The Emergence Model White Paper DRAFT

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

The Emergence Model A White Paper

_________________________________________________________________________________ The Emergence Model’s logical view (M5) logically draws its basis from Most Basic Particles (MBPs).

MBPs are the quintessential integer, and it is through their “intrinsic nature” all other concepts are derived. It is the MBP in M5 which manifests the three dimensions associated with all real objects not space. M5 is centrally characterized by two processes so derived; “The Fundamental Entanglement Function” which is limited by the other, “Severance”. The Fundamental Entanglement Function, the ‘build’ process, entangles MBPs into all configurations of “architectural mass” generally envisioned to follow Knot Theory, including dark matter within any given Event Frame. Severance, as an independent process, is ‘the failure mode’ of any given configuration of MBPs and represents the limits of architectural mass to remain intact specifically due to the intrinsic nature of constituent MBPs. Space in M5 is dimensionless nothing. Force, all force, is the work instantiated through the intrinsic Action of configurations of MBPs forming architectural mass. Architecture of relative and respective constructs so configured determines physical properties which manifest. Time is an “action displacement index” of the relative and respective architectural masses in the frame. Energy is the ability of relative and relevant architectural mass to do that work. ________________________________________________________________________________

1 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

NOTE: This white paper took almost 20 years of R&D in order to write. You are intercepting this effort well after it started. There is much data to articulate in the proper context. We are about to mode shift what it is you think you know into alignment with the unified Universe. Hang on to your hat, this is going to be a roller coaster ride.

NOTE: This document is about a particular set of EIMs which are intended to be used as a part of the Elegant Reasonism utility process by investigators wishing to mode shift what it is we think we know into alignment with the unified Universe. The Emergence Model needs to be understood in context of Elegant Reasonism or there is a high probability you will not understand what follows.

This is The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33. © Copyright SolREI Publishing 2021 all rights reserved.

SolREI Publishing is a wholly owned subsidiary and operating unit of SOLREI INC. ISBN: 978-1-946009-60-9 ISBN: 978-1-946009-61-6

Paperback eBook/PDF

Also see the Elegant Reasonism White Paper.

ISBN: 978-1-946009-95-1 ISBN: 978-1-946009-96-8

Paperback eBook/PDF

Elegant Reasonism is a utility process patent pending 20200372376 16/405134 worldwide assigned to SOLREI INC and published by the United States Patent & Trademark Office 26 Nov 2020. See our Press Release. Licensing is available from SolREI through the company website.

SOLREI INC 515 N Flagler Dr.,P300 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 https://www.solrei.co Contact Us 2 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Table of Contents The Emergence Model...............................................................................................................................1 Preamble.....................................................................................................................................................8 Acknowledgments.................................................................................................................................8 Context.......................................................................................................................................................9 This Document.........................................................................................................................................10 The https://www.SolREI.co Website...................................................................................................10 Enumerations.......................................................................................................................................10 Derivation.................................................................................................................................................11 Logical Flash of Insight.......................................................................................................................11 Thought Experiment 4: Something vs Nothing...................................................................................11 Nothing...........................................................................................................................................12 Something.......................................................................................................................................12 Lexiconography, Etymology, and Taxonomy of Terms.......................................................................13 Open Source Historical Review......................................................................................................13 EIM Integrity..................................................................................................................................13 Satisfying Elegant Reasonism Rules........................................................................................................14 Mode Shifting into The Emergence Model.........................................................................................14 Insights and Paradigm Shifts..........................................................................................................14 Truth in Evidence............................................................................................................................14 Simultaneous Truth....................................................................................................................15 Holistic Truth.............................................................................................................................15 Truth as a Function of the unified Universe..............................................................................15 A Few Insights Mode Shifting M1 into M5........................................................................................15 Variable Assignments Change........................................................................................................15 Architectural Mass Nomenclature..................................................................................................15 Particle.......................................................................................................................................15 The Speed of Light (e.g. Photon Velocity).................................................................................16 Rapidity......................................................................................................................................16 Mode Shifted Rapidity..........................................................................................................16 Limits Vanish (e.g. Hubble Vindicated)..........................................................................................16 ‘Our’ Universe is Not ‘The’ Universe But Only a Small Fraction of All That Is...........................17 The unified Universe Becomes Unfathomably Ancient.................................................................17 A Note About Unification...............................................................................................................17 Geometric Basis.........................................................................................................................17 Fully Coupling All Reference Frames.......................................................................................18 The Tapestry of Unification.......................................................................................................18 Measurement, Location, & Discernment...................................................................................18 Fractal Geometry of Nature...................................................................................................18 The Emergence Model.............................................................................................................................19 Core Constructs...................................................................................................................................19 Most Basic Particles (MBPs)..........................................................................................................20 MBP States.................................................................................................................................20 3 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 MBP State Zero (0)...............................................................................................................20 MBP State One (1)................................................................................................................20 MBP State Two (2)................................................................................................................20 Core Concepts.....................................................................................................................................20 Knot Theory....................................................................................................................................21 Convergence...............................................................................................................................21 Knot Action States.....................................................................................................................21 Energy Signature.................................................................................................................................22 Frames of Reference............................................................................................................................22 Event Frame....................................................................................................................................22 EFPS1: Cascade to Severance...................................................................................................22 EFPS2: Geodesic Cruise Interval...............................................................................................23 EFPS3: Capture or Merger Initiation.........................................................................................23 EFPS4: Resonant Feedback.......................................................................................................23 EFPS5: Max Q...........................................................................................................................23 EFPS6: Subsidence....................................................................................................................23 EFPS7: Endurance.....................................................................................................................23 Local Frame....................................................................................................................................24 Construct Taxonomy...........................................................................................................................24 The Emergence Model of Particle Physics.....................................................................................24 The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance.............................................24 Feynman Diagrams...............................................................................................................25 Severance..............................................................................................................................25 Matter / Antimatter................................................................................................................25 The Speed of Entanglement..................................................................................................25 Entanglement Gradient..........................................................................................................26 Interaction as a Function of Architecture..............................................................................26 Mode Shifting Dark Matter...................................................................................................26 Preons.........................................................................................................................................26 Gravitons....................................................................................................................................26 Virtual Particles..........................................................................................................................27 Mode Shifting the Higgs Mechanism........................................................................................27 Mode Shifted Bosons.................................................................................................................27 Mode Shifted Photons...........................................................................................................28 Mode Shifted Gluons............................................................................................................28 Mode Shifted W Bosons........................................................................................................28 Mode Shifted Z Bosons.........................................................................................................28 Mode Shifted Leptons................................................................................................................28 Mode Shifted tau...................................................................................................................28 Mode Shifted muon...............................................................................................................29 Mode Shifted electron...........................................................................................................29 Mode Shifted tau neutrino.....................................................................................................29 Mode Shifted muon neutrino.................................................................................................30 Mode Shifted electron neutrino.............................................................................................30 Mode Shifted Quarks.................................................................................................................30 4 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 Mode Shifted up....................................................................................................................30 Mode Shifted charm..............................................................................................................30 Mode Shifted top...................................................................................................................31 Mode Shifted down...............................................................................................................31 Mode Shifted strange............................................................................................................31 Mode Shifted bottom.............................................................................................................32 Classifications of Matter............................................................................................................32 Mode Shifted Subatomic Particles.............................................................................................33 Mode Shifted Protons............................................................................................................33 Mode Shifted Neutrons.........................................................................................................33 Why Confidence Is High..........................................................................................................................33 The Arrow of Time - Solved................................................................................................................34 Multiverse - Solved.............................................................................................................................34 Wave-Particle Duality – Solved..........................................................................................................34 Quantum Entanglement – Mode Shifted........................................................................................34 Quantum Superposition – Mode Shifted........................................................................................34 Quantum Teleportation – Mode Shifted.........................................................................................35 Particle Beam Alignment – Mode Shifted...........................................................................................35 Bremsstrahlung Radiation – Mode Shifted.........................................................................................35 Neutrinos – Mode Shifted...................................................................................................................35 Frangibility of Architectural Mass......................................................................................................35 Taxonomy Clarity................................................................................................................................35 Elimination of Langer Epistemology Errors.......................................................................................36 Elimination of Concept Compression Issues.......................................................................................36 High Affinity with The unified Universe............................................................................................36 SolREI Field Team 01.....................................................................................................................36 100% Success Mode Shifting Existing Knowledge (so far)...............................................................37 Art Appreciation.............................................................................................................................37 Economics.......................................................................................................................................37 Presentations............................................................................................................................................38 Elegant Reasonism Introduction Series...............................................................................................38 Part 01: Introduction and Overview...............................................................................................38 Part 02: Introduction to Mode Shifting...........................................................................................39 In Unification’s Wake Series...............................................................................................................40 Part 01: Stereotypical Questions.....................................................................................................40 Part 02: Mathematical Proofs.........................................................................................................41 Part 03: Communications...............................................................................................................42 Part 04: Relatedness........................................................................................................................43 Part 05: Business Impact................................................................................................................44 Education.................................................................................................................................................45 The Emergence Model 101.................................................................................................................45 Unification...............................................................................................................................................46 Accomplishing Unification.................................................................................................................47 Experiments.............................................................................................................................................48 Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................49 5 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 Systems Review Needed.....................................................................................................................49 Free Markets Embracing Elegant Reasonism.....................................................................................49 Perceiving & Engaging The Unified Universe....................................................................................49

6 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Table of Figures Figure 1: SolREI Studios Channel on YouTube.........................................................................................8 Figure 2: Knot Action States....................................................................................................................21 Figure 3: Event Frame Phase Steps 1 through 7......................................................................................22 Figure 4: Classifications of Matter (in M1).............................................................................................32 Figure 5: Proton.......................................................................................................................................33 Figure 6: Neutron.....................................................................................................................................33 Figure 7: Elegant Reasonism Introduction and Overview Presentation via SolREI Studios...................38 Figure 8: Elegant Reasonism Introduction to Mode Shifting Presentation via SolREI Studios..............39 Figure 9: In Unification's Wake, Part 01: Stereotypical Questions Presentation via SolREI Studios.....40 Figure 10: In Unification's Wake, Part 02: Mathematical Proofs Presentation via SolREI Studios........41 Figure 11: In Unification's Wake, Part 03: Communications Presentation via SolREI Studios..............42 Figure 12: In Unification's Wake, Part 04: Relatedness Presentation via SolREI Studios......................43 Figure 13: In Unification's Wake, Part 05: Business Impact Presentation via SolREI Studios...............44

7 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Preamble Unpacking that paragraph on page 1 of this document could fill yet more libraries next to those filled

by Elegant Reasonism. These and other network based materials are generally available free to registered users of SolREI.co in the User Library. Registration is free and the company does not sell or trade your information. If you do not wish to register, you may watch video presentations via SolREI Studios with paid advertising. If you would like to review Elegant Reasonism or other presentation charts ad free without registering, they are available via ISSUU/SolREI. Click the lens below to review SolREI Studios materials.

Figure 1: SolREI Studios Channel on YouTube

Acknowledgments Unification could not have been accomplished absent the insights of a large number of people both living and gone. Their insights, contributions and in well over 250+ case examples and references of their work are available in the User Library. Three people deserve special mention: Albert Einstein, Susanne K Langer, and Lev B Okun. See Concept Sieves which represent over 400 equations, 60+ physical properties, many Thought Experiments, and Propositions that were a part of an almost 20 year systems review and represent some of the most brilliant scientists in history. What is here only exists because of them.[1] [2] NOTE: Proof sets based on any EIMs which do not or can not close to unification does not merit proof relative to the unified Universe. Elegant Reasonism proof sets demand and require truth as a function of the unified Universe as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. Having such a proof is necessary but insufficient to meet requirements of Elegant Reasonism. If you can not demonstrate such alignment you need to comprehend this material. Also see video Presentations beginning on page 38 for even more detail watch those video presentations on SolREI Studios.

8 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Context The reader here should be keenly aware that under Elegant Reasonism rules EIM s establish fundamental foundational context for 100% of all domains of discourse manifesting that context therein. For example in M1 elementary particles are defined as those constructs science has (so far) determined are not comprised of smaller elements. The only elementary particle under M5 are Most Basic Particles (MBPs) discussed on page 20 and everything real is some configuration of them.

Moving one’s thinking from M1 into the realm of M5 is a non-trivial exercise. Maintaining context focus demands critical situationally awareness thinking unrivaled anywhere else. And then we get to paradigm shifts dealing with Measurement, Location, & Discernment discussed on page 18. How we think about what it is we are doing in any given experiment matters a great deal. Recognizing the deep and highly systemic nature of abstractions relative to fundamental context is vital and one which Elegant Reasonism is intended to deal with. This EIM is a result of that treatment. Reading any part of what follows with the expectation that it is in a familiar context is a tragic mistake. The material herein is intended to be in the full Elegant Reasonism based context of The Emergence Model, except where specifically noted that a particular context is based on another EIM. Consider yourself notified.

Lexiconography, Etymology, and Taxonomy of Terms discussed on page 13 is important exactly for these reasons. Liberal treatment of terms is acceptable so long as they are documented along with their impact to the entire analytical stack as discussed under Elegant Reasonism and holistically consistent with that epistemology. This EIM is considered holistically consistent with that epistemology.

9 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

This Document This white paper is a general discussion about The Emergence Model. It is not necessarily a discussion about Elegant Reasonism which is the process used to develop this EIM. Nor is it necessarily a discussion about the systems review which produced it and ultimately led to the development of Elegant Reasonism. The document does attempt high level compliance with the realm of c’s. The document is linked to established network based resources as detail back up. Readers may be required to register on the website in order to gain access to that detail. Registration is free and the company neither sells nor trades your personal information. The intent and purpose is to help you learn to wield these assets effectively and transformationally.

There is much we know at this juncture and there is a great deal more we do not yet know. Some aspects have placeholders and yet others are areas yet to be explored. There are distinctions between what philosophically must be there and what we can discern. Experiments must be reviewed top to bottom, stem to stern, and then mode shifted for insights. So this white paper is about these issues and an attempt to help others to understand where we are and what needs doing next. Another aspect of this white paper is about what drives our confidence. What is it that we have been able to explain which previously we could not. This document is not necessarily about those insights, interesting as they are.

We may point out why this EIM perceives what it does so we may engage those insights. This is not a detailed systems review of any particular insight, much less the holistic set of them. Such characterizations would fill libraries and the largest computers on the planet. Some will be left tantalized by insights in an area where no details exist. Two that come immediately to mind are also why we have asked the National Science Foundation to support an investigation into these areas. One area is ‘architectures of mass’. As simple a phrase as that is to write it does not convey how incredibly vast that topic actually is. It does not articulate the intrinsic nature driving those foundations, nor does it connect all the evidence chains linking the unified Universe to the plethora of phenomena, properties, or character that we would all like to see. There simply is not the real estate to do that here. However, what we do hope to accomplish here is to lay the foundations so those tasks can be communicated at a later time elsewhere.

The https://www.SolREI.co Website The company website has even greater detail. Registered users gain immediate access to greater detail.

In many cases we have detail from our original systems review that is not yet even on the website. In those cases we have placeholder pages in place populated with lorem ipsum text until we have time and resources to get what we have and know there. Please bear with us during these struggles. We know everyone wants to see that material. We are few, you are many, and we only have two hands.

Remember, we’ve been at this for almost 20 years. We can’t just snap our fingers and wish that material into place. We are going as fast as we can with what we have to work with.

Enumerations The reader will encounter various enumerations within the body of work this white paper reflects.

Those enumerations / numbers mean absolutely nothing other than the order they appeared in McGowen’s original notes during the original systems review. No further meaning should be drawn.

10 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Derivation How we got where we are is a story in and of itself and this brief mention will do that pursuit no justice. There was not a single flash of insight that resulted in this EIM. There were many and over many years. It took a dozen years for the puzzle pieces to even fit together. The motivating factor penetrating that pursuit though was that at each juncture when something did fit, it fit with an increased and unrivaled perfection. Even when the fit was rough there was enough in that roughness to illuminate what needed honing and polishing. Even now, the areas where we know we need further R&D those areas are well defined and those keys to those domains are hanging there waiting to turn the lock for investigators with chutzpah and intrepidity enough to challenge the status quo.

Logical Flash of Insight The flash of insight setting all of this into motion was driven by an inability to connect needed dots across scales. Quantum Mechanical scales did not work at Cosmological scales. Newtonian mechanics did not work with relativistic mechanics, etc. Simplistically the insight was that these realms of thought were all logically correct, from their particular perspectives, but in that logical correctness lay the strategic clue needed to get past their inabilities to accomplish what we needed done. Realizing their logical correctness allowed for industry standard approaches to be arranged and employed in a unique manner and updated slightly with a specific purpose which demanded attainment of the precipice capable of perceiving and engaging the unified Universe. Once the strategic insight of logical correctness was recognized, we had to explain the shackles constraining perception and ideas. The answer to that particular set of problems are Langer Epistemology Errors. Systems Engineering defined the principles, practices, and processes of requirements gathering. Industry QMS standards and consulting practices governed our approach. With these in place we conducted a systems review and that utility process became Elegant Reasonism and this EIM resulted from that effort.

Thought Experiment 4: Something vs Nothing At the time Translation Matrices had only two columns and neither closed to unification. The columns representing M1 and M2 presented problems exactly because neither closes, but the question was why did they not close? Even that has a story behind it alluded to in the Elegant Reasonism white paper.

The Logical Flash of Insight above enabled us to set all of these various issues aside and create two new columns in the Translation Matrices being employed. Ultimately these new columns became M5 and M6, both of which are fully compliant. That means, among other things, they close to unification.

This piece of that story though comes from those early days before those EIMs existed. At that time our columns were simply labeled predominant thinking, Einstein’s thinking, and to headerless columns required by Systems Engineering principles.

Thought Experiment 4 is powerful in and of itself exactly because the concept of nothing does not exist in M1 nor in M2 exactly because all constructs must be considered there real. Predominant thinking employing the concept of nothing is not maintaining critical situational awareness thinking, see Elegant Reasonism. That the concept of ‘nothing’ really does not exist there is exceedingly hard for humans to fathom much less employ in a thought experiment. I can report that it most certainly was for me. Remember, predominant thinking requires us to consider spacetime as a real construct and it 11 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 therefore must be considered ‘something’ not ‘nothing’. We very quickly get into a discussion about quantum mechanics regarding the Big Bang. Many if not most theoretical physicists will tell you that the Big Bang banged because of quantum fluctuations in finite regions of space. At least that was the answer I got back from the WMAP team at the time. The point here is that spacetime is, in M1, a real construct and must be completely accounted for in thinking about a fully coupled reference frame capable to employing a common geometric basis point. That answer does not allow that to happen and so it makes no sense to me in that context. Ignoring those issues we must recognize then that ‘nothing’ does not really exist in any EIM employing the spacetime-mass interface. This thought experiment then, in those EIMs, is essentially rendered irrelevant. The question then became, is there an EIM where it is relevant. One of those empty columns in our Translation Matrices employed ‘dimensionless nothing’ as a definition for ‘space’. I can attest that was a source of many headaches.

Nothing The concept of ‘nothing’ is difficult for humans to fathom because it is absent from our experience on Earth. Everything around is something real, including our own physicality. We use words like empty, void, and even the term space to discuss the absence of real objects. The problem is that those words imply a container of some sort, even if only indirectly. Defining space as dimensionless nothing reconciles the container issue. There is no container in this EIM (e.g. The Emergence Model). Nothing defies description, nor can it influence anything real. Because the paragraph on page one (1) of this document defines space as dimensionless (Proposition 9) nothing (Proposition 8) together render ‘space’ essentially irrelevant in most conversations. What this does set up however, is a requirement to shift our focus away from the medium and onto the relevant real objects within our Frames of Reference (p 22). That requirement ultimately became Proposition 25 (to that affect and effect) in our investigation.

Something Something here is construed to mean everything real associated with the holistic unified Universe. That sentence is written the way it is because The Emergence Model suggests that the actual unified Universe is significantly larger than our particle horizon constituting ‘our’ Universe. Consequently we have to be careful using even that term. Yet another reason to focus on abstraction inventory wielding Elegant Reasonism working through the Process Decision Checkpoint Flowchart.

The 800lb gorilla in the room with this EIM is discerning the intricacies associated with the architectures of mass. SolREI has pointed this out to the U.S. National Science Foundation and suggested the creation of a dedicated information system to research these and other related issues. We believe such a system would likely be an order of magnitude more powerful than Summit. It is our opinion that this R&D project constitutes the single largest computing opportunity humanity will ever face. After all it would be researching the unified Universe, what’s more powerful than that? In his book (and show) Cosmos, Carl Sagan once explained divisions in all somethings considered real by continuing to slice an apple pie.[3] The point he was making was about getting down to fundamentals.

In our original systems review, looking into what constituted the somethings we perceive as reality, we went through the same exercise but with a decidedly different objective.

At the smallest possible divisions we ultimately come to Most Basic Particles (MBPs) (p 20). It does not really matter philosophically if further divisions are accomplished because that only refines the 12 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 existing definition. It does not fundamentally change the systemic nature of what it produces in the holistic context of this EIM.

Lexiconography, Etymology, and Taxonomy of Terms The recognition phase of Elegant Reasonism requires a historical review of terms, abstractions and constructs, etc. and one of the first things an investigator will notice is the inconsistent use, definition of, and manner in which application of any given term is liberally applied. Consequently the process and methods requires specific tools to inventory abstractions and calls for adherence to specific declared iteration of enumerated constructs as employed by EIMs. The reason is simple, fundamental changes in definitions are highly systemic and flow away from foundational constructs up through every higher order. Saying, for example, that some particle can ‘carry’ ‘a force’ rather than ‘instantiate’ that force is a problem over any given intervening distance. One must be able to account for every real object in application of such a claim. It should be noted that in M1 spacetime is considered real as is mass; which then implies that the spacetime-mass interface must also be considered real and in that realization – one must be capable of traversing that interface (which by a famous formula we know no real object can accomplish). Consequently we must be exceedingly careful in how words, terms, and their relative and respective taxonomy is employed. Elegant Reasonism employs the ISO 9001 Unification Tool for exactly this reason. Phenomena are not encapsulated, transferred, only to magically reappear somewhere else and neither are forces. Tangible instantiation of must be illuminated and illustrated with clear evidence chain linkage such that it survives the discipline and rigor of Elegant Reasonism analytics.

Open Source Historical Review It is not lost on us the implications of ‘goal post moving’, ‘removal of historical context’, and other actions which obfuscate critical situational awareness thinking demanded by Elegant Reasonism. These acts of obfuscation cause great harm to our progeny by hiding alternative thinking which impacts axiology of new ideas from old contexts. Such actions affect people due to NNRP concerns. For this reason SOLREI INC has built a User Library and references original works by the original authors.

100% of this material is available not just for your inspection but your subsequent referencing and linkage. We don’t want you to take our word for something. Get a historical reference straight from the original author in their own words. See our Acknowledgments page for a list of those works influencing the body of work these white papers reflect. While all of this has more to do with Elegant Reasonism than it does The Emergence Model it is important to note that both M5 & M6 survived this rigor and discipline. Hopefully our subsequent articulation is up to the challenge of communicating all this effectively.

EIM Integrity Concept integrity within any given EIM is a challenge especially within communities where liberal commission of Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) is rampant. Scan the current literature and you will see, for example, many who do not grasp how Einstein viewed the manifestation of gravity and as a direct result of their ignorance they suggest constructs like gravitons. There are other examples to be sure but the point here is the degree to which such liberalism affects elimination of LEEs and the relative and respective critically situational awareness thinking employed, communicated, and interpreted. EIM integrity is vital and Elegant Reasonism analytics should employ metrics to that end.

13 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Satisfying Elegant Reasonism Rules Remember that Elegant Reasonism rules require investigators to employ a plurality of EIMs in any given investigation and at least one of those EIMs must be fully compliant (e.g. it must close to unification). The Emergence Model minimally satisfies that requirement in that role. Readers should also be aware that by setting certain parameters to neutral values that The Emergence Model is capable of emulating other logically correct models which do not close and the EIM M4 is set aside for exactly that purpose. Elegant Reasonism is the utility process through which The Emergence Model was produced and that is the relationship between these ideas. They are just different facets of the same body of work.

Mode Shifting into The Emergence Model Readers must understand that mode shifting is not tweaking existing ideas. It is fundamentally changing the entire context of how one perceives and engages reality. Do not read the material here expecting it to be in status quo context. If you do you will be confused and lost. You will certainly miss the points being made.

Mode Shifting ‘gang switches’ all associated relationships and patterns EIM to EIM for paradigms of interest or of nature (POI/N). This switching is not limited to equations or individual concepts. It is inclusive of everything required in order for you to perceive and engage that POI/N in context of the unified Universe. Most often that requires an array of paradigm shifts to take place. Do not expect to sit down and fully comprehend all of this in five minutes. That very likely is not going to happen.

Insights and Paradigm Shifts One of the hardest paradigm shifts cope with in our experience is discussed in Measurement, Location, & Discernment on page 18. There is just so much of mathematics which places emphasis on ‘space’ rather than the real objects. Saying that the source of dimensions of real objects are derived from the intrinsic nature of MBPs (Page 1) is one thing, but applying the propositions holistically demands critical situationally aware thinking on a detail level that places increased stress and emphasis on terms like rigor and discipline. We must shift our focus away from the medium of a reference frame and onto the constituent details of the architectures constituting the real objects and phenomena in that frame.

For example, simply looking up what constitutes a Fractal and you will see it defined in terms of Euclidean ‘space’, not in terms of configurations of architectures constituting composites made manifest by The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance on page 24. Be prepared to wrestle and reconcile a great many paradigms in order to fully comprehend Elegant Reasonism and The Emergence Model.

Truth in Evidence The Emergence Model is an EIM employed by Elegant Reasonism which is an epistemology supported by an analytical framework which seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science. Elegant Reasonism based truth held in Treatise is expected to withstand not only the analytical rigor of the process but also in litmus relative to and respective of the unified Universe.

14 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Simultaneous Truth In Elegant Reasonism, simultaneous truths usually are paradigms made manifest usually in two or more EIMs. What changes between those manifestations is context of that truth. Potentially what that truth is true is different EIM to EIM, but that the paradigm is true is not really in question. Remember EIMs are encapsulated and can not instantiate across those boundaries. The only manner which can perceive such truth are the tools of Elegant Reasonism.

Holistic Truth Holistic Truth is a truth that survives the analytical rigor of Elegant Reasonism and remains true all the way down through all of the various analytical stacks and assures EIM Integrity (p 13) in every instance. The implication in that expectation is critical situationally awareness thinking is assured and employs proper metrics. The expectation is that it would also be true in nature but there is no guarantee for that. The final arbiter is the unified Universe.

Truth as a Function of the unified Universe Elegant Reasonism, as an epistemology, finds holistic truths in highest and best affinity with the unified Universe.

A Few Insights Mode Shifting M1 into M5 There are more than a few stunning insights that arise from any effort mode shifting what it is we think we know between these two EIMs.

Variable Assignments Change Do not expect status quo mode shifting into The Emergence Model. More than one variable assignment has changed passing the threshold into this realm. Variables ‘c’, and ‘β’ are just two examples.

Architectural Mass Nomenclature Mass mode shifted into The Emergence Model is denoted by iℂmparticle in order to articulate the complex discontinuous composite architectures formed by The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance (p 24) reflecting the construct representing a particular particle or mass. The preceding i may be used to denote the line illuminating the fact that we are not committing Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) and are only logically representing the actual real particle.

Particle Herein a particle is defined as some configuration of MBPs stable in a Local Frame (p 24) for some defined action displacement (e.g. time). There is much internal debate as to whether or not stable Preon configurations constitute particles under this definition since they are not likely perceivable. Then there is the issue of some collected set of Preons which are constituents within a larger composite but form an independent lattice within that parent construct. For example it might be possible for such a lattice to warrant Mode Shifting the Higgs Mechanism (p 27).

15 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

The Speed of Light (e.g. Photon Velocity) Rhetorically asking from a decidedly M1 perspective and trying to maintain EIM Integrity we ask: “If nothing can go faster than the speed of light then why do your rules allow you to square that value?”

Herein the speed of light variable ‘c’ mode shifts to mean Severance where we must also understand what that is. Severance is the architectural interactions (e.g. failure mode of them), in the case of the Electron, which produce the Photon due to centripetal force upon the Electron. The velocity value is the same. It’s just the reasons its true are different. The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance (p 24) is a cornerstone concept of this EIM. Ultimately that requires us to recognize the implications to Rapidity.

Rapidity From the historical review we find a concept called Rapidity in full use in the early 1900’s. Rapidity, or Beta (β), is defined as velocity over ‘c’ (the speed of light). Mode shifting this area reassigns ‘c’ to Severance which subsequently redefines Rapidity as Velocity over Severance. Read in this way Hubble is vindicated and his measurements actually do represent multiples of the speed of light, but they are held cosmologically and not locally. We generally do not recognize this because predominant status quo thinking is entrenched in M1 or M2, not M5. There are a great many equations throughout science employing the variable ‘c’ which when read as Severance make a great deal more sense and provide compelling insights.

Mode Shifted Rapidity There are many equations throughout the body of historical science which present the concept of v/c (e.g. Rapidity), including Einstein in many instances. When we recognize Beta (β) is v/c there is an even larger pool to draw from. When we deconstruct the limits associated with EIMs employing the spacetime-mass interface and we reassign ‘c’ to Severance as the primary reason for the consistency in measured speed of light we are then left with the issue of Hubble’s measurements. Mode Shifting this effectively through Elegant Reasonism analytics will clearly illuminate these discussions to illustration.

Please consult the website acknowledgments for more detail. Also see: Particle Beam Alignment – Mode Shifted on page 35.

Limits Vanish (e.g. Hubble Vindicated) The instant space is defined as it is on Page 1 the construct of spacetime vanishes from existence. When that happens so do previously imposed limitations. The issue then becomes explaining all the interferometer experiment measurements, LIGO, and others. The answer to those questions is Severance. Photons are emitted by electrons. Always and in every single instance. Even when Photon – Electron pairs are produced in higher ordered particle exchanges, the photon came from some electron in that Event Frame (p 22). In the M5 EIM there are no speed limits imposed on Photons by any real construct, but saying that is a cosmological statement, not a local statement. The local statement is that electrons, due to Severance, always produce photons at the measured velocity. This is why Hubble is vindicated. He measured cosmological velocities between objects. We then find it very interesting to mode shift photons from say BX442 arriving at the Hubble Space Telescope Sensor Array. That should obviously be a discussion for another time. The point here is that any effective Elegant Reasonism based investigation will produce these same insights.

16 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

‘Our’ Universe is Not ‘The’ Universe But Only a Small Fraction of All That Is The Bang to Bang article on the website illuminates and illustrates this point. A subsequent review of the WMAP data found ‘statistical circles’ in the data that ‘they’ could not explain. We did explain them in that article. We did so consistent with the body of work this and other white papers holistically represent. We might add that the explanation is holistically consistent with the unified Universe held litmus as well.

The Bang to Bang page points out that the real objects producing ‘our’ bang came from earlier bangs elsewhere. When we review our own cosmos we see supermassive black holes racing away from everything else, which too is explained in that same discussion. The point here is that this behavior is consistent with the premise posited there. That this condition sets up the cycle to repeat yet again elsewhere. The implication is clear. That “the” unified Universe is a great deal larger than our particle horizon. Everything the WMAP data measured is inside our particle horizon and represents only our portion of all that is. All of what is, is incalculable, if only because it is beyond our particle horizon.

The unified Universe Becomes Unfathomably Ancient Recognizing Limits Vanish (e.g. Hubble Vindicated) on page 16 then we inventory the comprehensive set of z-factors previously associated with the Inflationary Theory, which does not exist here either, what we find are staggering numbers which push the age of just our portion of the unified Universe potentially an order of magnitude older than current estimates under M1. A more appropriate review is clearly called for. If the NSF grants the architecture review process we would include this effort in that review.

A Note About Unification Unification places certain demands upon the utility process that is Elegant Reasonism which produced this EIM and is why those demands must be considered a philosophical requirement entering science.

The Emergence Model, this EIM, is presumably only the first such EIM that meets compliance requirements. Part of the point here is not to take this EIM as the final EIM. There may be, at some later date, more aligned ideas. What we know right now is that nothing real can transition the spacetime-mass interface and that means no EIM employing those constructs will ever be compliant with unification. Compliance requires a completely different EIM and what it is we think we know must then be mode shifted through Elegant Reasonism. The characterization on page one of this document intrinsically and inherently accomplishes unification. The body of work reflected by this white paper illuminates and illustrates relatedness holistically consistent its definition. See Presentations beginning on page 38.

Geometric Basis Unification is a bringing together of all concepts. What that means is that evidence chains must have a clear path back to the intrinsic nature of the EIM making them manifest. There are many aspects to this requiring attention, but here it means that the geometry of all constructs considered real have a valid geometric basis point available for common use across all reference frames. Herein Most Basic Particles (MBPs) on page 20, or any set of them, satisfy that requirement.

17 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Fully Coupling All Reference Frames History notes that physics (much less the Universe) could not be perceived in a unified manner until such time as all of the fundamental forces could be perceived in all reference frames relative to one another. The Emergence Model, this EIM, accomplishes that task. First the fundamental core construct are Most Basic Particles (MBPs) below, and it is their intrinsic nature, cited on page 1 of this document, which derives all other concepts either directly or indirectly, restful as they may be. Force, all force, is the work instantiated by the action(s) of architectural mass so configured by The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance (p 24) and may be characterized in an appropriately configured Event Frame (p 22). If there is no architecture there is no force and this is true if only because ‘nothing’ can not impart any force. ‘Force’ must therefore be the work instantiated through the action of architectural mass. Time then is a displacement index of that action performing that work.

The Tapestry of Unification Being able to derive everything real from a single cogent paragraph demands a tapestry a great deal larger than any single discipline of science or school of thought. Even here in this EIM we are backed into the philosophical realm demanding to know sources only to be offered shrugged shoulders. Further pursuit left to others to ponder and pursue. Gaining this precipice for the first time though is exhilarating and awe inspiring. Gone are the vague euphemisms of the past. Elegant Reasonism holds the keys to other EIMs. Herein we concern ourselves with how this EIM links the evidence chains together.

Measurement, Location, & Discernment Mode Shifting Dark Matter on page 26 in the holistic context herein taken along with concepts from Quantum Mechanics, like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, we begin to realize that The Emergence Model presents something of a challenge when certain aspects of some architectures are densely saturated configurations or employ constituents within their composites that are such constructs. The point here is that there are a number of reasons why we may not be able to perceive some aspects of some architectures. We must depend on two propositions 17: Structure equals properties & 149: Properties infer intrinsic structure which in holistic context here become of vital import.

Fractal Geometry of Nature Applying fractal mathematical sciences to the intrinsic nature of Most Basic Particles (MBPs) (p 20) relative to and respective of architectures of mass suggests a whole new domain of discourse to be investigated. We have said here that MBPs taken as a fractal initiator in context of that paragraph on page one implies that the unified Universe (as envisioned by M5) is a fractal. The implications of that are stunning in many regards least of which is Knot Theory discussed on page 21.

18 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

The Emergence Model The Emergence Model is holistically represented by two EIMs; one logical (M5), one physical (M6).

M5’s fully compliant description is on page 1. There is a knee-jerk reaction among many to jump to M6, but we are not going to do that. We recognize that civilization is not ready for that adventure just yet exactly for all the reasons we are where we are. Those emotionally attached to ‘physics’ dealing with constructs they believe ‘real’ are to be reminded that even in M6 we are dealing with abstract constructs but with a slightly different set of rules and we remain susceptible to the same failures that got us into this mess to start with. The fine line distinction being made here is due to commission of Langer Epistemology Errors and the implications of such commissions. We are therefore saving M6 for a later time when all of this has matured. What we can say about M6 at this juncture is that it must, by definition, support M5. The Emergence Model is not one or the other, it must, by definition, be an integration of both views in full compliance of Elegant Reasonism. The logical nature of M5 provides a bit more maneuvering room in exercising investigative techniques and methods. It also has a tendency to remind us more about past failures. For these and many more reasons, we have a tendency herein to leverage M5 rather than M6 at this juncture and until such time as our understanding of these issues has matured. Having said that the holistic EIM will not be considered mature until such time as both M5 and M6 are clearly articulated and patently compliant with Elegant Reasonism in their entirety.

Page 1 characterizes the basis for the EIM that is The Emergence Model’s logical view (e.g. M5). The M6 description is on the website and is very similar excepting the distinction that it is the underlying physicality supporting M5. The details here are not relevant at this level of maturity and our focus therefore remains with the logical view. Remember M1 and M2 are both logical views as well. The important issue to remember is that we have not actually been working with physicality at any juncture in the last 2000 years. We have been working with abstractions of it and we have been committing Langer Epistemology Errors. See the Elegant Reasonism White Paper.

Where possible discussions of specific particles compare mass in Electron Volts / c2. Special note should be taken to remember that here c mode shifts to Severance. This is a point of comparison relative to and respective of a particular construct. We are not simply regurgitating values from the network. The points being made refer to complex composite, likely discontinuous, architectures of mass. It is the nature and character of these architectures which is of interest. There are an array of experiments which can be conducted about how mass reacts under differing circumstances which will tell us much about that nature and character relative to and respective of the architecture under investigation.

Core Constructs The primary constituent of The Emergence Model, described on page 1, is the Most Basic Particle (MBP) and which acts as the geometric basis for all reference frames and constitutes the basis of all real objects. Defined in this way any division of any construct identified as an MBP only serves to refine, not redefine, its fundamental purpose for being (e.g. its ontology).

19 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Most Basic Particles (MBPs) The intrinsic nature of MBPs, by definition, may entangle with at most two other MBPs each, generally construed as following Knot Theory (p 21), and derives two basic processes; a build process and a configuration failure mode process. The latter limits the first. Investigating this we find: The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance (p 24) configures MBPs into discontinuous configurations of complex composite architectures of mass forming everything real. MBPs taken as a system then implies that everything real is a system or system of systems. Taken as a fractal initiator implies the unified Universe is a Geometric Fractal as envisioned under this EIM. The specific configuration yields the properties and characteristics which are made manifest by particular higher ordered architectures.

MBP States MBPs can be said to exist in one of three states enumerated simply as 0, 1, and 2. Part of the R&D associated with architectures of mass would also explore the intrinsic nature of MBPs, especially MBP states relative to and respective of thermodynamics, knot theory, structures, properties, etc.

MBP State Zero (0) State 0 has no energy and as a result does not entangle with anything. Such a construct may only entangle by receiving energy moving it into MBP State 1.

MBP State One (1) State 1 MBPs entangle. These are the MBPs The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance on page 24 configures into everything real. Taken as a system implies that everything real is a system or system of systems. Taken as a Fractal initiator implies that the unified Universe is a geometric fractal in holistic context of The Emergence Model.

MBP State Two (2) State 2 MBPs possess energy exceeding Severance. Because MBPs can divide no further their energy has an unbounded upper limit. These MBPs can cause significant havoc to most, if not all, subsequent configurations. Theoretically an MBP with high enough energy could penetrate the most massive Black Hole essentially unscathed. Presumably it would likely lose some of its energy in the process, ultimately reducing it back into state 1.

Core Concepts EIMs, under Elegant Reasonism rules are iterated and not changed. Under that rule the baseline EIM M5 is defined having MBPs that may entangle with at most two other MBPs each. There are other iterations of that baseline which have other characteristics. We will stick with the foundation definition (e.g. initial baseline EIM for M5) for the purposes of this white paper. The reason for this is fairly straightforward in as much as the results seemed to us more natural and reflective of reality’s nature.

There was also greater congruence with String Theory and other theoretical models. Consistent with this definition then we find MBPs naturally forming lines. In Knot Theory below those lines are called ropes and rope segments.

20 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Knot Theory Knot Theory here subsumes and integrates string theory. MBPs form ‘lines’ as a function of their intrinsic nature. Not lost on anyone here are insights resulting from The Speed of Entanglement on page 25, and the point here is that can occur at superluminal velocities. Line segments placed in tumbled chaotic conditions form knots in seconds. The early Universe is no different and at those velocities would not take even that long to begin manifesting everything real consistent with this EIM. It should be noted that a simplex review of knots with 16 or fewer crossings will manifest some 3.2052268E+33 permutations of configurations and the number of knots expected in reality have numbers of crossings significantly higher than that. There is ample room in this concept to manifest all real objects, properties, phenomena, etc. This is an area of R&D rich with opportunity.

Convergence Under M1 there is no reason necessarily for convergence to exist. When pressed about ‘quantum fluctuations in spacetime’ rationales become increasingly elaborate. Under M5 convergence is a natural result of the intrinsic nature of MBPs. And while this increases the affinity this EIM has with String Theory it also illuminates and illustrates something a great deal more insightful. Convergence leads to Euler’s Beta and Gamma Functions. Those functions lead to pole residues. We stereotypically associate poles with electromagnetism. However, that paragraph on page 1 of this document should result in a natural polar phenomena in many if not most configurations of architectures. That insight led to realizing the nature of polarization beyond electromagnetism. Gravitons polarize high mass low mass, for example. At distances far enough away from their anchoring high mass, they reverse poles because there is more mass behind them than in front of them. Like poles repel one another. And in that sudden realization we explain why all the galaxies are rushing away from one another.

Knot Action States We can then posit knot action states as being a two part byte where the first digit is the internal state and the second is the external state of the structure relative to any Event Frame or Local Frame. These considerations are important when, for example, Mode Shifting the Higgs Mechanism (p 27).

The concept of Knot Action States comes into its own when we discuss neutrinos most especially state 51 constructs. This state in those cases is very likely why neutrinos change flavor in EFPS2 local frames. See neutral generation neutrinos in Figure 4: Classifications of Matter (in M1) on page 32.

Figure 2: Knot Action States 21 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Energy Signature Critical review of the astronomical inventory in context of the paragraph on page 1 of this document will provide interesting insights. The Event Frame Phase Step Taxonomy describes predominant action transpiring therein. The latter Event Frame Phase Steps provide us the opportunity to hold in evidence the Event which produced what we presently find in evidence. That is to say because some particular Event transpired we may infer the energy signature required in order for that set of circumstances to have been made manifest. An interacting gradient forms from individual MBPs all the way to the Big Bang and everywhere in between.

Frames of Reference Mode shifting standard frames of reference via Elegant Reasonism finds The Emergence Model employing essentially two types of reference frames. One which describes interacting real objects and one that does not. That is to say that the real objects interact with other real objects in one and in the other those same objects interact only with themselves. Reference frames may be nested for investigative purposes.

Event Frame Event Frames are the standard interacting reference frame under this EIM. Event Frame are relativistic, isotropic, and are characterized by the predominant action within them by one of seven Event Frame Phase Steps (EFPS1 – EFPS7) depicted Error: Reference source not found by Error: Reference source not found.

EFPS1: Cascade to Severance Event Frame Phase Step 1 (EFPS1) begins with the set of phenomena cascading toward Severance (p 25) and ends when Severance has taken place. Given that we are centrally of interest with

Figure 3: Event Frame Phase Steps 1 through 7 22 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 phenomena we humans may wish to investigate, we may presume that generally is construed to mean here on the Earth. Obviously there are a wide variety of circumstances which may lead to any given eventual destination but they all begin with EFPS1. However, given the material here, we can absolutely assign a probability 1 to whatever circumstances transpired to get it here, because in the end – it is here.

EFPS2: Geodesic Cruise Interval Largely governed by factors affecting material in a ‘geodesic cruise mode’ of flight, this Phase Step is predominantly in interstellar space. This Event Frame Phase Step is what might classically be known as “the spacetime interval”. It should be noted that for example photons, from source to target and traversing space, generally construed to be be in EFPS2 may also be said to be in LF2, but when gravity changes the vector of its arm briefly enters LF3 , but due to Severance returns to LF2 and continues on its geodesic to the target. The material, on any scale, is bounded on all sides by space, and can be described in those moments by Concept 289: Mass ( d ) (p 681). There is a holographic quality to this phase step because the normalized frequency post Severance is preserved. Momentum and other vector characteristics are described by Imaginary Units (p 593) consistent with Concept 261: Imaginary Unit until such a time as the cruising material’s local reference frame has some commonality with another reference frame. Only then can it be influenced in any way. If the cruising material’s reference frame is influenced and not captured, then the energy associated with its reference frame is higher than the influencing system’s Lagrangian, and so ‘cruising’ material continues its journey.

EFPS3: Capture or Merger Initiation EFPS3 is an interesting phase step ….

EFPS4: Resonant Feedback From merger initiation up to Max Q this phase step describes interactions between real systems.

EFPS5: Max Q The point of maximum thermodynamic interaction.

EFPS6: Subsidence Depending on the Energy Signature Taxonomy classification of the Perimeter resulting from the Event, this phase step may take exceedingly long periods of time.

EFPS7: Endurance This is the classical period where traditional notion of geologic diagenesis occurs over the longest period of time. However, we are going to parse the traditional definition of diagenesis and force explanation of every aspect of the structures that result. Scrutiny is the order of the day. The orthodox definition of diagenesis is any chemical, physical, or biological change undergone by a sediment after its initial deposition and during and after its lithification, exclusive of surface alteration (weathering) and metamorphism. Here in this Phase Step, subsidence has generally been considered “normalized” and has ended. Diagenesis occurs after “initial deposition”. Obviously, that means the initial deposition must have already occurred. The stereotypical processes of erosion rule material movement in this Phase Step. Besides diagenesis are all of the natural processes of the Earth and its biosphere that can act on the materials including weathering and metamorphism. All of these conspire over the intervening 23 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 millions of years to create the world around us today. Because diagenesis, by definition, occurs ‘after’ deposition; especially in context of the accretion disc deposition process, we must conclude that diagenesis is a derivative of the deposition function. Proposition 92: Diagenesis is a derivative function of deposition Diagenesis Traditionally diagenesis refers to changes in sediment or sedimentary rocks during and after rock formation, Lithification, at temperatures and pressures less than that required for the formation of metamorphic rocks or melting.

Local Frame Describe real objects interacting only internally with themselves. The local frame is defined by The Emergence Model as a reference frame whose real basis point is insulated and isolated by space such that all vectors and external references are imaginary. Real objects in such frames are generally construed as not interacting with and other real objects external or internal to the frame (e.g. elsewhere within that frame). For example a local frame may contain two non-interacting real objects. Such objects under this definition may not interact in any way neither directly nor indirectly. This condition is isotropic in this frame. Any interaction instantly converts this frame into an Event Frame which must then fully describe the interaction.

Construct Taxonomy The Emergence Model holds that everything real is some configuration of MBPs. Under this definition the smallest real object would be an individual Most Basic Particles (MBPs) (p 20). Following this logic then the largest construct would be the most super-massive Black Hole in existence. Everything else is somewhere between those two extremes. 100% however, is governed by or is a derivative resulting from the intrinsic nature of MBPs, as characterized on page 1 of this document. The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance (p 24) configures MBPs into complex, discontinuous, composite architectures of mass forming everything real in ‘the’ unified Universe. The discontinuous character of such configurations gives rise to the organic from inorganic, ultimately culminating in our own physiology.

The Emergence Model of Particle Physics Subatomic particles under The Emergence Model of Particle Physics are essentially mode shifted counterparts to The Standard Model of Particle Physics with several distinctions. The first is in how fundamental forces are made manifest. The paragraph on page one (1) describes how that happens here.

The most obvious implication of this is in how gravity is made manifest. Under M1 gravity is a phenomena made manifest by mass warping spacetime. Under M5 gravity is the force made manifest by the work instantiated by the intrinsic action of gravitons.

The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance is derived from the intrinsic nature of MBPs and is responsible for configuring them into everything real. There exists a vast array of detail we are not going to be able to get to in any white paper. That Knot Theory (p 21) flows naturally as a consequence is no special surprise; however, it does raise some very interesting insights in any given Event Frame (p 22), especially in context of the discontinuous nature of the resulting configurations.

Being able to recognize the emergence of organic matter from the inorganic for example. Another set of details involve the integrated R&D area of Knot Theory (p 21) and the Fractal Geometry of Nature in 24 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 context of the intrinsic nature of Most Basic Particles (MBPs) (p 20) relative to the various architectures of mass which result. This is a very complex area of R&D and is inherently tied to the NSF information system proposal we made if only because ultimately deals with the manifestation of properties by any given configuration (e.g. architecture). Also very important here is to recognize the implications of The Speed of Entanglement below.

Feynman Diagrams When we mode shift particles into The Emergence Model of Particle Physics Feynman Diagrams really come into their own, pardon the pun, element. What is absent here are the specific architectures involved and the exact nature of the ensuing interactions. This is yet another reason we need detailed R&D capability (in context of Elegant Reasonism) looking into the Architectures of Mass in context of The Emergence Model.

Severance The clues to Severance are very subtle. When we look at Einstein’s coefficients for emissions we don’t see Severance in action; however, we are looking too late in the cascade when we perform that review.

Severance is evident earlier in the mathematical reduction producing those coefficients. What we find there in those more complete equations is the elimination of ‘c’ through mathematical cancellation of terms. When we realize that ‘c’ mode shifts assignment away from the speed of light and to Severance many equations become very much different in character. In the case of Einstein’s coefficients of emission in longer form equations reduce because the photon left the system through the cascade to Severance. The coefficient describes the remaining system. Mode Shifting assignment of ‘c’ to Severance in this manner, in hindsight, makes all the sense in the world. Subsequent systems review of the equations employing that variable now read more naturally and make more common sense. That is to say with higher affinity to the unified Universe. We might also add that this holistic insight adds to the Why Confidence Is High beginning on page 33.

Matter / Antimatter The relationships between particles and their relative and respective antiparticle is a matter of resonance between architectures and in this case is destructive resonance which simplistically exceeds the Severance of those Event Frames.

The Speed of Entanglement It is very likely that the Bell Inequality Tests conducted years ago, which were presumed to have unexplained glitches in their systems, did not. Experiments testing “spooky action at a distance” reported exceptional superluminal velocities. Those tests produced good numbers, but nevertheless need to be revisited. The simplex point here is that those tests suggested superluminal velocities and not just by a little bit but by many multiples. Part of the next set of challenges will be understanding those speeds in context not just of this function limited by Severance but in how various architectures may influence or change the intricacies of associated configurations (or vice-versa). Such tests hold the potential of recreating cosmological velocities locally. Insights potentially allowing us better systems review of the WMAP data calculating the size and age of our part of the unified Universe.

25 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 Entanglement Gradient The entanglement gradient spans all scales from individual MBPs to the largest construct known to science and every real object along that gradient is subject to the same intrinsic nature of MBPs and the processes derived from it.

Interaction as a Function of Architecture Configurations of MBPs will naturally have associated structural engineering factors and aspects to them which must be accounted for and which will determine in large part how they interact with other real objects (e.g. other configurations resulting in differing architectures). The most notable aspect of this insight is that of Dark Matter. Dark Matter is generally construed as configurations whose architectures do not interact with other configurations. Likely this is due to configuration saturation, density, and other issues. Another set of factors are the Knot Action States (p 21) associated with the relative and respective constructs in the Event Frame (p 22).

Mode Shifting Dark Matter Dark matter here is not a mystery, nor does it have any special energy associated with it. It is simply configurations of MBPs whose architectures are densely saturated and whose MBP states are not allowing interactive action. The big surprise comes when we realize that such concepts are not necessarily discrete configurations. Some portion of them are constituent configurations in higher ordered constructs. Also, there is only one kind of energy and it too is a derivative of that same nature.

The big unknown are permutations of architectures of mass and how they integrate and interact across the entanglement gradient.

Preons The concept of Preons is anything but new. The term was coined over a century ago and it is essentially used consistent with that original definition, but updated within the body of work this document holistically reflects. Preons are essentially configurations of MBPs between individual MBPs and least recognizable subatomic particles, which are generally construed as mode shifted Bosons.

Preons play a huge role here and in a variety of manners. Gluons are likely mode shifted Preons. When we look at Mode Shifted Protons and Mode Shifted Neutrons, both below, we find something there interesting. The sum of the mass of the Mode Shifted Quarks (p 30) is about 3% of the mass of the higher ordered parent particle. Several points of insight here. One is that delta mass of 97% is comprised of Preons and it is those configurations which structurally dampen and bind the Mode Shifted Quarks into their parent particles. Another insight is that this ratio of 97/3 is recurrent in many other areas. Until such time as architectures of mass can be properly researched we won’t understand why that is so. Yes we asked the NSF for help in that pursuit. So far that fell on deaf minds.

Gravitons The force of gravity in The Emergence Model is the instantiation of the work performed by the intrinsic action of these architectures. Here again we do not know what these architectures look like and R&D is required. Hence our proposal to the NSF. Gravity in M1, M2, M3 and other EIMs employing the spacetime-mass interface is a phenomena resulting from the warping of spacetime by mass. Anyone suggesting gravity exists in such an EIM does not understand relativistic physics much less Einstein’s 26 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 papers. EIM Integrity must be maintained through critical situational awareness thinking while executing the utility process that is Elegant Reasonism, especially down through the various analytics.

Critical review of MBPs in context of Knot Theory finds affinity with String Theory where they will find congruence with Euler’s Beta and Gamma Functions. Salient in that insight is the notion of convergence and polar residue. Historically ‘poles’ have been the purview of electromagnetism. Not until The Emergence Model was it realized that gravitons are polarized along a high mass – low mass axis. Gravitons can entangle with other constructs and especially other gravitons. At distance from the primary high mass anchor point, gravitons will sense more mass behind them than in front of them and they will ‘turn around’ and present their high mass pole outward away from the mass actually anchoring them. This condition sets up a like pole situation between all high mass objects (e.g. supermassive black holes) in which like poles repel each other. It is for this reason that galaxies are flying away from each other with ever increasing rapidities. Ultimately this condition and situation characterizes the Bang to Bang page on the website.

Virtual Particles This nomenclature was coined before the information age matured in any significant manner. Virtual anything is not real and these particles certainly are, they just don’t survive very long. As such this label is something of a misnomer of a bygone era. These types of particles under this EIM are configurations of MBPs whose internal resonance is destructive. The length of time the resonance takes to destroy the configuration determines the longevity of the particular particle.

Mode Shifting the Higgs Mechanism Understanding mode shifting resulting in the Higgs Mechanism requires greater comprehension of The Speed of Entanglement (p 25) holistically herein. It also requires an understanding of property manifestation not just of individual architectures of mass but of them acting in concert. Concerts of harmonic phonons are one thing. Chaotic behavior in confinement is an entirely different matter (no pun intended). The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance above provides many keys to unlock all of these various realms. Part of the answer in mode shifting the Higgs Mechanism is found mode shifting various types of Preon fields through Elegant Reasonism.

Mode Shifted Bosons The paradigm of a ‘force carrier’? The more you think about that concept in an EIM reality where spacetime is considered a real construct and nothing real can transit the spacetime-mass interface, well such a construct becomes something some might consider virtual (e.g. not real). The struggle purveyors of virtualized ideas is a real problem they are desperately trying to rationalize. Page one (1) of this document states that action instantiates force through work performed by architectural mass. The only question is what does that architecture look like. This is a very common problem, especially among those entrenched in commission of Langer Epistemology Errors. One cannot trade one LEE for another, they are still LEEs and that’s why the decision checkpoint flowchart in Elegant Reasonism loops back on itself.

27 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 Interestingly when we realize how the variable c is reassigned to Severance it becomes of vital importance to comprehend the full implication in how we calculate the mass of many subatomic particles, including the Bosons. Complex architectures of mass are measured in GeV/c2. Think about that for more than a few minutes.

Mode Shifted Photons These are some of the most interesting constructs to mode shift. Stunningly delightful these are. Mode shifting the photon construct was the effort which illuminated the composite nature and integration under Knot Theory of constituent constructs in higher ordered configurations. Mode Shifted Photons are a relatively low ordered parent particle in the grand scheme of things. The strategic clue here was the opposed electric and magnetic constituents being 90 degrees offset. There is an mechanical architecture which will produce such motion but it requires a hidden third constituent. A dark constituent, and that spawned the idea accounting for the missing dark matter in the Universe. It isn’t all discrete. A great portion of it is acting as constituent Dark Matter within what we already know about.

Mode Shifted Gluons Gluons are generally associated with the strong nuclear force. Herein gluons instantiate strong interactions between quarks in quantum chromodynamics. Until such time as proper R&D into the architectures of mass can be conducted specific detail is lacking regarding manifestation of any given property or phenomena. Discerning Gluons from Preons is one area of interest.

Mode Shifted W Bosons W and Z Bosons instantiate the weak nuclear force. Until such time as proper R&D into the architectures of mass can be conducted specific detail is lacking regarding manifestation of any given property or phenomena. Discerning Gluons from Preons is one area of interest.

Mode Shifted Z Bosons W and Z Bosons instantiate the weak nuclear force. Until such time as proper R&D into the architectures of mass can be conducted specific detail is lacking regarding manifestation of any given property or phenomena. Discerning Gluons from Preons is one area of interest.

Mode Shifted Leptons Mode shifting Leptons is an interesting exercise in studying various architectures of mass. These constructs do not undergo strong interactions. There are both charged and uncharged versions. In context of the broader Interaction as a Function of Architecture discussion on 26 including those revolving around Mode Shifting Dark Matter we begin to have new appreciation for why these various particles behave as they do.

Mode Shifted tau The tau (τ), also called the tau lepton, tau particle, or tauon, is an elementary particle similar to the electron, with negative electric charge and a spin of 1/2. Like the electron, the muon, and the three neutrinos, the tau is a lepton, and like all elementary particles with half-integer spin, the tau has a corresponding antiparticle of opposite charge but equal mass and spin. In the tau's case, this is the "antitau" (also called the positive tau). Tau particles are denoted by the symbol τ− and the antitaus by

28 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 τ+. Tau leptons have a lifetime of 2.9×10−13 s and a mass of 1776.86 MeV/c2. Since their interactions are very similar to those of the electron, a tau can be thought of as a much heavier version of the electron. Because of their greater mass, tau particles do not emit as much Bremsstrahlung Radiation – Mode Shifted (p 35) as electrons; consequently they are potentially much more highly penetrating than electrons. Because of its short lifetime (due to destructive resonance exceeding Severance for this architecture of mass), the range of the tau is mainly set by its decay length, which is too small for bremsstrahlung to be noticeable. Its penetrating power appears only at ultra-high velocity and energy (above petaelectronvolt energies), when time dilation extends its otherwise very short path-length.

Mode Shifted muon The muon (/ˈmjuːɒn/; from the Greek letter mu (μ) used to represent it) is an elementary particle similar to the electron, with an electric charge of −1 e and a spin of 1/2, but with a much greater mass.

It is classified as a lepton. As with other leptons, the muon is not known to have any sub-structure – that is, it is not thought to be composed of any simpler particles. The muon is an unstable subatomic particle with a mean lifetime of 2.2 μs, much longer than many other subatomic particles. As with the decay of the non-elementary neutron (with a lifetime around 15 minutes), muon decay is slow (by subatomic standards) because the decay is mediated only by the weak interaction (rather than the more powerful strong interaction or electromagnetic interaction), and because the mass difference between the muon and the set of its decay products is small, providing few kinetic degrees of freedom for decay.

Muon decay almost always produces at least three particles, which must include an electron of the same charge as the muon and two types of neutrinos. Like all elementary particles, the muon has a corresponding antiparticle of opposite charge (+1 e) but equal mass and spin: the antimuon (also called a positive muon). Muons are denoted by μ− and antimuons by μ+. Formerly, muons were called "mu mesons", but are not classified as mesons by modern particle physicists (see § History), and that name

is no longer used by the physics community. Muons have a mass of 105.66 MeV/c2, which is approximately 207 times that of the electron, me.

Mode Shifted electron The Electron as a discrete architecture is fascinating. Synchrotron radiation was key in understanding application of centripetal force needed to comprehend Mode Shifted Photons above. Once this insight was recognized it inspired the equation linking Gravitons to Electromagnetism via ‘Architectures of Mass’ made manifest by The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance at The Speed of Entanglement. Also see The Speed of Light (e.g. Photon Velocity) on page 16 and Limits Vanish (e.g. Hubble Vindicated) on page 16.

Mode Shifted tau neutrino Knot Action States on page 21 helps mode shift type changes between neutrino generation types as depicted in Figure 4: Classifications of Matter (in M1) on page 32. A particle might start out as an electron neutrino, but as it moves, it morphs into a muon neutrino or a tau neutrino, changing flavors as it goes.

29 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 Mode Shifted muon neutrino Knot Action States on page 21 helps mode shift type changes between neutrino generation types as depicted in Figure 4: Classifications of Matter (in M1) on page 32. A particle might start out as an electron neutrino, but as it moves, it morphs into a muon neutrino or a tau neutrino, changing flavors as it goes.

Mode Shifted electron neutrino Knot Action States on page 21 helps mode shift type changes between neutrino generation types as depicted in Figure 4: Classifications of Matter (in M1) on page 32. A particle might start out as an electron neutrino, but as it moves, it morphs into a muon neutrino or a tau neutrino, changing flavors as it goes.

Mode Shifted Quarks Quarks exist only in a bound state. That means that their relative and respective architectures inherently possess energy exceeding Severance which must be structurally dampened in order to remain intact.

Otherwise destructive resonance transpires to the architecture. Here again R&D into these architectures is needed in order to more fully document these processes. Do they reduce to individual MBPs or do they reduce into Preons? Right now, we do not know.

Mode Shifted up The up quark or u quark (symbol: u) is the lightest of all quarks, a type of elementary particle, and a major constituent of matter. It, along with the down quark, forms the neutrons (one up quark, two down quarks) and protons (two up quarks, one down quark) of atomic nuclei. It is part of the first generation

of matter, has an electric charge of +2/3 e & a bare mass of 2.2+0.5 −0.4 MeV/c2.[4] Like all quarks, the up quark is an elementary fermion with spin 1/2, and experiences all four fundamental interactions: gravitation, electromagnetism, weak interactions, and strong interactions. The antiparticle of the up quark is the up antiquark (sometimes called antiup quark or simply antiup), which differs from it only in that some of its properties, such as charge have equal magnitude but opposite sign. Its existence (along with that of the down and strange quarks) was postulated in 1964 by Murray Gell-Mann and George Zweig to explain the Eightfold Way classification scheme of hadrons. The up quark was first observed by experiments at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in 1968.

Mode Shifted charm The charm quark, charmed quark or c quark (from its symbol, c) is the third most massive of all quarks, a type of elementary particle. Charm quarks are found in hadrons, which are subatomic particles made of quarks. Examples of hadrons containing charm quarks include the J/ψ meson (J/ψ), D mesons (D), charmed Sigma baryons (Σc), and other charmed particles. It, along with the strange quark, is part of the second generation of matter, and has an electric charge of +2/3 e and a bare mass of

1.275+0.025−0.035 GeV/c2.[4] Like all quarks, the charm quark is an elementary fermion with spin 1/2, and experiences all four fundamental interactions: gravitation, electromagnetism, weak interactions, and strong interactions. The antiparticle of the charm quark is the charm antiquark (sometimes called anticharm quark or simply anticharm), which differs from it only in that some of its 30 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 properties have equal magnitude but opposite sign. The awareness that emerges here from this text (because the exact same text appears in other places) is the architectural nature of this and other particles. Fundamental context for these descriptors changes as a function of this document and the situational awareness it represents.

Mode Shifted top Like all other quarks, the top quark is a fermion with spin 1/2 and participates in all four fundamental interactions: gravitation, electromagnetism, weak interactions, and strong interactions. It has an electric charge of +2/3 e. It has a mass of 172.76±0.3 GeV/c2,[4] which is close to the rhenium atom mass.[5] Because top quarks are very massive, large amounts of energy are needed to create one. The only way to achieve such high energies is through high-energy collisions. These occur naturally in the Earth's upper atmosphere as cosmic rays collide with particles in the air, or can be created in a particle accelerator. See Event Frame on page 22.

Mode Shifted down The down quark or d quark (symbol: d) is the second-lightest of all quarks, a type of elementary particle, and a major constituent of matter. Together with the up quark, it forms the neutrons (one up quark, two down quarks) and protons (two up quarks, one down quark) of atomic nuclei. It is part of the first generation of matter, has an electric charge of −1/3 e and a bare mass of 4.7+0.5 −0.3 MeV/c2.[4] Like all quarks, the down quark is an elementary fermion with spin 1/2, and experiences all four fundamental interactions: gravitation, electromagnetism, weak interactions, and strong interactions. The antiparticle of the down quark is the down antiquark (sometimes called antidown quark or simply antidown), which differs from it only in that some of its properties have equal magnitude but opposite sign. When found in mesons (particles made of one quark and one antiquark) or baryons (particles made of three quarks), the 'effective mass' (or 'dressed' mass) of quarks becomes greater because of the binding energy caused by the gluon field between quarks (see mass– energy equivalence). These considerations herein are a function of the Architectures involved and that includes not just the down quark but various Preons (p 26) as well. Preon configurations must be taken into account as constituents in any discussion of ‘binding energy’. There are also considerations relative to ‘fields’ in terms of how individual constituents interact and the degree of harmony imposed relative to and respective of the real objects in the defined Event Frame discussed on page 22.

Mode Shifted strange The strange quark or s quark (from its symbol, s) is the third lightest of all quarks, a type of elementary particle. Strange quarks are found in subatomic particles called hadrons. Examples of hadrons containing strange quarks include kaons (K), strange D mesons (Ds), Sigma baryons (Σ), and other strange particles. According to the IUPAP the symbol s is the official name, while "strange" is to be considered only as a mnemonic. When we review the history behind the concept of the Strange Quark and the people involved they were in effect conducting a rudimentary form of Elegant Reasonism, but they were unaware of Langer Epistemology Errors or the deep implications of abstraction usage in that context. Here we are keenly aware of such implications.

31 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 Mode Shifted bottom The bottom quark or b quark, also known as the beauty quark, is a third-generation heavy quark with a charge of −1/3 e. All quarks are described in a similar way by electroweak and quantum chromodynamics, but the bottom quark has exceptionally low rates of transition to lower-mass quarks.

The bottom quark is also notable because it is a product in almost all top quark decays, and is a

frequent decay product of the Higgs boson. The bottom quark's "bare" mass is around 4.18 GeV/c2[3] – a bit more than four times the mass of a proton, and many orders of magnitude larger than common "light" quarks. Although it almost exclusively transitions from or to a top quark, the bottom quark can decay into either an up quark or charm quark via the weak interaction. CKM matrix elements Vub and Vcb specify the rates, where both these decays are suppressed, making lifetimes of most bottom particles (~10−12 s) somewhat longer than those of charmed particles (~10−13 s), but shorter than those of strange particles (from ~10−10 to ~10−8 s).[6] When we look at the mass and transition rates here they give experimental physics investigators a great deal of material for consideration. Not just in terms of re-configuring techniques like B-tagging but for experiments and other programs across the particle physics communities worldwide.

Classifications of Matter It is SOLREI INC’s position that the international community needs to come together and rethink how we classify matter subsequent to the USPTO publishing Elegant Reasonism, which included The Emergence Model (e.g. this EIM). There are a number of issues which require global consensus and SolREI is in no position to nor do we desire to dictate any of this. While we have engaged NIST, to sponsor us in developing new Figure 4: Classifications of Matter (in M1) standards which would then propagate to the ISO community our position is that we want to facilitate such activity not perform it ourselves nor do we desire to dictate such standards. We invite the international community to participate as appropriate in all of this. We will help, facilitate, or lead as we have resources to do so.

The following table is presented from an M1 perspective and needs mode shifting by the international community. It minimally needs updating to holistically reflect the body of work this and the Elegant Reasonism white paper represent. It should be noted here particle/antiparticle relationships are maintained. Herein they are a function of destructive resonance. The relationships remain the same from The Standard Model of Particle Physics Generations depicted in the above chart. That those particles are considered generational is important relative to architecture evolution under Knot Theory in the holistic context here.

32 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Mode Shifted Subatomic Particles I suppose technically this would include all particles smaller than an atom which would necessarily include everything already discussed. The real point major constituents of nuclei (e.g. protons and neutrons.

Mode Shifted Protons A proton is a subatomic particle, symbol p or p+, with a positive electric charge of +1e elementary charge and a mass slightly less than that of a neutron. Protons and neutrons, each with masses of approximately one atomic mass unit, are jointly referred to as "nucleons" (particles present in atomic nuclei). One or more protons are present in the nucleus of every atom; they are a necessary part of the nucleus. The number of protons in the nucleus is the defining property of an element, and is Figure 5: Proton referred to as the atomic number (represented by the symbol Z).

The mass of the proton is reported as 938.27208816(29) MeV/c2. That measurement here reads Megaelectron Volts over Severance squared. It should be noted here that the sum of the masses of the constituent quarks is less than 1% of the mass of the parent proton. The delta in that mass here is due to damping Preonic configurations which keep the particle both stable and bound.

Mode Shifted Neutrons The neutron is a subatomic particle, symbol n or n0, which has a neutral (not positive or negative) charge, and a mass slightly greater than that of a proton. Protons and neutrons constitute the nuclei of atoms. Since protons and neutrons behave similarly within the nucleus, and each has a mass of approximately one atomic mass unit, they are both referred to as nucleons.[7]

The mass of the neutron is reported as 939.56542052(54) MeV/c2. That measurement here reads Mega-electron Volts over Severance squared. It Figure 6: Neutron should be noted here that the sum of the masses of the constituent quarks is roughly 1.23% of the mass of the parent neutron. The delta in that mass here is due to damping Preonic configurations which keep the particle both stable and bound.

Why Confidence Is High Confidence is high that The Emergence Model has great affinity with the unified Universe. That does not say that their might not be another EIM which also meets compliance rules of Elegant Reasonism.

We only state that this model is compliant. Below are just a few of the issues reconciled or done more naturally under this EIM. Some of these issues can not be reconciled under M1, M2, or M3.

33 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33 Reconciling these issues here required Elegant Reasonism and The Emergence Model (this EIM).

Taken together collectively they build a compelling case for both Elegant Reasonism and The Emergence Model.

The Arrow of Time - Solved The Emergence Model defines time as an action displacement index respective of and relative to architectures of mass in an Event Frame. Because Severance is isotropic across the frame so is the constancy of action. Action is always positive, therefore the arrow of time is always positive.

Multiverse - Solved The concept of the multiverse, parallel universes, etc. is a logic artifact directly due to the inability of M1, M2, and M3 to close to unification exactly because nothing real can traverse the spacetime-mass interface. These concepts are therefore considered virtual and not real. The multiverse exists only because no reference frames employing the spacetime-mass interface will ever close to unification and they will not because they are [ONLY] logically correct (e.g. they are not compliant with unification).

Wave-Particle Duality – Solved The wave-particle duality of photons is due to The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance configuring MBPs into complex composite, discontinuous, architectures of mass. These architectures are not point masses as is often depicted. We tend to think of photons like the head of a dandelion with wispy filaments. The wave functions so often cited in experiments is due to entanglement of the photon passing some entangling object and suffering Severance at different points relative to the geometries and energies involved. See Aircraft “Glories” on the SolREI Studios channel online to see one experiment projecting this onto clouds below a Cessna 172S. Because the waveparticle duality is a function herein of The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance it essentially renders the wave function a logic artifact of M1 and M2 thinking. It is for all practical intents and purposes an illusion created by entanglement. Consequently the cat is unaffected and there is no real wave function.

Quantum Entanglement – Mode Shifted This is what Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”. It was spooky to him because he though it was instantaneous. It isn’t, but it is superluminal and takes place at The Speed of Entanglement (page 25). Investigators are also encouraged to consider the implications of R&D associated with architectures of mass and what these architectures actually look like. There is a great deal to unpack here, the least of which is relative and respective interactions across permutations of architectural mass especially given The Speed of Entanglement on page 25.

Quantum Superposition – Mode Shifted Is essentially the same illusion eliminated by mode shifting wave-particle duality in context of The Speed of Entanglement (page 25). Industries strategically employing quantum superposition as a function of their relative and respective business plans are strongly encouraged to review: In Unification’s Wake, Part 5: Business Impact on page 44 lest their shareholders take them to the cleaners.

34 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Quantum Teleportation – Mode Shifted Simultaneity of causality on local scales is specifically due to The Speed of Entanglement (page 25). It is an illusion and logic artifact generally associated with M1 and M2. Simplistically quantum teleportation is a logic artifact due to the constructs of EIMs employing the spacetime-mass interface. It does not exist in the real unified Universe (e.g. nature).

Particle Beam Alignment – Mode Shifted Particle beams all over the Earth use Rapidity (p 16) for beam alignment. Rhetorically we ask, why do you suppose that is? Holistically herein the use of this term makes a great deal of sense, but from an M1 perspective it seems there should be another way to accomplish the task. That there isn’t is also telling.

Bremsstrahlung Radiation – Mode Shifted Bremsstrauhlung Radiation is deeply linked to Rapidity (p 16). Our brief systems review mode shifted this type of situation completely consistent with The Emergence Model through the utility process of Elegant Reasonism.

Neutrinos – Mode Shifted Knot Action States on page 21 explains why neutrinos change flavors during geodesic cruise (e.g.

EFPS2: Geodesic Cruise Interval on page 23)

Frangibility of Architectural Mass One of the key insights emerging from this EIM came as a result of The Fundamental Entanglement Function, limited by Severance on page 24. If Severance limits all configurations of MBPs (e.g. everything real), then all architectural mass is frangible under the right conditions of Severance. This single insight explains why, for example, craters are wider than they are deep. This condition is the basis for the Bang to Bang page on the website. A salient point worth making, even if it is patently obvious, is that this insight spans all scales exactly because it is a derivative of the intrinsic nature of MBPs. Frangibility divides inertia and momentum into the constituent components of the parent mass under conditions of Severance. Accelerator science sees this often in their particle collisions. Modern industrial technology has frangible bullets that can be used with many if not most calibers which prevents collateral damage by eliminating ricochets. Planetary scientists see this in craters and impacts as well. EFPS5 energy propagates evenly from the Event. Inertia and momentum from the parent mass is greatest as frangibility transpires, but subsequently is divided among all the various constituents involved. Craters as a result are wider than they are deep. The Bang to Bang page describes the largest known structures succumbing to exactly the same phenomena.

Taxonomy Clarity The Emergence Model taxonomic relationships are also fully compliant with the realm of c’s as defined

by Elegant Reasonism in context of its rule set.

35 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Elimination of Langer Epistemology Errors It is a bit of a misnomer to state that The Emergence Model eliminates Langer Epistemology Errors since this EIM is the result of the process that is Elegant Reasonism and it is that process which does the elimination. A more accurate statement would be that LEEs have been eliminated (so far as we can tell and at this juncture of maturity) by that process. To this end The Emergence Model reflects the unified Universe to high affinity in a fully compliant manner. This is not to say that there won’t be a better EIM developed later, just that this one seems to work pretty well right now. Does that mean this EIM is complete or that we have mode shifted all human knowledge? Absolutely not, we have barely scratched the surface. That surface having been scratched though tells a compelling story.

Elimination of Concept Compression Issues Concept compression issues are best exemplified by objects like BX442. BX442 is a Grand Design Spiral Galaxy. Such galaxy formations take billions of years to form through gravity. The specific problem is that the Hubble Space Telescope has observed this particular galaxy so far away that, under M1, or M2, rules there is not enough time for it to have formed since the Big Bang (also envisioned under those same rules). Consequently something, somewhere, is incongruous (under those same rules). Such issues are generally described as concept compression issues because they force us to compress the amount of time required for a construct to have formed using the rules of a given EIM and that act serves to attack EIM Integrity discussed on page 13. Elegant Reasonism analytic rigor which produced The Emergence Model has, as far as we can tell, eliminated such problems. They are eliminated exactly because of circumstances articulated holistically herein, the least of which is the vindication of Edwin Hubble.

High Affinity with The unified Universe Our adventures in the field with SolREI Field Team one found congruence at every turn. The geological sciences will never be the same once our insights are more broadly understood. Vindicating Edwin Hubble made us rethink and mode shift existing theories. Many existing assumptions simply fell apart under the analytical rigor of Elegant Reasonism. One example is the Inflationary Theory. That theory requires a concept called ‘rapid expansion’ in order to rationalize what we see in the astronomical sciences today. The problem is that Black Holes grow. The issue is that reverse engineering rapid expansion requires a concept called ‘infinite compression’. No one anywhere can reconcile that growth with infinite compression. That required us to conduct yet another systems review into the Big Bang. Ultimately we were able to describe the unified Universe Bang to Bang.

SolREI Field Team 01 We collected hundreds of pounds of samples, and documented current circumstances with historical references and events. The insights we gained are unprecedented. Part of that effort resulted in The Talladega Report, a proprietary report for the company and outlined significant strategic insights. We will report that these insights have been reported to all appropriate agencies of the U.S. Federal Government. A select few have copies of this report. Our subsequent actions depend on them. The report needs updating but once that has been done, we could flip a proverbial switch and change history as it was documented/taught prior to 2020.

36 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

100% Success Mode Shifting Existing Knowledge (so far) We have been trying to break The Emergence Model more than a decade now and every attempt only serves to make it stronger than it was before and we’ve barely scratched the surface of what needs doing. Every turn only teaches us something new about Elegant Reasonism and makes that process better than it was and our ability to wield it to affect with great effect is strengthened. Everything dovetails together. The evidence chains link, not just within the encapsulated confines of this EIM but to great affinity with the actual unified Universe held litmus. Where other EIMs fail, this EIM rises to the challenge illuminating and illustrating without so much as skipping a heartbeat. Only personally wielding all of this will convey the exhilaration and shear joy of such pursuits. I’d love to report that we have not been able to mode shift some aspect of some field of study but every time we turn around what we looked at clicked into place with minimal effort. Admittedly we were not writing deep dissertations about those other vessels. We just wanted to see if they fit at the wharf and would generally ‘click in’. Every test we tried exceeded our wildest expectations. Hopefully your experience will be similar. Several examples are:

Art Appreciation Susanne K Langer’s book Philosophy in a New Key, written in 1948 gave credibility to the notion of such epistemological errors when we mistake abstractions for actual reality. That book however was actually about art appreciation from a philosophical point of view. Arguably there is a case to be made that something as restful as art appreciation now has a credible path back to the unified Universe as a result through the holistic content of that book.

Economics In 1949 Ludwig Von Mises wrote: Human Action, A Treatise on Economics. Action in the holistic context here represents an evidence chain linking this treatise all the way back to the unified Universe.

Here again the overarching requirements of unification, however restful, demand some credible path linking the evidence chains and Von Mises didn’t skip a beat, though at the time he did not know this.

There is a great deal of work to do…

37 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Presentations SolREI Publishing has created a number of presentations which SolREI Studios then has turned into video presentations online. Presentations in PDF format are available from ISSUU.com/SolREI. Our SolREI Studios channel has created a variety of original content videos and several themed video playlists so far with many more in development.

• •

Elegant Reasonism In Unification’s Wake

Elegant Reasonism Introduction Series Part 01: Introduction and Overview Presentation Charts Presentation Charts with speaker notes Elegant Reasonism is the utility process which produced The Emergence Model.

Figure 7: Elegant Reasonism Introduction and Overview Presentation via SolREI Studios

38 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Part 02: Introduction to Mode Shifting Presentation Charts Presentation Charts with speaker notes

Figure 8: Elegant Reasonism Introduction to Mode Shifting Presentation via SolREI Studios Historically we humans believed we could just tweak this parameter or that factor and ignore consequences to everything else. That is simply an illusion and ignores the fantastically amplified consequences caused by systemically integrated abstractions from the core of how we perceive reality.

Elegant Reasonism implements tools called Translation Matrices to document the relationships EIMs have to paradigms of interest or of nature down through a rigorous analytical stack in order to enable mode shifting of what it is we thought we knew into alignment with the unified Universe. Mode Shifting is not a simple factor tweak. It is a comprehensive change in how our thinking must recognize patterns as a function of essential context changes.

39 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

In Unification’s Wake Series This series is intended to elaborate on insight resulting from having accomplished unification (e.g hindsight). How has perspectives changed in a given area or subject. Please Contact Us if you see something we should cover not already in a presentation. Remember that we are few and you guys are many. You may get a reply agreeing with your suggestion and that someone, somewhere should pursue that effort. Right now we are busy just getting this much. So please bear with us.

Part 01: Stereotypical Questions These are knee-jerk kinds of questions we get when folks first consider that unification has been accomplished. Everyone usually thinks it was done in context of what they already knew rather than what actually happened and why. Some get so caught up in those aspects they don’t stop to consider these questions and answers.

Presentation Charts

Figure 9: In Unification's Wake, Part 01: Stereotypical Questions Presentation via SolREI Studios

40 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Part 02: Mathematical Proofs Presentation Charts

Figure 10: In Unification's Wake, Part 02: Mathematical Proofs Presentation via SolREI Studios It is necessary, but insufficient to simply say “the math works”, and the reason this is true has to do with comprehension of essential interpretive context. We must separate the mechanical aspects of mathematics from interpretations of constants and variables as they are assigned to represent different aspects across sciences. In essence what we must do is to mode shift our thinking to represent what it is we think we are proving.

Traditional mathematical proofs operate within a given EIM. The mechanics of mathematical operations do not change EIM to EIM, but what they work with relative to and respective of fundamental and essential context does change and we must be critically situationally aware in our thinking in order to establish viable proof as evidence.

41 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Part 03: Communications Presentation Charts

Figure 11: In Unification's Wake, Part 03: Communications Presentation via SolREI Studios This presentation attempts to answer questions involving why Elegant Reasonism is so difficult to communicate to the uninitiated. Essentially everyone desires new information and concepts to be in the same fundamental context and that is simply not the case here. This presentation attempts to help other to comprehend those issues and how they relate to the framework that supports the epistemology that is Elegant Reasonism.

42 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Part 04: Relatedness Presentation Charts

Figure 12: In Unification's Wake, Part 04: Relatedness Presentation via SolREI Studios There is a distinction to make sure you the reader here understands and understands the implications of and it is that Elegant Reasonism is the utility process that produced The Emergence Model. The utility process requires at least one EIM employed be fully compliant and close to unification. It is The Emergence Model which satisfies that requirement. The utility process only does to the extent that the EIMs it employs do. There is nothing restricting or inhibiting other investigative teams from implementing other EIMs so long as they are fully compliant holistically under Elegant Reasonism. It may be that others see what we did and decide they can do better. Go for it. We’re done.

The Emergence Model is the source of relatedness in this presentation.

43 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Part 05: Business Impact Presentation Charts

Figure 13: In Unification's Wake, Part 05: Business Impact Presentation via SolREI Studios The only business defense against Elegant Reasonism is wielding it better than your competition. Any competitor who can wield Elegant Reasonism better than you can eviscerate you as a function of their will, desire, and resources. There are several reasons for this. One is that Elegant Reasonism enables them to see what you can not. Another is that it enables and empowers the capability to mode shift existing knowledge into to alignment with the unified Universe. While that is fantastic for scientists it is a very lousy situation for global enterprise and here’s why. Global enterprise now has to protect their existing portfolios because mode shifted insights constitute net new insights and are available to be patented under existing global treaty and appropriate national legislation. You can’t patent what you can not perceive and you certainly can not engage it. Therefore if you want to protect your existing portfolio then you had better get to it before someone else does.

44 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Education SolREI is currently working to develop a number of courses from general information to certification for professional purposes. Proper development of these materials will take some time, so again, please bear with us. We are working as fast as our meager resources allow. Generally, licensing Elegant Reasonism is free for non-revenue associated activities. All activities associated with creating value for revenue generating purposes require acquisition of a commercial license. The prices associated with these courses has been waived until the courses are fully developed and considered complete. At that time prices will go into affect. Until then they are free to registered users under the Elegant Reasonism General Use License. This document, for example, is being shared under that same general license.

Contact Us if you have any questions or would like to establish a commercial license for your institution, organization, or enterprise.

The Emergence Model 101 This course currently under development is intended to be the initial course for certification on The Emergence Model. While this course is under active development we encourage review and assessment of this material for education purposes and refinement of goal attainment relative to and respective of the skills determined to be required.

45 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Unification Historically, maybe by tradition as well, the quest for unification has been within the domain of discourse associated with theoretical physics, often astrophysics. People like Stephen Hawking, Albert Einstein, and many others come quickly to mind and are examples but by no means are they the only ones. The mistake we all made was first characterized by Susanne K Langer in 1948. We believed that the abstractions we were working with were reality. The central nervous system of human physiology instantly furnishes our brains with abstractions in order to relate to and work in the realm in which we exist. Biological entities are hard wired, essentially to commit such errors exactly because of this situation.

Recognizing Langer Epistemology Errors, with simultaneous recognition that what Albert Einstein created with his papers was logically correct, results in critically situationally aware thinking that may employ many tools, practices, techniques, and processes from information sciences in pursuit of other EIMs that are also logically correct. The almost 20 year systems review conducted by Charles C McGowen following Elegant Reasonism principles resulted in The Emergence Model. Unification was the furthest possible objective of that original systems review. Unification was discovered accidentally.

The original systems review dealt with impact dynamics on celestial bodies. There were many aspects of that which simply did not make sense in the traditional manners in which they were perceived.

Consequently McGowen employed a standards based approach to parse those dynamics. Unification was not even recognized when it was first written down. Recognition came a few years later and even then only on review. What happened next was almost instantaneous and that ‘Ah Ha!’ moment was the implication demanding investigations of the Big Bang. Once we could reflect what it was we thought we knew Bang to Bang, it was very patently obvious that the single science of physics was necessary but insufficient to bring everything together. That’s when the requirements of unification became a quest to comprehend the failures in philosophy and science that had obfuscated the traditional path.

That’s when it was recognized that unification had to be a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science, not after you were already in science.

Elegant Reasonism as an epistemology integrates and embraces the other traditional epistemologies (i.e. empiricism, rationalism, constructivism, etc.) statistically weighted relative to and respective of holistic truth sourced from the unified Universe. When we do that in the fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism, especially in context of Elegant Reasonism’s Decision Checkpoint Flowchart we begin to perceive everything around us in a different manner (e.g. context). The ‘Ah Ha!’ moments come so fast and furious that the feelings can only be described as ineffable.

Unification demands critical situationally aware thinking. That means we are aware of the fundamental context driving any given conversation. It means we have to have a mode shifted ‘Baloney Detection Kit’. [8] In the interim we suggest you watch In Unification’s Wake Series Part 05: Business ImpactPart 05: Business Impact on page 44.

Unification is nothing short of unified thinking about everything real.

46 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Accomplishing Unification Accomplishing unification was the result of an almost 20 year systems review into what it is we all thought we knew. In hindsight there are two types of investigations. One mode shifts what it is we think we know using Elegant Reasonism, as filed and holistically articulated, as part of an investigation into some given set of paradigms of interest/nature. The other is a specialized quest to determine a net new EIM and that is a beast of an entirely different character. These two types of investigations are two sides of the same coin. One can not just sit down and write one cogent paragraph that fully complies with unification requirements. That paragraph must be reverse engineered as a product of a comprehensive systems review and that’s why these two types of investigations have the relationships they do.

Mode shifting what it is we think we know inevitably begins with our own individual perceptions and paradigms exactly because they filter how we interpret evidence.

The quest for unification may be over but the real work lay ahead of us all. Again, in hindsight, it should have been obvious that unification required a much broader canvas than any single discipline of science in order to attain. The tapestry that is unification literally integrates everything real in the unified Universe and if one can not lay out a credible path to those real constructs then unification has not been attained. Now it seems patently obvious that expecting unification to come in the form of an equation is too simplistic. There must be credible manifestation of evidence chains linking everything real to the unified Universe and doing that requires a reintegration of philosophy and science.

47 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Experiments We have requested that the U.S. National Science Foundation address the need for a super-computing facility specifically to address R&D not just for industry but for science organizations with the specific mission to investigate Architectures of Mass. Given the mission and nature of these computational investigations such a system as envisioned would likely be an order of magnitude more powerful than Summit currently employed by ORNL where it routinely investigates hundreds of atoms. This new system must be able to render the unified Universe. The question is to what precision and accuracy.

Having made that point, there is much that organizations pursuing high energy particle physics can do in context of Elegant Reasonism employing The Emergence Model. We would also point out there is much we can learn about the architectures of photon from antenna design studies. The distinction is context as a function of The Emergence Model to the Electrical Engineering domains of discourse.

We do not believe calling out laboratories by name serves the common good. Everyone knows who and where they are. We are in hopes that we can help to weave common threads throughout not just the theoretical physics communities but throughout global enterprise so that we might more powerfully connect evidence chains relative to and respective of the unified Universe and the truth sought as a function of Elegant Reasonism.

48 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Executive Summary The Emergence Model solves problems, especially in science, available in no other way, but this EIM must be understood in the full holistic context of Elegant Reasonism. This EIM is the first such model to close to unification. Hopefully it is not the last. Time will tell. What has been accomplished here is as disruptive as it is epic. Those who think apathy or belligerence effective tools are likely going to wake to a bad situation at some point. We strongly suggest you do not allow an adversary to mode shift value out from under your enterprise. Your shareholders might not be to happy with you.

Systems Review Needed A comprehensive systems review is now needed to mode shift what it is we, as a civilization, think we know into alignment with the unified Universe. Existing efforts to create new experiments need to take a deep breath, pause, and reflect on how those endeavors might be better suited to illuminate and illustrate insights from the unified precipice. The In Unification’s Wake Series presentation Part 05: Business Impact on page 44 gets into many of the reasons global enterprises should embrace Elegant Reasonism with great intrepidity and sense of urgency. The salient point there is that the only defense against an adversary wielding Elegant Reasonism is you and your organization wielding it better and more effectively. Defend your existing assets and mode shift your insights as fast as you can. Prioritize and project manage your system reviews and business process reengineering efforts as appropriate.

Free Markets Embracing Elegant Reasonism These white papers, the website, and more materials are all online and available for free under SolREI’s General Use License so everyone everywhere may learn about what this all means to them at their own pace. A commercial license is only required when any of this is used in any axiological effort aiding revenue generation activities. Axiology is the philosophical study of value derivation and herein is in the context of the unified Universe. There is an important aspect to licensing that all business leaders should be aware of. Honesty is the best policy if for no other reasons than the Decision Checkpoint Flowchart illustrates Langer Epistemology Errors as a gating factor in gaining the precipice where the unified Universe may be perceived and engaged. Essentially what that means is that you can not start working with any of this in your business absent a commercial license from SolREI. It also means you can not change your business planning strategy without that commercial license exactly because the only way to perceive the need for that change is because of the body of work this EIM and the utility process which developed it (all of which requires a commercial license).

Perceiving & Engaging The Unified Universe No one has a crystal ball. Organizations who realize that action oriented effort will prosper.

Recognizing the larger tapestry all this represents will hone the edge you work to create in any domain of discourse or endeavor. There are many aspects to all of this requiring the attention of us all. It is our wish that Elegant Reasonism and The Emergence Model be wielded effectively but transformationally exactly because with great power comes great responsibility. Go forth, but do good. And when you can, pay something forward and invest in the future of strategic sustainability.

49 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

Bibliography 1: Acknowledgements, , , https://www.solrei.co/info/library/user-library/ 2: et al, , , https://www.solrei.co/corporate/ip/elegant-reasonism/patent-pending-16405134/ acknowledgements/ 3: Sagan, Carl, ,Cosmos, 1980,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmos_(Sagan_book) 4: Tanabashi, M; et al, ,Review of Particle Physics, 2018,https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10020536/ 5: Elert, Glenn, ,Quantum Chromodynamics, 1998,https://physics.info/qcd/practice.shtml 6: Nave, C.R. (ed), , , http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Particles/qrkdec.html 7: Thomas, A.W.; Weise, W., ,The Structure of the Nucleon, 2001, 8: Sagan, Carl, ,The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, 1997,

50 of 51

The_Emergence_Model_White_Paper_33

SOLREI INC 515 N Flagler Dr.,P300 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 https://www.solrei.co FAX: (772) 872-5300 Contact Us

51 of 51