I cannot do what these “math kids” are doing,
However, I THINK….NOW WE ARE STARTING TO KICK ***!
Things are moving.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.2629v1.pdf
DUAL COMPUTATIONS OF NON-ABELIAN YANG-MILLS ON THE LATTICE
J. WADE CHERRINGTON, J. DANIEL CHRISTENSEN, AND IGOR KHAVKINE
18 May 2007
By making topological excitations manifest, a dual model is well suited to evaluating proposed mechanisms of quark confinement, such as the dual superconductor picture.
Note: cubic packing and hex. packing for the plaquettes
Our claim of ergodicity does however depend on the unproven hypothesis that exceptional zeros of the 18j symbol are isolated, i.e. the zeros do not form surfaces that separate the space of admissible spin foams.
Note: Are these two concepts related? When turning a coin (plaquette), (2d) you go from the face (+), to the edge ( zero), to the back (-).
============

You might find this explanation of the Standard Model as interesting as I did.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0704/0704.2232v1.pdf
Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking as a Basis of Particle Mass
Chris Quigg
Theoretical Physics Department, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
P.O. Box 500, Batavia, Illinois 60510 USA
And Theory Group, Physics Department, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
17 April 2007

The aim of this article is to set the stage by reporting what we know and what we need to know, and to set some “Big Questions” that will guide our explorations.

The CP-PACS Collaboration (centered in Tsukuba, Japan) has made a
calculation omitting virtual quark-antiquark pairs that matches the observed lighthadron spectrum at the 10% level [11]. That discrepancy is larger than the statistical and systematic uncertainties, and so is interpreted as an artifact of the quenched (no dynamical fermions) approximation. New calculations that include virtual quarkantiquark pairs should show the full quantitative power of lattice QCD, and give us new insights into the successes and shortcomings of the simple quark model [12; 13].
Note: When using minimum scale (24 units on a 2d sphere) there exist a 10% extra area that needs to be explained.
------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-lat/pdf/0206/0206009v1.pdf
Light Hadron Spectrum and Quark Masses from Quenched Lattice QCD
S. Aoki, G. Boyd, R. Burkhalter, S. Ejiri, M. Fukugita, S. Hashimoto, Y. Iwasaki, K. Kanaya,
T. Kaneko, Y. Kuramashi, K. Nagai, M. Okawa, H. P. Shanahan, A. Ukawa, T. Yoshi´e
(June 13, 2002)
I don't have the training to determine if their 10% is related to the 10% that I get.
--------------
If you go back into my thread you will find Chris Quigg and the dual simplex model.
------------

I want to understand how the universe is made and how it works.
I reserve the right to change my mind on what I extrapolated from what I have learned if new information contradict what I have already learned.

There is a missing piece of the puzzle that everyone is trying to find.
I don’t care it they call it a brane, higgs, particle, dark matter, plaquettes, 5 force, white hole, etc.
At the end of the day, it’s going to fit into and be part of a structured spacetime.


http://www.astrobiology.cf.ac.uk/fredhoyle.html
Professor Sir Fred Hoyle [1915-2001]
Fred believed that, as a general rule, solutions to major unsolved problems had to be sought by exploring radical hypotheses, whilst at the same time not deviating from well-attested scientific tools and methods. For if such solutions did indeed lie in the realms of orthodox theory upon which everyone agreed, they would either have been discovered already, or they would be trivial.
==========
We should keep our feet on the ground.
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/stdystat.htm
Errors in the Steady State and Quasi-SS Models
http://www.aas.org/head/headnews/headnews.nov00.html
3. Robert Michael Hjellming 1938-2000
=============
If matter really vanishes inside black holes, as if they were bottomless pits, where has the matter gone? British Theorist Roger Penrose suggested some time ago that the missing matter may pop out elsewhere in the universe —or even in an entirely different universe.
Picking up where Penrose left off, Robert M. Hjellming says that the point at which the matter re-emerges in the other universe would be a white hole. Even more intriguing, this passage of matter would not be a one-way street. Matter would also leave the other universe through black holes, says Hjellming, and appear in ours through white holes. Thus the flow of matter between the two universes would be kept in balance.
But, he adds, some evidence may already be at hand that white holes do exist. One of the great puzzles of contemporary astrophysics is the huge amount of energy —cosmic rays, X rays, infrared radiation —that is apparently coming from distant quasars and from the centers of galaxies, including the earth's own Milky Way; the output seems to be greater than can be accounted for by known physical processes, including the conversion of matter into energy by thermonuclear explosions. If it could be shown that matter and energy were coming from another universe, Hjellming says, that problem would be neatly solved.
=============
From J. Baez
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Rela...s/universe.html
The big bang is therefore more like a white hole which is the time reversal of a black hole. According to classical general relativity white holes should not exist since they cannot be created for the same (time-reversed) reasons that black holes cannot be destroyed. This might not apply if they always existed.
The possibility that the big bang is actually a white hole remains.
….. we must ask if there is a white hole model for the universe which would be as consistent with observations as the FRW models.
A white hole model which fitted cosmological observation would have to be the time reversal of a star collapsing to form a black hole.
It follows that the time reversal of this model for a collapsing sphere of dust is indistinguishable from the FRW models if the dust sphere is larger than the observable universe. In other words, we cannot rule out the possibility that the universe is a very large white hole.
==============
With minimum length there should be quantum mini black holes then there should also be quantum mini white holes.
Where are the many mini white holes hiding that are still adding to the structural elements into our universe so that we observe expansion, acceleration and dark mater/energy?

============

http://www.citebase.org/fulltext?format=ap...gr-qc%2F9505012
Spectroscopy of the quantum black hole
Jacob D. Bekenstein, V. F. Mukhanov
10 May 1995 (Received April 13, 2006)
One prediction is that there should be no lines with wavelength of order the black hole size or larger. This makes it possible to test quantum gravity with black holes well above Planck scale.
Note: substitute “white” for “black”
===========
Different calculations are being done to find the missing piece of the puzzle but nobody has agreed on the name for the baby elephant.

Quantum physic and cosmology abound with unsupported theories.
Here is a sample of reasonable thoughts from a search of the web on White Holes
The idea of a white hole is the opposite of a black hole, and is entertained more in science fiction than in actual science journals. Some believe it is the "other side" of a black hole. It is theorized to spew matter and energy out. A flaw in this theory, as many scientists have noted, is that the matter ejected from the white hole would accumulate in the vicinity of the hole, and then collapse upon itself, forming a black hole.
The existence of white holes is implied by a negative square root solution to the Schwarzchild metric for space-time-matter continuum.

A white hole will turn up in your mathematics if you explore the space-time around a black hole without including the star which made the black hole (ie. there is absolutely no matter in the solution). Once you add any matter to the space-time, the part which included a white hole disappears.

A physicist that specializes in relativity will probably say that white holes are simply time-reversed black holes in which all geodesics must emerge but not enter. A geodesic, by the way, is the 4-dimensional world-line of a particle as it traces its path through space and time. For a black hole, all geodesics at the event horizon may enter but not leave, however, if you reversed the direction of time, the same black hole with 'positive time' becomes a white hole with 'negative time'
Would anything be emerging from the white hole in a constant stream? Not unless it entered the black hole end in the first place, or spontaneously was produced inside the Kerr worm hole by perhaps a quantum mechanical process of some kind.
In astrophysics, a white hole is a postulated celestial body that is the time reversal of a black hole. While a black hole acts as a point mass that attracts and absorbs any nearby matter, a white hole acts as a point mass that repels or (perhaps) even ejects matter.
The existence of white holes that are not part of a wormhole is doubtful, as they appear to violate the second law of thermodynamics.
===================
second law of thermodynamics.
Meaning #1: a law stating that mechanical work can be derived from a body only when that body interacts with another at a lower temperature; any spontaneous process results in an increase of entropy
The second law of thermodynamics is an expression of the universal law of increasing entropy. In simple terms, it is an expression of the fact that over time, differences in temperature, pressure, and density tend to even out in a physical system which is isolated from the outside world. Entropy is a measure of how far along this evening-out process has progressed.
The second law is only applicable to macroscopic systems. The second law is actually a statement about the probable behavior of an isolated system. As larger and larger systems are considered, the probability of the second law being practically true becomes more and more certain.
===========

If we are to do “new physics” at the quantum level then the “new physics” must also be reflected at the larger scales.
================

Present avenues of research are not looking too promising.
http://www.citebase.org/fulltext?format=ap...ro-ph%2F0306134
STATUS AND PERSPECTIVES OF DIRECT DARK MATTER SEARCHES
G. CHARDIN
04 June 2006
Supersymmetric particles represent the best motivated candidates to fill the Dark Matter gap
Worse, although CDM appears essential to produce cosmic structures observed at our present epoch, agreement with observations is marginal without additional components, such as neutrinos.
=================
Doing a little bit of balancing on the shoulders of giants and adding the facts of missing neutrinos, minimum scale, dark matter/energy, acceleration, and all of the empty spacetime particles that exist between galaxies, If black holes are connected to a 2d universe that are continuously subtracting spacetime then there must exist white hole that are continuously adding spacetime to account for the expansion and the acceleration of the universe.
-------------
I’M LOOKING FORWARD TO READING ABOUT A NEW COSMOLOGICAL MODEL THAT WILL AGREE WITH THE “NEW PHYSICS” OF MINIMUM LENGTH.

The big bang model has never worked…. Observations have never supported the big bang model. We just thought that it did.
From present observation, it appears that galaxies are distributed as if on the surfaces of connected soap bubbles AND accelerating.

Based on what we know of Black Hole mechanics in our universe, is 'shrinking the universe down to a point' a valid lookback (time reversal) of a gravitational collapse?

The only valid lookback that can be done is to stops at where the soap bubbles are so small that what we would be looking at is a bag of dust.
Models of a bag of dust cannot be made that evolve/agree with the distribution of galaxies as if on the surfaces of connected soap bubbles.

From the point of view of the observer at the center of the bubble, the walls are receding and found to be accelerating, as more space units are being added to the space structure, between him and the walls. Different bubbles …. Different sizes …. Different observations …. Different conclusions.
This then begs the question.
Where are the space units coming from?
Are they coming from the center of the bubbles or the surface of the bubbles?
We have not noticed anything happening in the center of the bubbles.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/question232.htm
How does gravity work?
Each particle of matter attracts every other particle with a force which is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
----------------------
The search for an answer is happening at all scales.
1. A NEW EXPANSION MECHANISM.
2. SPECIFIC TIME REQUIRED TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OLBERS’ PARADOX
3. ORIGIN MUST HAVE HIGH ENERGY
4. EXPLAIN THE ABUDANCE OF HYDROGEN, HELIUM
5. EXPLAIN NEUTRINOS
6. EXPLAIN DARK MATTER/ENERGY
7. NOT VIOLATE THE SECOND LAW OF TERMODYNAMICS
8. EXPLAIN THE QUANTUM MINIMUM LENGTH STRUCTURE
---------------
Professor Sir Fred Hoyle [1915-2001] CAME THE CLOSEST WITH THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION. He would have been right if he would have known about QMLS.
---------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeVeS
Tensor-Vector-Scalar gravity (TeVeS)

http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/19/6/5/1
Gravity's dark side
Feature: June 2006
http://www.physics.mcmaster.ca/origins/dar.../Talks/Bean.pdf
Constraining modified gravity theories of dark energy
Origin of Dark energy mat 2007

The latest info on the distribution of stars etc.
http://cfcp.uchicago.edu/research/publications/index.html
KICP Publications
--------------------
PICK UP YOUR SHOVEL.
The big bang is dead.
-------------------
insert: (speculative conclusions)
Where are the many mini white holes hiding that are still adding to the structural elements into our universe so that we observe expansion, acceleration and dark mater/energy?
Isotopes certainly qualify as unstable configurations of a structure.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/nucl-th/papers/0511/0511051.pdf
On the Cosmic Nuclear Cycle and the Similarity of Nuclei and Stars
O. Manuel, Michael Mozina, Hilton Ratcliffe
(Submitted on 18 Nov 2005)
Repulsive interactions between neutrons in compact stellar cores cause luminosity and a steady outflow of hydrogen from stellar surfaces. Neutron repulsion in more massive compact objects made by gravitational collapse produces violent, energetic, cosmological events (quasars, gamma ray bursts, and active galactic centers) that had been attributed to black holes before neutron repulsion was recognized.
Rather than evolving in one direction by fusion, nuclear matter on the cosmological scale cycles between fusion, gravitational collapse, and dissociation (including neutron-emission). This cycle involves neither the production of matter in an initial “Big Bang” nor the disappearance of matter into black holes. The similarity Bohr noted between atomic and planetary structures extends to a similarity between nuclear and stellar structures.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0510/0510001.pdf
Isotopes Tell Sun’s Origin and Operation
O. Manuel1, Sumeet A. Kamat2, and Michael Mozina
To be published in Proceedings of the First Crisis in Cosmology Conference Monção, Portugal, 23-25 June 2005
(Submitted on 28 Sep 2005)
The Source Of Luminosity In An Iron-Rich Sun
---------------
-----------------
WOW!!!! wow!!! What a paper!!!!
Tell Martin Bojowald (and those that he cited), that I’m throwing a party and supplying the refreshments and photo ops. (They can get an expense account from their depts.).
Marcus, you can forget all the other papers …. This is the most influential paper … and it will be for years to come.
I want to tell all the “seekers” about this paper.
I want to tell the whole world!
Contrarily to Martin Bojowald, I can take a definite position and say that his paper presents a strong argument as to why the “inflaton” is not needed.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.4398v1.pdf
The Dark Side of a Patchwork Universe
Martin Bojowald
30 may 2007
A complete understanding of the universe currently faces several problems, most of which are occasionally expected to be solved by some version of quantum gravity. This also applies to the dark energy problem.
Schematically, one has a picture where space is presented as a discrete structure building up from a small state at the big bang to a highly refined, nearly continuous fabric today. The evolution picture is thus that of an irregular lattice structure which changes in internal time by elementary changes of geometry.

Note: just add one more unit every once in a while

From the point of view of quantum field theory on curved space-times one can effectively view the finiteness of vacuum energy in loop quantum gravity as a cut-off provided by the underlying discrete structure of loop quantum gravity. On the grounds of dimensional arguments one would expect that the cut-off occurs at Planckian values of energy or length, which would certainly result in the well known mismatch between the predicted and observed cosmological constants.

Note: I would like to see arguments why the cutoff cannot be at 10^18 (gluon interaction sizes/length)

It is to be expected that vacuum energy in this formalism does not only depend on the matter state but also on quantum geometry.

In fact, such a quantum geometry epoch of inflation typically does not last long enough to provide all 60 e-foldings required for successful structure formation.
Moreover, such an isotropic model with only inverse volume corrections is not
very accurate at large volume because it does not fully take into account the dynamical discreteness of space manifesting itself in lattice refinements determined by the elementary moves of a Hamiltonian constraint.
Rather, during expansion the discrete structure of space subdivides as described in Sec. 2 which can be modeled by adding new small, discrete patches resulting from new vertices of graphs. When the number of patches increases with volume, their size stays nearly constant or could even decrease.

francesca
I did not even look at the other papers that you mentioned. Martin Bojowald’s paper was just tooooo much!
jal
---------------
I was waiting for comment from the more informed and critical members of this forum and I was also searching for clarifications and so as to improve my knowledge.
Since no one has posted any other comments …. here are my comments. (for a general audience)
Martin Bojowald in “The Dark Side of a Patchwork Universe” is also proposing that quantization could be an approach for solving the Casimir Effects, which is outside of the proton, neutron drip-line and proposes an intuitive understanding of the “quark sea” which is inside the drip-line.
-----------------
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0406/0406024v1.pdf
REVIEW ARTICLE
The Casimir effect: Recent controversies and Progress
Kimball A. Milton
02 june 2004
---------------
p. 61 This promises to add another bit of understanding to our knowledge of Casimir forces, knowledge that seems to grow only incrementally based on specific calculations, since a general understanding is still not at hand.
p. 62
6. Dynamical Casimir Effects
Dynamically,
photons indeed should be produced by QED by a rapidly oscillating bubble, but to produce the requisite number (106 per flash) necessitated, if not superluminal velocities at least macroscopic collapse time scales of order 10−15 s, rather than the observed 10−11 s scale [80].
-----------
The casmir effect has been observed down to 10nm. The similarity with the "quark sea" at 0.1 fm is only that... a similarity. The two are different.
--------------
10 june
http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.3793v1
Precision measurement of the Casimir-Lifshitz force in a fluid
Authors: Jeremy N. Munday, Federico Capasso
(Submitted on 25 May 2007)


----------------------
This is the only game in town.
http://www.phys.psu.edu/~cteq/handbook/v1.1/handbook.pdf
Handbook of perturbative QCD

--------------
Doing quantization (LQG) is much more intuitive that “dipping” into an unknown “quark sea” and picking out “particles” that make the parton model work.
-------------

QUOTE

p. 25 The successes of QCD in describing the strong interactions are summarized by two terms: asymptotic freedom (Gross and Wilczek, 1973a; Politzer, 1973) and confinement. To understand the importance of these two attributes we should recall some facts about the strong interactions. Hadron spectra are very well described by the quark model, but quarks have never been seen in isolation. Any effort to produce single quarks in scattering experiments leads only to the production of the familiar mesons and baryons. Evidently, the forces between quarks are strong. Paradoxically, however, certain high energy cross sections are quite successfully described by a model in which the quarks do not interact at all. This is the parton model that we shall describe in Section III.. Asymptotic freedom refers to the weakness of the short-distance interaction, while the confinement of quarks follows from its strength at long distances. An extraordinary feature of QCD is its ability to accommodate both kinds of behavior. It does this by making the forces between quarks a rather complicated function of distance. Qualitatively, when two quarks are close together, the force is relatively weak (this is asymptotic freedom), but when they move farther apart the force becomes much stronger (confinement). At some distance, it becomes easier to make new quarks and antiquarks, which combine to form hadrons, than to keep pulling against the ever-increasing force. The realization that a single theory might describe such a complicated behavior is commonplace nowadays, but it required a major reorientation in our way of thinking about fundamental forces.