Aut but not bitter

Bitter?  No, too early in the process to be bitter.
http://www.universetoday.com/131128/2016-nobel-prize-physics-complicated/
This raises the question not of gravity waves which are not the same as other movement, but movement in general
All of what we call movement is, by definition even to Kinder P, change relative to ct1 solutions.
Actual change (from one universe state to the next) is actual variation of the universe.  The choices for this variation are broadly:
1) Current universe made from stacking two prior universe (where's all the extra weight from this information?)
2) Current universe made from cycling each quantum state and increasing the amount of information by increasing x by 1 (while you don't have the weight problem, you also depart from the information solution)
3) A combination of 1 and 2 by having some but not all states stack
It could, of course the nobel prize announcement, be written at the last minute that I came forward and explained these other guys didn't even know what they are looking at, but all in good time, right?
Kinder P believed in the fantasy of balanced mathematics.  AuT believes in infinite converging series (actually knows the universe is powered by those, but we don't want to embarrass the nobel prize committee).  Kinder P believes in positive and negative energy (represented by matter and gravity being balanced) while AuT recognizes that there are alternating spirals but that gravity is only the effect of state change and matter is only the compressed information of space.
The "perfect balance" that Kinder P looks for in the universe is absent, but it's hidden in the high value of x and the resulting approach towards a solution that is never reached to curvature and equal parts positive and negative spiral convergence.
One way of dealing with item 1 which is the suggested approach is to ignore the stacking of all information and instead only stack new information.
Looked at another way:
x
x
xx
xxx
xxxxx
is the appearance of true F-series history.  At values of x that we experience the next value of x is very high.  But you can also have a change reflected this way:
x                             x xx xxx
xx                           xx xxxx xxxxxx
xxx                        xxx xxxxxx  xxx.xxx.xxx
and so on.  In this way, x is only increasing by 1 on the stacking state (the left hand column), even though the total amount of information is growing exponentially.
What we experience directly is reflected by the increase in x by 1 while indirectly the amount of information is stacking up and increasing according to the F-series.
It is also possible that the stacking of the universes only occurs at inflection points.
This is one of the more important concepts because history in a quantum universe requires that stacking occur of history would be invisible, but how it is stacked is critical.
One suggestion is that only space is stacked.  Space occupies an important place because we know that movement is accomplished only relative to this state of information even though all other forms of information arise from this one.
There is an answer, but apparently no one is giving me the nobel prize this year, they're giving it to people chasing bozos and misconceptions.  That's ok, they really don't have a choice.