Fermilab and symmetry breaking

Dr. Nambu's work is very interesting.
The following discussion is from the New York Times:

Ever since Galileo, physicists have been guided in their quest for the
ultimate laws of nature by the search for symmetries, or properties of
nature that appear the same under different circumstances. “It’s the
lamppost we search under,” said Michael Turner, an astrophysicist at
the University of Chicago.
One example of an obvious symmetry is a snowflake, which looks the
same when you rotate it one-sixth of a turn. Another is Einstein’s
theory of relativity, which says the laws of physics are the same no
matter what speed. However, in the 1960s, Dr. Nambu, inspired by
studies of superconductivity, suggested that some symmetries in the
laws of elementary particle physics might be hidden, or “broken” in
actual practice. “You have to look for symmetries even when you can’t
see them,” Dr. Turner said.
The principle of symmetry breaking is now embedded in all of modern
particle physics. The $8 billion Large Hadron Collider, a giant
particle accelerator soon to go into operation outside Geneva, was
designed largely to find a particle known as the Higgs boson, which is
theorized to be responsible for breaking the symmetry between
electromagnetism and the so-called weak nuclear force, imparting mass
to many particles that in theory are massless.
Imagine a pencil balanced on its point on a table — one of physicists’
favorite examples. To the pencil while it is still on its point, all
directions along the table are the same. But the standing pencil is
unstable and will eventually fall onto the table pointing in only one
direction.
Applying this notion to a puzzle in the subatomic realm, Dr. Nambu
explained why a particle known as the pion, which carries the strong
nuclear force that holds atomic nuclei together, was much lighter than
the protons and neutrons inside it. If it were not so light, the
strong force would not extend far enough to stick nuclei heavier than
hydrogen together, said Daniel Friedan, a physicist at Rutgers.
The fact that the pion is light, he said, explains why there is a
variety of atoms in the world. “There is a variety of atoms because
there is a variety of nuclei,” Dr. Friedan wrote in an e-mail message.
In 1972, Dr. Kobayashi and Dr. Maskawa, extending work by the Italian
physicist Nicola Cabibbo, showed that if there were three generations
of the elementary particles called quarks, the constituents of protons
and neutrons, the principle of symmetry breaking would explain a
puzzling asymmetry known as CP violation.
At the time, only three kinds of quarks were known: the up and down
quarks, which make up most ordinary matter, and the strange quark. In
1974, the so-called charmed quarks were discovered. The last pair, the
bottom and top quarks, were discovered in 1977 and 1994, completing
the three generations of two quarks each predicted by Dr. Kobayashi
and Dr. Maskawa.
The CP violation — C and P stand for charge and parity, or
“handedness” — was discovered in 1964 by the American physicists James
W. Cronin and Val L. Fitch — a discovery that also won a Nobel Prize.
Until then, physicists had assumed that exchanging positive for
negative and left-handed for right-handed in the equations of
elementary particles would result in the same answer.
The fact that nature operates otherwise, physicists hope, is a step
toward explaining why the universe is made of matter and not
antimatter, one of the questions that the Large Hadron Collider is
also designed to explore.
==========================

On Oct 15, 9:47*am, "Painius" wrote:

It's a Mexican standoff... *I can't "prove" its spatial
energy that accelerates into matter and causes gravity.

In a court of law, the causal mechanism of gravity would stand on the
great preponderance of evidence. When the alternate theories are
introduced into evidence (i.e, "gravitons" and/or 'curvature' of a
will-o-the-wisp 'something'), all theories would be required to pass
the litmus test : explain the literal mechansim that POWERS the
stellar collapse that powers the fusion that rebounds as a super/
hypernova blast and also powers the far more energetic, sustained
process of a quasar. Only one model comes close to passing the litmus
test : the pressure-driven, accelerating flow of the spatial medium
into mass with mass synonymous with flow sink.. impelled by a
hyperpressure state of the medium exceeding degeneracy pressure of the
atomic nucleus.

But nobody can prove that gravity is the result of matter
"attracting", "pulling" other matter, either.

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote...
in message ...

Painius seems a successful merging of QM and GR and possibly
modification of one or both could make a good theory. We do use the
string theory to help in thinking quantum gravity Quantum gravity has
the use gravitons as the force of gravities messenger particle like
virtual photons are use to give magnetic force. Both particles have A
LOT IN COMMON. Push or pull means little in my thinking what makes
gravity work over great distances. My Spin is in theory I can show how
both are possible(just a way of picturing the action) TreBert

Maybe you're right, Bert. Maybe the "push or pull" means
very little. But maybe it makes all the difference, too.
Believing that matter attracts matter sends science down a
lot of wrong roads that lead to dead ends. Also, if Wolter
and oc are right about the push effect being the result of
sub-Planckian energy that flows into matter, this leads to
the possibility of someday harnessing this energy.

Right now, because of our prison-like situation stuck as we
are on planet Earth, our imaginations are hemmed in as
well. We come up with speculative space drives "warping"
and "antimatter"ing all over the galaxy. However, just a
little imaginative thought about "space as energy" can put
a whole different slant on the future of space flight and
exploration! Harnessing spatial energy would put those ol'
Roddenberry warp drives to shame! In the time it took ol'
Kirk 'n crew to get from Earth to the stars in constellation
Andromeda, spatial energy could get us from Earth to the
Andromedan galaxy!

Powerful stuff, space... real powerful stuff! Can't you feel
it?...

http://secretsgolden.home.att.net/Se...ialenergy.html

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S. (to a young physics student) "Your theory is
crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true."
Niels Bohr

P.P.S.: http://yummycake.secretsgolden.com
http://garden-of-ebooks.blogspot.com
http://painellsworth.net

On Oct 17, 3:08 pm, "Painius" wrote:
"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote...

Push or pull means little in my thinking...

Maybe you're right, Bert. Maybe the "push or pull" means
very little. But maybe it makes all the difference, too.

This has been discussed too, in deferance to the acolytes of the
"pull" idea. Say an object is in freefall ; the accelerating "wind" of
space through the object's atomic lattice imparts a 'tensioning' in
the direction of flow to each individual atom. Every atom is
'stretched' in the axis of flow as its trailing edge is forced to
'catch up' with the leading edge. Thus momentum is imparted to the
whole object by the *acceleration component* of the flow. The most
extreme example of this would be the 'spagettification' effect if the
object were falling into a black hole. The extreme accelerational
gradient could be seen as imparting a "pull" effect at the atomic
level in addition to the primary, pressure-driven *push* driving the
flow itself.

Believing that matter attracts matter sends science down a
lot of wrong roads that lead to dead ends. Also, if Wolter
and oc are right about the push effect being the result of
sub-Planckian energy that flows into matter, this leads to
the possibility of someday harnessing this energy.

Right now, because of our prison-like situation stuck as we
are on planet Earth, our imaginations are hemmed in as
well. We come up with speculative space drives "warping"
and "antimatter"ing all over the galaxy. However, just a
little imaginative thought about "space as energy" can put
a whole different slant on the future of space flight and
exploration! Harnessing spatial energy would put those ol'
Roddenberry warp drives to shame! In the time it took ol'
Kirk 'n crew to get from Earth to the stars in constellation
Andromeda, spatial energy could get us from Earth to the
Andromedan galaxy!

Roddenberry's 'warp drive' idea as well as Alcubierre's hyperdrive are
rooted in the VSP and thus would be obliged to run by "manipulating
the geometry of space-time". They acknowledge need for preposterously
high energy to operate, requiring "exotic matter", dilithium crystals
etc. ..oblivious to the the fact that every cc **of space irself** is
packed with more than sufficient energy. Right now, as far as how to
tap that energy, we're just about like a 15th century sailor pondering
the workings of a nuclear aircraft carrier.

Powerful stuff, space... real powerful stuff! Can't you feel
it?...

Yeah. I never cease to marvel at the 'standing arm-wave test' whereby
one can, at any time, literally *feel* the spatial medium. Just stand,
with both arms outstretched to your sides. Now abruptly jerk both arms
forward, then back. And repeat. Feel the inertia? That is literally
the resistance *of space itself* to acceleration and deceleration.
This self-same property of space is at work as its *accelerating flow*
gives you 'weight', planting your feet firmly to the ground. This
simplest of all tests demonstrates the 'hyperfluidic' property of
space which underlies and fixes the laws of inertia and conservation
of momentum, and gravity-acceleration equivalence.

Apologies if the duplicates the first attempt wouldn't send !@#$%^ !!

On Oct 17, 3:08 pm, "Painius" wrote:
"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote...

Push or pull means little in my thinking...

Maybe you're right, Bert. Maybe the "push or pull" means
very little. But maybe it makes all the difference, too.

This has been discussed too, in deferance to the acolytes of the
"pull" idea. Say an object is in freefall ; the accelerating "wind" of
space through the object's atomic lattice imparts a 'tensioning' in
the direction of flow to each individual atom. Every atom is
'stretched' in the axis of flow as its trailing edge is forced to
'catch up' with the leading edge. Thus momentum is imparted to the
whole object by the *acceleration component* of the flow. The most
extreme example of this would be the 'spagettification' effect if the
object were falling into a black hole. The extreme accelerational
gradient could be seen as imparting a "pull" effect at the atomic
level in addition to the primary, pressure-driven *push* driving the
flow itself.

Believing that matter attracts matter sends science down a
lot of wrong roads that lead to dead ends. Also, if Wolter
and oc are right about the push effect being the result of
sub-Planckian energy that flows into matter, this leads to
the possibility of someday harnessing this energy.

Right now, because of our prison-like situation stuck as we
are on planet Earth, our imaginations are hemmed in as
well. We come up with speculative space drives "warping"
and "antimatter"ing all over the galaxy. However, just a
little imaginative thought about "space as energy" can put
a whole different slant on the future of space flight and
exploration! Harnessing spatial energy would put those ol'
Roddenberry warp drives to shame! In the time it took ol'
Kirk 'n crew to get from Earth to the stars in constellation
Andromeda, spatial energy could get us from Earth to the
Andromedan galaxy!

Roddenberry's 'warp drive' idea as well as Alcubierre's hyperdrive are
rooted in the VSP and thus would be obliged to run by "manipulating
the geometry of space-time". They acknowledge need for preposterously
high energy to operate, requiring "exotic matter", dilithium crystals
etc. ..oblivious to the the fact that every cc **of space irself** is
packed with more than sufficient energy. Right now, as far as how to
tap that energy, we're just about like a 15th century sailor pondering
the workings of a nuclear aircraft carrier.

Powerful stuff, space... real powerful stuff! Can't you feel
it?...

Yeah. I never cease to marvel at the 'standing arm-wave test' whereby
one can, at any time, literally *feel* the spatial medium. Just stand,
with both arms outstretched to your sides. Now abruptly jerk both arms
forward, then back. And repeat. Feel the inertia? That is literally
the resistance *of space itself* to acceleration and deceleration.
This self-same property of space is at work as its *accelerating flow*
gives you 'weight', planting your feet firmly to the ground. This
simplest of all tests demonstrates the 'hyperfluidic' property of
space which underlies and fixes the laws of inertia and conservation
of momentum, and gravity-acceleration equivalence.

oc & Painius To stay with space energy being a very strong push it fits
well with my theory that space shortens in the direction a space ship is
going. Thus a space ship not going against SR (cant reach c) can still
go from A to B in a spacetime faster than a photon. Never fool with
light speed,but only shorten the distance. I should get a Nobel for
that convex curve TreBert Ps Well a photon can be every where in
the universe at once in reality. It shortens spacetime to zero go
figure

On Oct 18, 1:17 pm, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
oc & Painius To stay with space energy being a very strong push it fits
well with my theory that space shortens in the direction a space ship is
going. Thus a space ship not going against SR (cant reach c) can still
go from A to B in a spacetime faster than a photon. Never fool with
light speed,but only shorten the distance. I should get a Nobel for
that convex curve TreBert Ps Well a photon can be every where in
the universe at once in reality. It shortens spacetime to zero go
figure

The Nobel will likely go to whomever puts your sorry butt in the
grave.

Nobel doesn't fork it over for any kind of physics or science
revision.

If whatever you have to offer in any way revises physics, science or
history, you can forget ever receiving a Nobel (even after you're
dead).

According to faith-based Nobelism, space is always expanding
(period!).

~ BG

BG The fact that space is convexing(expanding) goes well with my
Concave & Convex theory. My having space foreshortning as well of
inflating goes well with nature again using her balancing act. It all
fits TreBert

You made that up, BradBoi! lmfjao!

You don't understand how BEERTbrain's mind works. That's why he'll
NEVER GET A NOBEL!

Saul Levy


On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 17:02:02 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On Oct 18, 1:17 pm, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
oc & Painius To stay with space energy being a very strong push it fits
well with my theory that space shortens in the direction a space ship is
going. Thus a space ship not going against SR (cant reach c) can still
go from A to B in a spacetime faster than a photon. Never fool with
light speed,but only shorten the distance. I should get a Nobel for
that convex curve TreBert Ps Well a photon can be every where in
the universe at once in reality. It shortens spacetime to zero go
figure

The Nobel will likely go to whomever puts your sorry butt in the
grave.

Nobel doesn't fork it over for any kind of physics or science
revision.

If whatever you have to offer in any way revises physics, science or
history, you can forget ever receiving a Nobel (even after you're
dead).

According to faith-based Nobelism, space is always expanding
(period!).

~ BG