##### Introduction

One outstanding problem currently facing Physics is how to combine Quantum Theory with General Relativity. This is the backdrop for the book “Gravity” by Brian Clegg in which he explains that any theory to relate the two must include quantum gravity. He considers the reasoning behind an assumed relationship with gravity is that if our universe was once condensed down to a single point, around the time of the Big Bang, gravity was also. If the three other forces, the strong nuclear, weak nuclear and electromagnetic force were also united with gravity, it could offer a

square of the radius. As you get nearer to the singularity it shoots up to infinity and the singularity itself should be infinite and physics as we know it breaks down“ (p. 189). The problem may first lie in accepting the concept of an infinite singularity, as the two words seem in complete opposition. How does one look for an infinite singularity?

Theory of Everything (Francis). Clegg describes the problem impeding the unification is that “The gravitational force at the singularity grows with the inverse

It would be hard to imagine a more fundamental starting point for that search and tangible theory of quantum gravity than the numbers we use for measurement. Primes may be vital in leading us toward answers. Linearly, 99.3% of primes from 5-881 (the extent I’ve physically drawn out) occur with a partner and follow an A + C= 2B formula. This is excluding 2 & 3 as they are the only consecutive primes (Wikipedia).

Below, the number line A) shows arches connecting the discovered prime partners B). Their placement is a result of the discovered palindromic code embedded in our number line C). The palindromic code is quantized into Base Code Segments D), which follow the same A + C = 2B formula. (Fig. A).

Regardless of the unit we’re measuring with, Plank lengths or parsecs, prime and composite quantities retain the relationships seen in the image because they appear to be inherently woven into the nature of spacetime itself. The palindromic code embedded in prime and composite quantities seems to offer individual ‘packets’ or quanta of spacetime (referred to here as Base Code Segments). It is the center point of these base code segments (BCS) that seem to reflect properties of quantum gravity, in this case, by attracting symmetric primes to itself. Since these relationships are not visible between objects, it stands to reason this would be occurring on a quantum level.

Anywhere a distance exists, these predetermined relationships between primes and composites would also, regardless if we decide to or are able to measure them or not. Euclid and a number of others have offered proofs that primes are infinite and in so, the number line would be as well (Caldwell). That being the case, on the edge of the infinite there is no stable outside point in which to measure to, still, the relationships exist even when that outside point is yet to be determined. The meanings behind this apparent quantization of spacetime could prove to be vast and to understate it, quite exciting. The palindromic code is shown continuing into the millions above. The first BCS has a prime center point (Fig. B).

The BCS evolve when primes are pushed together or compacted, changing the geometry of the linear number line by forcing all consecutive composites into a vertical position the y-axis (Fig. C ). This offers a better visual presentation of the symmetry created by the palindromic code and indiviualizes the BCS.

By circling the vertical groups of consecutive composites as radii, the geometry produced by the code becomes evident (Fig. D). Some BCS, like center point 9 consist of an individual radius. Others like center point 30 consist of multiple radii, involving pairs or multiple pairs of symmetric radii.

The circled radii are referred to as given geometry, verses the implied geometry coming up. Sometimes, only 1 composite will occur between primes, these are know as Twin Primes (Wikipedia). Because the composite between them doesn’t have a raised radius, its geometry is not shown here. Twin primes form each 111 code segment. For any odd quantity of numbers on the number line, their average is the center point, or median number (Dictionary. com). BCS are no different. The prime, composite and total averages all equal the center point number and each radius average is its median. In center point 30, the torus theme surfaces, implying a 3D structure.

There are a number of theories regarding quantum gravity. One in particular may be describing the spacetime of Base Code Statements (BCS). Clegg states that “In Loop Quantum Gravity space and time are quantized, broken down into “digital” units… Space becomes a construct of special atoms, not physical objects but the logical components of space. These atoms of space act as if they were a loop of 1D material” (p. 200). Could the implied dimension be holographic? Carlo Rovelli states in relation to LQG: “The passage of time is internal to the world, it is born of the world itself between quantum events that comprise the world and are themselves the source of time.”

The symmetry of BCS predetermines a reflected copy of the beginning code at the end. What that means for distance, measurement or time gets tricky. Using center point 30 as an example, from a linear perspective, 13 had to ‘know’ what 47’s plan was and vice versa, otherwise the symmetry would likely not exist. This implies the other 33 numbers in between had to ‘know’ what they were to do as well. It seems the numeric symmetry, geometry and algebra would be planned from 30 into the past to 13 and then into the future to 47. From a linear view, that would mean that 30 would have to exist before it was created, another chicken or the egg paradox. The intricacies of quantum particle mass are broad, number 30 has no mass yet it still pulls primes to it as if has a gravity well. Could this be the result of quantum gravity at each center point? Might it even affect the handedness of particles?

I’m eager to see how our current view of time and past, present and future evolves with further insight into this. It seems there would have to be some degree of coexistence between the three for BCS to exist. Just as DNA screening can tell us if we’re predetermined to – in the future – have cancer, could the relationships between two points, objects, or even people also have a certain degree of predetermination? Their existence detracts nearly all meaning from words like random, uncertainty or chaos to describe any part of our world, visible or otherwise. For clarity, I’m not implying we have no free will but that the situations we express our free will in are likely part of a larger reality we’re just beginning to touch the surface of.

There are formulas and algorithms regarding some primes patterns but it seems, nothing comprehensive. An online site called Independent had a recent article about primes. In it, they said “Their properties have baffled number theorists for centuries, but mathematicians have usually felt safe working on the assumption they could treat primes as if they occur randomly. … After devising a computer program to search for the first 400 billion primes, mathematicians found prime numbers tend to avoid having the same last digit as their immediate predecessor.” It was titled “Math Experts Stunned as They Crack a Pattern of Prime Numbers” (Lusher). I imagine they will be interested in this. There are a number of articles hoping for a connection between prime numbers and general relativity and it seems this might be it, just a step further.

The rare prime asymmetry as center points may pique some interest in regards to the creation of the universe. It is a widely accepted view there has to be asymmetry between quantities of matter and anti matter particles or our universe wouldn’t exist because even quantities of the two would annihilate each other (Cern). The asymmetry here presents on the rare occasion a prime occurs as a center point. Excluding 2 & 3, out of the 150 primes to 881 this happens once linearly (.7% of the time in that range). That code segment is duplicated in another area. BCS may challenge the meaning of a prime number because they are repeated identically into the negatives. One accepted view is that primes cannot be negative, another is that “in a sense, negatives represent the same prime” (Caldwell). If you could consider the positive and negative aspect as charge, this offers what might be conceptualized as potential matter/antimatter particle pairs.

For those expecting more in the way of equations and proofs, I apologize but have no formal background in these areas. I will attempt to offer a few axioms below.

1) There is a **palindromic code** embedded in our number line consisting of prime and composite quantities.

2) This code can be individualized into segments based on the symmetry of prime and composite quantities relative to a center point. These are referred to as Base Code Segments (BCS).

3) The vast majority of primes occur as **prime partners**, in tandem relationships with a symmetric partner relative to a center point. (It’s possible prime partners demonstrate quantum entanglement and may be the cause of Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance” (MIT).

4) Each pair of prime partners within a BCS will adhere to the **A + C = 2B **formula, as will the composites (**Fig. E**). (The A + C = 2B formula surrounds every number (6+8= 14, B=7) so the symmetric composites outside of the BCS will infinitely continue to follow the formula – even into the negatives.)

5) Prime Partners relate to center points from the **outside, in (Fig. E)**.

6) The vast majority of BCS begin and end with **threshold prime partners** the numerical boundary of coded prime symmetry belonging to that segment.

7) The threshold primes act both as an **Alpha and Omega** for each BCS. They are both the end of one BCS and the beginning of another, each are used twice. (5 is one exception to this.)

8) The median number of each BCS is the **center point** or axis of prime and composite symmetry.

9) Once orthogonal, consecutive composites can function geometrically, as radii.

10) A BCS can consist of a single radius or have multiple radii.

11) There are **only odd quantities of consecutive composites** between primes (**Fig. F**). (Except 2 and 3.)

12) While this doesn’t allow prime prediction, it cuts the numbers to be prime checked down as all primes are separated by an odd number of consecutive composites. This includes center point primes.

13) As **primes become less frequent** ascending up the number line, consecutive composite radii become larger (Rooney p.48).

14) Combining radii may relate to the inverse square law (Fig. F).

15) For **radii to manifebst** it seems the number line (spacetime) or at least each individual quanta of space time (BCS) would be under the influence of movement, acceleration or centripetal force.

16) From 5 to 881 there are 77 pieces of Geometry but only 28 different BCS are used. Of those 28 pieces, 11, or 39% of them are duplicated at least once in that range. If the search for duplicates is extended to 2000, 21 of the 28 or **75 percent are duplicated** and only 7 remain unique. It’s likely if the search were extended, that number would drop again. 0-4 will be addressed in the future.

17) At least 5 methods of **Error Correction** are built into each BCS.

- The mirror symmetry of the palindromic code
- The Geometry
- The formula, solidified by
- The threshold primes, confirmed to be the last primes belonging to the segment in that
- The next external primes on each side are un-symmetric to the center point and do not follow the formula.

18) Any patterns within the **sequencing of the BCS** remain unclear.

19) From a 3D perspective looking into the **x-axis**, the once linear BCS are organized into concentric circles.

Still excluding 2 and 3, primes occur individually, similar to particles. However, prime partners behave as waves in relation to their center point. From that perspective, the waves from Fig. A form a horn torus around center point 30 (**Fig. G**). What appear to be individual styles of a torus (ring, spindle, horn and tube) may only be bi-products of perspective with the torus in rotation. Center point 30 below contains the geometry of Fig. G when it is rotated just past 90°, placing the two smallest end circles next to each other in the center (Fig. H ). At 90° in that rotation it would appear as concentric circles (or nested ring tori). It also contains the spindle tori and when rotated, would appear as a tube torus from the top. The implied geometry found by continuing to circling two symmetric circles creates what could be considered as fractal copies of BCS. This may relate to Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

It seems possible that the numeric relationships composing our number line (as spacetime) may, at the very least, contribute to the four forces of nature. The radii of the compacted number line and the un-compacted number line might relate to the strong and weak nuclear forces respectively, possibly even constituting them as quantum fluctuations of spacetime itself, as the radii transition (**Fig. H**). Could particle exchange be occurring as the prime compaction causes conservation of momentum to create radii of composites? If so, could the particles carrying these forces actually be emitted quanta from that spacetime fluctuation, similar to rain from a cloud? The toric geometry provided by the radii has potential as the foundation of electromagnetic force and may relate to photon wavelengths.

The concentric circles seen when looking into the x-axis may be an incredible perspective of the quantum gravity holding spacetime together, a highly ordered unit with the compilation of all 4 forces into a quantum channel (with properties of a Lorentz Transformation (Fig. I). In the smallest visible ring at the center of this perspective, just prior to the door of the infinite singularity, are twin primes. Even without yet seeing the infinite singularity itself, when this unit of concentric circles is rotated 90° it reveals the linear number line geometry, formerly stacked behind each other, stretching out to infinity. In this case, the transition from the linear number line to concentric circles (the side view of 3D spheres) may suggest wave particle duality as a product of the observer’s frame of reference. This view into the x-axis seems to re-emphasize gravity as a property of spacetime, could though the center points be the theoretical gravitons responsible for this property? The outermost layer of concentric circles continues to grow infinitely as a result of increasing radii heights and may relate to universal expansion. Further work I’ve produced suggests the singularity at the center of the channel houses the vacuum of space, zero point energy (including a sink) and instead of breaking down, spacetime (and the patterns with it) fold neatly together. This will be another paper. What I have provided isn’t exhaustive, but a good introduction.

A portion of the repeating multi-radius BCS are shown in matching colors in **Fig. J**. All of the individual radii BCS repeat. BCS are akin to throwing a handful of sand in the air and it landing as a sandcastle. This order couldn’t happen if primes were random. The fact that 75% of the BCS from 5-881 repeat at least once by 2000 is like throwing more sand and it landing as geometric duplicates of the first sandcastle. Clearly, the palindromic code is not accidental and it seems some form of intelligence and/or intentional planning and design must be involved. It’s in this vein the potential of Cymatics may come into play. If there’s a scientific reason for these patterns – which I’m nearly positive there is – it doesn’t mean that reason can’t also be God. The coding seems to support Einstein’s statement that “God doesn’t play dice” (Boor). **Fig. K** is the given geometry of the three blue BCS to the right, their palindromic code is 1 5 1 3 1 5 1. The surface areas of the spheres are seen at in relation to pi and possible fractalization in** Fig. L**. Below, the 4 Forces are shown in **Fig. M** and a look into the vortex is offered in **Fig. N**.

My experience leading up to this information ties into the past, present, future aspect. If I hadn’t experienced it myself, I’d likely find it hard to believe but some may wonder how I produced this and if I said anything else, I’d be lying. In July of 2013 I became extremely ill to the degree I had to leave my job and move in with someone for help. A week before moving in, I walked into what would become my room and realized the exact scene was shown to me in a dream about 30 years prior, when I was 7 or 8, 2000 miles away. One would think I could have made a million decisions that would have landed me somewhere else. It was truly shocking. I continued to get sicker and had a near death experience. Following it, I remembered seeing patterns on the multiplication table as a kid and began to retrace them. My worst subject had always been Math and according to any information on prime gaps, I still approach counting differently, which led me to this. Retracing what I’d seen, I learned prime numbers weren’t on the multiplication table as products of other numbers outside of 1 and themselves and started looking for their patterns (Wikipedia). Prior to this I didn’t know or honestly care what a prime was. In March of 2014 I began producing this information in the room from the dream. In High School I also had a dream about the Geometry and Physics of it. I was in absolute awe when I first pulled back and saw what was under my pencil. I tried to keep it very pure and did little research initially. Someone I shared it with early on pointed out that a man named Matthew Jarvis comes close to the prime aspect of this approach geometrically. (7 pieces related to this have been registered between 2014 and 2016 with the US Copyright Office, Department of the Library of Congress.)

There are many areas of study this would find footing in. The obvious in Physics and Mathematics are Special and General Relativity and Quantum Physics, Quantum Field Theory and Number Theory. Cosmology, CPT Symmetry, Higgs Field, Kaluza-Klein States, Holography and Moiré Patterns would be relevant. As are, Gauge Theory and Lie groups, Zeta Function and Yang-Mills Theory. Coding, Programming, Encryption and Quantum Error Correction are other areas. Fields dealing with genetics or dyslexia might also find this of use. Those studying music, Cymatics, Sacred Geometry or the Flower of Life (Fig. O) may also find this applicable.

My purpose behind sharing this isn’t to claim I have provided the Theory of Everything. It will take the work of many people, equations and proofs before that can be determined. The calculus of the given geometry will provide much insight. My purpose is to provide this organic starting point as an extremely suitable foundation, one we would be remiss to disregard. This format isn’t comparable to what most in the fields it encompasses would generally entertain but the audience is broad. Many of the questions and undefined words are there to relate the work to, not define the subjects. When proven, this will likely aid advances in many areas but it has a bigger purpose too.

This is intended to bring us together. It belongs to everyone – as people (not as employees) – and is something that should be used for collaboration and not competition. We all need to know this exists and most importantly, that every one of us is a necessary part of it. Not because of a discovery you may make surrounding it but because, inherently, you always have been. This is sacred. It is part of each one of us and interconnects us all. Any contributions you may make toward this are your gifts to give and should be treated accordingly. This is bigger than money. Use it creatively and selflessly with humility. Find ways to use it to clean the environment, to feed people, to find cures, to make art and music, to unify. We are all infinite singularities in an infinite singularity. I hope this helps open the doors of our perceived separations that prevent us from knowing and consciously living in that truth.

It’s exactly these types of work that require an anti-disciplinary approach. While this is work centers on prime number patterns, it emphasizes the need for cumulative perspectives in a profound manner. Thank you MIT Media Lab for this forum. I look forward to seeing what comes of this. I want to thank Marilyn Wellfonder for her unwavering encouragement of my pursuit in this. Thank you for reading.

**WORKS CITED **

Clegg, Brian. “Gravity.” (New York, St. Martin’s Press, 2012) p. 189, p. 200

Francis, Matthew R. “All four one and one for all” 6/21/16. Symmetry Magazine. A joint Fermilab/SLAC publication. US Department of Energy, Office of Science. http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/all-four-one-and-one-for-all

Wikipedia. “Palindrome” Wikimedia Foundation Inc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palindrome.

Caldwell, Professor Chris K. *“*Euclid’s Proof of the Infinitude of Primes (c. 300 BC)” *The Prime Pages, **https://primes.utm.edu/notes/proofs/infinite/**,*. The University of Tennessee at Martin, ©1994-2016.

Wikipedia. “Twin Primes” Wikimedia Foundation Inc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_prime. Dictionary.com. “Median” 2016 Dictionary.com LLC. www.dictionary.com/browse/**median**** **

Rovelli, Carlo. “Carlo Rovelli Quotes” Seven Brief Lessons on Physics. *Goodreads Inc. 2016 **http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/108952.Carlo_Rovelli?page=2** *

Lusher, Adam. “Math Experts Stunned as They Crack A Pattern of Prime Numbers” Independent, March 15, 2016. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/maths-experts-stunned-as-they-crack-a-pattern-for-prime-numbers a6933156.html.

Cern. “Matter/antimatter asymmetry | Media and Press Relations – Cern”

https://press.cern/backgrounders/matterantimatter-**asymmetry**** **

Caldwell, Professor Chris K. “Can negative numbers be prime?” The Prime Pages,

https://primes.utm.edu/notes/faq/negative_primes.html, The University of Tennessee at Martin, ©1994-2016.

MIT Technology Review. “Einstein’s “Spooky Action at a Distance” Paradox older Than Thought.” 3-8-12 Emerging Technology from the arXiv

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/427174/einsteins-spooky-action-at-a-distance-paradox-older-than-thought/

Rooney, Anne. “The History of Mathematics.” (New York, The Rosen Publishing Group Inc., 2013) p. 48

Boor, Marina. “Physics and Beyond: “God does not play dice,” What did Einstein Mean?” Saint Mary’s University, Twickenham London, Sept 1, 2014. http://www.stmarys.ac.uk/news/news/ug-applied-physics/2014/09/physics beyond-god-play-dice-einstein-mean/.

Wikipedia. “Prime Number,” Wikimedia Foundation Inc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number.