Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63

yquantum
bukh, et al,

QUOTE
Everything is according to definitions - and definitions bear a close releationsship to what can be percepted / measured.

Let me ask a question then maybe I will better understand your comment.

Do you except QM as a viable model of physics? It might be awhile but will check back, with respect yq.

ciao_
yquantum
Zephir
QUOTE (yquantum+Jul 28 2007, 10:36 PM)
Do you except QM as a viable model of physics?

By AWT every theory can become viable, if it will be made implicit and recursive.
Of course, simpler theories is easier to modify by such way.
bukh
yquantum

QUOTE: "Let me ask a question then maybe I will better understand your comment.
Do you except QM as a viable model of physics?"

The short version is: Viable model yes - but incomplete.

This is not an easy question - but I am aware that you are not putting easy questions forward.

Let me try to answer by putting some questions up that bother me in the understanding of QM and in fact in the understanding of EVERYTHING.

Wave and Moving Particle ? -

QM is based on such principles without defining in the very very essence what exactly is meant by "Particle" or what is meant by "Wave" - or what is meant by Motion - if I read it correctly. Can anyone describe QM without using these terms?

Wave - and Motion involves discontinuation and quant, and wave need medium, and motion is change, and change is information. There are more axiomatic conditions involved in the 3D Pixel Universe, but I would say that 3D Pixel Universe has grown out of such considerations, and taken its structure more or less as a necessity.

So I do not think that QM is basically wrong - but it is an incomplete theory, in as much as QM does not answer the very fundamental questions about wave and particle. I am not saying that we will get answers about the true Origen - but I say that we need a better understanding - and bettter definitions of the principal elements that is being used in QM - a one step deeper insight.

And that is where I hope that the 3D Pixel Universe perhaps could be an inspiration.

One example could be the uncertainty principle of h/2pi, - simply because the underlying wave-structure - defining matter = particle will have an inbuild uncertainty of the pixel-size - expressed in pi - h as scale in this context is irrelevant, because scale will relate to what we observe and therefore measure - but pi - it will always exist as uncertainty - in the smallest scale.

Another example is how to get a better understanding of the underlying principles of the quantum-numbers.

Principal quantum number of an electron is freely defined as its energy - and this without really bothering about what IS energy in its very essence. We can say a lot about the transformations of energies - but we have no clue about the one step deeper understanding of energy. I imagine that energy is essentially motion - which is change - which is information - and Information has everything to do with number of pixels playing to express said energy. In the context of electron, its energy is related to its orbit, and orbit is the amplitude of the standing wave-pattern that define said electron, and the higher the amplitude the more pixels are being involved to play said wave-pattern = the more energy involved. Azimuth number of an electron = shape of its orbit = angular momentum is conventionally defined as the resistance of a spinning object to speed up and slow down under influence of external force. Imagine that spin is identical with the frequency of the standing wave - then this frequency can be affected by external forces (meaning from outside comming interference forces) to compress or extend the wave- to take another frequency.

3D Pixel Universe may also give inspirations how to better understand Time and gravitational time-dilation, speed time dilation, low entropy universe, the Origen not as BB, ----

Ivars
QUOTE (bukh+Jul 28 2007, 11:09 AM)
hej Ivars

QUOTE"what would put constraints on math if there would be no medium expressing it, may be carrying it, determining possible connections and giving feedback-via WHAT?"

Of course there are put no constraints on Math.- but I would like to say that the math which can be expressed into physical Universe is constrained - and will include only that part of math. which can be in some way or another defined as discontinued.

hej bukh

Of course, math is constrained. The more research is done on math, the more connections, many time unexplainable, are found between its variuos parts. And it has nothing to do with applications to physics- most of the math is still not applicated anywhere- but it is obvious that math has inner complicated structure which can not be violated and which moves towards some closed system in limit.

Now why would math be made that way? My thinking is, math as part or language of inforamtion world is tightly connected with physical - so not everything is possible. If it is connected with physical, or Aether, then

1) When we have a coherent mathematical idea , it resonates
2) I am not talkking about totally incoherent ideas- they are just noise, not linked to the structure of math
3) So math has a medium as well, which has certain resonance properties singling out possible paths of development
4) This medium is the same as we are talking about, namely, either Aether , or better, sticky liquid Aether, so , as it acts as a resonance filter, it must have at least standign waves in it ;although I suspect strongly it is MOVING as a complex structures, patterns in this sticky liquid, and only those patterns which are in resonance with this sticky liquid motion persist.
5) In the end, the mathematical stable patterns drive , transform the primordial matter via Information space in physical laws, and noise sends part of it back.
bukh
Hej Ivars

QUOTE: "although I suspect strongly it is MOVING as a complex structures,"

How do you define "moving"
Ivars
QUOTE (bukh+Jul 29 2007, 08:01 AM)
Hej Ivars

QUOTE: "although I suspect strongly it is MOVING as a complex structures,"

How do you define "moving"

hej bukh

Take Mobius strip, or double mobius strip ( = Klein bottle) and paint a pattern on it. Imagine it is kind of filtering porous border to something (e.g. wine in the Klein bottle). Let these surfaces rotate so that a point comes back to where it was after full rotation. It will be mirror imaged, so it will need 4PI rotation (2 circles) to get back as it was.

So this is the first movement- of surface against the content.

Now imagine that all patterns must have the property to be able to be the same after 4pi rotation, even after they have been stretched and interacted with wine in the bottle during the rotation.

When wine quantizes into e.g pixels, the borders between pixels connect to the flow at the borders of the bottle- so again surfaces on a smaller scale are moving against content.

And I think the wine is moving both into the flowing borders of the bottle - stretched- and between the pixels via borders that they have.

It is very difficult question I would like to leave open for the time being.
yquantum
bukh, Ivars, Laidback, et al,

QUOTE
So I do not think that QM is basically wrong - but it is an incomplete theory, in as much as QM does not answer the very fundamental questions about wave and particle. I am not saying that we will get answers about the true Origen - but I say that we need a better understanding - and bettter definitions of the principal elements that is being used in QM - a one step deeper insight.
by bukh

Correct, I believe if you questioned any practicing physicist she/he would concur with you -- I do as well.

Problem, even on this site and you have realized that this Physorg Forum is very relaxed as it should - because all views cover the spectrum of levels of expertise. In fact this could be the very site in which someone will discover a more complete theory or theories. Models.

You should identified with this, the Genome Project & ACTG's of the DNA you have a working model yet so much to learn but it is a starting place to find cures in the future. What a jump in your field and now you have the blueprint that will go down in history as one of the greatest.

QM has progress because of hard work and many years of data to support its findings, it works and the laws it implies work and the problem you mentioned is correct mostly because I would think you as well as many of us do not like, probabilities but I believe there is one aspect of the model that will stand, when you get down to the QM level you are no longer in Kansas?

Let me give you a point to consider and we will not get all wrapped up with the QL/J --- you, me & everyone else on this site is made up of 99% empty space, we only know 4% of what our UNIVERSE is made of, & there seems to be shadows of other dimensions [still on the table] but that is just how much we do not know. This is my point.

So as I have said in the past post, question everything and if you believe in the pixel model make sure you can predict a result which will show validity to your model.

Best & ciao_
yquantum
Laidback
QUOTE (bukh+Jul 27 2007, 06:48 PM)
Hey Laidback

QUOTE (Laidback+)
"Now imagine having to traverse all the above areas if they were returned to their full area of occupation via NOT being compressed.."

Not an easy post to grasp - anyhow if I read you rightly - my answer would be that we have transformations - scale-transformations - and one transformational zone is the pixel. Pixel expressing wave-patterns is in my mind an ideal way of defining "forces" in an ordered manner, so that Informational Physical Matter = Pixel matter = all forces belonging to this part of Universe, is orderly stored within the pixel.
I forgot to point out I do AGREE to a certain point, noting the Pixels and or grids are there only for theoretical convenience, as are set quanta for all theoretical particles, which in essence are much like your pixels, only they are confused to be with momentum rather than the contents being with meeting velocities that result in relative space-time compression points..

I should point out the below model from NASA was meant to depict a single two dimensional plane of Space-Time.

When one considers the theoretical pixels and or Grids and how they MUST conform to General and special Relativity with respects to compression points, each theoretical pixel and or grid must be compressed more than the other end, the end that is farthest from the compression point is always occupying more of an area, and when another compression wave is experienced we have change and whats more these theoretical grids can point out how the lensing effect is possible!

And when we need to consider speed, we also need to calculate the change in speed so that everything remains relative to what ever co-ordinates one is referencing..

For example, the closer to the core of a given compression point the slower the Unrelated speed would seem, IE {perceived kinetic energy exchanged to Potential energy}
Err, I should point out this is where most, including the most brilliant minds! can get relativity all wrong! In fact, that's why the above model from NASA is wrong with respects to where mass should be exchanged to maximum relative Potential Energy, the implied forces via theoretical velocities in the above image actually imply we can jump from one point from the planet into space with the greatest of ease.

Cheers!

Peter J Schoen.
bukh
yquantum

QUOTE: "Let me give you a point to consider and we will not get all wrapped up with the QL/J --- you, me & everyone else on this site is made up of 99% empty space, we only know 4% of what our UNIVERSE is made of, & there seems to be shadows of other dimensions [still on the table] but that is just how much we do not know. This is my point."

Thank you - your comments have been truely appreciated - BTW - I think that you, me & everyone else on this site is made by 100% pixels - !

Have you any suggestions how to get clues about Pixels - by their indirect effects???
Laidback
QUOTE (Montec+Jul 28 2007, 04:50 AM)
Hello yquantum, et al.

Hehe, the spin of an electron is relative. The electron is the same but the orientation of the spin axis is free to point in any direction.  An outside magnetic field is needed to affect/define the axis orientation.

UCT's do make the exchange of ideas somewhat difficult, but that is life and life goes on.

How the electron behaves under different circumstances is something to think about. Lets look at three models for a photon emission from an atom.

#1 The electron does not change energy shells by movement but the dielectric space within the atom changes as a function of energy absorption and emission. The energy is stored and released from an actual change in the permittivity and permeability of space.

#2The electron changes energy shells by movement but the movement lags behind or precedes the absorption or emission events, respectively, of a photon.

#3The electron changes energy shells by tunneling.

Each of the above models will give the appearance of "no time" or "quantum jumps" within the atom. The actual mechanism maybe one or a combination (or none) of the above models. But it should be noted that the larger the jump, the higher the frequency of the photon. This implies that the actual volume/area involved with the photon absorption or emission may not be a linear relationship.

I am inclined to favor the #2 model since the electron's behavior outside the atom must also be considered.

A quick simple question.

with reference to electron Spin?

What forces and or better yet the velocities for implied forces resulting in spin of theoretical electron do the velocities originate from?

can you explain the dynamics beyond the electron?
And in fact what velocities imply the Electrons structure and or form?

what velocities does your model consider for the greater environment?

How does the electrons forces and or the velocities that imply its forces interact with other particles forces?

Put simply why don't they fully comply to Newtons Laws on FORCE and MOTION?
and how is this ever possible if you imply the Theoretical Electron to be with Momentum IE (SPIN) and FORCE IE (charge)?
Laidback
QUOTE (Neil Farbstein+Jul 28 2007, 03:24 PM)

Feynmans diagram

Excellent!

As it actually agrees to a certain point with real working models and is very close to a REAL working model or proper reality, Let me point out I have made it clear the areas that I refer to are theoretical, Feynman does not clearly point out his theoretical boundaries, and if one is not mindful of this at all times, one can actually take on a reality that is in part really only theoretical so to speak.. like treating theoretical quanta IE (Particles) as if they are actual reality, when really the implied particles quanta is only a theoretical number calculated with another theoretical quanta or reference..

I would suggest everyone go over ones work with this in mind, perhaps it will become clear as to where implied theoretical constructs and boundaries must be applied and removed so that one can consider proper reality..

But above all! I strongly suggest one fully understands Newtons Laws on Force and Motion, because all PHYSICS in reality DOES and must comply to it..

If one is mindful that all forces are the result of its velocities IE (Kinetic Energy), and all velocities are the result of Force IE (Potential Energy), Physics will begin to make astounding progress in understanding what is implied by Potential Kinetic Energy IE {MASS} an area implied with a given quanta "A theoretical quanta"} via implying the theoretical area is experiencing meeting velocities at "c" which is the cause for space-time compression to our theoretical area so that special and general relativity can be considered correctly with respects to Mass and or Force and its implied momentum relative to other Forces and its momentum.

Cheers to all!

Peter J Schoen.
yquantum
Lb, bukh, Ivars, NF, et al,

Laidback, I think you should see how far you can go with the site that Neil F has given. I believe NF has served you well on this.

But you have asked a question -- and I think we started out maybe with some misunderstandings but after I reading your up on your model, I do understand completely your reaction, and now we both know.

Let me think of a way for your to consideration => dealing with the e- spin that might make it more palatable.

A good question which deserves a direct answer which I feel can be provided to your (? ) satisfaction - this would be my hope.

bukh, not sure I can help you on your quest -- I must say what I have read and it could be due the fact that when you mentioned pixel's it reminded me due to association of the => Holography Universe Model, are you familiar with this?

caio_
yquantum
yquantum
Laidback et al,

I wanted to give you some example of application of the model used e-. This way you see it is not just theoretical and we are not in some delusional state of mind, well I cannot prove the last comment come to think about it.

http://www.whatsnextnetwork.com/technology.../p5498#more5498

caio_
yquantum

bukh, I am reading your replies to see {now that is a good one } what I might have overlooked -- truthfully I am not sure I understand the premise.

ciao_
yquantum
Laidback
QUOTE (yquantum+Jul 30 2007, 10:58 AM)
Laidback et al,

I wanted to give you some example of application of the model used e-.  This way you see it is not just theoretical and we are not in some delusional state of mind,  well I cannot prove the last comment come to think about it.

http://www.whatsnextnetwork.com/technology.../p5498#more5498

caio_
yquantum

Excellent!
This is indeed good news..

To think, it only took other research teams fifteen years to catch up, I give it another five years - Perhaps less.. if they are utilizing a larger research team..

Hey! They could even be disbanding the inference to the electron area consisting with spin perhaps next year!.

Mark my words! If they are to supersede my research there is no other way..

Thanks for that Yquantum..

Cheers,

Peter J Schoen.
yquantum
Laidback, bukh, Ivars, NF, et al,

Glad you have found something that is of encouragement in your quest, Laidback.

bukh, hope you found some reference on the model mentioned.

http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/29893

ciao_
yquantum
Laidback
QUOTE (yquantum+Jul 31 2007, 04:25 AM)
Laidback, bukh, Ivars, NF, et al,

Glad you have found something that is of encouragement in your quest, Laidback.

bukh, hope you found some reference on the model mentioned.

http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/29893

ciao_
yquantum

Yes Yquantum,

But alas my joy was short lived, because as I lay in bed and went back over as to how I stumbled onto the fact that spin isn't an actuality, I am fearful that none of the active research members today may be mindful that all physics MUST fully conform and comply AT ALL levels, to Newtons Basic Laws in respects to Force and Motion, "The Standard Model" and its non compliance to it, is to blame for all of our woes and misconceptions, the good thing is this deliberately introduced deception will expose many more facts anyway!
And at least these facts will rip down the hidden agenda with no chance of recovery!

<Sigh> My only hope is some bright spark working with the "LHC" wipes the slate clean when faced with the problem and insists ALL Forces and in-particular all velocities must comply to Newtons Laws..

I know it's Hardly likely if the theoretical particles don't need to comply to Newtons Laws in the first place, all I can do is hope the LHC may result with researchers forced to consider compliance to Newtons Laws!

Until then I guess - Magic, Miracles, Uncertainty and Religion will plague and persist in holding back Science and Physics..

Cheers!

Peter J Schoen..

Watch those religiously run Universities influences and hidden agenda's Guys ?! Err~& Gals.
yquantum
Laidback, bukh, Ivars, NF, et al,

As you know the SM was formulated during the 70's (early) & I must mention that does not include the discovery that neutrinos have (M).

I do not want to play both sides of this issue but I can be candid about the problem it has as you have pointed out, YOU NOT ALONE there are some in my humble view some problems that cannot be overlooked.

1. The constants [define constant in your mind] well they are adjustable but the surprise is that any value concerning the experiment will show the theory mathematically consistent. (You can read this about anywhere you might look when you study the SM.)

2. You know that there are about twenty constants -- hope you see the problem here for I will not go into detail.

I use it because it works and it is a great tool but anyone who works close with this model knows there has to be something more. But we all know this and working so hard to correct it around the world.

That is were I am, a REALIST by nature not just what I see lacking in the frame of reference I work in. I must say I hope that when LHC from CERN goes on line soon - it will cause chaos in particle physics because of new data which I hope will be a new turn in the world of physics as we know it up side down.

So keep pushing and stay focused -- someone one day will discover that there is a complete model or at least a better one --- or we just might find ourselves =>?.

caio_
yquantum
bukh
yquantum

Thanks very much for yuor pointing out Holographic Universe - with the Bohm and Pribram ideas - which are in my eyes really very exciting - and yes bears many points of resemblance with the ideas of the 3D Pixel Universe.

just a little citation:

"But the most mind-boggling aspect of Pribram's holographic model of the brain is what happens when it is put together with Bohm's theory. For if the concreteness of the world is but a secondary reality and what is "there" is actually a holographic blur of frequencies, and if the brain is also a hologram and only selects some of the frequencies out of this blur and mathematically transforms them into sensory perceptions, what becomes of objective reality?"

I could not put better words on it.

And a few more citations:

"Researchers have discovered, for instance, that our visual systems are sensitive to sound frequencies, that our sense of smell is in part dependent on what are now called "cosmic frequencies", and that even the cells in our bodies are sensitive to a broad range of frequencies. Such findings suggest that it is only in the holographic domain of consciousness that such frequencies are sorted out and divided up into conventional perceptions.

We are really "receivers" floating through a kaleidoscopic sea of frequency, and what we extract from this sea and transmogrify into physical reality is but one channel from many extracted out of the superhologram.

Encoding and decoding frequencies is precisely what a hologram does best. Just as a hologram functions as a sort of lens, a translating device able to convert an apparently meaningless blur of frequencies into a coherent image, Pribram believes the brain also comprises a lens and uses holographic principles to mathematically convert the frequencies it receives through he senses into the inner world of our perceptions.

As the religions of the East have long upheld, the material world is Maya, an illusion, and although we may think we are physical beings moving through a physical world, this too is an illusion."

Look at the 3D Pixel Universe as a model which more concretely gives "One Example" how the PHYSICAL WORLD can be arranged, and in such a way that we better can deal with this physical part of our BEEING.

And at one occasion you said that you frankly were not sure if you understood the premise(s) of the 3D Pixel Universe. Could you mention one or more of the premises that you find difficult to accept.
Ivars
hej bukh yquantum et al

Just to let You know I am doing something I post this totally crude development of former ideas:

Right now I am trying to put super fluid turbulence (to get Kolmogorov length and time of Universe, of course) together with Universe CBR and temperature. I want to find out where Is Universe (liquid) Aether today- below or above lambda point? ( if that will prove applicable). I hope below, and not close.
As Aether has lower viscosity than He, its lambda point might be higher ?

So no Big Bang. Everything starts at T=OK (and cycle ends there as well when T exponentially gets over some limit- e.g. when we get fluid instead of super fluid and it overheats because of the viscosity-destroying all even smallest most stable resonance patterns by thermal noise kT) and HEATS up because of internal thermal motions as there is no T equalizing HEAT container which might be sustaining any given temperature of Universe (this has been proven experimentally in HeII) . Universe is heating up, not cooling, not stable- that is point Nr 1. No expansion related cooling, but motion resulting in matter related heating

T= f(effective viscosity which includes all motions/frictions appearing in Universe, including creation of matter and the friction -negative feedback stabilizing force it feeds back to Aether). As we know from Super fluid turbulence, it can only dissipate by:

1) sound waves below quantized vortex scale created from excitations of vortexes connecting OR breaking - sound waves in Aether- why not EM waves?

2) breaking of vortexes into smaller ones until it reaches scale below scale vortex can exist ->turbulence.

Where does the energy which turns into heat (movement of things inside Aether with collisions or friction) via creation of viscosity comes from? External or internal rotation of something of a very special kind. But if we accept there might exist one with properties we need? That mostly UNIDIRECTIONAL rotation is the source of everything and is present in Aether is intuitively obvious in Nature.

Next question is if Universe today is at 2,7K black body radiation temperature what is present everywhere to create such distribution? the answer is obvious- something which has BOSE distribution over energies when T>0. Now what can that be - not the result, but CAUSE of BOSE distribution?

So essentially with increasing temperature of Universe we get smaller things in Aether creating background radiation (or any radiation) . They are breaking up. Also locally. If looked at distribution over wavelengths, it seems, there is kind of LONGEST limit at any given temperature, The longest limit of T=2,7K sits around 5 mm while shortest extend to (ALMOST) 0. ( Why not Kolmogorov length?) . Frequencies, on contrary, extend to almost infinity ( why not 4,43*10^65) while they have a lowest frequency limit somewhere around 100 GHz.
Then , also , these things have the property of adding 1/2 hv vacuum energy to any electron oscillators quantum mechanics energy. HOW?

What is the longest wavelength limit at T close to 0 for Universe? Actually, how is a rotating HeII organized at 0 K? are there quantized vortexes? Yes? Why it gets turbulent when there is no normal fluid component? Is there a quantisized grid /lattice (pixel type) inside which we can not see but what causes turbulence at very low T? Are vortexes initially taking max possible LENGTH in a given geometry? Can they be VERY long in some geometry? Can there be only 1 vortex initially ( like Hilbert curve goinf through all pixels) if there is special driving potential available or special shape of container with driving walls? I do not know.

Why I am putting this forward is that is intuitively leads to Kolmogorov scaling of Aether turbulence and smallest eddies being at Kolmogorov length l=G/c^2 m e = 6,76 * 10-58 m . Super fluid turbulence obeys Kolmogorov scaling very nicely in inertial range if there is DISSIPATION present in governing equations. About 3-4%.

So next guess is that visible matter 4% is the source of dissipation term below vortex formation length in Aether by acting back to it with friction. Then the rest 96% could be : Dark matter ( 26%)-normal fluid component (has viscosity- has mass) , Dark energy (70%) -superfluid component. This leads to conclusion that matter is something that heats up Aether, causes friction, is different, is neither superfluid not normal fluid but consists of the same smallest shapes as it is just a differently organized Aether- in form of sustainable resonance shapes-e.g. particles- instead of quantized vortexes.

May be these last analogies are not correct as 2 fluid model has not clear microscopic explanation, neither has Aether models, but the key is that if Aether behaves something like super fluid turbulence (in pure, empty vacuum) in somehow rotating frame, then the rest is possible to find out sooner or later. May be rotation is even not needed.

Excuse me for quite far fetched analogies, but they help me to understand what might be going on. This is only beginning:) Do not worry about accerated expansion of Universe, redshift can be taken care of by nonlineary increasing gravitation=time dilution= space stretching closer to the rotating "walls" of Universe so redshift actually happens at source.

Huh...
bukh
hej Ivars

As always very inspiring and good points you put forward.

Intuitively I feel that we are much more in agreement than you may think.

When we get down to the real essentials, then the EVERYTHING can be viewed in different ways - according to the "Pictures" from "Real World" we like to use - and one of mine (mis) persevera- tions is that I do not like MOTION in the way that motion is percepted in the physical world. Motion is a nice illusion in the physical world - but when we come down to the very essential - then motion becomes more and more problematic.

Having said that - I share a lot of what you put forward in the above.

QUOTE: "So no Big Bang. Everything starts at T=OK"

Yes, that is where I say T0 = first physical expression, is first math. point in Physical Informational Space, the smallest possible physical expression that we can define. Next step more math. points leading to 3D and pixel matter, then pixels playing , first wave patterns and so on ---.

Overheating - destroying, yes perhaps - or perhaps an ever increasing Universe. Destroying temperature (if such a thing exists), that would be when Pixels is forced to play faster than there "Delay Time" allows.

SUPERFLUID - try to think of superfluid as a 3D Pixel Grid. All the qualities of a superfluid you can express via such pixels exhibiting delay function. And then back to basic with INFORMATION as your essential source of energy. Energy IS motion, and motion IS change, and change IS information. try to forget about an internal rotation of a very special kind - it is no more than a superflous extra layer of complications.

QUOTE: "So essentially with increasing temperature of Universe we get smaller things in Aether creating background radiation (or any radiation) . They are breaking up."

I would say in reverse order. The first thing to happen is that smallest matter is being created (expressed) and that turns temperature. Pixels starts expressing smallest wave-structures and interfrence patterns are being created and so on---

QUOTE: "If looked at distribution over wavelengths, it seems, there is kind of LONGEST limit at any given temperature, The longest limit of T=2,7K sits around 5 mm while shortest extend to (ALMOST) 0. ( Why not Kolmogorov length?) . Frequencies, on contrary, extend to almost infinity ( why not 4,43*10^65) while they have a lowest frequency limit somewhere around 100 GHz."

I am curious to know from where and how you calculate these figures?

QUOTE: "So next guess is that visible matter 4% is the source of dissipation term below vortex formation length in Aether by acting back to it with friction. Then the rest 96% could be : Dark matter ( 26%)-normal fluid component (has viscosity- has mass) , Dark energy (70%) -superfluid component. This leads to conclusion that matter is something that heats up Aether, causes friction, is different, is neither superfluid not normal fluid but consists of the same smallest shapes as it is just a differently organized Aether- in form of sustainable resonance shapes-e.g. particles- instead of quantized vortexes."

I think that this can freely be translated into something like: dark matter (26%) is all wave-interference patterns played by the pixels, and with the characteristic that all this dark matter structure is below human detection levels, and dark energy (70%) is mute pixels, potentially able to play. All matter, both visible and dark, contributes to temperature, and contributes to mass.

3D Pixel Screen is a true interphase - and it can show two different existances:

1) 3D Pixel Screen (Aether) - no pixels playing - mute screen - equivalent to non-perceptable aether - NOTHING for us humans to percept - we have no means to sense the pixel screen,

2) 3D Pixel Screen - pixels playing - active screen - expressing matter - IS matter - now the pixels suddenly have become PART of matter - some day we may even be able to percept smallest expression of matter (dark matter)

QUOTE: "May be rotation is even not needed." THANK YOU.
yquantum
bukh, Ivars, et al,

It seems that this is of interest to you both and for that reason I never want to discourage any constructs that might have information/possiblities in our better understanding of the universe in which we live.

This comes with references that you might want to pursue when time allows -- also know that it is rather recent and the source is as you will see came from Scientific America if I remember around 2003/?.

Hope it will shed some light [PUN] dealing with your questions.

After working with QM for so long I believe anything is possible -- if it cannot happen it WILL. Well almost?

ciao_
yquantum
samcox
Particulation in the universe is indeed an interesting, and somewhat involved process. Einstein, Bohr and others did a two year study quite a while back which pretty conclusively indicated that the universe will only particulate in 4 dimensions...3 of space and 1 of time. This is a confirmation of GR for that concept is 4D. It is important to note that the above information does not limit the number of dimensions in the universal structure...it only confirms that particulation, if it is to occur, occurs in that manner. For example, a universe with two 4D "tracks" can particulate just as nicely as a universe with one 4D "track".

The process by which matter forms in the sub-microscopic is not involved or difficult to understand at all. As scale decreases, the amount of energy density required to form a black hole decreases...at first slowly and then toward the Planck Realm, very rapidly. From about 10 to the minus 8th centimeters downward, the universe is very much a quantum phenomenon...even atoms can be described as particles OR waves.

At the lower levels of scale, the amount of energy concentration necessary to produce a black hole becomes so small that normal quantum fluctuations and local concentrations of energy can produce...particles. An understanding of the geometry is very important. Everything which happens in the universe happens cat invariant frames of reference. What happens at one point in the coordinate system stays there essentially forever. To understand how this can be so in the rapidly pulsating quantum realm we must understand the GR scale forumlae. What seems random and transient, when observed at higher levels of scale in extreme gravitational time dilation, "freezes"....just as an astronaut approaching a black hole, when observed from a distance would freeze and remain on the edge.

However, the Planck Realm is not a galactic black hole (though both are part of the "dark energy" matrix). The particles we observe in the sub-microscopic (almost) "freeze" into information and complexity, time and space...the vastness of our universe. I say almost for a reason. Because of scale relationships, some particles are short lived, while others such as the proton exist virtually for the same period as the existence of the universe itself (that is no coincidence!).

So the process by which particulation occurs...a QM matter, occurs as a result of relationships of scale described in the GR/SRT forumlae and the Schwarzschild geometry. SRT/GR and QM are truly closely related!

HOW related these ideas are can be seen in the fact that Einsteins grand proportion in confirmed in the way particles form from energy at the quantum level of scale.
Ivars
QUOTE (samcox+Jul 31 2007, 07:17 PM)
At the lower levels of scale, the amount of energy concentration necessary to produce a black hole becomes so small that normal quantum fluctuations and local concentrations of energy can produce...particles. An understanding of the geometry is very important. Everything which happens in the universe happens cat invariant frames of reference. What happens at one point in the coordinate system stays there essentially forever. To understand how this can be so in the rapidly pulsating quantum realm we must understand the GR scale formula. What seems random and transient, when observed at higher levels of scale in extreme gravitational time dilation, "freezes"....just as an astronaut approaching a black hole, when observed from a distance would freeze and remain on the edge.

So the process by which particulation occurs...a QM matter, occurs as a result of relationships of scale described in the GR/SRT forumlae and the Schwarzschild geometry. SRT/GR and QM are truly closely related!

HOW related these ideas are can be seen in the fact that Einsteins grand proportion in confirmed in the way particles form from energy at the quantum level of scale.

Samcox

That is almost exactly what I am trying to find out- why it happens so? What drives it (could drive it?).

I agree that black holes are in fact finite size singularities- SOURCES AND SINKS which actually are involved at matter and particle production and destruction- but not from other universes, but from sub matter scale thing-which we can call Aether, Vacuum, Space . There is no need for more than 4 dimensions in our matter side of these sources, however, on the other side I feel things turn around and there are 3 time dimensions and 1 space-but that is very disputable. The reason is, I do not see any need in Aether without gravitation and matter to have space dimensions as there is nothing to measure- at least not more than 1.

I think on the other side of a black hole, in Aether, Space, Vacuum, is a very special type vortex of Aether. The scale of matter sources/sinks can be as small as electron creating black hole-Kolmogorov length vortex l=G/c^2 * m e, or maybe as big as observable in quasars if conditions happen to be that dissipation of Aether energy can occur in such big scales directly into visible matter.

The freezing of particles and long life times can be explained by time dilation on the edge of the black hole from our side, but what causes this dilation, what causes mass? Alternatively, particles can be a stable vortex breakdown =resonance structures of Aether . This e.g. allows to include life as a special form of particle=double helix. The smallest double helix type stable Aether vortex resosnance structure IS the most primitive building block and appearance of life.

What flows via particle so that E=mc^2 is true? I guess we have to look at other side, or, better, at both sides simultaneously.

yquantum
samcox, welcome- bukh, Ivars, Laidback, et al,

samcox, your comment was clear I hope you understand this is what bukh is working on - it is really deals with pixels and the universe.

I am not in this field of study but I am interested in outside views and when he mentioned pixels it reminded me of the Holographic Universe Theory.

I read what you said if there was time we could cover some points but there is not. But as I have mentioned to bukh- that due to dark energy and matter 70/26 -- it is very difficult to quantitatively assets any real model of the universe to our understanding as of today.

This is just my opinion and from my frame of reference.

Qm, does not as you well know make it any easier for us due to the uncertainty theory and the weirdness it presents in actual experiment.

Thank you for your comment and maybe you three, Ivars & bukh can exchange ideas. I just might comment and mention the Higgs boson for a review.

ciao_
yquantum

samcox, just for the record I believe you will find that on the very quantitative level you will only have waves. We say in lectures that there is a wave/particle duality -- to keep from frying the 101 students minds.
Turya
QUOTE (samcox+Jul 31 2007, 07:17 PM)
...

So the process by which particulation occurs...a QM matter, occurs as a result of relationships of scale described in the GR/SRT forumlae and the Schwarzschild geometry. SRT/GR and QM are truly closely related!

HOW related these ideas are can be seen in the fact that Einsteins grand proportion in confirmed in the way particles form from energy at the quantum level of scale.

But HOW? What of relations you (or someone else) can provide? What realistic phenomena can support such a stance?

You know, in a way to see a general picture we simply must get rid from the old. Almost from all of them and for the moment at least. Why? Because the "general picture" exists out there from the "very beginning" and all our particular theories, no matter how nice and complex seem to be, are simply WRONG from such a perspective.

As I can see, too many authors are not aware of that simple fact. On the other hand, if one claims that he has an valuable insight he simply must provide direct predictions otherwise unreachable.

So I can predict one fact for sure. In the beginning of the "New Cosmic Science" it will be rejected or ignored from both sides, being "mainstream" or not. Simple because of the above reasons. Otherwise, such a truth wouldn't be a truth at all.

Regards to All
Zephir
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 1 2007, 12:01 AM)
I hope you understand this is what bukh is working on - it is really deals with pixels and the universe

What testable can you predict such concept?
How can you falsify this concept?
bukh
Zephir

QUOTE: "QUOTE (yquantum @ Aug 1 2007, 12:01 AM)
I hope you understand this is what bukh is working on - it is really deals with pixels and the universe

Zephir: "What testable can you predict such concept?
How can you falsify this concept?"

Zephir
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 1 2007, 01:01 AM)

bukh
Zephir

Oh my dear - do you really expect me to be able to answer that kind of questions - you are expecting too much from me - remember I am but a humble human being.

BTW there are a few questions pending that you have not answered as yet.
yquantum
bukh, Laidback, Ivars, et al,

Just a little advice bukh, zep will do this through out this site & post. He will answer your questions with a question.

You are truly looking for some solution, he just wants to disrupt any post possible => if you interact with him. It is your choice!

Check around and see how he interacts with everyone on this entire post.

But show respect as you have and just ignore him.

caio_
yquantum
bukh
yquantum

QUOTE: "he just wants to disrupt any post possible => if you interact with him. It is your choice!"

Thanks. I try to let be - but I am a human being - and sometimed get tempted. Z. started to insult many months ago, and I have learned that an overnice - sarcastic reply is my best weapon. Second best to ignore. Forum would benefit if we all ignored.
Ivars
hej bukh, samcox , yquantum et al

The only meaningful spatial dimension in Aether ( be it moving or motionless) is the length of vortex cores.

The rest is wave phenomena in Aether which can be described as changes - 3 Time dimensions. 3D Frequency space.

One of the time dimensions goes always together with vortex core in Aether, so s/m becomes meaningful combination- changes per space=information.Every information can only be expressed as changes per space, be it hard disc of human memory etc.

The other 2 time dimensions in Aether I do not have a clue about but they must come as a pair, on some TIME surface. What could be their meaning - it has to be related with the transformation back from physical space into informational via matter sink-finite singularity-black hole - when this happens, stable information PARTICLES can be formed in Aether which has more than 1 time dimensions, but 3, 1 along vortex core, 2 along TIME surfaces ( whatever it means) and can serve to build up complex informational organisms, for example, which exist in Aether. Also perhaps having stable helical vortex breakdown structures in TIME as well, so able to "live" in a sense.
yquantum
Ivars, bukh, samcox , et al,

http://www.fen.bilkent.edu.tr/~yalabik/applets/collapse.html

It is like a question that was asked how a e- has a wave function. I understand somethings cannot be observed and I concede to this when it come to the QM world.

QUOTE
The rest is wave phenomena in Aether which can be described as changes - 3 Time dimensions. 3D Frequency space. The rest is wave phenomena in Aether which can be described as changes - 3 Time dimensions. 3D Frequency space.

This I must say that I have not seen any evidence of the substance called Aether there would have been data to support this even with the technology we have today. Now you might want to change the your direction to vacuum space with the seething particles that include VP's et..

I respect your view but would like to see some time of data to support.

bukh, you made a comment that the 99..... empty space we are made of could be pixels. Could you explain this I am not sure how pixels and force fields relate?

ciao_
yquantum
samcox
To understand how, and know why particulation happens is different from generally describing the format and mathematical functions on the process.
If we come at this from another angle, maybe we can at least get some perspective on particulation.

The best way to describe the universe is in terms of energy densities. That sounds obvious, but it has some profound implications and raises some important questions.

First since the universe consists of energy densities there is no vacuum...even space itself is massed...the Planck Realm, which exists not only in space, but is the foundation of everything. The Planck Realm is singular. At lower scales, quantum fluctuations in the Planck Realm result in the formation of particles. The Planck Realm is, therefore, the basis for what we know as "gravity".

The formation and stratification of particles with their varying masses and periods of existence is morphologically similar to planetary formation, in the sense that spin principles are involved. Remember that the Planck Realm is timeless and space less...it can only be defined from outside in the space/time lattice observing inward. Furthermore, the Planck Realm represents a kind of Newtonian gravity...as gravity it is nearly instantly propagating throughout the universe.

Gravity from our frame is observed to propagate at the speed of light, in fact from 4D observing frames, the speed of light (also requiring time of course) is a kind of universal speed limit...nothing in normal measurement is observed to exceed it- even if gravity actually does! An important conclusion of what we know about the nature of the universe- and the truth of the existence of singularity and black holes-is that there is something far more fundamental and significant about the universes structure than what we see and directly measure.

Spin requires time by definition. When quantum fluctuations reach a certain level of GR scale, above the amorphous cosmic singular abyss, spin begins and energy density fluctuations begin to form particles...which particles is primarily related to the level of scale at which a particular kind of particle is formed...more common, less common, more massive, less massive, short lived or long lived.

What we call "spin" is, close to the Planck Realm, something quite different, for because of quantum effects, electrons for example may be observed to take on particulate qualities (a cathode ray TV) or cloud like qualities (as around atomic information). In our universe, spin develops with increasing scale and does not become spin as we define it until above the level of atomic scale (10 to the minus 8th CM) where quantum effects begin to be observed to diminish. We observe particles and even atoms below atomic scale to have "wave/particle duality".

Why does energy naturally form densities, information and even biological complexity within the GR scale and according to the formulae and transforms of SRT? That is a 64 dollar question. At Fermi, they are looking at the particulation and complexity forming processes as I write this.

Where energy came from I don't know. What I can say is that the universe is energy and would not exist without it. GR scale and SRT transforms would not exist without energy and the grand proportion of Einstein by which energy density matter is formed from photons.

Perhaps, given the existence of energy in a finite and exact amount ( the standard model demands a specific density for the universe at the big bang, and density formulae do not admit infinities), the universe, over eternity could have developed complexity phylogenically (by evolving) according to certain built in fundamental mathematical relationships...those of GR with invariant frames, etc.

One of the philosophical issues which has many scientists scrambling for something "beyond Einstein" is their discomfort with a quasi-static rigid model with ulta-slow change and especially the implication that the universe may be a construct. Of course, the Einstein universe is eternal by definition and also there is nothing outside it...again by definition. Personally I believe that energy has always existed, but complexity has not. There must be something in the nature of energy itself which predisposes it to act in the SRT/GR/QM fashion...which again brings one to the uncomfortable notion that energy is something really special and inherently complex, whether it has existed for eternity- or not!

Best Wishes
Ivars
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 1 2007, 06:15 PM)
Ivars, bukh, samcox , et al,

http://www.fen.bilkent.edu.tr/~yalabik/applets/collapse.html

This I must say that I have not seen any evidence of the substance called Aether there would have been data to support this even with the technology we have today. Now you might want to change the your direction to vacuum space with the seething particles that include VP's et..

Yquantum,

Well its not so easy... It is everywhere, moving, but the only way today to detect it is by constructing a theory based on Aether which accounts for much more things than QM etc. Because it is so subtle...

The problem is, that moving Aether is akin to super fluid turbulence+normal turbulence+dissipative nonlinear systems +OPEN systems etc so none of the phenomena even have reasonable theory explaining them, so no wonder Aether based theories can not improve mainstream linear approximations /perturbation approximations/continuous math approximations etc for calculations.

Qualitatively though it can. Call it energy, vacuum, Aether , it helps to understand things current math models can not cope with. I hope simple formulas can be found that have general character, but before that is possible, total picture of how vacuum works must be understood exactly qualitatively.

For example, the wave function imaginary part in simulation You mention, if mapped, can be perceived as Aether wave which superluminally transfers information and actually allows electron-or rather, Aether waves constituting and surrounding it- to be slightly dispersed before gathering them together at detector exactly. I do not say this is the exact interpretation, but if any quantum process involves imaginary waves, why can not they be in Aehter? Imaginary means that they directly are not perceivable in our space, but the result of their interaction with it is.
Ivars
QUOTE (samcox+Aug 1 2007, 08:39 PM)
There must be something in the nature of energy itself which predisposes it to act in the SRT/GR/QM fashion...which again brings one to the uncomfortable notion that energy is something really special and inherently complex, whether it has existed for eternity- or not!

Have You noticed that mathematics as well seem to somehow manage to get to the right relations, leaving many hidden connections between its parts still undiscovered?

There is something in mathematics that predisposes it to building complexity in a certain way that complies with certain parts of mathematics we have discovered...

So if energy is physical expression of something really special, then mathematics (+language+music+++) is and can be informational something really special and both these things are deeply connected.

if we consider transformation of pure primordial energy , unharmonic, into harmonic complexity, why can not it happen via filter that is essentially physical expression of mathematics? How? That can be found out by finding what unifies them (Aether phases?) , and what is the hidden structure of mathematics. Why pi is pi and e is e in our Universe? why e^ip+1=0? why monster group? etc.

From my point of view, harmonic energy comes from mathematical FLOW/construct of some medium which transforms primordial matter into informational and physical complexity we perceive.
yquantum
Ivars, samcox, bukh, et al,

I think it could be detected just by experiment which the data would show that the Aether is not present. That is if I take the Aether with the association that goes with it. Math is not the problem as I see it. [pun]

samcox,

Is this what you are saying about energy density. I know I have mentioned this before and remember this is really textbook, the distribution of a fixed amount of energy among a number of identical particles depends upon the density of available energy states and the probability that a given state will be occupied.

The probability that a given energy state will be occupied is given by the distribution function, but if there are more available energy states in a given energy interval, then that will give a greater weight to the probability for that energy interval.

ciao_
yquantum
Zephir
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 2 2007, 12:33 AM)
...experiment which the data would show that the Aether is not present...

This is just a naive demagogy, because the nonexistence of something cannot be proven by any experiment. The experiments are demonstrating just the light speed invariance, the gravitational redshift, time dilatation and other phenomena without relevant explanation.

At the moment, the inertial environment concept (aka Aether) can help to explain such observation, the corresponding experiments will become the best confirmation of Aether concept instead. I suppose, the Aether hypothesis will be dead in the moment, when the people like you will start to interpret it by the same way, like the relativity today: from position of dumb, naive religion in its omnipotence.
bukh
yquantum

QUOTE: "bukh, you made a comment that the 99..... empty space we are made of could be pixels. Could you explain this I am not sure how pixels and force fields relate?"

Or to be more accurate 100 %

What are we made of ? - I say that we - everything, IS wave-interference phenomena / structures. So that is what we are made of.

So now we need to define how the waves are being made - and I say that all waves are being expressed by the pixels -

Force field ? - must have something to do with energy - and what is energy?. I say that energy is the potential to make a change - and a change is being defined by one well defined "frozen" stage - followed by the next, and with a slight change (like pictures in a movie). PHYSICAL means that the expression can be frozen for a period of time (can express / define a picture - that is the very essential definition of physical)

Any physical expression is played by the pixels. The pixels are filling fundamental space completely - shoulder by shoulder - like a 3D grid. Any wave can be expressed by the pixels by the signal ON - provided that this is with a well defined delay time from pixel to pixel - otherwise it would not have been a wave.

HOW the pixel initiate a wave - do not ask - but any wave started will get into interference and come back in a new wave-formation, and will hit the pixel again.

So the pixels initiate and sustain any wave-formation. So in a frozen well defined state it is the number and pattern of pixels playing that define the picture - and in the next following frozen state a new combination of pixels will define the next picture - that IS change, that IS mtion, that IS energy.

Energy has nothing to do with so-called spin of a particle - nothing to do with some obscure source of "energy" - energy is no more no less than the information expressed via the pixels playing.

So when the pixels are mute - they will mimic - or will BE the aether - total vacuum - no matter whatsoever. And once the pixels start to play they will start to express matter - they will BE matter- and that is how aether transforms into matter - how energy starts to exist in a physical form (information translated into physical - also meaning that there will always be the amounf of energy as needed - no more no less - and needed is defined by the information laying behind the physical expression).

I do not know if this is what you aimed at in your question about the relation between pixels and force fields.

So put shortly Pixels are everything and nothing - depending on their ON - OFF signal. Not easy to define experimental conditions to verify Nothing - and when ON the pixels ARE matter - and still as such invisible in the sense that pixels cannot be separated from matter.

But by defining the pixel by its scale size and its delay-time(s) - I envisage that a pretty good deal of universal constants can be derived - and that we shall learn to translate most or all of QM qualities into wave-pattern definitions - being based upon the pixels.

The very existance of the pixels - also makes the concept of motion to be a very delicate question - there cannot be motion in the sense that a particlec cannot move into space - there exist no such thing as free space. Everything MUST be expressed via pixel-waves - and everything is oscillating and constantly being re-expressed. And this oscillating being, is the BEAT OF THE UNIVERSE. It is the smallest QUANT - the smallest TIME UNIT. It is the driving force of universe. And from where do we get that beat - do not ask for the moment.

jal
QUOTE
The pixels are filling fundamental space completely - shoulder by shoulder - like a 3D grid.

I disagree. See my summary page
jal
yquantum
bukh, jal, Ivars, samcox et al,

bukhI must read your post a little more slowly & try and digest what you have made reference to.

I had worked on this theory for sometime and now have entered into another field -- reason which I will not go into. But the gist of what you said sounds like superstring theory or M-theory.

Please look into it if you have not heard of it but you would almost have had to or you were so engrossed in your other occupation -- which can happen to all of us.

jal, I could not with good conscience copy and paste something that is copyrighted dealing with the other question you asked. It does cost and there are repercussions if broken.

I am sure you were just asking for a summation and it is about the same as we discussed but I will say the uncertainty theory is a problem at that level as you well know.

jal, give bukh the site in which you made mentioned so he can read it if that is your wish.

ciao_
yquantum
jal
Hi yquantum!
As you probably saw in the other thread I found the paper.
bukh
Here is my summary page.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...20&#entry243583
It's my learning curve
jal
Laidback
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 2 2007, 07:33 AM)
Ivars, samcox, bukh, et al,

I think it could be detected just by experiment which the data would show that the Aether is not present. That is if I take the Aether with the association that goes with it.  Math is not the problem as I see it. [pun]

samcox,

Is this what you are saying about energy density.  I know I have mentioned this before and remember this is really textbook, the distribution of a fixed amount of energy among a number of identical particles depends upon the density of available energy states and the probability that a given state will be occupied.

The probability that a given energy state will be occupied is given by the distribution function, but if there are more available energy states in a given energy interval, then that will give a greater weight to the probability for that energy interval.

ciao_
yquantum

Well put Yquantum,

And if we define theoretical three, four or even more dimensional areas we could imply how ones area decreases in energy (force) as a neighboring area increases in energy (force) via change and or velocities from one area to another, inferred as the kinetic Energy that increases the Potential Energy (force) for our theoretical areas.

Of course our theoretical areas can also be implied as theoretical Pixels and or even theoretical sub Atomic Particles with set functions and or velocities.
____________________________________________________________________
Cheers,

Peter J Schoen..
Ivars
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 1 2007, 11:33 PM)
The pixels are filling fundamental space completely - shoulder by shoulder - like a 3D grid.

hej bukh

i can not neither fully agree no be 100% sure it is not true. in T=0, before the first expression of physical space - definitely.

When sound waves in pixel "solid" Aehter begins, liduid Aether properties appear, turbulence - it may interact back on pixels-may be stretch them, tear?

Or, it all can happen on the bacground of firm pixel grid, totally unnoticeable, as You said. 70 % of energy still sits in that grid despite the fact of existance of Aehter vortices (26%) and expression/dissipation into matter (4%).

What happens with pixels when energy gets transformed into Aether liquid phase and matter as their share of energy decreases ( information, of course:))? Do they change?

Could be; Waves, waves.... What creates pixels- or are they the fundamental granular form of primordial matter so they are just there?

I am puzzled still.
bukh
Hej Ivars

QUOTE: " What creates pixels- or are they the fundamental granular form of primordial matter so they are just there?"

yes - but be careful - pixels - pixel matter is the primordial matter in smallest granular form - and being comprised of PHYSICAL INFORMATIONAL MATTER - which is all that part of information that belongs to physical universe - and that is the part of mathematics that probably is discontinued - and where the math. points have taken a size. Th eremaining part of informational world is containde in "sticky aether" which takes no space but make the borders to define one pixel from the other. And a border - a membrane takes no space.
bukh
Ivars

and pixel matter - yes - made of waves of course - and waves made by math points-
yquantum
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 2 2007, 11:01 AM)
Ivars

and pixel matter - yes - made of waves of course - and waves made by math points-

bukh, Ivars, Laidback, jal, et al,

bukh, just a simple question [no trap/hidden agenda] what is the model/dynamics that causes the waves -- please define what you mean by math points?

jal, when I have the time, I would like to respond to your question but on your site I have a question for you as well. If not I will contact you personally by PM's ...

Ivars, please think about this if there were a conspiracy to cover up the Aether it would be very difficult with scientist around the world wanting to make a break through not to reveal this median call Aether.

If they could prove it, it would bring some type of recognition for further study not to mention reputation as a scientist.

In science it is a very competitive arena in which to compete.

ciao_
yquantum
Brain W
HI, Yquantum, buhk, Ivars, Laidback,

Yq, I have a simple question for you, why then have they not found AWT, if seems to exist to me.

Electromagnetic Waves must travel in some type of source?

I know what what is said when you search for in on the web, but can the vacuum act as a medium there must be something.

Thanks,
Brain W
fivedoughnut
Hey Brain dude perhaps they do not travel ..... only pass into higher geometry.
I call it energy transdimensionality. What manisfests as distance maybe as simple as the infinite transition from one singularity state to another? i.e point to circle, circle to sphere etc
That's the cool deal and it's one I currently find positively cryogenic.

yquantum
QUOTE
Hey Brain dude perhaps they do not travel ..... only pass into higher geometry.
I call it energy transdimensionality. What manisfests as distance maybe as simple as the infinite transition from one singularity state to another? i.e point to circle, circle to sphere etc
That's the cool deal and it's one I currently find positively cryogenic.

It has been a long time, 5d & hope all is well with you and family.

Where did you get this information I would love to read up on it. Take care......I currently find positively cryogenic. I like it.... have to use that some time.

cioa_
yquantum
Laidback
QUOTE (Brain W+Aug 4 2007, 12:43 AM)
HI, Yquantum, buhk, Ivars, Laidback,

Yq, I have a simple question for you, why then have they not found AWT, if seems to exist to me.

Electromagnetic Waves must travel in some type of source?

I know what what is said when you search for in on the web, but can the vacuum act as a medium there must be something.

Thanks,
Brain W

An excellent Question,

And yes, Space and or NEAR vacuum (SPACE) is not empty or nothing (VOID)..

In the electronics Industry we treat the near vacuum as one solid that to us is near to no relative force or relative Energy, mind you that's both {Potential} and {Kinetic energy..} put simply {Stored= Potentail} and or with {Kinetic=momentum IE (velocity)}.

The only relative difference is that a solid is experiencing many more meeting velocities.. (higher Potential or more stored kinetic energy in the area)

To explain this in a simple manner so that even a child can understand how an area can be so compressed simply by meeting momentum one needs to refer to our atmosphere and or even our oceanic bodies via the suppression of momentum and or to imply how the more meeting velocities (kinetic Energy) solidifies via an areas momentum is being canceled out or converted to Potential energy (or as stored energy).

Anyway lets first refer to an air compressor and lets force more air into it (introduce kinetic energy from a large area to a small area) than it was designed for, and lets stop when the air begins to buckle the storage container a little..

Lets now consider how air or the gases from our atmosphere has been able to buckle our SOLID container, and it should be obvious that the combined air or gases within the container simply must have more force than the container to do this..

Now before we move on lets now refer to a submarine where the deeper it needs to go, the stronger the vessel needs to be..

Now here is a mass, a liquid mass mind you - That is quite capable of crushing a vessel made of thick metal.

OK lets briefly go back to our container and lets release the compressed Air, now I don't know if you have ever done this or not, but when we do this, what most should observce and note is that as well as the air, some liquid also comes out from the container, and it is this clue that can lead us to as to why our current oceanic level is where it is on our planet, err~ That' And the speed of light in a solid compared to the speed of light in a near vacuum, where the pressure has compressed some of the gas into liquid (a much more solid state than gas or even more so than the NEAR vacuum and or space.) keeping this mind..

To further elaborate on the force of water we can impact it with our flat hands which would feel quite solid, but if we repeat the action but much slower we actually don't feel the full force, these different speeds should give us clues that even a solid can be traversed as long as our speed is slow enough, so all we need do is to slow our speed down relative to all the other meeting velocities that imply an area as solid, and this goes for any area in the universe, where for every momentum there is always some momentum that opposes it, and in order to experience a Near vacuum as a solid we need to be with an extremely fast speed..

Now by considering the above with the fact that the further we go from our planet the more spread out each Molecule and or Atoms are from each other, and at this point we need to clear up a notion that just about every one I come across holds..

I refer to the notion that in between each Atom we have an enormous amount of space, this is absolutely wrong!

The fact is, even in space we have the theoretical Atoms area being constrained by its neighboring theoretical atom just like in a solid, the fact remains the (theoretical Atoms Grids and or Pixels) all simply occupy a greater area the further away from any given compression point we refer to.. if anyone finds my ramblings hard to understand then mabe a read on general and special relativity may serve one better..

I should point out the above is part of the Electronic Industries model which is kept under lock and key I also should point out this model was in part developed by me quite a long time ago.

This model treats the WHOLE universe as a single medium and or mass, where some areas consisting of a vast area occupy an area with a compressed {for want of a better word} footprint via its area is compressed to imply the area is with a relatively small foot print, and the smaller its occupational foot print the more solid would be the perception.. One really needs to fully understand both Special and general relativity here, but in its essence if any area was allowed to fully ocupy its natural state and we took a given amount of time to traverse it, and even if it had a smaller (footprint) occupation it would still take the same time to traverse the area, its for this reason a solid implies a slower velocity when the fact is the velocity does not change but the perceived speed does...

So why don't our satellites and vessels decompress? well they in fact do, but mind you one needs to refer to relativity as to how much and why they don't completely decompress, and once again the easy way is to consider it all via ALL velocities.

And further more~ Why does an area only max out to a near vacuum rather than to a pure void? No-Thing? zero?

Well any less and it WILL be nothing and or zero meeting velocities, but that simply is impossible as something always has be something once it was possible

OK! ~ OK! I don't know why! the reason for "what is possible must remain possible and the impossible must remain impossible.. sheesh!
Nick
WHY IS IT THAT BOUND NUCLEONS HAVE LESS MASS THAN FREE PROTONS OR NEUTRONS?

WHAT IS FUNDEMNTAL MASS IF IT VARIES BY CONDITION?

THE CONDITION IS BINDING FORCE. MASS BECOMES THE STRONG FORCE. MASS BECOMES THE BINDING ENERGY OF TRHYE STRONG FORCE. MASS BECOMES THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCE BINDING ELECTRONS TO THE NULCEUS AS WELL. FREE ELECTRONS HAVE MORE MASS.

SO WHAT IS FUNDAMENTAL?

MITCH RAEMSCH
yquantum
Laidback, Brain, Ivars, bukh, et all,

Laidback, I did not get to read all of you post in full but I am sure you have new ideas to consider.

I am going to use the classical perspective which should fit -- I hope in your model if not please point the differences from your perspective. In the 19th century, people made discoveries in electricity and magnetism. After zillions of experiments, they discovered a consistent description of observed electromagnetic phenomena. The two most important physical laws discovered were:

The quantitative description of the force acting between two charges, then the quantitative description of the force acting between two magnets (or equally, between two wires running current). These two laws contain two new fundamental constants of nature, called permeability and permittivity of vacua. These two constants set the strength of the electric and magnetic forces. We will discuss the need for these constants in a while.

Later on, a further and final step was made when British physicist James Maxwell discovered a way to unify all the known electric and magnetic phenomena under one theory of electromagnetism. His equations were very rich in information and had incredible predictive power. Maxwell's Equations in a Vacuum => check out the results if you have the time.... You should know the Maxwell Equation well I hope if not, just google and you will find it on your search engine.

Brain, example, you can easily (well, after doing some math, of course) read out from Maxwell's equations our wave equations for electromagnetic waves introduced on the page "What is light?". If you do this little exercise, you will discover that the parameter c in the wave equations is not a free parameter (as amplitude and frequency were) but can be calculated from the two fundamental constants of nature, the permittivity and permeability .

The numerical value of © is --->© = 299,792,458 m/s where m/s is meters/second. The physical meaning of this value is the speed of the propagating electromagnetic wave! As soon as people realized that light is just an electromagnetic wave, it was possible to apply all of Maxwell's tools.

Laidback you know that the physicists then had a full description of the light in the classical (nonquantum) framework. So we can agree on many areas of physics I hope.

caio_
yquantum
Laidback
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 4 2007, 12:43 PM)
Laidback, Brain, Ivars, bukh, et all,

Laidback, I did not get to read all of you post in full but I am sure you have new ideas to consider.

I am going to use the classical perspective which should fit -- I hope in your model if not please point the differences from your perspective.  In the 19th century, people made discoveries in electricity and magnetism. After zillions of experiments, they discovered a consistent description of observed electromagnetic phenomena. The two most important physical laws discovered were:

The quantitative description of the force acting between two charges, then the quantitative description of the force acting between two magnets (or equally, between two wires running current). These two laws contain two new fundamental constants of nature, called permeability and permittivity of vacua. These two constants set the strength of the electric and magnetic forces. We will discuss the need for these constants in a while.

Later on, a further and final step was made when British physicist James Maxwell discovered a way to unify all the known electric and magnetic phenomena under one theory of electromagnetism. His equations were very rich in information and had incredible predictive power.  Maxwell's Equations in a Vacuum => check out the results if you have the time.... You should know the Maxwell Equation well I hope if not, just Google and you will find it on your search engine.

Brain, example, you can easily (well, after doing some math, of course) read out from Maxwell's equations our wave equations for electromagnetic waves introduced on the page "What is light?". If you do this little exercise, you will discover that the parameter c in the wave equations is not a free parameter (as amplitude and frequency were) but can be calculated from the two fundamental constants of nature, the permittivity and permeability .

The numerical value of © is --->© = 299,792,458 m/s where m/s is meters/second.  The physical meaning of this value is the speed of the propagating electromagnetic wave!  As soon as people realized that light is just an electromagnetic wave, it was possible to apply all of Maxwell's tools.

Laidback you know that the physicists then had a full description of the light in the classical (non-quantum) framework.  So we can agree on many areas of physics I hope.

caio_
yquantum

For the most I reason we have always been in Agreeance Yqunatum, and in fact by being here my reasoning has most here have modelled their models very close to each other, even though different terminologies may have been referred to such as some refer to particles whilst one here refers to theoretical areas as pixels "BukH", a model very close to my theoretical grids derived from theories based on Relativity.

Anyway I think we have made some considerable head-ways and as long as we make it clear our Particles, our theoretical grids and or theoretical Pixels are only theoretical and or the theoretically quantified areas gained via experiments are only for our use in QM calculus, which I should point out are always going to be susceptible to uncertainty if one is not mindful of whatever theoretical boundaries we may have not defined, anyway if we are all open instead of insisting my way or take the highway I believe we may end up holding a good sound model via our collaborations..

QUOTE

The quantitative description of the force acting between two charges, then the quantitative description of the force acting between two magnets (or equally, between two wires running current). These two laws contain two new fundamental constants of nature, called permeability and permittivity of vacua.

Let me stress though all Mass be-it Solid, Liquid, Gas or near Vacuum all have this permeability and permittivity properties..

Cheers all,
Nick
If light has no mass why does it convert to mass when it is absorbed?

MITCH RAEMSCH
fivedoughnut
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 3 2007, 08:53 PM)

It has been a long time, 5d & hope all is well with you and family.

Where did you get this information I would love to read up on it. Take care......I currently find positively cryogenic. I like it.... have to use that some time.

cioa_
yquantum

yquantum,

Family's peachy yq .... trust yours are too. That "info" is just home-brewed 5-D crank talk much in the same vein as this stuff:

The degree of wave condensation to event horizon formation may determine a photons frequency; using the same logic, cycle times for elementary particles may decrease with greater energy (see 5-D's Wavicle Mechanics below); remember, these wavicles are also integrated into the wavefront of our universe; it is my speculative assumption that @ the nexus of wavicle/cosmic wavefront, where said wavicle is increasing energy via (acceleration/gravitational source), the wavefront exhibits a proportionally shortened cycle time in accordance to their mutual harmonic existence; meaning that it would locally increase in propagational speed compared with areas of less energy; it is this I believe that produces the time dilation effect.

Wavicle Mechanics

All particles may arise from cyclic trans-dimensional wave propagation stemming from a primary source of extreme high dimensionality. This initial wave has since undergone many stages of 'decay' whereby secondary, tertiary etc dimensional collapse has created the plethora of particles within & beyond our universe.

Wave propagation transits from high to low dimensionality (low to high density respectively) via a pivotal stage of highest condensation called a singularity & cycles upspace back to its beginning only to restart the process again ad infinitum unless further dimensional collapse occurs.

Before singularity creation, all waves form event horizons marking the magnetic/electric boundary responsible for the 180 degree out of phase temporal duality effect we know as the electric & magnetic field. The magnetic field of an electron represents all propagation exterior to the EH...The electric...is all propagation in respect to its interior!; it is this interior propagation that produces the 'electric field' and the consequent temporal reversal effect 'magnetic field'. In this way the event horizon is a little like a semi-transparent mirror. The EH's outer edge is magnetic maxima, " "...inner edge, electric minima, whilst the singularity represents electric maxima (point charge/mass) and co-existing event reversed magnetic minima.

With photons these forces are contained within lower dimensional restraints;only the exo EH wave component 'magnetic field' makes it's presence known whilst the electric component exists confined in an endo-EH vacuole. However, hypertoroidal wave propagation (like that which produces electrons & positrons) allows for this duality to manifest as force.

This wavicle 'exists' from ring singularity to hypertoroid in a continuous event loop courtesy of endo event horizon relativity which produces the duality we label "electromagnetism".

In addition, the hyperspacial arc produced by the hypertoroid multi-wavefront allows for wave transit around this 'structure'; being merely a component of its overall transdimensional propagation & that photons are carried as 'daughter wavicles on this circumnavigating wavefront. Particle charge can be thought as the directional penetration of this component wavefront through the 3-D wavefront of our universe; simply imagine a rotating ring intersecting an imaginary 2-D plane @ 90 degrees; the ring exists only as two separate points on this surface; can you see the motion of the ring @ these points? (up/down) .... yes, you've got it! the electron and positron are one and the same; each electron in our universe may create a positron existing far beyond the edge of the visible universe.

Well if you have a low energy wave it might take a lot more condensing to arrive at the event horizon stage than say that of a high energy wave...might it not?

( Eat your hearts out inferior cranks!)
jal
Hi fivedoughnut
LOL
I understood every word that you said.
Much better quality than the average para site.
Would you like to help falsify my approach?

I shall do my summary.
I am, I hope, referred to, with respect, as the "Flat earth".
You can get the idea from
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=5203
The only thing flat is the quantized membranes or anything else that you want to called them. I called the individual energy concentration "spot" and even the minimum required units the by same name, for simplicity.
As a result, you can have 4 locations in a "spot" OR IN 2D, 6 locations in a "spot" of a possible 24 locations OR IN 3D, 12 locations out of a possibility of 48 locations. All of this is because of a FIRST PRINCIPLE.
QUANTUM MINIMUM LENGTH.
In the language of LQG (triads) you end up with a double tetra in 3d.
All the citations are in my thread.
The "math kids" are proving every step and eventually will end up with a model with which dynamics can be studied.
jal
Ivars
Few more ideas on Aether vortex created particles and their properties.Aether is supposed to be a low viscosity, granular media with preexisting lattice and liquid properties at scales > 10-68m

1) Structure of electron:

To maintain electron structure at rest , via 1 beat of time T= (r kolmgorov)/ c = 2,254*10E-66 s = period of rotation of dissipative Aether vortex of Kolmogorov scale r kolmogorov= (G/c^2) *m e= 6,76 *10E-58 m ,Energy = me* c^2 = 8,19*10E-14 J in a form of Aether flux flows through it via Kolmogorov scale vortex with to dissipation in the other end of electron. The power of this flow equals P planck = E/T= 8,19*10E-14 J/2,254*10E-66 s =c^5/G=3,63*10E52 W in each pumping beat.

Reynolds Number of Aether at Kolmgorov scale is 1. So , electron must be a simple vortex; However, there is a caveat: due to the specific structure of a Komogorov scale Aether eddy which we will look at later , electron as Aether Vortex is divergent-increases in diameter and becomes NOT axisymetric when 2 electrons fill the same state .

Let us take the expression of Komogorov time of Aether T= (r Kolmogorov/c ) = (G*m e)/c^3 and multiply by spin of electron, h dirac/2. The resulting value will have dimension of moment of Inertia:

T*h dirac/2= h Dirac *G* m e/2* c^3 = 1/2 l planck^2 * m e.

what could be a physical interpretation? In my opinion, it is a spiral vortex which has outer radius of an order l planc. Now, the electron vortex started from Kolmogorov scale eddy of size 6,76 *10E-58 m, but ends up at plank length scale lp= 1,616* 10-35 m.

So the vortex over the length of electron ( we shall discuss is later) probably exponentially increases in size 1,616*10E-35/6,76*10E-58 = 0,24*10E23 times! Obviously, such increase can not be computed of reproduced in macroscopic flow experiments. The type of spiral may be well golden in this case.

2) Length of electron vortex at rest:

It is natural to assume that at rest electron vortex will take space equal to its debroglie wave at rest, lambda= h/(m e*c) = 2,42*10E-12 m.

So we can imagine electron vortex inside a cylinder of length of debroglie length, 2,42 *10-12 m, and radius of l planck = 1,616*10-35 m. In one end of the cylinder there exists a Kolmogorov scale vortex which pumps Aether in the cylinder and creates electron vortex.

What happens in the other end with electron at rest?

3) Dissipation of Aether flux back into Aether via acoustic waves at the other end of cylinder:

Let us assume flow of Aether flux ( energy) dissipates at the other end of Aether cell-cylinder where electron vortex rotates, via creation of acoustic waves in Aether. Let us calculate the speed of Aether acoustic waves by assuming speed of vortex at distance l Planck from the center must be equal to speed of sound in Aether:

We know that angular circulation frequency of Kolmogorov vortex is omega= c^3/ (G*m e) = 4,436*10E65 1/s, so Aether sound speed at the edge of vortex:

v aether sound = omega * l planck = c^3/2* (h dirac)^1/2/ (G^1/2* m e) = 7,17 * 10^30 m/s.

These acoustic waves may be the ones which carry debroglie waves so that part of electron wave function reaches the other side of universe in less than 10-4 sec. In this way, information about the single electron is transfered to the whole Universe.

4) Pauli exclusion principle

Let us think how we can put 2 electron Aether vortexes( exponentially expanding spirals) into the same cylindrical cell so that the can have the same quantum state except of spin? The only way is to put 2 spirals around each other with 180 degree rotation phase difference; this should lead to the ends of spirals occupying each 1/2 of the area on opposite sides of the end of the cylinder.Like 2 snakes, with heads looking in opposite directions. In this arrangement, they will be identical to all external observers except for spin values-> the maximum speed points of each of the spiral will be 180 degrees opposite. So spin 1/2 in this sense means 1 spiral vortex arm which is NON AXYSYMETRIC but is confined in 1 half of the circle. Spin -1/2 means the spiral rotating in the same direction but in the other side of the circle. So a filled electron state looks like a rotating vortex with 2 spiral arms. It has total spin 0.

5) Spin 1,1 1/2 and 2 particles:

With this model, how do we get spin 1 particle? It must be a particle where spirals with spin 1/2 are formed on the opposite ends of the cylinder, but both are in the same half or end circles. Or alternatively, spiral arms may be 2, but outside the circle, rotating in perpendicular plane. Spin 3/2 particle will have 3 arms, and probably will be very unstable as they can not find equilibrium. Spin 2 particle will have 4 spiral arms, like some cosmic objects.

I strongly suspect that Kolmogorov size eddy is spin 2 particle and has 4 arms outside it, but still inside the l p. So basically Kolmogorov Aether eddy is graviton.

6) Moving of electron Aether vortex

Let us assume that, because of environment acting back on Aether cells, it gets stretched. E.g. by some external fields. Stretching means that its radius will become LESS than l planck. If we look at the formula of l planck, that means that most likely, G/c^3 is not constant because of stretching, but decreases, so speed of Kolmogorov vortex grows faster than gravitational constant. Or may be even h dirac is reduced. But let us look at process, how electron moves:

when cylinder ( or rather, very long tube as its length to radius ratio, l de broglie / l planck = 1,31 * 10^23 ) gets narrower, exponentially growing electron vortex can not reach the sound speed of Aether, so it can not dissipate the Aether flux being pumped in it by Kolmogorov vortex at Kolmogorov scale. That also means that vortex reaches walls of tube earlier, and de broglie wave of electron gets shorter. As flux can not be dissipated, it is reflected back from the tube and starts to increase Aether flux in the center of vortex in the plane at distance new de broglie length from the origin of vortex, until NEW kolmogorov vortex is created there. Via this vortex, electron vortex is pushed forward and disappears in the place it was and reappears after next de broglie length. In such a way, the stretched tube gets particulated again, and Kolmogorov vortexes remain at their places. Electron mass now has increased by the mass of 1 Kolmogorov vortex (because of extra Aether flow needed to sustain it), or 1 graviton. In such way, one can imagine Aether tube for electron being stretched until it reaches the Kolmogorov radius- at this case, electron as vortex does not appear at all, so movement with speed c of electron means just movement of Kolmogorov vortexes, or gravitons.

The rate of mass increase with such mechanism should coincide with relativistic mass increase of moving electron.

7) Proton structure

Proton is the next stable Aether vortex breakdown which appears at Reynolds number of Aether of 1836,15. This is a bubble vortex breakdown. It should obey the same m*c^2 law of Aether flux vi ait PER beat of Universe and it has a positive charge. The power via it is bigger than Planck power, so dissipation via Charge spiral is not enough and it will send wrong information - proton wave function will look like a positron. That means that proton vortex bubble also dissipates power , and much bigger, exciting Aether sound waves via its own rotation-probably where the vortex bubble touches walls of the cell.

Let us consider that Aether tube radius is stretched sgrt (1836, 15 times) =42,8 times. That would give exactly the reynolds number needed. So now at rest we have a cylinder of radius 43 l planck, lenght =lambda de broglie proton= 2,42*10E-12/1836,15 = 1,31810E-15 m, with Kolmogorov vortex at one end, spiraling exponentially growing vortex tail similar to electron but rotating in opposite direction it so it has positive charge.
The cell is shorter but wider, so at the end of it speed of Aether sound need for dissipation is reached. The movement of proton happens similar to the movement of electron, just with debroglie length period recreated vortex breakdown shape is more complicated.

8) Nature of charge

Charge is determined by the direction of rotation of the electron type spiral vortex . Positron is a rare vortex exactly like electron but rotating in opposite direction. When moving positron meets electron, that just cancel each other; but, as canceling each other means dissipation of Aether flux via l plank end of each of them is not possible any more, nor is movement and creation of new Kolmogorov vortices possible, Aether flux that was flowing via each creates 2 spin 1 particles.

Vortexes with the opposite direction of rotation attract because speed of liquid Aether between them increases, and pressure reduces. They attract.

9) Hydrogen atom

In lowest energy state, Electron pipe attracts to proton end charge vortex in such a way the the narrow end of electron votive aligns with the wide end of proton charge votive. This deforms the electron tube so that it closes on itself and may be also changes position relative to proton tube. Remember, these tubes are just lattices, in principle they can be freely crossed by liquid Aether.

10) fractional charge

Imagine a cylinder which is shorter then electron DE broglie length, but somehow able to provide dissipation at the ends before electron vortex spiral has reached its full size - may be by reducing the speed of sound in Aether.

For some reason the length of such cylinder can be only multiples of electron cylinder.

11) Neutron

Electron and proton charge vortexes are annihilated, but the Aether flux they carried is dissipated by higher intensity of acoustic waves by neutron vortex breakdown bubble rotation- increasing the radius of tube slightly.

12) parameters of Aether I have found so far:

dissipation rate of turbulence epsilon = 0,3986/2 pi * 10E84
viscosity and circulation quanta = 127,34*10E-50
Kolmogorov length = 6,76 E10-58m
Kolmogorov speed = c
Kolmogorov time= 14,17*10E-66 s
Speed of sound in Aether = 7,17 * 10^30 m/s.
Temperature of Aether - 2,7 K

Density and stiffness is not clear. Obviously, Aether is not dense in our usual understanding, but then it should be very stiff. Stiffness can come from the coexistence of Aether as turbulent super liquid with its lattice of unknown origin.
Patrick McManus
All I can say is that the Higgs is pretty damn interesting.... god, why can't they hurry it up with the LHC. I'm taking the freaking day off when they find that Particle.
Mark W.
Hi guys and all,

I know one person that will let you know ASAP not to be mistaken as the AWT.

I will be the one who started this discussion which I would like to request that everyone get back to the original theme. BTW, this theory is going to rock the physics world and it is not some off the wall topic.

Come on everyone what the ? is the Higgs and how can you help me better understand it. I know of Peter Higgs and work but keep it simple so I can celebrate.

Mark
bukh
yquantum

QUOTE: "bukh, just a simple question [no trap/hidden agenda] what is the model/dynamics that causes the waves -- please define what you mean by math points?

What IS a wave ? -

- Can a wave be defined without involving particle structures
- Can a wave show motion without exhibiting discontinuity
- Can a wave show motion without having a medium

For me it is obvious that a wave cannot be defined by a continuum, and a wave cannot be without a medium. So long that good.

I would like to define a wave by "points" shoulder by shoulder "signaling" with a delay time - inertia. I envisage that wave structures can last forever provided that there is no fatique in the signal capacity, and I envisage that standing wave structures can last unchanged provided that the frequencies are just the right ones. (that is the fundamental behind spin).

Back to the 3D Pixel Screen.

Any wave that has been initiated on the 3D pixel screen will be reflected in some interference pattern sooner or later, meaning that the pixels constantly will be bombarded by such interfering and reflected waves - and then it is up to the pixel to decide if the signal shall be answered (to sustain the wave pattern) or the signal shall be ignored (to anihilate the wave-pattern).

This is not a simple task - the pixels must have an inborn resonnance - a harmony. I imagine that the pixel matter (like the physical universe) is made by wave-interference patterns - but in another scale. The pixel matter serves as the resonnance structure that can tell exactly which resonnances are the right ones. So where the pixel is the smallest "point" in physical universe - likewise the mathematical "point" is the smallest in Physical Informational world.

Now I am a little on thin ice - but I imagine that all the information that is behind the physical universe - all the information that is related how to express and define anything physical - all that information, is intimately related to all the mathematics that is related to wavefunctions / waveexpressions. And this mathematics is confined to that specific part of mathematics that deals with discontinua. I imagine that this kind of mathematics - in order to serve as mathematics for all what is non-continuus - such mathematics must have points with a size in order to serve this purpose. It is simply not possible to define anything which is discontinued with something that does not take a size in the point. And that is the basis for transforming - translating Information into Physical. The information must take a SPACE - otherwise the information will not be able to express the discontinuum which is the very ESSENTIAL of the Physical World. Sylwester Koronowski mentioned this in a recent discussion - and I agree with this point of view.

How a pixel exert its signal function ? - at the moment I have no idea !. I can only say that it is probably with preservation of volume (perhaps change in tension = change in amount of information) - and with a well-defined time delay.

Fundamental space is immensely dense, made by pixels shoulder by shoulder - and the pixels made of pixel matter - which is likewise made by math. points shoulder by shoulder. So motion as we humans like to see motion - with a particle mooving freely in space, is an illusion - it is simply not possible to have motion - it is only possible to have ever changing oscillating pictures.

It can also be said to be fluctuations in energy - which is the same as fluctuations in information density. The whole trick for nature is to be able to organize information in the most economical way, in order to express the highest physical complexity with the smallest amount of information involved. Waves are extremely economical, in that a simple equation can express a wave structure, and a wave structure can go into interference, and a wave interference will play back onto the pixels.

As to the ORIGEN - what caused the initial wave(s) - ???

Are waves constantly being initiated ?- or is EVERYTHING build on the first simple wave structure(s) that has turned into ever increasing complexities ???

bukh
Hej Ivars

QUOTE: "Few more ideas on Aether vortex created particles and their properties.Aether is supposed to be a low viscosity, granular media with preexisting lattice and liquid properties at scales > 10-68m"

Why not define Aether as the 3D Pixel Screen -

In order to function as medium for Stable - EVER Lasting - wave-interference patterns, there can be no such thing as just LOW VISCOSITY - but there must be a well defined DELAY TIME = INERTIA, and a NIL TIREING OUT in the signal of the granule (pixel). Furthermore in order to control everything there must be total order between the granules.

Spin IS frequency of the wave-structure, and everything can probably be explained via relevant interference patterns.

It is logic that there can exist but a very few fundamental spins (wave-frequencies) - that can enter into long-lasting and stable interferences. These fundamental spins are probably reflected in the limited number of characteristic delay-times of the pixel-response (inertia).
Neil Farbstein
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 4 2007, 09:34 PM)
Hej Ivars

QUOTE: "Few more ideas on Aether vortex created particles and their properties.Aether is supposed to be a low viscosity, granular media with preexisting lattice and liquid properties at scales > 10-68m"

Why not define Aether as the 3D Pixel Screen -

In order to function as medium for Stable - EVER Lasting - wave-interference patterns, there can be no such thing as just LOW VISCOSITY - but there must be a well defined DELAY TIME = INERTIA, and a NIL TIREING OUT in the signal of the granule (pixel). Furthermore in order to control everything there must be total order between the granules.

Spin IS frequency of the wave-structure, and everything can probably be explained via relevant interference patterns.

It is logic that there can exist but a very few fundamental spins (wave-frequencies) - that can enter into long-lasting and stable interferences. These fundamental spins are probably reflected in the limited number of characteristic delay-times of the pixel-response (inertia).

It seems logical to hypothesize a granular or pixelated underlying organization of the universe. But it might not be the way things really are. There is no proof of the existence of the plank length either. The Heim theory does not give an absolute frame of reference either. It posits a rubbery wavering reality that shifts and changes at the lowest levels. The Newtonian nature of the world that seems normal is at odds with the shifting frames of reference of relativity and the uncertainties inherent in the quantum theory.
Laidback
QUOTE (Nick+Aug 4 2007, 02:36 PM)
If light has no mass why does it convert to mass when it is absorbed?

MITCH RAEMSCH

In order to understand that Light is a byproduct of mass interacting, can be hard to understand..

But in essence how we detect changes in mass can give us good clues..

This may at first be hard to believe but all of our sensors work via force and or the velocities that exude our force..

Its only in the last century or so that we have discovered these forces are electromotive and or best treated via Electron theory, and that includes at one point even for our hearing where we need to refer to electron theory - If not at the level of how our brain functions, at least as to how waves are possible via the similarities of sound and Electromagnetic waves..

Anyway if we disregard the inference to electromotive forces we should note we are still working with forces, and we should note all forces simply must comply to Newtons Laws, and that includes the inferred strong and or weak forces!

It is for this reason a good University will not continue on with ones education if this is not fully and completely understood, so I would suggest if you don't fully understand Newtons laws with respects to Force and Motion, you should sit down and get to know it intimately! As you wont be able to follow the rest of this Post...

The next consideration one must consider is how force is possible, and its here where just about every University fails their students at the most critical stage in ones education in any Physics..

So lets consider how force is possible...

If we need to push a heavy object it becomes obvious we need to utilize momentum, and whats more we need more weight than the object we wish to move to do this and in this case the forces we are working with is weight..

There are several ways we can move an object - We can have a number of weaker weights each with a slower momentum to the direction we want the object moved or we can have a weight the same but with some considerable momentum in the direction we want the object moved, we could also utilize a larger heavier object with just enough momentum but then we would be back to square one! how do we move that object?

In the first case we would utilize a lot of small amounts of momentum to the object we wanted moved and here is where a pulley system does the job nicely, and by considering the sum of each tiny exertion and the momentum that is to exert it, one may be able to visualize all mass is simply an area experiencing opposing momentum (velocities)..

That's all all very well but it does not explain force and in particular the Potential Kinetic energy required for our various forces, and here I would suggest one would need to learn how a pulley system is able to lift heavy objects at the expense of momentum...

Lets do something that may have never been presented to you before where we have all momentum being at the same speed, and lets say the velocity is at "c" Thats the speed of light, and lets say all mass is experiencing these momentum's at this point I am trying to inject an image of two breezes meeting and canceling each other out, where the result is an area that is compressed by it, compression increases an areas potential which should be treated much like an increase in force to the area to which, if there is no opposing force (equal or greater potential ) we would have a momentum to decompress the experienced compression, which leads us back to a wave like phenomenon, so lets briefly cover how our tidal waves are formed..

I will refer to the oceanic tidal waves and how they are created on our planet via a massive compressed area hindering inbound velocities to our Planet (these velocities are seen as a pushing force via the rest of the Universes mass which is decompressing resulting in a compression to our local area which is actually stuffing us into our Local black hole which I point out every galaxy consists with a black hole at its core). Let me point out a Black hole is simply another compression point..

Getting back to the lacking inbound velocities experienced we have a body of water that is availed the luxury of decompressing, so therefore it rises, yeah I know most laymen ?! and in fact most of mainstream scientists still perceive this as the moons gravity which pulls at the body of water and therefore it rises, this concept about gravity I am confident will change when certain key points of a model kept under lock and key (and contract) are leaked, and or when Universities get their act together and avail proper information to their students about how all physics MUST conform and comply to Newtons Laws!

Anyway as the earth rotates the wave ( decompressing molecules) is put into motion, and it should be noted here that the whole body of water (Ocean) does not have the momentum of the wave, what really is happening is each water molecule decompresses and then as the velocities from the compressing force returns they are compressed back to a higher Potential, it should be noted here, as the Potential energy exchanges we have it briefly exchanged to kinetic Energy, and the same dynamics here also goes for all of the electromagnetic spectrum, where the mass "theoretical Atoms" decompress and or compressed back forth and from this we perceive the increase and decrease in potential is propagated via the waves when in fact everything simply adheres to Newtons laws..

Now I am hoping one can work it all out from here as to how a surfer is treated with a delightful wave when the waves end up traversing to the shores..

The above also should point out why PHOTONS are only theoretical, and it should also reveal that our theoretical Atom and its sub-atomic components are only theoretical as well, each postulated particle in fact are simply a quantified area with a given force via its quantified detection to which it is then asserted to a mathematical representation so that QM and or QED calculus can be utilized in predicting and or to working physics.

Any questions?

Cheers,

Peter J Schoen..

Nick
Sub atomic partciles unreal?
Then what are we accelerating?
Laidback
QUOTE (Nick+Aug 5 2007, 11:41 AM)
Sub atomic particles unreal?

That's right!

You must be mindful of how our detectors via our experiments result with a quantity of force presented to them, this quantity is then elaborated with other experiments quantities via other detection methods, which we then postulate our theoretical models upon.

Lets briefly consider an electron and lets consider how the implied negative force and or charge was detected? keep in mind the very Particle we are attempting to detect actually is in part part of the detectors make-up, and if our model of our detector is wrong then so must our model of what we detected be wrong, thus far though our theoretical models for our detectors have sufficed, the result is the quanta for our electron infers somewhat this may be actual reality if not for a model kept under lock and key (contract) which is a working model that unifies Gravity, Relativity and Mass.

At this point all I can suggest is - In order to ensure we have got our models correct, we must consider the forces that our detector depends upon, and this is not an easy task if one does not fully understand force and Motion so I will leave it up to your discretion what reality is acceptable.. but let me insist mainstreams model although close to reality is still inaccurate.

QUOTE
Then what are we accelerating?

Exactly! And the only way to fully understand and decipher it all for ourselves is if we intimately understand Newtons Laws pertaining to force and motion, and by taking a critical note that for a force to exert it must be with momentum (velocity), but for momentum (velocity) to be possible we need a reference to a force..

The inference to Energy can be considered as a quanta of force where we can infer it to exist in one of two states, Potential (stored force) and or Kinetic (velocity or working force), and at this point some should see a correlation with Force and Motion.. well I can only hope..

Let me give you something to ponder over to ensure you understand the above inference to mass..

If we have an area that experiences two forces from opposite origins what would you expect?

Try and consider the above via expected velocities for our forces and lets state the velocities are at "c".

I would recommend you fully refresh your self to Newtons Laws before you apply your self to the above considerations..

Any Questions?

Cheers,

Peter J Schoen.
Ivars
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 4 2007, 09:34 PM)
Hej Ivars

QUOTE: "Few more ideas on Aether vortex created particles and their properties.Aether is supposed to be a low viscosity, granular media with preexisting lattice and liquid properties at scales > 10-68m"

Why not define Aether as the 3D Pixel Screen -

In order to function as medium for Stable - EVER Lasting - wave-interference patterns, there can be no such thing as just LOW VISCOSITY - but there must be a well defined DELAY TIME = INERTIA, and a NIL TIREING OUT in the signal of the granule (pixel). Furthermore in order to control everything there must be total order between the granules.

Spin IS frequency of the wave-structure, and everything can probably be explained via relevant interference patterns.

It is logic that there can exist but a very few fundamental spins (wave-frequencies) - that can enter into long-lasting and stable interferences. These fundamental spins are probably reflected in the limited number of characteristic delay-times of the pixel-response (inertia).

hej bukh

Your 3D pixel screen is the granular, atomic structure of Aether. Of course these pixels or granules have inertia which may be characterized as their inertial mass.

Of course there is no viscosity on that level. Actually, I think You are right also in that in starting phase, Aether even with liquid phase turbulence does not have viscosity. Viscosity ( again, not in granular, pixel level) appears when matter is already created.

Aether as super fluid has a quantum of circulation, which is determined by h/m where m is the inertia of a pixel, granule.

This quantum of circulation leads to higher level particulation of Aether by so called vortex lattice. It has generally bigger elements than pixels, much bigger, and it is those elements i am talking about, and interested in, because they directly lead to observable physical phenomena and can be tested with working theories.

These bigger elements can be stretched, what ever, they do change even when they get the information about something changing in the other end of Universe.They interact. What You probably noticed when reading about the movement of the electron is that FIRST the cell comprising electron gets narrower because it receives information about outside things happening ( e.g. existence of field potential) and only then electron knows that is has to move. Also, its movement in my model is as You suggested- it regenerates itself in the next cell which it creates for itself, and disappears from previous cell via a small opening, so it does not move continuously as a particle, it moves exactly as a wave interference would. The vortex I ascribe to electron can be reduced to its Fourier components moving with different speeds, so that Wave packet appears and gets desynchronized just to appear again after some distance in the same shape if resonance conditions hold ( in this case, the diameter of the tube, no interference from other information ).

So , there are 2 levels of information flows:

1) Fundamental : between pixels , borders between them- the fundamental reason for particulation of Aether in granules, pixels, and defining their properties
2) physical : between Aether vortex lattice cells, via their borders, which explains e.g why imaginary wave function based quantum mechanics work, gravity, etc.

I hope this is acceptable to You, because in no way does it contradict the possibility that this next level is just a result of fundamental pixels playing. But it is necessary to understand what laws govern the result of pixels playing/not playing, and, by finding these laws get closer to what laws might be driving pixel behavior themselves, why they are there, and are they really the fundamental level of realization of mathematics and harmonical information in SPACE, which I do not doubt, but which is to far from what we can observe to be used to make accurate predictions.

Philosophically, there is no infinities nor singularities in space, I think we agreed on that long time ago. So there is no such thing also in mathematics. So mathematics/harmonically organized information take space and are PRESENT in space. That is kind of obvious, but how to derive physical laws which have proven to be true from this alone? We must go to higher level but BELOW quantum mechanics. Below quantum, above pixels is the place where answers lie.

HiggsInteresto
It's been a while I've read over some deep physics as deep as today whilst studying black holes and the Higgs mechanism (not here BTW).

I find it very interesting and quite a mystery, but nonetheless, I'd like to see some seriously critique and evaluation of this supposition [Higgs Boson] when experimentational testing is underway at LHC. I've heard they're encountering many engineering problems linked mainly with the superconducting magnet though, as well as with finance.
Until then, I'm not really sure whether other causes can be considered by me personally, since it's not far from the final stage now and is a good project to answer many "theoretical suppositions" until now.

Maybe it really is an over complicated view of things that actually take place? Do you think if a proposition (theoretical explanation of an occurrence) was simple it would simply be rejected by the authoritative scientific community and major publishing bodies (though it may actually be factual but not yet known) ?

I personally "ponder" some times that maybe a sort of inductive vibrational movement has something to do with particles having mass. Vibration on minima scales a fraction of the actual particle mass yet initiated by a set of occurrences external and internal to the particle itself. Just over-simplistic pondering, nothing more.

I'd like to see if the SUSY partners exist and mainly how.

Ivars
I just wanted to remind that the name of the thread as posted by Yquantum is :

""Particles have mass, HOW?" Higgs or?

I am working with the "or" part of the hypothesis.
bukh
Hej Ivars

yes - I knew that you would be in agreement. And remember that viscosity is just another way of expressing inertia. And inertia/viscosity starts to exist exactly when the pixels start to play wave-patterns - physical matter.

QUOTE:
"Of course these pixels or granules have inertia which may be characterized as their inertial mass."

I prefer to define Inertia - simply as delay time in response - and not trying to tie inertia directly up to mass - as long as we have no accurate idea about exactly how to define mass.

I think that mass is reflected in the effective AREA of the pixel screen that is occupied, and not merely by the number of pixels playing. That is why a photon - or bosons generally - those elementary particles that obey Bose Einstein condensation, have a very little mass, because they occupy a very small effective area of the pixel screen, and allows for other bosonic particles to be present on the same area of the pixel screen simultaneously. Fermion-like particles on the other hand "shadow" a bigger area - but not all the pixels are playing on said shadowed area. That is why photon with little mass can be transformed into electron with big mass.

When it comes to Pixel Inertia - it is defined by the pixels signal delay - and this delay time could very well be a reflection of how much information (number of math.-points playing wave-patterns) involved - in order to trigger the pixel-signal.

QUOTE: "
This quantum of circulation leads to higher level particulation of Aether by so called vortex lattice. It has generally bigger elements than pixels, much bigger, and it is those elements i am talking about, and interested in, because they directly lead to observable physical phenomena and can be tested with working theories."

I would phrase it slightly different - "quantum of circulation" is Pixel ON / OFF, "vortex lattice" is any wave-pattern played by the pixels, small and non-complex wave-patterns belong to subatomic world, and more complex and bigger structures belong to observable physical phenomena. It is the latter that you are concerned about for the moment.

QUOTE:
"These bigger elements can be stretched, what ever, they do change even when they get the information about something changing in the other end of Universe.They interact. What You probably noticed when reading about the movement of the electron is that FIRST the cell comprising electron gets narrower because it receives information about outside things happening ( e.g. existence of field potential) and only then electron knows that is has to move. Also, its movement in my model is as You suggested- it regenerates itself in the next cell which it creates for itself, and disappears from previous cell via a small opening, so it does not move continuously as a particle, it moves exactly as a wave interference would. The vortex I ascribe to electron can be reduced to its Fourier components moving with different speeds, so that Wave packet appears and gets desynchronized just to appear again after some distance in the same shape if resonance conditions hold ( in this case, the diameter of the tube, no interference from other information )."

You say that it moves exactly as a wave-interference would - why not make it simple and say that it IS a wave-interference (played by the pixels). And it is the pixel information (propagated from pixel to pixel with immense speed) that "tells the electron to move - because movement is nothing else than neighboring pixels starting to play the wave, and thereby propagating the electron wave-interference pattern over the 3D Pixel screen.

It is immensely important to be absolutely true to the principle that pixels do not move - pixels do not change position - all motion is an illusion - all motion is re-expression of next following "picture" played by the pixels - all motion is the mere expression of infromation.

QUIOTE:
"So , there are 2 levels of information flows:
1) Fundamental : between pixels , borders between them- the fundamental reason for particulation of Aether in granules, pixels, and defining their properties
2) physical : between Aether vortex lattice cells, via their borders, which explains e.g why imaginary wave function based quantum mechanics work, gravity, etc. "

Pixel information is so immensely rapid in its propagation from pixel to pixel, because it is based upon wave-structures that are made by math-. points - which are so small that they have nearly nil delay time. One could say Newtonian principles even in the smallest scales.

Physical information I define as the back-play onto the pixels by the wave-interference patterns.

QUOTE:
"Philosophically, there is no infinities nor singularities in space, I think we agreed on that long time ago. So there is no such thing also in mathematics. So mathematics/harmonically organized information take space and are PRESENT in space. That is kind of obvious, but how to derive physical laws which have proven to be true from this alone? We must go to higher level but BELOW quantum mechanics. Below quantum, above pixels is the place where answers lie.

Pixel < wave-interference patterns to be defined / understood / picturelized < QM

Yes - I agree. But I hope that PIXEL SIZE and DELAY-TIME are two universal constants that can be defined and used in the understanding of many of the QM Units.
yquantum
bukh, Ivars, HiggsInteresto, Laidback, Brain, et al,

You might find this of interest (because of its lack of technical jargon I hope you do not find it insulting) it will give you sites for further information on the left of the article.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/20127

bukh, Ivars, & Laidback I noticed that you have posted -- I am with the family on a mini vacation and must get back -- looking forward to reading your replies as soon as everyone is asleep.

And that is a big if for the next few.

caio_
yquantum
Neil Farbstein
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 5 2007, 03:46 PM)
Hej Ivars

yes - I knew that you would be in agreement. And remember that viscosity is just another way of expressing inertia. And inertia/viscosity starts to exist exactly when the pixels start to play wave-patterns - physical matter.

QUOTE:
"Of course these pixels or granules have inertia which may be characterized as their inertial mass."

I prefer to define Inertia - simply as delay time in response - and not trying to tie inertia directly up to mass - as long as we have no accurate idea about exactly how to define mass.

I think that mass is reflected in the effective AREA of the pixel screen that is occupied, and not merely by the number of pixels playing. That is why a photon - or bosons generally - those elementary particles that obey Bose Einstein condensation, have a very little mass, because they occupy a very small effective area of the pixel screen, and allows for other bosonic particles to be present on the same area of the pixel screen simultaneously. Fermion-like particles on the other hand "shadow" a bigger area - but not all the pixels are playing on said shadowed area. That is why photon with little mass can be transformed into electron with big mass.

When it comes to Pixel Inertia - it is defined by the pixels signal delay - and this delay time could very well be a reflection of how much information (number of math.-points playing wave-patterns) involved - in order to trigger the pixel-signal.

QUOTE: "
This quantum of circulation leads to higher level particulation of Aether by so called vortex lattice. It has generally bigger elements than pixels, much bigger, and it is those elements i am talking about, and interested in, because they directly lead to observable physical phenomena and can be tested with working theories."

I would phrase it slightly different - "quantum of circulation" is Pixel ON / OFF, "vortex lattice" is any wave-pattern played by the pixels, small and non-complex wave-patterns belong to subatomic world, and more complex and bigger structures belong to observable physical phenomena. It is the latter that you are concerned about for the moment.

QUOTE:
"These bigger elements can be stretched, what ever, they do change even when they get the information about something changing in the other end of Universe.They interact. What You probably noticed when reading about the movement of the electron is that FIRST the cell comprising electron gets narrower because it receives information about outside things happening ( e.g. existence of field potential) and only then electron knows that is has to move. Also, its movement in my model is as You suggested- it regenerates itself in the next cell which it creates for itself, and disappears from previous cell via a small opening, so it does not move continuously as a particle, it moves exactly as a wave interference would. The vortex I ascribe to electron can be reduced to its Fourier components moving with different speeds, so that Wave packet appears and gets desynchronized just to appear again after some distance in the same shape if resonance conditions hold ( in this case, the diameter of the tube, no interference from other information )."

You say that it moves exactly as a wave-interference would - why not make it simple and say that it IS a wave-interference (played by the pixels). And it is the pixel information (propagated from pixel to pixel with immense speed) that "tells the electron to move - because movement is nothing else than neighboring pixels starting to play the wave, and thereby propagating the electron wave-interference pattern over the 3D Pixel screen.

It is immensely important to be absolutely true to the principle that pixels do not move - pixels do not change position - all motion is an illusion - all motion is re-expression of next following "picture" played by the pixels - all motion is the mere expression of infromation.

QUIOTE:
"So , there are 2 levels of information flows:
1) Fundamental : between pixels , borders between them- the fundamental reason for particulation of Aether in granules, pixels, and defining their properties
2) physical : between Aether vortex lattice cells, via their borders, which explains e.g why imaginary wave function based quantum mechanics work, gravity, etc. "

Pixel information is so immensely rapid in its propagation from pixel to pixel, because it is based upon wave-structures that are made by math-. points - which are so small that they have nearly nil delay time. One could say Newtonian principles even in the smallest scales.

Physical information I define as the back-play onto the pixels by the wave-interference patterns.

QUOTE:
"Philosophically, there is no infinities nor singularities in space, I think we agreed on that long time ago. So there is no such thing also in mathematics. So mathematics/harmonically organized information take space and are PRESENT in space. That is kind of obvious, but how to derive physical laws which have proven to be true from this alone? We must go to higher level but BELOW quantum mechanics. Below quantum, above pixels is the place where answers lie.

Pixel < wave-interference patterns to be defined / understood / picturelized < QM

Yes - I agree. But I hope that PIXEL SIZE and DELAY-TIME are two universal constants that can be defined and used in the understanding of many of the QM Units.

if the pixels are really pixels like a TV screen then they dont move or have mass themselves. They project viscosity and inertia onto particles as waves pass though a particular region. The viscosity theory of inertia might be restated as a constant resistance to change of the scalar value of each pixel. The value of the resistance to change term would be equivalent to viscosity.

It's interesting you give the pixels vortice type properties. Why vortexes, do they do something that explains something?
bukh
Hej Neil Farbstein

QUOTE: "It's interesting you give the pixels vortice type properties. Why vortexes, do they do something that explains something? "

No - I do not put any vortice type properties on the pixels -

The pixels behave exactly as you say like pixels on a TV screen. They exert no motion, only signaling, and you can say that they are without mass - whatever the latter is.

A pixel is defined by taking a volume, can signal ON OFF, and the signal is with well defined delay time, and the pixel contains information (a lot) about which wave-patterns shall be sustained and which not.

So the pixel is an (incomprehensible) complex structure.

The whole concept behind the 3D Pixel Universe is how the Informational World expresses itsself in a physical form.

We are dealing with only part of the Informational World - namely that part of it, which is mathematical and confined to that part of mathematics, that relates to discontinua. For that specific part of mathematics - logically - any math. point must take a size. And this is how information (relevant to the physical universe) can be translated into a volume - namely pixel matter. I envisage that all this relevant mathematics at its very bottomline can be expressed in wave-forms.

So pixel matter (information) is in the form of wave-interference patterns with waves composed of math. points.

Likewise physical universe is in the form of wave-interference patterns with waves composed of pixels

Math. points and pixels serve the same function, they are just different scales.

We humans are an intimate part of this physical scale, and this is the only relevant scale in this context.

There may well exist other scales - non-relevant for us, and there may well exist many other expressions than this particular physical expression - and again non-relevant for us.

We percept what we are.

And yes - inertia can be accounted for by the pixel delay-time.
yquantum
QUOTE
math. points and pixels serve the same function, they are just different scales.

We humans are an intimate part of this physical scale, and this is the only relevant scale in this context.
=> bukh

bukh, how would one measure this pixel model or is a awareness of the cognitive process as in a projection. When you said that
QUOTE (->
 QUOTE math. points and pixels serve the same function, they are just different scales.We humans are an intimate part of this physical scale, and this is the only relevant scale in this context.
=> bukh

bukh, how would one measure this pixel model or is a awareness of the cognitive process as in a projection. When you said that So the pixel is an (incomprehensible) complex structure.
if I understand your statement then this is just speculative but could never be analyze for testing...

If I misunderstood then it can be detected --> then what micro measurement would you estimate?

Good question NF you are on a role.

ciao_
yquantum
bukh
yquantum

In my answer to Neil I did not comment on this:

QUOTE NEIL: "if the pixels are really pixels like a TV screen then they dont move or have mass themselves. They project viscosity and inertia onto particles as waves pass though a particular region."

Just for the sake of accuracy, I would say that pixels ARE the waves - (no wave without points to express the wave). So the pixels are not projecting (if I understand rightly -I am not English tongue) viscosity and inertia onto particles ---. I would say that the pixel behaviour - defined by its delay-time - that is what gives us the qualities of viscosity and inertia. EVERYTHING starts from the math.point, and physical universe is about how this math. point stepwise turns itsself into expressions which are more and more physical - so to speak.

QUOTE: "how would one measure this pixel model or is a awareness of the cognitive process as in a projection. "

I am not sure exactly what you are pointing at ? please rephrase.

QUOTE: "If it can be detected then what micro measurement would you estimate?"

The pixel as such is an intimate part of all physical matter,

When the pixel screen is mute - not playing - no wave-structures are being expressed, and we humans will see the mute pixel screen as absolute vacuum.

Our only chance to detect the pixel is indirectly, we have to look at how wave-forms are build from the pixel-points.

Any particle is made by wave-interferences, and lets start with the smallest elementary particles that we can put qualities on as of to day, fermions - bosons. This mean that we know characteristic frequencies - that is what is being referred to as spin, we may know volume / mass / energy - that has bearing to amplitude, flavour may get an interpretation wave-wise and so on and so on -

On this basis I envisage that it is possible to get ideas about Universal Units such as pixel volume and pixel delay time.

How many pixels are being involved in a wave-expression - what is the inertia in the expression -

The smaller the elementary "particles" that can be described the more "direct" the pixel can be seen.

jal
Not everyone believes that physic goes to Planck Scale.
Why Planck Scale. Why not stop at 10^-18?
Let’s look at some papers.
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0601097
Planck-scale physics: facts and beliefs
Authors: Diego Meschini
(Submitted on 23 Jan 2006)

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0506068
Is empty spacetime a physical thing?
Authors: Diego Meschini, Markku Lehto
(Submitted on 11 Jun 2005 (v1), last revised 24 Oct 2005 (this version, v2))

Let’s look at some others who research Planck scale
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0305019
Selected topics in Planck-scale physics
Authors: Y. Jack Ng (University of North Carolina)
(Submitted on 4 May 2003 (v1), last revised 15 May 2003 (this version, v2))
Abstract
We review a few topics in Planck-scale physics, with emphasis on possible manifestations in relatively low energy. The selected topics include quantum fluctuations of spacetime, their cumulative effects, uncertainties in energy-momentum measurements, and low energy quantum-gravity phenomenology. The focus is on quantum-gravity-induced uncertainties in some observable quantities. We consider four possible ways to probe Planck-scale physics experimentally:
1. looking for energy-dependent spreads in the arrival time of photons of the same energy from GRBs;
2. examining spacetime fluctuation-induced phase incoherence of light from extragalactic sources;
3. detecting spacetime foam with laser-based interferometry techniques;
4. understanding the threshold anomalies in high energy cosmic ray and gamma ray events.
Some other experiments are briefly discussed. We show how some physics behind black holes, simple clocks, simple computers, and the holographic principle is related to Planck-scale physics.
We also discuss a formulation of the Dirac equation as a difference equation on a discrete Planck-scale spacetime lattice, and a possible interplay between Planck-scale and Hubble-scale physics encoded in the cosmological constant (dark energy).
--------------
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312014
Planck-scale structure of spacetime and some implications for astrophysics and cosmology
Authors: Giovanni Amelino-Camelia
(Submitted on 30 Nov 2003 (v1), last revised 8 Dec 2003 (this version, v2))
-----------
jal
Laidback
QUOTE (HiggsInteresto+Aug 5 2007, 11:29 PM)
It's been a while I've read over some deep physics as deep as today whilst studying black holes and the Higgs mechanism (not here BTW).

I find it very interesting and quite a mystery, but nonetheless, I'd like to see some seriously critique and evaluation of this supposition [Higgs Boson] when experimenting and or testing is underway at the LHC.

I've heard they're encountering many engineering problems linked mainly with the superconducting magnet's, not to mention problems with funding.
Until then, I'm not really sure whether other causes can be considered by me personally, since it's not far from the final stage now and is a good project to answer many "theoretical postulations and or assumptions" for now.

Maybe it really is an over complicated view of things that are actually taking place? Do you think if a proposition (theoretical explanation of an occurrence) was simple it would simply be rejected by the authoritative scientific community and major publishing bodies (though it may actually be factual but not yet known) ?

I personally "ponder" some times that maybe a sort of inductive vibrational movement has something to do with particles having mass. Vibration on minima scales a fraction of the actual particle mass yet initiated by a set of occurrences external and internal to the particle itself. Just over-simplistic pondering, nothing more.

Lets never over look that All forces adhere to classical mechanics..
QUOTE
I'd like to see if the SUSY partners exist and mainly how.
By understanding the Physical Laws on Force and Motion you should already know if SUSY pairs are a justified reference in the first place..

Cheers all,

Peter J Schoen.
Laidback
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 6 2007, 06:47 AM)
yquantum

In my answer to Neil I did not comment on this:

QUOTE NEIL: "if the pixels are really pixels like a TV screen then they don't move or have mass themselves. They project viscosity and inertia onto particles as waves pass though a particular region."

Just for the sake of accuracy, I would say that pixels ARE the waves - (no wave without points to express the wave). So the pixels are not projecting (if I understand rightly -I am not English tongue) viscosity and inertia onto particles ---. I would say that the pixel behaviour - defined by its delay-time - that is what gives us the qualities of viscosity and inertia. EVERYTHING starts from the math.point, and physical universe is about how this math. point stepwise turns itsself into expressions which are more and more physical - so to speak.

QUOTE: "how would one measure this pixel model or is a awareness of the cognitive process as in a projection. "

I am not sure exactly what you are pointing at ? please rephrase.

QUOTE: "If it can be detected then what micro measurement would you estimate?"

The pixel as such is an intimate part of all physical matter,

When the pixel screen is mute - not playing - no wave-structures are being expressed, and we humans will see the mute pixel screen as absolute vacuum.

Our only chance to detect the pixel is indirectly, we have to look at how wave-forms are build from the pixel-points.

Any particle is made by wave-interferences, and lets start with the smallest elementary particles that we can put qualities on as of to day, fermions - bosons. This mean that we know characteristic frequencies - that is what is being referred to as spin, we may know volume / mass / energy - that has bearing to amplitude, flavour may get an interpretation wave-wise and so on and so on -

On this basis I envisage that it is possible to get ideas about Universal Units such as pixel volume and pixel delay time.

How many pixels are being involved in a wave-expression - what is the inertia in the expression -

The smaller the elementary "particles" that can be described the more "direct" the pixel can be seen.

Hey Bukh,

Just a few quick question, with respects to your inference to the Theoretical Pixel..

Is my reasoning justified if I state each pixel is set out 3 dimensionally "set measurement and or quanta" and every one of them are the same as all the others?

It concerns me.. Whether they are only theoretical as I have been reasoning thus far or as per your above statements imply they are a reality?

If this is the case then I guess further considerations for both General and Special relativity need to be considered.. And how does one explain gravities downward push and or exertion, does your model consider and or comply to the implications?
and what resolution have you reasoned them with?

I guess we are bordering where it may nessecitate the calculus which I should point out is not my strong point never the less feel free to punish me with it, nothing better than getting ones feet wet if one needs to experience and or understand water so to speak..
bukh
Hej Laidback

QUOTE: "It concerns me.. Whether they are only theoretical as I have been reasoning thus far or as per your above statements imply they are a reality?"

What is theoretical and what is real ?

We are used to think that there exist easy distinctions between these two worlds - but actually I see it as a very subtle and difficult to answer question.

The short version is that Pixel is very REAL. Pixel is perhaps the most real we can think of. The pixel is the underlying reality of any wave-structure.

And yes - physics is probably in a paradigma shift, not that we are to abandon all or any of what have been accumulated of wisdom - but going downwards, a totally new insight of complexity opens up. We get closer to a TOE. We can use most of what we already know to calculate downwards - and the most important will probably be to allot wave-concepts a very central place.

Gravity - I call it this odd desire of Nature to socialize.

Where someting is - more comes to - and matter creates matter.

The 3D Pixel Screen is an ideal medium for explaining how -

Any wave-pattern will enter into interference with nearby wave-patterns - the nearer the easier. That phenomenon we experience / interpret as gravity. The information contained in the respective pixels will ease this gravitational process.

QUOTE: "I guess we are bordering where it may nessecitate the calculus which I should point out is not my strong point never the less feel free to punish me with it, nothing better than getting ones feet wet if one needs to experience and or understand water so to speak.. "

Oh I like You - nothing better than get things moved - and you may know that I am totally ignorant in EVERYTHING related to physics and math. Ivars and Sylwester are those - as you already know - that have been using the calculator. I understand that the scale is around 10-64.
yquantum
bukh, Ivars, Laidback, Brain, et al

The pixel is the underlying reality of any wave-structure...Oh I like You - nothing better than get things moved - and you may know that I am totally ignorant in EVERYTHING related to physics and math. Ivars and Sylwester are those - as you already know - that have been using the calculator. I understand that the scale is around 10-64. =>bukh

bukh, 10^64 is a number I cannot or know of a supercomputer that can compute such a vast #.

NF, mentioned TV and projection and you rejected the analogy. So if they are points and I think I remembered you saying they were sometimes off/on what mechanism turns the waves off/on.

QUOTE
It concerns me.. Whether they are only theoretical as I have been reasoning thus far or as per your above statements imply they are a reality?. => Laidback

Are you talking about different dimensions, bukh?

I am trying to understand this model you have been working on, but I cannot wrap my mind around the PIXELS as you describe them. Is this your alternative to the Higgs boson?

ciao_
yquantum
bukh
yquantum

QUOTE: "bukh, 10^64 is a number I cannot or know of a supercomputer that can compute such a vast #."

OK - but why is it important that a supercomputer cannot compute values of that order of magnitude - in as much as a supercomputer is a fairly primitive calculator, at least if we look at it in say 10 years time. Anyhow I am not a math. guy, so i am not the right one to answer this question.

QUOTE: "NF, mentioned TV and projection and you rejected the analogy."

No, it was not meant as a rejection of the analogy - on the contrary - TV screen (3D) is a very good analogy - it was just a comment on the semantic level on something else - namely:

QUOTE Neil: "They (pixels) project viscosity and inertia onto particles as waves pass through a particular region." In my ears this can be misinterpreted, in a way that it is not the pixels that create the waves. On the bottom line it is the pixels that create everything - and they are the underlying cause of everything, and as such the pixels are the underlying cause of viscosity and inertia ----and waves ---and particles ----and physical world ----and humans.

QUOTE:
"It concerns me.. Whether they are only theoretical as I have been reasoning thus far or as per your above statements imply they are a reality?. => Laidback

Are you talking about different dimensions, bukh?"

I do not understand why dimension is relevant in this context.

If you ask me whether a pixel is a theoretical or a real "creature" I would say that the pixel is the most real, that exist in our physical universe - and at the same time the pixel is by its very nature impossible ever to "touch".

Anyhow - the question whether something is real or not - that is a very very subtle question, and cannot be answered by a yes or no. "Reality" is something that needs an accurate definition in the context it is being used.

QUOTE: "I am trying to understand this model you have been working on, but I cannot wrap my mind around the PIXELS as you describe them. Is this your alternative to the Higgs boson?"

Well - the Pixel solve in my eyes the problems that the Higgs boson should remedy - but the Pixel has a much more far-reaching effect on "Everything".

Laidback
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 6 2007, 07:41 PM)
Hey Laidback

QUOTE (LaidBack+)
It concerns me.. Whether they are only theoretical as I have been reasoning thus far or as per your above statements imply they are a reality?"

What is theoretical and what is real ?

For starters,
Any event that is replicated to imitate a previous event assumes that all variables are considered into our observations..

The universe being in a constant state of change makes this near impossible..

Anyway, In any research facility, all we can do is to setup some tests, lets say we were trying understand what the hell is going on with ones hair as one nears a metal sphere..

All we can do is to set up various tests for our observations, and as proof we can get someones Else's confirmation, and thus no calculus is needed as direct observations were possible for confirmation, with these observations we needed guidelines so that others can repeat the test and or experiment ending with the same results..

From this need, certain forces needed to be quantisized and set up so confirmation is possible simply by repeating the theoretical variables, and its here where the theory began to enmesh with reality, HELLO Quantum mechanics "QM" and Quantum ElectroDynamics "QED" via some bright spark doing the theory before even the experiment took place..

Anyway during the introduction of QM and QED there was a point in time where theory could calculate what would be observed, Much of the Atoms Model is structured from this theoretical bases, as is most of Electronics, anyway over the past 25 to 30 years the Electronics Industry was met with many problems that conflicted with the current models, and as a result new models have been postulated and tested and via the results proved more reliable, and as long as we cant directly observe the Atom and the postulated Electrons, the best we can do is to rely on tests gained via detectors noting that the detectors depend on theoretical forces with set quanta.. we also should note the detectors consist much of what we may be trying to detect in the first place..
QUOTE
We are used to think that there exist easy distinctions between these two worlds - but actually I see it as a very subtle and difficult to answer question.
Agreed! That's why we should always be mindful we are working with much theory and whats more in many cases, theories that rely on previous theories which in some cases some may base data on outdated models, models that work for one purpose but not for all the other purposes, and no where is this problem more evident than when one refers to Photons rather than to the latest models developed in the communications industry, err~ I am afraid that's all I can say on this matter in avoiding serious repercussions..
QUOTE (->
 QUOTE We are used to think that there exist easy distinctions between these two worlds - but actually I see it as a very subtle and difficult to answer question.
Agreed! That's why we should always be mindful we are working with much theory and whats more in many cases, theories that rely on previous theories which in some cases some may base data on outdated models, models that work for one purpose but not for all the other purposes, and no where is this problem more evident than when one refers to Photons rather than to the latest models developed in the communications industry, err~ I am afraid that's all I can say on this matter in avoiding serious repercussions..The short version is that Pixel is very REAL. Pixel is perhaps the most real we can think of. The pixel is the underlying reality of any wave-structure.

Yquantum has already queried this, but If the Pixel is real what forces (velocities) give it, it's form and or structure?
QUOTE
And yes - physics is probably in a paradigm shift, not that we are to abandon all or any of what have been accumulated of wisdom - but going downwards, a totally new insight of complexity opens up. We get closer to a TOE. We can use most of what we already know to calculate downwards - and the most important will probably be to allot wave-concepts a very central place.
My reasoning is we already have TOE, its just that most have the silly idea of a perception being some magical attractive and or pulling force...

My reasoning has me convinced that once this gross oversight is addressed gravity will be treated via its proper inbound velocities.
QUOTE (->
 QUOTE And yes - physics is probably in a paradigm shift, not that we are to abandon all or any of what have been accumulated of wisdom - but going downwards, a totally new insight of complexity opens up. We get closer to a TOE. We can use most of what we already know to calculate downwards - and the most important will probably be to allot wave-concepts a very central place.
My reasoning is we already have TOE, its just that most have the silly idea of a perception being some magical attractive and or pulling force...

My reasoning has me convinced that once this gross oversight is addressed gravity will be treated via its proper inbound velocities. Gravity - I call it this odd desire of Nature to socialize.
And this has come about via NOT fully understanding what Force means.

Force means an exertion, and an exertion is only possible via considering the velocities implicated.. Know this and it becomes blatantly obvious attraction or pull is a by-product of previous velocities..
QUOTE
Where something is - more comes to - and matter creates matter.
I reason Gravity is the result from the dynamics of Potential Kinetic Energy, via from the perspective of certain velocities that result from meeting velocities having traversed an area only to be met by inbound velocities from other areas outward velocities..

Put simply where the majority see the swell of water from the moon above as the pull of the moon, I reason the body of water is mass that has the luxury to decompress via lacking inbound velocities..

This is because I insist attraction and or magic is not possible!
QUOTE (->
 QUOTE Where something is - more comes to - and matter creates matter.
I reason Gravity is the result from the dynamics of Potential Kinetic Energy, via from the perspective of certain velocities that result from meeting velocities having traversed an area only to be met by inbound velocities from other areas outward velocities..

Put simply where the majority see the swell of water from the moon above as the pull of the moon, I reason the body of water is mass that has the luxury to decompress via lacking inbound velocities..

This is because I insist attraction and or magic is not possible! The 3D Pixel Screen is an ideal medium for explaining how -

Any wave-pattern will enter into interference with nearby wave-patterns - the nearer the easier. That phenomenon we experience / interpret as gravity. The information contained in the respective pixels will ease this gravitational process.
Yes I agree but they are NOT real unless you can detail how their structure is possible as per Physical laws on force and motion require it..
QUOTE
Oh I like You - nothing better than get things moved - and you may know that I am totally ignorant in EVERYTHING related to physics and math.  Ivars and Sylwester are those - as you already know - that have been using the calculator. I understand that the scale is around 10-64.

Mathematics is not a strong point of mine but even so when push comes to shove when some one declares or implies form and or structure, I try to apply my own model to it, to see if it conforms and complies to Newtons Laws, and if there were problems, in the past I snickered to myself, knowing to well it does NOT comply to cause and effect and or Newtons critical Laws on FORCE and MOTION, which then implies to me the theory is based partly on a flawed theory that may further be based on further outdated theoretical models, these days I don't have to concern myself with the protection of my models being utilized by my competitors as I consider myself retired, of course I still have to avoid legal repercussions if I leak out to much of the model I developed.. the best I can do is to drop a few clues..

Any questions?

Cheers,
Peter J Schoen.
yquantum
bukh, Ivars, Laidback, Brain, et al,

This is not to be a means or effort to impress you with the power mathematical disciplines. It just gives us a tool in which to better understand our universe both macro and micro -- I believe Laidback touched on this.

The information below could be found I would think anywhere from text to math models that would give some type of picture of our universe & its vastness.

bukh

To give you somewhat an appreciation of the number you mentioned and as it said below is a lower limit will express what the model your purposes. Please remember the," law of conservation - the number give or take a few ? is all there will ever be.

QUOTE
QUOTE: "bukh, 10^64 is a number I cannot or know of a supercomputer that can compute such a vast #."

OK - but why is it important that a supercomputer cannot compute values of that order of magnitude - in as much as a supercomputer is a fairly primitive calculator, at least if we look at it in say 10 years time. Anyhow I am not a math. guy, so i am not the right one to answer this question.

You might say that this is not relevant but when you form a hypothesis/model you must included so many other theories/models that have been proven to extreme detailed.

I do not believe your pixel postulation takes these into account (VP's, forces, DM/E, etc. as an example & how your postulation explains events) I believe you would find some problems with what you have mentioned. And this is if I understand what you are purposing.

Laidback understands I deal with the micro or QM side but am open to just using classical because that is the world you see. I do understand why you use this approach. It is intuitive not unintuitive as what I see each day.

My experiences in observation, forces (you should like that description, Laidback) me into models QM etc. that has given much information with tremendous accuracy in predictions.

This is just a classical view.

A typical star weighs about 2x10^33 Grams, which is about 1x10^57 atoms of hydrogen per star ... That is a 1 followed by 57 zeros.

It is estimated a typical galaxy has about 400 billion stars so that means each galaxy has 1x10^57 X 400,000,000,000 = 5x10^68 hydrogen atoms in a galaxy, say like ours.

It has been estimated there is 80 billion galaxies in the Universe, so that means that there are about: 5x10^68 X 80,000,000,000 = 4x10^79 hydrogen atoms in the Universe. But this is definitely a lower limit calculation, and ignores many possible atom sources.

I do not know what DM or DE might be made of but there you have to take into account 96% of the unknown cosmos. I would not even begin to try and express what influences it might have on experment's. This is really the important point on this reply, bukh.

Just wanted to give you some idea of what is said when you say that all there your pixels explain everything around us.

caio_
yquantum
bukh
Hej Laidback

QUOTE:
"The short version is that Pixel is very REAL. Pixel is perhaps the most real we can think of. The pixel is the underlying reality of any wave-structure.

Yquantum has already queried this, but If the Pixel is real what forces (velocities) give it, it's form and or structure?"

It is a very demanding question - in as much as this is unknown for "Everything". We have previously been touching this topic about force / energy - and origen of same.

I imagine that energy is intimately associated with motion - and motion is change - and change is information - and the Pixel contains the informational world.

This is what gives the pixel its force - the ability to signal ON OFF, and this signal is then translated into the creation of the wave-structures - and the wave structures creates the particles by their standing wave-interference patterns - to express the whole physical Universe.

Universe is the physical expression of the informational world- Information is being utilized but cannot be used up - so Universe will always have the amount of "energy" as needed. EVERYTHING is created out from informations that translate itsself into physical expressions.

QUOTE:

"Gravity - I call it this odd desire of Nature to socialize.--

And this has come about via NOT fully understanding what Force means.
Force means an exertion, and an exertion is only possible via considering the velocities implicated.. Know this and it becomes blatantly obvious attraction or pull is a by-product of previous velocities.."

Agreed - I made a sloppy and incomplete answer. I trust that you understand what I meant - namely that gravity IS force - the force that is being expressed when wave-systems on the 3D Pixel Grid is approaching (building up tension - force) and subsequently being repelled and creating vacuum (relative). But also that wave-systems more easily enter into interferences with nearby wave-systems - so they are being attracted to each other.

And NEWTONIAN ! --

On the bottom line I would say that the behaviour of the pixel signaling ON with a deleay time from pixel to pixel, that IS Newtonian in its very micro-expression. "A body (pixel) with inertia (delay time), and this is the origen of EVERYTHING. You can say that it is the microcosmos of Newtonian law - which is scaled upwards in the formation of what we see as physical particles (wave-interference structures construed out from pixels) and consequently everything in physical universe behaves according to Newtonian laws.
Ivars
hej bukh

Sounds familiar, no?

http://www.physorg.com/news105703818.html

A vacuum – space essentially void of any matter whatsoever – is a strange thing. And it may be even stranger, according to recent research. Motivated by the results of an experiment known as PVLAS, which showed that not only is the vacuum empty but can act like a crystal under a strong magnetic field, a group of physicists has proposed a dark-matter candidate particle produced during the early universe and within stars.

So , crystal like "imaginary" aether lattice like in a superfluid is there, like we predicted. And we also said that it may explain 70% dark energ part, 26% going to liquid Aether, 4% to matter.

Nice.
yquantum
QUOTE
crystal like "imaginary" aether lattice like in a superfluid is there, like we predicted.

Hi Ivars, "imaginary" aether lattice am I to understand that you do not believe in the aether?

ciao_
yquantum
Ivars
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 7 2007, 05:20 PM)

Hi Ivars, "imaginary" aether lattice am I to understand that you do not believe in the aether?

ciao_
yquantum

"Imaginary" in a sense that it affects Aether behaviour, creates its turbulence at low T ( like in superfluid) , so it is there, on other hand, it is not clear why it is there (what could cause Aether=vacuum to be particulated in a regular way, and why this component of vacuum is kind of totally separated from other things going on - e.g. why are space ships able to move via crystal without almost no problem?)

Normaly we would assume crystal and vacuum ( solid and very rarified gas) are very far from each other- it appears that in the end they connect, but the crystal is special- the lattice is still there, but there is NOTHING , no matter in this crystal. So it is kind of imaginary crystal, and I expect that it is the true reason physics can not live without complex numbers.
yquantum
Ivars,

Great question, and I hope this will clear some issues up for you.

http://www.uncwil.edu/courses/mat111hb/Izs...ex/complex.html

ciao_
yquantum
Neil Farbstein
QUOTE (Ivars+Aug 7 2007, 06:42 PM)
"Imaginary" in a sense that it affects Aether behavior, creates its turbulence at low T ( like in super fluid) , so it is there, on other hand, it is not clear why it is there (what could cause Aether=vacuum to be particulated in a regular way, and why this component of vacuum is kind of totally separated from other things going on - e.g. why are space ships able to move via crystal without almost no problem?)

Normally we would assume crystal and vacuum ( solid and very rarefied gas) are very far from each other- it appears that in the end they connect, but the crystal is special- the lattice is still there, but there is NOTHING , no matter in this crystal. So it is kind of imaginary crystal, and I expect that it is the true reason physics can not live without complex numbers.

You think space is some type of crystallized object. It's pretty but relativity contradicts it. Crystalline structure might have something to do with defining the speed of light. Crystal type aether is attractive to us as concept since it lets us explain something intuitive about space and motion or something else; quantum teleportation etc.
Ivars
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 7 2007, 07:13 PM)
Ivars,

Great question, and I hope this will clear some issues up for you.

http://www.uncwil.edu/courses/mat111hb/Izs...ex/complex.html

ciao_
yquantum

hej yquantum,

Mathematically -of course, by why do we need them to calculate real physical values? As an intermitent mathematical tool?

I have this mystical feeling that harmony and connections we see in math more and more and which we still have not discovered truly are there because it fits the nature. And comlex numbers probably is one of the first things - to find out why imaginary unit is needed in physics- is there a place for it in Universe?

I believe there is.

QUOTE
A pseudoscalar in a geometric algebra is a highest-grade element of the algebra. For example, in two dimensions there are two basis vectors, e1, e2 and the associated highest-grade basis element is

e1e2 = e12.
So a pseudoscalar is a multiple of e12. The element e12 squares to −1 and commutes with all elements — behaving therefore like the imaginary scalar i in the complex numbers. It is these scalar-like properties which give rise to its name.

In this setting, a pseudoscalar changes sign under a parity inversion, since if

(e1, e2) → (u1, u2)
is a change of basis representing an orthogonal transformation, then

e1e2 → u1u2 = ±e1e2,
where the sign depends on the determinant of the rotation. Pseudoscalars in geometric algebra thus correspond to the pseudoscalars in physics.

Ivars
QUOTE (Neil Farbstein+Aug 7 2007, 07:21 PM)
You think space is some type of crystallized object. It's pretty but relativity contradicts it. Crystalline structure might have something to do with defining the speed of light. Crystal type aether is attractive to us as concept since it lets us explain something intuitive about space and motion or something else; quantum teleportation etc.

We might get around the relativity problem in the same heat conductivity works in superfluids- there is NEVER a temperature gradient in superfluid as its thermal conductivity becomes very large.

We may say that superfluid of Aether, with "imaginary" crystal behind it, have the nice property of NEVER having a light speed gradient- because vaccums "conductivity" for light speed becomes very large - so light speed is everywhere the same.
yquantum
Ivars, NF, bukh, Laidback, et al,

QUOTE
Mathematically -of course, by why do we need them to calculate real physical values? As an intermitent mathematical tool?
=> Ivars

I am not able to reply ASAP due to other responsibilities I remember reading this some time ago and hope it helps. This is not intended to push SS, or T/models but how they are used.

QUOTE (->
 QUOTE Mathematically -of course, by why do we need them to calculate real physical values? As an intermitent mathematical tool?
=> Ivars

I am not able to reply ASAP due to other responsibilities I remember reading this some time ago and hope it helps. This is not intended to push SS, or T/models but how they are used.

So suddenly you find these wonderful numbers that work so well in mathematics, but didn't seem to have any role to play in the physical world now had a role to play in the physical world. Well twistor theory is trying to take that one step further, so you look for a role for these complex numbers, complex spaces, and so on to have a role in spacetime geometry.

http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~frank/BerkeleyGroks_Penrose.htm

In the interview with RP you will find your answer, --> it starts the paragraph with,

QUOTE
Let me just backtrack a little bit.

ciao_
yquantum
bukh
yquantum

QUOTE: "it has been estimated there is 80 billion galaxies in the Universe, so that means that there are about: 5x10^68 X 80,000,000,000 = 4x10^79 hydrogen atoms in the Universe. But this is definitely a lower limit calculation, and ignores many possible atom sources."

I am pretty happy with this kind of figure - because it fits well with a scale that is ultimately set by human being - so it means that we are in a range of 10^80 - 10-80.

QUOTE: "I do not know what DM or DE might be made of but there you have to take into account 96% of the unknown cosmos. I would not even begin to try and express what influences it might have on experment's. This is really the important point on this reply, bukh."

With the 3D Pixel Universe, fundamental space IS the crystalline grid made by the pixels. When the pixels are not signaling - not playing - the fundamental space expresses nothing and will be percepted as absolute vacuum - and that is DE. When the pixels are playing - they are expressing wave-patterns - and it is Physical MATTER. Now depending on the complexity - the size of wave-interference structures - the amount of "energy" - the amount of Information that is contained in the said particle expression - (analogies for the same) - such matter will be either DM - in the case that "particles" are too small to me percepted by human senses / technologies - or it is ordnary physical matter, in the case that the particles are sized "elementary" and upwards.

VP is particle forms so short lasting that they are nearly impossible to detect - and/or too small to be percepted.

We will learn - I imagine to get fairly accurate impressions about VP and DM by their indirect fingerprints - and perhaps the announcement of to day about a crystalline structure in vacuum represents the first clue of the 3D Pixel Universe - who knows.

QUOTE: "Just wanted to give you some idea of what is said when you say that all there your pixels explain everything around us."

Pardoni - it was not meant like that - you know, sometimes one get so happy about own ideas, that it is really too much.

The important point is that physical universe can be seen as the physical expression of information. MOTION becomes a very triggy concept - and should perhaps more accurately be defined as shifting expressions. Motion as we traditionally see it as humans - is an illusion.
bukh
Hej Neil

QUOTE: "You think space is some type of crystallized object. It's pretty but relativity contradicts it."

Why would you say that the idea of crystalline fundamental space is contradicted by relativity.
Laidback
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 8 2007, 01:21 AM)
Hey Laidback

The short version is that Pixel is very REAL. Pixel is perhaps the most real we can think of. The pixel is the underlying reality of any wave-structure.

QUOTE (Laidback+)
Yquantum has already queried this, but If the Pixel is real what forces (velocities) give it, it's form and or structure?

It is a very demanding question - in as much as this is unknown for "Everything".

Well my view is we already know what we need to know, Err~ for TOE.

Well maybe some of us at this point in time, as I am extremely confident all of physics MUST follow on with observable Laws..

Yquantum, may not be aware how closely QM is adhering to these basic laws, all it needs is to be mindful of RELATIVITY via considerations to all Velocities for all of the forces implicated, Err~ paying attention to clues I have slipped in I hope as I cant say to much more...
QUOTE
We have previously been touching this topic about force / energy - and origin of same.

I imagine that energy is intimately associated with motion - and motion is change - and change is information - and the Pixel contains the informational world.

This is what gives the pixel its force

OK lets consider each and every Pixel is with a force lets say of two Newtons a meter Err {2 Nm} or even better lets convert your Pixel to a single dimension and imply 2 joules, and seeing joules are Energy each Pixel is equal to 2 joules of Potential Energy..

Now lets consider this is their on state, and their off state is ????????

Hmmm we cant destroy Energy but we can give it momentum but only if its force or Energy is with a greater force to what surrounds it..

If all the pixels in the Universe were with a force of two in all directions there is our structure, but each pixel simply can only be stagnant..

Unless we consider the bigger picture!

lets consider with respects to just 729 pixels in an array of 9 x 9 x 9 and consider that each pixel each was with the energy and or force of 2 joules and or importantly converted back to 2 Newton meters, which refers to their force via Kinetics and or momentum (force) lets consider how much RELATIVE force the very central Pixel is experiencing by keeping in mind in reality our 729 pixel model may be experiencing a lot more compression than what our central pixel model is experiencing, Err~ I wish I could say more so that I can clue in Yquantum why relativity MUST be considered here correctly but that's all I can say.. well other than to again point out to the critical error in the below image as a key, and by understanding why and how the error was made should lead to an astounding simplicity...

Any way going back to that central Pixel what do you think its occupation would be with respects to the other pixels occupation? and if the nine by nine structure was spherical who here can point out where we would most likely find the following states within one of the pixels for, Near vacuum, Gas, Liquid, Solid, further more where would we have the slowest velocities, slowest time rates? if we were three pixes deep, which direction would imply red-shift and which direction would imply Blue-shift? if anyone can answer all of these questions well you are damn close to understanding ALL of physics!

Of course one must be capable of calculus and conversions from one quanta to another, but other than that - That's it, its that easy and or simple well sort of..

QUOTE (->
 QUOTE We have previously been touching this topic about force / energy - and origin of same. I imagine that energy is intimately associated with motion - and motion is change - and change is information - and the Pixel contains the informational world. This is what gives the pixel its force

OK lets consider each and every Pixel is with a force lets say of two Newtons a meter Err {2 Nm} or even better lets convert your Pixel to a single dimension and imply 2 joules, and seeing joules are Energy each Pixel is equal to 2 joules of Potential Energy..

Now lets consider this is their on state, and their off state is ????????

Hmmm we cant destroy Energy but we can give it momentum but only if its force or Energy is with a greater force to what surrounds it..

If all the pixels in the Universe were with a force of two in all directions there is our structure, but each pixel simply can only be stagnant..

Unless we consider the bigger picture!

lets consider with respects to just 729 pixels in an array of 9 x 9 x 9 and consider that each pixel each was with the energy and or force of 2 joules and or importantly converted back to 2 Newton meters, which refers to their force via Kinetics and or momentum (force) lets consider how much RELATIVE force the very central Pixel is experiencing by keeping in mind in reality our 729 pixel model may be experiencing a lot more compression than what our central pixel model is experiencing, Err~ I wish I could say more so that I can clue in Yquantum why relativity MUST be considered here correctly but that's all I can say.. well other than to again point out to the critical error in the below image as a key, and by understanding why and how the error was made should lead to an astounding simplicity...

Any way going back to that central Pixel what do you think its occupation would be with respects to the other pixels occupation? and if the nine by nine structure was spherical who here can point out where we would most likely find the following states within one of the pixels for, Near vacuum, Gas, Liquid, Solid, further more where would we have the slowest velocities, slowest time rates? if we were three pixes deep, which direction would imply red-shift and which direction would imply Blue-shift? if anyone can answer all of these questions well you are damn close to understanding ALL of physics!

Of course one must be capable of calculus and conversions from one quanta to another, but other than that - That's it, its that easy and or simple well sort of..

"Gravity - I call it this odd desire of Nature to socialize.--

QUOTE (LaidBack+)
And this has come about via NOT fully understanding what Force means.
Force means an exertion, and an exertion is only possible via considering the velocities implicated.. Know this and it becomes blatantly obvious attraction or pull is a by-product of previous velocities.."
Agreed - I made a sloppy and incomplete answer. I trust that you understand what I meant - namely that gravity IS force - the force that is being expressed when wave-systems on the 3D Pixel Grid is approaching (building up tension - force) and subsequently being repelled and creating vacuum (relative). But also that wave-systems more easily enter into interferences with nearby wave-systems - so they are being attracted to each other.

If you go back to the Pixel Model and as to how that central Pixel experiences its surrounding pixels combined forces, it is that compression what I see as gravity, keep in mind of the huge number of Pixels the universe is made up of.. now imagine what compression does to your Pixels the more central it may be of a greater number of them?

QUOTE
And NEWTONIAN ! --

On the bottom line I would say that the behaviour of the pixel signaling ON with a delay time from pixel to pixel, that IS Newtonian in its very micro-expression. "A body (pixel) with inertia (delay time), and this is the origin of EVERYTHING. You can say that it is the microcosm of Newtonian law - which is scaled upwards in the formation of what we see as physical particles (wave-interference structures construed out from pixels) and consequently everything in physical universe behaves according to Newtonian laws.

But for change we must have momentum, and for momentum we must have force, and for force we must have momentum..

Wait! I already stated that? didnt I?
Zephir
QUOTE (bukh+Aug 8 2007, 12:41 AM)
The short version is that Pixel is very REAL. Pixel is perhaps the most real we can think of. The pixel is the underlying reality of any wave-structure.

The true is, nobody did see the single explanation using the 3D Pixel concept, some testable prediction the less.
yquantum
Laidback, bukh, Ivars, et al,

Laidback, I have not overlooked your comments - wanting to keep a very open mind and see if all you have stated is possible. More importantly is there a experiment that I have heard of that supports the model which is as you know very important.

QUOTE
The pixel is the underlying reality of any wave-structure.
=>bukh

I believe any scientist in this field would want to test this underlying reality of the -- "WAVE MODEL'. Do you have any approach/experiment that you would suggest.

QUOTE (->
 QUOTE The pixel is the underlying reality of any wave-structure.
=>bukh

I believe any scientist in this field would want to test this underlying reality of the -- "WAVE MODEL'. Do you have any approach/experiment that you would suggest.

The true is, nobody did see the single explanation using the 3D Pixel concept, some testable prediction the less.
=Z

ciao_
yquantum
Laidback
QUOTE (yquantum+Aug 8 2007, 10:13 AM)
Laidback, bukh, Ivars, et al,

Laidback, I have not overlooked your comments - wanting to keep a very open mind and see if all you have stated is possible.  More importantly is there a experiment that I have heard of that supports the model which is as you know very important.

ciao_
yquantum

NASA done some experiments with water and alkaselza of all things, there are some movies available, but I don't know if they may help with how the solid alkaselza briefly are exerted to the core of a body of water before it dissolves..

Let me know if you find the video of it, as I would love a copy of it..

The important point to note is how the solid tablet was exerted to the core of the body of the water in two of their videos just before the chemical reactions propelled it every-which way..

Cheers to all,

Peter J Schoen.
yquantum
Laidback,

QUOTE
NASA done some experiments with water and alkaselza of all things, there are some movies available, but I don't know if they may help with how the solid alkaselza briefly are exerted to the core of a body of water before it dissolves..
=>Laidback

Are you referring to the experiment with Alka-Seltzer when added to spherical water drop in micro gravity on board the International Space Station? -- (March 22, 2003)

It might be some time before I can reply but will check after some data has be discussed.

caio_
yquantum
Neil Farbstein
QUOTE (Laidback+Aug 8 2007, 12:35 AM)
NASA done some experiments with water and alkaselza of all things, there are some movies available, but I don't know if they may help with how the solid alkaselza briefly are exerted to the core of a body of water before it dissolves..

Let me know if you find the video of it, as I would love a copy of it..

The important point to note is how the solid tablet was exerted to the core of the body of the water in two of their videos just before the chemical reactions propelled it every-which way..

Cheers to all,

Peter J Schoen.

Amazing!
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.