|
|
#12
December 24th 03, 05:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Hi I'm new here
A "groove?" I don't think so. you ever use a record player? the earth is the needle, space is the vinyl (only it's blank) the sun is the pin in the center of the record. mercury venus are the last two tracks, earth is the third to last, mars is fourth the belt is fifth (kindof a transitional song) jupiter is sixth, etc. etc. the great question of course is what set the whole thing into motion (cosmology) --------- steve(vote for me2020!) http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/whyweig...mtbrand=AOL_US "music is like this porthole into another world... the world of truth."- trey Stick it to the man in 2004, wait? who's the green candidate in 2004? 
|
|
#13
December 24th 03, 05:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi I'm new here
A "groove?" I don't think so. you ever use a record player? the earth is the needle, space is the vinyl (only it's blank) the sun is the pin in the center of the record. mercury venus are the last two tracks, earth is the third to last, mars is fourth the belt is fifth (kindof a transitional song) jupiter is sixth, etc. etc. the great question of course is what set the whole thing into motion (cosmology) --------- steve(vote for me2020!) http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/whyweig...mtbrand=AOL_US "music is like this porthole into another world... the world of truth."- trey Stick it to the man in 2004, wait? who's the green candidate in 2004?
|
|
#14
December 24th 03, 08:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi I'm new here
On 24 Dec 2003, bug wrote:
A "groove?" I don't think so. you ever use a record player? the earth is the needle, space is the vinyl (only it's blank) the sun is the pin in the center of the record. mercury venus are the last two tracks, earth is the third to last, mars is fourth the belt is fifth (kindof a transitional song) jupiter is sixth, etc. etc. the great question of course is what set the whole thing into motion (cosmology) And the "groove" is a spiral. Other than that ... -- Only an idiot condemns Socrates for owning slaves. -- The Iron Webmaster, 2977
|
|
#15
December 24th 03, 08:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi I'm new here
On 24 Dec 2003, bug wrote:
A "groove?" I don't think so. you ever use a record player? the earth is the needle, space is the vinyl (only it's blank) the sun is the pin in the center of the record. mercury venus are the last two tracks, earth is the third to last, mars is fourth the belt is fifth (kindof a transitional song) jupiter is sixth, etc. etc. the great question of course is what set the whole thing into motion (cosmology) And the "groove" is a spiral. Other than that ... -- Only an idiot condemns Socrates for owning slaves. -- The Iron Webmaster, 2977
|
|
#16
December 24th 03, 11:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi I'm new here
"bug" wrote in message ... A "groove?" I don't think so. you ever use a record player? the earth is the needle, space is the vinyl (only it's blank) the sun is the pin in the center of the record. mercury venus are the last two tracks, earth is the third to last, mars is fourth the belt is fifth (kindof a transitional song) jupiter is sixth, etc. etc. the great question of course is what set the whole thing into motion (cosmology) --------- So the Mays Absurd Postulate forms from the mist.... I will start with an assumptions and explain why... I have heard both side of the arguments on whether the Universe is a product of a Big Bang (BB from now on) and I have heard the arguments on it not being a product of a BB.. and IMHO the argument, data and explanations in favor of the Universe being a product of the BB seems the most plausable for the observed Universe we live in. So I will not make that argument as others have a much better knowledge base and I would let their views stand and I will take the position that I assume the Universe was the product of a conversion of the yet to be defined energy Quantum that I coin a Quantum Point. I also consider most all existing mathematical models hold with my postulate but the interpretation may be in question in some models. I think that some of the more contrived constructs are complicated by the Fact that we do not know all of the rules that apply to the observed Universe and some mathematical constructs have been required to use assumed values and contrived elements in order to fit experimental data when All the rules are not yet defined. The primary missing rules are concerning gravitational variance in the presence of objects with rest mass. We can define the Effects aspect with great accuracy but we have yet to define the cause and using existing physical rules, I submit, we never will because All existing physical rules only apply to the effect aspect of matter in motion in relation to other matter in motion... This is just my neophyte attempt to give a postulate that gives a rational for that cause while maintaining that existing rules of effects remain intact and explains many aspects of the observed universe that have alluded science for a very long time...... In The Beginning.... To understand the foundation for this postulate some have called a "Quack Theory of Everything" I must try to describe the Singularity of the BB before anything that follows. And in doing so I will postulate on the causation mechanism for the yet to be defined elements of gravitational and magnetic variance. We consider that the yet to be defined energy form that was the source of the BB was following Einsteinian conversion then looking at the reverse condition may explain a bit better. If I have a finite amount of matter and I convert it into an energy form we observe the energy forms (kinetic, thermal, inertial,) and are controlled by relativistic force forms ( EM,G,WN&SN) If we consider the matter without relation to external matter and convert the matter to energy without reference to external matter (as is the case of a BB singularity) you have a unified yet to be defined energy form that seems to have a infinite energy density but was converted from a finite amount of matter. In the case of a hypothesized Singularity ( I have a postulate I've posted before on the view of the Singularity as a Quantum Point of finite energy potential in base state of ciaos but its generally given the plonk treatment from the outset) it cannot be defined by any existing rules at this point and the laws of physics break down causing the mathematically created illusion of infinity. I submit that the mental construct of infinity is illusion, illusion that occurs in a model when the existing rules fail due to scale. This was the Quantum Point of the BB ( I consider QP [Quantum Point] as a better descriptor for my postulate for several reasons, it better relays the concept after time 0+ , better explains the relationships of matter in both micro and macro regions, better expresses base form of nature. ) The QP (Chaos Point, Singularity) was a finite amount of unified energy of a yet to be defined nature. It would have been governed by only two rule's that we can identify and that is probability and uncertainty. Without matter all other laws fail... No mathematical construct can be applied using the rules we today know... Not that there are not rules that apply, only that existing rules cannot. So I propose that the QP had the probability of converting a finite amount of matter in the form of matter/anti matter base particles of a finite size or not. And that the converted matter due to uncertainties of conversion may tend to be of any finite amount and in a finite ratio of matter to antimatter. This view of energy conversion is fully in holding with Einsteinian conversion theory. The only consideration is in considering the conversion in the absence of related other matter external of the local event. So I posit that the QP existed ( may be a multitude of QP in a multitude of conversion conditions existing without dimensional properties that apply from our set of rules in this Universe) From this QP a finite amount of matter and a finite amount of antimatter was converted ( a tad bit more matter than antimatter). At time 0+ the matter and antimatter annihilated each other converting the matter and antimatter into energy and since we now have the left over matter we can model the conversion using rules that apply to matter in relation to other matter in motion. This period of annihilation was the inflationary period that is well written of. The energy was imparted into the base particles left over, and makes up all matter in the universe today. This imparted energy maintains the expansion that followed the inflation with the imparted kinetic applied and set the particles to ringing, this ringing is the EM signature of each particle. At this point I must define my "Particle" as opposed to "point particles"," Virtual Particles" and other surnames... My SPP ( Smallest Physical Particle) is a real physical ball of stuff (very small) that produces a EM wave of a variable frequency with variable rate of decay of the frequency and amplitude of the wave. I think it is detectable and experimentally verifiable but not with the technology and rules we have in use today. I consider the string theories to be on the right track but have yet to consider the bias of considering a concept while imbedded in the construct in question. Consider the wave nature of a String as theorized and then consider it a slice of a EM wave propagating from a EM producing SPP. If a variation of the view is applied to the String theory we see that variation as another String at angle to our first construct and have a new dimension to contend with. So I contend that string theory describes the radiating EM fields of the base SPP and equates out as a slice in the field at a specific distance of the radiating SPP. The uncertain nature of the wave is due to the "Medium" the wave propagates through and other EM producing SPP's. The "Medium" that I consider is not the medium of Maxwell's Aether its a bit different and needs a bit of explanation. After time 0+ there was a finite amount of matter converted from the QP but it was not a 100% conversion. Probability tells us it could have been a .00000001% to a 99.999999% conversion so we have a remainder of the QP that did not convert its unified yet to be defined energy form into matter or anti-matter. I contend that the Quantum Point of the BB still exists as a Quantum State between all SPP's. Its properties are that it produces a inverse tensor (elastic mode variable) between all SPP's. Each SPP produces a EM wave and those EM wave mix, heterodyne, cancel out producing a composite EM signature for each local grouping of SPP's. Due to the complexities and uncertainty of the mixings end composite it tends to be a probabilistic state. Locally when two or more SPP's are brought in proximity they increase in tensor value in relation to local other SPP's but dependent of the interplay of the EM waves some will be attracted and some repelled and will tend to form structure as harmonic nodes form in the EM interplays. The crux of the problem is the position of the observer in relation to the observed. Since the reader, writer and all known methods to observe exist as conglomerates of SPP's it contains intrinsic bias. We observe by detecting or producing EM waves and sampling the wave at specific intervals of time. Since we are connected to the observed by the Quantum State our act of observing impacts the observed and the observed impacts the design and method of observing. As An Example I propose this: A ----------------------B----C--O--D------E-----------------------Z A= Furthest SPP in some direction B= Furthest SPP in some direction relative to local SPP's C= Closest SPP in some direction relative to local Observer O= Observer D= Closest SPP in some direction relative to local Observer E= Furthest SPP in some direction relative to local SPP's Z= Furthest SPP in some other direction --------- = Quantum State A ----------------------B----C--O--D------E-----------------------Z -- If A moves the total value of QS varies art the rate of movement. This is detectable as a variation in the UGC (Universal Gravitational Constant, Cosmological Constant) which would reduce as A and all other particle are separated buy implied kinetic energy. Locally the observer would note the variance on a much lesser scale as it would be locally mediated by local SPP's. If this rate occurs on a universal scale the oberver would consider the value a constant in that its variance would not be detectable within the life span of the solar system if we consider the expansion on a universal scale. This also predicts that the rate of expansion will increase as the universe expands. A ----------------------B----C--O--D------E-----------------------Z -- Now we move D ... the value of the QS is increased between the observe and the QS value is decreased between D and E. the UGC remains intact but locally the value between D,O and C also vary . This separation distance between SPP's set the local value of all locally considered SPP's and gives rise to the illusion of curved space. Since we have yet to define the nature of this Quantum State (QS), or even all the rules that apply to it, we model it and the calculation leads to an illusion of curvature due to the missing construct. Since we exist within the QS with every particle of our existence connected to every other we look for observations and detect the EM waves of groupings of SPP's and due to our interconnection the EM wave may be observed and modeled as a "particle" when examined physically or empirically for a short duration of time, a time that is short enough to fall below our ability to measure. This intrinsic bias gives rise to "virtual" particles and any particle that produces the observable aspect of duality. And also give rise to the constructs of infinity. So my own view is that infinity is just illusionary.... An illusion that occurs when the existing rules fail due to scale or missing rules of causation. I actually think QM is getting closest to the true nature of the issue it still not advanced to the point of unification and that's the issue when speaking of Quantum points ( Ciaos Point [Williams] , singularity)... The whole of the universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate as it expands... and the best rational is that the mechanism that displays as an effect gravity is the Quantum, yet to be defined, energy that is the remainder of the finite energy that produced by conversion all the matter in our universe. That Quantum State exist as a inverse tensor field (elastic mode variance) where as the field strength reduces with separation distance of bound physical particles. As the universe expands from the conversion of matter and anti- matter into heat and kinetic during the inflation period the field between all particles is reduced causing the UGC ( universal gravitational constant ) to reduce... this causes a lower UGC on a universal scale and the universe increases its rate of expansion... Consider the old view of a Universal Balloon.. if you were at outside edge or close to it because it has no edge like a balloon ( think of it as a balloon with the skin on the inside... each particle connected to each other particle with the skin.. as the particles move apart the strength of the connect is maintained no matter the distance but its value is reduced between any particles) The UGC is set by the overall separation of all matter so the baseline Gravitational field is not constant but varies at a rate set by the total separation of all matter so on our scale it would appear as a constant due to it not varying in any degree that could be measured on our scale..... But locally if the matter is dense the local gravitational set is varied.. this causes the gravitational wells of massive objects. The baseline gravitational field is an effect aspect of separation distance of particles. I truly think there are no constants or infinities in the universe. We call a mathematical construct a constant because we cannot ever note a change in it.. But if it changes on a universal scale we would never be able to note it as a variable,,, and I submit that the concept of infinity is but a illusion that occurs when known mathematical laws break down. As an example.. try this thought experiment.. you have a finite amount of matter.. consider it the only matter in the universe.. Einsteinian rules say It can be converted into energy and energy can be converted into matter.. If its the only matter and you convert it into energy you cannot get kinetic form because there is no other matter to impart to.. you cannot get thermal because thermal conversion must occur to other matter also.. What you would end up with would be unified energy without any matter for effect physical laws to apply. Now try as you like, if you wish to calculate the energy quanta of this conversion you end up with infinite energy.. because all physical laws we know are only applicable to matter in motion... and break down if you try to know the energy quanta ...you end up with the illusion of infinite energy even though you know that it was converted from a finite amount of matter.. And I now postulate another kook concept.... The value of c is variable and is set by separation distance of true Physical particles (SPP"s) but the rate of variance of the base value is set by total separation distance of all particles on a universal scale and will not vary in the life span of our solar system. But will vary locally in closely grouped particle fields. I postulate that this is the reason for the velocity of EM waves to reduce while traversing a medium. This is why we experimentally observe c as source independent because in vacuum it's value is set by the total separation distance of all SPP's on a Universal scale. But in a local dense grouping of SPP's we note a reduced value for c as when an EM wave traverses a non zero distance through a medium, which is nothing more than a local dense grouping of SPP's . The theory of velocity being reduced by absorbs and retransmission was only conceived because of the bias that c was constant and a mathematical rational had to be formed that explained why the measured value of c was reduced in a medium. If you apply the same formula to the concept and consider that the value of c is less between particles you end up with the same end results as the absorbs and retransmission model.... Using this postulate I make a few predictions 1. The Rate of Expansion will increase as the Universe expands. 2. The UGC or CC will vary at the rate of expansion. [UGC = Universal Gravitational Constant CC = Cosmological Constant 3. The Value of C in a vacuum will vary at the rate of expansion. 4. The Value of C will vary in a local close grouping of Particles ( Medium) 5. The Value of G will vary locally with separation distance of local matter. 6. All particles that display the aspect of duality are only EM waves sampled in a short time frame by a method and design that is intrinsically biased. 7. The concepts of infinity and paradox are illusions created when existing rules fail due to scale or incompleteness. 8. Gravity is the effect of varying the separation distance of SPP's ( Smallest Physical Particle) 9. Magnetism is the effect of EM waves through natural selection forming a heterodyned interplay that is detectable as the attractive force. 10. the WN and SN forces are effects aspects of short range EM interplays finding equilibrium as SPP's group. And have as an experiment to show the effect is the Brown effect of applied static field which Tesla considered in his 1937 static motion demonstration. Here's a working variation to demonstrate the effect of altering the local QS by applied static charge.... http://ripkaboroski.com/device5b.jpg In closing let me repeat... This is not a theory... I have not the Mathematical ability to provide models that can be examined but I do think the model can be created and verified. For the most part I see no point where I disagree with the existing standard models and all existing math remains intact for the most part. My Postulate explains many of the issues that have plagued physics for ever while maintaining that for the most part all existing physical laws are correct and viable. My postulate also address's the Zero Point Energy theories that float about and fills in the problems that exist in that area. It follows String Theory to a great deal but gives predictions and asserts that there is no need for more than 4 dim to define any point in the universe. The postulate explains the Brown Effect which has yet to be defined to a point the definition in agreement with GR or SR. I look for anyone to debate my view in detail and destroy it by showing me where I deviate from the existing theory to a point my postulate fails. Feel free to ask any question on any aspect not understood and I will gladly explain my concept of the details mentioned. I cannot prove my postulate so don't ask for proof but I can explain the construct and how it fits the existing observation of the reality around us. There is many aspects I do not fully grasp so there of course will be holes in the postulate and that's why I'm here looking for intelligent people to point out the holes and poke new ones so I can better express the postulate. -- Paul R. Mays ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Some where within the Quantum State Http://Paul.Mays.Com/story.html http://paul.mays.com/mayday.html "The man who cannot occasionally imagine events and conditions of existence that are contrary to the causal principle as he knows it will never enrich his science by the addition of a new idea." - Max Planck steve(vote for me2020!) http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/whyweig...mtbrand=AOL_US "music is like this porthole into another world... the world of truth."- trey Stick it to the man in 2004, wait? who's the green candidate in 2004?
|
|
#17
December 24th 03, 11:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi I'm new here
"bug" wrote in message ... A "groove?" I don't think so. you ever use a record player? the earth is the needle, space is the vinyl (only it's blank) the sun is the pin in the center of the record. mercury venus are the last two tracks, earth is the third to last, mars is fourth the belt is fifth (kindof a transitional song) jupiter is sixth, etc. etc. the great question of course is what set the whole thing into motion (cosmology) --------- So the Mays Absurd Postulate forms from the mist.... I will start with an assumptions and explain why... I have heard both side of the arguments on whether the Universe is a product of a Big Bang (BB from now on) and I have heard the arguments on it not being a product of a BB.. and IMHO the argument, data and explanations in favor of the Universe being a product of the BB seems the most plausable for the observed Universe we live in. So I will not make that argument as others have a much better knowledge base and I would let their views stand and I will take the position that I assume the Universe was the product of a conversion of the yet to be defined energy Quantum that I coin a Quantum Point. I also consider most all existing mathematical models hold with my postulate but the interpretation may be in question in some models. I think that some of the more contrived constructs are complicated by the Fact that we do not know all of the rules that apply to the observed Universe and some mathematical constructs have been required to use assumed values and contrived elements in order to fit experimental data when All the rules are not yet defined. The primary missing rules are concerning gravitational variance in the presence of objects with rest mass. We can define the Effects aspect with great accuracy but we have yet to define the cause and using existing physical rules, I submit, we never will because All existing physical rules only apply to the effect aspect of matter in motion in relation to other matter in motion... This is just my neophyte attempt to give a postulate that gives a rational for that cause while maintaining that existing rules of effects remain intact and explains many aspects of the observed universe that have alluded science for a very long time...... In The Beginning.... To understand the foundation for this postulate some have called a "Quack Theory of Everything" I must try to describe the Singularity of the BB before anything that follows. And in doing so I will postulate on the causation mechanism for the yet to be defined elements of gravitational and magnetic variance. We consider that the yet to be defined energy form that was the source of the BB was following Einsteinian conversion then looking at the reverse condition may explain a bit better. If I have a finite amount of matter and I convert it into an energy form we observe the energy forms (kinetic, thermal, inertial,) and are controlled by relativistic force forms ( EM,G,WN&SN) If we consider the matter without relation to external matter and convert the matter to energy without reference to external matter (as is the case of a BB singularity) you have a unified yet to be defined energy form that seems to have a infinite energy density but was converted from a finite amount of matter. In the case of a hypothesized Singularity ( I have a postulate I've posted before on the view of the Singularity as a Quantum Point of finite energy potential in base state of ciaos but its generally given the plonk treatment from the outset) it cannot be defined by any existing rules at this point and the laws of physics break down causing the mathematically created illusion of infinity. I submit that the mental construct of infinity is illusion, illusion that occurs in a model when the existing rules fail due to scale. This was the Quantum Point of the BB ( I consider QP [Quantum Point] as a better descriptor for my postulate for several reasons, it better relays the concept after time 0+ , better explains the relationships of matter in both micro and macro regions, better expresses base form of nature. ) The QP (Chaos Point, Singularity) was a finite amount of unified energy of a yet to be defined nature. It would have been governed by only two rule's that we can identify and that is probability and uncertainty. Without matter all other laws fail... No mathematical construct can be applied using the rules we today know... Not that there are not rules that apply, only that existing rules cannot. So I propose that the QP had the probability of converting a finite amount of matter in the form of matter/anti matter base particles of a finite size or not. And that the converted matter due to uncertainties of conversion may tend to be of any finite amount and in a finite ratio of matter to antimatter. This view of energy conversion is fully in holding with Einsteinian conversion theory. The only consideration is in considering the conversion in the absence of related other matter external of the local event. So I posit that the QP existed ( may be a multitude of QP in a multitude of conversion conditions existing without dimensional properties that apply from our set of rules in this Universe) From this QP a finite amount of matter and a finite amount of antimatter was converted ( a tad bit more matter than antimatter). At time 0+ the matter and antimatter annihilated each other converting the matter and antimatter into energy and since we now have the left over matter we can model the conversion using rules that apply to matter in relation to other matter in motion. This period of annihilation was the inflationary period that is well written of. The energy was imparted into the base particles left over, and makes up all matter in the universe today. This imparted energy maintains the expansion that followed the inflation with the imparted kinetic applied and set the particles to ringing, this ringing is the EM signature of each particle. At this point I must define my "Particle" as opposed to "point particles"," Virtual Particles" and other surnames... My SPP ( Smallest Physical Particle) is a real physical ball of stuff (very small) that produces a EM wave of a variable frequency with variable rate of decay of the frequency and amplitude of the wave. I think it is detectable and experimentally verifiable but not with the technology and rules we have in use today. I consider the string theories to be on the right track but have yet to consider the bias of considering a concept while imbedded in the construct in question. Consider the wave nature of a String as theorized and then consider it a slice of a EM wave propagating from a EM producing SPP. If a variation of the view is applied to the String theory we see that variation as another String at angle to our first construct and have a new dimension to contend with. So I contend that string theory describes the radiating EM fields of the base SPP and equates out as a slice in the field at a specific distance of the radiating SPP. The uncertain nature of the wave is due to the "Medium" the wave propagates through and other EM producing SPP's. The "Medium" that I consider is not the medium of Maxwell's Aether its a bit different and needs a bit of explanation. After time 0+ there was a finite amount of matter converted from the QP but it was not a 100% conversion. Probability tells us it could have been a .00000001% to a 99.999999% conversion so we have a remainder of the QP that did not convert its unified yet to be defined energy form into matter or anti-matter. I contend that the Quantum Point of the BB still exists as a Quantum State between all SPP's. Its properties are that it produces a inverse tensor (elastic mode variable) between all SPP's. Each SPP produces a EM wave and those EM wave mix, heterodyne, cancel out producing a composite EM signature for each local grouping of SPP's. Due to the complexities and uncertainty of the mixings end composite it tends to be a probabilistic state. Locally when two or more SPP's are brought in proximity they increase in tensor value in relation to local other SPP's but dependent of the interplay of the EM waves some will be attracted and some repelled and will tend to form structure as harmonic nodes form in the EM interplays. The crux of the problem is the position of the observer in relation to the observed. Since the reader, writer and all known methods to observe exist as conglomerates of SPP's it contains intrinsic bias. We observe by detecting or producing EM waves and sampling the wave at specific intervals of time. Since we are connected to the observed by the Quantum State our act of observing impacts the observed and the observed impacts the design and method of observing. As An Example I propose this: A ----------------------B----C--O--D------E-----------------------Z A= Furthest SPP in some direction B= Furthest SPP in some direction relative to local SPP's C= Closest SPP in some direction relative to local Observer O= Observer D= Closest SPP in some direction relative to local Observer E= Furthest SPP in some direction relative to local SPP's Z= Furthest SPP in some other direction --------- = Quantum State A ----------------------B----C--O--D------E-----------------------Z -- If A moves the total value of QS varies art the rate of movement. This is detectable as a variation in the UGC (Universal Gravitational Constant, Cosmological Constant) which would reduce as A and all other particle are separated buy implied kinetic energy. Locally the observer would note the variance on a much lesser scale as it would be locally mediated by local SPP's. If this rate occurs on a universal scale the oberver would consider the value a constant in that its variance would not be detectable within the life span of the solar system if we consider the expansion on a universal scale. This also predicts that the rate of expansion will increase as the universe expands. A ----------------------B----C--O--D------E-----------------------Z -- Now we move D ... the value of the QS is increased between the observe and the QS value is decreased between D and E. the UGC remains intact but locally the value between D,O and C also vary . This separation distance between SPP's set the local value of all locally considered SPP's and gives rise to the illusion of curved space. Since we have yet to define the nature of this Quantum State (QS), or even all the rules that apply to it, we model it and the calculation leads to an illusion of curvature due to the missing construct. Since we exist within the QS with every particle of our existence connected to every other we look for observations and detect the EM waves of groupings of SPP's and due to our interconnection the EM wave may be observed and modeled as a "particle" when examined physically or empirically for a short duration of time, a time that is short enough to fall below our ability to measure. This intrinsic bias gives rise to "virtual" particles and any particle that produces the observable aspect of duality. And also give rise to the constructs of infinity. So my own view is that infinity is just illusionary.... An illusion that occurs when the existing rules fail due to scale or missing rules of causation. I actually think QM is getting closest to the true nature of the issue it still not advanced to the point of unification and that's the issue when speaking of Quantum points ( Ciaos Point [Williams] , singularity)... The whole of the universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate as it expands... and the best rational is that the mechanism that displays as an effect gravity is the Quantum, yet to be defined, energy that is the remainder of the finite energy that produced by conversion all the matter in our universe. That Quantum State exist as a inverse tensor field (elastic mode variance) where as the field strength reduces with separation distance of bound physical particles. As the universe expands from the conversion of matter and anti- matter into heat and kinetic during the inflation period the field between all particles is reduced causing the UGC ( universal gravitational constant ) to reduce... this causes a lower UGC on a universal scale and the universe increases its rate of expansion... Consider the old view of a Universal Balloon.. if you were at outside edge or close to it because it has no edge like a balloon ( think of it as a balloon with the skin on the inside... each particle connected to each other particle with the skin.. as the particles move apart the strength of the connect is maintained no matter the distance but its value is reduced between any particles) The UGC is set by the overall separation of all matter so the baseline Gravitational field is not constant but varies at a rate set by the total separation of all matter so on our scale it would appear as a constant due to it not varying in any degree that could be measured on our scale..... But locally if the matter is dense the local gravitational set is varied.. this causes the gravitational wells of massive objects. The baseline gravitational field is an effect aspect of separation distance of particles. I truly think there are no constants or infinities in the universe. We call a mathematical construct a constant because we cannot ever note a change in it.. But if it changes on a universal scale we would never be able to note it as a variable,,, and I submit that the concept of infinity is but a illusion that occurs when known mathematical laws break down. As an example.. try this thought experiment.. you have a finite amount of matter.. consider it the only matter in the universe.. Einsteinian rules say It can be converted into energy and energy can be converted into matter.. If its the only matter and you convert it into energy you cannot get kinetic form because there is no other matter to impart to.. you cannot get thermal because thermal conversion must occur to other matter also.. What you would end up with would be unified energy without any matter for effect physical laws to apply. Now try as you like, if you wish to calculate the energy quanta of this conversion you end up with infinite energy.. because all physical laws we know are only applicable to matter in motion... and break down if you try to know the energy quanta ...you end up with the illusion of infinite energy even though you know that it was converted from a finite amount of matter.. And I now postulate another kook concept.... The value of c is variable and is set by separation distance of true Physical particles (SPP"s) but the rate of variance of the base value is set by total separation distance of all particles on a universal scale and will not vary in the life span of our solar system. But will vary locally in closely grouped particle fields. I postulate that this is the reason for the velocity of EM waves to reduce while traversing a medium. This is why we experimentally observe c as source independent because in vacuum it's value is set by the total separation distance of all SPP's on a Universal scale. But in a local dense grouping of SPP's we note a reduced value for c as when an EM wave traverses a non zero distance through a medium, which is nothing more than a local dense grouping of SPP's . The theory of velocity being reduced by absorbs and retransmission was only conceived because of the bias that c was constant and a mathematical rational had to be formed that explained why the measured value of c was reduced in a medium. If you apply the same formula to the concept and consider that the value of c is less between particles you end up with the same end results as the absorbs and retransmission model.... Using this postulate I make a few predictions 1. The Rate of Expansion will increase as the Universe expands. 2. The UGC or CC will vary at the rate of expansion. [UGC = Universal Gravitational Constant CC = Cosmological Constant 3. The Value of C in a vacuum will vary at the rate of expansion. 4. The Value of C will vary in a local close grouping of Particles ( Medium) 5. The Value of G will vary locally with separation distance of local matter. 6. All particles that display the aspect of duality are only EM waves sampled in a short time frame by a method and design that is intrinsically biased. 7. The concepts of infinity and paradox are illusions created when existing rules fail due to scale or incompleteness. 8. Gravity is the effect of varying the separation distance of SPP's ( Smallest Physical Particle) 9. Magnetism is the effect of EM waves through natural selection forming a heterodyned interplay that is detectable as the attractive force. 10. the WN and SN forces are effects aspects of short range EM interplays finding equilibrium as SPP's group. And have as an experiment to show the effect is the Brown effect of applied static field which Tesla considered in his 1937 static motion demonstration. Here's a working variation to demonstrate the effect of altering the local QS by applied static charge.... http://ripkaboroski.com/device5b.jpg In closing let me repeat... This is not a theory... I have not the Mathematical ability to provide models that can be examined but I do think the model can be created and verified. For the most part I see no point where I disagree with the existing standard models and all existing math remains intact for the most part. My Postulate explains many of the issues that have plagued physics for ever while maintaining that for the most part all existing physical laws are correct and viable. My postulate also address's the Zero Point Energy theories that float about and fills in the problems that exist in that area. It follows String Theory to a great deal but gives predictions and asserts that there is no need for more than 4 dim to define any point in the universe. The postulate explains the Brown Effect which has yet to be defined to a point the definition in agreement with GR or SR. I look for anyone to debate my view in detail and destroy it by showing me where I deviate from the existing theory to a point my postulate fails. Feel free to ask any question on any aspect not understood and I will gladly explain my concept of the details mentioned. I cannot prove my postulate so don't ask for proof but I can explain the construct and how it fits the existing observation of the reality around us. There is many aspects I do not fully grasp so there of course will be holes in the postulate and that's why I'm here looking for intelligent people to point out the holes and poke new ones so I can better express the postulate. -- Paul R. Mays ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Some where within the Quantum State Http://Paul.Mays.Com/story.html http://paul.mays.com/mayday.html "The man who cannot occasionally imagine events and conditions of existence that are contrary to the causal principle as he knows it will never enrich his science by the addition of a new idea." - Max Planck steve(vote for me2020!) http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/whyweig...mtbrand=AOL_US "music is like this porthole into another world... the world of truth."- trey Stick it to the man in 2004, wait? who's the green candidate in 2004?
|
|
#18
December 24th 03, 03:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi I'm new here
"bug" wrote in message ... A "groove?" I don't think so. you ever use a record player? the earth is the needle, space is the vinyl (only it's blank) the sun is the pin in the center of the record. mercury venus are the last two tracks, earth is the third to last, mars is fourth the belt is fifth (kindof a transitional song) jupiter is sixth, etc. etc. the great question of course is what set the whole thing into motion (cosmology) OK, but it isn't gravity itself that causes the planets to act as if they are in a "groove," it's gravity _and_, as you mention, their motion, or really their momentum--their _initial_ momentum is what determined what orbits they would end up occupying under the influence of solar gravity. What started it all (where did all initial momentum arise?)--the standard thy. is the Big Bang thy....more recently, a thy. involving crashing "branes" in a higher dimensional space based in Superstring Thy. has been proposed, so we really don't know anything for sure yet about whatever the original creation event for the cosmos was due to. Maybe someday... ....tonyC --------- steve(vote for me2020!) http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/whyweig...mtbrand=AOL_US "music is like this porthole into another world... the world of truth."- trey Stick it to the man in 2004, wait? who's the green candidate in 2004?
|
|
#19
December 24th 03, 03:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi I'm new here
"bug" wrote in message ... A "groove?" I don't think so. you ever use a record player? the earth is the needle, space is the vinyl (only it's blank) the sun is the pin in the center of the record. mercury venus are the last two tracks, earth is the third to last, mars is fourth the belt is fifth (kindof a transitional song) jupiter is sixth, etc. etc. the great question of course is what set the whole thing into motion (cosmology) OK, but it isn't gravity itself that causes the planets to act as if they are in a "groove," it's gravity _and_, as you mention, their motion, or really their momentum--their _initial_ momentum is what determined what orbits they would end up occupying under the influence of solar gravity. What started it all (where did all initial momentum arise?)--the standard thy. is the Big Bang thy....more recently, a thy. involving crashing "branes" in a higher dimensional space based in Superstring Thy. has been proposed, so we really don't know anything for sure yet about whatever the original creation event for the cosmos was due to. Maybe someday... ....tonyC --------- steve(vote for me2020!) http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/whyweig...mtbrand=AOL_US "music is like this porthole into another world... the world of truth."- trey Stick it to the man in 2004, wait? who's the green candidate in 2004?
|
|
#20
December 24th 03, 05:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi I'm new here
And the "groove" is a spiral. Other than that ...
just like a vinyl ep steve(vote for me2020!) http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/whyweig...mtbrand=AOL_US "music is like this porthole into another world... the world of truth."- trey Stick it to the man in 2004, wait? who's the green candidate in 2004?
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
