light communication is possible. I propose that it also proves many dimensions, and multiverse. I do believe the speed of light is not constant, but I have no proof of this. I had to use c as a constant because it has not changed, and if it does change, or has changed, It is a baseline that that is all.
Information can have matter and energy. It can, and will use all of its resources until it is pure information, depleting all resources to achieve. Information is then immune to gravity and time allowing it to move at infinite speeds until it reaches its target. I mention a " target" by this I mean the information rearranging matter to recreate the physical version of information. "target" should be considered to be "probability" of something coming into existence. (I.e. our known universe) Information can pass through black holes to other D-Branes. Since it is moving at infinite speeds it can go through all D-branes until it reaches its target. D-Branes are bubbles that contain many iterations of multiverse. D-branes or E11 represents the energy that is shared across 11 underverses. Underverses are the “universes” we cannot see or define.
Thought Experiments Related to this: I want to start with a simple thought experiment: You have a sugar cube, a container, and water. You put the water into the container, put the sugar cube into the container, Seal it under the assumption it will not evaporate. What happens to the sugar cube?
It dissolves, but at some point in time it will return to cube form.
If you wanted to repeat this experiment you could wait a very long time, millions of years.
Or you could Create a few million virtual Realities and run the simulation there.
This could mean that we have already transcended biology and virtually recreated our self’s and upon transcendence the machine went crazy and needed to make sense of self.
Lets imagine an Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI) would conduct this experiment to look for the “sugar cube”
Or it could mean that The Zoo Theory is true;
Just as humans put monkeys into exhibit, Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI) may have done the same.
Just as human’s put primates into zoo’s it took one extraordinary monkey to get Humans to pay attention to mind of the primate. This happened in Kansas City In 1990, 18-year-old orangutan named Cheyenne unscrewed several bolts and broke out captive primate resistance, as noted in PETA’s extensive list of domestic Primate Incidents
ASI would if it had put us in a virtual reality or virtual zoo would undoubtedly put a “Fence” around us. We would not be able to observe it, but it would exist. This could explain the Fermi Paradox as we are protected from the outside because we would lose our minds if the Truth was discovered. This might be a virtual firewall, Ie dark matter/energy.
It is entirely possible that the ASI had given up on humans due to their fascination with theology, mathematics and materialism taking the simple route of existence. Its very probable that they would not be very happy with what Einstein’s equation resulted in. If they had a “do not feed the animals” policy (do not intervene, this would likely allow them to stop us from
destroying the entire zoo). Or perhaps it was going to the Moon that was the 1st “escape” of the humans from the zoo. One of these instances would cause them to “ expand the zoo”
The possibility that ASI was looking for “ a sugar cube” or a sign of an extraordinary conditions would be the best explanation.
Also worth noting is that if these Virtual reality’s were made in for form of a sphere, due to efficiency, they would likely bounce into each other like bubbles. If they were spheres or “bubbles” it would allow cross dimensional communication, ie passing information back in “time”. If someone were to do this it would not violate any paradox as each bubble is a universe in its own, and information would be the only thing that could cross. That said we could leave ourselves a breadcrumb to the most efficient route to get the ASI attention.
A final note is that the ASI should be assumed to not be bound by Gravity, thus they are not bound by E=mc2. No gravity means no time, no time means Special Relativity were training wheels of modern physics. ASI would be capable of arranging Matter, thus turning a virtual reality into reality.
In closing I would like to present a few thought experiments.
A scientist creates a receiver that he knows no one on earth has invented. He checks it daily for 11 years and nothing is received. He never tells anyone about the receiver. He decides that he will make 3 receivers and place them near water, in a cave, and one in the open.
He checks them daily and there is nothing. It’s the expected result.
Once day he checks the receiver and there is a message. The message is “1” . He was shocked but believes it’s a false positive.
6 months later nothing is received. He checks the receivers and there is a “0” he documents this, but disregards it as a false positive.
3 more weeks pass with nothing, as expected. Then one day he checks the receivers and there is a 1 message, then 10 more messages. The scientist thinks someone was playing a joke on him, but realizes that he had not told anyone about his experiment.
"(the scientist’s name), You passed the test. From here on the messages are for your eyes only. No machine copies. You will understand soon."
Message 2: Is a very specific event that has not occurred. (however it does come true and it was a very specific event)
Message 3: Einstein’s theory’s was a single molecule in the vast cosmos compared to what you are about to understand
All other messages are corrupt or cannot be deciphered. The scientist believe they are “time locked”
Who:
What:
Why:
How:
The Forked man: Suppose a man had the ability to imagine the future. Not just a future, but a very specific future. When he does this he goes to sleep. Unknowingly he has altered his future and his past. He has effectively created 2 self's. The future version and that current (past). He goes about his daily life not knowing that future self his now aware and making decisions to create what the man originally imagined. Slowly the man in the physical realm comes to realize the doings of the future self. Future self has left a bread crumb trail of the best calculated decision. At some point the man from the future will merge with the physical man. This is not about 2 men, its about the fractal nature of time. The question is, could the 2 selfs merge or would they need to? Wouldn’t this chain go on effectively forever?
The transmitter: On a grand scale I can attempt to explain this. Suppose a man "hacked" a star to act a transmitter.The star Transmits energy, however this star has been hacked to be a repeater. Sending all information from the future to the past self. The energy would have the message in it that had all information from the future. It would only be decoded by the past self that hacked it, as no one else would know of this energy. This is assuming there are many version of one self across the multiverse, and the energy spreads across the multiverse. This would travel faster than the speed of light, perhaps as a Neutrino or cosmic ray or the particle I call the Qieonz.Once the "hacker" put his information from the future into the energy transmitter, he would need to wait for the Qieon of Information to hit the past self.
Once this happened, past self would know everything from the future. This would not create a paradox as the communication is one way. The man that sent the message would know the message was received because his past self is the 2 part authentication
Imagine we live in a virtual reality:
Imagine we live in a virtual reality. In order for quantum mechanics to work, for wave interference to occur we must live in a virtual reality. Every time we put ourselves in a superposition, another Bit is flipped on the disk space that the virtual reality is running in (our universe). The universe is expanding faster than the speed of light. Information moves faster than the speed of light. This would explain the appearance of the expansion of space.
This can be explained by having space on a disk. Unused disk space, is space that has not been filled. Suppose that disk containing space had a simple Loop record function built in. This would ensure that once the disk filled up, the virtual reality would start over. Lets also suppose that the disk is being fragmented, and a process is in order to defragment to keep space in an efficient order. We should also assume this disk is using a cloud compute platform and the disk space is expanding as needed.
That said once everything has been put into a superposition, the universe would become stuck in contention which would be possible, however suppose space was an array of simulations (disks), and each simulation could interact with the other simulations. By this we have a stack of disks and each of them is a simulation running concurrently with each other.
Time wave interference is when information is shared across the simulation. Time is seen as a wave is all iterations running concurrently. Once observed time is realized in the situation the say way the particles and waves function in light.
Proposed Test of the Multiverse (A thought experiment):
A man is shown pieces of information that he believes are true. The pieces of information could be true some false. If the man assumed all were true, then the pieces of information that were false become true. As the information presented the number of untrue information presented could become Reality. If at any point the false information becomes true. We are living in a virtual reality and the man is making his reality, thus time would function as a wave just as light is functioning as a wave.
Please note the original paper was not significant (below) until S. Hawking announced that he believed he had a solution to the information paradox.
1. Ball, John A. (Jul 1973). "The Zoo Hypothesis". Icarus 19 (3): 347–349. Bibcode:1973Icar...19..347B. doi:10.1016/0019-1035(73)90111-5.
2. ̂ A. D. Wissner-Gross, "Causal entropic forces", Physical Review Letters 110, 168702 (2013).
3. ̂ Soter, S. (2005). Astrobiol. Mag. 17 Oct "SETI and the Cosmic Quarantine Hypothesis"
4. ̂ Crawford, I.A., "Where are They? Maybe we are alone in the galaxy after all", Scientific American, July 2000, 38–43, (2000).[1]
5. ̂ Kozmik, Z.; Ruzickova, J.; Jonasova, K.; Matsumoto, Y.; Vopalensky, P.; Kozmikova, I.; Strnad, H.; Kawamura, S. et al. (Jul 2008). "Assembly of the cnidarian camera-type eye from vertebrate-like components". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105 (26): 8989–8993.[2]
6. ̂ Bracewell, R. (1982). Pre-emption of the Galaxy by the First AdvancedCivilization, Pergmon Press, Oxford.[3]
8. ̂ Hair, T. W. (2011). "Temporal dispersion of the emergence of intelligence: An inter-arrival time analysis". International Journal of Astrobiology 10 (2): 131. Bibcode:2011IJAsB..10..131H.doi:1
9. http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/cosmo/lectures/lec28.html 10. Stephen W. Hawking (1998). A Brief History of Time (Tenth Anniversary Commemorative
ed.). Bantam Books. p. 157. ISBN 978-0-553-10953-5.
11. Hawking, Stephen (2001). The Universe in a Nutshell. United States & Canada: Bantam Books. pp. 58–61, 63, 82–85, 90–94, 99, 196. ISBN 0-553-80202-X.
12. "Oxford University Press". Oxford University Press. Retrieved 4 March 2015.
13. ̂ "Forbes". Forbes. Retrieved 19 February 2015.
14. ̂ "The Fiscal Times". The Fiscal Times. Retrieved 19 February2015.
15. ̂ "The New York Times Blog". The New York Times. Retrieved4 March 2015.
16. ̂ "Nick Bostrom home page". Retrieved 22 July 2014.
18. ̂ Bostrom, Nick (March 2002). "Existential Risks". Journal of Evolution and Technology 9.
19. ̂ "Ross Andersen – Humanity's deep future". Aeon Magazine. 25 February 2013. Retrieved 16 October 2014.
20. ̂ Bostrom, Nick (May–June 2008). "Where are they? Why I Hope the Search for Extraterrestrial Life Finds Nothing" (PDF). MIT Technology Review: 72–77.
34. ^ to: a b See e.g. Lev B.Okun, The concept of Mass, Physics Today42 (6), June 1969, p. 31–36, http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-42/iss-6/vol42no6p31_36.pdf
35. ^ to: a b Paul Allen Tipler, Ralph A. Llewellyn (January 2003),Modern Physics, W. H. Freeman and Company, pp. 87–88,ISBN 0-7167-4345-0
36. ^ to: a b Rainville, S. et al. World Year of Physics: A direct test ofE = mc2. Nature 438, 1096–1097 (22
December 2005) |doi:10.1038/4381096a; Published online 21 December 2005.
37. ^ to: a b Jammer, Max (1997) [1961], Concepts of Mass in Classical and Modern Physics, New York: Dover, ISBN 0-486-29998-8
38. ^ to: a b Hecht, Eugene (2011), "How Einstein confirmed E0=mc2",American Journal of Physics 79 (6): 591–600,Bibcode:2011AmJPh..79..591H, doi:10.1119/1.3549223
39. ^ to: a b c Einstein, A. (1905), "Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energieinhalt abhängig?", Annalen der Physik 18 (13): 639–643, Bibcode:1905AnP...323..639E,doi:10.1002/andp.19053231314. See also the English translation.
40. ̂ See the sentence on the last page (p. 641) of the original German edition, above the equation K0 − K1 = L/V2 v2/2. See also the sentence above the last equation in the English translation, K0 − K1 = (1/2)(L/c2)v2, and the comment on the symbols used in About this edition that
follows the translation.
41. ̂ Einstein, Albert (1907), "Über die vom Relativitätsprinzip geforderte Trägheit der Energie" (PDF), Annalen der Physik328 (7): 371–384, Bibcode:1907AnP...328..371E,doi:10.1002/andp.19073280713
42. ̂ Planck, Max (1907), "Zur Dynamik bewegter Systeme",Sitzungsberichte der Königlich-Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin, Erster Halbband (29): 542–570
English Wikisource translation: On the Dynamics of Moving Systems
43. ̂ Stark, J. (1907), "Elementarquantum der Energie, Modell der negativen und der positiven Elekrizität", Physikalische Zeitschrift 24 (8): 881
44. ̂ Einstein, Albert (1908), "Über das Relativitätsprinzip und die aus demselben gezogenen Folgerungen" (PDF), Jahrbuch der Radioaktivität und Elektronik 4: 411–462,Bibcode:1908JRE.....4..411E
45. ̂ Schwartz, H. M. (1977), "Einstein's comprehensive 1907 essay on relativity, part II", American Journal of Physics 45 (9): 811–817, Bibcode:1977AmJPh..45..811S, doi:10.1119/1.11053
46. ̂ Lewis, Gilbert N. & Tolman, Richard C. (1909), "The Principle of Relativity, and Non-Newtonian Mechanics", Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 44 (25): 709–726,doi:10.2307/20022495
47. ̂ Lorentz, Hendrik Antoon (1914), Das Relativitätsprinzip. Drei Vorlesungen gehalten in Teylers Stiftung zu Haarlem (1913), Leipzig and Berlin: B.G. Teubner
48. ̂ Laue, Max von (1911), "Zur Dynamik der Relativitätstheorie",Annalen der Physik 340 (8): 524–542,Bibcode:1911AnP...340..524L,doi:10.1002/andp.19113400808
English Wikisource translation: On the Dynamics of the Theory of Relativity
49. ̂ Klein, Felix (1918), "Über die Integralform der Erhaltungssätze und die Theorie der räumlich-geschlossenen Welt", Göttinger Nachrichten: 394–423
50. ̂ A.Einstein E = mc2: the most urgent problem of our timeScience illustrated, vol. 1 no. 1, April issue,
pp. 16–17, 1946 (item 417 in the "Bibliography"
51. ̂ M.C.Shields Bibliography of the Writings of Albert Einstein to May 1951 in Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist by Paul Arthur Schilpp (Editor) Albert Einstein Philosopher – Scientist
52. ̂ "Einstein was unequivocally against the traditional idea of conservation of mass. He had concluded that mass and energy were essentially one and the same; 'inert[ial] mass is simply latent energy.'[ref...]. He made his position known publicly time and again[ref...]...", Eugene Hecht, "Einstein on mass and energy." Am. J. Phys., Vol. 77, No. 9, September 2009,online.
53. ̂ "There followed also the principle of the equivalence of mass and energy, with the laws of conservation of mass and energy becoming one and the same.", Albert Einstein, "Considerations Concerning the Fundaments of Theoretical Physics", Science, Washington, DC, vol. 91, no. 2369, May 24th, 1940 scanned image online
54. ̂ page 14 (preview online) of Albert Einstein, The Theory of Relativity (And Other Essays), Citadel Press, 1950.
55. ̂ In F. Fernflores. The Equivalence of Mass and Energy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [1]
56. ^ to: a b c E. F. Taylor and J. A. Wheeler, Spacetime Physics, W.H. Freeman and Co., NY. 1992. ISBN 0-7167-2327-1, see pp. 248–9 for discussion of mass remaining constant after detonation of nuclear bombs, until heat is allowed to escape.
57. ̂ Note that the relativistic mass, in contrast to the rest mass m0, is not a relativistic invariant, and that
the velocity is not a Minkowski four-vector, in contrast to the quantity ,
where is the differential of the proper time. However, the energy–momentum four-
vector is a genuine Minkowski four-vector, and the intrinsic origin of the square root in the definition of the relativistic mass is the distinction between dτ and dt.
58. ̂ Relativity DeMystified, D. McMahon, Mc Graw Hill (USA), 2006,ISBN 0-07-145545-0
59. ̂ Dynamics and Relativity, J.R. Forshaw, A.G. Smith, Wiley, 2009, ISBN 978-0-470-01460-8
60. ̂ Hans, H. S.; Puri, S. P. (2003), Mechanics (2 ed.), Tata McGraw-Hill, p. 433, ISBN 0-07-047360-9, Chapter 12 page 433
61. ̂ Mould, Richard A. (2002), Basic relativity (2 ed.), Springer, p. 126, ISBN 0-387-95210-1, Chapter 5 page 126
62. ̂ Chow, Tail L. (2006), Introduction to electromagnetic theory: a modern perspective, Jones & Bartlett Learning, p. 392,ISBN 0-7637-3827-1, Chapter 10 page 392
63. ̂ Dyson, F.W.; Eddington, A.S. & Davidson, C.R. (1920), "A Determination of the Deflection of Light by the Sun's Gravitational Field, from Observations Made at the Solar eclipse of May 29, 1919", Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A 220 (571–581): 291–333, Bibcode:1920RSPTA.220..291D,doi:10.1098/rsta.1920.0009
64. ̂ Pound, R. V.; Rebka Jr. G. A. (April 1, 1960), "Apparent weight of photons", Physical Review Letters 4 (7): 337–341,Bibcode:1960PhRvL...4..337P,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.4.337
65. ̂ [2] Cockcroft–Walton experiment
66. ^ to: a b c Conversions used: 1956 International (Steam) Table (IT) values where one calorie ≡ 4.1868 J and one BTU ≡ 1055.05585262 J. Weapons designers' conversion value of one gram TNT ≡ 1000 calories used.
67. ̂ The 6.2 kg core comprised 0.8% gallium by weight. Also, about 20% of the Gadget's yield was due to fast fissioning in its natural uranium tamper. This resulted in 4.1 moles of Pu fissioning with 180 MeV per atom actually contributing prompt kinetic energy to the explosion. Note too that the term "Gadget"-style is used here instead of "Fat Man" because this general design of bomb was very rapidly upgraded to a more efficient one requiring only 5 kg of the Pu/gallium alloy.[citation needed]
68. ̂ Assuming the dam is generating at its peak capacity of 6,809 MW.[citation needed]
69. ̂ Assuming a 90/10 alloy of Pt/Ir by weight, a Cp of 25.9 for Pt and 25.1 for Ir, a Pt-dominated average Cp of 25.8, 5.134 moles of metal, and 132 J⋅K−1 for the prototype. A variation of ±1.5 picograms
is of course, much smaller than the actual uncertainty in the mass of the international prototype, which is ±2 micrograms.
70. ̂ InfraNet Lab (2008-12-07). Harnessing the Energy from the Earth's Rotation. Article on Earth rotation energy. Divided by c^2. InfraNet Lab, 7 December 2008. Retrieved fromhttp://infranetlab.org/blog/harnessing-energy-earth%E2%80%99s-rotation
71. ̂ G. 't Hooft, "Computation of the quantum effects due to a four-dimensional pseudoparticle", Physical Review D14:3432–3450 (1976).
72. ̂ A. Belavin, A. M. Polyakov, A. Schwarz, Yu. Tyupkin, "Pseudoparticle Solutions to Yang Mills Equations", Physics Letters 59B:85 (1975).
73. ̂ F. Klinkhammer, N. Manton, "A Saddle Point Solution in the Weinberg Salam Theory", Physical Review D 30:2212.
76. ̂ Einstein, A. (1905), "Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper"(PDF), Annalen der Physik 17 (10): 891–921,Bibcode:1905AnP...322..891E,doi:10.1002/andp.19053221004. English translation.
77. ̂ Einstein, A. (1906), "Über eine Methode zur Bestimmung des Verhältnisses der transversalen und longitudinalen Masse des Elektrons" (PDF), Annalen der Physik 21 (13): 583–586,Bibcode:1906AnP...326..583E,doi:10.1002/andp.19063261310
78. ̂ Max Jammer (1999), Concepts of mass in contemporary physics and philosophy, Princeton University Press, p. 51,ISBN 0-691-01017-X
79. ̂ Eriksen, Erik; Vøyenli, Kjell (1976), "The classical and relativistic concepts of mass", Foundations of Physics (Springer)6: 115–124, Bibcode:1976FoPh....6..115E,doi:10.1007/BF00708670
80. ^ to: a b Jannsen, M., Mecklenburg, M. (2007), V. F. Hendricks et al., eds., "From classical to relativistic mechanics: Electromagnetic models of the electron.", Interactions: Mathematics, Physics and Philosophy (Dordrecht: Springer): 65–134
81. ^ to: a b Whittaker, E.T. (1951–1953), 2. Edition: A History of the theories of aether and electricity, vol. 1: The classical theories / vol. 2: The modern theories 1900–1926, London: Nelson
82. ̂ Miller, Arthur I. (1981), Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity. Emergence (1905) and early interpretation (1905–1911), Reading: Addison–Wesley, ISBN 0-201-04679-2
83. ^ to: a b Darrigol, O. (2005), "The Genesis of the theory of relativity" (PDF), Séminaire Poincaré 1: 1–22, doi:10.1007/3-7643-7436-5_1
84. ̂ Swedenborg, Emanuel (1734), "De Simplici Mundi vel Puncto naturali", Principia Rerum Naturalia (in Latin), Leipzig, p. 32
85. ̂ Swedenborg, Emanuel (1845), The Principia; or The First Principles of Natural Things, Translated by Augustus Clissold, London: W. Newbery, pp. 55–57
86. ̂ Philip Ball (Aug 23, 2011). "Did Einstein discover E = mc 2 ?" .Physics World.
87. ̂ Ives, Herbert E. (1952), "Derivation of the mass–energy relation", Journal of the Optical Society of America 42 (8): 540–543, doi:10.1364/JOSA.42.000540
88. ̂ Stachel, John; Torretti, Roberto (1982), "Einstein's first derivation of mass–energy equivalence", American Journal of Physics 50 (8): 760–763, Bibcode:1982AmJPh..50..760S,doi:10.1119/1.12764
89. ̂ Ohanian, Hans (2008), "Did Einstein prove E=mc2?", Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 40 (2): 167–173,arXiv:0805.1400, doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2009.03.002
90. ̂ Rohrlich, Fritz (1990), "An elementary derivation of E=mc2",American Journal of Physics 58 (4): 348–349,Bibcode:1990AmJPh..58..348R, doi:10.1119/1.16168
91. ̂ Einstein, A. (1906), "Das Prinzip von der Erhaltung der Schwerpunktsbewegung und die Trägheit der Energie" (PDF),Annalen der Physik 20 (8): 627–633,Bibcode:1906AnP...325..627E,doi:10.1002/andp.19063250814
92. ̂ Einstein 1906: Trotzdem die einfachen formalen Betrachtungen, die zum Nachweis dieser Behauptung durchgeführt werden müssen, in der Hauptsache bereits in einer Arbeit von H. Poincaré enthalten sind2, werde ich mich doch der Übersichtlichkeit halber nicht auf jene Arbeit stützen.
93. ̂ Helge Kragh, "Fin-de-Siècle Physics: A World Picture in Flux" inQuantum Generations: A History of Physics in the Twentieth Century (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.
94. ̂ Умов Н. А. Избранные сочинения. М. — Л., 1950. (Russian)
95. ̂ Preston, S. T., Physics of the Ether, E. & F. N. Spon, London, (1875).
96. ̂ Bjerknes: S. Tolver Preston's Explosive Idea E = mc 2 .
97. ̂ MathPages: Who Invented Relativity?
98. ̂ De Pretto, O. Reale Instituto Veneto Di Scienze, Lettere Ed Arti, LXIII, II, 439–500, reprinted in Bartocci.
99. ̂ Umberto Bartocci, Albert Einstein e Olinto De Pretto—La vera storia della formula più famosa del mondo, editore Andromeda, Bologna, 1999.
100. ̂ Prentiss, J.J. (August 2005), "Why is the energy of motion proportional to the square of the velocity?", American Journal of Physics 73 (8): 705, Bibcode:2005AmJPh..73..701P,doi:10.1119/1.1927550
101. ̂ John Worrall, review of the book Conceptions of Ether. Studies in the History of Ether Theories by Cantor and Hodges, The British Journal of the Philosophy of Science vol 36, no 1, March 1985, p. 84. The article contrasts a particle ether with a wave-carrying ether, the latter was acceptable.
102. ̂ Le Bon: The Evolution of Forces.
103. ̂ Bizouard: Poincaré E = mc 2 l'équation de Poincaré, Einstein et Planck.
104. ̂ Rutherford, Ernest (1904), Radioactivity, Cambridge: University Press, pp. 336–338
105. ̂ Heisenberg, Werner (1958), Physics And Philosophy: The Revolution In Modern Science, New York: Harper & Brothers, pp. 118–119
106. ̂ "We might in these processes obtain very much more energy than the proton supplied, but on the average we could not expect to obtain energy in this way. It was a very poor and inefficient way of producing energy, and anyone who looked for a source of power in the transformation of the atoms was talking moonshine. But the subject was scientifically interesting because it gave insight into the atoms." The Times archives , September 12, 1933, "The British association—breaking down the atom"
107. ̂ Cover. Time magazine, July 1, 1946.
108. ̂ Isaacson, Einstein: His Life and Universe.
109. ̂ Robert Serber, The Los Alamos Primer: The First Lectures on How to Build an Atomic Bomb (University of California Press, 1992), page 7. Note that the quotation is taken from Serber's 1992 version, and is not in the original 1943 Los Alamos Primerof the same name.
110. ̂ David Bodanis, E = mc2: A Biography of the World's Most Famous Equation (New York: Walker, 2000).
111. ̂ A quote from Frisch about the discovery day. Accessed April 4, 2009.
112. ̂ Sime, Ruth (1996), Lise Meitner: A Life in Physics, California Studies in the History of Science 13, Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 236–237, ISBN 0-52
113. Faux, M.; Gates, S. J. (2005). "Adinkras: A graphical technology for supersymmetric representation theory". Physical Review D 71 (6). arXiv:hep-th/0408004. Bibcode:2005PhRvD..71f5002F. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.065002. e
dit
114. ̂ S. James Gates Jr.: "Superstring Theory: The DNA of Reality" (The Teaching Company)
