High-genus Riemann Surface for Universe and Consciousness?

In the generic model of reality , published in the book Time Hybrids, the definition of existing is for strings of potentials at moments, connected by transitions between momentary states of the reality (universe).Depending on what the resulting existing object of a string of potentials will be thosee potentials are called pre-objects, pre-interactions, pre-events or more generally: pre-things. Now some strings of momentary potentials become existing things over some specific time intervals which are aptly called: existence intervals. hence every existing thing is given as a series of momentary pre-things over some specific time interval.Before the full time interval has passed the series is a process in the void, where the void means the “existence void” being a structure of short — that is shorter than the existence interval for the thing — string processes in reality which are not yet existing. from these assumptions it follows that all existing things evolve from the void. The universe has a state U(t) at every moment t and the transitions to later states U(t’) with t’>t depend on the pre-interactions at the intermediate moments. Hence in the generic model, we now deal with, we arive at the conclusion: “pre-interactions (between momentary pre-objects) form reality.

Now physics aims to describe reality by equations and measuring by numbers, and to enable this one has to embed reality into some mathematical model with some geometry ( some topology will suffice). Since the equations and the associated geometry are assumed to express laws of the universe, these are assumed not to change with time, indeed the same theoretical description is supposed to hold now and in the future. So indeed in modern Physics the spacetime involves time as aparameter and thatconcept does not vary in time of reality. Of course as Science progresses the notion of the geometry of the univese has changed — and may change again in the future — once it was a Euclidean geometry with a distance calculated in terms of three coordinates, so in a three dimensional space with one dimensional time parameter, in Relativity Theory it has changed into some(differentiable geometric) manifold. In this new geometry the distance is not calculated using only the three place coordinates but now the metric (that means the distance) is defined by some quadratic form mixing place and time and that metric space is then called the Minkowski space. When Einstein predicted the curving of the line followed by a photon when passing some heavy cosmic body, the metric space was adjusted to this curving by using the speed of light in the definition of the distance between points in the 4-dimensional space of thee Minkowsky space. Since Einstein’s prediction has been confirmed it became standard language to say that: gravity curves the geometry! Of course one has to becareful with this statement, a geometry is anabstract concept and it cannot be curved by any thing from reality, but what is meant is that the configuration-space in reality — that is the space where particles will move — does not use the Euclidean metric but is using the Minkowski metric geometry with the speed of light embedded in the definition of distance, which yields geodetics corresponding with the curvature by gravity predicted by Einstein. Now once this abstract structure is fixed, it is kept fixed forever in Relativity theory. Thus the physical interpretation makes gravity into something invariant which determines the structure of the universe, so almost godlike one may say.

Of course it is only a model, agood model, yet quantum theory does not really fit well in it. In the generic model pre-interactions at moment t “partially define” the transitions from state U(t) at t to the state U(t’) at t’ for every t’> t, I say “partially” because there are creative potentials — those are original in the sense that no transition from the past ends at such creative potential — at every t’ in time. Thus such creative potentials (for example some set of pre-interactions) have no history in the evolving of the universe, that makes for the unpredictable characteristic of the future in reality.

Thus the geometry (topology) of the universe at moment t (as in usual physics) is being deformed by the pre-interactions at moment t and it is a process of geometries (topologies) so not an invariant geometry where everything is supposed to be embeddable in. So even the smallest pre-interaction — in your brain activity for example — will deform reality; sure,that will be in a neglectable almost non-existing way, and only gravity has immediate effect on the macro-level while at the same time in all local micro-levels other deformations are taking place including effects from all standard forces… but also other interactions! The relativity theory is in more than one sense a geometric theory, see the Minkowski manifold where everything is supposed to move, so with respect to gravity alone, how can this be mixed with quantum theory with the nano-local deformations (involving non-commutative geometry if you like, but it is not essetial here).

It seems that the only unification can be in some local-global theory (geometrically much like sheaf theory) where not only mass but all — or at least many -other (global and local) properties are used as ingredients. In fact from the generic model ( which does specialise to Relativity as well as Quantum by adding more assumptions — like measuring with real numbers — to those in the generic model) it seems quasi evident that no unifying theory will exist as long as the micro-deformations are not integrated with the macro curving (also deformation), a necessary condition … and fitting the sheaf theoretical philoshy.

Finally in “Our multi-sheeted view on reality”, a Medium blog of May 2018, I introduced a Riemann surface model of our use of the memory and our analysis, in order to arrive at a global picture of separated observations as being on separate sheets connected by wormholes in points. This is very similar to the method in mathematics to deal with multivalued complex functions like “square root of x” by a single valued function on another domain, a Riemann surface of suitable genus, for example in the square root example it will be two sheets glued in one point (the zero).

In dealing with the local parts of the universe as separate sheets to glue them to a whole global structure the measurings of the same quantityy but in different localities may be viewed as one “multivalued measuring” which can then be transformed into a single valued measuring on a Riemann surface -type of universe constructed from the local parts glued at places of observations in in the intersections of localities used in the description. It may be impossible to actually do — at least at this moment in our development — measurings in different local parts of the universe but the interest is in the theoretical unification of the local parts into a “ glued global universe” different from the real global universe but perhaps this high-genus “glued global” model is suitable for another intermediate unification of the Relative and the Quantum model. Since common observations in different localities are used in the gluing the difference between glued global and real global cannot lead to contradictions with earlier knowledge.

It is funny that the high-genus Riemann surface idea came from my toy-model of the memory, thinking…thus of consciousness, now perhaps that structure is part of the genesis of the observed universe as well as for consciousness; coincidence or not, it is a more natural and not paranormal link between the universe and consciousness then, … I got to dream about this for a while…