disgusting terrsts of foreign gypsies foreign terrorst grp/cult

 gosh if it were holographic universe (reverse concept of string theory) than it would mean the hilbert recursiveness among universe that creates additional dimensions feel are somewhat pathway connected to multiverse QFT points by similar hilbert coordinate. 

but what is the dimension in that what is the felt but not existing dimension,  a very hard to discriminate initially with basic thought of guh.

i mean is it that there is more universes than actual or the reverse, there is many universes (which we had not deciphered yet in addition to time and euclidean 3d  of 4d universe) but also which are pseudo dimensions created by hilbert metaphoric structuring of universe storage. 

so what is real? -> which dimension is real? is y dimension real for any at all? 

or not the 4d, but is the new dimensions to be discovered are only  a side effect of a hilbertian holographic underlying universe topology?  e.g. if there were 20 dimensions just hypothethical thinking,   would the 20th dimension would be actually a pseudo dimension caused by hilbertian structures giving pseudo dimension effect?

so the topology of the cosmological shape of the universes/multiverse mixture is yet not deciphered at all. 

but it could be either alike string theory alike theorems (more dimensions but not perceived) or else holographic topoological universe definitions alike initially mentioned holographic universe theory or a constant dimension count.

this topology of universe not in just   topology of its universe's curvature is also a topological topic about its dimensions topology. 

is it something hilbertian? or  is it contrarily string theory type topology?

queries that makes one very get curious. e.g. the topology of multiverse. the qft field's dimensional topology struct.

for we humanity to create 5d travel in such multiverse requires first solving this query -> topology of universes mixture (topology of multiverse)

it wont be hard to create many theories to suchtopics by automated science framework tools. i mean abstraction creation capable ml tools with proof/logical modules capacity.

there in someitme before even computer science existed, a computer scientist people tried to create calculators to answers initial queries they had.

then science advanced in 1900s. maths advanced in some paths.

then Cantor came and set the new queries about abstractions.  

so abstraction capacity of science has been started to be redefined. 

and then here maths came to times where abstract maths gone alot.

so we need automated thinking systems to decipher universe's alternate theories (since i am not genius in that side, i need a calculator for that if we call such logic modules systems with automated proof generations skills as calculators of this century)

so ->  what intrigues guh most -> the first query guh wonders -> the topological structure of dimensional structure of multiverse. is it something alike what string theorists envision? or is it something alike what holography theorists think of? 

i mean before space time curvature topic, there this dimensional topology is imho even more to be priotized to be answered first. 

hmm so to be able to answer such queries, we need automated proof systems (the least i need. since i am not genius in such geniusness types to calculate it myself plus i am lazy and would do calculate it laziest wise)  

what we think of initially, how universe behaves gives clue that its actually possibly hilbertian.

e.g. entangled particles means two particles holographic position has some either coming from entire multiverse has some flow/link between them. 

i mean if it were not holographic,  that would also be possible thinking multiverse,  since such eigenstate entanglement would might be connected to a larger sheaf of contra direction future universe sets that makes it behave like that.  but still to have it measurably always happen like that means its not just multiverse side effect, it must be some physical connection between entangled particles (coming from holographic dimension concept that bypasses the locality factor ) 

i mean basical thought process makes one think that it must be a holographic universe since entanglement happens with passing locality concept in physics. (which even einstein did not liked either that in his thoughts)

which would had meant our dimensions is psuedo. the actual universe is something holographic which then even if in our psuedoe dimension concept of space time even parsecs distant particles can entangle. then that means our distance in space time concept is a pseudo dimension. as same as distance concept is pseudo to light/photon itself. 

so our initial look to universe makes us think that its rather a holographic structure which somewhat photons wise topologically connected. since photon particle exists at start and end destination at the same time,  (per photon, not the photon observers) it means the topologically where photon goes and reaches or starts are topologically connected somehow in the holographic universe. but to us which are not photons see that topological concept with some different we see photon takes times to travel. so how we see photon is also comiong from where we are in topological structure. 

so -> our initial thought experiments favors the universe definitions which are metaphorically hilbertian wise branchening infinitely. 

but how is that a topology that has a strange L1/L2 or L3 whatever point wise topology for the photons but for the observers of photons it has a different topology look a view. 

so if you decipher topological shapes that enables where a hilbertian topological structure definition has perspect wise changes,  then we would create a starting point of how to define universe itself is. and to connect it in multiverse to many universe versions like that. 

so universe definitions requires bold initiatives in topology maths field. of definiting recursive analytical hilbertian topological definitions which then would also enable the perspect wise different topological wise perception topic. (e..g that to us to have photon travel requires time) but to photon's perspect it does not require time. 

so timeis a pseudoe dimension. alike euclidean coordinates in space time either.  its just the pseudoe dimensioons created by the underlying holographic topologic structure of universe which is yet to be deciphered yet. 

so whilst old fashioned physicists claims warp is not possible,  but we think it would be possible. i think alcubierre drive is a good starting point. but that also depends on not yet complete physics frameworks. 

so even initiative wise its a very creative nice cool idea, still it depending on old fashioned physics frameworks is the weakness of it but its also very cool theory since it opens the horizons of thinking mind to new horizons of travel capacities of humanity in spacetime.

but its weakness is from its dependence to old fashioned physics frameworks. but still even with that its a very cool initiative (alcubierre warp drive idea) since opens humanity's horizons to such innovative ideas types. 

see when you exceed horizons of old fashioned science, you reach even to Banach Tarski :) where cohesion is also some pseudo concept where e.g. from a sphere you can create two same spheres.

what if cohesion is also psuedo effect of holographic structure relations of underlying topological dimension structure of universe mix. 

so we dont know even cohesiveness is also a relativistic thingy of the universe.

to invent 5d requires to go beyond boldly in abstract maths! not thing is set in stone! everything of earlier physics frameworks, do not consider them as any standard! go beyond! go abstract! go ask queries alike banach tarski if you want to invent 5d travel I say to we physicists scientists or amateurs to physics science!

do not be constrained in earlier physics frameworks definitions. 

go beyond that extend your horizons with abstract and intuitionistic maths defined by mathematicians! e..g starting with Cantor mathematicians started to reask queries about their science. then came abtrac maths frameworks and intuitionistics maths!  of from Cantor to Lawvere its iterating very fast and going beyond and creating new horizons to maths science! with full warp speed! :)

physics science needs same perspect and new horizons (i think most physicists already think alike this actually except physicsts whom are old fashioned and wrongly thinks warp is not possible)

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

lets not mention.