A few years ago (okay, about 10) I was reading a theoretical paper in which it had been claculated that if a photon of energy E, with a wavelength of L can be converted into a close looped toroid (which because of the topography is actually a double-toroid) of toroidal circumference L (such that the self-propogating nature of the photon EM wave results in a continual following of the same toroidal path), then the resultant electromagnetic properties of this structure match those of an electron almost perfectly.
The paper can be found here (http://members.chello.nl/~n.benschop/electron.pdf)
This paper uses a semmi-classical model of a photon.
What I am trying to find (without necessarily spending days web-surfing) is if anyone knows of any recent work in semi-classical mechanics, that may have advanced that model into a potential contender with quantum mechanics (or has it died).
Yes, it seems yes - but electron it's not formed by photon probably - but rather some quantum state of the supergravity wave. No known bosone can serve as both the source, both the interaction particle - with exception of (super)gravitone.
If you're spreading a wave onto water surface, you have to use source formed by the more basic sound/EMG/gravity interaction (like paddle, or something simmilar..). Therefore the electron as the photon source cannot be formed itself by the photonic wave alone.
There is another reason, because of electron isn't just source of EMG charge, but the source of leptonic charge, too (like the neutrinos, and other heavier particles) - and this leptonic charge is emananted to short distance using the weak interraction bosones, not photones.
If you're spreading a wave onto water surface, you have to use source formed by the more basic sound/EMG/gravity interaction (like paddle, or something simmilar..). Therefore the electron as the photon source cannot be formed itself by the photonic wave alone.
There is another reason, because of electron isn't just source of EMG charge, but the source of leptonic charge, too (like the neutrinos, and other heavier particles) - and this leptonic charge is emananted to short distance using the weak interraction bosones, not photones.
Electrons and photons are very siimlar but differ by mass. Both interact through distance and time (wavelength and frequency) and both are particles and waves. The electron has finite mass while the photon has zero mass. The finite mass of the electron allows the electron, through e=mc2, to give off a wide range of photons, as long as their summation energy does not exceed its mass equilvilent. It mass also allows it to have variable speed given even further range to its variety. The photon, being without mass and having a finite speed has little variety, unless one counts changes within relativistic reference changing its color.
QUOTE (MDT+Sep 3 2005, 04:51 PM)
...Electrons and photons are very siimlar but differ by mass....
OK, but there is a "weak" problem: the electron poses not just to electromagnetic force, but a weak nuclear force, too. If the weak force would be derived form the photon, as the rest of electron supposedly is, then the weak charge has to interract with photons too..
Unfortunatelly, this is not very true (the neutrino cannot be trapped using the EMG field) - so that we have to elucidate the hiearchical relationship between the gravity, weak and the strong EMG force now, because it'seems here it is a whole set of short-distance dimensions, which aren't influenced by the light (i.e. "hidden world").
And it seems, both the weak, both the strong EMG interactions are being derived from the (super)gravitational force (compare to GUT family of theories). Thus its evident, that electron contains not just only the "photonic force part" - but some of the "gravity force part", which forms the weak interaction - i.e. weak from practical point of view - but very important from the theoretical one. Therefore, the electron isn't formed by the photon interaction only.
By the way, the very similar mistake have done the geometrodynamic theory at the end of 60's and Quantum Loop Gravity theory, suggesting the photonic origin of Aether/vaccuo.
Although it's possible to consider the virtual particles of Aether to be photonic and the resulting model is rather elegant and simple, it's structure is a little bit intricated (but no so far, in fact...) due to existence of weak nuclear force (and its EMG-coupled derivate, i.e. strong nuclear force). By the way, it has a deep cosmological consequences, for example - the light and it's spacetime metric weren't exist here from the very beginning of the universe, but only after the so called "inflation period", during this the part of dimension compactification has came through.
So I suppose, the real nature of Aether/photon/electron, etc. is gravitational. But why, my goddness - if i'ts well known, that gravity is so weak force? Well, M-theory has the answer: on the scale of compactified dimensions it isn't - but here the gravity is trully dominanting.
OK, but there is a "weak" problem: the electron poses not just to electromagnetic force, but a weak nuclear force, too. If the weak force would be derived form the photon, as the rest of electron supposedly is, then the weak charge has to interract with photons too..
Unfortunatelly, this is not very true (the neutrino cannot be trapped using the EMG field) - so that we have to elucidate the hiearchical relationship between the gravity, weak and the strong EMG force now, because it'seems here it is a whole set of short-distance dimensions, which aren't influenced by the light (i.e. "hidden world").
And it seems, both the weak, both the strong EMG interactions are being derived from the (super)gravitational force (compare to GUT family of theories). Thus its evident, that electron contains not just only the "photonic force part" - but some of the "gravity force part", which forms the weak interaction - i.e. weak from practical point of view - but very important from the theoretical one. Therefore, the electron isn't formed by the photon interaction only.
By the way, the very similar mistake have done the geometrodynamic theory at the end of 60's and Quantum Loop Gravity theory, suggesting the photonic origin of Aether/vaccuo.
Although it's possible to consider the virtual particles of Aether to be photonic and the resulting model is rather elegant and simple, it's structure is a little bit intricated (but no so far, in fact...) due to existence of weak nuclear force (and its EMG-coupled derivate, i.e. strong nuclear force). By the way, it has a deep cosmological consequences, for example - the light and it's spacetime metric weren't exist here from the very beginning of the universe, but only after the so called "inflation period", during this the part of dimension compactification has came through.
So I suppose, the real nature of Aether/photon/electron, etc. is gravitational. But why, my goddness - if i'ts well known, that gravity is so weak force? Well, M-theory has the answer: on the scale of compactified dimensions it isn't - but here the gravity is trully dominanting.
Hi Apeman et al,
That is a BRILLIANT paper on the topological equivalence of the electron and the photon. The ONLY changes that would be possible for that would be the addition of extra dimensions to make it "String Theory" compatible. It is rather long but it is intelligible and shows true imagination.
Actually I have been looking for just such an idea for a long time. Thank you very much... I will look into it and evaluate it carefully.
Thanks once again.
Cheers
That is a BRILLIANT paper on the topological equivalence of the electron and the photon. The ONLY changes that would be possible for that would be the addition of extra dimensions to make it "String Theory" compatible. It is rather long but it is intelligible and shows true imagination.
Actually I have been looking for just such an idea for a long time. Thank you very much... I will look into it and evaluate it carefully.
Thanks once again.
Cheers
QUOTE (Good Elf+Sep 4 2005, 12:52 PM)
The ONLY changes that would be possible for that would be the addition of extra dimensions to make it "String Theory" compatible.
I understand your euphoria - but unfortunatelly "the addition of extra dimensions " is a very strong concept - without this the TOE would be called the Wheller's electrodynamic theory now....
The superstring theory dualities covers this model completelly - its evident, if we replace the double helix duality in it's core by the simple one, well obtain the semiclassical "photon" model of electron, too. But using a just a three dimesion of space it isn't possible to simply explain a such of "details" as a photon spin using the tranversal wave spreading model and the electron symmetry with respect to it's spin transform (720 deg), too.
In brief, the semmi-classical photonic model of electron correponds the reality in some aspect, but i'ts too simplistic, because it explains only part of it's properties. It's good to understand its strength and weakness, too.
I understand your euphoria - but unfortunatelly "the addition of extra dimensions " is a very strong concept - without this the TOE would be called the Wheller's electrodynamic theory now....
The superstring theory dualities covers this model completelly - its evident, if we replace the double helix duality in it's core by the simple one, well obtain the semiclassical "photon" model of electron, too. But using a just a three dimesion of space it isn't possible to simply explain a such of "details" as a photon spin using the tranversal wave spreading model and the electron symmetry with respect to it's spin transform (720 deg), too.
In brief, the semmi-classical photonic model of electron correponds the reality in some aspect, but i'ts too simplistic, because it explains only part of it's properties. It's good to understand its strength and weakness, too.
Using this simplistic electron-photon model the difference is mass. The mass is where the weak nuclear force and charge has association. The photon being without mass and charge does not have weak nuclear force association.
In this simple particle model, distance and time are called distance potential and time potential. Distance potential is more than just distance; it is the summation of all phenomena that use distance to express themselves. The photon is confined to spin and wavelengh and the speed of light to express distance potential. While the electron mass (kinetic energy) weak nuclear force, EM force, Gravity, charge, entropy, etc., Any purtubations that lowers any of these aspects of electron distance potential will ceates photons. The specific change within electron distance potential defines the photon wavelength.
If we stripped the electron of all its distance potential to a ground state, it would lose entropy, force connection, charge, kinetic energy, etc., to become a clump of matter with spin but no velocity or charge. This electron ground state will only differ from photons because of electron mass and photon speed of light. The distance potential of photons is limited in expression but neverthless is associated with electron diversity through the electron's distance potential diversity.
In this simple particle model, distance and time are called distance potential and time potential. Distance potential is more than just distance; it is the summation of all phenomena that use distance to express themselves. The photon is confined to spin and wavelengh and the speed of light to express distance potential. While the electron mass (kinetic energy) weak nuclear force, EM force, Gravity, charge, entropy, etc., Any purtubations that lowers any of these aspects of electron distance potential will ceates photons. The specific change within electron distance potential defines the photon wavelength.
If we stripped the electron of all its distance potential to a ground state, it would lose entropy, force connection, charge, kinetic energy, etc., to become a clump of matter with spin but no velocity or charge. This electron ground state will only differ from photons because of electron mass and photon speed of light. The distance potential of photons is limited in expression but neverthless is associated with electron diversity through the electron's distance potential diversity.
Hi Zephir and ApeMan,
I quite understand the limitation. This topological "twist" is just the idea I have been looking for. The spin problem is "nothing" and is easy to remedy in extra dimensions. This also seems to solve the idea of three complex spacial spin. This can be "exactly" modeled. The mobius strip is a wonderful thing and the way it preserves and "exposes" the charge is a brilliant insight. When you say "The superstring theory dualities covers this model completely" I am not so sure that has been fully exploited. No offence... I do not see the "double helix" symmetry, especially all that supercoiling stuff but I am well aware of the mobius strip analogy of the electric and magnetic field and the way the "charge" maps to the surface of the particle for all phase. The simplicity appeals and it is suggestive of impressed spin. I see it fitting my geometrodynamic model better than it fits other "particle" theories. Clearly what is seen in these models will only work in higher dimensions especially when you take into account the property of spin.
What is gravity?, What is gravity "made of"? .... GoodElf
This discussion is the way to attach topologically this idea to a fully comprehensive overall idea. Obviously not "together" yet but it is a way through I think. That is barring any really big problems.
It is also brilliant for the explanation of "intrinsic" de Broglie Wavelength of a particle. I guess that would be almost inevitable for any paper published in "Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie". Nothing in the Universe addresses "everything" but this goes most of the way toward resolving all the major outstanding issues other than spin and the real meaning of charge itself. It is a kind of topological soliton utilizing higher curvature of spacetime than is usually possible in conventional 3D + T "bulk". This "solution" strongly constrains any model and might even uniquely determine some of these systems... I am not sure but it is a very valuable contribution. These are dielectric "cavities".... resonant cavities if you will. Stroke of genius. These are now able to be dealt with as "plumbing". It would be interesting to see how these "fields" are able to be simulated. This is geometry,charge, spin and spacetime. It is possible to work with this.
The maths is a "relative" doddle. I like that in maths. It shows great simplicity and this is also a very good sign. The way it observes charge conservation principles is "no accident". I just wonder why this has not become well known... ApeMan where did you come to hear of this "wonder"? I never saw it about anywhere... it certainly got past me. J.G. Williamson and M.B. van der Mark are brilliant and they must have a place in the overall picture in the end.
It also makes us all think about internal geometry with a number of different systems. For instance ball lightning created from these dielectric cavities.
Cheers
I quite understand the limitation. This topological "twist" is just the idea I have been looking for. The spin problem is "nothing" and is easy to remedy in extra dimensions. This also seems to solve the idea of three complex spacial spin. This can be "exactly" modeled. The mobius strip is a wonderful thing and the way it preserves and "exposes" the charge is a brilliant insight. When you say "The superstring theory dualities covers this model completely" I am not so sure that has been fully exploited. No offence... I do not see the "double helix" symmetry, especially all that supercoiling stuff but I am well aware of the mobius strip analogy of the electric and magnetic field and the way the "charge" maps to the surface of the particle for all phase. The simplicity appeals and it is suggestive of impressed spin. I see it fitting my geometrodynamic model better than it fits other "particle" theories. Clearly what is seen in these models will only work in higher dimensions especially when you take into account the property of spin.
What is gravity?, What is gravity "made of"? .... GoodElf
This discussion is the way to attach topologically this idea to a fully comprehensive overall idea. Obviously not "together" yet but it is a way through I think. That is barring any really big problems.
It is also brilliant for the explanation of "intrinsic" de Broglie Wavelength of a particle. I guess that would be almost inevitable for any paper published in "Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie". Nothing in the Universe addresses "everything" but this goes most of the way toward resolving all the major outstanding issues other than spin and the real meaning of charge itself. It is a kind of topological soliton utilizing higher curvature of spacetime than is usually possible in conventional 3D + T "bulk". This "solution" strongly constrains any model and might even uniquely determine some of these systems... I am not sure but it is a very valuable contribution. These are dielectric "cavities".... resonant cavities if you will. Stroke of genius. These are now able to be dealt with as "plumbing". It would be interesting to see how these "fields" are able to be simulated. This is geometry,charge, spin and spacetime. It is possible to work with this.
The maths is a "relative" doddle. I like that in maths. It shows great simplicity and this is also a very good sign. The way it observes charge conservation principles is "no accident". I just wonder why this has not become well known... ApeMan where did you come to hear of this "wonder"? I never saw it about anywhere... it certainly got past me. J.G. Williamson and M.B. van der Mark are brilliant and they must have a place in the overall picture in the end.
It also makes us all think about internal geometry with a number of different systems. For instance ball lightning created from these dielectric cavities.
Cheers
QUOTE (Good Elf+Sep 4 2005, 03:29 PM)
I am well aware of the mobius strip analogy of the electric and magnetic field and the way the "charge" maps to the surface of the particle for all phase
This is what I am talking about - it's a quite difficult the explain the transversal rotation of photon (i.e. "spin") without intruducing a hidden dimension space, in which the the spin momentum persists. 3D elastic Minkowski elastic space model is flat and doesn't support this kind of torsion vibration.
So the basic question isn't "why the electron can be described as the mobius photonic strip" but such as "why photonic wave can be decribed as the mobius strip".
This is what I am talking about - it's a quite difficult the explain the transversal rotation of photon (i.e. "spin") without intruducing a hidden dimension space, in which the the spin momentum persists. 3D elastic Minkowski elastic space model is flat and doesn't support this kind of torsion vibration.
So the basic question isn't "why the electron can be described as the mobius photonic strip" but such as "why photonic wave can be decribed as the mobius strip".
QUOTE (Good Elf+Sep 4 2005, 03:29 PM)
..ball lightning created from these dielectric cavities...
It's a little a bit far from the scope od current discussion, but concerning the ball lightning i would prefer the Rydberg's atom hypothesis supported the London kohesion interraction.
Look at its color.
It's a little a bit far from the scope od current discussion, but concerning the ball lightning i would prefer the Rydberg's atom hypothesis supported the London kohesion interraction.
Look at its color.
Good Elf et al,
I must admit that much of the discussion is beyond me at the moment. It has been quite a few years since I was deep in the intricacies of particle physics. But then again I have been working in a law enforcement environment, as opposed to workin in research, for the past decade. Three little kids can also seriously eat into your reading time...
To answer though, I was at a pub with some of the mates I'd gone through Uni with, and the old Head of Physical Sciences rocked up. He recalled that a couple of us had expressed an interest in some of the papers he'd shown us on semi-classical mechanics, and pulled this one out of his briefcase. I never got a copy and only recently found out where it came from.
It cam to mind when I was considering current theories and alternatives, and I recalled this paper. Glad it helps. Perhps it never got a great deal of circulation outside of those interested in semi-classical mechanics. I certainly thought it deserved a wider audience, and to be honest I thought it had gotten one.
As an aside, anyone ever gotten used to mucking around with their kids, and feeling superior 'cos it's so easy, and then you get into a mock fight with one of your mates, and suddenly realise how far out of condition you are? Often it prompts you back to the gym or training... Well, Zephir, since I can understand about 10% of what you write (10 years is a long time in particle physics) I am getting renewed determination to bone up on the basics and get back into the stuff that used to fire me up about quantum mechanics and particle theory. So thanks.
I must admit that much of the discussion is beyond me at the moment. It has been quite a few years since I was deep in the intricacies of particle physics. But then again I have been working in a law enforcement environment, as opposed to workin in research, for the past decade. Three little kids can also seriously eat into your reading time...
To answer though, I was at a pub with some of the mates I'd gone through Uni with, and the old Head of Physical Sciences rocked up. He recalled that a couple of us had expressed an interest in some of the papers he'd shown us on semi-classical mechanics, and pulled this one out of his briefcase. I never got a copy and only recently found out where it came from.
It cam to mind when I was considering current theories and alternatives, and I recalled this paper. Glad it helps. Perhps it never got a great deal of circulation outside of those interested in semi-classical mechanics. I certainly thought it deserved a wider audience, and to be honest I thought it had gotten one.
As an aside, anyone ever gotten used to mucking around with their kids, and feeling superior 'cos it's so easy, and then you get into a mock fight with one of your mates, and suddenly realise how far out of condition you are? Often it prompts you back to the gym or training... Well, Zephir, since I can understand about 10% of what you write (10 years is a long time in particle physics) I am getting renewed determination to bone up on the basics and get back into the stuff that used to fire me up about quantum mechanics and particle theory. So thanks.
Hi ApeMan and Zephir,
Thanks for that ApeMan. It seems to me that it has not enjoyed the respect it deserves. It needs extra dimensions to spin in. As to Zephir's question... I am still thinking about the last statement. It is quite a difficult one to satisfy... why? Ouch!
It goes along the lines of the photon being a type I Superstring. These can form loops naturally. The trick is this "brane" (the "thicker" form of it) needs to transform from a "tube" (sort of like the photon like Zephyr's picture above) to a "sphere" (electron) through "self-interaction". But we already know this needs at least another photon to do this trick so there is a bit of a ballet going on there ... a par de deux. This is not in 3D + T but in "Uberspace". I would like to see this as a "dielectric quantum cavity" of only two dimensions. Sort of a 2D bubble with the photon looped inside and mapped on the inner surface topologically as that mobius strip. The charge and magnetic moment would escape via a "flat" Twistor "point" in 3D + T. Something like a bubble you can make on a balloon when you twist it ... everything seen on the "inside". The actual size could be infinitesimally small on the outside and much larger on the inside due to spin and compactification. The rest of the Theory can "fit" de Broglie theory better then.
This may sound a bit complicated for an electron but "one treatment for everything" just different dimensions. Charges are mapped on the surface of the brane as a "braneworld" and the "origin" of the charge is the "null" uncharged string. It exhibits charge and mass as projections on the brane..
The soliton is a different "beast" from the brane. The soliton is the "string" and the "brane" is the multi-dimensional space. Like your comments on that one.... pure conjecture.
Cheers
Thanks for that ApeMan. It seems to me that it has not enjoyed the respect it deserves. It needs extra dimensions to spin in. As to Zephir's question... I am still thinking about the last statement. It is quite a difficult one to satisfy... why? Ouch!
It goes along the lines of the photon being a type I Superstring. These can form loops naturally. The trick is this "brane" (the "thicker" form of it) needs to transform from a "tube" (sort of like the photon like Zephyr's picture above) to a "sphere" (electron) through "self-interaction". But we already know this needs at least another photon to do this trick so there is a bit of a ballet going on there ... a par de deux. This is not in 3D + T but in "Uberspace". I would like to see this as a "dielectric quantum cavity" of only two dimensions. Sort of a 2D bubble with the photon looped inside and mapped on the inner surface topologically as that mobius strip. The charge and magnetic moment would escape via a "flat" Twistor "point" in 3D + T. Something like a bubble you can make on a balloon when you twist it ... everything seen on the "inside". The actual size could be infinitesimally small on the outside and much larger on the inside due to spin and compactification. The rest of the Theory can "fit" de Broglie theory better then.
This may sound a bit complicated for an electron but "one treatment for everything" just different dimensions. Charges are mapped on the surface of the brane as a "braneworld" and the "origin" of the charge is the "null" uncharged string. It exhibits charge and mass as projections on the brane..
The soliton is a different "beast" from the brane. The soliton is the "string" and the "brane" is the multi-dimensional space. Like your comments on that one.... pure conjecture.
Cheers
Thread noted.
Sets differ from the teaching atom of Bohr.
Sets differ from the teaching atom of Bohr.
Notes, say on Zephir shows a topology for the actual atom, not only the design of the atom, but how the strong and weak forces react within.
Addend, superiorisms, the dynamic range in balance:Zeph said> Although it's possible to consider the virtual particles of Aether to be photonic and the resulting model is rather elegant and simple, it's structure is a little bit intricated (but no so far, in fact...) due to existence of weak nuclear force (and its EMG-coupled derivate, i.e. strong nuclear force). By the way, it has a deep cosmological consequences, for example - the light and it's spacetime metric weren't exist here from the very beginning of the universe, but only after the so called "inflation period", during this the part of dimension compactification has came through.
Ph says> What are control bosses through the tunneling means of communication, via a telos-em defining wave?
Addend, superiorisms, the dynamic range in balance:Zeph said> Although it's possible to consider the virtual particles of Aether to be photonic and the resulting model is rather elegant and simple, it's structure is a little bit intricated (but no so far, in fact...) due to existence of weak nuclear force (and its EMG-coupled derivate, i.e. strong nuclear force). By the way, it has a deep cosmological consequences, for example - the light and it's spacetime metric weren't exist here from the very beginning of the universe, but only after the so called "inflation period", during this the part of dimension compactification has came through.
Ph says> What are control bosses through the tunneling means of communication, via a telos-em defining wave?
Examples:I've been here every night, but your new?
Girl; Sure' I'm new, my friend told me about this joint, so I came down.
Man; You look like her, I mean smell like,......
Girl; Sorry?!
I'm not a whore you know.I've got a father, come from a good home and don't need as-holes likes you, telling me that I'm trying to run a racket.
Man,, Sorry!?
Girl; Sure' I'm new, my friend told me about this joint, so I came down.
Man; You look like her, I mean smell like,......
Girl; Sorry?!
I'm not a whore you know.I've got a father, come from a good home and don't need as-holes likes you, telling me that I'm trying to run a racket.
Man,, Sorry!?
QUOTE (ApeMan+Sep 5 2005, 03:06 PM)
...and get back into the stuff that used to fire me up about quantum mechanics and particle theory...
You can see, how the photon wave probably really looks like in introductional animation give here, or maybe AVI video (cca 8 MB dowsnload). Maybe it gives you a better idea of vaccuum behavior, which is good for deeper understanding of derived effects.
The concept of string duality is derived from the fact, that the magnetic fields can be described as the electric field moving along torroidal path and vice versa. The photon wave is in fact a set a three levels of torroidal deformations of space, which are similar to deformation of hyperelastic foam rubber, when your'e a jumping on it. It produces the rotational (inertial) component of energy wave motion in particle, which is closely connected to the rest mass of particle.
Therefore, the electron looks like the photonic wave, because of it contains a torroidal duality inside, too. But the skull of this duality is formed by the gravity loop, not the photonic one. All known kinds of charge (leptonic, baryonic or electromagnetic ones) are in fact a certain type of gravity interaction convoluted into the hidden dimension dualities. Basically, it's so intensive energy vibration vortex, so it colapses by its own gravity.
Try to find all my submission here, you'll found the more detailed illustration of its scheme. But this basically a very high level picture, similar to planetary model od atom. The real shape could vary on the large scale due to mutual quantum interferences of energy into multidimensional manifolds by the similar way, as orbitals in atom does. The exact topology of this interaction is a subject of M-theory, which is a successor the string theories.
You can see, how the photon wave probably really looks like in introductional animation give here, or maybe AVI video (cca 8 MB dowsnload). Maybe it gives you a better idea of vaccuum behavior, which is good for deeper understanding of derived effects.
The concept of string duality is derived from the fact, that the magnetic fields can be described as the electric field moving along torroidal path and vice versa. The photon wave is in fact a set a three levels of torroidal deformations of space, which are similar to deformation of hyperelastic foam rubber, when your'e a jumping on it. It produces the rotational (inertial) component of energy wave motion in particle, which is closely connected to the rest mass of particle.
Therefore, the electron looks like the photonic wave, because of it contains a torroidal duality inside, too. But the skull of this duality is formed by the gravity loop, not the photonic one. All known kinds of charge (leptonic, baryonic or electromagnetic ones) are in fact a certain type of gravity interaction convoluted into the hidden dimension dualities. Basically, it's so intensive energy vibration vortex, so it colapses by its own gravity.
Try to find all my submission here, you'll found the more detailed illustration of its scheme. But this basically a very high level picture, similar to planetary model od atom. The real shape could vary on the large scale due to mutual quantum interferences of energy into multidimensional manifolds by the similar way, as orbitals in atom does. The exact topology of this interaction is a subject of M-theory, which is a successor the string theories.
No on Zephirs say.
This is why.Light is invested in the atom, or mass, regardless of the knowledge level that we have now.
It always was.
Light within matter is resiprosical by nature and is always inherent within mass.
String topologies, both macro and micro, must be inherent, , as this indicates a collective force, in which tunneling principles could occur.
There are no text offered by the two posters, in this thread, as what they are trying to do, is capitalize on what they know, make themselves look supreme and everyone else, woefully dumb.
Rotational factors, as Penrose puts them, I believe have only been professed in the large scale macro sence.
So now these two posters, are professing that rotational values are within the micro-realms?
Sources please?
This is the point where the computer does everything for you, including fashioning your view of the atoms.
What your computer will not do, is show you mercy, if you show no others any level of it, in your quest to look God-like.
This is why.Light is invested in the atom, or mass, regardless of the knowledge level that we have now.
It always was.
Light within matter is resiprosical by nature and is always inherent within mass.
String topologies, both macro and micro, must be inherent, , as this indicates a collective force, in which tunneling principles could occur.
There are no text offered by the two posters, in this thread, as what they are trying to do, is capitalize on what they know, make themselves look supreme and everyone else, woefully dumb.
Rotational factors, as Penrose puts them, I believe have only been professed in the large scale macro sence.
So now these two posters, are professing that rotational values are within the micro-realms?
Sources please?
This is the point where the computer does everything for you, including fashioning your view of the atoms.
What your computer will not do, is show you mercy, if you show no others any level of it, in your quest to look God-like.
QUOTE (philip347+Sep 5 2005, 08:52 PM)
..This is why. Light is invested in the atom, or mass, regardless of the knowledge level that we have now....
There is a small strange world of about 1E-20 meter size, which contains a short-distance forces and ultralight particles, which aren't influenced by the light totally.
Therefore, it could be overlooked easily, but it suggests a reason of radioactivity, for example. It gives a low-level structure of vaccuo by the same way, as donuts oriented themselves after being shaked in a box. Therefore, it has the same significance for Aether behavior as the existence of molecules for some of fluid properties (like surface tension giving the mercury appearance of nucleon dropplets) and suggests a theoretical reason of Higgs bosone, being searched for.
Nevertheless, you can suggest, the fluid is continuum and use this idea in number of elegant and usefull photon based theories - but don't forget, they're all approximative, in general. Small things often have a big consequences.
There is a small strange world of about 1E-20 meter size, which contains a short-distance forces and ultralight particles, which aren't influenced by the light totally.
Therefore, it could be overlooked easily, but it suggests a reason of radioactivity, for example. It gives a low-level structure of vaccuo by the same way, as donuts oriented themselves after being shaked in a box. Therefore, it has the same significance for Aether behavior as the existence of molecules for some of fluid properties (like surface tension giving the mercury appearance of nucleon dropplets) and suggests a theoretical reason of Higgs bosone, being searched for.
Nevertheless, you can suggest, the fluid is continuum and use this idea in number of elegant and usefull photon based theories - but don't forget, they're all approximative, in general. Small things often have a big consequences.
Hello Zephir, Good Elf.
Just an aside for anow (I will post observations on the subject matter soon).
The aside being: I hope you have taken note of the reaction of "philip347" to the 'wholly incromphensible/irrelevant' 'mathematical' language being used to put/justify your 'takes' on electron topology/folding/imbedding etc....all of which things can be readily discussed using easily accessible 'classical' concepts, and without such 'elitist' resort to unjustified purely 'speculative' mathematical constructs.
You can see what I meant earlier Good Elf, Zephir, when I spoke of SIMPLIFYING rather than just going on contributing to the rampant COMPLEXIFYING of the last 80 years. If I wanted to, I too could trot out all sorts of mathematical brilliance, but it won't mean a thing unless the processes/objects so described can be related to the real world. For example, all one has to do to BOTH OBSERVE AND TREAT TWISTOR-TO-BULK TOPOLOGIES ANALOGICALLY (that is, CLASSICALLY both physically and mathematically using fluid/plasma equations etc.) is look at what the astronomers are seeing---namely:
- TOROIDAL/COMPLEX-TOROIDAL 'smoke-ring-type' convoluted structures in a 'spacetime' pseudo-bulk;
- STREAMLINEAR/MEMBRANE 'SURFACES'/AREAS' in interactions between twistor and bulk; etc.......
No wonder we increasingly get such 'violent' disdain from people: we WILL insist on continuing to remove 'mathematically' whatever vestage of reality is left to those not in the 'elite' position of having learned a 'language' that very few others understand. It is salutary to remember that science is NOT just for those who have had the time and inclination for mathematical pursuits...although some of us might wish to think that physics is 'mathematical', it is aelf-evidently NOT, since mathematical 'fashions', 'tools' and 'schools' come and go...but the concrete reality plays on right before our eyes, if only we could see it without being blinded by the maths.
Anyhow, just try not to alienate any further those very people who are the ultimate audience/arbitrators of what we are presenting. See-ya!
Best reality-checking regards from: RealityCheck.
.
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Sep 5 2005, 10:18 PM)
TOROIDAL/COMPLEX-TOROIDAL 'smoke-ring-type' versus STREAMLINEAR/MEMBRANE 'SURFACES'/AREAS' in interactions between twistor and bulk; etc.......
Hi, RC..
Well, there isn't a strict distinction between this two basic kind of motion - it's a just a question of it's relative speed of wave and observer, whether the movement will appear to be bosonic or fermionic. The same behavior ressembles the string theory dualities, quantum loop gravity theory or the twistor theory (twistor is a pair of complex bounded symmetric spinors)
This is why the most energetic, short-living waves (so called calibration bosones of weak interraction) behaves as both the bosonic wave, both the fermion-antifermion pairs, which are in in thermodynamic equillibria. The vortex formation is the reason of short range of such of this bosones by the same way, as the vortex coming from paddle splashing of water, moreover the fermionic character gives a nonzero rest mass to this bosone.
The higher energy of wave, passing through Aether, the greater the probability of the fermion-antifermion pair formation is (i.e. materialization of radiation). This property of Aether protects Earth against the impact of ultraenergetic particles and strangelets from quasar formation (which can possibly induce the similar process with contact to compact matter) by the similar way as the (still somewhere existing, reputedly...) ozone hole does.
So thick Aether layer can be very usefull for utroubled evolution of human beings, could be said... And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waves...
...And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darknes....
Therefore I woudn't recommend to confuse the photonic wave with the rest of Aether, at least not after inflation period.... Even the God not very likes it.
Hi, RC..
Well, there isn't a strict distinction between this two basic kind of motion - it's a just a question of it's relative speed of wave and observer, whether the movement will appear to be bosonic or fermionic. The same behavior ressembles the string theory dualities, quantum loop gravity theory or the twistor theory (twistor is a pair of complex bounded symmetric spinors)
This is why the most energetic, short-living waves (so called calibration bosones of weak interraction) behaves as both the bosonic wave, both the fermion-antifermion pairs, which are in in thermodynamic equillibria. The vortex formation is the reason of short range of such of this bosones by the same way, as the vortex coming from paddle splashing of water, moreover the fermionic character gives a nonzero rest mass to this bosone.
The higher energy of wave, passing through Aether, the greater the probability of the fermion-antifermion pair formation is (i.e. materialization of radiation). This property of Aether protects Earth against the impact of ultraenergetic particles and strangelets from quasar formation (which can possibly induce the similar process with contact to compact matter) by the similar way as the (still somewhere existing, reputedly...) ozone hole does.
So thick Aether layer can be very usefull for utroubled evolution of human beings, could be said... And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waves...
...And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darknes....
Therefore I woudn't recommend to confuse the photonic wave with the rest of Aether, at least not after inflation period.... Even the God not very likes it.
Hello Zephir.
Again, I beg to differ: since regardless of relative/subjective frames of reference, observer and speed considerations, phenomena have ABSOLUTE DURATION in whatever frame/bulk they are occuring...theis duration being dependent ONLY (first) on the medium/propagating characterisics AND (second) on the TOPOLOGICAL STABILITY or flow-configurations involved in the SOLITON in question. For example, a STREAMLINEAR flow may dissipate once its motivator is no longer active; whereas a SPIRALLING FLOW may PERSIST much longer; and whereas a CLOSED-SPIRALLING flow may persist EVEN LONGER. So in fact, OBSERVATIONAL considerations have nothing to do with this aspect.
And I assure you that I don't "...confuse the photonic wave with the rest of Aether...". I never have. Oh...I would appreciate it if in future replies (at least replies specifically intended for me), you would resist introducing any sort of reference to any 'scriptural' or 'metaphysical' quotations of any sort. I do not, and never have, depended on ANY literary/spiritual allusions to make my point...as I am my own person, and need no other 'authority/sanction' for my own perceptions/perspectives/conclusions. Just thought I'd better get that straight right away, so as to forestall any deviation into 'learned' commentary based on 'irrelevant' qualifiers/clarifiers.
Respectful regards once more from: RealityCheck.
.
Oh...and by the way, Zephir,
Regarding : "...TOROIDAL/COMPLEX-TOROIDAL 'smoke-ring-type' versus STREAMLINEAR/MEMBRANE 'SURFACES'/AREAS' in interactions between twistor and bulk; etc..."...
There IS a distinction between these two types of structure/motion/propagation:
- the former type has more 'INTERNALISED energy' and thus has comparatively more 'separatedness' or 'imbedded characteristics' in relation to the relevant 'supporting' pseudo-bulk'; whereas latter type of structure/motion/propagation has less 'internalised energy' and is 'more open', and thus has comparatively less 'separatedness' or 'imbedding characteristics' in that same 'bulk'.
Addendum regards from: RealityCheck.
.
Hi all,
yuo're thiking too complex when it comes to the fundamental particle (of which there is only one) The beginning was simple, later it became complex. The so called photon and the fundamental mass particle (P1) is the same except that the mass particle is a core and shell of energy, therefore a balanced "system" while the photon (E1) is two circulating energies with opposite polarity. As it is pulled to the sphere (always with speed of light) it rotates with a speed (frequency) determined by the release factors. It is therefore observed as a wave. The mass particle adjusts the max and min distance between the shell and core with a frequency corresponding to the particles resonnance frequency (which is extremely high and cannot be observed). The core pulls on the shell (which is opposite polarity) )but is not allowed to annihilate otherwise the whole universe would collapse) with greater force in the max amplitues than "necessary" which leaves a "residual" force on the outside of the particle, which is known as gravity. This force is so small that it has no effect on the relations in particle building. During the compression (pre BB) the pressure was so high on the particles that all forces were used to avoid annihilation, hence gravity seized in the inner particles of the "body" and when the number of these exceeded the more pheripheral particles which had gravity, the expansion known as the big bang started. But duting the compression the first elementary particles formed by combining shells. The P1 (two P1-one dimension), the P2 (three P1-two dimensions) and P4 (four P1 in a tetrahedron) No more than 4 can bind, as they all have to touch in order to adjust distances to cores. The frequency is now lowered to the resonnance frequency of the combined elementary particle. It was no rule governing which polarity made up the shell and core and we therefore have "particle and antiparticle"
yuo're thiking too complex when it comes to the fundamental particle (of which there is only one) The beginning was simple, later it became complex. The so called photon and the fundamental mass particle (P1) is the same except that the mass particle is a core and shell of energy, therefore a balanced "system" while the photon (E1) is two circulating energies with opposite polarity. As it is pulled to the sphere (always with speed of light) it rotates with a speed (frequency) determined by the release factors. It is therefore observed as a wave. The mass particle adjusts the max and min distance between the shell and core with a frequency corresponding to the particles resonnance frequency (which is extremely high and cannot be observed). The core pulls on the shell (which is opposite polarity) )but is not allowed to annihilate otherwise the whole universe would collapse) with greater force in the max amplitues than "necessary" which leaves a "residual" force on the outside of the particle, which is known as gravity. This force is so small that it has no effect on the relations in particle building. During the compression (pre BB) the pressure was so high on the particles that all forces were used to avoid annihilation, hence gravity seized in the inner particles of the "body" and when the number of these exceeded the more pheripheral particles which had gravity, the expansion known as the big bang started. But duting the compression the first elementary particles formed by combining shells. The P1 (two P1-one dimension), the P2 (three P1-two dimensions) and P4 (four P1 in a tetrahedron) No more than 4 can bind, as they all have to touch in order to adjust distances to cores. The frequency is now lowered to the resonnance frequency of the combined elementary particle. It was no rule governing which polarity made up the shell and core and we therefore have "particle and antiparticle"
Zephir' there were a grouping of what you would call as wizards, a couple of thousand years ago.
I am only allowed to say, they lived over by Europe.
They ranged about seven foot in height and were what you would refer to as part human and parts Grays.
They wore black robes, and worked within what are known as pods.
There was an organ in their abdomen, that could transmute matter.
This feature was tightly controlled by a special council.
I think what you seek, is the utility of the Higgs Boson, not the boson itself.
I am only allowed to say, they lived over by Europe.
They ranged about seven foot in height and were what you would refer to as part human and parts Grays.
They wore black robes, and worked within what are known as pods.
There was an organ in their abdomen, that could transmute matter.
This feature was tightly controlled by a special council.
I think what you seek, is the utility of the Higgs Boson, not the boson itself.
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Sep 6 2005, 12:20 AM)
..I do not, and never have, depended on ANY literary/spiritual allusions to make my point...
You know, I'am just a dilligent context collector and there is a lot of connections to common social archetypes (Uroboros as a duality model, as an example).... I'am not distinguishing between social/bilogical/physical consequences, because I believe, evolution of all of it is driven by the same simple principle, by the evolution of materialised information. So it's possible to understood a evolution of spacetime on the background of evolution of human society easily and vice-versa. This is not spiritual conception in any way, but scientific method of understanding of very common context.
For example, both the social, bilogical and cosmological evolution is driven by its own gradient. If the condition of system doesn't change, the evolution of it stops in the local supremum, too. But the condition are influenced by the evolution, the evolution changes these condition alone, so a potential instability exists here by the same way, as in the graduall mass/energy accumulation at the universe. Therefore, the motive power of biological/social evolution is basically the same kind of instability, as the mutuall mass/energy evolution and can be expressed by the simmilar set of differential equations.
Moreover, there is a natural limits of this avalanche effect, because the system instability is slowing down the overall speed of evolution, too. In universe exists at least a three different mechanism of keeping the rate of it's evolution in the acceptable range: quantum effects, infimum of the action (topological criterion) and kinetic convergence of this process. The very same natural limits can be observed for the human society evolution. So it seems, the rate of universe evolution is adjusted automatically to the optimal rate with respect of global speed of evolution by the very some way, as for the other kinds of evolution. So it's possible, our universe isn't the very first generation of universe, and/or the physical laws are automatically adjusting, so its evolution stays optimised.
You know, I'am just a dilligent context collector and there is a lot of connections to common social archetypes (Uroboros as a duality model, as an example).... I'am not distinguishing between social/bilogical/physical consequences, because I believe, evolution of all of it is driven by the same simple principle, by the evolution of materialised information. So it's possible to understood a evolution of spacetime on the background of evolution of human society easily and vice-versa. This is not spiritual conception in any way, but scientific method of understanding of very common context.
For example, both the social, bilogical and cosmological evolution is driven by its own gradient. If the condition of system doesn't change, the evolution of it stops in the local supremum, too. But the condition are influenced by the evolution, the evolution changes these condition alone, so a potential instability exists here by the same way, as in the graduall mass/energy accumulation at the universe. Therefore, the motive power of biological/social evolution is basically the same kind of instability, as the mutuall mass/energy evolution and can be expressed by the simmilar set of differential equations.
Moreover, there is a natural limits of this avalanche effect, because the system instability is slowing down the overall speed of evolution, too. In universe exists at least a three different mechanism of keeping the rate of it's evolution in the acceptable range: quantum effects, infimum of the action (topological criterion) and kinetic convergence of this process. The very same natural limits can be observed for the human society evolution. So it seems, the rate of universe evolution is adjusted automatically to the optimal rate with respect of global speed of evolution by the very some way, as for the other kinds of evolution. So it's possible, our universe isn't the very first generation of universe, and/or the physical laws are automatically adjusting, so its evolution stays optimised.
Hello Zephir.
Regarding your occassional inclusion of 'psycho-social 'evolutionary allusions and/or quotations: I understand that your allusions were'nt meant to be taken as 'spiritual'/sectarian etc. However, while I understand that your INTENT is merely to more 'broadly contextualise' your expositions, nevertheless the EFFECT (whether intentional or not) of such easily-misunderstood 'emotively laden' accompaniments to what should appear as 'basically emotiveless' communication, is to POTENTIALLY put MANY in your audience either on the 'spiritual' defensive/offensive IN THEIR ASSIMILATION OF WHAT YOU SAY through their only-too-human perceptional 'filters'. I myself am not prey to such filter-induced 'pre-judice' problems, but some others may because they may have yet to 'override' such kneejerk mechanisms of perception. It takes a lot of hard work to learn to avoid such a problem...and not all of us have had the time/opportunity to overcome it.
So while I understand your wide-ranging contextualising, I would suggest you keep it to a minimum where 'emotive' areas are concerned; mainly so that the real import of what you say is not drowned by the emotive reactions of your audience.
Regarding the universal 'evolution' per se that you speak of: It may be as well to remember that all the terms/processes you describe, while true, are only referring to a CLOSED UNIVERSE TOPOLOGY/SYSTEM; in no way does the 'slowing/equalibrating' you describe apply to an UNBOUNDED UNIVERSE SYSTEM. any evolution/equilibrating to or between 'universes' is merely reference to RELATIVE 'pseudo-bulk' observationally/topologically-bounded 'subdivisions/universes' within the unbounded UNIVERSAL 'true bulk'.
But let me say that, despite my little 'quibbles', your comprehension of 'what is going on about you' is quite remarkable; quite impressive. kudos.
Respectful regards from: RealityCheck.
.
Hi, RC,
I understand the problems of common analogy - so I'll try to bring up my ideas to a bit more concrete form:
It's evident, the Aether as a gravitational geon structure forms a new dimension set, whenever the certain concentration of energy/matter occurs, as the case of pressure increasing of supercritical vapour. This density makes the mass/energy waves to collapse in the aproximatelly 1E40 spacetime ratio (by the very same way, as intrastellar matter collapses during the star evolution), thus forming a convoluted dualities, which interfere together using a new dimension set. Lets try to bring up the energy induction of wire loop (energy dualities, twistor) system: it proceeds just only in pararalel direction, so it starts to be a directional, forming a right-angle dimension set. So, increasing a energy density forms a system of directional gravity loops, which are sharing the energy not just simply by omnidirectional way as before, but by directional way preferrably.
Thus, a internal symmetry of the system decreases significantly per saltum as the phase transition. We call this effect as the result of spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB) an it has a lot of very common physical resemblancies (from crystalisation over the ferro/paramagnetic transition bellow the Curie point to superconductive phase creation). Even the formation of the fermion-antifermion pairs during materialization of energy pair could be described in terms of local example of SSB, because the superconductivity Cooper pairs creation is just the bulk case of such a transition.
So, what's situation in biological/society evolution now? If the critical density of information in its population is reached, then a new biological solutions/invention and or theories are found very often as a result of mutation od genes / shared ideas. Even my theory is the result of this critical density of scientific/social/biological information of density. Currently is a quite simple to develop such a common theory, with compare to the situation at te start of 19th century. It's evident, if I wouldn't present such a thery now, somebody else would doing it instead of me in a few years perspective, so it's a rather deterministic proces and character of it is the more evident, as the density of information increases.
But such of this model changes a insight to reality significantly, so we can expect a number of a new quality of knowledge: i.e. mathematical models of reality and new high level } (i.e. dimension metric) of understanding and/or communication in the scope of the specific group of problems. The resemblance to the universe evolution is a quite evident here - so it's clear, the Aether theory isn't just a theory of universe matter evolution, but it's a very common thermodynamic model of one. Everyone can use it for description of the concrete dynamic system of the personal preference.
I understand the problems of common analogy - so I'll try to bring up my ideas to a bit more concrete form:
It's evident, the Aether as a gravitational geon structure forms a new dimension set, whenever the certain concentration of energy/matter occurs, as the case of pressure increasing of supercritical vapour. This density makes the mass/energy waves to collapse in the aproximatelly 1E40 spacetime ratio (by the very same way, as intrastellar matter collapses during the star evolution), thus forming a convoluted dualities, which interfere together using a new dimension set. Lets try to bring up the energy induction of wire loop (energy dualities, twistor) system: it proceeds just only in pararalel direction, so it starts to be a directional, forming a right-angle dimension set. So, increasing a energy density forms a system of directional gravity loops, which are sharing the energy not just simply by omnidirectional way as before, but by directional way preferrably.
Thus, a internal symmetry of the system decreases significantly per saltum as the phase transition. We call this effect as the result of spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB) an it has a lot of very common physical resemblancies (from crystalisation over the ferro/paramagnetic transition bellow the Curie point to superconductive phase creation). Even the formation of the fermion-antifermion pairs during materialization of energy pair could be described in terms of local example of SSB, because the superconductivity Cooper pairs creation is just the bulk case of such a transition.
So, what's situation in biological/society evolution now? If the critical density of information in its population is reached, then a new biological solutions/invention and or theories are found very often as a result of mutation od genes / shared ideas. Even my theory is the result of this critical density of scientific/social/biological information of density. Currently is a quite simple to develop such a common theory, with compare to the situation at te start of 19th century. It's evident, if I wouldn't present such a thery now, somebody else would doing it instead of me in a few years perspective, so it's a rather deterministic proces and character of it is the more evident, as the density of information increases.
But such of this model changes a insight to reality significantly, so we can expect a number of a new quality of knowledge: i.e. mathematical models of reality and new high level } (i.e. dimension metric) of understanding and/or communication in the scope of the specific group of problems. The resemblance to the universe evolution is a quite evident here - so it's clear, the Aether theory isn't just a theory of universe matter evolution, but it's a very common thermodynamic model of one. Everyone can use it for description of the concrete dynamic system of the personal preference.
Hello Zephir.
Brilliant! Clear, concise and to the point in real terms. Again, impressive.
My comments"
- re last paragraph: True; no argument;
- re 2nd-last paragraph: True; no argument;
- re 3rd-last paragraph: True; no argument; however...
- re 1st paragraph: Mostly true EXCEPT...it is important to note tha the 'phase-changed' (or collapsed) bulk medium produce TWO CLASSES of separations/imbeddings...ONE is 'doubly-closed' PERSISTENT-loop-flow structures having 'compact/intense' ELECTRO-MAGNETIC-TYPE twistor TOPOLOGY/CHARGE interaction characteristics which display/produce the 'definite' right-angled 'resultant-direction' energy loops you mentioned; the OTHER is the open/singly-closed TRANSIENT-loop-flow 'swirls' having 'diffuse/less-intense GRAVITO-INERTIAL-TYPE spinor-twistor TOPOLOGY/PRESSURE-DRAG interaction characteristics which DO NOT display/produce ANY definite right-angled 'resultant-direction' loop-energy exchange as you mentioned. So, when you say: "... increasing a energy density forms a system of directional gravity loops, which are sharing the energy not just simply by omnidirectional way as before, but by directional way preferrably."...I have to differ on that one.
Otherwise, great stuff!
Impressed regards from: RealityCheck.
.
QUOTE (RealityCheck+Sep 6 2005, 09:55 AM)
...collapsed... bulk medium produce TWO CLASSES of separations/imbeddings...ONE is 'doubly-closed' PERSISTENT-loop-flow structures ....the OTHER is the open/singly-closed TRANSIENT-loop-flow 'swirls' having 'diffuse/less-intense GRAVITO-INERTIAL-TYPE spinor-twistor TOPOLOGY...
OK, thanks - but can you explain the exact principial difference of both these two types using a (schematic) illustration for me ? And what does it mean "doubly-closed" loop-flow structure exactly?
In my model the more complex (i.e. double/triple curled duality scheme) simply results from a just a multiple phase-transitions/inflations, not a some specific one. The principle of formation of multiple convoluted dimension therefore remains the same - it's a result of subsequenet convolution of previously convoluted system (like the fractal systems in particular).
OK, thanks - but can you explain the exact principial difference of both these two types using a (schematic) illustration for me ? And what does it mean "doubly-closed" loop-flow structure exactly?
In my model the more complex (i.e. double/triple curled duality scheme) simply results from a just a multiple phase-transitions/inflations, not a some specific one. The principle of formation of multiple convoluted dimension therefore remains the same - it's a result of subsequenet convolution of previously convoluted system (like the fractal systems in particular).
Hello Zephir.
I am having trouble with my graphics/drawing applications. I'll get back to you when I can provide the schematics you ask for. Meanwhile, about your relating the re-convolutions to the re-iterations of the 'fractal' terms in the relevant equations: it is obvious that the 'fractal' pattern is a membrane-only type boundary-variation/topology (that is, there is NO INTERNAL-to-EXTERNAL structure/process that relates to the future 'evolution' of the fractal re-iterative changes/relativities occurring at the 'surface' of the fractal 'growth-front'; Moreover, you will note that the fractal 'process' is an EXPANSIONARY one.
Whereas your re-convolutionary 'process' is not only 'CONTRACTIONARY', but at every stage of that re-looping/convoluting, there is a feed-back-loop between INTERNAL and EXTERNAL dimensions/flow-structures which DETERMINES the 'next favourable' convolutionary step---unlike for the fractal 'growth' which only depends on 'neighbouring' conditions ON THE MEMBRANE 'GROWTH FRONT' AND NOT THE BODY STRUCTURE BELOW IT.
Anyway, I shall be much involved with other work and my computer problems for a while...so I'll see you later! Enjoy!
Hiatus regards from: RealityCheck.
.
OK, OK - I believe, now I'am understand what you mean - so you can stop to torture your drawing SW...
Well, conceptionally it seems we have a really two separate kinds of deformation of the spacetime geometry - one of these leads to the convoluted dimension, the other doesn't. Well, what's the difference between this now?
In fact, both of deformation are exactly the same, but the first one may be stabilised by the quantum effects, so it forms a more or less stable "closed" duality. But there is not exact stability barier, even the very stable particles are in thermodynamic equilibria with its precursor "open" duality perturbation.
It means, whenever some strong energy wave (like photone of cosmic radiation) creates the pair of virtual particles, these particles are a perfectly real from it's very beginning. But it's perceived existence is given by it's sucessfull distance separation (for example using a electric/magnetic field), so that if we will not separate the particle immediatelly, they recombine again to previous Aether state using a common anihilation mechanism. Neverthelles, they can create bosonic pair inbetween detectable as the much or less stable intermediate rezonace state (for example pozitronium in the case of electron-positron pair creation). From this point of view, there is no significant topological difference between paired a unpaired Aether excitation.
But there is a second level of difference, which is given by a total number of dimension convoluted. As I've told previously, the most stable level of curling dimension is six. This is the reason, why most of universe exists in the form of well known of so called "vaccuo" - it means the specific, most stable state of Aether with a six dimensions convoluted to the shape of well known Callabi-Yau manifold. It has a deep topological reason based on the infimum of the action quantity during gravity energy exchange across the dimensions convoluted. It's not a "magical quantum number", but a rather a topological one. It seems, the real optimum of it lies slighty above the number of six topological dimension, so it's not even a rational number....
Neverthelles, it means that curling of the number six of dimension in Aether will be preferred, so that the spontaneous avalanche mechanism of Aether formation during inflation period stops at this level of compactification (...whoa!). Thus, for the formation of more deeply convoluted dualities (9 or above dimension level, i.e. real massive particles detectable using a EMG or weak interactions) we have to add an aditionall energy to the Aether - so most of particles (with exception of the few most stable ones, like electron) tends turn to back to the radiation. It's very good new, so that the the strong energetic pulse cannot induce the spontaneous phase transform of universe now - but as the overall mass of universe increases, the energetic barrier gradually decreases by the time. But this limit is a matter of exact quantum mechanic and topological calculations, which I currently haven't, of course.
Well, conceptionally it seems we have a really two separate kinds of deformation of the spacetime geometry - one of these leads to the convoluted dimension, the other doesn't. Well, what's the difference between this now?
In fact, both of deformation are exactly the same, but the first one may be stabilised by the quantum effects, so it forms a more or less stable "closed" duality. But there is not exact stability barier, even the very stable particles are in thermodynamic equilibria with its precursor "open" duality perturbation.
It means, whenever some strong energy wave (like photone of cosmic radiation) creates the pair of virtual particles, these particles are a perfectly real from it's very beginning. But it's perceived existence is given by it's sucessfull distance separation (for example using a electric/magnetic field), so that if we will not separate the particle immediatelly, they recombine again to previous Aether state using a common anihilation mechanism. Neverthelles, they can create bosonic pair inbetween detectable as the much or less stable intermediate rezonace state (for example pozitronium in the case of electron-positron pair creation). From this point of view, there is no significant topological difference between paired a unpaired Aether excitation.
But there is a second level of difference, which is given by a total number of dimension convoluted. As I've told previously, the most stable level of curling dimension is six. This is the reason, why most of universe exists in the form of well known of so called "vaccuo" - it means the specific, most stable state of Aether with a six dimensions convoluted to the shape of well known Callabi-Yau manifold. It has a deep topological reason based on the infimum of the action quantity during gravity energy exchange across the dimensions convoluted. It's not a "magical quantum number", but a rather a topological one. It seems, the real optimum of it lies slighty above the number of six topological dimension, so it's not even a rational number....
Neverthelles, it means that curling of the number six of dimension in Aether will be preferred, so that the spontaneous avalanche mechanism of Aether formation during inflation period stops at this level of compactification (...whoa!). Thus, for the formation of more deeply convoluted dualities (9 or above dimension level, i.e. real massive particles detectable using a EMG or weak interactions) we have to add an aditionall energy to the Aether - so most of particles (with exception of the few most stable ones, like electron) tends turn to back to the radiation. It's very good new, so that the the strong energetic pulse cannot induce the spontaneous phase transform of universe now - but as the overall mass of universe increases, the energetic barrier gradually decreases by the time. But this limit is a matter of exact quantum mechanic and topological calculations, which I currently haven't, of course.
all -
excellent article. Read the first couple of sections and scanned the remainder. Have to sit down and read the rest of it thoroughly. Nice first principles type of layout.
exciting!
ApeMan - I understand your plight. But I think you should bite the quantum mechanical bullet (boy, several puns in there!) and go back to physics! Law enforcement is soooooo Neanderthal - but it does pay the bills better than sitting underneath my magnet!
- gleefully spinning solids.
excellent article. Read the first couple of sections and scanned the remainder. Have to sit down and read the rest of it thoroughly. Nice first principles type of layout.
exciting!
ApeMan - I understand your plight. But I think you should bite the quantum mechanical bullet (boy, several puns in there!) and go back to physics! Law enforcement is soooooo Neanderthal - but it does pay the bills better than sitting underneath my magnet!
- gleefully spinning solids.
Zephir -
why Aether?
here is an excellent "best guess" on the part of cosmologists on the existence of at least 3 more spatial dimensions (they didn't seem to want to include time in their addition). No Aether required.
I realize this isn't specific to this discussion, but the Goodly Elvish One's nice contribution regarding additional dimensions to further enhance the article made this particular article seem relevant.
solidspin = scienceslut!
why Aether?
here is an excellent "best guess" on the part of cosmologists on the existence of at least 3 more spatial dimensions (they didn't seem to want to include time in their addition). No Aether required.
I realize this isn't specific to this discussion, but the Goodly Elvish One's nice contribution regarding additional dimensions to further enhance the article made this particular article seem relevant.
solidspin = scienceslut!
QUOTE (solidspin+Sep 6 2005, 02:21 PM)
...No Aether required...
Well, this explanation suggested is probably nearly indentical with explanation of mine (which I've presented in many places of internet ) - but from my point of view the priority it's no so crucial, I'm conceiving such a theories as a pleasant hobby. Moreover, nobody can expect, all people will read all both the articles, both the discussions list - so the duplicity of ideas may occur in generall.
This explanation of dark matter is fully consistent both with my theory of Aether, both with superstring theory. But Aether suggest not only the six-order dimension state of vaccuo, but very common state of energy/matter in universe. I've just pointed out it's mechanical analogy with respect the light scattering virtual particle system and Pioneer probes slowening consequences. The suggestion of wave Aether environment results not from the wave nature of universe, because it corresponds the basic idea string theory, after all.
I am not even the author of Aether hypothesis, which is 2000+ year old (see the ancient Greek "plenum" idea) - and therefore it resembles a lot of newer theories, often very closely. In fact, the existence of Aether theory results directly from from the silly overlooked fact, the Einstein's postulates can be derived just from wave spreading geometry easily without any othe assumptions (see the applets links). This is the rational base of the string theory an it must included by it, sooner or later - because of you simply cannot derive the wave based theory without the Aether idea. So I hope, the quantitative properties of Aether are fully described by the M-theory.
Well, this explanation suggested is probably nearly indentical with explanation of mine (which I've presented in many places of internet ) - but from my point of view the priority it's no so crucial, I'm conceiving such a theories as a pleasant hobby. Moreover, nobody can expect, all people will read all both the articles, both the discussions list - so the duplicity of ideas may occur in generall.
This explanation of dark matter is fully consistent both with my theory of Aether, both with superstring theory. But Aether suggest not only the six-order dimension state of vaccuo, but very common state of energy/matter in universe. I've just pointed out it's mechanical analogy with respect the light scattering virtual particle system and Pioneer probes slowening consequences. The suggestion of wave Aether environment results not from the wave nature of universe, because it corresponds the basic idea string theory, after all.
I am not even the author of Aether hypothesis, which is 2000+ year old (see the ancient Greek "plenum" idea) - and therefore it resembles a lot of newer theories, often very closely. In fact, the existence of Aether theory results directly from from the silly overlooked fact, the Einstein's postulates can be derived just from wave spreading geometry easily without any othe assumptions (see the applets links). This is the rational base of the string theory an it must included by it, sooner or later - because of you simply cannot derive the wave based theory without the Aether idea. So I hope, the quantitative properties of Aether are fully described by the M-theory.
Zephir -
I'm very familiar w/ the Aether hypothesis and its age. The issue is that it has been disproven or, rather, proven to be not needed, particularly for EMF, time, etc.
It seems to be easier to employ a force particle rather than an Aether, don't you think? The methodology is tried and true for subatomic particles. Media only seem necessary for ordinary types of forces - sound; heat transfer (generally); etc.
-ss
I'm very familiar w/ the Aether hypothesis and its age. The issue is that it has been disproven or, rather, proven to be not needed, particularly for EMF, time, etc.
It seems to be easier to employ a force particle rather than an Aether, don't you think? The methodology is tried and true for subatomic particles. Media only seem necessary for ordinary types of forces - sound; heat transfer (generally); etc.
-ss
QUOTE (solidspin+Sep 6 2005, 04:30 PM)
...the issue is that it has been disproven or, rather, proven to be not needed..
Suppose we'll considere of about ten ad-hoc postulates of the quantum/relativity theories as the subject of experimentally supported belief - so then you're right completelly, of course....
But there is a lot of other consequences, which could be understood a lot of easily, then using a classical insight. Moreover, I don't understand, why are you requiring the massive media concept for the heat/sound transfer - and not for the light.
Suppose we'll considere of about ten ad-hoc postulates of the quantum/relativity theories as the subject of experimentally supported belief - so then you're right completelly, of course....
But there is a lot of other consequences, which could be understood a lot of easily, then using a classical insight. Moreover, I don't understand, why are you requiring the massive media concept for the heat/sound transfer - and not for the light.
http://members.chello.nl/~n.benschop/electron.pdf received.
Comments. Gravity is a unit mass attraction.
Others,_ Zephir, thank you so much for the two hundred dollar pictorial textbook, on the topologies of the atom atlas.
I really enjoyed my visit to the university and was treated acceptably.
I liked the CD CAD to where I could observe the simulation of how each atom works, and in what sence, tunneling topologies could affect the transmission of any particle agent, within the cosmos.
Thanks again, so much.
Comments. Gravity is a unit mass attraction.
Others,_ Zephir, thank you so much for the two hundred dollar pictorial textbook, on the topologies of the atom atlas.
I really enjoyed my visit to the university and was treated acceptably.
I liked the CD CAD to where I could observe the simulation of how each atom works, and in what sence, tunneling topologies could affect the transmission of any particle agent, within the cosmos.
Thanks again, so much.
no,
1 quonta proton,two quonta electron,1 quonta muon pock of four is light photon,
1 quonta elecron,two quonta proton,1 quonta muon pock of four is x ray photon.
1 quonta proton,two quonta electron,1 quonta muon pock of four is light photon,
1 quonta elecron,two quonta proton,1 quonta muon pock of four is x ray photon.
Dear Good Elf, Zephir and Ape man.
Good to hear that you have been enjoying our paper on the the electron as a localised photon. I think you are right: it does need a somewhat larger audience. We are working on that! Let me clear a coupla things up first and then tell you what is new.
Firstly there is a little subtlety which is mentioned (but not particularly well explained). The Looped photon is not 3D, but 4D. The toroidal projection is a projection onto two dimensions of space and a third dimension of space-time corresponding to the internal phase of the wave. That is onto x and y (or better r and theta) for the two spatial dimensions, and onto z-ct for the phase. the projection onto space (projecting out time) is spherical. This phase and its internal rotation transform differently under a boost, giving rise to a de Broglie "Harmony of Phases" between the two. Its little known now but the Harmony of phases was at the root of quantum mechanics (the lambda = h/p part. Also the strip is not a Mobius strip but a double looped strip. There is an amusing story associated with this. We were contacted by Ulrich Enz who had proposed a Mobius model of the electron , and he showed us one of his beautiful models, smiled and said " I guess I got it wrong!" Lovely man!
Just a little warning as to string theory: its relatively simple to form a string theory from anything. All you need to do is to bundle the extra properties not contained in your current theory onto invisible properties on the string and hey-presto, the theory acquires those underlying properties, symmetries or whatever. The problem is that the theory so formed tends to rapidly acquire just too many properties. It becomes floppy (nothing worse than a floppy string!) and in gaining descriptive powers, loses many of its predictive powers. This may be part of the reason why there are quite so many different varieties of string theory and such a a dearth of solid predictions from them. Much harder path is to limit yourself in the tightest possible straightjacket (see Roger Penrose excellent "Road to Reality").
Anyway in the last few years we have been having fun developing the simple semiclassical model into a fullblown theory. We have a new (pretty crazy) idea as to the possible origin of gravitation, can derive Electromagnetsim and the Dirac equation from a single formalism and have a new origin for the quark model. All we need to do now is to start getting it all published!
Watch this space!
Good to hear that you have been enjoying our paper on the the electron as a localised photon. I think you are right: it does need a somewhat larger audience. We are working on that! Let me clear a coupla things up first and then tell you what is new.
Firstly there is a little subtlety which is mentioned (but not particularly well explained). The Looped photon is not 3D, but 4D. The toroidal projection is a projection onto two dimensions of space and a third dimension of space-time corresponding to the internal phase of the wave. That is onto x and y (or better r and theta) for the two spatial dimensions, and onto z-ct for the phase. the projection onto space (projecting out time) is spherical. This phase and its internal rotation transform differently under a boost, giving rise to a de Broglie "Harmony of Phases" between the two. Its little known now but the Harmony of phases was at the root of quantum mechanics (the lambda = h/p part. Also the strip is not a Mobius strip but a double looped strip. There is an amusing story associated with this. We were contacted by Ulrich Enz who had proposed a Mobius model of the electron , and he showed us one of his beautiful models, smiled and said " I guess I got it wrong!" Lovely man!
Just a little warning as to string theory: its relatively simple to form a string theory from anything. All you need to do is to bundle the extra properties not contained in your current theory onto invisible properties on the string and hey-presto, the theory acquires those underlying properties, symmetries or whatever. The problem is that the theory so formed tends to rapidly acquire just too many properties. It becomes floppy (nothing worse than a floppy string!) and in gaining descriptive powers, loses many of its predictive powers. This may be part of the reason why there are quite so many different varieties of string theory and such a a dearth of solid predictions from them. Much harder path is to limit yourself in the tightest possible straightjacket (see Roger Penrose excellent "Road to Reality").
Anyway in the last few years we have been having fun developing the simple semiclassical model into a fullblown theory. We have a new (pretty crazy) idea as to the possible origin of gravitation, can derive Electromagnetsim and the Dirac equation from a single formalism and have a new origin for the quark model. All we need to do now is to start getting it all published!
Watch this space!
Hi jgw,
If that is your paper on the electron... .Is the electron a Photon with Toroidal Topology ... you have my highest respect on this matter. It bowled me over. I am sorry I have not seen this thread before now (for some time) and I will place a watch on it from here on in. I certainly get the point about the kind of space the photon is trapped in. I think though that Space-time is far too "stressed" for low energy trapping of particles there... but string theory will eventually take care of these problems despite the caution. The problem is mentioned here...
The impossibility of something faster than light mentioned as the "Hierarchy Problem" in String Theory. I admit these ideas will inevitably start off "sloppy" but can quickly tighten to suit the "boundary conditions" if they are based on reality. I am sure you will all meet any future challenges. The idea has substantial merit. I take your point... it is NOT a Mobius strip is it? Yet is is twisted... he he he!
I am aware of the subtlety of the 4D interpretation of Space-time in the closed space. This would be fine if it could occur. What I would hope for the future is a "rough draft" of a method of construction of particles using this method and approach. The is one in Barton Zwiebach's Book in "A First Course in String Theory". I will include the illustration here..
P343, "A First Course in String Theory" by B. Zwiebach
Here he is able to show through a number of boosts and spins all particles of the standard model can be generated (as you had "teased" in the paper above). Your "photon" can be walked through such a process and a classical analog can be developed. This will give a way to compare and contrast Classical and String Derivations of the same entity. No matter the "risk" you probably could not resist having a go at connecting the dots for a full model. Your derivations lend themselves to closed hyper-tori construction with that "twist"... Similar to the geometry of our Universe (just a tad simpler) as discovered by some WMAP papers such as the one on a "Cosmic Hall of Mirrors". It concluded that it was rhombohedral multiple connected topology with a 36 degree "twist" per "facit".
Cosmic Hall of Mirrors very reminiscent of the topology of your "particle". I would be interested if you didn't see a connection? Obviously this is a "motif" that seems beyond the scale of the electron... or is it?
Cheers
If that is your paper on the electron... .Is the electron a Photon with Toroidal Topology ... you have my highest respect on this matter. It bowled me over. I am sorry I have not seen this thread before now (for some time) and I will place a watch on it from here on in. I certainly get the point about the kind of space the photon is trapped in. I think though that Space-time is far too "stressed" for low energy trapping of particles there... but string theory will eventually take care of these problems despite the caution. The problem is mentioned here...
The impossibility of something faster than light mentioned as the "Hierarchy Problem" in String Theory. I admit these ideas will inevitably start off "sloppy" but can quickly tighten to suit the "boundary conditions" if they are based on reality. I am sure you will all meet any future challenges. The idea has substantial merit. I take your point... it is NOT a Mobius strip is it? Yet is is twisted... he he he!
I am aware of the subtlety of the 4D interpretation of Space-time in the closed space. This would be fine if it could occur. What I would hope for the future is a "rough draft" of a method of construction of particles using this method and approach. The is one in Barton Zwiebach's Book in "A First Course in String Theory". I will include the illustration here..
P343, "A First Course in String Theory" by B. Zwiebach
Here he is able to show through a number of boosts and spins all particles of the standard model can be generated (as you had "teased" in the paper above). Your "photon" can be walked through such a process and a classical analog can be developed. This will give a way to compare and contrast Classical and String Derivations of the same entity. No matter the "risk" you probably could not resist having a go at connecting the dots for a full model. Your derivations lend themselves to closed hyper-tori construction with that "twist"... Similar to the geometry of our Universe (just a tad simpler) as discovered by some WMAP papers such as the one on a "Cosmic Hall of Mirrors". It concluded that it was rhombohedral multiple connected topology with a 36 degree "twist" per "facit".
Cosmic Hall of Mirrors very reminiscent of the topology of your "particle". I would be interested if you didn't see a connection? Obviously this is a "motif" that seems beyond the scale of the electron... or is it?
Cheers
hello, GE, apeman and our new, esteemed guest - jgw
Phenomenal explanation of the subtleties of your paper. We have been discussing it for some time now and the clarification that you provide is well-received. Personally, I can't wait for your additional insights to the derivation of Maxwell and Dirac from a single formalism! Of course, the sexiest will be the source of gravitation. Can you give us a hint? I'd like to hazard a detailed guess, but I'm a little hesitant. Besides, if my PhD adviser ever found out I'm dabbling in something far afield of my own research topic, I don't think I'd ever see the light of day!
- gleefully spinning solids
Phenomenal explanation of the subtleties of your paper. We have been discussing it for some time now and the clarification that you provide is well-received. Personally, I can't wait for your additional insights to the derivation of Maxwell and Dirac from a single formalism! Of course, the sexiest will be the source of gravitation. Can you give us a hint? I'd like to hazard a detailed guess, but I'm a little hesitant. Besides, if my PhD adviser ever found out I'm dabbling in something far afield of my own research topic, I don't think I'd ever see the light of day!
- gleefully spinning solids
My model is simpler and more elegant. Radial dipole population.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.